BIBLE
a book containing the sacred writings of the Jewish and Christian religions. The Hebrew Bible, a collection of ancient Hebrew sacred texts, is also included in the Christian Bible, forming its first part - the Old Testament. Both Christians and Jews consider it to be a record of the agreement (covenant) made by God with man and revealed to Moses on Mount Sinai. Christians believe that Jesus Christ announced a new Covenant, which is the fulfillment of the Covenant given in Revelation to Moses, but at the same time replaces it. Therefore, the books that tell about the activities of Jesus and his disciples are called the New Testament. The New Testament constitutes the second part of the Christian Bible.
Bible text. Most of the Old Testament books are written in Hebrew (Biblical Hebrew), but there are also passages in Aramaic, the language spoken by Jews after the 4th century. BC. Traditionally, the authorship of the Old Testament books is attributed to several leaders who became famous in Jewish history, including Moses, Samuel, David, and Solomon. However, it has now been established that many of the books are later compilations of ancient legends and documents. The Book of Genesis, for example, contains fragments written down in the 10th century. BC. and dating back to an oral tradition of 800 years ago, but the entire book was probably written down in its modern form no earlier than the 5th century. BC. The New Testament books appeared during the first century after the death of Jesus. They are written in Greek, although it is possible that one or two books were originally written in Aramaic and later translated into Greek. The authors of the New Testament books are considered to be the apostles and disciples of Jesus.
Biblical canon. The list of books that are considered divinely inspired and recognized as sacred in a particular religion is called the canon. The canons of the Old and New Testaments were established much later than the books that composed them were written. The canon of Hebrew Scripture was probably completed in the 2nd century. BC, during the Hasmonean era. The biblical books were divided into three groups: the “Law” or “Pentateuch” (Torah), which constituted the quintessence of the doctrine; "Prophets" (Nevi'im) - a collection of historical and prophetic books; "Writings" (Ketuvim), containing narrative material, poetic works, prayers and aphorisms of worldly wisdom. Rabbis who gathered in Jamnia at the end of the 1st century. AD, they tried to resolve the issue of excluding from the canon some books that had been approved before, but still left them as part of the Bible. The history of the Christian canon of the Old Testament turned out differently. In the 3rd-2nd centuries. BC. Among the Jews of the Diaspora who spoke Greek, a translation of Jewish religious books into Greek was carried out, to which the name Septuagint was assigned. The books of the Septuagint are arranged in a slightly different order: the Pentateuch, Historical Books, Poetic and Edifying Books, Prophetic Books. In addition, it contains some books excluded from the rabbinic canon. When Christianity began to spread among the Greeks, they used the Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible, the Septuagint. Currently used by the Roman Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox Churches, the Old Testament is a collection of Old Testament books arranged in the order of the Septuagint. The Protestant Old Testament contains only those books that are recognized as canonical in Judaism, but the order of the books of the Septuagint is preserved here. Books not included in the Jewish canon are either omitted or placed in an additional section as "Apocrypha." Just as with the Old Testament, the list of Christian writings considered canonical has changed over the centuries. The modern list, including 27 canonical New Testament books, accepted in its time by most of the major Christian sects, was formed by 367. It was officially recognized as definitive in 405.
Hebrew Bible. The modern Hebrew Bible largely conforms to the canon of Jamnia. In Hebrew it is called Kitve Kodesh ("Holy Scriptures") or Tanakh (an abbreviation for Torah, Nevi'im, Ketuvim). The Hebrew text is still considered official and is used in worship. Its standard text is based on the edition of a 10th century Jewish scholar. Moshe ben Asher, who corrected numerous copyist errors that had accumulated over the centuries. A widely distributed publication contains, in addition to the Hebrew original, its translation into Aramaic, as well as a commentary by Rashi, the great scientist of the 11th century. The entire Bible is considered sacred by Jews, but the Torah is especially revered. Every synagogue has handwritten Torah scrolls. Thanks to the rule that no Torah scroll can be destroyed, many ancient Torah manuscripts have been preserved that otherwise might have been lost. In the first centuries of our era, a code of oral law (Mishna) and a commentary on it (Gemara) were formed in Judaism. They expanded the system of biblical commandments, turning it into a set of regulations covering all aspects of Jewish life. Mishnah and Gemara in the 6th century. were compiled into one book called the Talmud. The Talmud is a highly revered book in Judaism, the formal and ritual aspects of which are determined by the Holy Scriptures in the Talmudic interpretation. The Jewish tradition of biblical exegesis is exceptionally rich. Rabbinic texts use a sophisticated system of interpretative techniques (middot) to explain and apply biblical texts to life. Interpretation (derash) was carried out at various levels, but the literal meaning of the text (peshat) retained significance on its own level. Philo of Alexandria (c. 20 BC - 40 AD) used an allegorical way of interpreting the Bible, thereby influencing later Christian exegesis even more than Jewish exegesis. Medieval Jewish commentators on the Bible (Rashi, ibn Ezra, Kimhi, Nachmanides, etc.) were mainly concerned with identifying the literal meaning, relying on new philological methods, but along with this, philosophical and mystical schools of interpretation flourished.
Catholic Bible. The Roman Catholic Church traditionally uses the Latin translation of the Bible. The early church in Rome used several Latin translations made from the Septuagint and the Greek New Testament. In 382, Pope Damasus commissioned Jerome, a major philologist and scientist, to make a new translation of the Bible. Jerome revised the existing Latin versions based on the Greek original, and edited the Old Testament based on the Hebrew manuscripts. The translation was completed approx. 404. Subsequently it superseded other Latin translations, and it came to be called the “generally accepted” (Vulgata versio). The first printed book (the famous Gutenberg Bible, 1456) was an edition of the Vulgate. The Catholic Bible contains 73 books: 46 books of the Old Testament and 27 books of the New Testament. Since the Old Testament here goes back to the Septuagint and not to the Hebrew Bible approved by the Sanhedrin of Jamnia, it contains seven books not included in the Jewish canon, as well as additions to the Books of Esther and Daniel. In addition, the Septuagint follows the order of books in the Catholic Bible. The main canonical edition of the Vulgate was published in 1592 by order of Pope Clement VIII and was called the Clement Edition (editio Clementina). It repeats Jerome's text (404), with the exception of the Psalter, which is presented in Jerome's edition before its revision taking into account the Hebrew originals. In 1979, the church approved a new edition of the Vulgate (Vulgata Nova), which took into account the latest achievements of biblical studies. The first translations of the Catholic Bible into English were made directly from the Vulgate. The most famous and widely used translation was the Douay-Rheims Bible (Duay-Rheims Version, 1582-1610). However, in 1943, Pope Pius XII gave strict orders to biblical scholars in their translation work to henceforth rely only on ancient Aramaic and Hebrew manuscripts. The result of this was new translations of the Bible. The position of the Roman Catholic Church regarding the authority of the Bible was formulated at the Council of Trent (1545-1563). In contrast to the Protestant reformers, who saw the Bible as the only foundation of their faith, the fourth session of the council (1546) decreed that Tradition - the part of Revelation not written in Holy Scripture, but transmitted in the teachings of the church - has equal authority with the Bible. Catholics were not allowed to read the Bible in translations not approved by the Church and without commentaries consistent with Church Tradition. For some time, reading biblical translations required permission from the pope or the Inquisition. At the end of the 18th century. this restriction was lifted, and since 1900 the reading of the Bible by the laity was even officially encouraged by church authorities. The Second Vatican Council (1962-1965) discussed the relationship between Scripture and Tradition: whether they should be considered as independent “sources of Revelation” (a more conservative point of view) or as sources that complement each other, “like two electric arcs in one searchlight.”
Orthodox Bible. The Orthodox Church consists of a number of related but independent churches, most of which are Greek and Slavic churches. The Bible of the Greek churches uses the Septuagint as the Old Testament and the original Greek texts of the New Testament. The Orthodox Bible is a translation of the Greek Bible into one of the dialects of the ancient Bulgarian language (the language of this translation is traditionally called Church Slavonic). Like the Catholic Church, the Orthodox Church bases its faith on Holy Tradition and Holy Scripture.
Protestant Bibles. There is no single Protestant Bible: all Protestant Bibles are translations made in the 16th century. during or after the Reformation. Even the King James Version has never achieved the status of an official translation of the Church of England, although it is often called the Authorized Version. In the Middle Ages, the Roman Catholic Church discouraged translations of the Vulgate for fear that without church guidance the text might be corrupted or that the words of the Bible might be misunderstood. However, Protestant reformers of the early 16th century. believed that God directly addresses man through the Bible and that reading and studying the Bible is the right and duty of every Christian. Translations were needed to provide the Bible to the majority of Christians for whom Latin was a dead language. “How can people think about what they cannot understand?” - asks one of the translators in the preface to the King James Bible. The Reformers were not the first translators of the Bible (in the period after the invention of printing and before the appearance of Luther's Bible in Germany, 17 editions were published in German). Protestant reformers either contributed to the translations or themselves undertook the translation of the Bible into the languages of their countries. They took as a basis not the Vulgate, but the Hebrew text of the Old Testament and the Greek text of the New Testament. In the early 20s of the 16th century. Luther translated the New Testament into German, Jacobus Faber into French, and William Tyndale into English. Translations of the Old Testament were carried out by the same translators in the next decade. Since then, many Protestant translations have been published.
Interpretation of the Bible. During the first centuries of the Christian era, biblical texts were believed to have multiple meanings. The Alexandrian school of theology, influenced by Philo, developed a system of interpreting biblical texts as allegories that contained hidden truths in addition to their literal meaning. Everything in the Bible was viewed from a Christian point of view, and the independent meaning of the Old Testament was actually ignored. Old Testament events and their participants were widely interpreted as prototypes of the events and characters of the New Testament; This method of interpretation is called typological. Thus, Jonah, ejected from the belly of a whale on the third day, was interpreted as a prototype of Christ, resurrected on the third day after the crucifixion. A rival theological school in Antioch developed a doctrine of the historical and literal meanings of biblical texts. This school rejected the search for allegories, except in cases where they consciously used them. The Latin church fathers tried to find a compromise between the extreme positions of the Alexandrian and Antiochene schools. In general, theologians were attracted to the system of figurative meanings. By the 11th-12th centuries. a classification that distinguished four types of meanings became generally accepted (it is widely used to this day): 1) literal, or historical meaning; 2) a figurative or metaphorical meaning that relates this text to Christ or his church; 3) anagogical meaning, revealing spiritual or heavenly truths; and, finally, 4) moral meaning, which relates to the soul and gives directions for life practice.
Reformation. Protestant reformers of the 16th century. rejected metaphorical interpretations and returned to the direct, historical meaning of the Bible. They were guided by the following principle: “Scripture is its own interpreter”; they believed that God directly enlightens the minds of those who, in the words of Calvin, read “as if they had heard these words from the mouth of God himself.” Nevertheless, different Protestant denominations have developed different approaches to the interpretation of biblical texts. Luther, for example, believed that the Bible contains the Word of God, but is not itself the Word of God. This position allowed him to distinguish between books of greater or lesser spiritual significance. Quakers insisted that the Holy Spirit could enlighten a person both directly and through the Bible. The Puritans saw the Bible as a codification of the law governing all public and private activities. In the 18th century Methodists and other movements preached that in the Bible God speaks exclusively about the salvation of man through Jesus Christ and nothing else should be looked for in it.
Doubts about the authority of the Bible. Since the 17th century. The development of the natural sciences and humanities gave rise to new problems in the interpretation of the Bible. Astronomers, geologists and biologists painted a completely different picture of the Universe than in Holy Scripture. A number of scholars have concluded that the Bible has undergone many changes. Thus, doubts were sown about the literal accuracy and traditional authorship of biblical books. And finally, the rationalistic spirit of the late 19th and early 20th centuries. reflected secular faith in the progress of mankind and the perception of the Bible as a relic, or even simply as a collection of superstitions. New research has led to the suggestion that the Bible is not the unchanging Word of God, but rather a historically determined record of man's search for God. First, the Catholic Church declared heretical the results of historical and natural science research that undermined the traditional teachings of the church. Later, under Pope Pius XII (1939-1958), the church began to encourage scientific research, declaring that its results, provided they were true, could not affect church traditions and dogmas. Protestant theology split into two camps. Fundamentalists insist on the literal truth of the Bible and do not accept any research by biblical scholars or natural scientists if their results contradict the Word of the Bible. Other Protestants, this especially applies to theologians and so-called scientists. historical-critical direction, are leaders in new critical research. One school of Protestant thought calls for the “demythologization” of biblical thought in order to remove the contradictions between natural scientific discoveries and the pre-scientific picture of the world presented in the Bible. Other Protestants argue that God cannot be known through scientific or historical methods, and that the growing body of knowledge regarding the authorship of the biblical books, the historical situation at the time they were written, and the changes made to them cannot overshadow the importance of the key concepts of sin, atonement, and Revelation.
Biblical studies. The scientific study of biblical texts is divided into two related disciplines: textual criticism and historical-critical analysis. The task of textual criticism is to restore the original text of biblical books. Historical-critical studies analyze the authorship of a text, the time of its creation, purpose, style, form and, if possible, oral predecessors.
Textology. The need to criticize the text arises due to the fact that the original manuscripts of the Bible have been lost, and the oldest copies that have come down to us differ significantly. The earliest complete manuscripts of the New Testament date back to the 4th century. Until 1947, when the Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered, containing parts of almost all the Old Testament books and written between 200 BC. and 100 AD, scientists had at their disposal the oldest copies of the Old Testament, dating back to the 9th-11th centuries. AD, with the only exception - a fragment of the Pentateuch of the 2nd century. BC. In antiquity and the Middle Ages, all texts were copied by hand and contain copyist errors. There were frequent cases of adding, changing, repeating and omitting words. Sometimes entire sections were destroyed or redrawn, often radically changing the meaning of the text. Since ancient times, biblical textual scholars (among Jews - starting with the Masoretes, and among Christian biblical scholars - since Jerome) have strived for accuracy; their work was based on careful comparison of handwritten versions of the text. Nowadays, the establishment of generally accepted criteria for comparing manuscripts, improving the knowledge of ancient languages and the discovery of new manuscripts has made it possible to put textual criticism on a scientific basis.
Historical-critical method. Historical criticism marks a new phase in biblical studies and was formed on the basic premise that the Bible was written by men. Specialists in the historical-critical method (which originated with Protestant scholars) study the Bible like any written document and do not take into account its place in the system of church doctrine. The purpose of historical criticism is to clarify the meaning that biblical texts had at the time of their creation, which allows them to speak to us modern people in a more understandable language. The historical-critical method has questioned the literal accuracy of most biblical texts and for this reason has caused and continues to cause a lot of controversy. Contemporary Catholic scholars also make significant contributions to historical-critical scholarship, primarily in the field of biblical archaeology. Many Jewish biblical scholars work in the field of historical criticism of both the Old Testament and the New Testament, making adjustments to the tendency of Christian scholars (even modernist ones) to see in the New Testament the spiritual completion of the Old Testament.
OLD TESTAMENT
The basis of the text of the Old Testament accepted in modern editions is the Hebrew Bible. It originally contained 24 books, divided into the following three sections: I. "Law": Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy. II. "Prophets", including the "early prophets" ("neviim rishonim"): Joshua, Judges, Samuel, Kings, and the "later prophets" ("neviim aharonim"): Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, 12 "minor prophets" . III. "Scriptures": Psalms, Job, Proverbs, Ruth, Song, Ecclesiastes, Lamentations, Esther, Daniel, Ezra, Chronicles. In modern editions, the books of Samuel, Kings and Chronicles are divided into two (in the Russian Synodal Translation of the Bible, the books of Samuel and Kings are called 1-4 Books of Kings, and Chronicles - 1-2 Books of Chronicles), the book of Nehemiah is separated from the book of Ezra, and the book of the Twelve Little The prophets are divided into 12 separate books, according to the number of prophets. The Catholic Bible also contains: Tobit, Judith, Wisdom of Solomon, Baruch, 1-2 Maccabees, as well as additions to Esther and Daniel. All this, together with 1-2 Esdras (in the Vulgate 3-4 Esdras) and the Prayer of Manasseh, is called “apocrypha” in the Protestant Bible.
