Timeline for How do books which have obviously been compiled become part of Tanach?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
18 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 13, 2017 at 12:41 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://judaism.stackexchange.com/ with https://judaism.stackexchange.com/
|
|
| Apr 25, 2014 at 4:27 | comment | added | Baby Seal | Jackpot! traditionarchive.org/news/originals/Volume%2030/No.%202/… | |
| Apr 25, 2014 at 4:15 | comment | added | Baby Seal | Here's a start! judaism.stackexchange.com/a/10527/4682 | |
| Apr 25, 2014 at 4:07 | comment | added | Shmuel | @DoubleAA - ? Rashi and Ibn Ezra think it was written in Babylon. Simple p'shat is that it was written there. See my answer on the linked question. | |
| Apr 25, 2014 at 4:04 | comment | added | Shmuel | Re Scholars: Some of them, yes. Others, no. Not sure how that's relevant. Ecclesiastes\Kohelet has words that weren't used in early Biblical times, but are used in Second Temple\Mishna times, like (3:1) "זמן" (Used in Esther, Ezra & Nehemiah, but not before; Thus Kohelet wasn't written before Second Temple era.) | |
| Apr 25, 2014 at 4:01 | comment | added | Double AA♦ | @Shmuel Not definitely if you take every Midrash as historical fact. | |
| Apr 25, 2014 at 3:59 | comment | added | Shmuel | Psalms was definitely still being written long after David. See Psalm 137. I'm not an expert on Daniel, but maybe Talmud considered him as not a prophet because his work was already not part of Prophets? | |
| Apr 25, 2014 at 2:56 | history | edited | Shmuel | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 177 characters in body
|
| Apr 25, 2014 at 0:09 | history | edited | Shmuel | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 143 characters in body
|
| Apr 24, 2014 at 23:59 | history | edited | Shmuel | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
clarified
|
| Apr 24, 2014 at 23:53 | history | edited | Shmuel | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 421 characters in body
|
| Apr 24, 2014 at 23:36 | history | edited | Shmuel | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added source
|
| Apr 24, 2014 at 23:07 | comment | added | Baby Seal | sacred-texts.com/jud/gfp/gfp132.htm | |
| Apr 24, 2014 at 21:56 | comment | added | Shmuel | Neviim Acharonim (Ezekiel, Jeremiah, etc) are different, as they're mostly Prophecy (not narrative). However, they're not inerrant because while the prophecy is from God, the books are the prophecies as understood and interpreted by the prophet. This is explicit in the books themselves. For example, see Jeremiah chapter 1. I'll look for explicit Talmudic\Rishonim sources regarding inerrancy and post later. | |
| Apr 24, 2014 at 21:53 | comment | added | Shmuel | Those books also contain little actual prophecy, and the prophecies that they do contain seem to be specific to those circumstances - ie, God telling Samuel to annoint David. I don't know of any explicit sources regarding the (lack of) inerrancy of these book off-hand, but I'll look. | |
| Apr 24, 2014 at 21:51 | comment | added | Shmuel | Neviim (Prophets) can be split in two. First Prophets - Joshua thru Kings - is mostly narrative, similar in style to Torah. But these books also mention that they're based, in part, on outside sources, specifically jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/judaica/… | |
| Apr 24, 2014 at 8:25 | comment | added | user4951 | So, in Judaism, only torah is inerrant. The rest of the tanach while very accurate and "worthy" is not inerrant. That's the difference between Christian typical inerrant doctrine and Judaism. What about talmud? That's even less inerrant | |
| Apr 24, 2014 at 1:17 | history | answered | Shmuel | CC BY-SA 3.0 |