I'm assuming you're here from eesirachs blog because that's the only reason you would've come to this blog.
So, when I say "Tanakh" as opposed to "the Hebrew Bible" (a term that I don't use to begin with alongside "Old Testament" for several reasons) I do in fact mean the TNK, and in that order. That is the order I read them in, the order I tell people to read them it, and etc. As I'm sure you're already aware, one misses out on a lot when one doesn't read it as designed. As of a few weeks ago I've started saying "the prophets" (in comparison to "the apostles") as a way of referring to the writings of Moses and the prophets (which is how the text describes it's own authorship and composition). As to the canon, please correct me if I'm wrong but
- The Instruction, 5 Books traditionally ascribed to Moses
- The Prophets (4 Former + 3 Latter + the 12)
- The Writings (3 Poetic + 5 Megillot + 3 Historical).
Is there an extra book(s) that Protestant Christians have? Or that is in the Tanakh canon that I haven't listed? (tagging @entanglingbriars in case Anon doesn't see this because this is an important question) I understand that (some) Judaism(s) have a different conception of canonicity that Christians, even more of a difference than an Orthodox Christian would have from a Protestant one, but the issue of extra books is a much bigger deal.
Edit: everywhere I look it says "In Protestant Bibles, the Old Testament is the same as the Hebrew Bible, but the books are arranged differently." So yes, very confused as to where the idea of a different canon comes from.
As to the issue of deity: the issue of whether or not Jews and Christians (or literally any other religions) worships the same deity is a matter of hot contention and a statement like "hashem is ontologically disconnected from the christian trinity" is a statement loaded with tons of historical, philosophical, and theological assumptions and can't just be said as is. The fact that I do not agree with this statement (at least, not in it's entirety) is evidence enough for differing sophistical, philosophical, and theological assumptions and emphasises. As I try to tell many Christians, no theological position just comes "sola scriptura" so to speak: there are tons of unstated assumptions that come with that position and without understanding those underlying assumptions it's very hard to have a conversation about it. Also, I am aware of what "ha-shem" means.
I was going to go into it but uh I'm tired and my head hurts lol. And have lots of school work to get done. If you would like me to you can send me another ask but for now I'm going to leave it at what I've already said. As far as I am concerned, and as far as is relevant for this discussion i believe, I worship HaShem.
I am quite aware of *why* Jews refer to G-d as "Hashem": i do so for the exact same reason. I never use the epithet personally, only ever in "academic" or public spiritual writings, and only ever use it in public as to not offend or possibly harm any Jews or Christians with similar feelings on orthopraxy and divine name usage.
All this said however, I can promise you that I have and will always try to do everything with awareness and respect.