This collection of writings in the את Cepher (pronounced et' sef’-er) is a restoration of the books traditionally recognized as set-apart (holy) Scripture and also includes Chanoch (Enoch) and Yovheliym (Jubilees) as found in the Dead Sea Scrolls, together with the recaptured writing of the Cepher Ha’Yashar (Jasher) and the Apocalypse of Baruch (2 Baruch), the recapture of those books recognized in the Septuagint, and is completed with the last two writings of the Makkabiym (3 and 4 Maccabees). The את Cepher sets forth the set-apart (holy) name and set-apart (holy) identities in an English transliteration (also available in Spanish), and additionally restores the names of over 3,100 people and places found in the original Ivriyt (Hebrew) language, all of which have also been transliterated into English.
Give ear, O ye heavens, and I will speak; and hear, O earth, the words of my mouth. 2 My doctrine shall drop as the rain, my speech shall distil as the dew, as the small rain upon the tender herb, and as the showers upon the grass: 3 Because I will publish the name of Yahuah: ascribe ye greatness unto our Elohiym.
Devariym (Deuteronomy) 32:1-3
I will declare your name unto my brethren: in the midst of the assembly will I praise you.
Tehilliym (Psalms) 22:22
And I have declared unto them your name, and will declare it: that the love wherewith you have loved me may be in them, and I in them.
Yochanon (John) 17:26
We make mention herein of the name Yahuah (יהוה). The tetragrammaton went unmentioned for over two millennia based upon the ineffable name doctrine articulated after the destruction of the second temple. However, Yocephus tells us in Wars of the Jews, Book Five, Chapter Five, Section 7, that the tetragrammaton was pronounced by the priests prior to the temple’s destruction, and they pronounced it as four vowels. We believe that the demands of the language declare those vowels to be ee-ah-oo-ah, which we have captured in the construction of the word Yahuah. The construct of the first two letters is one that is common in modern Hebrew, where the yod is pronounced ee with the vowel hey being pronounced ah, creating ee-ah, which we have captured as Yah (יה). The construct of this pronunciation is one that is common in modern Hebrew, where the hey is pronounced with the vowel ah, creating Yah (יה). This name stands alone as Yah 45 times in the Tanakh, Ex 15:2; Ex 17:16; Ps 68:4; Ps 68:18; Ps 77:11; Ps 89:8; Ps 94:7; Ps 94:12; Ps 102:18; Ps 104:35; Ps 105:45; Ps 106:1; Ps 106:48; Ps 111:1; Ps 112:1; Ps 113:1; Ps 113:9; Ps 115:17; Ps 115:18; Ps 116:19; Ps 117:2; Ps 118:5; Ps 118:14; Ps 118:17; Ps 118:18; Ps 118:19; Ps 122:4; Ps 130:3; Ps 135:1; Ps 135:3; Ps 135:4; Ps 135:21; Ps 146:1; Ps 146:10; Ps 147:1; Ps 147:20; Ps 148:1; Ps 148:14; Ps 149:1; Ps 149:9; Ps 150:1; Ps 150:6; Isa 12:2; Isa 26:4; Isa 38:11.
In Shemoth (Exodus) 3:14, Elohiym gives his name as אהיה אשׁר אהיה (Ehayah asher Ehayah), translated most basically as "I Am that I Am" (or "I will be that I will be"). However, in Bere’shiyth (Genesis) 2:4 first sets forth the name Yahuah (יהוה) and it is established in the vocalization Yahuah where the vav is used in its vowel form as an “u” (oo), rather than declaring the vowel as a jot beside the consonant hey. So, the yod is pronounced as ee, the hey is pronounced as ah, the vav is pronounced as oo, and the hey is pronounced as ah. Therefore, the pronunciation is ee-ah-oo-ah, or, Yahuah.
To ignore the ah at the end is a disservice (as is found in the pronunciation Yahweh), as the ah is the breath of the Father within His own name. This claim is supported with the following example concerning the change of the name of Avram to Avraham.
Neither shall your את-name anymore be called Avram, but your name shall be Avraham; for a father of many nations have I made you.
Bere’shiyth (Genesis) 17:5
Here, the ah is breathed into Avram, and the covenant is expressed as an everlasting covenant. The breath of life was then poured into Avraham’s wife Sarai, who became Sarah, Bere’shiyth (Genesis) 17:15. For this reason, pronunciations such as Yahweh, Yahveh, Yahvoh, or Yahvah are not widely disparate: Yahueh instead of Yahuah; Yahveh instead of Yahueh; however, Yahuah is the more accurate.
The Name of Yahusha
We have set forth the name of the Messiah as Yahusha (יהושע), partly because this name is identical to the name as was set forth in Bemidbar (Numbers) describing the Ephrayimiy Husha, the son of Nun, who was selected as one of the twelve to spy out the Promised Land during the beginning of the Exodus.
Bemidbar (Numbers) 13:8 Of the tribe of Ephrayim, Husha the son of Nun.
Bemidbar (Numbers) 13:16 These are the names of the men which Mosheh sent to spy out את-the land. And Mosheh called Husha the son of Nun Yahusha.
In the Masoretic text, you see the name Yahusha spelled only twice as yod (י) hey (ה) vav (ו) shin (ש) vav (ו) ayin (ע) or Yahushua. Therefore, the assumption is that Mosheh added not only Yah – the name of He who visited Mosheh at the burning thorn bush, but also added the vav to create “shua” as the ending syllable at least in two instances.
