Along these lines we could also throw in Jesus' synthesis of the two greatest Commandments. However, Jesus would never say to forget about the rest. He never says there is anything wrong with the full list of ten. He says they are all 100% correct. So, while there may be an apparent hierarchy, in no way does that diminish the rest. I think it is the same with the Bible in general. I have no problem with zooming in on the Gospels, but I don't think that in any way diminishes the epistles, etc. I don't think they contradict in any way.
My point is that the Church does not treat all of the scripture the same way. It never quotes from the Chronicles or the Kings (historical books) because neither did Christ in the Gospels, nor are they listed in the 'canon' mentioned by Christ (cf. Luke 24: 44).
I think that is unfortunate, and I don't see how that squares with "All scripture is God-breathed". Does the Church follow that, and do you think that all scripture is purely infallible? I'm trying to figure if you don't quote from the books you mention because there are only so many days in the year, or whether the Church does not really believe they are authority.
BTW, shame on me for not being able to remember the reasoning, but I thought it was Blogger who earlier showed that the historical OT books you mention are included under the Prophets.
|
Jewish |
Catholic/Orthodox |
Protestant |
|---|---|---|
|
Torah |
Pentateuch |
Pentateuch |
|
Genesis |
Genesis |
Genesis |
|
Prophets (Former) |
Historical Books |
Historical Books |
|
Joshua |
Joshua |
Joshua |
|
Prophets (Latter) |
||
|
Isaiah |
||
|
The Writings |
Wisdom Books |
Poetic Books |
|
Psalms |
Job |
Job |
|
Prophets |
Prophets |
|
|
Isaiah |
Isaiah |
1 In the Greek tradition (the Septuagint and some modern traditions that follow the Eastern church tradition), 1 and 2 Samuel are combined with the books of Kings, known as 1-4 Kings. In most Protestant canons of the Western Church, the books are known as 1-2 Samuel (1-2 Kings) and 1-2 Kings (3-4 Kings).
2 The books of Ezra and Nehemiah were originally combined into a single book. The combined book, Ezra-Nehemiah, was sometimes referred to as Esdras (Hb: Ezra, Gk: Esdras) but called 1 Esdras in the early Greek translations to distinguish it from another book from the same period (containing 2 Chron 35-36, Neh 7:38-8:12, plus other material not found in the Old Testament) that was also known as Esdras. While this second book was sometimes also called 1 Esdras it later came to be known as 2 Esdras. Still a third pseudepigraphic book of apocalyptic visions entitled Esdras was circulated a little later and was also know as 2 Esdras. After Ezra-Nehemiah was split into two books, Ezra was known as 1 Esdras, Nehemiah as 2 Esdras, the expanded OT version book as 3 Esdras, and the apocalyptic book as 4 Esdras.
3 There are also a 3 and 4 Maccabees, but these were never considered to be biblical books. The Greek Orthodox Church does not accept 1 and 2 Maccabees.
4 The Book of the Twelve contains the remaining 12 prophetic books: Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi. These are sometimes called the Minor Prophets in Christian tradition due to their shorter length, while the longer prophetic books are called the Major Prophets.
5 Also known as the Wisdom of Jesus ben Sira or Sirach.
Try 600 commandments God gave, according to Judaism.
I think that is unfortunate, and I don't see how that squares with "All scripture is God-breathed"
It's not unfortunate. It's tiered. Like everything else in the Church of God. Some are called to be Apostles, some teachers, etc. There is no equality whatsoever in the OT or the NT. One is always serving a master, except One.
The Church never did quote from the Kings and the Chronicles, and it never did quote from the whole Bible. Never. And the Orthodox Church never quotes from the Revelation.
Obviously, some verses are considered 'more important' than others. obviously some books are treated as more important than others.
BTW, shame on me for not being able to remember the reasoning, but I thought it was Blogger who earlier showed that the historical OT books you mention are included under the Prophets
Blogger is right. I stand corrected. Nevertheless, the NT does not quote from the Chronicles or the Kings. Even the NT holds some Scripture 'more important' than others.