Kevin, I did not imply that you were in error, only that it was a good example of spin. Nothing is going to make us change our view of this ancient book written by goat herders.

While I do not wish to put words into Darius' mouth, and may be wrong, I have the impression that he's talking about our subconscious tradition which pictures the Bible as God takes from these simple people in the middle east and puts some in a trance where God uses them as his pen to write for us the Bible, and that these words have been magically preserved for us.

When people learn that it is more complicated than our nice little mental picture,(such as the uproar about Mrs. White) and and when other ideas that come up that do not fit our tradition, even if they dovetail our tradition, people would rather hold on to the tradition than the facts.

Although I never made a study of the subject, I must admit I do not have much confidence in that Book of Jasher as translated by Joseph Smith. Has anyone else ever seen the original Hebrew text he claims to base his translation on? Is it merely a fake product made to support the Book of Mormons?

I have my serious doubts that this Book of Jasher is the one mentioned elsewhere in Scripture. It is merely produced because such a book is mentioned there, a book which is lost?

The Authentic Annals Of The Early Hebrews - Is It The "Real" Book of Jasher?

The first step in dealing with the question of authenticity is to simply read the book with an open mind. One cannot effectively investigate the matter unless he is familiar with it. After all, according to Solomon, "He who answers a matter before he hears it, It is folly and shame to him". (Proverbs 18:13). The reader will find that it reads very much like the Bible, except that many passages are replete with details that are not recorded in the Bible.

There are digressions from the biblical narrative that show concurrent events in other parts of the world. There are chapters dealing wholly with events in Egypt or events in Europe. Much of this material can be recognized from other works of ancient history. To anyone familiar with ancient history, it will be obvious that Jasher places these events in a radically different time period than do conventional historians. To be sure, if Jasher be true, there needs to be a radical alteration in the conventional interpretation of ancient history, especially in the area of chronology.

There is little of consequence at variance with the Bible. There are some chronological features that differ, but these can usually be attributed to a textual error. Usually the error will be resolved by reading on. A later entry will fall into harmony with the Bible text. Remember that the ancient scrolls of this book were in poor condition when the book was printed in Hebrew in 1613. It is not unlikely that some numbers could get scrambled.

There are a couple mysterious accounts of incidents that smack of Greek or Roman mythology, such as the story of Zepho, the grandson of Esau who slew a half human monster in a large cave. This account is easily recognized as the same story as that of Theseus, who slew the minotaur. The characters and the setting are different. A critical reader may object to this material, but many valid explanations are possible concerning why this and other such events were recorded in this book. The original author may have simply reported those things because they were popular folklore of his day. Such stories are merely mentioned in passing and no significance is attached to them. Though one might doubt the veracity of these tales, there is nothing here that should dissuade an objective reader from the opinion that this book is genuine. Even the most casual reader will find Jasher enlightening. Accounts in the Bible can be made more lucid and easier to understand with the background of Jasher in mind. . . .

Finally, consider how Josephus described the Book of Jasher. He said "by this book are to be understood certain records kept in some safe place on purpose, giving an account of what happened among the Hebrews from year to year, and called Jasher or the upright, on account of the fidelity of the annals." There could be no better description of the book you see before you. The bottom line is that you, as the reader, will have to answer the question of legitimacy for yourself. Whichever side of that issue you take, I think that you will be enlightened by exploring the issue and by reading the book. If you feel as I do, that this book has the powerful credentials to commend it as the biblical Book of Jasher, you will now have in your hands an additional source to investigate when studying the Bible. You will also have much food for thought in regard to the issues of conventional chronology in ancient times. http://www.ccel.org/a/anonymous/jasher/real.htm

(c)Copyright 1997 by Wayne Simpson
Distributed by Biblical Research Foundation, 629 Lexington Road Sapulpa, OK 74066
Reproduction and distribution are permissible provided this copyright notice remains intact on all copies.