Strong's Hebrew Dictionary 7737 sets forth “shua” as the word shavah – giving a “v” sound to the vav, rather than the much more common “oo”. Its usage is construed to mean to level, i.e. equalize; figuratively, to resemble; by implication, to adjust (i.e. counterbalance, be suitable, compose, place, yield, etc.): to avail, behave, bring forth, compare, countervail, (be or make) equal, lay, be, or make, alike, make plain, profit, or reckon.
Therefore, the uniquely used name Yahushua can be understood as Yah (in the Ivriyt (Hebrew (יה), which is the shortened name of the Father, Hu (in the Ivriyt (הוּ), which means “he”, and finally Shua (in the Ivriyt (שׁוּע), which means makes level or equal. Therefore, Yahushua means in this analysis, Yah is He who makes equal.
Yahusha, in contrast, is found 175 times in the Tanakh, and it has a wonderful meaning. Strong’s H3467 declares that ישׁע (yâsha’) is used as a primitive root, meaning properly: to be open, wide or free, that is, (by implication) to be safe; causatively to free or succor: to avenge, defend, deliver, help, preserve, rescue, to be safe, to bring or to have salvation, to save, or to be a Savior, or to get victory. We have elected to publish the name Yahusha, in the first instance because it is the most accurate transliteration of the name given to the Messiah, as he was given the same name as Husha / Yahusha son of Nun, whom the English world has always called Joshua. The Septuagint in reckoning the ancient Ivriyt Scripture to Koine Greek, translated the name Yahusha (in English, Joshua) as Iesous (Ἰησοῦς). The Messiah has the same name as Joshua son of Nun. Proof can be found in comparing the Septuagint rendering of the name with the rendering of the name in the Besor’oth:
Septuagint: Joshua / ΙΗΣΟΥΣ ΝΑΥΗ 1:10-11
And Joshua commanded the scribes of the people, saying, 11 Go into the midst of the camp of the people, and command the people, saying, Prepare provisions; for yet three days and ye shall go over this Jordan, entering in to take possession of the land, which the Lord God of your fathers gives to you.
In the Greek:
ΙΗΣΟΥΣ ΝΑΥΗ 1:10 Καὶ ἐνετείλατο ᾿Ιησοῦς (Iesous) τοῖς γραμματεῦσι τοῦ λαοῦ λέγων· 11 εἰσέλθατε κατὰ μέσον τῆς παρεμβολῆς τοῦ λαοῦ καὶ ἐντείλασθε τῷ λαῷ λέγοντες· ἑτοιμάζεσθε ἐπισιτισμόν, ὅτι ἔτι τρεῖς ἡμέραι καὶ ὑμεῖς διαβαίνετε τὸν ᾿Ιορδάνην τοῦτον εἰσελθόντες κατασχεῖν τὴν γῆν, ἣν Κύριος ὁ Θεὸς τῶν πατέρων ὑμῶν δίδωσιν ὑμῖν.
We see here that the word Ιησοῦς is the Greek word we interpret as Joshua in the English. Now let us compare it with Matthew 1 in the Stephanus Textus Receptus (Greek)
Stephanus Textus Receptus:
Ματθαῖος 1:16 ιακωβ δε εγεννησεν τον ιωσηφ τον ανδρα μαριας εξ ης εγεννηθη ιησους (Iesous) ο λεγομενος χριστος (Christos).
The acceptance that Joshua held the same name as the Messiah is acknowledged by most 20th Century publishers of Scripture in Ivriym (Hebrews) 4:8, where the Greek sets forth the name ιησους yet where virtually all 20th Century publishers have translated the name as Joshua.
ει γαρ αυτους ιησους κατεπαυσεν ουκ αν περι αλλης ελαλει μετα ταυτα ημερας.
For if Yahusha (the son of Nun) had given them rest, perchance another would speak again of this day. 9 There remains therefore a Shabbath for the people of Yah. 10 For he that is entered into his rest, he also has ceased from his own works, as Yahuah did from his.
Ivriym (Hebrews) 4:8-10
We can therefore determine exactly what all of the modern Scripture interpreters have concluded in the translation of the passage in Ivriym (Hebrews) 4:8: that the name of Mashiach is, in Ivriyt, whatever the name of Joshua was in the Ivriyt, which of course was Yahusha (175 instances) [compared with Yahushua or Yahoshua, found only 2 times]. This name Yahusha means I Am He who avenges, defends, delivers, helps, preserves, rescues, saves, brings salvation, your Savior, who brings you to victory.
Yachiyd
Another wonderful word we have elected to use in the text is the word yachiyd (יחיד) which in its use declares tremendous meaning. In its first use, we find it in Bere’shiyth with the instruction to Avraham, saying:
And he said, Take now את-your son, your את-yachiyd את-Yitschaq, whom you love, and get you into the land of Moriyah; and offer him there for a burnt offering upon one of the mountains which I will tell you of.
Bere’shiyth (Genesis) 22:2
Yitschaq was not the firstborn, nor the only begotten son of Avraham, but he was nonetheless the yachiyd. The word yachiyd is not just reserved for describing sons, however, but also daughters. In Shofetiym 11:34, it is written:
And Yiphtach came to Mitspah unto his house, and, behold, his daughter came out to meet him with timbrels and with dances: and she was his yachiydah; beside her he had neither son nor daughter.
