GarySpFc>>> The psalms are not what we know as the Book of Psalms, but the Writings. <<<

CHGhanbari>>>Then why didn't He say, the Writings? As you know, the Psalms were part of The Writings; seems to me that by saying "psalms" He meant "psalms", and if He meant the Writings he would have said the Writings....unless the Bible is in error, of course, or unless you are merely indulging in semantics against the clearly stated teachings of the word....<<<

The Hebrew "Holy Scriptures" are known as the Tanakh. The Tanakh has three divisions which were known and accepted in the time of Jesus. These three divisionas are the Torah, Neviim and Kethuvim. For example ... Nevi'im means "The Prophets" But it includes MANY books that we don't normally think of as being "Prophetic books" Like Joshua, Judges, 1 and 2 Sam, 1 and 2 Kings. But, even though it includes books OTHER THAN the Major and Minor prophets, it is still called "The Nevi'im" ... the Prophets.

The third section of the Tanakah, is the Writings, which in Hebrew is "Kethuvim" The Psalter HEADS UP the Kethuvim, hence it generally is thought of as standing for it. But the "writings" includes MORE than just the Psalms, and that is why Jesus used that division in Luke 24:44. The Kethuvim includes: Psalms, Proverbs, Job, Song of Songs, Ruth, Lamentations, Ecclesiastes, Esther, Daniel, Ezra, Nehemiah, 1 and 2 Chronicles. That Jesus meant these three to be divisions of the O.T. is clear from the context. These three divisions are also mentioned by the grandson of Jeshua Ben Sira when, shortly after emigrating from Palestine to Egypt in 132 BCE.

"The books of the Hebrew Bible are traditionally twenty-four in number, arranged in three divisions, Torah, Prophets and Writings….. In the Writings, fiirst come the Psalms…" The Canon of Scripture" F.F. Bruce

"The threefold division of the Hebrew Bible is reflected in the wording of Lk. 24:44 (‘the law of Moses . . . the prophets . . . the psalms’); more commonly the NT refers to ‘the law and the prophets’ (see Mt. 5:17, etc.) or ‘Moses and the prophets’ (Lk. 16:29, etc.)." The New Bible Dictionary

"This Torah is the revelation of God to Moses on Mount Sinai, contained in the Pentateuch, as well as the other biblical books, known to Israel all together as Tanakh (for Torah, Nebiim, Ketubim, that is, Torah, prophets, writings), and to Christendom as the Old Testament." The Mishnah

"They indicate that it was customary to divide the sacred books into three categories: law, prophets, and the rest, the most famous of which was Psalms." The Dead Sea Scrolls Today

"The next time this threefold division is used is in Lk 24:44 where Jesus speaks of the "law of Moses and...the prophets...and the psalms." Wycliffe Bible Encyclopedia

"This threefold division was also attested to by Josephus (a.d. 37–95), Bishop Melito of Sardis (ca. a.d. 170), Tertullian (a.d. 160–250), and others." The Moody Handbook of Theology

"Jesus Christ accepted the books of the Old Testament in the same threefold division that was common to th e Jews of his day. This is clear in his statement to his disciples: "These are My words which I spoke to you while I was still with you, that all things which are written about Me in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms must be fulfilled" (Luke 24:44). Josh McDowell, Josh McDowell’s handbook on apologetics

CHGhanbari>>>I suppose you also know that the Hebrew canon included only the Torah until the first century AD, and that the Hebrew canon of Torah, Prophets and Writings was not finalized around 90 AD, therefore when Jesus and Paul and the Apostles referred to holy Scripture, they meant the Torah.<<<

That’s not correct! You are referencing the Council of Jamnia (ca. a.d. 90) the rabbis had rejected the larger canon that continued in the lxx in favor of the twenty-four-book collection we have labeled the Hebrew Bible. Ultimately this Jamnian canon became the canon for Judaism as a whole.

The canon of Scripture was, of course, being formed as each book was written, and it was complete when the last book was finished. Some assert that all the books of the Old Testament canon were collected and recognized by Ezra in the fifth century b.c. References by Josephus (a.d. 95) and in 2 Esdras 14 (a.d. 100) indicate the extent of the Old Testament canon as the thirty-nine books we know. The discussions by the teaching-house at Jamnia (a.d. 70–100) seemed to **assume this existing canon.** A Survey of Bible Doctrine

"We have no evidence that the Jamnian rabbis either defined a canon or issued any authoritative decree about one." The Dead Sea Scrolls Today

