Channels, Spring 2019

Channels • 2019 • Volume 3 • Number 2 Page 5 orders need to be considered for their theological implications. This is because it is no longer acceptable to assume that the Leningrad Codex is the standard for the order of the books within the Hebrew Bible. 27 They state that all orders should be considered, that the amount of orders should not dismiss the importance of them for theological study, and that equal status among the witnesses cannot be assumed. 28 With these considerations in mind, the final goal should be an attempt to find the “original” order of the Writings (the intentional order by the authors) or, to put it another way, the most reasonable explanation behind both the external and internal evidence. Steinberg and Stone assert this goal by giving two additional criteria for a study of certain orders of the Writings. “(First), not only should the rationale for the order be based on formal principles of chronology, genre, and authorship, etc., but it should presumably take content and theology into consideration. (Secondly), the order can be shown to have had a certain degree of prominence in the community of faith or some group of it.” 29 It is not possible to go into all the different orders in this essay, but a short study of two witnesses— tractate b. B. Bat. 14b and the Leningrad Codex— will be beneficial to this study. Baba Batra (around 200 C.E) is one of the oldest Jewish witnesses that deals specifically with the order of biblical books. It agrees with the tripartite structure of the Hebrew Bible and appears to have had a strong influence on the other orders that are found in the Jewish tradition. 30 The order of the books within the Writings that are given in this witness are as follows: Ruth, Psalms, Job, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs, Lamentations, Daniel, Esther, Ezra/Nehemiah, and Chronicles. The best explanation for this particular ordering is not one of historical or chronological interest, but of theological intentions. There are many different orders within other textual witnesses that take a similar shape, following a theological rationale. 31 As mentioned before, for many scholars, the Leningrad Codex is the scholarly standard for the final form of the Hebrew Bible. The order of the books within the Writings in this witness is Chronicles, Psalms, Job, Proverbs, Ruth, Song of Songs, Ecclesiastes, Lamentations, Esther, Daniel, and Ezra/Nehemiah. This order is different from the Talmudic order (Baba Batra) in several ways, but the most outstanding difference is the placement of Ruth. This dramatically changes its theological thrust. 32 Steinberg and Stone point out that the difference in the placement of Chronicles is not overly important because it would have a similar role at the beginning or the end. This paper argues that the theological thrust of the whole canon is affected by the placement of Chronicles at the end of the Writings. This study disagrees with Steinberg and Stone’s assessment. The book gives a 27 Ibid. The Leningrad Codex has been considered the standard for establishing the text of the Hebrew Bible. 28 Ibid.,35-36 29 Ibid.,41 30 Ibid.,41-42 31 Ibid., 47. Some orders place Ruth after Proverbs as the proper conclusion to the wisdom book. Other orders switch Job and Proverbs. Daniel and Esther are sometimes reversed. Most of the time, Chronicles is seen as an ending to the Writings, but other orders see it beginning this section. The reason that these orders are best explained by theological intentions is due to the intertextuality and composition of the books themselves when seen in this order. I am going to argue that Chronicles belongs at the end for similar reasons, but overall this approach allows for an appropriate understanding of the authors intentions and knowledge of his own place in the biblical world. 32 Ibid., 49. Ruth being placed before Psalms gives the Writings and the book of Psalms a Davidic foundation, whereas the placement of Ruth after Proverbs gives the reader the practical example of the virtuous woman.