Shofetiym (Judges) 11:34
The yachiyd is then better understood as the beloved child, not necessarily the only begotten. Consider the comments of Shalomah, who said in Mishlei as follows:
For I was my father's son, tender and only yachiyd in the sight of my mother.
Mishlei (Proverbs) 4:3
However, there are three passages which cannot be ignored where the word yachiyd is applicable. It is these passages which gave rise to our editorial decision to include the word yachiyd in these passages.
O daughter of my people, gird you with sackcloth, and wallow yourself in ashes: make you mourning, as for a yachiyd, most bitter lamentation: for the spoiler shall suddenly come upon us.
Yirmeyahu (Jeremiah) 6:26
And I will turn your feasts into mourning, and all your songs into lamentation; and I will bring up sackcloth upon all loins, and baldness upon every head; and I will make it as the mourning of a yachiyd, and the end thereof as a bitter day.
Amoc (Amos) 8:10
And I will pour upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Yerushalayim, the Ruach Chen v’Tachanuniym (Spirit of Grace and Supplications): and they shall look upon me את whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn for him, as one mourns for his yachiyd, and shall be in bitterness for him, as one that is in bitterness for his firstborn.
Zakaryahu (Zechariah) 12:10
So it is with these considerations that we have made the following change:
For Yah so loved את-the world, that he gave את-his את-yachiyd, that whosoever believes in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
Yochanon (John) 3:16
Yachad
Consider also our use of another term, similar in nature to this term yachiyd, but carrying with it additional meaning. This word we have elected to use is the term by which the Essenes called themselves, namely yachad. This word in its application means to be one, or to become one; to join or to unite. Yet, it appears to be the joining of the word Yah and the word echad (one). Yachad then means to be joined or to be united with Yah. Therefore, we made the following change:
Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word; 21 That they all may be yachad; as you, Father, are in me, and I in you, that they also may be yachad in us: that the world may believe that you have sent me. 22 And the glory which you gave me I have given them; that they may be yachad, even as we are yachad.
Yochanon (John) 17:20-22
Heylel
Yesha`yahu (Isaiah) 14 is well known as the only place in all of Scripture where some Bibles have substituted the name Lucifer, yet the name Lucifer (the light bearer) does not actually appear in the original Ivriyt (Hebrew). The original Ivriyt indicates that there is no such name, and further, that it is an extrapolation of what may actually be the true name of the fallen angel.
How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer הילל, son of the morning! שׁחר ילל
how art thou cut down to the ground, which did weaken the nations!
Yesha`yahu (Isaiah) 14:12
The term הילל reading right to left looks conspicuously like hey, yod, lamed, lamed h-y-l-l, or hell. The pronunciation however places more vowels yielding heylel. There are but two angels identified in the Protestant Bible – Miyka’el and Gavriy’el. Both names end with the identifier “el.” We have the same condition with heylel, leading to the possible conclusion that the word is actually the name of an angel – in this case, possibly the fallen angel Heyl’el. However, this same word may simply be the word ילל– yawlal, set with the hey as a prefix meaning the. This word is not referenced or interpreted in any other English text besides this את CEPHER. The word ילל– yawlal means “howling.” Hence, the phrase which formerly referenced Lucifer now reads as follows:
How are you fallen from heaven, O Heylel, son of the howling morning!
how are you cut down to the ground, which did weaken the nations!
Yesha`yahu (Isaiah) 14:12
666
The most interesting correction in this text, however, is the correction made in Chizayon (Revelation) 13:18, which restores the original Greek letters to what has been interpreted for the last 400 years as six hundred threescore and six.
Here ωδε is εστι wisdom σοφια. Let him that hath εχω understanding νους count ψηφιζω the number αριθμος of the beast θηριον: for γαρ it is εστι the number αριθμος of a man ανθρωπος; and και his αυτος number αριθμος is Six hundred threescore and six χξς.
Chizayon (Revelation) 13:18
However, there are no numbers, but rather the three Greek letters χξς chi xi stigma khee xee stig'ma. These letters found in Strong's Greek Dictionary 5516 are defined as the 22nd, 14th and an obsolete letter (4742 as a cross) of the Greek alphabet (intermediate between the 5th and 6th), used as numbers; denoting respectively 600, 60 and 6; 666 as a numeral: six hundred threescore and six. Stigma, στιγμα stig'mah Strong's Greek Dictionary 4742, is a word from a primary stizo (to "stick") means a mark incised or punched (for recognition of ownership), i.e. (figuratively) a scar of service: or mark. For example, a stigmata, or in another instance, to stigmatize. We elected to restore the actual picture of the mark as it was seen by Yochanon (John).
The phrase gets even more complicated when you consider the translation of the term arithmos αριθμος as number. According to the Thayer and Smith "Greek Lexicon entry for arithmos from “The New Testament Greek Lexicon,” the term arithmos means both a fixed and definite number and an indefinite number, or a multitude. Some have described the x in the algebraic equation x + 1 as being the arithmos, for instance. The Ivriyt (Hebrew) word found here is cepher. This term also means number in this application.
Yashar’el (ישראל)
Another word which has been restored herein is the word commonly found in English as the word Israel. Our review of the words Yah (יה (I AM), shar (שר) (for prince), Yashar (ישר) (the prince of Yah), and Yasharun (ישרון) (the whole of the people in the exodus). In the first instance (Yah) we find the letters yod-hey. In the next instance (shar) we find the letters shin-resh. In the next instance (Yashar) we find the letters yod-shin-resh. In the next instance (Yasharun) we find the letters yod-shin-resh-vav-nun safit. Therefore, we have concluded that the word spelled with the letters yod-shin-resh-aleph-lamed is to be pronounced “Yashar’el”. All of the words with this spelling in the Ivriyt (Hebrew) have been restored to this spelling in the English.
