Toto

Discussion about Dr. Gene Scott has been split off.

Please say on topic.

Javaman

This magic cloak doesn't seem to give the wearer the ability to control animals. If, for the sake of argument, we take the book of Jasper to be accurate (we know it is a compilation from a later date but the information may be true - at least for this argument) we still have a problem. From here:

Jasher 7
30 And Nimrod became strong when he put on the garments, and God gave him might and strength, and he was a mighty hunter in the earth, yea, he was a mighty hunter in the field, and he hunted the animals and he built altars, and he offered upon them the animals before the Lord.

There's nothing here about animal control. From the other WT link:
{emphasis mine}

All conjecture and not supported by the text. Is there somthing else?

Jobar

In the link I posted earlier to a previous discussion, it was noted that 'Jasher' may be a mistranslation, and should instead be 'Book of songs'. This is made plausible by the second reference in the OT, in Samuel; it would seem that might be talking about a song, and certainly it makes sense that the Israelites would have made a song about a victory where God caused the sun to stand still, the Joshua reference.

It may well be that there are Jewish scholars who've attempted to separate the truly ancient parts of the 12 century Jasher from additions made at that time. I must admit I'm not interested enough in this topic to seek them out, though!

NOTE TO MODS- the Spelling Nazis vill use you for experimental subjects if you do not CORRECT THE SPELLING OF 'JASHER' IN THE TOPIC TITLE!!

Clivedurdle

Why do we talk about twelth century "forgeries" as somehow less important than books possibly two and a half thousand years old? It feels as if inerrancy is creeping in - it is all literature with value about how people were thinking.

Is there any difference between magical coats and talking donkeys?

Mageth

My response to this got split off: I'll just note that, while it's true that earlier versions of the KJV included apocryphal books that were later removed, the Book of Jasher was not among them. So I fail to see the point of this.

WILLOWTREE

The point is contained in the last three sentences of the post you responded to.

WT

Javaman

What, these three?
Could you post the evidence again. I either missed it or it was split off. If it still exists in this thread which I've re-read several times, you might have a different definition of 'proving'. Remember, even if the Book of Jasher to which you refer (we all agree that the hoax one isn't under discussion, right?) is 'authentic', it is not ancient in anyway other than as an amalgam of other writings/traditions.

Toto

Please do not repost this alleged evidence: WT's demon experience

or an appeal to the authority of Dr. Scott

Your mod thanks you.

Javaman

Ah, so it was split off. So sorry. Can I assume that there is no more to the cloak story, then? It seems sketchy at best.

spin

Although moderation is doing a wonderful job containing this thread, what has it got to do with BC&H?

The book of Jasher is not biblical. It's a late Jewish composition which didn't appear before 1552 and was apparently translated into English around 1840. There were comments when published that the translation followed the rabbinical text faithfully.

Is there a forum for late rabbinical hagiography?


spin