ISBN: 9781236267382

This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustra… More...

This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1898 edition. Excerpt: ...Rabbinical chronologers consider the latest prophets of the Canon of the Bible... to have been members of the Great Synod. We meet with this notion already in Aboth di R. Nathan. (Megilla, 70 d). This is a very remarkable difference. Is it possible that a body of such importance, and which formed a direct succession to the prophets, and had, according to tradition, also prophets among its members, should have left such a faint remembrance to posterity, that it was not even known of how many persons it was composed? This question is also a part of our problem. The data which we possess as to the functions and the scope of activity of the Great Synod also require to be considered. Occasional and sporadic references in Rabbinical literature teach us that we must look upon the men of the Great Synod as the reorganizers of Judaism on the return of the Jews from their exile. Everything that gave the later Judaism its peculiar character, everything that was cherished by that Judaism, was referred to the Great Synod. That body was believed to have collected and arranged the holy writings, to have enjoined the public recital of Holy Writ, to have composed regular prayers, to have laid the foundation of the Liturgy, and to have inaugurated the method which led, in the course of time, to the great Talmudical science. Now it is remarkable that a part of these institutions is otherwise attributed to the scribes (dhbid). Is there, or is there not, a difference between scribes and men of the Great Synod? And, if yes, what are these differences1? From the halo with which the Great Synod is surrounded we might have expected that the supreme political authority was also vested in that body, and that it represented Judaism abroad at the Persian court. But... Israel Abrahams, Books, History, The Jewish Quarterly Review Volume 10 Books>History, General Books LLC<

2012, ISBN: 1236267389

[EAN: 9781236267382], Neubuch, [PU: Rarebooksclub.com, United States], Brand New Book ***** Print on Demand *****.This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers c… More...

[EAN: 9781236267382], Neubuch, [PU: Rarebooksclub.com, United States], Brand New Book ***** Print on Demand *****.This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1898 edition. Excerpt: .Rabbinical chronologers consider the latest prophets of the Canon of the Bible. to have been members of the Great Synod." We meet with this notion already in Aboth di R. Nathan. (Megilla, 70 d). This is a very remarkable difference. Is it possible that a body of such importance, and which formed a direct succession to the prophets, and had, according to tradition, also prophets among its members, should have left such a faint remembrance to posterity, that it was not even known of how many persons it was composed? This question is also a part of our problem. The data which we possess as to the functions and the scope of activity of the Great Synod also require to be considered. Occasional and sporadic references in Rabbinical literature teach us that we must look upon the men of the Great Synod as the reorganizers of Judaism on the return of the Jews from their exile. Everything that gave the later Judaism its peculiar character, everything that was cherished by that Judaism, was referred to the Great Synod. That body was believed to have collected and arranged the holy writings, to have enjoined the public recital of Holy Writ, to have composed regular prayers, to have laid the foundation of the Liturgy, and to have inaugurated the method which led, in the course of time, to the great Talmudical science. Now it is remarkable that a part of these institutions is otherwise attributed to the scribes (dhbid). Is there, or is there not, a difference between scribes and men of the Great Synod? And, if yes, what are these differences1? From the halo with which the Great Synod is surrounded we might have expected that the supreme political authority was also vested in that body, and that it represented Judaism abroad at the Persian court. But.<

ISBN: 9781236267382

This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustra… More...

This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1898 edition. Excerpt: ...Rabbinical chronologers consider the latest prophets of the Canon of the Bible... to have been members of the Great Synod. We meet with this notion already in Aboth di R. Nathan. (Megilla, 70 d). This is a very remarkable difference. Is it possible that a body of such importance, and which formed a direct succession to the prophets, and had, according to tradition, also prophets among its members, should have left such a faint remembrance to posterity, that it was not even known of how many persons it was composed? This question is also a part of our problem. The data which we possess as to the functions and the scope of activity of the Great Synod also require to be considered. Occasional and sporadic references in Rabbinical literature teach us that we must look upon the men of the Great Synod as the reorganizers of Judaism on the return of the Jews from their exile. Everything that gave the later Judaism its peculiar character, everything that was cherished by that Judaism, was referred to the Great Synod. That body was believed to have collected and arranged the holy writings, to have enjoined the public recital of Holy Writ, to have composed regular prayers, to have laid the foundation of the Liturgy, and to have inaugurated the method which led, in the course of time, to the great Talmudical science. Now it is remarkable that a part of these institutions is otherwise attributed to the scribes (dhbid). Is there, or is there not, a difference between scribes and men of the Great Synod? And, if yes, what are these differences1? From the halo with which the Great Synod is surrounded we might have expected that the supreme political authority was also vested in that body, and that it represented Judaism abroad at the Persian court. But... Israel Abrahams, Books, History, The Jewish Quarterly Review Volume 10 Books>History <