The ending of The Book of Leviticus

[CyrilSebastian]

With The Book of Leviticus, a footnote indicated that:
The Book of Leviticus seems originally to have ended here Chapter 26: Verse 46. The following chapter is an appendix.

Who would have written Chapter 27?       

:bible1::bible1::bible1:

 

[sirach2v4]

A Jewish commentary indeed corroborates that C. 27 is an appendix that was added to describe the funding for the sanctuary.

The answer to your question may irritate some, because it delves into the documentary hypothesis. In this case, chap 27 seems to have been written in the priestly tradition. Internally it refers to those regulations as having been given from God to Moses.

If this footnote about 27 being an appendix wasn’t there, would chap 27 still bother you?

It’s just altogether too speculative to suggest that the author was someone other than the author of Leviticus, itself. It sounds like our respective footnotes avoid that subject altogether.

I’m reading a lengthy Jewish Torah with commentary and there seems to be both obvious (you can tell in English) and not so obvious (you need the original Hebrew to see it) indications of insertions and such in the text.

For example, in Exodus where I’m reading now, there’s an out-of-place statement that requires the Israelites to observe the Sabbath, which seem to jump the gun on the actual command that will be given shortly later at Sinai. There have been various suggestions from the rabbis and sages over the centuries about why things turned out the way they did, in the text.

Your’s is a question that does not have an authoritative absolute answer. It should reassure you that chap 27 was accepted as canonical by both Judaism and Christianity.

 

[sirach2v4]

As a further thought on the matter, we should all remember that footnotes in a Bible aren’t inspired.

It seems almost intellectually inflammatory, to make a “hit and run” comment about a chapter of scripture, as here, that such and such is an addition to the book.

The gospel of John seems to have an added chapter. If you just simply read the last two chapters, the second-to-the-last chapter seems to have been the original ending, with some more material added, and a final ending which repeats some of the wording from the preceding chapter.

If I’m not mistaken, it’s Second Corinthians which ends with a handwritten note from Paul with some concluding remarks. Far beyond that, First and Second Corinthians appear to some scholars to be a melding of up to six different letters from Paul to this community.

I have a set of Jewish commentaries on the Hebrew Bible and a set of Christian (early church fathers) commentaries on the entire Christian Bible, and the commenters in both frequently mention the evidence for the text being manipulated in some fashion.

The translation itself sometimes needs explanation, as a choice of words – even one word difference – changes the entire perspective on the text.

For example, the Hebrew word “elohim” is plural in form, and can mean anything from “God” to “gods” to “judges” or “divine beings.” It’s really a judgment call on which translation is most appropriate. The Jewish commentary delves into this matter of translation, whereas a Catholic study Bible doesn’t even bring up the subject.

I have no qualms about those who set a goal of reading the Bible in a year. But, I can’t read that fast, when there’s so much background to the material, especially in the Old Testament.

In Exodus appears the legal standard of “an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth, (etc.)” where the commentary points out that this was never intended to be taken literally.

And, a superficial reading of Exodus would tell you that the Bible approves of slavery. But, the slavery of which it speaks is nothing like the demeaning slavery the Israelites experienced in Egypt. Instead, it was an economic institution in which people submitted in repayment of debts, and which was dissolved in so-called jubilee years, etc. Hebrew slaves were, in some respects, treated as part of the family. When a term of “slavery” ended the owner was obligated to send the former “slave” off with a generous payment for the service which had been rendered.

I find that I need to make a mental note of such a comment about the ending of Leviticus, and then look for a better explanation in a commentary. Sometimes it is necessary to search for a commentary which happens to redress the issue.

 

[aragonjohn1]

With The Book of Leviticus, a footnote indicated that:
The Book of Leviticus seems originally to have ended here Chapter 26: Verse 46. The following chapter is an appendix.

Who would have written Chapter 27?       

:bible1::bible1::bible1:

somebody was learning psalms.

God bless you