Sha’ul and Pa’al
In Ma’asiym (Acts) 13:9 Sha’ul is first identified as one Paul. However, the name Paul (in the Greek, Paulos) is a Greek spelling, yet Sha’ul spoke (Ma’asiym 21:40) and was spoken to (Ma’asiym 26:14) in Hebrew. Sha’ul was schooled in Hebrew under Gamliy’el (Ma’asiym (Acts) 22:3). Therefore, it is reasonable to conclude that Sha’ul took the Hebrew name Pa’al (פָּעַל)(Strong’s G6466), which means worker. Because we conclude that the works of the writings of the Messianic period were Hebraic in nature, we have used the Ivriyt (Hebrew) Pa’al for the Greek Paul.
These, then, are some of the corrections in the את CEPHER. It is our most fervent prayer that these are found true and pleasing to Yahuah Elohaynu (Yahuah our Elohiym), and that they would come to bless you in your pursuit of the Truth to which you were called.
Who has ascended up into heaven, or descended?
Who has gathered the wind in his fists?
Who has bound the waters in a garment?
Who has established all the ends of the earth?
What is His name, and what is His Son's name, if you can tell?
Dead Sea Scrolls
You will also find references to books that you may not recognize if you are an adherent to the post-19th century Protestant Bible and its sixty-six books. These citations include books such as the Cepher Yovheliym (Jubilees), the Cepher Chanok (Enoch), the Cepheriym Baruk, the Cepheriym Esdras (Ezra), or the Cepheriym Makkabiym (Maccabees). These books are called the Deuterocanon, or second books. Some of these books have been called the Apocrypha (secret writings). Over the years, these books have been excluded from the sixty-six books of the Protestant Bible. However, this exclusion cannot be justified historically.
In the second century BC, 70 Rabbis translated 46 books from Ivriyt (Hebrew) to Greek, a translation called the Septuagint. The Septuagint did not include the Cepher Chanok (Enoch) and the Cepher Yovheliym (Jubilees). In the first century, the early believers relied on this Septuagint as their source for sacred Scriptures, and the writings of the Brit Chadashah (New Testament) also indicate that there was reliance on the Cepher Chanok (Enoch), Yovheliym (Jubilees), and 4 Ezra (2 Esdras).
Allegedly, the first attempt to limit the books available to the believers happened at the council of Laodikea in 368 AD. This council created 60 rules or canons. The 60th canon concluded that the books of the Old Testament which were approved to be read were 1, Genesis of the world; 2, The Exodus from Egypt; 3, Leviticus; 4, Numbers; 5, Deuteronomy; 6, Joshua, the son of Nun; 7, Judges, 8, Ruth; 9, Esther; 10, Of the Kings, First and Second; 11, Of the Kings, Third and Fourth; 12, Chronicles, First and Second; 13, Esdras, First and Second; 14, The Book of Psalms; 15, The Proverbs of Solomon; 16, Ecclesiastes; 17, The Song of Songs; 18, Job; 19, The Twelve Prophets; 20, Isaiah; 21, Jeremiah, 22, Baruk, 23, Lamentations, and the Epistle; 24, Ezekiel; 25, Daniel. 42 books are individually counted, and this list includes Baruk and the Epistle of Jeremiah.
The council then concluded that the books of the Brit Chadashah (New Testament) which were approved to be read were the Four Gospels, Matthew, Mark, Luke and John; The Acts of the Apostles; Seven Catholic Epistles, to wit, one of James, two of Peter, three of John, one of Jude; Fourteen Epistles of Paul, one to the Romans, two to the Corinthians, one to the Galatians, one to the Ephesians, one to the Philippians, one to the Colossians, two to the Thessalonians, one to the Hebrews, two to Timothy, one to Titus, and one to Philemon. 26 books were counted, and the Book of Revelation was excluded.
The authenticity of the 60th Canon has been doubted by many scholars because it is absent from most manuscripts containing the decrees of the Council of Laodikea. The list was likely added later. The Greek text which supposedly sets forth this Canon was created by and according to B.F. Westcott, from his book A General Survey of the History of the Canon of the New Testament (5th ed. Edinburgh, 1881). Those who claim this list, rely on a writing of Cyril of Jerusalem, who took it upon himself to declare which books were to be read, and which not. There was no synod concurrence, and further, there was no Canon adopted as a result. We simply have the opinion of Cyril. He rejected the book of Revelation, and left only 26 books in the New Testament.
According to Westcott, the council of Laodikeia adopted the existing Tanakh (Torah, Neviy’iym, Ketuviym) as the total text of the Old Testament in its rule, although the order was obscured. Around AD 100, Jewish rabbis met at the Council of Jamniah and concluded on 39 books only as the generally accepted Tanakh, because allegedly they were the only texts that could be found in the original Ivriyt (Hebrew). Recall that three centuries earlier, 72 leaders of the tribes of Yashar’el translated 46 books from Ivriyt to Greek in the Septuagint.
The 60th Canon has little or no value as the absence of Chizayon (Revelation) from the New Testament is fatal to its reception as an ecumenical definition of the canon of Holy Scripture to all orthodox believers, as is the absence of the book of Wisdom, etc., from the Old Testament to its reception by those who accept the books of the Greek collection (Septuagint), as distinguished from the Jewish collection (Tanakh).
