That’s the title of this scholarly article by rabbi Arthur Chiel I recently found in an old issue of the journal Judaism:
Chiel-The-Mysterious-Book-of-Jasher
The article is a very good survey of the history of what some folks(even today) tout as a lost biblical book. It isn’t.
Excellent info i have already heard some end times theorist’s who have incorporated this book into their end times views with regards to nimrod, they cite this as an credible source. When the books purpose was to dilute credibility of biblical revelation according to the article, a conclusion I agree with.
glad it was helpful!
Lemme see if I’ve got this sorted out…
1756. Jacob Ilive does 3 years in the slam for “Jasher” and lesser/includedes.
2015. MegaFraudster Jim Bakker does “almost 5” of 45.
Highlighted by:
“He served time in the Federal Medical Center, Rochester, in Rochester, Minnesota, sharing a cell with activist Lyndon LaRouche and skydiver Roger Nelson.” (wikipedia)
(See: you can’t make this ‘stuff’ up)
…ahem…
Gets plastic surgery/another blonde helpmate/big faux-TudorNightmare house inna Ozarks/TV show/book deal.
I’m struggling a little here, but I guess we ‘moderns’ appreciate our Biblio-fictionists a great deal more than ‘they’ used to.
So.
I got to lookup aggadic/aggadah. Had it confused with “Midrash”…kinda/sortta.
Thence.
I, for once, don’t feel any dumber after reading about another amazingly “discovered” noncannonical book of the notbible.
Hence.
I shoot the shark in mid-leap and declare a ‘winning’.
Best & Thanks.
had to laugh!
Yes, mad skill.
I read it and what I understood is that we dont know much about the book of Jasher as it is referenced in the OT, but that the paper focuses on two “imitations” of a supposed book of jasher that rehashes and expands on the books of Genesis to Joshua. After discussing these two “imitations” that were produced (3rd BCE / 1625 CE / 1757 CE), he doesnt come back to the supposed book of jasher from the biblical references.
So, what do you mean when you say that “it isn’t” [lost]? You mean that these two imitations arent the actual lost book of Jasher (with which I would agree the article argues), or that there is absolutely no lost book of Jasher at all?
That what folks think of as the lost book of Jasher (i.e., this fraud) isn’t. There may in fact actually be no lost book of Jasher (Jashar / Yashar) at all. Here’s Boling’s note from his Anchor-Yale commentary – note the end line about LXX:
“The Book of Yashar. Also quoted in 2 Sam 1:18–27, David’s poetic lament at the deaths of Saul and Jonathan. The root yšr refers to what is right; compare the two uses of the cliché with which the pre-monarchy period ends, negatively in Dtr 1 (Judg 17:6) and positively in Dtr 2 (Judg 21:25). “The Book of the Upright One” might refer either to individuals whose deeds were lauded in its contents or to Israel collectively, also known in a related title as “Jeshurun.” The alternative explanation recognizes yšr as verbal: “Let him (Israel) sing.” See C. F. Kraft, “Jashar, Book of,” IDB 2, 803. Other “anthologies” are known to have existed, for example, the Book of the Wars of Yahweh (Num 21:14).
It is possible, however, that this question originated in a marginal query, since it is missing in the best LXX manuscripts.”
Consequently, this line may be a LATE addition. Woudstra notes:
“The word yāšar can either be left as a proper name, Jashar, or it may be rendered “just,” “upright.” Moffatt’s translation renders it “heroes,” apparently treating the singular as a collective. It has also been taken as a reference to believing Israel, or to one or more believing Israelites. Some have seen a reference to Jeshurun here (cf. Deut. 32:15; 33:5, 26.)”
Marten H. Woudstra, The Book of Joshua (The New International Commentary on the Old Testament; Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1981).
On Joshua LXX:
“The fact that the book of Joshua in the LXX is some 4–5 percent shorter than in the MT indicates a substantially divergent recension and acutely raises the question of the consistent transmission of both major and minor details upon which one might erect historical reconstructions.”
S. A. Meier, “History of Israel 1: Settlement Period,” ed. Bill T. Arnold and H. G. M. Williamson, Dictionary of the Old Testament: Historical Books (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2005), 426.
Lastly, aside from LXX suggesting this line isn’t original, the Jewish Encyclopedia notes various ways the phrase may refer to other parts of the OT:
http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/8526-jasher-book-of
Consequently, there may be no lost book of Jasher at all.
Robert G. Boling and G. Ernest Wright, Joshua: A New Translation with Notes and Commentary (vol. 6; Anchor Yale Bible; New Haven; London: Yale University Press, 2008), 285.
Thank you for the clarification!
Great article! This book is a HUGE resource for some of the nephilim crowd (ex. Rob Skiba). I cringe every time they use Jasher to justify their ideas. It makes me very suspicious of them for using such spurious resources.
Didn’t realize that; good!
Oh yeah! Mr. Yeager has it right on the nose. Not only do the Nefilim conspiracy buffs conflate everything under the Sun (and in the Pit) but most of them seem to love to quote the “Book of Jasher” as an authentic source. I found this very strange because, up until I started listening to their theories, I can’t even remember seeing the “Book of Jasher” except as a 2 Sam reference and a fake book along the lines of Simon’s 1980 “Necronomicon”.
Thanks for clarifying a few things for me.
You’re welcome!
Thanks for posting this link. I had been naively hoodwinked into purchasing a copy of this ‘Book of Jasher’ (translated by J. H. Parry) some years ago. I had even quoted it a few times in some of my articles, because some of its ‘extra-biblical’ material seemed to make sense, particularly in relation to aspects of Genesis. I will need to be a little more cautious in future!
that sort of thing just happens.