BOOKS OF THE OLD TESTAMENT
Pentateuch. The books that describe the events from the creation of the world to the death of Moses are called the Torah, or Pentateuch. In ancient times, the manuscripts of the Pentateuch, due to the large volume of text, could not be written on one parchment scroll of the usual size, so the Torah was divided into the currently generally accepted five books (Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy), written on separate scrolls . These scrolls were kept in clay vessels (Greek: teuchos), hence the Greek term Pentateuchos, "five vessels (for scrolls)." The oldest texts included in it date back to the time of the “patriarchs” (18th century BC), and the latest sections could not have been written before the resettlement of the Jews to Babylon (6th century BC). In the 5th century BC. all this material, combined and edited by the Jerusalem temple scribes, acquired its current form. And only then, perhaps in the 2nd century. BC, the idea of the authorship of Moses arose. Despite the ideological, linguistic and stylistic diversity of its parts, the Pentateuch is a very integral monument. Its central theme is the connection between the fate of Israel and the plan of God revealed in the creation of the world and man. The early narratives in the Book of Genesis - the fall of Adam and Eve, the death of humanity in the universal flood, man's daring attempt to reach heaven with the help of the Tower of Babel - speak of the distance of the human race from its Creator, of the movement of people through wars and violence towards chaos and destruction. However, with the appearance of Abraham comes hope. God chose Abraham's descendants to be the pattern in which "all families of the earth would be blessed." What follows is the story of Abraham's descendants: his sons Isaac and Ishmael, Isaac's sons Jacob and Esau, Jacob's son Joseph. The book ends with the story of Joseph achieving high position in Egypt. The remaining books focus on the activities of Moses and the making of the treaty between God and Israel. The Book of Exodus tells the story of the liberation of the children of Israel from Egyptian slavery and how God gave Moses the laws on Mount Sinai. The book of Leviticus is primarily concerned with the order of worship. The Book of Numbers tells the story of Israel's 40-year wandering in the desert. It contains the results of the census of the Israelite tribes and some additional laws. In Deuteronomy, Moses instructs his fellow tribesmen before his death: he reminds them of the significance of the exodus from Egypt as the event that turned the Jews into the people of God, and briefly sets out the Law. This book ends with the story of the death of Moses on the border of the Promised Land. It is possible to distinguish four different layers of material attracted by the scribes when compiling the Pentateuch. These sources, usually called "codices", are now designated by the Latin letters J, E, D and P. None of them has come down to us in its original form, but scholars have reconstructed much of their purported content and their history. The oldest of the four sources is designated by the letter J (Yahwist). In all likelihood, it was something like a national epic, compiled in the 11th-10th centuries. BC. from the traditions kept by the Jewish tribes who lived in Canaan. J is the source of the well-known Genesis stories. Among them are the second story about the creation of the world (chapter 2), stories about Adam and Eve, Noah and the flood, about the promise given by God to Abraham, about the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, about how Jacob outwitted his older brother Esau by stealing his father's property. blessing. Codex J also contains much of the story of the exodus from Egypt and the wilderness wanderings discussed in the books of Exodus and Numbers. Some of the Codex J material survives outside the Pentateuch in the Book of Joshua. The name of the source J was given by one of its features associated with the sacred name of God. In Hebrew, where writing did not have vowels, the name of God was written with four consonants: JHWH (or YHWH), which may have been pronounced "Yahweh." According to the Book of Exodus, this name was unknown to people until God revealed it to Moses. However, in Codex J the name JHWH is often used in accounts of events that occurred before the birth of Moses. From about the 4th century. BC. the Jews did not pronounce the sacred name, but replaced it with the word Adonai (Lord). Bible translations generally take this practice into account. Thus, in the Russian translation of the Book of Genesis, the word Lord often corresponds to the abbreviation JHWH and often indicates that the phrase with this word is taken from the tradition of J. E (Elohist), the second source, is not as integral as J. It is a set loosely connected narratives and laws that probably circulated within the northern kingdom, Israel. This collection originated in the 8th century. BC, when Israel and Judah were separate kingdoms. Codex E contains many important narratives: about Abraham and Hagar, about Abraham's sacrifice of Isaac, about the rise of Joseph in Egypt. Among the legislative material is an early form of the Decalogue, or Ten Commandments (Exodus 20). This codex is designated by the letter E, since in the narrative of events that occurred before the revelation of the name JHWH, the deity is called exclusively Elohim (God). The third source, D (Deuteronomy), is a collection of documents compiled at court during the period of Israelite judges and kings (12th-8th centuries BC) and relating to civil, criminal law, and religious matters. The version of the Decalogue in Deuteronomy 5 probably came there from D. After the Kingdom of Israel was in 722 B.C. conquered by Assyria, this legislative material was written down by the surviving scribes who found refuge in the south, in Judea. Ultimately, it formed the core of Deuteronomium, from whose Latin name the letter D is taken. The latest of the four sources of the Pentateuch, P (Priestly Code), was compiled by Jerusalem priests during the Babylonian captivity (598-538 BC) , after the fall of the Kingdom of Judah. These priests wanted to rework national memories in the light of their main task - serving Yahweh in the Jerusalem Temple. Their final work was a combination of information from world history, cult rules and genealogy, based on many early sources. Thus, for example, the Decalogue in its modern form is version P, which is a reworking of versions E and D. The Priestly Code contains the first account of the creation of the world (Gen. 1), as well as the account of God's covenant with Abraham, which is a parallel text to the text J Some chapters of the Book of Exodus, the entire Book of Leviticus, and many chapters of the Book of Numbers, which contain cultic laws and make up most of the Pentateuch, are also included in source P.
"Prophets". Between 9th and 5th centuries. BC. In Palestine, a movement of prophets arises who believed that God was inspiring them to proclaim their will to the chosen people. They scourged kings, priests and commoners because they were mired in wickedness, turned away from God and neglected his laws; prophesied the approach of divine judgment over the kingdoms of Israel and Judah and called on listeners to repent and submit to the will of God. Stories about their deeds, sermons, and prophecies, embodying a view of history as divine judgment, dominate the second section of the Hebrew Bible, called “The Prophets.” The Early Prophets recount historical events from the death of Moses (c. 1400 BC) to the collapse of the Kingdom of Judah in the 6th century. BC. Most of the historical material of these books was written in the 8th-7th centuries. BC, although the written recording of the final parts, editing and compilation of books continued until the 5th century. BC. The Book of Joshua tells the story of Joshua's conquest of Canaan in the 14th century. BC. The Book of Judges speaks of the reign of military commanders-judges - Deborah, Gideon, Samson and others in the 13th-11th centuries. BC. The books of Samuel tell about the fate of the prophet and last of the “judges of Israel” Samson, about the creation of the Jewish state under Saul and its rise under David in the 10th century. BC. The Books of Kings describe the flourishing of the kingdom under Solomon, its division into two kingdoms - Judah and Israel - after the death of Solomon, and also contain warnings expressed by the prophets Elijah and Elisha. At the end of the story, it talks about the conquest of Israel by Assyria in 732-721 BC, the capture of Judea by the Babylonians in 598-587 BC. and the beginning of the subsequent exile to Babylon. Although the books of the "early prophets" are historical, their authors do not care about objectively recording the events of the Jewish past. Their goal is to show the development of a certain religious principle: the well-being of the country can only be counted on if people and their leaders fulfill the terms of the contract with God, and disasters and national catastrophes are divine punishment for evil and lawlessness. The view that God directs the history of his chosen people according to their good or evil deeds is derived from the teaching of the prophets. Thus, the "early prophets" provide the historical background for the sermons and poetic works of the prophets themselves, which are compiled into books called the "later prophets." The "later prophets" fall into two groups: the "major prophets" - Jeremiah, Isaiah, Ezekiel, and 12 "minor prophets". But if you read them in chronological order, you can better understand the development of the thoughts of the prophets in the context of the era. According to one view, the poetic works and sermons of the prophets were preserved in oral transmission by their disciples and were not written down until many years after the death of the prophets themselves. The exact dates of compilation of these books are still a matter of debate, and therefore all dates given are approximate. Amos (c. 751 BC) was a native of the southern kingdom of Judah, but prophesied mainly in the kingdom of Israel in the north. A prophet of divine justice, he announced that God would destroy Israel for its social injustice and moral depravity. God requires righteous behavior, not formal performance of rituals; and his commandments apply not only to Israel and Judah, but to the whole world. Hosea (heyday of activity 745-735 BC), the only prophet from the natives of the kingdom of Israel, whose sermons have reached our time. Like his teacher Amos, he emphasized that God loved his people even if they stopped worshiping him. Fulfilling the command of God, he took a harlot as his wife, which symbolized the betrayal of Israel, who began to worship foreign gods. Hosea proclaimed that God was suffering as a betrayed husband who still loved an unfaithful wife, and that the tribulations that Israel was destined to go through would ultimately bring about cleansing for them. Isaiah of Jerusalem (c. 740-686 BC) was, like Hosea, a disciple of Amos. He predicted (and later, while in the kingdom of Judah, witnessed the fulfillment of his prophecy) the conquest of Israel by the Assyrians (722 BC) and the captivity of the Israeli tribes. At the same time, he announced that the "remnant" of Israel would once again turn to Yahweh and at the end of history there would be universal peace, and all humanity would be united under the rule of the descendant of King David. Isaiah was the first to express the hope of the coming of the Messiah, which later had a strong influence on both Judaism and Christianity. Likewise, his idea of a “remnant” who would survive the destruction of Israel prepared the way for the idea of the universal purpose of the synagogue and the Christian church. Only the first 33 chapters of the Book of Isaiah can be attributed to Isaiah himself, however, some parts of these chapters are later insertions.
Micah of Moresheth (c. 700-650 BC) advocated for the oppressed poor and, like Amos, warned against magical ritual formalism. Zephaniah, Nahum and Habakkuk (heyday c. 626-620 BC) continued to preach in Jerusalem the will of the just God, the absolute master of history. Habakkuk deepened Isaiah's concept of faith and developed the theme of submission to the will of God without hopes of material gain. Jeremiah (626-581 BC) predicted and lived through the destruction of Jerusalem and its Temple. After the first siege and deportation of the Jews (598 BC), he wrote to the captives in Babylon, encouraging them and strengthening their resolve to resist assimilation. After the final destruction of Jerusalem (586 BC), he proclaimed that the religion of the Jewish people would survive the destruction of the state and that God would make a “new covenant” with the “house of Israel and the house of Judah” and write it on the hearts of the people (Jeremiah 31:31- 34). The book of the prophet Obadiah (after 586 BC) is the shortest in the Old Testament. It is, in essence, a reworking of chapter 49 of the Book of Jeremiah, which contains a prophecy about the death of the tribe of Edomites who helped destroy Judah. Ezekiel (593-571 BC), son of a Jerusalem priest, supported the spirit of the Jewish captives in Babylon. He developed the principle of individual (rather than national) responsibility for good and evil deeds. His vision of the new Temple (the last nine chapters of the book) formed the basis of the Jewish religion of the post-exilic period, which emphasized the fulfillment of the Law and cultic instructions. An obscure prophet from the era of the Babylonian captivity (c. 545 BC) is known as Deuteroisaiah. He owns the prophecies contained in ch. 40-55 Books of Isaiah. In a section called "The Song of Yahweh's Suffering Servant," he interprets Israel's mission as a sacrifice to atone for the sins of the world and calls for the new Israel to become the light of all nations, even to the ends of the earth. Haggai (flourished 520 BC) and Zechariah (fledged 520-517 BC) preached after the Persian conquest of Babylon in 539 BC, ending the captivity of the Jews. The Persians allowed the Jews to return to their homeland, but many chose to remain in Babylon. Haggai and Zechariah inspired those who returned to rebuild the Jerusalem Temple, the so-called. Second temple. "Tritoisaya" is the name given to the collection of poetic works that make up ch. 56-66 of the Book of Isaiah, and relating to the era of the Babylonian captivity and the period immediately following it (c. 500 BC). Joel and Malachi (c. 500-450 BC) ) tried to reform the religion and morality of Palestinian Jews. The book of Jonah (c. 400 BC), although included in the prophetic books, is not actually one. This is a text full of humor, which sets out the legend of the prophet who lived in the 8th century. BC. (mentioned in 2 Kings 14:25). Jonah, who opposed the will of God and did not want to preach to the Assyrians, was punished for this: he had to spend three days in the belly of a whale and suffer sunstroke. The book testifies that the Jewish religion of the 4th century. BC. universalist ideas were inherent. The purpose of the book is to show that Yahweh cares for all people, even the hated Assyrians of Nineveh.
The "Scriptures" are a motley collection of poetic works, songs, aphorisms, historical and prophetic texts. The Psalter contains hymns and prayers, partly dating back to very ancient times. Many of them were used in the Jerusalem cult between the First and Second Temples. The final selection probably dates from the 3rd century. BC. The Book of Job (c. 575-500 BC) is a dramatic poem set within the narrative frame of a folk tale. The righteous Job suffers one misfortune after another, which God sends to test the strength of his faith. In a series of conversations with his friends, Job tries to unravel how suffering can befall a righteous person. At the end of the poem, God declares that his ways are beyond human understanding, and Job submits to the divine will. The central character of the book is a non-Jew, and there is no mention of the covenant with God at Mount Sinai. The book shows a man at a crossroads in a world that seems hostile. There is still controversy over the time of its creation. The Book of Proverbs (c. 950-300 BC) is a collection of aphorisms and maxims of worldly wisdom. It offers a practical philosophy of life based primarily on success and a morality guided by prudence and common sense. The authorship of the book is traditionally attributed to Solomon, although the collection was compiled much later based on many sources. The Five Scrolls (“Megillot”) are books that are traditionally read on the five Jewish holidays. These are Song of Songs, Ruth, Lamentations, Ecclesiastes and Esther. The Song of Songs, traditionally attributed to Solomon, is probably a collection of wedding songs from the 10th to 9th centuries. BC. It is read on the Jewish Passover, when the exodus from Egypt is remembered. The Book of Ruth tells the story of the marriage of the wealthy landowner Boaz to the Moabite girl Ruth. Probably written between the 5th and 3rd centuries. BC, this book confirms the openness of the Jewish religion to foreigners: after all, it says that even David had foreign ancestors. The book is read on Shavuot, or Pentecost, the spring harvest festival. The Book of Lamentations, traditionally attributed to Jeremiah, consists of five poems lamenting the destruction of Jerusalem (586 BC) and dates back to the Babylonian captivity (586-536 BC). It is read on the 9th day of the month of Av, on the day of fasting, when Jews remember the destruction of the Jerusalem Temple. The book of Ecclesiastes, along with Proverbs and the Song of Songs, is traditionally attributed to Solomon, although it is more likely that all these books belong to an unknown author of the 3rd century. BC. The book of Ecclesiastes is full of pessimistic thoughts. This is a collection of aphorisms, the main meaning of which, unlike the Book of Proverbs, is that neither intelligence nor talent guarantee a person success. The book of Ecclesiastes is associated with the autumn harvest festival of Sukkot. The Book of Esther tells about the Jewish wife of the historically unknown Persian king Ahasuerus (in the Septuagint and Synodal translation - Artaxerxes). Thanks to her courage, the Jewish community of Persia was saved from extermination, which was prepared for it by the evil vizier Haman. The book is read on the holiday of Purim, a spring holiday dedicated to the memory of this event. It was probably created in the 2nd century. BC. The books of Chronicles (Chronicles), Ezra, Nehemiah are considered parts of a single book dating back to approximately 250 BC. and written, apparently, by one of the scribes of the Second Temple. This book returns to the historical events recorded in the books of Kings and contains additional material about David, Solomon, the Jerusalem Temple, and the kings of Judah and Israel. The history of the Jews is brought up to the author's contemporary period. The book describes the revival of the Jerusalem urban community after the return from Babylonian captivity (538-500 BC), the restoration of the walls of Jerusalem by Nehemiah (444 BC) and the legislative reforms carried out by the scribe Ezra (397 BC). . The Book of Daniel (c. 165-164 BC) is probably the latest in the Old Testament. It tells about the prophet Daniel, who lived in Babylonian captivity, and about the fulfillment of his prophecy about the capture of Babylon by the Persians. The final part of the book is the apocalypse, a revelation about the near end of history and the approach of God's Kingdom. Daniel's visions depict the main ancient eastern kingdoms of the era of the Maccabean revolt (168-165 BC).
