The Book Of Jasher

[VirginShallConceive]

The original Book of Jasher is considered a lost book. It is mentioned in the Bible in Joshua 10:13 and 2 Samuel 1:18. It appears that the writer/writers of those two passages held the Book of Jasher in high esteem. I'm certain that if the original book was ever found, it would be considered a great archaeological achievement.



Somewhere down the line, this book was claimed to have "resurfaced" at around the 16th or 17th century . . . A.D. Anyone who knows anything knows that this forgery isn't the actual "lost book of the Bible".



Nevertheless, you might encounter "Christians" who cite this forgery . . .

http://www.ccel.org/a/anonymous/jasher/home.html

. . . as actual scripture. I kid you not.

 

[P31Woman]

Our bible is not missing any books.

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

What P31woman said. " ... considered to be a lost book ... " by whom? Those who would deny biblical truth? Our Scriptures contain not one more word than necessary, and certainly the don't contain less.

 

[VirginShallConceive]

Our bible is not missing any books.

What P31woman said. " ... considered to be a lost book ... " by whom? Those who would deny biblical truth? Our Scriptures contain not one more word than necessary, and certainly the don't contain less.

I totally understand your concern. If you two are "lucky", one of these Christians who thinks otherwise may pop in for a discussion. Let's wait and see . . .

 

[VirginShallConceive]

Our Scriptures contain not one more word than necessary, and certainly the don't contain less.

It is of my humble opinion that you have a lot to learn about your scriptures.

 

[Knotical]

It is of my humble opinion that you have a lot to learn about your scriptures.

Care to enlighten us? Of course you must remember to stay within the confines of the ToS.

 

[VirginShallConceive]

Hi, Knotical.

Care to enlighten us? Of course you must remember to stay within the confines of the ToS.

Sure.

This is the statement that I responded to:

Our Scriptures contain not one more word than necessary, and certainly the don't contain less.

Notice how this is a bold, assertive statement. It is a clear statement. It is a mathematically clear statement, even. I don't think that it is even possible to misinterpret this statement.

So, I received this statement in a world where there are countless versions of the Bible. Some versions may be more similar to some than others, but none of these different versions are exactly the same. I know that I am not telling you anything new. That's why I am somewhat surprised that you asked.

 

[Rollo Tamasi]

I think the book of Jasper is certainly lost.
From what I've learned, it was probably used as a resource similar to that of the Talmud and Mishnah.
The 1625 AD version is flawed and could never be considered scripture.

 

[Knotical]

Hi, Knotical.

Sure.

This is the statement that I responded to:


Notice how this is a bold, assertive statement. It is a clear statement. It is a mathematically clear statement, even. I don't think that it is even possible to misinterpret this statement.

So, I received this statement in a world where there are countless versions of the Bible. Some versions may be more similar to some than others, but none of these different versions are exactly the same. I know that I am not telling you anything new. That's why I am somewhat surprised that you asked.

Wow, all of that and you didn't bother coming close to answering the question. Try again.

 

[P31Woman]

Wow, all of that and you didn't bother coming close to answering the question. Try again.

I believe he did answer your question.

 

[P31Woman]

What P31woman said. " ... considered to be a lost book ... " by whom? Those who would deny biblical truth? Our Scriptures contain not one more word than necessary, and certainly the don't contain less.

I think you are trying to address the sufficiency of scripture. Something I agree with completely. As Dr. Mark Thomas says,

"However, to deny the sufficiency of Scripture is to say something quite serious about the character of God. Our God is Lord of all and is both able and willing to provide for his people. In his mercy he does not leave us with a Scripture that is incomplete or incomprehensible. In his wisdom he cannot have been caught by surprise by the cultural and intellectual developments of the late twentieth century. He has spoken and just as in the days of Paul and Timothy, the Word he has given is able to equip us thoroughly for life as his people.

2 Timothy 3:16-17

New Century Version (NCV)

16 All Scripture is inspired by God and is useful for teaching, for showing people what is wrong in their lives, for correcting faults, and for teaching how to live right. 17 Using the Scriptures, the person who serves God will be capable, having all that is needed to do every good work.

 

[ezrider]

What P31woman said. " ... considered to be a lost book ... " by whom? Those who would deny biblical truth? Our Scriptures contain not one more word than necessary, and certainly the don't contain less.

John 21:25
And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written. Amen.