Historically, the 60th Canon has not been accepted as genuine. The text by Innocent I of Rome did not comport with this list. The 60th Canon was also omitted by John of Antioch, one of the most esteemed and oldest Greek collectors of canons. Bishop Martin of Braga in the sixth century, though he had the fifty-ninth canon, also did not included in his collection the sixtieth canon so nearly related to it, nor does the Isidorian translation appear at first to have had this canon.
The delineation of sacred Scripture by rule or canon began to emerge in the late 4th Century and early 5th Century with the work of St. Jerome, aka Eusebius. Jerome sought to limit the books of the Old Testament to the 39 books of the Tanakh. He was overruled, however, by Pope Damasus, who wanted all 46 traditionally-accepted books included in the Old Testament, so the Latin Vulgate Old Testament was finalized – but not Canonized - with 46 books.
The exact list of the books of the New Testament in the number and order in which they are traditionally delivered, was set forth by Athanasius, Bishop of Alexandria, in a letter of AD 367, and Pope Damasus later ratified the same list. This list was later affirmed in the Muratorian fragment, a 7th-century Latin translation of a Greek original written around the 4th century.
Martin Luther began his translation – and his canonization – of the bible at the Wartburg castle, where he was held prisoner by Frederick the Wise of Saxony for his own safety from May 1521 to April 1522. He limited the Old Testament to only 39 books, put the extra books in an appendix he called the Apocrypha. He also removed the books of Hebrews, James, Jude, and Revelation from the New Testament order, declaring them to be less than canonical.
In response, in AD 1546, the Catholic Council of Trent reaffirmed the canonicity of all 46 books originally found in the Septuagint, and reaffirmed the full list of 27 books of the New Testament as traditionally accepted, to wit:
Of the Old Testament: the five books of Moses, to wit, Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy; Josue, Judges, Ruth, four books of Kings, two of Paralipomenon (1 Chronicles/2 Chronicles), the first book of Esdras, and the second which is entitled Nehemias; Tobias, Judith, Esther, Job, the Davidical Psalter (Psalms), consisting of a hundred and fifty psalms; the Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, the Canticle of Canticles (Song of Solomon), Wisdom (Proverbs), Ecclesiasticus, Isaias, Jeremias, with Baruch; Ezechiel, Daniel; the twelve minor prophets, to wit, Osee (Hosea), Joel, Amos, Abdias (Obadiah), Jonas (Jonah), Micheas (Micah), Nahum, Habacuc, Sophonias (Zephaniah), Aggaeus (Haggai), Zacharias (Zechariah), Malachias (Malachi); two books of the Maccabees, the first and the second. Of the New Testament: the four Gospels, according to Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John; the Acts of the Apostles written by Luke the Evangelist; fourteen epistles of Paul the apostle, (one) to the Romans, two to the Corinthians, (one) to the Galatians, to the Ephesians, to the Philippians, to the Colossians, two to the Thessalonians, two to Timothy, (one) to Titus, to Philemon, to the Hebrews; two of Peter the apostle, three of John the apostle, one of the apostle James, one of Jude the apostle, and the Apocalypse of John the apostle. But if anyone receive not, as sacred and canonical, the said books entire with all their parts, as they have been used to be read in the Catholic Church, and as they are contained in the old Latin vulgate edition; and knowingly and deliberately contemn the traditions aforesaid; let him be anathema. Let all, therefore, understand, in what order, and in what manner, the said Synod, after having laid the foundation of the Confession of faith, will proceed, and what testimonies and authorities it will mainly use in confirming dogmas, and in restoring morals in the Church. Those who knowingly and deliberately contemn the 46 books of the Old Testament and the 27 books of the New are anathema to Canonized Law.
This canon is the first and last official Canon of the church as to the list of books to be included in the Roman Catholic Bible. The 1535 Coverdale Bible, 1560 Geneva Bible, and the 1611 King James Bible-Authorized Version contained a 39 book Old Testament, a 15 book Apocrypha and a 27 book New Testament. The redaction of the Authorized Version to only 66 books, violating the Canonic list, followed the publication of the Westminster Confession of 1647 and the beheading of Charles I of England. It was adopted by the Scottish Presbyterians which coincided with the rise of the “Kirke” (Church) in Scotland, and then in England.
For many reasons, this method of inclusion, and by default, exclusion, has relegated significant books to the dust bin. For instance, the justification for the elimination of the Makkabiym (Maccabees) is not set forth in the decision of the councils. The argument that the Makkabiym are merely historical ignores the extent that these writings answer many of the obscure prophecies found in Daniy’el 11. The Canon of Trent excluded Makkabiym Sheliyshiy (3 Maccabees) and Makkabiym Reviy`iy (4 Maccabees), Baruk Sheniy (2 Baruk), and Ezra Sheliyshiy and Reviy`iy (3 and 4 Ezra), Chanok (Enoch), and Yovheliym (Jubilees); these were excluded from the Vulgate. These books appear as deuterocanonical works in various parts of the world, however. For instance, both the Cepher Chanok (Enoch) and the Cepher Yovheliym (Jubilees) appear in the Abyssinian sect as deuterocanonical works; 1 and 2 Esdras appear in the 1535 Coverdale, the 1560 Geneva, and the 1611 King James Version- Authorized Version.
