Post by msgolds on Sept 7, 2008 21:57:32 GMT -5
Hey all. This is the first response paper I need to write for my Jewish History, Culture and Society class this semester (I am a Jewish Studies minor at Virginia Tech). I footnoted my sources, but wasn't able to transfer them to the forum. If you want to see my Bibliography, let me know. Looking forward to hearing your responses!
There are very few works that are more frequently cited as a source of absolute truth than the Hebrew Tanakh. The Tanakh is composed of the five books of Moses (most frequently referred to as Torah or Teachings), the books of the Prophets, and the Writings. These books have all been ascribed a canonical status. In other words, the texts themselves have become sources of authority. Moshe Halbertal describes many different properties of canonization in his work: People of the Book. He defines a “normative” canon as one that establishes rules and laws by which a person or society lives. The Tanakh most certainly falls under this category, as it comes to be looked upon as a divinely inspired framework by which society should function. Rabbis endlessly debate the meaning of the texts, but the one thing that they can all agree on is that the Tanakh is the source which they should be working from. Halbertal further draws a distinction between open and sealed canons. A sealed canon is one which nothing can be added to, because it is definitive. The Tanakh is the perfect example of a sealed canon. If one even tries to add anything to it, it would be a futile attempt because it would not hold the same divine status as the current three components. By comparison, an open canon is one by which new elements can be added and have the same status as the preceding texts. An illustration of an open canon is the United States Constitution. The Constitution can be continually amended; and the amendments are able to cancel each other out (such as the eighteenth and twenty-first amendments). Any new addition to the Constitution is just as important as previous amendments. What should be noted is that while both open and sealed canons are considered authoritative, they can both be subjected to interpretations which lead to different practical applications of the same normative canons. For example, the United States Supreme Court settles disputes in interpretations of the Constitution, and Rabbis constantly argue about interpretations of the Tanakh. Therefore, just because a text is canonized, does not mean that everybody will view it the same way. The importance of a canon is that the source material is agreed upon.
One of the prominent features of the Tanakh is the writings of the Hebrew Prophets. The reason for their Canonization comes from the belief that they are divinely inspired. Perhaps the most quoted and well-known book is the Book of Isaiah. In the book, Isaiah makes reference to new era where everybody follows the word of the Lord, and war becomes non-existent (Isaiah 2:2-4). The passage is repeated almost verbatim in the book of Micah (Micah 4:1-4). The concept illustrated in these two passages becomes known as the Messianic Era, and is the basis for the belief in a Messiah that will lead the house of Israel into its golden age. An interesting point to be made, though, is that while the books of the prophets are currently sealed canons, they were obviously open at one point. The fact that the language and word-choice is almost the same suggests that one prophet cited the other. Similarly, the themes of both books are the same. The major motif in the first part of Micah is divine judgment as a result of conquest and godlessness. From this, it is likely to be inferred that both Micah 4 and Isaiah 2 were written in similar historical and political contexts.
Conversely, both passages are referenced in Isaiah 51:1-6. Many critics hold the belief that the book of Isaiah actually had multiple authors, and that Chapter 51 was composed by an unknown prophet who was dubbed “Deutero-Isaiah” around the end of the Babylonian exile. Because of this, the concerns of the Israelites have changed. Whereas early Isaiah seems to have been written during a time when the Kingdoms of Judah and Israel were constantly engaged in warfare (something the author deeply opposed as can be seen in 2:4), Isaiah 51 was written in a post-exilic Israel where restoration is a major concern. What that means is the overall intents of the authors are different. In early Isaiah, the author is anticipating the end of Israel and Judah as a result of war, conquest, and godlessness. In Isaiah 39 and beyond, the focus is more on “comforting” the people of Israel, and letting them know that the cause of restoration is not an impossible one. Isaiah 51:4 almost directly echoes the earlier passages’ message of G-d establishing His kingdom and conveying his teachings to the nation of Israel. However, now the intent is to comfort a despairing people, rather than to convey a message of divine justice. Essentially, the author takes an earlier canonized text, and reinterprets it. Even within the Bible itself, earlier canons are reinterpreted into a different context! Further, Christians also reference the book of Isaiah (which was a closed canon at that point) to affirm their belief that Jesus is the Messiah. In effect, the same canon was reinterpreted multiple times depending on the context.
The irony of canonization is that although a canonized text is authoritative in itself, the ways that it can be interpreted depends entirely on who is doing it and what context it is in. As is seen with Isaiah and Micah, canonical texts can cite each other. Along with that, canonical texts can reinterpret themselves depending on the historical context, as happened in Isaiah 51. This is not to mention the fact that even after a canon is sealed; it can still be reinterpreted, just as Christian scholars have done with the book of Isaiah. While canonized texts are more-or-less static, how people view them is completely fluid.
