Q: What is the canonical arrangement of the OT and NT books

Old Testament have 39 books (Hebrew Bible ! books" The #aw$ Torah:

%& 'enesis & ()od*s The .ro/hets$ Nebiim: The 0ormer .ro/hets: 1& 2osh*a 3& 2*dges The #atter .ro/hets: %7&8saiah %3&The twelve: a" Hosea b" 2oel c" :mos d" Obadiah The Writings$ 6et*bim: .oetical: %!&.salms The >olls: %3&5ong of 5olomon %4&>*th Historical: &,aniel

3& #evitic*s !& N*mbers

+& ,e*teronom-

4& % 5am*el and 9& % 6ings and

5am*el 6ings

%%&2eremiah

% &(9ekiel

e" 2onah f" ;icah g" Nah*m h" Habakk*k

i" <e/haniah =" Haggai k" <echariah l" ;alachi

%+&.roverbs

%1&2ob

%9&#amentations 7&(cclesiastes

%&(sther

3&(9ra?Nehemiah

!&% @hronicles and @hronicles

During the fourth to second century BCE, only the Torah (The Law) was at canonical state: The Septuagint translation ade in third!century BCE "le#andria, Egypt, for $ree%!spea%ing &ews' there were no (oo%s of prophets or other writings at that ti e) This is consistent with the supposition that these last two di*isions of the +e(rew Bi(le were not yet settled) &ews +e(rew Bi(le' Sa aritan Septuagint (L,,) There are te#tual differences (etween the L,, and the +e(rew) -n te#ts agree with the L,, against the +e(rew) Scholars use these clues to try deter ine the original te#t) So e of the prophets spo%e and wrote (efore the e#ile, and we (elie*e that a portion of their writings ha*e reached us today in the Bi(le) +owe*er, a great nu (er of other writings also e#isted, and there is no e*idence that there e#isted !! at the ti e of E.ra !! an e#clusi*e collection of inspired writings outside of the Law of /oses, and yet also separate fro religious writings in general) There are a considera(le nu (er of wor%s 0uoted (y the Bi(le, (ut do not the sel*es appear in our canon) So e of the ade it into the "pocrypha, so e are preser*ed in frag ents (y the &ews in 1u ran (the site of the Dead Sea Scrolls)) +ere is a list of sources used (y Bi(lical writers, (ut that are not the sel*es preser*ed in our canon) 22 The +e(rew Bi(le of today is su(stantially the sa e as the original writings, with only physical changes li%e the addition of *owel pointings, reading aids in the argins, and a change to a ore open for of the letters, etc) -n 3o ans 4:5 we are told that the oracles of $od,6 the 7ld Testa ent Scripture, had (een entrusted to the &ews' they were to (e the custodians of the 7ld Testa ent) This precisely fits what we %now a(out the &ews and the 7ld Testa ent) They ha*e always (een a people of one (oo% who ha*e guarded it with e#tre e care and precision) 8ro the ti e of E.ra and e*en (efore, there were priests (Deut) 49:5:!5;) and later scri(es called sopherim who were gi*en the responsi(ility to copy and eticulously care for the sacred te#t so they could hand down the correct reading) To ensure this accuracy, later scri(es %nown as the /asoretes de*eloped a nu (er of strict easures to ensure that e*ery fresh copy was an e#act reproduction of the original) They esta(lished tedious procedures to protect the te#t against (eing changed) 8or instance, (a) when o(*ious errors were noted in the te#t, perhaps (ecause a tired scri(e nodded, the te#t was still not changed) -nstead, a correction was placed in the argin called qere, to (e read,6 and that which was written in the te#t was called, kethibh, to (e written)6 (() <hen a word was considered te#tually, gra atically, or e#egetically 0uestiona(le, dots were placed a(o*e that word) (c) /inute statistics were also %ept as a further eans of guarding against errors: in the +e(rew any of these, the Sa aritan