Chanok (Enoch)
We have elected to include within this binding the Cepher of the Prophet Chanok (also known as 1 Enoch). While some historians have rejected Chanok (Enoch) as heresy, Kepha Sheniy (2 Peter) 2:4-5 indicates that one of the believers in Chanok (Enoch) was Kepha himself, for he states: For if Yah spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to She’ol, and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be watched unto the judgment of anguish; 5 And spared not the old world, but saved Noach the eighth person, a preacher of righteousness, bringing in the flood upon the world of the wicked. The delivery into chains of darkness and the being watched unto the judgment of anguish is discussed primarily in the Cepher Chanok (Enoch).
While the Ethiopian Bible – the earliest complete collection in the world – has always contained both Chanok and Yovheliym, the decision to include both of these books was made easier when ancient versions of Chanok (Enoch) and Yovheliym (Jubilees) were found in Cave 4 at Qumran (Dead Sea Scrolls). While some of these fragments are disparate, there is substantial evidence that the Ethiopian text comports with these fragments.
The Cepher of the Prophet Chanok (Enoch) was clearly known to early Christian writers as the following quote from Chanok 2:1 indicates:
And Chanok also, the seventh (generation) from A’dam, prophesied of these, saying: “Behold, Yahuah comes with ten thousands of his qodeshiym, 15 To execute judgment upon all, and to convince all that are wicked among them of all their wicked deeds which they have wickedly committed, and of all their hard speeches which wicked sinners have spoken against him.”
Yahudah (Jude) 14-15
Although we have included the writing now known as 1 Enoch, we do not include the writings called 2 Enoch or 3 Enoch.
The Epistle of Barnabas, young Origen, Clement of Alexandria, and Tertullian all considered 1 Enoch to be Scripture. Tertullian wrote in Concerning The Genuineness Of The Prophecy Of Enoch; “I am aware that the Scripture of Enoch [Chanok], which has assigned this order (of action) to angels, is not received by some, because it is not admitted into the Jewish canon either… But since Enoch in the same Scripture has preached likewise concerning the Lord [Mashiach], nothing at all must be rejected by us which pertains to us; and we read that 'every Scripture suitable for edification is divinely inspired.'… To these considerations is added the fact that Enoch possesses a testimony in the Apostle Jude." [Tertullian, On the Apparel of Women, in The Ante-Nicene Fathers: Fathers of the Third Century: Tertullian, Part Fourth; Minucius Felix; Commodian; Origen, Parts First and Second, ed. Alexander Roberts, James Donaldson, and A. Cleveland Coxe, trans. S. Thelwall, vol. 4 (Buffalo, NY: Christian Literature Company, 1885), 15.
The Cepher Chanok is referenced in what is called the New Testament [Brit Chadashah] at least 40 times. Several of these are even direct quotations, though not directly attributed to Chanok. In the Cepher Yahudah [Jude] 14-15, there is a direct quotation, attributed specifically to Enoch himself. Many concepts of Chanok are found in the New Testament, such as the springs of living waters, Yochanon [John] 4:13-14 / Chanok 49:1; the new heaven and new earth, Chizayon [Revelation] 21:1 / Chanok 92:16-17; and several of the Beatitudes. Mattithyahu [Matthew] 5, Luqas [Luke] 6 / Chanok 5:7, 95:8.
Further, there are substantial Messianic prophecies set out in Chanok:
At that time my eyes beheld the dwelling of the elect, of truth, belief, and righteousness. 6 Countless shall be the number of the holy and the elect, in the presence of Elohiym forever and ever.
Chanok (Enoch) 39:5-6
Then I heard the voices of those upon the four sides magnifying Yahuah of glory. 4 The first voice blessed Yahuah Tseva’oth forever and ever. 5 The second voice I heard blessing the Elect One, and the elect who suffer on account of Yahuah Tseva’oth. 6 The third voice I heard petitioning and praying for those who dwell upon earth and supplicate the name of Yahuah Tseva’oth. 7 The fourth voice I heard expelling the impious angels and prohibiting them from entering into the presence of Yahuah Tseva’oth, to accuse the inhabitants of the earth.
Chanok (Enoch) 40:3-7
In that day shall the Elect One sit upon a throne of glory; and shall choose their conditions and countless habitations, while their ruachoth within them shall be strengthened, when they behold my Elect One, for those who have fled for protection to my holy and glorious name. 4 In that day I will cause my Elect One to dwell in the midst of them; will change heaven; will bless it and illuminate it forever.
Chanok (Enoch) 45:3-4
Wisdom is poured forth like water, and glory fails not before him forever and ever; for potent is he in all the secrets of righteousness 2 But iniquity passes away like a shadow and possesses not a fixed station: for the Elect One stands before Yahuah Tseva’oth; and his glory is forever and ever; and his power from generation to generation. 3 With him dwells the Ruach Da’ath v’Chokmah, [Spirit of knowledge and wisdom] the Ruach Ha’Torah [Spirit of Instruction] and Gevurah, [Spirit of Power] and the ruach of those who sleep in righteousness; he shall judge secret things. 4 Nor shall any be able to utter a single word before him; for the Elect One is in the presence of Yahuah Tseva’oth, according to his own pleasure.
Chanok (Enoch) 49:1-4
In those days shall the earth deliver up from her womb, and She’ol deliver up from hers, that which it has received; and destruction shall restore that which it owes. 2 He shall select the righteous and holy from among them; for the day of their yeshu`ah [salvation] has approached. 3 And in those days shall the Elect One sit upon his throne, while every secret of intellectual wisdom shall proceed from his mouth, for Yahuah Tseva’oth has gifted and glorified him.
