Jump to content

Talk:Development of the Old Testament canon

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Sources for future article expansion

[edit]

This article may have started from a crib of the EB 11 article, which was a gutting of the much more thorough EB 9 article:

  • "Canon" , Encyclopædia Britannica, 9th ed., Vol. V, New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1878, p. 1–15.
  • "Canon" , Encyclopædia Britannica, 11th ed., Vol. V, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1911, pp. 190–191.

There's obviously more modern scholarship, but there might be lines that were simply copied that should be attributed and the EB 9 article is a good source for the traditional views in the 19th century, based on the surviving textual resources. See also the EB 11's article on the Bible, which has detailed sections on the canon:

 — LlywelynII 14:53, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Development of the Old Testament canon. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:10, 12 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Development of the Old Testament canon. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:16, 9 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Two books of Ezra.

[edit]

Galllager and Meade - citing Bogaert - state "Bogaert has emphasized that when the ancient canon lists, whether Greek or Latin, mention two books of Esdras, they must have in mind the books known in the LXX and Old Latin as Esdras A and Esdras B; i.e. our 1 Esdras and Ezra-Nehemiah." Somehow this article has been re-edited to reflect the formerly dominant critical opinion that separate books of Ezra and Nehemiah are intended in such references; in spite of there being no material evidence for such a division, either in the plentiful surviving manuscript witnesses before the 9th century or in patristic citations. Or does anyone know of recent scholarship that challenges Bogaert's finding? TomHennell (talk) 01:30, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

book of Baruch

[edit]

the Book of Baruch has always been considered canonical in the East; but in the West is never specified separately as canonical in early canon lists; its text being consistently cited as being from the Book of Jeremiah. Jerome, however, specifically excludes it from Jeremiah - and does not otherwise include it separately in the Vulgate - and consequently Baruch appears to have ceased to be considered as canonical by authorities in the West after the 5th centuries, only to regain canonical status in late medieval discussions. I have lifted the section on canonicity from the Book of Baruch article; but it no doubt needs some trimming. TomHennell (talk) 12:13, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Closing of the Jewish canon

[edit]

I've never heard this anywhere else, and it's not mentioned in the article cited.

In compiling his index of the Old Testament, Luther drew from the 24 books of the Hebrew Bible, which was still an open canon as late as 200 and probably even after the Catholic canon was set in 382. [9] 2603:6010:8100:F602:E909:3DA8:E747:C77B (talk) 18:53, 18 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Development_of_the_Old_Testament_canon&oldid=1250053381"