Apocrypha. Apocryphal in Protestantism include some relatively late (2nd-1st centuries BC) biblical texts that are absent from the Jewish canon and therefore not included in Protestant editions of the Bible. This is Susanna, Bel and the Dragon, the Song of the Three Youths, included as later additions to the Book of Daniel. The Book of Tobit is a pseudo-historical novella placed by the Greek Bible between 1-3 Books of Ezra and the Book of Judith. It tells about the salvation of the pious old man Tobit, who was at first blind and ruined, but then returned to his former prosperity thanks to his son Tobias, who from a distant country brought wealth, a wife and a magical remedy that restored his father’s sight. The Book of Judith is a pseudo-historical tale not found in the Hebrew Bible, but preserved in a Greek translation from a lost Hebrew original and in a Latin translation from a lost Aramaic version. The Greek Bible places it among the books of history, between the Book of Tobit and the Book of Esther. Probably written during the persecution of Antiochus Epiphanes (c. 175-174), it tells the story of a Jewish woman who, in order to save her hometown of Betulia, seduces and then beheads the enemy general Holofernes. Jerome translated it and included it in the Vulgate on the basis that the Council of Nicaea (325) recognized this book as part of Holy Scripture. The Wisdom of Solomon and the Wisdom of Jesus Sirach contain aphorisms and practical everyday advice, reminiscent of the Proverbs of Solomon and Ecclesiastes. Baruch is a prophetic book attributed to the disciple of the prophet Jeremiah. At the end there is usually a message attributed to Jeremiah. 1-2 Books of Maccabees describe the struggle of the Jewish people for independence in the 2nd century. BC. (3 Book of Maccabees is not included in the canon of the Catholic Bible). 1 The Book of Ezra is a reworking of some parts of Chronicles (in the Synodal translation: the books of Chronicles), Ezra and Nehemiah. 2 Book of Ezra - a collection of apocalyptic visions. In the Vulgate these books are called 3-4 Books of Ezra. The Prayer of Manasseh is a plea for forgiveness addressed to God, attributed to the king of Judah, who was in Babylonian captivity.
HISTORY OF THE OLD TESTAMENT CANON
Since the time of Moses, the religion of the Jews has been based on a growing body of sacred laws. The earliest of these were probably the Ten Commandments (in their original form), carved on stone tablets. Further, among the priests and prophets of Israel, the idea of the canon of Scripture gradually formed, i.e. collections of books considered sacred, immutable, and of unquestioned authority. The first book recognized as canonical was the Book of the Law, found in the Jerusalem Temple in 621 BC, during the reign of Josiah. Apparently, this was the code of Israel's laws, hidden in the Temple by the priests who managed to escape from the Assyrian invaders a hundred years before this event. Josiah received it as the law of Moses. Before the capture of Jerusalem by the Babylonians, only this book was recognized as sacred. This was probably the core of source D, which later became part of Deuteronomy. More than 200 years later, a larger body of writings was canonized. For the celebration of Tabernacles in 397 BC. (according to other sources - in 458 BC) the scribe Ezra read aloud the Book of the Law of Moses, which he brought to Jerusalem from Babylon, where it was kept in the Jewish community. This book appears to have been the complete text of the Pentateuch, the first of the three collections of books that make up the Hebrew Bible to be accepted as canonical. In the 2nd century. BC. Two more collections of sacred books were canonized - the Prophets and the Scriptures - which were read during services in the Temple and synagogues. The prophets were apparently canonized c. 200 BC The Scriptures had an independent circulation, their composition and arrangement changed for a long time. Some rabbis of that time severely criticized and prohibited the reading of Ecclesiastes, Esther, and the Song of Songs. In the apocryphal II Book of Ezra, written c. 50 AD, seven dozen books are mentioned, the status of which has not yet been established. And only ok. 95 AD, after the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem by the Romans, a rabbinical congress in Jamnia officially drew a line under the biblical canon, approving a number of controversial books as canonical. The wisdom of Jesus Sirach was recognized as edifying, but devoid of divine inspiration. Most early Christians were familiar with the Old Testament through the Septuagint and often quoted scriptures that were not included in the canon approved by the Sanhedrin of Jamnia. However, this canon was authoritative even in Christian circles, and books not included in it were shelved by local bishops or priests. Over time, they began to be called apocryphal (“hidden”, “hidden”). By the 4th-5th centuries. Church communities in the West largely restored the authority of the Apocrypha and began to recommend them for reading, although some learned authorities - among them Jerome (d. 420) - did not go so far as to include them in their list of canonical books. Under the influence of Augustine (354-430), African councils of the late 4th century. - beginning of the 5th century recognized the apocrypha, but their rejection persisted for a long time. In 405 the canonicity of the apocrypha was confirmed by Pope Innocent I. In the Roman Catholic Church they are usually called "deuterocanonical" (forming a second, later canon). In early Protestantism, the authority of the apocrypha was largely rejected. Martin Luther declared them non-canonical texts, but included most of the books in an appendix to his translation of the Bible, stating that they were “profitable and good to read.” Over time, they were included in most German, French, Spanish, Dutch and other Protestant translations of the Bible. The Apocrypha is included in the earliest editions of the King James Bible (a translation published since 1611), and can be found in many modern editions of the Bible. However, most Protestants view them as not entirely canonical.
Pseudepigrapha. Some biblical texts, attributed to famous biblical figures for greater authority, are usually called pseudepigrapha (“falsely inscribed”). These include the Odes of Solomon, Psalms of Solomon, and the Book of Enoch.
ANCIENT BIBLE TRANSLATIONS
The Old Testament was written in Hebrew (with the exception of the Aramaic parts of the books of Ezra, Nehemiah, and Daniel), and already in ancient times the need for translations arose. These early translations are very important for the textual study of the Bible because they are older than the Masoretic Bible and they contain readings that are sometimes even more reliable than in the Masoretic text.
Aramaic Targums. In the middle of the 1st millennium BC. Aramaic (Syrian) becomes the dominant spoken language throughout the Middle East. The Jews, gradually forgetting classical Hebrew, increasingly understood the sacred texts that were read in the synagogues. Thus, the need arose for translations (“targumim”) from Hebrew into Aramaic. The oldest surviving targum is the Targum of the Book of Job, discovered among the Dead Sea Scrolls at Qumran. It was written around the 1st century. BC, but other surviving targums appeared later among Aramaic-speaking Babylonian Jews. The Targums are a paraphrase rather than a literal translation of the Bible. They bring a lot of explanation and edification, reflecting the spirit of their time. In many modern editions of the Hebrew Bible, the Aramaic Targum is given parallel to the Hebrew text.
Septuagint. The Greek translation of the Hebrew Holy Scriptures originated as a targum for Jews living in the Greek-speaking regions of the Middle East. Until 3rd century BC. Separate Greek translations were circulated. According to legend, the unofficial nature of these translations caused dissatisfaction, and a group of 70 or 72 eminent scholars of Alexandria made an official translation for the library of King Philadelphus Ptolemy (285-247 BC). However, it is more likely that the translation, which eventually came to be called in Latin the Septuagint, (the Translation of the Seventy [[interpreters]]), is a collection of edited oral translations into Greek recorded in synagogues. At first, the Jews favored the Septuagint. But with the emergence of Christianity, it became associated primarily with the Christian church. Then the Jews rejected it and made new translations into Greek. In the New Testament, the Old Testament is quoted, as a rule, from the Septuagint. The greatest theologian and philologist Origen of Alexandria (c. 185-254) made a huge contribution to the development of biblical textual criticism and exegesis. In his monumental work Hexaples, he wrote out in six parallel columns the Hebrew original, its transcription in Greek letters, and four Greek translations: the Septuagint and the versions of Aquila, Symmachus, Theodotion. Unfortunately, only a few fragments of this work have survived.
Other translations. Ancient translations of the Bible into Latin, Syriac, Ethiopian, Coptic, Arabic, Armenian, Georgian and many other languages have also reached us. Some of them were made by Jews directly from the original; Christian translations were carried out mainly from the Septuagint or other ancient translations. A number of Bible translators were forced to first invent an alphabet for languages that did not have a written language. This happened with translations into Armenian, Georgian, Church Slavonic and a number of others. The translations were very different - from literal to completely free; Thus, the learned bishop Ulfilas, who translated the Bible for the Goths, omitted the books of Kings. He believed that they would only fuel the warlike fervor of an already aggressive people.
THE TEXT OF THE HEBREW BIBLE AND TEXTOLOGICAL ISSUES
The original manuscripts of the Old Testament have not reached us. We have only relatively recent copies of the Hebrew Bible and ancient translations. The Hebrew text is the fruit of the work of many generations of copyists; it was often changed and distorted. Since many errors crept into the manuscript, the task of Old Testament textual criticism is to accurately restore those words that were written down at the earliest stage of written recording.
Texts of the scribes (soferim). For several centuries the text of the Old Testament does not appear to have been firmly fixed. Scribes-scribes of the early period (c. 500 BC - 100 AD), who are called "early scribes (soferim)", distorted the text: they made mistakes when copying, mishearing a particular word, misreading or having written it. There were spelling errors; words, lines or entire phrases were omitted, repeated or rearranged; words that were incomprehensible or offensive were “corrected”; inserts were made with editorial explanations and conclusions; different readings of the same text were given in a row; marginal notes were later taken as part of the original text and inserted in the wrong places. All this has led to an extraordinary variety of options. However, in Roman times the so-called The “later scribes” begin attempts to unify the text of Scripture. Thus, under the leadership of Rabbi Akiba (c. 50-132), attempts were made to restore the original text of the Bible; these were the first steps of textual criticism. However, even during this period minor changes to the text were allowed. Eighteen corrections (called "corrections of the scribes") affected words that were considered erroneous or blasphemous in pious circles. So, for example, Hab 1:12 said: “O Yahweh... You will not die” (in Hebrew - “lo tamut”). But this thought could sow doubts about the eternity of the Creator, and therefore one letter was changed, and the text became: “We will not die” (in Hebrew “lo namut”).
Masoretic Bible. In the period from the 5th century. up to 11-12 centuries The scribes (soferim) were replaced by scholars who were called Masoretes (baale-hammasora, keepers of tradition). The text, developed by the greatest of the Masoretes, Aaron ben Asher, formed the basis of the modern Hebrew Bible. The Masoretes avoided direct interference with the Hebrew text of the Bible, which was considered sacred at the time, so any changes were unthinkable. Instead, they collected thousands of marginalia (marginal notes) from numerous manuscripts and incorporated them into the text. Marginalia such as “kere” (“read”) are so rooted in tradition that the synagogue reading of the Bible was guided by them, and not by the version that was in the handwritten text (“ketiv”). For example, in the original Job 13:5 it reads: “Behold, he (God) kills me, and I have no hope,” but the Masoretes, instead of “no,” prescribed to read “in him,” and the result was: “Behold, he kills me, but in him is my hope." The Masoretes made some important improvements in the recording of biblical texts. Hebrew writing only denoted consonants, but the Masoretes developed a system of diacritics to denote vowels. Now they could change the vowel in the word they wanted to correct. For example, they provided the tetragram JHWH with vowel symbols for the word substitute Adonai (Lord). Some Christian readers, unfamiliar with the practice of adding the vowels of one word to the consonants of another, misread the name of God as Jehovah. There was also no punctuation in the scribes' text. Intonation pauses or the end of a sentence were judged only by guesswork, which also gave rise to the possibility of misunderstanding. The oral tradition of cantillation, or psalmody, was useful in indicating the correct phrasing and emphasis of the words of a text, but there was always the danger that the tradition would break down and not be passed on to the next generation. This is why the Masoretes developed a system of accents, small icons similar to vowels, which were placed above or below words in the text. Each of these accents, which are still printed in all modern editions of the Hebrew Bible, signifies a specific melodic figure, a motif consisting of one or more notes. In addition, the accent performs syntactic and phonetic functions: it divides a sentence into semantic parts by caesura and helps to establish semantic connections between the individual words of a given sentence, and also highlights the stressed syllable in a word. There were several Masoretic schools with different approaches to vocalization, punctuation and "correction" of texts. The two most famous of them are the schools of Moshe ben Naftali and Aaron ben Asher (both from the Palestinian Tiberias). Ben Asher's text became generally accepted and was followed, for example, by the famous Jewish philosopher Maimonides (1135-1204). However, in the first printed Hebrew Bible, prepared by Jacob ben Chayim and published in Venice by D. Bomberg (1524-1525), later, mixed manuscripts were used. And only in 1937 a critical edition by R. Kittel appeared, based on the authoritative text of ben Asher. Textual studies of the Hebrew Bible from the Renaissance to the 20th century. During the Renaissance and Reformation, an uncritical enthusiasm for the authenticity of the Masoretic text prevailed for some time. Some scientists of the 16th-17th centuries. they even argued that the Masoretic vowel was divinely inspired and sacred. Eventually, more cautious scholars came to the conclusion that the texts of the Masoretic Bible were not accurate copies of the originals, and conducted a detailed study of the ancient translations. At the same time, knowledge of the Hebrew language began to improve thanks to familiarity with Arabic and other Semitic languages. Textual methods underwent further development throughout the 19th and early 20th centuries. In recent years, the discovery of new manuscripts and advances in Hebrew research have led to a better understanding of the Hebrew Bible. Significant progress has been made in the study of the Septuagint and other ancient translations. Thanks to the discovery of the Dead Sea manuscripts at Khirbet Qumran (1947), it became clear that between the 1st century. BC. and 1st century AD There were at least several editions of the biblical text. It also turned out that the Qumran manuscripts often show greater proximity to the Septuagint than to the Masoretic text.
HISTORICAL-CRITICAL METHOD
In the 17th-18th centuries. scientists began to study the Bible based not on theological, but on historical-critical considerations. Philosophers T. Hobbes and B. Spinoza questioned the authorship of Moses in relation to the Pentateuch and pointed out a number of chronological inconsistencies that arise with a literal interpretation of the Book of Genesis. The French scientist J. Astruc (1684-1766) put forward a hypothesis that the Book of Genesis belongs to two authors (Yahwist and Elohist). Believing that Moses was the author of the Pentateuch, Astruc assumed that Moses used some additional sources in his work. J. Eichhorn, in his work Introduction to the Old Testament (1780-1783), for the first time distinguished between the documentary sources of the Pentateuch - J, E, P and D. Not all of Eichhorn's assumptions were subsequently confirmed, but in general his approach turned out to be fruitful, and is currently considered the father of the historical-critical approach to the Old Testament. In the 1870-1880s, the documentary hypothesis found its classical form in the works of the greatest biblical scholar of that time, J. Wellhausen. In his work, Wellhausen did not limit himself to researching the sources of the Pentateuch, but tried to reconstruct the religious history of Israel in the light of Hegel's philosophy of history. He neglected the biblical history of the Jews before King David, regarding it as legendary, ignored the personality of Moses and the monotheistic ideas contained in the early sources J and E, so that the religion of the ancient Hebrew tribes in his presentation appeared as polytheistic. He believed that, in contrast to this polytheism, the prophets put forward the idea of God, one for the entire Universe. The opposition between these two points of view disappeared in the Jewish religion in the era after the Babylonian exile, when the ritualism and legalism of the Jerusalem priests and the humanism of the people who compiled such books as Proverbs and Ecclesiastes prevailed. This view has not stood the test of time. Archaeological research has shown that many of the elements of religious worship that Wellhausen attributed to the post-exilic era have older origins, such as details of sacrifices and details of the construction of the tabernacle of the covenant. Nevertheless, despite its shortcomings, the Wellhausen school has generated unprecedented interest in the prophets, whose contributions to the religious beliefs of Jews and Christians are widely recognized. With the development of Near Eastern archaeology, the study of the Old Testament has become a special field of Near Eastern studies. Archaeologists have discovered highly advanced civilizations surrounded by the ancient Hebrews, and have convincingly confirmed biblical stories that were dismissed as legends a century earlier. The discovery of many thousands of literary texts and inscriptions throughout the Middle East has allowed Old Testament scholars to recognize even more clearly the kinship of the Hebrew religion with the cults of neighboring peoples, as well as to emphasize its individuality. Increasing attention is being paid to the fundamental unity of theological concepts expressed in the Old Testament, the role of worship in the formation and formulation of religious ideas, and the significance of the covenant union entered into by God with His people.
