The Evangelical Universalist Forum

The order and number of books in the Bible

Theology Biblical Theology
#1

[size=150]OLD TESTAMENT[/size]

Did you know that originally the Old Testament was only 22 books? Jerome, when he translated the Old Testament into Latin, made it into the 39 books which we have today. Here is how the Old Testament was originally ordered.

I. THE LAW (TORAH)

  1. Genesis
  2. Exodus
  3. Leviticus
  4. Numbers
  5. Deuteronomy

II. THE PROPHETS

  1. Joshua and Judges
    [reckoned as two separate books by the Jews after the 2nd century]
  2. The Book of Kingdoms (Samuel and Kings)
    [reckoned as two separate books by the Jews after the 2nd century]
  3. Isaiah
  4. Jeremiah
  5. Ezekiel
  6. The Twelve (Hosea to Malachi)
    [always reckoned as one book by the Jews]

III. THE HOLY WRITINGS (or THE PSALMS because it was the
first book in the collection in this “Royal Division”)

  1. The Psalms
  2. The Proverbs
  3. Job
  4. Song of Songs
  5. Ruth
  6. Lamentations
  7. Ecclesiastes
  8. Esther
  9. Daniel
  10. Ezra-Nehemiah [reckoned as one book by the Jews]
  11. The Book of Chronicles [reckoned as one book by the Jews]

This is quite staggering when you realize that if we had kept the scriptures in this order we would have 49 books of the bible (the perfect number 7 times 7) instead of 66 (we all know that 6 is widely held to be the number of man). I don’t mean to get off on numerology and such, I just find it REALLY interesting.

[size=150]NEW TESTAMENT[/size]

While this is less radical it should be recognized that the books order of the New Testament in some of the earliest manuscripts is NOT what we have in our modern day bibles.

Prof. Scrivener, after examining over 4000 manuscripts of the New Testament, said:

**“Whether copies contain the whole or a part of the sacred volume, the general order of the books is the following: Gospels, Acts, Catholic Epistles, Pauline Epistles, Apocalypse.”

Introduction to Criticism of the New Testament, vol. I, p.72**

This means that the epistles of James, Peter, John, and Jude came BEFORE Paul’s letters. Not only this but originally Hebrews was positioned right behind 2 Thessalonians (making a better case for it being Paul’s epistle).

What do you think? Should the bible have stayed in its original order and number? Is this just semantics? I personally would love to see a bible in English that followed the pattern of the original.

#2

I’m not sure I agree with Dr. Scrivener about the order of the New Testament canon. The Muratorian Fragment, for instance, lists them more or less in our present order. As the OT goes, I think the contemporary order pretty much follows the Septuagint (we separate books that it combines and omit the Apocrypha that it includes and so on, but it’s closer to the LXX than to the Masoretic), but I know that, for instance, the Jewish Publication Society puts out an OT using the Masoretic book order.

#3

What is also interesting is the emphasis Šemot/Exodus has over Bereishit/Genesis in Jewish thought. Though Genesis precedes Exodus chronologically, it is not really considered the first book of the Tanakh. Exodus is considered the basic book of the Tanakh because Yahweh is seen primarily as the Liberator – not as the universal Creator I think we Christians tend to overemphasize. In Hebrew, Egypt is called Mitsrayim meaning “dual besiegement”. Ellul (1991) writes that the rabbis explain this dual besiegement as “the anguish of living and the anguish of dying” and believe that this is the dual bondage Yahweh has liberated us from (Egypt is therefore a type). The Yahweh of the Tanakh, at least to rabbis, is primarily this God – a Liberator.

#4

Restoring the original order
askelm.com/restoring/index.asp

#5

Exactly where I got these idea lol. Thanks for posting it.