The Hebrew Canon: Among Jews, the oldest canon appears to have been the one defining the Torah (the first five books of modern Bibles), which was not only the central document of Jewish faith but also the fundamental law of the Jewish nation. These five books reached final form and were set apart not earlier than the mid-sixth and not later than the fourth century b.c. It is the one canon upon which all Jewish groups, and also Samaritans and Christians, have usually agreed. Harper’s Bible Dictionary

The Writings was the LAST section of the Hebrew Bible to be canonized. According to Dr. Roland E. Murphy's commentary on the Wisdom Literature ... which, essentailly, is the "Writings" it was generally accepted by the time of the translation of the LXX, which would be the middle of the 3rd Century BCE. Some debate still existed, but by 100 BCE, however, there would be NO question as to it's acceptance, in Hebrew, but absent the Apochrypha found in the LXX. They would still consider the Apochrypal books as being important ... as usefull ... as we should, but they didn't accord them the highest standing.

Dr. Roland E. Murphy, O.Carm. Professor of OT at Duke. He is also the senior editor for the OT in the NRSV.3 New Jerome Biblcal Commentary.

"Thus they endorse as genuine and authentic the canon of the Jewish Scriptures. The Septuagint Version (q.v.) also contained every book we now have in the Old Testament Scriptures. As to the time at which the Old Testament canon was closed, there are many considerations which point to that of Ezra and Nehemiah, immediately after the return from Babylonian exile." Easton’s Bible Dictionary

"Also, the so-called Council of Jamnia is a very shadowy thing. There is no contemporary information on it. Moreover, the books there questioned were questioned not for admittance into the canon, but as to their continued acceptance…… Any discussion of rabbis at Jamnia proves absolutely nothing about the close of the canon. It only shows that questions of canonicity keep popping up! 1" Wycliffe Bible Encyclopedia

"The Jewish Canon closed with the writing of Malachi (c. 420 b.c.)." The KJV Study Bible

"The Book of Malachi closed the Old Testament canon in perhaps about 397 b.c. Word In Life Study Bible

"The Old Testament Canon is ratified by the fact that the present Old Testament books were those accepted in the time of Christ and endorsed by him, and that of the 275 quotations of the Old Testament in the New, no book out of the Canon is quoted from except perhaps the words of Enoch in Jude.—Ed.)" Smith’s Bible Dictionary

"Ezra organized the synagogue. He was the founder of the order of scribes. He helped settle the canon of Scripture and arranged the Psalms." Thru the Bible Commentary

"According to Jewish tradition, Zechariah was a member of the Great Synagogue that collected and preserved the canon of revealed Scripture." Talk Thru the Bible

"Some scholars appeal to ecclesiastical or conciliar decisions as the basis for the selection of the sixty-six books of the Bible. A rabbinical gathering at Jamniac. a.d. 90 debated the canonicity of some Old Testament books, but every indication points to the acceptance of the thirty-nine books of the present Old Testament at a much earlier time." Believer’s Study Bible

Romath, if you care what my opinion is, I take Jesus to have meant we are no longer under the letter of the Mosaic law, but we are still under the intent of it; i.e., to love God and our neighbor as ourselves.

-------------------------------------

Subj: Re:CHG & Wade in Left Field

Date: 97-09-14 01:29:47 EDT

From: RVWade1

GarySpFc >>> Sorry RVW, but Mike and I believe there is an absolute truth, and therefore Conservative Theology is not speculative. <<<

Of course. The key word is "believe". I know a guy, a patient of mine, who believes he is JFK in a federal witness protection program. I regard that as speculative on his part -- and he talks to others about my being stuoid and mentally ill because I doubt him. No matter how fervently you believe that you know what you only believe, you only believe it. Theology is without evidence of its subject. It is purely 100% speculative.

>>> Maybe Conservative Theology is speculative in your eyes, but then your relative position on issues changes year by year, month by month, day by day, minute by minute, second by second and so on. <<<

Well, no. My positions don't change so frequently. However, they DO change whenever new knowledge or thought warrants a change. You see, unlike you, I wasn't born knowing everything and being absolutely right about everything, so I've learned and changed all my life, and hope I never stop. When I do, I'll be dead, comatose, or suffering fron Alzheimer's Disease, and it will mark quite a change in me. In your case, there won't be much change even then -- over your current mental state. Yep, you're solid alright -- like concrete, or a granite tombstone.

Subj: Re:CHG & Wade in Left Field

Date: 97-09-14 01:31:44 EDT

From: RVWade1

GarypFc >>> Dear Casey, there is a profound difference between adding to Scripture and searching out the Scripture in deeper and broader context to discern God's will. <<<

No. It's a subtle difference, and I can't even imagine you being subtle.