Technically, Aquinas can be "correct" here, but "Torah" is a rather vague term:
"Torah" is sometimes the name given to the Five Books of Moses (also called "Chumash", or "Pentateuch"). In traditional Judaism, these five books are considered a faithful and exact record of the word of G-d to His prophet, Moses. These books describe the creation of the world, the main events of the first 2000 years of history, the origins of the family which was to become the Jewish people, our exile and slavery in Egypt, redemption, the giving of the "Torah" at Mt. Sinai and some very limited details of the 613 mitzvos which the Jews were commanded to observe.
"Torah" sometimes also refers to the whole Bible (Old Testament; "Tanach"). This collection includes the five books of Moses, eight books of the prophets, and eleven books of the "writings." These 24 books make up the written law.
However, that does not tell the whole story. There are times when the word "Torah" will be used to cover the whole, huge body of Jewish teaching - both written and oral. That includes the Tanach, the Mishna, the Talmud and many other works - all studied without stop throughout the generations until this very day.
And finally, there's "Torah" used without reference to any specific book, but to the sum of all the knowledge that's to be found in all of these works together. How to apply the principles of the Torah to a world forever changing has been the work of every generation's greatest scholars. The sum total of the untiring labor of these thousands of dedicated leaders is the "Torah" in its largest meaning - one of the greatest libraries in the world.
|
On that note, I left the channel - did not "claim victory" as James predicted - and I don't have to, this logfile "speaks volumes."
Now, for some research:
|
While the canon in the West proved to be relatively stable from the late fourth century, the canon in the oriental churches varied, sometimes widely. The Syriac church at the beginning of the fifth century employed only the Diatesseron (in place of the four gospels), Acts, and the Pauline epistles.58 During the fifth century the Peshitta was produced and became the standard Syriac version. In it the Diatesseron was replaced by the four gospels, 3 Corinthians was removed and three Catholic epistles, James, 1 Peter and 1 John were included. The Apocalypse and the other Catholic epistles were excluded, making a twenty-two book canon. The remaining books did not make their way into the Syriac canon until the late sixth century with the appearance of the Harclean Syriac Version.59 While the Syrian church recognized an abbreviated canon, the Ethiopic Church recognized the twenty-seven books of the New Testament plus The Shepherd of Hermas, 1 & 2 Clement and eight books of the Apostolic Constitutions.60
Even in the West the canon was not closed as tightly as commonly believed. A case in point is the apocryphal Epistle to the Laodiceans. In the tenth century, Alfric, later Archbishop of Canterbury, lists the work as among the canonical Pauline epistles. Westcott observes that the history of this epistle "forms one of the most interesting episodes in the literary history of the Bible."61 He notes that from the sixth century onward Laodiceans occurs frequently in Latin manuscripts, including many which were prepared for church use. So common was the epistle in the Medieval period, it passed into several vernacular translations, including the Bohemian Bible as late as 1488. It also occurred in the Albigensian Version of Lyons, and while not translated by Wycliffe personally, it was added to several manuscripts of his translation of the New Testament.62 On the eve of the Reformation, it was not only Luther who had problems with the extent of the New Testament canon. Doubts were being expressed even by some of the loyal sons of the Church. Luther's opponent at Augsburg, Cardinal Cajetan, following Jerome, expressed doubts concerning the canonicity of Hebrews, James, 2 and 3 John, and Jude. Of the latter three he states, "They are of less authority than those which are certainly Holy Scripture."63 Erasmus likewise expressed doubts concerning Revelation as well as the apostolicity of James, Hebrews and 2 Peter. It was only as the Protestant Reformation progressed, and Luther's willingness to excise books from the canon threatened Rome that, at Trent, the Roman Catholic Church hardened its consensus stand on the extent of the New Testament canon into a conciliar pronouncement.64 The point of this survey has been to demonstrate that the New Testament canon was not closed in the fourth century. Debates continued concerning the fringe books of the canon until the Reformation. During the Reformation, both the Reformed and Catholic Churches independently asserted the twenty-seven book New Testament canon.
Footnotes: 59 Ibid. 60 Ibid. The Ethiopic version is dated as early as the fourth century by some. Others would attribute it to the seventh century (Bruce Metzger, The Text of the New Testament (New York: Oxford University Press, 1968), 84. 61 B. F. Wescott, A General Survey of the History of the Canon of the New Testament, (3rd ed., London: MacMillian, 1870), 426. 62 Ibid., 429. C.f. Metzger, Canon of the New Testament, 238-240. 63 Ibid., 443. 64 It is significant that the early Lutheran Confessions did not contain a list of the canonical writings source: http://www.bible.org/docs/theology/biblio/canon.htm |