Chanok (Enoch) 51:1-3
O you kings, O you mighty, who inhabit the world you shall behold my Elect One, sitting upon the throne of my glory. And he shall judge Aza’zel, all his associates, and all his hosts, in the name of Yahuah Tseva’oth.
Chanok (Enoch) 55:5
Then they received the commandment, all in the heavens above; to whom a combined power, voice, and splendour, like fire, were given. 9 And first, with voice, they blessed him, they exalted him, they glorified him with wisdom, and ascribed to him wisdom with the word, and with the breath of life. 10 Then Yahuah Tseva’oth seated upon the throne of his glory the Elect One; 11 Who shall judge all the works of the holy, in heaven above, and in a balance shall he weigh their actions. And when he shall lift up his countenance to judge their secret ways in the word of the name of Yahuah Tseva’oth, and their progress in the path of the righteous judgment of El Elyon; 12 They shall all speak with united voice; and bless, glorify, exalt, and praise, in the name of Yahuah Tseva’oth.
Chanok (Enoch) 61:8-12
Thus, Yahuah commanded the kings, the princes, the exalted, and those who dwell on earth, saying: Open your eyes, and lift up your horns, if you are capable of comprehending the Elect One.
Chanok (Enoch) 62:1
Also see Chanok (Enoch) 46:1-3; 48:2; 62:9-10; 63:15, 69:38-41; 70:1; 71:17; 48:11; and 52:4.
In Daniy’el 12:9-10, the text refers to words that are shut up until the end of time:
And he said, Go your way, Daniy’el: for the words are closed up and sealed till the time of the end. Many shall be purified, and made white, and tried; but the wicked shall do wickedly: and none of the wicked shall understand; but the wise shall understand.
Daniy’el (Daniel) 12:9-10
And the Cepher Chanok (Enoch) is directed to this unsealing at the end:
The word of the blessing of Chanok, how he blessed the elect and the righteous, who were to exist in the time of trouble; rejecting all the unrighteous and wicked. Chanok, a righteous man, who with Elohiym,answered and spoke,while his eyes were open, and he saw a holy vision in the heavens.
Chanok (Enoch) 1:1
In addition, Ezra Reviy`iy (2 Esdras, the text of which is contained herein) says the following about the number of Cepheriym:
In forty days they wrote two hundred and four books. 45 And it came to pass, when the forty days were filled, that El Elyon spoke, saying, The first that you have written publish openly, that the worthy and unworthy may read it: 46 But keep the seventy last, that you may deliver them only to such as be wise among the people: 47 For in them is the spring of understanding, the fountain of wisdom, and the stream of knowledge. 48 And I did so.
Ezra Reviy`iy (2 Esdras) 14:44-48
Gradually, the term “apocrypha” – books reserved only unto the wise among the people – took on a pejorative connotation, as the orthodoxy of these hidden books was sometimes questioned. Origen (Comm. in Matt. 10.18; p. 13.881) distinguished between books that were to be read in public worship and apocryphal books. Because these secret books were often preserved for use within the esoteric circles of the elite believers, many of the “unenlightened” church Fathers found themselves outside the realm of understanding, and therefore came to apply the term “apocryphal” to what they claimed to be heretical works, and therefore forbidden to be read.
In the Protestant world, “the Apocrypha” designated 15 works, all but one of which were Jewish in origin and mostly found in the Septuagint (that is, the Greek translation of Ivriyt (Hebrew) and Aramaic texts by “the seventy”). There is a claim that parts of 2 Esdras are Christian or Latin in origin, and that 4 Maccabees was post-dated. Although some of them were composed in the Levant in Aramaic or Ivriyt, they were not accepted into the Jewish canon (Tanakh) formed late in the 2nd century A.D. (Canonicity, 67:31-35). The Reformers, influenced by the Jewish canon of the Old Testament, did not consider these books on par with the rest of the Scriptures. Thus the custom arose of making the Apocrypha a separate section in the Protestant Bible, or sometimes even omitting them entirely (Canonicity, 67:44-46). The Catholic view, expressed as a doctrine of faith at the Council of Trent, is that 12 of these 15 works (in a different enumeration, however) are canonical Scripture. They are called the Deuterocanonical Books (Canonicity, 67:21, 42-43). Many of the books were excluded due to discrepancies with the formulation of the Talmudic calendar, a calendar which established a new year in the fall, rather than in the spring as required in the Torah. Further, the Council of Trent did not have the benefit of the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls.
The books of the Protestant Apocrypha that are not accepted by Catholics are 3-4 Ezra, the Prayer of Menashsheh and 3-4 Makkabiym.
The Protestant Apocrypha excludes also Chanok, Yovheliym and Yashar. The theme of the Cepher of the Prophet Chanok dealing with the nature and deeds of the fallen angels so infuriated the later church fathers that one, Filastrius, actually condemned it openly as heresy (Filastrius, Liber de Haeresibus, no. 108). Nor did the rabbis deign to give credence to the book's teaching about angels. Rabbi Shim`on ben Jochai in the second century A.D. pronounced a curse upon those who believed it (Delitzsch, p. 223). So, the book was denounced, banned, cursed, burned and destroyed - and last but not least, lost (and conveniently forgotten) for a thousand years. But with an uncanny persistence, the Cepher of the Prophet Chanok found its way back into circulation two centuries ago.