Editors note: I suppose I can understand why you as a former Mormon would be senstitve to the issues you raise. I do not wish to become embroiled in any pro-Mormon/ anti-Mormon controversy - that is your business. But I can shed some light on the issues you raise. I can understand your suspicions, considering the dirth of critical information in the edition of Jasher that you have. The copy of Jasher which you have is a reprint of the 1887 printing by J. H. Parry & Co. of Salt Lake City, which was indeed a Mormon publisher. They purchased the copyright from the estate of M. M. Noah. This edition is a very popular printing and is the dominant one in print at this time. It is a very attractive book, but there are several key parts that were omitted by J. H Parry & Co. that were included in the 1840 edition. I cannot speculate as to the motivation of the J. H. Parry publisher for omitting these parts. Prior to the time that Artisan Sales began distributing the J. H Parry reprint, they distributed the earlier printing by the M. M. Noah publisher. This earlier edition did indeed contain the missing sections. Those sections were:

The translation of the Hebrew Preface written by the publisher of a 1550 Hebrew printing of Jasher giving the history of the survival of several Hebrew manuscripts of Jasher from which the publisher, a Italian Jewish publisher produced the first typeset printing of Jasher. It was the first time that that Jasher had been reproduced since the first century - and the first time that it was produced by other than a scribe, one copy at a time.

The English translation of the Printers Preface - by the the 1625 printer explaining how an ancient Hebrew text of Jasher (copied by a scribe named Joseph of Attiyah in 1613) ) came to be in his possession after a diligent search, and how he felt compelled to publish it. The publishing enterprise was called Signori Reformatorio del Studio de Padua"

M. M. Noah's Preface to the 1840 edition, that accompanied his printing.

And Incidentally, the Translators Preface that does appear in your edition was written by the translator, Mr. Moses Samuel, of Liverpool England in about 1839, prior to selling his translation to M. M. Noah.

Together these sections should fill in your understanding of how the Book of Jasher came down to us and it should go a long way toward quieting your suspicions.

Wayne Simpson http://www.jasher.com/Forum.htm

The Book of Jasher has been popular among members of the L.D.S. Church as a supplement to their study of the Old Testament ever since its publication was announced in the Times and Seasons in June, 1840.[1] Because the Church is now commencing study of the Old Testament again this month, it seems appropriate to reconsider just how authentic that book really is.

The L.D.S. Church has never taken an official stand on the authenticity of the Book of Jasher, but when apostles make lists of "lost books" from the Bible, Jasher is generally included.[4] One article in the "I Have a Question" column of The Ensign responded to the question of its authenticity.[5] After reviewing the standard scholarly analysis of how the book appears to have been composed of old Jewish legends, the article concluded with the wise injunction to treat it according to the Lord's advice on how to study the Aprocrypha:


Verily, thus saith the Lord unto you concerning the Apocrypha — There are many things contained therein that are true, and it is mostly translated correctly; There are many things contained therein that are not true, which are interpolations by the hands of men. Verily, I say unto you, that it is not needful that the Apocrypha should be translated. Therefore, whoso readeth it, let him understand, for the Spirit manifesteth truth; And whoso is enlightened by the Spirit shall obtain benefit And whoso receiveth not by the Spirit, cannot be benefitted. Therefore it is not needful that it should be translated. Amen. (D&C 91:1-6)
Anyone who has read the Book of Jasher will agree that it certainly contains much truth (many stories from the Bible), and it certainly appears to contain some later interpolations of men, so reading by the Spirit seems like an excellent way to discern which is which. How Did the Book of Jasher Know?

Reprinted from Meridian Magazine (Jan. 7, 2002)
©2002 by John P. Pratt. All rights Reserved. http://www.johnpratt.com/items/docs/lds/meridian/2002/jasher.html

The Arabic connections suggest that if the preface to the 1625 version is an "exaggeration", it was then probably written by a Jew who lived in Spain or southern Italy. The work was used extensively but not especially more than many other sources in Louis Ginzberg's Legends of the Jews. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sefer_haYashar_%28midrash%29