The Jewish Division of the Hebrew Bible and the Christian First Testament - Book Report/Review Example

The Jewish Division of the Hebrew Bible and the Christian First (Old) Testament THE 1000 of Institute The Jewish Division of the Hebrew Bible and the Christian First (Old) Testament Introduction The books in the Old Testament and the Jewish Bible have very little though obvious differences. A critical analysis indicates that the little difference that exists is a question of interpretation particularly with reference to prophesies events and time. This is particularly so in the chronological arrangements of the first seven books that differ in the two bibles. Owing to this, there has emerged what theologists see as structural variations between the two. The issue of structural variations emerged especially in the aftermath of the life and death of Jesus when Christianity started developing (Scott, 2000, p. 80). It is important to note that the structural differences between the Jewish Bible and the Christian first Old Testament was also influenced by the belief in the person of Jesus Christ as the coming Messiah, a claim Judaists have never approved (Scott, 2000, p. 93). It is in this context that the context of Christianity developed strongly after the Antioch gospel that born Christianity. Consequently, the merging of the Old Testament scrolls and the New Testament scrolls was sole activity done by believers of Christian faith, attempting to make relevant the historical time in which the events and prophecies in the various books took place. A proper understanding of the structural differences between the Jewish division of the Hebrew Bible and the Christian First (Old) Testament would a justice best delivered when preceded by a historical outline of the Israel. A Brief Outline of the History of Israel The early part of the history of Israel is technically Biblical history. On this note, it is vital to point out that the history of Israel, rather than using a theological reading only, ought to be governed by religious perspective. This is particularly so as it makes relevant connections with the past and present, though at different time-lines. A brief outline of the history of Israel starts with the call of Abraham when he went to the land of Canaan. From Abraham through Isaac and Jacob, the history of Israel as a nation begins to take shape. The jealousy of Joseph’s brothers changes fortune and Israel takes his sons to Egypt to escape the seven years of famine. Migration and conquest of Canaan starts with Moses and ends with Joshua. Briefly, a number of judges rule Israel, amongst them Deborah, Samson and Gideon until the birth of Samuel when Israel later demands an earthly King. This period has a number of prophecies and promises. Historically, this period takes place somewhere around the 1300 B.C and covers the reign of David Solomon and the division of Israel. The division of Israel into Southern and Northern Kingdoms follows closely with the fall of Israel and the exile into Babylon. The history of Kingship in Israel is widely covered in first and second Kings. This critical period marks Israel’s fall away from God and subsequent punishments by being exiled. The prophecy of Daniel actually takes place in exile (Scott, 2000, p. 357). Around 539 B.C., Babylon falls and prophets Ezra and Nehemiah lead the first phase of return into the Promised Land. The history of Israel during this time majorly dwells on liberation prophesies and various small revolts that are not covered in the Bible. During this time, Christianity has not been born but there are prophecies by Major Prophets such as Isaiah, Jeremiah and Ezekiel, pointing to a salvation of humankind through a God chosen Messiah. God restores the Israelites back to their land in readiness for the birth of Jesus Christ the Messiah. This is what Scott (2000, p. 307) refers to as the Messianic hope. This happened during the Roman reign at when Caesar Augustus was at the helm of Roman leadership. Other events happen in the context of the New Testament although they still form part of the history of Israel. A critical Discussion of the Structural Variations between the Jewish Division of the Hebrew Bible and the Christian Old Testament As noted, one of the most obvious structural variations between the Hebrew and Christian Old Testament is in the arrangement of the books. One can observe that the Torah plays a critical role in the foundations of all books. The law books are the foundation of Jewish culture in terms of explaining origin and other guidelines for both Hebrew and Christian living. Although the modern day Christians apply the teachings in Leviticus less strictly than in the past before the advent of Christianity, the only thing that has changed is the interpretation of the New Testament. This is particularly so in the context of Jesus interpretation of the law and how man should interact with the law. The concept of intertexuality may still draw various interpretations as a matter of fading or disappearing linguistics owing to translations. Even so, the basic theology is the message. This characteristic allows for overlap in the Bible hermeneutics. In so understanding, some scholars have observed that there had arisen misappropriation of the Hebrew’s historical event with what they perceive of the First Testament as an almost purely Gentile affair (Seitz, 2007, p. 98). To commence with, it has been observed that the word Bible has quite a number of meanings that various interpreters have attached to it. That may be irrelevant although it seemed to have been a determinant of what books to include into it. The Jewish Bible has taken keen interest in the particular chronology of how the books were written. The Jewish Bible and the Christian Old Testament are dissimilar, mostly in the sense that they are not in the same order. Like in the Jewish division of the Hebrew Bible, the Christian Old Testament has maintained the first five books. It is vital to understand that the name has its derivative from a root word that implies “to shoot something,” particularly an arrow. It also has other implied meanings such as guiding one in the right direction. It is therefore possible to translate the word to bring out the concept of teaching of offering instructions. In other context, the word had also been widely translated to mean “law.” As one may notice, it would appear that whereas Christian Old Testament may not be keen in using the first five books as the basis of Christian living, Judaists interpret the books in their original context as the