NEW TESTAMENT
God, through the life, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ, granted salvation to people - this is the main teaching of Christianity. Although only the first four books of the New Testament deal directly with the life of Jesus, each of the 27 books in its own way seeks to interpret the meaning of Jesus or show how his teachings apply to the lives of believers.
BOOKS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT
The New Testament begins with four accounts of the life and teachings of Jesus Christ: the gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. The Acts of the Apostles tells the story of the founding of the Christian church and the missionary activities of the apostles. Acts is followed by 21 Epistles, a collection of letters attributed to various apostles who instructed Christian communities and individual believers in matters of doctrine, morality, and the organization of their lives. The last book of the New Testament - Revelation, or Apocalypse - is dedicated to the vision of the coming end of the world and the final triumph of good over evil.
Gospels. Synoptic Gospels: Matthew, Mark, Luke. The first three gospels are often called synoptic (Greek: synopsis - joint review), because they talk about the same events associated with Jesus and give the same sayings, often coinciding verbatim. The known stories of the birth of Jesus, most of the miracles he performed, and all of his parables are contained in the synoptic gospels, but not in the Gospel of John. The synoptic gospels differ mainly in each person's point of view, reflecting the views not only of the evangelists, but also of the Christians for whom they were written. The authorship of the first gospel is traditionally attributed to Matthew, a tax collector (publican) who became one of Jesus' first disciples. Many, however, doubt the authorship of Matthew. It is clear that the author was Jewish and was writing for a Judeo-Christian readership. In Jesus, the author sees, first of all, the fulfillment and embodiment of what is written in the Jewish Holy Scriptures; he constantly repeats that the most important deeds and words of Jesus were already predicted in the Hebrew Scriptures. Matthew is the longest gospel, it contains the most complete statements of Jesus' sayings, especially in ch. 5-7 (the so-called Sermon on the Mount). More than other gospels, Matthew pays attention to the Christian church and Jesus as its founder. The Gospel of Matthew is a widely read and often quoted account of the life and teachings of Christ. In the gospels of Mark and Luke there is a closeness to the environment of the pagans, this is manifested both in the language and in the depicted setting. Matthew's Jesus is the one in whom ancient prophecies were fulfilled, and for Mark he is a miracle worker. The Gospel of Mark seeks to show that the messiahship of Jesus was hidden during his earthly life, and for this reason he was accepted by few and without due enthusiasm. The Gospel of Luke contains much material not found in other accounts of the life of Jesus, providing lengthy versions of the accounts of his birth, suffering and death, and his appearances to his disciples after the resurrection. The life of Jesus is seen as a turning point in world history: the era of Israel gives way to the era of the universal church. More than the other gospels, it portrays Jesus as a friend of the poor and outcast. Most scholars are unanimous that the similarity of the synoptic gospels is due to the fact that the authors used common material from the tradition, and the fact that they borrowed some materials from each other. But on the questions of who borrowed from whom, who is the author of the gospels and when they were written, researchers do not agree. According to a leading theory called the "four document hypothesis" (commonly known in German scholarly circles as the "two source hypothesis"), the earliest of the gospels and the first of the four documents is the Gospel of Mark. Mark is considered to be the source for Matthew and Luke, since both contain virtually all the material in the Gospel of Mark, although parts of this text are arranged in a different order and slightly changed. Further, Matthew and Luke cite a large number of sayings of Jesus that are common to them, which are not in Mark. They are believed to have been taken from a second, extant document, often denoted by the letter Q (from the German word Quelle, "source"). Finally, both Matthew and Luke have their own materials. Nevertheless, some conservative scholars continue to insist on the primacy of Matthew's Gospel. To prove this, they cite an ancient tradition according to which Matthew wrote the very first gospel in Aramaic, which was later translated into Greek. In dating the Synoptic Gospels, scholars rely mainly on “internal evidence.” A good example is the conclusions of many researchers drawn from the analysis of three versions of Jesus’ saying about the destruction of the Jerusalem Temple, which is adjacent to the apocalyptic prophecy about the end of the world and the second coming of Christ (Mark 13; Matthew 24-25, Luke 19:41-44 and 21: 5-36). Mark is believed to have written his version during the Jewish national revolt of 66-70 AD, but before the fall of the city and the destruction of the Temple by the Romans in 70 AD. Luke, on the other hand, shows knowledge of some details of the Roman siege of Jerusalem, which means that this gospel was written later. Matthew apparently wrote his book after this event, moreover, his narrative suggests a higher level of development of the Christian church than in the text of the Gospel of Mark. Therefore, Matthew and Luke are dated to ca. 80-85 AD
Gospel of John. The fourth gospel, the Gospel of John, differs from the Synoptics in its focus, material used, and composition. In addition, it paints a portrait of Jesus with significantly different colors than the Synoptic gospels. The author is not driven simply by narrative or biographical interest; the main thing for him is to present a single religious idea: Jesus is the Word of God made flesh. The first part of the gospel tells of a series of miracles performed by Jesus, with an explanation of their spiritual meaning given by Jesus himself. The final part contains a series of conversations between Jesus and his disciples at the Last Supper. Through signs and conversations, the true nature of Jesus and his role as the bearer of divine Revelation become clear. One of the church fathers, Clement of Alexandria, wrote: “After the other evangelists had recorded the facts of history, John wrote the spiritual gospel.” Most researchers agree that the fourth gospel was not written by the Apostle John, but perhaps by one of John’s assistants or disciples and was apparently created at the end of the 1st century.
Acts of the Apostles. It is generally accepted that the author of the book of the Acts of the Apostles is Luke. The first half of the book traces the early history of the Christian community led by Peter. The second tells of Paul's missionary activities from the time of his conversion to Christianity until his imprisonment in Rome. The Acts of the Apostles - the second volume of Luke's work - was written shortly after his gospel. This is the first attempt by a Christian author to write a history of the church.
Epistles of the Apostles. The corpus of 21 epistles, placed in the New Testament after Acts, is attributed to the Apostle Paul and the disciples of Jesus - James, Peter, John and Jude. At present, however, the traditional authorship and dating of the messages are the subject of scientific debate.
Epistles of the Apostle Paul. The traditional titles of the 14 epistles attributed to Paul contain the names of the communities or people to whom they were addressed. In the Bible, messages to congregations are printed before messages to specific individuals, and within each group they are arranged in order of size, with the longest ones at the beginning. Most scholars agree that Romans, 1-2 Corinthians, Galatians, Philippians, 1 Thessalonians, and Philemon are authentic. It is very likely that Paul also wrote Colossians, while his authorship of 2 Thessalonians and Ephesians is doubtful. Many scholars believe that 1-2 Timothy and Titus were not written by Paul. And virtually no one today would argue for Paul's authorship of Hebrews. Paul wrote his epistles after he was 50, and he died in the 60s. The chronology of his messages has not been definitively established, but he probably began with 1 Thess, the oldest document of the Christian church. The four great epistles - Gal, 1-2 Cor, Rom - may have been created after him, and the letters Philp and Philm were the last. If Paul was the author of 2 Thess., then it was probably written shortly after 1 Thess. if he wrote the message Col, then it appeared at about the same time as the message Flm. The central point of Paul's teaching can be stated as follows: salvation is available to the entire human race - both Gentiles and Jews - through faith in Jesus Christ. 1 Thess assures the community that at the second coming of Christ, both dead and living Christians will be with God; it ends with a series of instructions on the duties of Christians in life. 2 Fez advises against being impatient for the second coming. In Galatians, Paul begins by defending his credentials as an apostle and provides some interesting autobiographical details. He then argues that salvation requires faith in Jesus Christ first, not fulfillment of the Jewish Law. 1 Corinthians contains Paul's instructions on dissension, immorality, conversion of Christians to pagan courts, marriage, idolatry, etc., problems that troubled this most troubled of the communities he founded. The message contains a majestic hymn of love (chapter 13) and a discussion about immortality (chapter 15). 1 Cor, like Gal, contains evidence of Paul's claim to the apostleship. The book of Romans is the most complete statement of Paul's theology. In it he examines the problem of the relationship between Jewish Christians and Gentile Christians in the context of a detailed discussion of the problem of sin and salvation. The book of Colossians warns against the error of combining the desire to become like angels with the performance of Jewish religious rites. Flm - a private letter to a friend asking him to forgive a runaway slave. Phil - a friendly letter to the community in Philippi expressing love, joy for them and gratitude for the donations sent. Ephesians rather dryly summarizes the issues that Paul has already addressed. It lacks the immediacy and emotion of Paul's other letters. Traditionally, it is considered together with Flp, Kol and Flm as one of the so-called. Epistles from Bonds, written towards the end of Paul's life. The “Pastoral Epistles” (as 1-2 Tim is called) form a special group. Their style and content differ significantly from the style and content of Paul's other letters. They reflect a later stage in the development of the Christian church and were apparently written at the end of the 1st century. Hebrews is unjustifiably placed within the corpus of Pauline letters. This is a lengthy sermon, in good rhetorical tradition, distinguished by smooth style and eloquence. It argues that the death of Jesus represents the perfect sacrifice, abolishing the sacrificial system of the Jewish religion. Researchers agree that its author could not have been the Apostle Paul, and date it back to 60-80 years.
Other messages. The last seven epistles are called “conciliar” (“catholic”). This name indicates that they are addressed to the “universal” church, and not to an individual or a particular community. Unlike the letters of Paul, their titles contain the names of the authors. The Epistle of James is a moralistic treatise in the tradition of the Jewish "literature of the wise." The author argues with Paul's view (or rather, with its radical interpretations) that salvation can only be achieved by faith, and argues that faith must be supported by godly works. If its author was indeed James of Jerusalem (brother of the Lord), then it was written before 62 (the year of Jacob's death). However, a significant number of researchers place it at the end of the first century. 1 Peter also deals with moral issues and encourages believers to humbly endure persecution. If the author of the letter is Peter, then the persecution in question may be the persecution of Nero in the 60s; if the author lived in a later period, then the persecution of Domitian in the 90s is meant. 2 Peter warns against false teachers and states that the Day of Judgment has been postponed for a time to give people an opportunity to repent. Most scholars doubt the authorship of Peter and attribute the document to the first half of the 2nd century. In this case, this message is the latest book of the New Testament. 1 John is traditionally attributed to the author of the fourth gospel (whether it was the apostle John or someone else). It contains the doctrinal provisions of the fourth gospel. There is less agreement in scientific circles about the authorship of 2-3 John, which are short notes; it is possible that they were written late in the author's life. All three messages probably date back to the end of the 1st century. The Epistle of Jude, the last in the corpus, appeals to believers to avoid heresies and return to orthodoxy. Perhaps it was written at the end of the 1st century.
Revelation of John the Theologian. Revelation (Apocalypse), the last book in the Bible, continues the tradition of Jewish apocalypses. The author, in vivid symbolic visions, paints pictures of the struggle between good and evil; The culmination of this battle is the defeat of the forces of evil, the resurrection of the dead, and the second coming of Jesus to bring judgment at the end of the world. The book is traditionally attributed to the Apostle John, but stylistic differences between the Apocalypse, Gospel and John's epistles have led scholars to doubt that they were written by the same hand. The book appears to date from the reign of Emperor Domitian (81-96). It had the greatest influence on the Pentecostal and Adventist Protestant churches.
NEW TESTAMENT CANON
"Canon" refers to writings that are accepted as the highest authority. In the 1st century The Hebrew Bible was such a holy scripture for Christians. The books of the New Testament were created gradually, and acquired canonical status much later. By the middle of the 2nd century. Many Christian works were passed around. In addition to the texts that were eventually included in the canon, there were many other gospels, acts, epistles, and apocalypses, now called the New Testament Apocrypha. Some of them, such as the Gospel of Peter, contain the core of an authentic tradition. Others, such as the Gospel of the Childhood of Thomas the Apostle, are folk tales and legends intended to satisfy popular curiosity and fill gaps in the life stories of Jesus. Another group of writings, such as a collection of texts discovered in the 20th century. near the Egyptian town of Nag Hammadi, is of a Gnostic nature and was condemned as heretical. One group of books, written shortly after the age of the apostles, was especially revered and for a time was regarded almost as holy writ. Their authors are called "apostolic men." The letters of Ignatius of Antioch provide a glimpse of the church organization of the early second century; they preach the ideal of martyrdom. The First Epistle of Clement, one of the first Roman bishops, protests against the removal of some of the leaders of the Corinthian church. The Second Epistle of Clement is a sermon on the Christian life and repentance. The Shepherd of Hermas is a moralistic treatise imbued with cryptic symbolism, and the Epistle of Barnabas is somewhat reminiscent of the Epistle to the Hebrews, but is more allegorical in nature. The Didache (Teaching of the Twelve Apostles), in addition to moralistic discussions about the “two paths” of life and death, contains a number of instructions on the performance of church sacraments, on church organization and discipline. By the end of the 2nd century. Some Christian religious books clearly acquire canonical status: for example, from the writings of the early Christian apologist Justin Martyr, we know that Christians read the “memoirs of the apostles” before celebrating the Sunday Eucharist. Most lists of Christian books from this period include the four gospels, all of Paul's epistles (except Hebrews), and the First Epistles of Peter and John. Other books, and above all Revelation and the Epistle to the Hebrews, were rejected, while many of the writings of the “apostolic men” were considered divinely inspired. There were at least two criteria for inclusion in the lists of authoritative Christian books: apostolic authorship and widespread use in a particular local church. Over time, a line was drawn under the canon. In the 2nd century. Marcion, the head of a heretical sect in Asia Minor, compiled his own canon of Holy Scripture. There was no room for the entire Old Testament, and of all the Christian texts, the list included an abridged version of the Gospel of Luke and a heavily edited selection of the letters of Paul. Marcion's activities seem to have prompted the church to draw up its own canon to protect itself from heretical writings and to prevent the infiltration of heretical false teachings into already accepted books. Ultimately, the main criterion for inclusion in the New Testament canon was apostolic authorship. The first list of authoritative books, which is completely identical to the content of our New Testament, was compiled by St. Athanasius at 367.
TEXTS, TRANSLATIONS AND TEXTOLOGICAL PROBLEMS
Greek text. Several papyrus fragments found in Egypt are the oldest known manuscripts of the New Testament. The earliest of these, a passage from John 18 (Jesus before Pilate), was written c. 110. Approximately 150-200 include two larger fragments: one from the Epistle to Titus, the other from the Gospel of Matthew. The oldest papyri containing a sufficient amount of text for attribution were written ca. 200-250. One of them contains part of the Gospel of John, another contains passages from all four gospels and the Acts of the Apostles, and the third contains passages from the letters of Paul. In total, more than 70 papyrus fragments have reached us, on which almost half of the text of the New Testament is recorded. In the 4th century. papyrus began to give way to more durable parchment. Two almost complete Greek copies of the Bible date from this century: the Vatican Codex (Codex Vaticanus), kept in the Vatican Library, and the Codex Sinaiticus (Codex Sinaiticus), accidentally discovered in a Greek monastery at the foot of Mount Sinai, in a basket for old manuscripts that were to be burned. After 4th century the number of Greek manuscripts increases. To date, more than 5,000 manuscripts are known. The first printed edition of the Greek New Testament, called the Complutensian Bible (Biblia Complutensis), appeared in 1514. However, it was not distributed until 1516, when the Greek New Testament was published under the editorship of the humanist scholar Erasmus of Rotterdam. Its text was prepared hastily, using late and often unreliable manuscripts. Here and there Erasmus corrected the Greek text, bringing it into agreement with the Vulgate text. Nevertheless, its text formed the basis of many subsequent reprints of the Greek New Testament, and it was from it that the early Protestant Reformers made their translations. From 1546 to 1551, the Parisian printer Robert Estienne (Stephanus) published 4 editions of the Greek New Testament, containing the text of Erasmus with variant readings in the margins taken from the Complutensian Bible and other sources. Its 1551 edition served as the basis for later English translations, including the King James Version.
Ancient translations. Early translations of the New Testament date back to the 2nd century. The first Latin translations probably appeared in North Africa. They soon compiled an authoritative translation (the so-called Itala Vetus), which by the time of Jerome had almost canonical status. At the end of the 4th century. Jerome revised and significantly corrected the Itala, thereby creating his own translation, the Vulgate. In the East, New Testament books were translated in the 2nd century. into Syriac. Like the Old Latin translations, they were unified at the end of the 4th century. The standard translation is called the Peshitta, or "common" translation. It remains the official text of the Jacobite and Nestorian churches. It contains 22 of the 27 generally accepted books, excluding 2 Peter, 2 and 3 John, Jude and Revelation. Other ancient translations, in whole or in fragments, have come down to us in Arabic, Armenian, Georgian, Ethiopic, Nubian, Gothic, Old Church Slavonic and six dialects of Coptic.
Textual criticism, or text criticism. The task of textual critics is to establish with maximum reliability the original edition of a particular text. In the case of an ancient book like the New Testament, textual scholars study the various readings (variations) in the manuscripts to determine which is most likely to be the original edition and which may be discarded. Textual scholars have an impressive amount of material at their disposal: papyri, more than 5,000 Greek manuscripts, 10 thousand manuscripts of ancient translations and 80 thousand New Testament quotations in the works of the church fathers. No one knows how many different variations of the same phrase they contain. More than 30 thousand different readings were recorded in a survey of 150 manuscripts of the Gospel of Luke. In determining the most likely original reading of any New Testament passage, textual scholars follow certain standard rules. The general rule is that the older the manuscript, the higher the chance that it follows the original. However, this rule can be misleading, since later manuscripts of one family often retain correct readings that were corrupted in earlier manuscripts of another family. Simple copyist errors are easy to detect - often they are associated with memory errors (for example, the scribe could accidentally insert a reading from one gospel into another). However, often the scribe deliberately changed the text, either to correct or improve it, or to bring it into line with his own theological views. Thus, suspicious places in the text need to be checked for compliance with their style and the concept of the entire work as a whole. Shorter readings are generally preferred to longer ones, which may contain later additions. Often reading Greek that is too regular or smooth is discarded because the writers of the New Testament books used everyday language that was far removed from classical literary Greek. For the same reason, the more difficult to understand of two readings is often chosen, since the other may be the result of an editorial simplification by the copyist. Although the preference for one or another version often depends on the taste and intuition of the researcher, there is no doubt that today we have a Greek text of the New Testament that is significantly closer to the original than the text with which the scholars who stood at the origins of critical studies worked and relied on on the edition of Erasmus. So, for example, 1 John 5:7-8 in the Synodal Version reads like this: “For three bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one. And three bear witness on earth: spirit, water and blood; and these three are about one." The words in italics are not in the original text. The questionable passage goes back to Latin manuscripts made in Spain or North Africa, perhaps in the 4th century. It is absent from all Greek manuscripts made before 1400 and is omitted in modern critical editions of the New Testament.
HISTORICAL-CRITICAL RESEARCH METHODS
The historical-critical approach to the study of the New Testament - the attempt to understand the text in the context of the historical circumstances of its origin and taking into account the literary forms and genres used by its authors - has often caused controversy. Much of the historical-critical approach was driven by the desire to reconstruct the authentic teachings of Jesus and the early Christian community. Researchers leaned towards two extreme positions. Some critics saw in Jesus the preacher of a pure and simple message about the universal brotherhood of man and universal love and believed that this message was distorted by the introduction of other elements: teachings about the relationship of Christ to God, prophecies about the imminent end of the world, myths, as well as borrowings from folk religions. cults The task of criticism was to cleanse Christianity of these alien elements and restore the original teaching of Jesus. Other scholars have emphasized that theological elements in the New Testament are not necessarily foreign; many of them were already present in the very teachings of Jesus. According to this view, the New Testament is a presentation of the Christian message in terms understandable to a person living in the 1st century. The figure of the "historical Jesus", whose teachings were believed to diverge from the teachings of the religion that was formed under his name, first appeared in the work of G. S. Reimarus (1694-1768). Reimarus was a deist, i.e. believed in God, who can be comprehended only by reason and reveals his power in the immutable laws of nature. Rejecting miracles and Revelation, Reimarus tried to separate the historical Jesus from the figure of Christ, the suffering Redeemer of mankind; Such an idea of Christ, Reimarus believed, arose among the apostles after the death of Jesus. D. F. Strauss returned to the question of the historical Jesus in his work “The Life of Jesus” (1835-1836). Strauss insisted on the fundamental difference between what he called the “inner core” of the Christian faith (which he traced back to Jesus himself) from the “myths,” the miraculous and supernatural elements that were introduced into the image of Jesus and his teachings. F. K. Baur (1792-1860) focused on the history of the early Christian community. Influenced by the philosophy of G. W. F. Hegel, he viewed the history of the early church as a struggle between two currents - supporters of the observance of the Jewish Law (Petrinists) and a Christianity free from the Law (Paulinists), which led to the emergence of "early Catholicism" (i.e. to the formation of the church with its hierarchy, cult and fixed doctrine). Perhaps the most popular result of historical-critical research of the 19th century. became the work of E. Renan “The Life of Jesus”. In the second half of the 19th century. Scientists have been preoccupied with the question of what we can learn from the gospels about the “real” Jesus. Studies of this period usually took the form of comparisons between Paul's Christological concept and the simpler reconstructed image of the historical Jesus. Thus, for A. von Harnack (1851-1930), Jesus was, first of all, a rabbi who interpreted the Jewish religion in his own way, emphasizing that God is the Father of all people, which means all people are brothers. At the beginning of the 20th century. There was a strong reaction against the concept of the “liberal Jesus” (i.e. the image of Jesus in liberal theology). This rejection was expressed by A. Schweitzer in the book From Reimarus to Wrede (1906; the second edition was published under the title History of the Study of the Life of Jesus, 1913). Schweitzer and his associates believed that the “liberal” image of Jesus ignores the world around him in which Jesus lived and taught; and indeed, liberal theologians simply cleared the biblical image of Jesus of those elements that contradicted the ideals of the 19th century, declaring them to be later interpolations. Schweitzer proved that many of these elements were already present in pre-Christian Judaism. He, in particular, highlighted the ideas present in pre-Christian Judaism about the end of the world, the coming of God or his Messiah, the judgment of the world and the beginning of a new century in which the Dominion of God would be established. Other researchers have looked for outside influences that would explain the history of the Christian movement without having to resort to an analysis of Judaism. Focusing on the pagan cults of New Testament times, they identified their similarities with the religious practices of the early Christians. In particular, it was argued that the Eucharist resembles the ritual meals of the mystery cults of Dionysus, Attis and Mithras. Some scholars, following the tradition of the liberal school, have noted the radical change that the Christian religion underwent in the transition from Jesus to Paul; others, discovering the influence of pagan rituals on the external side of early Christianity, insisted on the unique originality of its content. J. Wellhausen at one time founded a “radical school” of historical criticism, which distinguished between the historical Jesus, who had no messianic claims, and the post-Easter community, which proclaimed him the Messiah and Lord. In line with this approach, a concept was developed according to which the gospel narratives were not the foundation of the early Christian community, but its product. In 1919, K. L. Schmidt proposed that the Gospel of Mark, which forms the backbone of the gospels of Matthew and Luke, was a compilation of church narratives that had previously circulated independently of each other. The study of this oral, pre-literary stage of the gospels led to the emergence of the influential and controversial school of form analysis (Formgeschichte), led by M. Dibelius (1883-1947) and R. Bultmann (1884-1976). In the form-analytic method, clearly defined meaningful units of text, called forms, are isolated from the material of the gospels, which gradually crystallized in the oral tradition until their written fixation in the gospels. These forms include stories of miracles, sayings of Jesus and parables, myths and legends about the birth of Jesus and his life, short scenes from the life of Jesus, ending with a laconic saying like the famous “what is Caesar's that is Caesar's.” Pointing out similarities between some gospel passages and folklore, many form analysts have questioned the historicity of some gospel stories, such as the miracles that followed Jesus' death on the cross. After the First World War, historical-critical research increasingly focused on the thought forms of the New Testament - on the main ideas of Jesus' proclamation. It has been argued that many of the mental forms in which the teachings of Jesus are expressed do not make sense to modern man. Thus, the idea of the end of the world or the second coming of the Messiah on a cloud does not correspond to modern experience. However, the fact that in the 20th century. Conservative and fundamentalist Protestant denominations have persisted and continue to emerge, demonstrating the enormous gap between the views of professional critics and many believers who read the Bible. To bridge this gap, the method of studying the history of editorial offices (Redaktionsgeschichte), which has been successfully developing since the mid-20th century, may be useful. While form analysts such as Bultmann focused on classifying certain formal elements in a text and determining the place and role of these elements in the life of the church before they were recorded in writing, redaction historians tried to figure out how these elements were compiled and used by the actual authors of the New Testament.
BIBLE TRANSLATIONS INTO ENGLISH
The history of Bible translations into English falls into two periods: the Middle Ages and the Modern Age.
Middle Ages.
Old English period. From the 7th century, when the Anglo-Saxons were converted to Christianity, until the Reformation, the only Bible considered authoritative in Britain was the Vulgate. The earliest attempts to translate the Bible into Anglo-Saxon cannot, strictly speaking, be called translations. These were free retellings in verse of well-known biblical stories. One ancient manuscript contains poems previously attributed to the monk and poet Caedmon of Whitby (flourished c. 670), but now dated to the 9th or early 10th century. Another corpus of rhythmic paraphrases is attributed to Cynewulf, who lived around the same era as Caedmon. The first attempts to truly translate the Bible were made in the 8th century. Bishop Aldhelm of Sherborne (d. 709) is probably the author of the translation of the Psalter. The Venerable Bede (673-735) translated the Lord's Prayer and part of the Gospel of John. King Alfred (849-899) translated the Ten Commandments and a number of other biblical texts. The manuscript known as the Vespasian Psalter, written c. 825, contains the earliest example of a certain type of translation called "gloss". The glosses were supposed to serve as an aid for the clergy and were inserted between the lines of the Latin text. They often followed Latin word order, which was quite different from the Anglo-Saxon word order. Around 950, a single gloss was inserted into a lavishly illuminated manuscript (the so-called Lindisfarne Gospels), the Latin text of which was written c. 700. Soon after this, similar glosses began to be included in other manuscripts. By the end of the 10th century. There have already been many translations. West Saxon Gospels (10th century) - a complete translation of the gospels, possibly made by three translators. Around 990, Ælfric, famous for his learning, translated several books of the Old Testament, including the entire Pentateuch, the books of Joshua, Judges, Kings and several books from the Old Testament apocrypha. He often inserted his translations, which often amounted to prosaic retelling, into sermons. Ælfric's work, the West Saxon Gospels, and numerous translations of the Psalter were all that were done in the Old English period towards a complete translation of the Bible. After Ælfric, Bible translations were no longer made: Britain plunged into the “dark ages” of the Norman conquests.
Middle English period. In the calmer 13th century. translation activities have resumed. Many new translations of the Bible into English fall into the category of religious literature rather than actual translation; thus, for example, the Ormulum of the monk Orm (c. 1215) is a rhythmic translation of Gospel passages used in the Mass in combination with homilies. Around 1250, a rhyming retelling of the books of Genesis and Exodus appeared. Three translations of the Psalter appeared c. 1350: An anonymous verse translation, a translation of the Psalter attributed to William of Shoreham, and a translation with commentary by the hermit and mystic Richard Rolle of Gempaul. In the 13th-14th centuries. Various parts of the New Testament were translated by unknown authors.
Wycliffe Bible. By the end of the 14th century. The first complete translation of the Bible into English appeared. This was the Wycliffe Bible, a translation made under the initiative and direction of John Wycliffe (c. 1330-1384). Wycliffe insisted that the Gospel is the rule of life and that all people have the right to read it “in the dialect in which they best know the teaching of Christ.” He insisted that the Bible in English was necessary to spread this doctrine. The Wycliffe Bible was almost certainly translated not by Wycliffe himself, but by his collaborators. There are two versions of the translation. The first was begun by Nicholas of Hereford, one of Wycliffe's followers, and completed by another hand c. 1385. A later and less ponderous translation was probably made by another follower of Wycliffe, John Perway (c. 1395). After Wycliffe's death, his views were condemned and the reading of his Bible was prohibited. Due to the unorthodoxy of Wycliffe's teachings and the intransigence of his supporters, the Bible in the native language began to be associated in the minds of the faithful with heresy. Although Bible translations were also undertaken in other European countries, no one began translating the Bible in England until the Reformation. Despite the ecclesiastical curse, Wycliffe's Bible was often rewritten, and parts of it were later borrowed by William Tyndale, the first of the Reformed translators. Protestant Translations: From Tyndale to the New English Bible. Protestant translators during the Reformation abandoned the Vulgate as their primary source. In the course of comparing the Hebrew and Greek texts of the Bible with the Latin text of the Vulgate, inconsistencies and inaccuracies were discovered. In addition, the reforming translators, who broke with the Roman Catholic Church, did not want to base their translations on the Latin Bible.
Tyndall. The first English Protestant translator of the Bible was William Tyndale (c. 1490-1536). Tyndale studied Greek at Oxford and Cambridge, and Hebrew, apparently, in Germany. He tried to print his translation of the New Testament in Cologne, but the church authorities forced him to move to Worms, where he completed the publication. A large-format edition was published at Worms in 1525; it reached England the following year and was promptly burned. Despite the church curse, reprints followed one after another, many coming to England from the Netherlands. The first volume of the Old Testament in Tyndale's translation was published in 1530; Tyndale was arrested; in prison he continued to work on the Old Testament, but in 1536 he was burned at the stake as a heretic in Vilvoorde near Brussels. The rejection of Tindal's translation was mainly due to its purely Protestant tone. Although King Henry VIII broke with Rome in the early 1530s, he was not at all sympathetic to Tyndale's views. Moreover, the translator’s desire to erase from the Bible all traces of Catholic worship prompted him to replace some terms: “church” was replaced by “community,” “priest” by “elder,” “repent” by “repent,” etc. In addition, the New Testament in the German translation of Martin Luther served as a model for Tyndale's translation.
Coverdale. In 1534, the Church of England petitioned the king for an English translation of the Bible. Archbishop Cranmer, the architect of Henry VIII's religious policies, took several steps on his own initiative to support the petition, but was unsuccessful. When Miles Coverdale, who was once an employee of Tyndale, completed his work and published the first complete Bible in English in Germany (1535), it soon came to England and was sold there without any objections from the authorities. Coverdale did not have Tyndale's learning. He borrowed from Tyndale a translation of the New Testament and part of the Old Testament, but since Coverdale clearly did not speak Hebrew, he had to complete Tyndale's work by translating from Latin (although he looked into the works of Luther, the Zurich Bible and consulted with contemporary scholars) . Coverdale's translation language is more melodious than Tindal's; The Psalter in his translation (1539 edition for the Great Bible) is still used in the Anglican missal (Book of Public Worship), and on account of its literary merits it is often preferred to the translation of the Psalms from the King James Bible.
Bible Matthew. In 1537 Henry VIII was persuaded to give his highest approval to the idea of creating an English Bible; This is how the “new translation” arose. It was believed to be a translation by a certain Thomas Matthew, although the real publisher was apparently another Tyndale employee, John Rogers; the text itself was compiled from the translations of Tyndale and Coverdale with the addition of many doctrinal notes. A fictitious translator was required in order to avoid scandal in connection with the actual publication of the work of the executed Tyndale.
Big Bible. In 1538, a royal decree was issued, according to which each parish was obliged to purchase a copy of the Bible for its church, and the parishioners had to reimburse half of the cost of the book. The decree was probably not talking about Matthew's Bible, but about a new translation. In 1539, a new translation was published, and this weighty volume was called the Great Bible. The editor was Coverdale, but the text was a revision of Matthew's Bible rather than Coverdale's translation of 1535. The second edition of 1540 is sometimes called the Cranmer Bible (prefaced by Archbishop Cranmer's preface). The Great Bible became the official text, but other translations were banned.
Geneva Bible. The coming to power of the Catholic Mary Stuart plunged English Protestants into horror. To avoid persecution, many of them emigrated and settled in Geneva, then the center of radical Protestantism. Under the leadership of the Scottish Calvinist John Knox, and possibly with the participation of Coverdale, the English community in Geneva published the New Testament and Psalter in 1557, and in 1560 a complete edition of the Bible, the so-called. The Geneva Bible (also known humorously as the "Bible of Pants" or "Bible of Breeches" because Genesis 3:7 is translated as follows: "And they sewed together fig leaves, and made themselves trousers"). The Geneva Bible was strikingly different in format from previous translations. There were several small-format editions of the New Testament, but the English Bible was intended to be read during church services with commentary by clergy. It was typed in an old Gothic font, was large in size and was very heavy; She was often chained to a music stand for safety. The Geneva Bible used clear Latin script and was much smaller in size. It contained the usual numbering of individual verses, as well as book introductions and notes, maps of biblical history, a summary of Christian doctrine, an index and glossary, various forms of prayer were given, and sheet music was appended to the psalms. In short, it was a very complete guide; its completeness and small size contributed to the development of home reading skills. The Geneva translation was, to a certain extent, the most scientific translation of that time. The text of the Great Bible (1550) was taken as a basis, which was then significantly improved by editors who corrected many errors and inaccuracies. The Geneva Bible almost immediately gained recognition and popularity, but it was not published in England until 1576. Although Queen Elizabeth I ascended the throne in 1558, the Anglican hierarchs were hostile to the Geneva Bible and sought to delay its publication. Once printed, it went through 140 editions and was published during the lifetime of an entire generation, even after the publication of the King James Bible. This was the Bible that Shakespeare knew and quoted.
Bishop's Bible. Cranmer's conservative successor as Archbishop of Canterbury, Matthew Parker, prevented the distribution of the Geneva Bible. In 1568 he published his own edition - the Bishop's Bible. The title suggests that it was a collective effort by Anglican bishops who completed the task in just two years; they used the Great Bible as their basis, deviating from it only where it conflicted with the Hebrew or Greek texts. The Bishop's Bible often borrows from the Geneva Bible where its advantages in terms of accuracy of translation are beyond doubt. After its completion, the Bishop's Bible replaced the Great Bible as the official Bible of the Church of England.
King James Bible. The Puritan John Reynolds proposed the need for a new authoritative translation, addressing him to King James I in 1604. James approved the idea and appointed translators - “men of learning, fifty-four in number.” The translators were divided into four groups, meeting at Westminster, Cambridge and Oxford; each group took for itself a part of the Bible, the initial, draft translation of which had to be approved by all members of the “company”. A committee consisting of 12 supervisory editors checked the first versions of the translation. The Bishop's Bible was chosen as the main text, but translations of Tyndale, Coverdale, Matthew's Bible, the Great Bible, the Geneva Bible and even the Catholic translation of the New Testament (published in 1582) were also involved in the work. The King James Bible was published in 1611: it took two years and nine months to translate, and another nine months to prepare the manuscript for printing. The first edition was a large volume in folio, the text was typed in Gothic type. The King James Bible would never have gained popularity if it had not been quickly reprinted in a small format and in Latin type (qualities that at one time ensured the wide circulation of the Geneva Bible). For nearly 400 years, the King James Bible enjoyed the status of an official translation. In England it is called the Authorized Version, although neither the royal house nor parliament issued any official act on this matter. Moreover, there is no doubt that the Authorized Translation became the Bible of the Church of England and its breakaways in the 17th and 18th centuries. religious associations; it has the same status in Protestant denominations in the United States. The copyright holder for the King James Bible was the royal printer, so it could not be published in the English colonies in the Americas until they achieved independence from England. As a result, the first Bible printed in America was not the King James Bible, but John Eliot's translation for the Algonquin Indians (Up-Biblum God, 1661-1663). In the 18th century two universities provided editors (Paris from Cambridge and Blaney from Oxford) to correct typographical errors and distortions in the text. In the USA, in the edition of N. Webster (1833), outdated phrases were replaced with more modern ones. This editorial work demonstrates efforts typical of the 19th century. and aimed at modernizing the old text.
The Revised Version. The movement towards modernizing the language of the old translation reached its apogee in 1870, when, on the initiative of a council of clergy of the dioceses of Canterbury and York, a committee was appointed to revise the text of the King James Bible. The Revised Translation (New Testament, 1881; Old Testament, 1885; Apocrypha, 1895) is still of value to scholars due to its conciseness and proximity to the original Hebrew and Greek biblical texts, but has not been able to replace the King James Version. The Revised Standard Version. The first edition of the Revised Translation in the United States included readings by American specialists working together with English editors. In 1901, these readings were included in the text of the publication, which was called the American Standard Version. It served as the basis for the Revised Standard Translation, prepared with the support of the International Council for Religious Teaching (1937). Dean L.E. Wagle of Yale University carried out the general edition of this translation (the New Testament was published in 1946, the Old Testament in 1952).
New English Bible. In sharp contrast to the various translation corrections stands the attempt in England to create an authoritative text of the English Bible for the 20th century. The New English Bible (New Testament, 1961; New Testament, Old Testament and Apocrypha, 1969) is a completely new, fresh translation of the original texts into natural, colloquial English of the 20th century, which avoids both archaic constructions of the 17th century and literal copying of Greek phrases. Thus this translation breaks with the tradition going back to Tyndale. The translation was published with the support and participation of all Christian churches in Great Britain with the exception of the Roman Catholic Church.
English Catholic Bible translations. Douay-Rheims translation. The resistance that the Catholic Church offered to the idea of translating the Bible into national languages weakened during the Counter-Reformation. In 1582, the Reims New Testament appeared, translated from the Vulgate by G. Martin at the English College in Reims (France). It was followed by a translation of the Old Testament completed in the French city of Douai (1609-1610). It was started by Martin and completed by Cardinal William of Allen, president of the college, with his collaborators R. Bristow and T. Worthington. It was a carefully executed translation, made from the Vulgate, which in many places was guilty of an abundance of Latinisms and literal copying of the original. In the period from 1635 to 1749, only the New Testament of the Douay-Rheims translation was reprinted (6 times). However, in 1749-1750, Bishop Richard Challoner made numerous amendments, which can be said to have revived the Douai-Rheims translation to new life.
Translated by Knox. The most important English Catholic translation of the 20th century. is a translation by Ronald Knox, published in 1945-1949. Knox has dealt extensively with the problems of translation, and his version is distinguished not only by its accuracy, but also by its elegance. The Knox Bible is a translation officially approved by the church.
Westminster Bible. The English Jesuits began in 1913 preparing a new translation of the Bible, made from the original languages (i.e., Hebrew and Greek). The New Testament from the Westminster Bible (as the translation was called) was published in 1948 under the leadership of J. Murray and K. Latty.
Jerusalem Bible. In the second half of the 20th century. Two Catholic translations appeared in English and French, called the Jerusalem Bible. A French annotated translation (from the original texts) was made at the Dominican Bible School in Jerusalem and published in 1956. In 1966, English scholars made their own translation, also from the original texts.
New American Bible. In the United States, the Bishops' Committee of the Fellowship of Christian Doctrine financed a series of biblical translations from the original languages of Hebrew and Greek. Translations of individual books prepared with the support of this fellowship began to appear in 1952, and the entire New American Bible was released in 1970. It replaced the old Douay-Rheims translation.
Bible translations for Jews. Translations of the Bible specifically for Jews began to be made relatively recently. In the 18th century Two translations of the Torah were published, one of them was made by the Jewish scholar I. Delgado (1785), the other by D. Levi (1787). However, the first complete translation of the Hebrew Bible was published in England only in 1851, its author was A. Benish. In 1853, I. Lizer published a translation in the USA, which became generally accepted in American synagogues. After the publication in England of the Corrected Translation (1885), English Jews began to use this edition, providing it with notes and some readings that deviated from the English versions (this work was carried out by Jewish scholars). In 1892, the American Association of Jewish Publishers began preparing its own translation of the Hebrew Bible, based on the text of Aaron ben Asher (10th century), but taking into account ancient translations and modern English versions. This translation was published in 1917 and replaced Leeser's translation as the standard English translation of the Bible for American Jews. In 1963-1982 a new version of the translation was released by the American Association of Jewish Publishers. Her style is emphatically modern and free from the influence of the King James Bible. The publication is characterized by an abundance of notes, which provide variants of translations and interpretations.
Other translations. From the beginning of the 16th century. many unofficial translations were made without the support or approval of any church groups. Incomplete translations (Psalms, prayers, passages from the Gospels) were published in a series of prayer books from 1529 to 1545. T. More translated parts of the Bible while imprisoned in the Tower of London in 1534-1535. R. Taverner prepared a new edition of Matthew's translation in 1539. Around 1550, J. Chick translated the Gospel of Matthew in an unusual, touching style. In the 18th century Several translations have appeared that have only historical value. Among them, it is worth noting the translations of D. Mace (1729), E. Harwood (1768) and J. Wakefield (1791). Modern non-church translations trace their origins back to the translation of E. Norton, a Unitarian church pastor who published his translation of the gospels in 1855. The New Testament for the 20th century was popular. (The Twentieth Century New Testament, 1898-1901); Moffat's New Testament, 1913); Goodspeed's New Testament, 1923, which, together with translations of the Old Testament, became part of the American Translation (An American Translation, 1931). Among the most popular publications is J.B. Phillips's translation into modern colloquial English (New Testament in Modern English, 1958). The Revised Standard Version Common Bible (1973), which is based on the 1952 Revised Standard Version, has been approved for use by Orthodox, Protestant, and Catholic denominations. The Good News Bible, a translation of the Bible into modern English, was released by the American Bible Society in 1976. Two new editions of older translations appeared in 1982: the New King James Version, combining the clarity of modern speech with literary style of the original King James Version, and Reader's Digest Bible, a condensed summary of the Revised Standard Version.
LITERATURE
Canonical Gospels. M., 1992 Teaching. Pentateuch of Moses. M., 1993 Biblical encyclopedia. M., 1996 Metzger B. Textology of the New Testament. M., 1996 Metzger B. The Canon of the New Testament. M., 1999
Collier's Encyclopedia. - Open Society. 2000 .
The average churchgoer is unaware of the difficult questions familiar words can raise. However, Bible scholars consider this book to be an artifact of the human race, just like any other book. Deciphering and analyzing it from this point of view became the meaning of their lives.Based on independent study of the texts, biblical scholars have come up with many theories about who actually wrote the Holy Scriptures. And these theories pose a serious challenge to traditional assumptions about who the Bible's author is.
10. Moses did not write the Pentateuch
Jews and Christians believe that Moses wrote the first five books of the Bible. However, doubts about this began to arise among medieval rabbis. The first obvious fact that raises suspicion: Moses could not have written verses 5-10 in Deuteronomy 34, which speaks of his death. But this glaring discrepancy is only the beginning of the inconsistencies.
Genesis 12:6 suggests that the author was writing about a time after the Canaanites had been driven out of the region, although this was after Joshua, Moses' successor, had arrived. Likewise, the information contained in Genesis 36:31 suggests that this text was written when Israel had already become a monarchy. Genesis 24 mentions domesticated camels, but camels were not domesticated until much later. As for the trading caravan in Genesis 37:25, this type of activity flourished only in the eighth and seventh centuries BC.
One early explanation for all these textual errors was that Moses wrote only the gist of the Pentateuch, but later editors (such as Ezra) added to it. But in 1670, the philosopher Baruch Spinoza first suggested that Moses did not write any of these books at all. In the ancient East it was quite common to attribute one's work to a predecessor hero, or even to God, in order to legitimize one's message and its content. Something similar probably happened here too.
9. Documentary hypothesis
In the 19th century, scholars began to discover even more inconsistencies and errors in the Bible, causing its compositional history to be much more complex than previously thought. In 1886, German historian Julius Wellhausen proposed that the Hexateuch (the Pentateuch together with the book of Joshua) was compiled from four different documents by different authors. These documents are marked: J (Jahwist), E (Elohist), D (Deuteronomium, translated from the Latin Deuteronomy) and P (Priesterkodex, translated from Deuteronomy). with it. Priestly Code). Each of them has its own theology and purpose.
This theory explains the presence of repeated stories ("doublets"), such as two mentions of Creation and two mentions of the Flood - Genesis 7:17 describes a 40-day flood, while Genesis 8:3 says it lasted 150 days . It is assumed that later editors combined data from several sources into one narrative, sometimes interweaving two versions of the same story, and sometimes neglecting to smooth out obvious discrepancies, as seen in the story of the Flood.
In Yahwist (J), God is called "Yahveh" or "Jehovah" (Jahveh) in German, hence the name "J". His concept allows us to perceive God in an anthropomorphic concept, because he appeared to people like Abraham face to face. The book marked E calls God by the name "Elohim" and depicts Him indirectly, as in dreams. D is the source of information for Deuteronomy, as well as the Book of Joshua, the Book of Judges of Israel, 1st and 2nd Kings, and the Book of Kings. This document defines God as having no form, one that can be seen by any person. As for the Priestly Code (P), it focuses mainly on the cult around God and is fixated on his ancestry and genealogical lists.
More recently, the idea of four separate, complete, and consistent documents has been much questioned, but the complex nature of the writing of the Pentateuch still remains an undeniable fact.
8. Deuteronomy originated as royal propaganda.
Deuteronomy literally means “Second Law.” It is believed that this book was written during the reign of King Josiah in the seventh century in order to promulgate new laws that would strengthen the position of the clergy and thereby create a more distinctive religion for the kingdom of Judah.
The new set of laws rethinks the old provisions established at Mount Sinai in the light of new political and social realities. The nature of his narrative suggests that Deuteronomy will be read by residents of cities and villages oriented towards the rule of the Temple of Jerusalem. The legislation written for the Temple replaces the earlier law written in Exodus 20:24, indicating that Deuteronomy was written much later after the people of Israel had wandered through the wilderness.
In 1805, Wilhelm Martin Leberecht de Wette suggested that the "Book of Laws" discovered in the Temple in Jerusalem during the reign of Josiah was in fact Deuteronomy. Proponents of this point of view believe that the document was deliberately placed so that it would be easy to discover. The commandments described in Deuteronomy are identical to the reforms carried out by Josiah, and therefore the book may have been written by royal supporters who wanted to provide God's support for the kings' actions.
There is also evidence that Deuteronomy is a composite work written at different times. The book discovered in the Temple was its main part. However, individual episodes suggest that the Babylonian captivity of the sixth century BC had already occurred at the time of their writing. These passages may have been added here many years later.
7. Daniel backdated his prophecies.
The Book of the Prophet Daniel is often compared to the Book of Revelations, because they both can point to future events that will happen before the end of the world. Many of Daniel's supposed prophecies were fulfilled, but does this prove that Daniel was an inspired seer?
Scientists see a more prosaic explanation for this fact. Daniel may indeed have been a Jew from the Hellenistic period, but he certainly was not one of the Babylonian judges. His so-called prophecies can be called "vaticinium ex eventu" or "prophecy of what happened", which were made on the basis of confirmed facts, so that he could simply pose as a genuine clairvoyant.
The book itself, apparently, was compiled by more than one author. After all, its chapters 1-6 are written in Aramaic, while chapters 7-12 are in Hebrew. Daniel makes many historical errors when it comes to the Babylonian period, the time in which he supposedly lived. For example, he claims that Belshazzar was the son of Nebuchadnezzar, but the Nabonidus Cylinder found at Ur indicates that Belshazzar's real father was Nabonidus. Additionally, Belteshazzar was crown prince but never became king, contrary to Daniel's claims. In Daniel 5:30, Daniel tells how one Darius of Media conquered Babylon. In fact, this was done by Cyrus the Great, a Persian by origin and not originally from Media. It was he who overthrew Babylon.
On the other hand, Daniel writes about the events of the Hellenistic era with extreme accuracy. Chapter 11, presented here as a prophecy, describes literally every detail of what was to happen. This leads to the conclusion that Daniel witnessed these events, but certainly did not live during the Babylonian period, the description of which he gives is very vague and incorrect.
Thus, scholars suggest that the Book of Daniel was written in the period from approximately 167 to 164 BC, during the persecution of the Jews by the Syrian tyrant Antiochus Epiphanes. The book was written as an inspirational scripture that was supposed to support Jews during difficult life trials. Once Daniel even tried to make a real prophecy, speaking about the death of Antiochus in the Holy Land. But it turned out to be unsuccessful. Antiochus died in Persia in 164 BC.
6. The Gospel does not contain eyewitness accounts.
The four canonical Gospels in the New Testament are anonymous. The names Matthew, Mark, Luke and John were not attached to them until the second century.
Whoever the actual authors of one of the four gospels were, they never claimed to have personally witnessed the events they described. The Gospel is more reminiscent of religious propaganda than a biography of Jesus, because theological motivation is clearly visible here. Each of his books is a distinct interpretation of Jesus, with Jesus representing the theological position of the evangelical author.
In the Gospel of Matthew, the most Jewish of the Gospels, we hear Jesus proclaim the continued relevance of the Torah. In the Gentile-oriented Gospel of John, Jesus himself takes the Sabbath off. And the Gospel of Mark presents us with Jesus, who is in agony and suffers until his death. As for the Gospel of John, here Jesus, on the contrary, looks calm and has everything under control.
Some scholars have suggested that the Gospels were written using the technique of midrash, a Jewish method of interpretation that allows old biblical stories to be given new forms (as they would now say in Hollywood, a “remake”). Thus, Jesus' 40-day stay in the desert is reminiscent of Moses' 40-year exile in the land of Midian. That is, the story of when Jesus comes from the desert, notifying everyone about the Kingdom of God, was borrowed from the story of Moses’ return from exile and his proclamation of the imminent liberation of the Israelites from slavery. And the loud name “Twelve Apostles” was inspired by the way Elijah called Elisha. And here further you can find many similar moments, because all the Gospels were built on the remnants of old stories, but told about new participants and new places of action.
5. The Gospel of Matthew and the Gospel of Luke were plagiarisms of the Gospel of Mark
Most New Testament scholars agree that the Gospel of Mark was the first of all four Gospels to be written. It is short, written in poor Greek, and contains many geographical and other errors.
Rather than presenting an independent account of the life of Jesus, the Gospels of Matthew and Luke borrowed heavily from the Gospel of Mark, and in some cases even copied its text almost verbatim. The Gospel of Matthew uses about 607 of Mark's 661 verses, and the Gospel of Luke uses 360.
To their credit, Matthew and Luke improved Mark's original text. They corrected the grammar, style, correctness of data and theology.
For example, in Mark 5:1, the eastern shore of the Sea of Galilee is mistakenly called the country of Gergesin, which is actually located more than 50 kilometers away. Matthew 8:28 replaces it with the more plausible country of the Gadarenes, located only 12 kilometers from the lake (note: referring to Lake Tiberias, which was previously called the Sea of Galilee). In Mark 7:19, Jesus “declares all foods to be clean,” a statement Matthew, who had read the Pentateuch carefully, apparently disagreed with, since he chose not to copy this statement into its parallel writings.
Mark erroneously attributes the quotation from Malachi to Isaiah, and Matthew 3:3 corrects this error. The more primitive teaching about Christ, which can be traced in the Gospel of Mark, allows Jesus to be called “Lord” only once and not at all a Jew. In the more developed Christology of Matthew, the word "Lord" is used 19 times, and in the Gospel of Luke it is repeated 16 times.
4. Forgotten Gospel Q
Both the Gospels of Matthew and Luke have common material not found in the Gospel of Mark. Scientists suspect that they had another document, apparently now lost, since for these statements they name the same unknown source, designated “Q” (from the German “Quelle” - “source”). We can reconstruct some of the data from Source Q by noting common quotations from the Gospels of Matthew and Luke. Apparently, Q included such important biblical records as the Beatitudes and the Lord's Prayer (Our Father).
The oral agreements between Matthew and Luke suggest that the material not taken from Mark must have been taken from a written, non-oral source. Matthew and Luke could not have copied these texts from each other because both Gospels contain conflicting stories (for example, the account of the Nativity and Resurrection of the Lord).
Q is mostly a collection of sayings rather than narratives. Matthew and Luke added separate sayings to the context of their stories, and they also used different styles in them. For example, the Gospel of Matthew includes the Beatitudes in Jesus' Sermon on the Mount, while Luke chose to break up the same sermon and present separate sayings from it throughout his history.
The restoration of Q led researchers to a strange conclusion: since Q does not contain the Passion of the Lord, whoever first wrote this document must have considered Jesus to be a teacher of wisdom and nothing more. The death of Jesus had no saving significance for this writer.
3. It turns out that Simon the Magus and Paul are the same person
While some of the theories presented in this article are favored by most scientists, others may well be more speculative.
One of them concerns Simon Magus. The Fathers of the Church condemned him as the creator of the Gnostic heresy, which promoted hostility towards God, Jews and the Torah. So it may come as a shock to many that Paul, the greatest apostle and author of much of the New Testament, may actually be Simon.
It is difficult to discern a consistent train of thought in Paul's letters. His writings are chaotic, incoherent and contain contradictory theology. But didn't Paul keep the Ten Commandments? Did he really not allow women to participate in worship? Was it not he who sought recognition of his gospel among men? Scholars such as Herman Detering and Robert Price have radically suggested that Paul's letters were altered and altered by later scribes to erase or soften their Gnostic content. This made it more acceptable to those from the primary orthodox Roman Catholic Church. It is assumed that the original, unforged letters were the work of Simon Magus or one of his followers.
There are some similarities between Simon and Paul. Simon was famous for his meeting with the Apostle Peter. In Galatians 2:11-14, Paul and Peter were at odds with each other. Simon was called the "Father of Heresies" and Paul was recognized as the "Apostle of Heretics." Simon pretended to be someone great, saying “the small must become great.” The Latin name "Paul" means "little". The Jewish historian Josephus tells of a sorcerer who may have been Simon, since he was called "Atomus" or "indivisible", that is, "small".
If the assumption that Paul is Simon is correct, then most of the New Testament was based on the works of the arch-heretic.
2. The Pastoral Epistles are fake.
The Epistles to Timothy and Titus differ from the writing style and biblical meaning of the original Pauline Epistles. This suggests that the Epistles were actually the work of a forger trying to gain the influence that Paul had. Most scholars, reluctant to label the Epistles as forgeries, have instead begun to label them as “pseudo-epigraphs,” which means the same thing.
Of the 848 words (excluding proper names) found in the Epistles, 306 were never used in the rest of Paul's Epistles. Their vocabulary is more similar to the language of popular Hellenistic philosophy than to the speech of Paul. The literary style also gives away the falsifier. While Paul uses dynamic and emotional Greek, the Epistles are serene and meditative. After all, these letters focus on topical issues in the developing second-century Catholicism (rather than on Paul's first-century Catholicism), such as church organization and the preservation of traditions. In the written Epistles, the emerging Church transforms Paul from the Gnostic "Apostle of Heretics" into the defender of an emerging orthodoxy.
Professor David Trobish suspects Bishop Polycarp of Smyrna of writing these forgeries. Trobisch says that Polycarp practically puts his signature on 2 Timothy 4:13: “When you go, bring the phelonion that I left at Troas with Carpus, and books, especially leather ones.” Carp's name, unlike the other names in this chapter, never appears again in the Acts of the Apostles or in Paul's earlier letters. It says here that Karp should bring a “phelonion,” that is, it means that he should take Paul’s mantle. He also used Paul's writing materials. A later verse mentions a guy named Criscent, and although he never appears anywhere in the canonical epistles, Criscent is mentioned in the Epistle of Polycarp.
1. John did not write Revelation
The traditional assumption that Jesus' disciple John wrote the Book of Revelation was challenged as early as the third century. The Christian writer Dionysus of Alexandria, using critical research methods still used by modern scholars, noticed the difference between the elegant Greek Gospel of John and the crude, illiterate prose of Revelation. These works could not have been written by the same person.
Dionysus notes that in the Revelations of St. John the Evangelist the author identifies himself in the work, while in the Gospel of John this is not the case. He argued that the two men simply had the same name.
Modern scientists have also added their own understanding of this problem. Today it is assumed that the real author was a Jew who opposed the portrayal of Christianity as Paul showed it, with its pagan elements and salvation without regard to the Pentateuch. The author calls Paul's church in Smyrna "a synagogue of Satan" and the woman steward of another church located in the city of Thyatira as "Jezebel." In short, he could not have been what we would call a Christian today.
In fact, Revelation may have been originally written before Christianity. References to Jesus Christ were inserted here many years later to make the document more Christian. They are mainly grouped in chapters 1 and 22, and only occasionally appear elsewhere. Surprisingly, these verses can be removed from here without disturbing its basic structure and the flow of surrounding verses, leaving the overall meaning of the text virtually intact. This suggests that the original Book of Revelations had nothing to do with Jesus at all.
The material was prepared by Natalya Zakalyk - based on material from the website listverse.com
If religion is far from you, then the fan environment is definitely close to you. If you want to know all the sports news and know everything about the life of your favorite clubs, then follow the link to find out everything.
P.S. My name is Alexander. This is my personal, independent project. I am very glad if you liked the article. Want to help the site? Just look at the advertisement below for what you were recently looking for.
Copyright site © - This news belongs to the site, and is the intellectual property of the blog, is protected by copyright law and cannot be used anywhere without an active link to the source. Read more - "about Authorship"
Is this what you were looking for? Perhaps this is something you couldn’t find for so long?
The Christian faith is built on the Bible, but many do not know who its author is or when it was published. To get answers to these questions, scientists have conducted a large number of studies. The dissemination of Holy Scripture in our century has reached enormous proportions; it is known that every second one book is printed in the world.
What is the Bible?
Christians call the collection of books that make up the Holy Scriptures the Bible. It is considered the word of the Lord that was given to people. Much research has been done over the years to understand who wrote the Bible and when, so it is believed that the revelation was given to different people and the recordings were made over many centuries. The Church recognizes the collection of books as inspired by God.
The Orthodox Bible in one volume contains 77 books with two or more pages. It is considered a kind of library of ancient religious, philosophical, historical and literary monuments. The Bible consists of two parts: the Old (50 books) and the New (27 books) Testament. There is also a conditional division of the Old Testament books into legal, historical and teaching.
Why was the Bible called the Bible?
There is one main theory proposed by biblical scholars that answers this question. The main reason for the appearance of the name “Bible” is associated with the port city of Byblos, which was located on the Mediterranean coast. Through him, Egyptian papyrus was supplied to Greece. After some time, this name in Greek began to mean a book. As a result, the book the Bible appeared and this name is used only for the Holy Scriptures, which is why the name is written with a capital letter.
The Bible and the Gospel - what's the difference?
Many believers do not have an accurate understanding of the main Holy Book for Christians.
- The gospel is part of the Bible, which is included in the New Testament.
- The Bible is an early scripture, but the text of the Gospel was written much later.
- The text of the Gospel tells only about life on earth and the ascension to heaven of Jesus Christ. There is much more information provided in the Bible.
- There are also differences in who wrote the Bible and the Gospel, since the authors of the main Holy book are unknown, but regarding the second work there is an assumption that its text was written by four evangelists: Matthew, John, Luke and Mark.
- It is worth noting that the Gospel is written only in ancient Greek, and the texts of the Bible are presented in different languages.
Who is the author of the Bible?
For believers, the author of the Holy Book is the Lord, but experts can challenge this opinion, since it contains the Wisdom of Solomon, the book of Job and more. In this case, answering the question of who wrote the Bible, we can assume that there were many authors, and everyone made their own contribution to this work. There is an assumption that it was written by ordinary people who received divine inspiration, that is, they were only an instrument, holding a pencil over the book, and the Lord led their hands. When figuring out where the Bible came from, it is worth pointing out that the names of the people who wrote the text are unknown.
When was the Bible written?
There has been debate for a long time regarding when the most popular book in the whole world was written. Among the well-known statements with which many researchers agree are the following:
- Many historians, answering the question regarding when the Bible appeared, point to VIII-VI century BC e.
- A huge number of biblical scholars are confident that the book was finally formed in V-II centuries BC e.
- Another common version of how old the Bible is indicates that the book was compiled and presented to believers around II-I century BC e.
The Bible describes many events, thanks to which we can come to the conclusion that the first books were written during the lives of Moses and Joshua. Then other editions and additions appeared, which shaped the Bible as it is known today. There are also critics who dispute the chronology of the writing of the book, believing that the presented text cannot be trusted, since it claims to be of divine origin.
What language is the Bible written in?
The majestic book of all times was written in ancient times and today it has been translated into more than 2.5 thousand languages. The number of Bible editions exceeded 5 million copies. It is worth noting that the current editions are later translations from the original languages. The history of the Bible indicates that it was written over many decades, so it contains texts in different languages. The Old Testament is largely presented in Hebrew, but there are also texts in Aramaic. The New Testament is presented almost entirely in ancient Greek.
Given the popularity of Holy Scripture, it will not surprise anyone that research was carried out and this revealed a lot of interesting information:
- Jesus is mentioned most often in the Bible, with David in second place. Among women, Abraham's wife Sarah receives the laurels.
- The smallest copy of the book was printed at the end of the 19th century using the photomechanical reduction method. The size was 1.9x1.6 cm, and the thickness was 1 cm. To make the text readable, a magnifying glass was inserted into the cover.
- Facts about the Bible indicate that it contains approximately 3.5 million letters.
- To read the Old Testament you need to spend 38 hours, and the New Testament will take 11 hours.
- Many will be surprised by this fact, but according to statistics, the Bible is stolen more often than other books.
- Most copies of the Holy Scriptures were made for export to China. Moreover, in North Korea, reading this book is punishable by death.
- The Christian Bible is the most persecuted book. In all of history, no other work is known against which laws were passed, for violation of which the death penalty was imposed.
“It has served us well, this myth of Christ...”
“Everything will be fine!” said God and created the Earth. Then he created the sky and all kinds of creatures in pairs, he also did not forget about vegetation, so that the creatures had something to eat, and, of course, he created man in his own image and likeness, so that there would be someone to dominate and make fun of at his mistakes and violations of the commandments of the Lord ...
Almost each of us is sure that this is what actually happened. What does the supposedly holy book, which is so ingenuously called, assure? "Book", only in Greek. But it was its Greek name that caught on, "Bible", from which in turn came the name of the book repositories - LIBRARIES.
But even here there is a deception, which few or no one pays attention to. Believers are well aware that this Book consists of 77 the lesser books and the two parts of the Old and New Testaments. Does any of us know that hundreds other small books were not included in this big Book only because the church “bosses” - the high priests - the intermediate link, the so-called intermediaries between people and God, decided so among themselves.
Wherein changed several times not only the composition of the books included in the largest Book itself, but also the contents of these smallest books.
I am not going to analyze the Bible once again; before me, many wonderful people read it with feeling, sense and understanding several times, who thought about what was written in the “holy scripture” and presented what they saw in their works, such as “Biblical Truth” "David Naidis, "Funny Bible" and "Funny Gospel" by Leo Texil, "Bible Pictures..." by Dmitry Baida and Elena Lyubimova, "Crusade" by Igor Melnik.
Read these books and you will learn about the Bible from a different perspective. Yes, and I am more than sure that believers do not read the Bible, because if they read it, it would be impossible not to notice so many contradictions, inconsistencies, substitution of concepts, deception and lies, not to mention calls for extermination of all the peoples of the Earth, God's chosen people.
And these people themselves were destroyed several times at the root during the selection process, until their god selected a group of perfect zombies who very well assimilated all his commandments and instructions, and, most importantly, strictly followed them, for which they were pardoned with life and continuation sort of, and... new religion.
In this work I would like to draw your attention to the fact that what is not included in the above canonical books, or what hundreds of other sources no less interesting than the “holy” scripture say. So, let's look at the biblical facts and more.
The first skeptic, who pointed out the impossibility of calling Moses the author of the Pentateuch (and this is what Christian and Jewish authorities assure us of), was a certain Persian Jew Khivi Gabalki, who lived in the 9th century. He noticed that in some books Moses talks about himself in the third person. Moreover, sometimes Moses allows himself extremely immodest things: for example, he can characterize himself as the meekest man of all people on earth (book of Numbers) or say: “...Israel never again had a prophet like Moses.”(Deuteronomy).
Further developed the topic Dutch materialist philosopher Benedict Spinoza, who wrote his famous “Theological-Political Treatise” in the 17th century. Spinoza “dug up” so many inconsistencies and outright blunders in the Bible - for example, Moses describes his own funeral - that no amount of inquisition could stop the growing doubts.
At the beginning of the 18th century, first the German Lutheran pastor Witter, and then the French physician Jean Astruc made the discovery that the Old Testament consists of two texts with different primary sources. That is, some events in the Bible are told twice, and in the first version the name of God sounds like Elohim, and in the second - Yahweh. It turned out that virtually all the so-called books of Moses were compiled during the period of the Babylonian captivity of the Jews, i.e. much later, than the rabbis and priests claim, and clearly could not have been written by Moses.
Series of archaeological expeditions to Egypt, including the expedition of the Hebrew University, did not find any traces of such an epoch-making biblical event as the exodus of the Jewish people from this country in the 14th century BC. Not a single ancient source, be it papyrus or an Assyro-Babylonian cuneiform tablet, ever mentions the presence of Jews in Egyptian captivity at this time. There are references to the later Jesus, but not to Moses!
And Professor Zeev Herzog in the Haaretz newspaper summed up many years of scientific research on the Egyptian issue: “It may be unpleasant for some to hear and difficult to accept, but it is absolutely clear to researchers today that the Jewish people were not enslaved in Egypt and did not wander in the desert...” But the Jewish people were enslaved in Babylonia (modern Iraq) and adopted many legends and traditions from there, later including them in a revised form in the Old Testament. Among them was the legend of the global flood.
Josephus Flavius Vespasian, the famous Jewish historian and military leader who supposedly lived in the 1st century AD, in his book “On the Antiquity of the Jewish People,” which was first published only in 1544, moreover, in Greek, establishes the number books of the so-called Old Testament in the amount of 22 units and says which books are not disputed among the Jews, because they have been handed down from ancient times. He speaks of them in the following words:
“We don’t have a thousand books that disagree with each other and don’t refute one another; there are only twenty-two books that cover the entire past and are rightly considered Divine. Of these, five belong to Moses. They contain laws and legends about the generations of people who lived before his death - this is a period of almost three thousand years. The events from the death of Moses to the death of Artaxerxes, who reigned in Persia after Xerxes, were described in thirteen books by the prophets who lived after Moses, contemporaries of what was happening. The remaining books contain hymns to God and instructions to people on how to live. Everything that happened from Artaxerxes to our time is described, but these books do not deserve the same faith as the above-mentioned ones, because their authors were not in strict succession with the prophets. How we treat our books is evident in practice: so many centuries have passed, and no one dared to add anything to them, or take anything away, or rearrange anything; Jews have an innate belief in this teaching as Divine: it should be held firmly, and if necessary, then die for it with joy ... "
The Bible as we know it consists of 77 books, of which 50 books are the Old Testament and 27 are the New. But, as you can see for yourself, back in the Middle Ages, only 22 books were recognized as part of the so-called Old Testament. Only 22 books! And these days, the old part of the Bible has swollen almost 2.5 times. And it was inflated by books containing a fictitious past for the Jews, a past that they did not have; a past stolen from other nations and appropriated by the Jews. By the way, the name of the people - Jews - carries their essence and means “cutting out the UD”, which is circumcision. And UD is the ancient name of the male genital organ, which also has meaning in words such as fishing rod, fishing rod, satisfaction.
The evolution of the Bible as a single book lasted several centuries, and this is confirmed by the churchmen themselves in their internal books, written for the clergy, and not for the flock. And this church struggle continues to this day, despite the fact that the Jerusalem Council of 1672 issued a “Definition”: “We believe that this Divine and Sacred Scripture was communicated by God, and therefore we must believe it without any reasoning, not as anyone wants, but as the Catholic Church has interpreted and transmitted it.”.
In the 85th Apostolic Canon, the 60th Canon of the Laodicean Council, the 33rd (24) Canon of the Carthage Council and in the 39th Canonical Epistle of St. Athanasius, in the canons of St. Gregory the Theologian and Amphilochius of Iconium provide lists of the sacred books of the Old and New Testaments. And these lists do not completely coincide. Thus, in the 85th Apostolic Canon, in addition to the canonical Old Testament books, non-canonical books are also named: 3 books of the Maccabees, the book of Jesus son of Sirach, and between the New Testament books - two epistles of Clement of Rome and 8 books of the Apostolic Constitutions, but the Apocalypse is not mentioned. There is no mention of the Apocalypse in the 60th rule of the Laodicean Council, in the poetic catalog of the Holy Books of St. Gregory the Theologian.
Athanasius the Great said this about the Apocalypse: “The Revelation of John is now ranked among the Holy Books, and many call it inauthentic.”. In the list of canonical Old Testament books by St. Athanasius does not mention Esther, which he, along with the Wisdom of Solomon, the Wisdom of Jesus son of Sirach, Judith and the book of Tobit, as well as “The Shepherd of Hermas” and “The Apostolic Doctrine”, ranks among the books “appointed by the Fathers for reading to newcomers and those wishing to make themselves known in the word of piety "
The 33rd (24th) rule of the Council of Carthage offers the following list of canonical biblical books: “The canonical scriptures are these: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, Kings four books; Chronicles two, Job, Psalms, Solomon books four. There are twelve prophetic books, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Daniel, Tobias, Judith, Esther, Ezra two books. New Testament: four Gospels, one book of the Acts of the Apostles, fourteen Epistles of Paul, two of Peter the Apostle, three of John the Apostle, one book of James the Apostle, one book of Jude the Apostle. The Apocalypse of John is one book."
Strangely, in the English translation of the Bible of 1568, the so-called "Bishops" Bible, only two books of Kings are mentioned. And this Bible itself consists of 73 books instead 77 as currently approved.
Only in XIII century, the biblical books were divided into chapters, and only in XVI century the chapters were divided into verses. In addition, before forming the biblical canon, the churchmen went through more than one heap of primary sources - small books, selecting the “correct” texts, which later formed a large book - the Bible. It is from their input that we can judge the affairs of bygone days, described in the Old and New Testaments. Therefore it turns out that Bible, which many may have read, was formed as a single book, only in the 18th century! And only a few Russian translations of it have reached us, the most famous of which is the Synodal translation.
From Valery Erchak’s book “The Word and Deed of Ivan the Terrible,” we became aware of the first mentions of the Bible in Rus', and these turned out to be just psalters: “In Rus', only lists of the books of the New Testament and the Psalter were recognized (the oldest list is the Galich Gospel, 1144). The full text of the Bible was first translated only in 1499 on the initiative of the Novgorod Archbishop Gennady Gonozov or Gonzov (1484-1504, Chudov Monastery of the Moscow Kremlin), who undertook this work in connection with the heresy of the Judaizers. In Rus', various service books were used. For example, the Gospel-aprakos existed in two varieties: the full aprakos includes the entire gospel text, the short one includes only the Gospel of John, the rest of the gospels amount to no more than 30-40% of the text. The Gospel of John was read in full. In modern liturgical practice, the Gospel of John ch. 8, verse 44, one does not read about the genealogy of the Jewish family...”
Why is the Bible called the Synodal Bible and why is it the most popular?
It's simple. It turns out that only synod The Russian Orthodox Church is a council of the highest church hierarchs, has the right at its discretion INTERPRET texts of the Bible, edit them as they please, introduce or remove any books from the Bible, approve biographies of supposedly holy church men, and much more.
So who wrote this supposedly holy book and what is sacred in it?
Only in Russian there are the following translations of the Bible: Gennady's Bible (XV century), Ostrog Bible (XVI century), Elizabethan Bible (XVIII century), translation of the Bible by Archimandrite Macarius, Synodal translation of the Bible (XIX century), and in 2011 the latest version was published Bibles - The Bible in modern Russian translation. That text of the Russian Bible, which is known to all of us, and which is called the synodal, first came out of print only in 1876 year. And this happened almost three centuries later, after the appearance of the original Church Slavonic Bible. And these, let me remind you, are only Russian translations of the Bible, and there are at least 6 known translations among them.
But the Bible has been translated into all languages of the world and in different eras. And, thanks to this, the translators have inherited, and almost identical texts of the Bible still reflect some points differently. And where they forgot to erase, for example, prohibited references to the area or descriptions of the weather, or names or names of attractions, the original texts remained there, which shed the light of truth on what happened in those not so ancient times in general. And they help a thinking person put together the scattered pieces of the mosaic into a single and complete picture in order to get a more or less complete picture of our past.
Recently, I came across a book by Erich von Däniken "Aliens from outer space. New finds and discoveries", which consists of individual articles by different authors on the topic of the cosmic origin of humanity. One of the articles in this book is called "The Original Biblical Texts" by Walter-Jörg Langbein. I would like to quote some of the facts he found to you, since they reveal a lot about the so-called truth of biblical texts. In addition, these conclusions are in excellent agreement with the other facts about the Bible given above. So, Langbein wrote that the biblical texts are filled with errors, which for some reason believers do not pay any attention to:
“The “original” biblical texts available today are filled with thousands upon thousands of easily detectable and well-known errors. The most famous "original" text, Codex Sinaiticus(Code Sinaiticus), contains at least 16,000 corrections, the “authorship” of which belongs to seven different proofreaders. Some passages were changed three times and replaced by a fourth "original" text. The theologian Friedrich Delitzsch, compiler of a Hebrew dictionary, found in this “original” text only errors scribe about 3000…»
I have highlighted the most important things. And these facts are simply impressive! It is not surprising that they are carefully hidden from everyone, not only religious fanatics, but even sensible people who are looking for the truth and want to figure out for themselves the issue of creating the Bible.
Professor Robert Kehl from Zurich wrote about the issue of falsifications in ancient biblical texts: “It happened quite often that the same passage was “corrected” by one proofreader in one sense, and “transported” by another in the opposite sense, depending on what dogmatic views were held in the corresponding school ... "
“Without exception, all the “original” biblical texts existing today are copies of copies, and those, presumably, in turn, are copies of copies. Neither copy is the same as any other. There are over 80,000 (!) discrepancies. From copy to copy, the elements were perceived differently by empathetic scribes and remade in the spirit of the times. With such a mass of falsifications and contradictions, to continue to talk about the “word of the Lord”, every time picking up the Bible, means bordering on schizophrenia ... "
I cannot but agree with Langbein, and, having a lot of other evidence for this, I absolutely confirm his conclusions.
But here is the fact of when and where the famous evangelists Matthew, Mark, Luke and John wrote their new testaments. Famous English writer Charles Dickens wrote a book in the 19th century called "Child's History of England". This is translated into Russian as “History of England for young (children).” This interesting book was published in the mid-19th century in London. And it tells about English rulers whom young Englishmen should have known well. This book says in black and white that during the coronation of Princess Elizabeth I, four evangelists and a certain Saint Paul were prisoners in England and received freedom under an amnesty.
In 2005, this book was published in Russia. I will give a small fragment from it (chapter XXXI): “...The coronation went off magnificently, and the next day one of the courtiers, according to custom, submitted a petition to Elizabeth for the release of several prisoners and among them four evangelists: Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, as well as St. Paul, who for some time were forced to express themselves in such a strange language that people have completely forgotten how to understand. But the queen replied that it was better to first find out from the saints themselves whether they wanted freedom, and then a grandiose public discussion was scheduled in Westminster Abbey - a kind of religious tournament - with the participation of some of the most prominent champions of both faiths (by other faith we mean , most likely Protestant).
As you understand, all sensible people quickly realized that only understandable words should be repeated and read. In this regard, it was decided to conduct church services in English, accessible to all, and other laws and regulations were adopted that revived the most important cause of the Reformation. However, Catholic bishops and adherents of the Roman Church were not persecuted, and the royal ministers showed prudence and mercy...”
Written testimony of Charles Dickens (he wrote this book for his children, and whom he clearly had no intention of deceiving), that Evangelists lived in the 16th century, published about 150 years ago in England, cannot be discarded so easily. This automatically follows the irrefutable conclusion that the New Testament of the Bible was written, at the earliest, in the 16th century! And it immediately becomes clear that this so-called Christian religion is based on a big lie! That “good news” - this is how the word “gospel” is translated from Greek - is nothing more than cynical fiction, and there is nothing good in them.
But that's not all. The description of the construction of the walls of Jerusalem, given in the book of Nehemiah, in all respects coincides with the description of the construction of the Moscow Kremlin (according to Nosovsky and Fomenko), which was carried out... also in the 16th century. What happens then is that not only the New Testament, but also the Old Testament, i.e. the whole Bible, was written in recent times - in the 16th century!
The facts I have given will certainly be enough for any thinking person to start digging and looking for confirmation himself, to add up his own integrity of understanding of what is happening. But even this will not be enough for false skeptics. No matter how much information you give them, you still won’t convince them of anything! For in terms of their level of knowledge they are at the level of small children, because believe mindlessly- much easier than know! Therefore, you need to speak to children in their children's language.
And if any of the respected readers has more information on this issue, and someone has something to complement and expand on the facts I have collected, I will be grateful if you share your knowledge! These materials will also be useful for the future book, the materials from which were taken to write this article. My e-mail address: [email protected]
Alexander Novak
Traditional Misconceptions
The Bible is a sacred book for a significant part of the world's population, and many of them blindly believe that it was written by the Lord himself, or at least from his words. You can find enough evidence for this, especially with regard to real historical events, one way or another veiled by sacred texts. This ancient book is simply a storehouse of wisdom with which it is not even possible to argue.
But all this is only at first glance. After all, if you approach this issue from the other side, it becomes clear who actually wrote the Bible, as well as why he needed it. Let's try to figure this out.
Who wrote the Bible. The opinion of theologians
Who, if not individuals “especially close to the Lord,” will be able to fully answer such a sensitive question that worries the minds of some of the parishioners? True, how truthful their answers will be can only be judged by those who listen to them. So, according to pundits, the Bible itself, the New Testament and the Old Testament were written by prophets, based on the received visions sent to them from above (read - by the Lord). Moreover, it is not possible to find the names of these prophets, except for John the Theologian (“Apocalypse”). You can, of course, believe this, but you can turn to another sensitive question about what to call a person who believes that in his sleep he talks to the Lord, and the rest of the time he broadcasts the received truth to the people.
Who wrote the Bible. The opinion of the mystics
Mystics are able to endow any, even the most insignificant thing with supernatural abilities and hidden meaning. Sort of like “costs of the profession.” But their opinion, oddly enough, is more like the truth. They believe that the Bible is a kind of collection of centuries-old wisdom of peoples, covered with a veil of everyday life, so that only those who are imbued with the Divine light can find it. We have to agree with this, because only those who acquire fanaticism can blindly believe every word spoken, claiming that every phrase spoken is endowed with meaning and is the Truth.
Who wrote the Bible. Opinion of historians
Various researchers who are inclined to compare historical monuments believe that most of the events described in the Bible were already described in other books or legends of ancient peoples. Indeed, it is impossible not to see the obvious similarity of the New Testament with the most widespread legends of different nationalities: Odin, Hercules, Hercules, Osiris. All these characters were children of some deity, sent to our world in various ways, carried Divine truth and died (they did not die a natural death). But even historians are inclined to penetrate into the Divine light; they often begin to look for some kind of code that allows them to understand the truth of the universe. It is still too early to judge its existence, as well as the feasibility of searching for it. Time will tell everything.
Who really wrote the Bible
Are you ready to get a truly objective answer? But in order to fully answer this question, we will first have to pay attention to what the Bible consists of: first of all, it is the numerous stories of misadventures of the Jewish people, which end well thanks to intervention from above. The approximate structure of each of them: description of the problem, description of the difficulties, getting rid of the difficulties. And some stories are completely instructive and contain morals ("Expulsion from Paradise", parables), which can be safely applied to today's life, without fear of making mistakes. It turns out that the Bible is a historical work, a description of the history of one people, based on real events and flavored with legends of the area in which they happened to be. This concerns the Old Testament (by the way, a small part of another holy book - the Torah). The New Testament is a description of the life of a real-life personality engaged in promoting new views, recorded by one of his followers. You can also find instructive stories and smart thoughts in it, but it remains a work of art.