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

John 21:25
And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written. Amen.

Which was John's way of saying, "you've been told all you need to know in order to understand who Jesus is. Anything else would be a waste of space." Otherwise, John would have written the books himself.

 

[felix]

The original Book of Jasher is considered a lost book. It is mentioned in the Bible in Joshua 10:13 and 2 Samuel 1:18. It appears that the writer/writers of those two passages held the Book of Jasher in high esteem. I'm certain that if the original book was ever found, it would be considered a great archaeological achievement.



Somewhere down the line, this book was claimed to have "resurfaced" at around the 16th or 17th century . . . A.D. Anyone who knows anything knows that this forgery isn't the actual "lost book of the Bible".



Nevertheless, you might encounter "Christians" who cite this forgery . . .

http://www.ccel.org/a/anonymous/jasher/home.html

. . . as actual scripture. I kid you not.

No manuscript can exist more than 2 centuries unless it is preserved with extreme care. People usually copy them and use the new when the original is no longer usable. The same is the case for Textus receptus (as I mentioned in another thread). If lack of earlier manuscripts is a benchmark for forgery, then KJV falls into the same pit as a translated forgery. However, that is not how forgery is validated. There are three versions of Jasher. Two are forgery only one is true.

What makes it interesting and valid is that, book of Jasher contains the same scribal errors as Samaritan Pentateuch. If anyone is doing a forgery, they don't do exactly the same mistakes when correct values are already available in the Bible which is already in circulation.

 

[P31Woman]

No manuscript can exist more than 2 centuries unless it is preserved with extreme care. People usually copy them and use the new when the original is no longer usable. The same is the case for Textus receptus (as I mentioned in another thread). If lack of earlier manuscripts is a benchmark for forgery, then KJV falls into the same pit as a translated forgery. However, that is not how forgery is validated. There are three versions of Jasher. Two are forgery only one is true.

What makes it interesting and valid is that, book of Jasher contains the same scribal errors as Samaritan Pentateuch. If anyone is doing a forgery, they don't do exactly the same mistakes when correct values are already available in the Bible which is already in circulation.

It is your belief that this book should be contained in our bible?

If so would you think it would be in the OT or NT?

 

[felix]

It is your belief that this book should be contained in our bible?

If so would you think it would be in the OT or NT?

It depends on your definition of Bible and the canon you follow. By the way, the definion of Bible according to Jesus did not have any NT and Martin's canon does not have Hebrews thro Revelation.

It is not a part of LXX as far as 3rd century BC. So, the book is good for deutrocannonical.

 

[P31Woman]

It depends on your definition of Bible and the canon you follow. By the way, the definion of Bible according to Jesus did not have any NT and Martin's canon does not have Hebrews thro Revelation.

It is not a part of LXX as far as 3rd century BC. So, the book is good for deutrocannonical.

What do you mean according to Jesus? Haven't you heard? Jesus IS alive.

 

[felix]

What do you mean according to Jesus? Haven't you heard? Jesus IS alive.

Luke 24:44-45 Then He said to them, "These [are] the words which I spoke to you while I was still with you, that all things must be fulfilled which were written in the Law of Moses and [the] Prophets and [the] Psalms concerning Me." And He opened their understanding, that they might comprehend the Scriptures.

Jesus mentions only Law of Moses, Prophets and Psalms.

How can you openly read someone's personal letters without their permission, and even quote them to others?
It is very indecent.

 

[VirginShallConceive]

Luke 24:44-45 Then He said to them, "These [are] the words which I spoke to you while I was still with you, that all things must be fulfilled which were written in the Law of Moses and [the] Prophets and [the] Psalms concerning Me." And He opened their understanding, that they might comprehend the Scriptures.

Jesus mentions only Law of Moses, Prophets and Psalms.

How can you openly read someone's personal letters without their permission, and even quote them to others?
It is very indecent.

Yeah, but most scholars don't even entertain the idea that the forgery that you claim is the Book of Jasher is a Law of Moses, the prophets, or Psalms.

 

[felix]

Yeah, but most scholars don't even entertain the idea that the forgery that you claim is the Book of Jasher is a Law of Moses, the prophets, or Psalms.

Neither did I say that "Book of Jasher" is a part of Law of Moses, the prophets, or Psalms nor did Christ say that. It is not available to Jews as of 3rd century since it is not a part of LXX. So, what is your point?