There are very few works that are more frequently cited as a source of absolute truth than the Hebrew Tanakh. The Tanakh is composed of the five books of Moses (most frequently referred to as Torah or Teachings), the books of the Prophets, and the Writings. These books have all been ascribed a canonical status. In other words, the texts themselves have become sources of authority. Moshe Halbertal describes many different properties of canonization in his work: People of the Book. He defines a “normative” canon as one that establishes rules and laws by which a person or society lives. The Tanakh most certainly falls under this category, as it comes to be looked upon as a divinely inspired framework by which society should function. Rabbis endlessly debate the meaning of the texts, but the one thing that they can all agree on is that the Tanakh is the source which they should be working from. Halbertal further draws a distinction between open and sealed canons. A sealed canon is one which nothing can be added to, because it is definitive. The Tanakh is the perfect example of a sealed canon. If one even tries to add anything to it, it would be a futile attempt because it would not hold the same divine status as the current three components. By comparison, an open canon is one by which new elements can be added and have the same status as the preceding texts. An illustration of an open canon is the United States Constitution. The Constitution can be continually amended; and the amendments are able to cancel each other out (such as the eighteenth and twenty-first amendments). Any new addition to the Constitution is just as important as previous amendments. What should be noted is that while both open and sealed canons are considered authoritative, they can both be subjected to interpretations which lead to different practical applications of the same normative canons. For example, the United States Supreme Court settles disputes in interpretations of the Constitution, and Rabbis constantly argue about interpretations of the Tanakh. Therefore, just because a text is canonized, does not mean that everybody will view it the same way. The importance of a canon is that the source material is agreed upon.
One of the prominent features of the Tanakh is the writings of the Hebrew Prophets. The reason for their Canonization comes from the belief that they are divinely inspired. Perhaps the most quoted and well-known book is the Book of Isaiah. In the book, Isaiah makes reference to new era where everybody follows the word of the Lord, and war becomes non-existent (Isaiah 2:2-4). The passage is repeated almost verbatim in the book of Micah (Micah 4:1-4). The concept illustrated in these two passages becomes known as the Messianic Era, and is the basis for the belief in a Messiah that will lead the house of Israel into its golden age. An interesting point to be made, though, is that while the books of the prophets are currently sealed canons, they were obviously open at one point. The fact that the language and word-choice is almost the same suggests that one prophet cited the other. Similarly, the themes of both books are the same. The major motif in the first part of Micah is divine judgment as a result of conquest and godlessness. From this, it is likely to be inferred that both Micah 4 and Isaiah 2 were written in similar historical and political contexts.
Conversely, both passages are referenced in Isaiah 51:1-6. Many critics hold the belief that the book of Isaiah actually had multiple authors, and that Chapter 51 was composed by an unknown prophet who was dubbed “Deutero-Isaiah” around the end of the Babylonian exile. Because of this, the concerns of the Israelites have changed. Whereas early Isaiah seems to have been written during a time when the Kingdoms of Judah and Israel were constantly engaged in warfare (something the author deeply opposed as can be seen in 2:4), Isaiah 51 was written in a post-exilic Israel where restoration is a major concern. What that means is the overall intents of the authors are different. In early Isaiah, the author is anticipating the end of Israel and Judah as a result of war, conquest, and godlessness. In Isaiah 39 and beyond, the focus is more on “comforting” the people of Israel, and letting them know that the cause of restoration is not an impossible one. Isaiah 51:4 almost directly echoes the earlier passages’ message of G-d establishing His kingdom and conveying his teachings to the nation of Israel. However, now the intent is to comfort a despairing people, rather than to convey a message of divine justice. Essentially, the author takes an earlier canonized text, and reinterprets it. Even within the Bible itself, earlier canons are reinterpreted into a different context! Further, Christians also reference the book of Isaiah (which was a closed canon at that point) to affirm their belief that Jesus is the Messiah. In effect, the same canon was reinterpreted multiple times depending on the context.
The irony of canonization is that although a canonized text is authoritative in itself, the ways that it can be interpreted depends entirely on who is doing it and what context it is in. As is seen with Isaiah and Micah, canonical texts can cite each other. Along with that, canonical texts can reinterpret themselves depending on the historical context, as happened in Isaiah 51. This is not to mention the fact that even after a canon is sealed; it can still be reinterpreted, just as Christian scholars have done with the book of Isaiah. While canonized texts are more-or-less static, how people view them is completely fluid.