Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: A.A. Cunningham
The Hebrew/Palestinian Old Testament Canon was not established until 100 AD by Jewish rabbis at Jamnia.

Prove it. I know you can't, so that's why I say it. You are referencing the same council of Jamnia that I noted never happened. It isn't a question of another date or whatever, it didn't happen. There was a meeting around that time in Yevnah

"The Rabbis never included the Apocrypha in the canon. The canon was fixed two centuries before Yavneh. This is explicit in numerous places in the Talmud." - Rabbi Shlomo Yaffe, Chabad.org

When I studied on this some time ago, I was referred to the above by the Jewish Learning Institute. And I only went there after finding that the best studied experts on the matter had concluded quite independantly that no council took place at Jevnah in 100AD or anytime therabouts. There is also no mention in that time frame of any modification of the Canon whatsoever. There not only is no evidence supporting your claim, the evidence argues against even the plausibility of it. It didn't happen.

That is factually incorrect. The Alexandrian/Greek Canon existed prior to the Hebrew/Palestinian Canon.

You haven't established that there was an Alexandrian Greek "canon". There was the LXX back at that time; but, you can't produce a catalogue list of what the original content of the LXX was. And per the Jewish scholarship, the deuterocanon was never canonized by the Jews. Never - in any form. So if the LXX was ever canon, the form that would have taken would have excluded the deuterocanonicals. Plain and simple any way you cut it. You can try to argue on semantics games; but, you can't escape the facts.

..Hebrew renders their rejection moot on at least one of the four criteria utilized by the Council of Jamnia.

Given that there was no council and they didn't do anything with the canon at yavneh, commenting on criteria used is rather absurd.

114 posted on 09/11/2005 6:20:17 AM PDT by Havoc (Reagan was right and so was McKinley. Down with free trade. Hang the traitors high)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 110 | View Replies ]


To: Havoc

Leaving open the question: why accept the Tanakh, since it, or at least those who clung to it, were anti-Christian? Council or not, Jamnia at least symbollically marks a break between Jews and Jews--between those who accepted Jesus and those who didn't. So far as I can tell, the Talmud seems to be the work of men who didn't believe --much--in Messiah. or at least were trying to distance themselves from Christianity as an ideology.


117 posted on 09/11/2005 6:33:31 AM PDT by RobbyS ( CHIRHO)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson