You are here:   Bible > Writing and Rewriting the Bible in the Time of Jesus
 

The term the "Rewritten Bible" has been hotly debated during the last quarter of a century. I use it here in the meaning I gave it when I first launched the concept in Scripture and Tradition in Judaism in 1961: 

In order to anticipate questions, and solve problems in advance, the midrashist (interpreter) inserts haggadic (descriptive or doctrinal) developments into the biblical narrative . . .

The essential feature of the Rewritten Bible is that instead of reproducing separately the biblical text followed by exegetical comments, as does the pesher, the Rewritten Bible incorporates the interpretative remarks into the scriptural text itself. The commentator literally "rewrites" the Bible. This kind of composition may be found throughout the whole of Jewish literature from the Bible itself (Deuteronomy reuses the earlier books of the Pentateuch and Chronicles re-edits Samuel and Kings) to the works Philo, Josephus and the rabbis. However, in recent years transatlantic scholars have tended to restrict research on this topic to the Dead Sea Scrolls. A number of them also object to my phrase "Rewritten Bible" and prefer "Rewritten Scripture". They argue that in the Qumran age the notion of "Bible" was still in a fluid state. But this literary category extends beyond Qumran. Furthermore, is there any difference in meaning between Bible and scripture? Finally, according to Josephus, in his time in the first century CE, Jews recognised as authoritative 22 books precisely. This signifies that there existed a canon, a definite list of works consisting of the five books of the Law (Genesis to Deuteronomy), the 13 books of the prophet-historians (Joshua, Judges-Ruth, Samuel, Kings, Chronicles, Ezra-Nehemiah, Esther, Job, Isaiah, Jeremiah-Lamentations, Ezekiel, Minor Prophets, Daniel) and the four books of Hymns and Wisdom (Psalms, Song of Songs, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes). They made up the Bible, so the phrase "Rewritten Bible" is fully justified.

Before the Dead Sea Scrolls, the principal representatives of the Rewritten Bible were the Book of Jubilees (mid-second century BCE), which retells with inserted comments the story of Genesis and the beginning of Exodus; Josephus's Jewish Antiquities (end of first century CE), covering the whole biblical history; and Pseudo-Philo's Book of Biblical Antiquities (first century CE), concerned with the Bible account from the creation to David. To these are to be added in the world of the rabbis the Palestinian Pentateuch Targums (Pseudo-Jonathan, Fragmentary Targum and Targum Codex Neofiti), all dating from the second to the fourth century CE, but containing much old material. Read out during the synagogue services, the Palestinian Targums performed the same role for the somewhat literate Jews as the visual narration of the biblical story in the frescoes and statues of the medieval churches did for the largely illiterate Christians.  

View Full Article
 
Share/Save
 
 
 
 
Jose Garcia
March 28th, 2013
4:03 PM
Why insisting on Aramaic as the language of Jesus when the inmense majority of the archeological records from that period in Judea favor Galilean Hebrew

Eliyahu Konn
December 22nd, 2012
5:12 AM
The articles use of the terms "Je-sus," and "Old Testament," are inaccurate. In an historically accurate study of the 1st Century, Y'shua is the accurate term, confirmed by 1st century ossuary inscriptions. The term "Old Testament," is clearly a Christian term sadly accepted by even those of Jewish descent. The Christian old and new designations reveal their displacement strategy. But within accurate dates the scrolls found at Qumran are a wealth of information. One needs to compare the data objectively and not use it to prove one's own theology. By the way, it is Yam HaMelakh, the Salt Sea, not the Dead Sea.

Post your comment

CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.