basis of Godly living according to the teachings of Torah (Seitz, 2007, p. 47). On the other hand, there, Christians have the same version of the first five books. Even so, much emphasis has been placed on the Gospels as the basis that guides Godly living. This is particularly so in the understanding that Jesus major role also included fulfilling the earlier prophecies of the Hebrew Bible. As such, it is observable that another difference between the Jewish division of the Hebrew Bible and the Christian Old Testament is also on the hermeneutic interpretation (Seitz, 2007, p. 100). Christians Old Testament is interpreted as an ancient guide to Jewish living. The teachings and the guidance in the Christian Old Testament are seen to have been fulfilled in the New Testament. Whereas the Jewish division of the Hebrew Bible stresses on the Torah as the basis of living according to God’s will, the Christian Old Testament connects the same teachings with the teaching Jesus that He is the way, the truth and the light, that no one goes to the Father but by Him (John 14:6). This way, the Christian Old Testament is seen as incomplete without reference to the fulfilments in the New Testament. The books reveal some differences in their arrangement. This is particularly so in the book of Ruth that comes immediately after Judges in the Christian First (Old) testament. The possible explanation for this difference in the arrangement is that the Jewish division of the Hebrew Bible took consideration the time during which each scripture was written. On the other side, Christian First (Old) Testament takes consideration of the events covered in the scripture. For instance, the book of Ruth comes after Judges, consistent with the events that follow. In Ruth, the events covered are background narrations that lead to the birth of Boaz and later David. This helps to make events in Samuel relevant when Israel demands for a physical king like their neighbours and Saul the first king comes is introduced. The introduction of Saul is closely connected with the events around David, a personality whose roots had been introduced in Boaz’s family tree in the book of Ruth. Consequently, the intentional restructuring of the Jewish Bible by to make Christian Bible may be seen to target meeting continuity and chronological flow of events (Seitz, 2007, p. 138). One may also notice that the Hebrew Bible’s structure creates a different picture especially with regard to the fulfilment of God’s promise to Abraham. It takes it that God fulfils his promise when Israelites finally settle in new land and prospers as a strong society. It also covers the decline of the society, the exile and the return from exile as the restoration that ends with Chronicles. One of the critical things worth noting in this theology of the Old Testament and the Hebrew Bible is that one can neither reject the exegesis not neglect the hermeneutics. It is the same word rearranged and re-expressed in a different language (Seitz, 2007, p. 71). It is observable that the books of Chronicles do not appear as the last book in the Christian Old Testament. Rather, they come closely after an analysis of the events in Kings 1 and 2. This is particularly so as the events in Kings and Chronicles are somewhat related. Even so, it is not quite clear why Ezra and Nehemiah have earned an earlier place in the chronology of Christian Old Testament. The two books deal with matters pertaining to the return to the Promised Land. The books of Ruth had been placed much earlier after Judges so that the events are consistent with the chronology of the events. These are events prior to the appointment of Saul and David as the first and second Kings of Israel. Owing to this apparent harmony, one may find the choice of Ezra and Nehemiah coming much earlier than Ezekiel, Daniel and Jeremiah structurally quite misplaced. This is because whereas the former books focus on the prophecies about restoration during the return, the latter tell something during the exile. Owing to this, they ought to come first before Ezra and Nehemiah so that they offer continuity of Bible chronology. Even so, it would appear that the Christian Old Testament ending of the books with Malachi, just after Hosea to Zechariah seem to be chronologically relevant. This is despite the fact that Hosea to Malachi after Esther all the way to Daniel. It end with Malachi’s prophesy of the coming of Elijah the prophet whom the Bible identifies as John the Baptist (Seitz, 2007, p. 201). In conclusion, it is observable that as the Hebrew Bible seemingly forms a complete cycle of promise, fulfilment of the prophecy, movement into exile and finally restoration. The Christian Old Testament does not end with a fulfilment, but rather a preamble into another section prophecy fulfilment. Therefore, while Christian Old Testament has 39 books, Hebrew Bible has 24 books since Samuel, Kings and Chronicles are grouped as one book as well as the 12 books of minor prophecy also forming one books. Even though the rest of the books are not grouped, they appear at different chronological order. As one may observe, the major variation of the Hebrew Bible and the Christian Old Testament is in the arrangement and the interpretations that the arrangement provoke. In fact, a virtual structure connects the last books of Malachi and the Torah with the some gospels (Hill and Walton, 2010, p. 115). As Gillingham observes, the best way to understand the testaments, Hebrew Bible and Christian, is likely to be a pluralistic approach. Even so, Gillingham points out that sometimes exegetical and hermeneutical approach can have elements of bias (Gillingham, 1999, p. 181). His observation sums up the arguments that have been forwarded about the Bible structure comparisons. This is particularly with regard to intertestamental approach (Scott, 2000, p. 74). It would appear that structural variations that that exist came about originally as a result of individual’s exegesis as opposed to a common belief by many people. Bibliography Gillingham, S.E., 1999. One Bible, Many Voices: Different Approaches to Biblical Studies. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. Hill, A.E. and Walton J.H., 2010. A Survey of the Old Testament. Grand Rapids: Zondervan. Scott, J.J., 2000. Jewish Backgrounds of the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic. Seitz, C.R., 2007. Prophecy and Hermeneutics: Toward a New Introduction to the Prophets. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic. The Holy Bible. Christian Bible: New International Version. Read More