Bi(le at Le*iticus =:=, the argin has a reference that this *erse is the iddle *erse of the Torah) "ccording to the note at Le*) 9>:9; the word darash is the iddle word in the Torah, and at 99::5 we are assured that the waw in a +e(rew word there is the iddle letter) "t the end of each (oo% are statistics as: the total nu (er of *erses in Deuterono y is ?@@, the total in the entire Torah is @,=:@' the total nu (er of words is ?A, =@;, and the total nu (er of letters is :>>,?:@);: -n this we see so ething of the painsta%ing procedures the &ews went through to assure the accurate trans ission of the te#t) 7ur English Bi(le is a translation of this +e(rew te#t which has (een handed down to us) $od ade the &ews the custodians of the 7ld Testa ent record) Though their eyes ay (e (lind to its truth (-sa) ;:9>' &ohn 95::>' 3o ) 9>:9!4' 99:A), they ha*e guarded its trans ission with great accuracy) The original copies of the 7ld Testa ent were written on leather or papyrus fro the ti e of /oses (c) 9:@> B)C)) to the ti e of /alachi (:>> B)C))) Bntil the sensational disco*ery of the Dead Sea Scrolls in 9?:A we did not possess copies of the 7ld Testa ent earlier than ")D) =?@) The reason for this is si ply that the &ews had an al ost superstitious *eneration for the te#t which i pelled the to (ury copies that had (eco e too old for use) -ndeed, the /asoretes (traditionalists) who (etween ")D ;>> and ?@> added accents and *owel points and in general standardi.ed the +e(rew te#t, de*ised co plicated safeguards for the a%ing of copies (as described above) C <hen the Dead Sea Scrolls were disco*ered, they ga*e us a +e(rew te#t fro the second to first century B)C) of all (ut one of the (oo%s (Esther) of the 7ld Testa ent) This was of the greatest i portance, for it pro*ided a uch earlier chec% on the accuracy of the /asoretic te#t, which has now pro*ed to (e e#tre ely accurate) 7ther early chec%s on the +e(rew te#t include the Septuagint translation ( iddle of third century B)C)), the "ra aic Targu s (paraphrases and 0uotes of the 7ld Testa ent), 0uotations in early Christian writers, and the Latin translation of &ero e (")D) :>>) which was ade directly fro the +e(rew te#t of his day) "ll of these gi*e us the data for (eing assured of ha*ing an accurate te#t of the 7ld Testa ent);@ The /asoretic te#t of the +e(rew 7ld Testa ent contains twenty!four (oo%s, (eginning with $enesis and ending with 5 Chronicles) Though this arrange ent of the 7ld Testa ent is in only twenty!four (oo%s, the su(Dect identical with the thirty!nine (oo% di*ision of our Erotestant English Bi(le) The difference is in the order and division of the arrange ent of the (oo%s) The reason for this is that the Erotestant canon of the 7ld Testa ent has (een influenced (y the $ree% translation of the 7ld Testa ent, the Septuagint (L,,) ade a(out 5@>!9;> B)C) The Septuagint di*ided the (oo%s of Sa uel, Fings, Chronicles and E.ra!Gehe iah each into two, which a%es eight instead of four) The Twel*e /inor Erophets were di*ided into twel*e, instead of (eing counted as one (oo% as in the twenty!four (oo% di*ision) This adds fifteen a%ing a total of the thirty!nine (oo%s as in the Erotestant English Bi(le) atter is

Since the year 9@9A, the

odern +e(rew Bi(les was di*ided into thirty!nine,

the three!fold di*ision was %ept including including the arrange ent of the (oo%s ($enesis through 5 Chronicles) as in the ancient +e(rew Bi(le) -n /atthew 54:4@, &esus said, that upon you ay fall the guilt of all the righteous (lood shed on earth, fro the (lood of righteous "(el to the (lood of Hechariah, the son of Berechiah, who you urdered (etween the te ple and the altar)6 The urder &esus spo%e of is recorded in 5 Chronicles 5::5>!55) "(elIs death is recorded in $enesis and in the +e(rew Bi(le 5 Chronicles is the last (oo%) -n essence then, Christ was saying fro the first to the last urder in the Bi(le)6 This was e0ui*alent to saying fro $enesis to /alachi and de onstrated what +e considered as the canon of the 7ld Testa ent)

:rrangement of OT now: Old Testament have 39 books %!& @hronicles 3&,aniel 4&Hosea 9&2oel 37&:mos 3%&Obadiah 3 &2onah 33&;icah 3!&Nah*m 3+&Habakk*k 31&<e/haniah 33&Haggai 34&<echariah 39&;alachi

%& 'enesis & ()od*s 3& #evitic*s !& N*mbers +& ,e*teronom1& 2osh*a 3& 2*dges 4& >*th 9& % 5am*el %7& 5am*el

%+&(9ra %1&Nehemiah %3&(sther %4&2ob %9&.salms 7&.roverbs %&(cclesiastes &5ong of 5ongs 3&8saiah !&2eremiah +&#amentations 1&(9ekiel

%%&% 6ings % & 6ings

%3&% @hronicles

.l*s books (OTA onl- in @atholic Bible"

New Testament has 3 books

%& ;atthew & ;ark 3& #*ke !& 2ohn +& :cts 1& >omans 3& % @orinthians 4& @orinthians

%+&% Timoth%1& Timoth-

%3&Tit*s %4&.hilemon %9&Hebrews 7&2ames %&% .eter & .eter

9& 'alatians %7&(/hesians %%&.hili//ians % &@olossians %3&% Thessalonians %!& Thessalonians

3&% 2ohn !& 2ohn

+&3 2ohn 1&2*de 3&>evelations

>eferences: %B 6aloob: interweavings on the @hristian 5tor- b- (rlinda Bragado and :rnold ;onera B htt/:CCbible&orgCseries/ageCbible?hol-?canon?scri/t*re 3B htt/:CCwww&infidels&orgClibrar-CmodernClarr-Dta-lorCcanon&html