My Tanakh is going forward

[Christina]

Incidentially, a similar situtation exists on the NT side. For those of you who have "Aramaic New Covenant Peshitta Text with Hebrew Translation", it also marks their version of the original lectionary divisions. The fact that Eastern Semitic believers did this to their NT back in the day is one of the most important yet neglected areas of our research, in my opinion.

Well then akhi, let's start a thread about.

[Burning one]

Shlama akhi,

the MATARA project sounds utterly daunting! keep up the excellent work and may Yah give you and all involved with it the strength and vision to present it in a way that will work simply and be most beneficial to the Body.

as for the lectionary divisions, this is news to me, as i don't have the "Aramaic New Covenant Peshitta Text with Hebrew Translation." the closest i've got is a bound copy of the Hebrew character version of the Western 1905 from torahwellsprings.org, which i hardly use.

i'd be interested in learning more about these NT divisions. from whence did they arise? and are they standard like the setumot and petuchot of the TN"K? is it any relation to the Karkaphensian?


Chayim b'Moshiach,
Jeremy

[Andrew Gabriel Roth]

Shlama Akhi Jeremy,

The lectionary phenomenon appears to be something carried over by Christian communities straight from Nazarene practice. I have traced it back almost all the way to the apostolic age from Greek and Aramaic traditions.

As you know, the word in Hebrew for "read" is qara (also "to call"). The received Tanakh text is called Miqra, and the earliest reference to reading to an assembly is in Exodus 24:7--And he took the book of the covenant, and read (QRA) to the audience of the people: and they said, All that YHWH said will we do, and be obedient.

Now 2000 years ago there is evidence that within Judaism two forms of this reading were in place. In Israel, the practice was to read through the entire Tanakh within 3 years, which included the Ketuvim. This may have originated with people reading the Psalms, 150 in all, once a week.. The Babylonian practice was a one year cycle of Torah and haftorah, divided into 54 sidrot. Eventually, this practice won out and the original tri-ennial practice was forgotten. Even today, no one can reconstruct exactly how Tanakh was read over 3 years.

The NT however has traces of both conventional Jewish and Nazarene practice (evidence for both 1 and 3 year systems implied therein is a constant debate), and the Aramaic carries over the Hebrew term, again QRA. Of course Y'shua was under this system when he read from Isaiah 61 in Luke 4. If that synagogue was following Babylonian practice---which is possible--it might be possible to know the exact week this happened.

Ya'akov 2:2 uses the term KNOOSHTA (knesset) rather than later EIDATA/ADAT to describe the assemblies, and the principal function of the assemblies was to read the Torah and, later, the Gospels and Rav Shaul's letters. Colossians 4:16 and 1 Thess 5:26 certainly suggest this on the Nazarene side.

On the conventional side, Luke 24:44 may imply the triennial cycle with "Torah, Prophet and Psalms". Psalms were part of the Ketuvim section which is not in weekly cycle under the 1 year system. On the other hand, Acts 13:15 may suggest the opposite, or perhaps both systems were in play, one in Jerusalem and the other in Pisdian Antioch. Acts 28:23 is even stronger in suggesting this:

When they had set a day for Paul, they came to him at his lodging in large numbers; and he was explaining to them by solemnly testifying about the kingdom of Elohim and trying to persuade them concerning Y'shua, from both the Torah of Moses and from the Prophets, from morning until evening.

In any case, some form of this carried over by the time Rav Shaul's letters were circulating amongst both Nazarene and Christian asemblies. The earliest traces of this practice appear to follow the tri-ennial model, again 150 divisions. The main difference is of course the readings were scheduled on Sunday rather than Shabbat. They read Gospels and then Tanakh.

In many cases, it seems the early mss were more lectionaries than actual "regular"mss. They did not use, as far as I am aware the petuchot and other Masoretic style markings. When looking at Khabouris, I thought some of the stray letters might have served this purpose, but that was a brief notion that I quickly abandoned.

However, it did seem to my eye that the division of the books themselves did have an impact on the way the Gospels were to be interpreted. For example, the traditional first chapter of Matthew ends with verse 17, which to my mind is very significant in light of the Gowra Scenario. That division may (and to my mind clearly does) indicate a separation of thought between the past Joseph of verse 16 who is Mary's guardian and the Joseph of verse 19 who is her husband.

Hope this helps!

[Burning one]

Shlama akhi Andrew,


thanks for the indepth reply. the congregation i attend actually is nearing the end of a 3-year cycle of just the Torah. i think we'll be finished by the end of July. we used the 1-year cycle for a few years, but then decided to change it up and try the triennial method. it has been so very eye-opening. i've been blessed to see, like David prayed, wonders out of the Torah! we've decided to just keep going after D'vareem is finished, so the entire congregation can, as a whole, read about what happens when the nation finally enters the promised land. it will be an even bigger change for us, but we're looking forward to it.

as for the lectionary divisions of the NT, is there any way to see them other than purchasing the Hebrew book you mentioned? it would be interesting to see the break-down listed easily, at least. what a great tool that could be for understanding context! like with how you've mentioned the ending of Matti at verse 17, it does affect the way the content is processed in our brains, and thus would seem to clarify possibly gray areas of intepretation.

thanks again for the information!

Chayim b'Moshiach,
Jeremy

[Andrew Gabriel Roth]

Shlama Akhi Jeremy,

Actually I mis-spoke. The division is at 2:18, not 1:17. There also appears to be a difference between the weekly portions and the chapter divisions.

[rungold315]

What is the update on your Tanakh, Andrew? And would you please be able to give your viewpoint on books in the Tanakh that the NT appear to quote, but arent included in our canon such as Enoch and Maccabees?

[distazo]

Shlama all--

There are many wonderful surprises on my books and materials that are coming out in the next year or so. Today though I just wanted to let all of you know that the MATARA project (Masoretic-Targumic Amplified Edition) is officially given the go ahead.

Stay tuned!

Andrew,

If you have finished it, I would like to translate it to Dutch <!-- s --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/smile.gif" alt="" title="Smile" /><!-- s -->

Regards

[Ben Masada]

Shlama all--

There are many wonderful surprises on my books and materials that are coming out in the next year or so. Today though I just wanted to let all of you know that the MATARA project (Masoretic-Targumic Amplified Edition) is officially given the go ahead.

Not giving out too many details here except to say that I am putting together readings from all the ancient voices the Masoretes would have listened to, and indented and footnoted the targums of Jonathan and Onkelos, Samaritan, Peshitta, DSS and so on. I am working on Genesis right now, as well as other aspects related to AENT and my other three books. It's going to be a great ride. WIth YHWH's help a good portion of this may surface in the next year or so.

Stay tuned!

--------------------------------------------
Shlama Andrew, I need some help with regards which tables of stone on which the Ten Commandments were written by Whom.

With regards to the first tables of stone, the text says that they were the work of God, and the writing was the writing of God graven upon the tables. That's in Exodus 32:16. Now, with regards to the second set of stones, I am having a problem to find out what happened. The Lord said to Moses to hew two tables of stone so that He (the Lord) could write upon these tables the words that were on the first tables. That's in Exo. 34:1. However, if you read verses 27,28, we have the Lord saying to Moses himself to write these words of the Covenant on those tables hewed by Moses, and Moses wrote upon them the Ten Commandments. I don't want to think about contradiction in the Tanach, but what is happening here?

Ben

[Thirdwoe]

GOD writes through the hands of His Anointed Servants...And Speaks through the mouth of His Chosen Messengers... Awesome. The Word of GOD coming through Human agency, as GOD intended it to be.