PolyPride
Member
Memphis Dwight said:
There are details in one version of the book of Jasher that correlates with the Bible, but that doesn't take away from the fact that the Book of Jasher that's extant today is at earliest, a 12th century creation. This point is important because if you ask how could these correlations be possible or if that proves the book of Jasher's validity, I'd ask you don't you think it's possible that someone from the 12th century had a copy of the book of Genesis and just used some details from it? I could write a book today and use events from Genesis, but does that make me a historian who would know all of the details during the time that Genesis describes AND even events that Genesis doesn't mention or does that mean I'm just copying from a book (Genesis) and adding things I made up to it?
I'm not concerned about the correlations because anyone with a copy of the Book of Genesis would've just copied from the book of Genesis, but what I'm calling into question are all of the other parts, the additions, etc that are not in the book of Genesis. Many fictional writers, especially those who wrote books that are classified as pseudepigrapha, were known for incorporating real details and real biblical characters into their writings, but of course their purpose is not just to copy real events (otherwise they may as well just call their book a copy of a biblical book) but also to add their own fiction to the writing and then FALSELY attribute to a real character in the Bible to give the impression that that's how they knew about the events that they're talking about all the while being thousands of years removed from the event(s) they are describing. I'm sure a lot of people would want to know about some of the gaps of knowledge that Genesis doesn't mention, like more on what Adam and Eve did in the Garden of Eden, more about NOah's time, etc, so lots of people would be willing to add their take and fanciful stories into those areas to intrigue people among other reasons.
Which again leads me to ask for purposes of validity, how would a 12th century writer know about what took place thousands of years before their time? A. They can refer to Genesis just as anyone with the book of Genesis today can - but what of the details that are NOT in Genesis? How did this author come to know these extra details without a historical reference and where is the evidence for that reference which is PRECISELY what the Book of Jasher LACKS and which is why it is not in the Bible canon and which is why most and probably all serious scholar's don't consider it an authentic source.
Memphis Dwight said:
You ask DaPastor if he has anything new to say but I'd ask you do you have anything to say that's "backed with evidence" to support your conclusion that the extant book of Jasher is a credible book?
The link you gave me amplifies my point in there not being anything that predates the 12th century to support the "extant" books of Jasher. The author of the article can't date it back earlier than the 12th century because there is no evidence to support that it was derived from anything prior than that point other than the author of Jasher (or for one of the versions of Jasher) COPYING from Genesis on some parts which even a 4-year-old can do. If you're so gullible to believe in something based on so little reason, then it convinces me more that I should write a book myself, and call it the book of Jasher, and maybe I'll throw in some details from Genesis to make it seem like I'm a historian with knowledge of that time, even beyond what Genesis can ever tell you. HOw's that for a new book?