In 1773, rumors of a surviving copy of the book drew Scottish explorer James Bruce to Ethiopia. True to hearsay, the Cepher of the Prophet Chanok had been preserved by the Ethiopic church, which put it right alongside the other books of the Bible. Bruce secured not one, but three Ethiopic copies of the book and brought them back to Europe and Britain. When in 1821 Dr. Richard Laurence, an Ivriyt (Hebrew) professor at Oxford, produced the first English translation of the work, the modern world gained its first glimpse of the forbidden mysteries of Chanok. Many scholars say that the present form of the story in the Cepher of the Prophet Chanok was penned sometime during the second century B.C. and was popular for at least five hundred years. The earliest Ethiopic text was apparently made from a Greek manuscript of the Cepher of the Prophet Chanok, which itself was a copy of an earlier text. The original was apparently written in Semitic language (possibly Paleo-Ivriyt (ancient Hebrew). The Laurence text is the underlying basis herein, with comparative interlineations from both the Charles and the Knibb editions.
Though it was once believed to be post-Christian (the similarities to Christian terminology and teaching are striking), recent discoveries of copies of the book among the Dead Sea Scrolls found at Qumran prove that the book was in existence before the time of Yahush Ha’Mashiach. But the date of the original writing upon which the second century B.C. Qumran copies were based is shrouded in obscurity. It is, in a word, old. Some historians claim that the book does not really contain the authentic words of the ancient biblical patriarch Chanok, since he would have lived (based on the chronologies in the Cepher Bere’shiyth (Book of Genesis) several thousand years earlier than the first known appearance of the book attributed to him. Such a conclusion would render the book pseudepigraphal – that is, of a pseudo epigraph (attribution to an author not actually writing the book). However, this same conclusion can be applied to all of the works of Mosheh.
Despite its unknown origins, many followers of Yahusha once accepted the words of this Cepher of the Prophet Chanok as authentic Scripture, especially the part about the fallen angels and their prophesied judgment. In fact, many of the key concepts used by Yahusha Ha’Mashiach himself seem directly connected to terms and ideas in the Cepher of the Prophet Chanok. Thus, it is hard to avoid the conclusion that Yahusha had not only knowledge of the Cepher of the Prophet Chanok, but also respected it highly enough to adopt and elaborate on its specific descriptions of the coming Kingdom and its theme of inevitable judgment descending upon “the wicked” - the term often used in the Old Testament to describe the Watchers.
There is abundant proof that Yahusha approved of the Cepher of the Prophet Chanok. Over one hundred phrases in the Brit Chadashah (New Testament) find precedent in the Cepher of the Prophet Chanok. Another remarkable bit of evidence for the early followers of Yahusha’s acceptance of the Cepher of the Prophet Chanok is found in an accurate translation of Luke 9:35, describing the transfiguration of Messiah: And there came a voice out of the cloud, saying, “This is my beloved son: hear him.” Apparently the translator here wished to make this verse agree with a similar verse in Matthew and Mark. But Luke's verse in the original Greek uses the phrase “ho eklelegmenos, which means, literally, “the elect one": Hence, we have set forth the verse as: This is my yachiyd, the Elect One; hear him. The “Elect One" is a most significant term (found fourteen times) in the Cepher of the Prophet Chanok. If the cepher was indeed known to the apostles of Ha’Mashiach, with its abundant descriptions of the Elect One who should “sit upon the throne of glory" and the Elect One who should “dwell in the midst of them," then great scriptural authenticity is accorded to the Cepher of the Prophet Chanok when the “voice out of the cloud" tells the apostles, This is my yachiyd, the Elect One - the one promised in the Cepher of the Prophet Chanok.
The Cepher Yahudah (Jude) makes mention in verse 14 that Chanok, the seventh from A’dam, prophesied... Yahudah makes reference in verse 15 of chapter 2, verse 1 of the Cepher of the Prophet Chanok (2:1), where he writes, to execute judgment on all, to convict all who are wicked. The time difference between Chanok and Yahudah is approximately 3400 years. Therefore, Yahudah’s reference to the Chanokian prophecies gives credence to the idea that these written prophecies were available to him at that time.
Fragments of ten Chanok manuscripts were also found among the Dead Sea Scrolls. The famous scrolls actually comprise only one part of the total findings at Qumran. Much of the rest was Chanokian literature, copies of the Cepher of the Prophet Chanok, and other apocryphal works in the Chanokian tradition, such as the Cepher Yovheliym (Jubilees).
The Cepher of the Prophet Chanok was also used by writers of other apocryphal texts. The Chanokian story of the Watchers, is also referenced in the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs and the Cepher Yovheliym (Jubilees).
The Cepher of the Prophet Chanok was in existence centuries before the birth of Ha’Mashiach and yet is considered by many to be more Messianic in its theology than Jewish. It was considered Scripture by many early followers of Messiah. The earliest literature of the “church fathers” is filled with references to this mysterious cepher. Second and third century “church fathers” like Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Origen and Clement of Alexandria all made use of the Cepher of the Prophet Chanok. Tertullian (160-230 A.D.) called the Cepher of the Prophet Chanok “Holy Scripture.” The Ethiopic Church added the Cepher of the Prophet Chanok to its official canon. It was widely known and read in the first three centuries after Ha’Mashiach.
Yovheliym (Jubilees)
In addition, there are references in this text from the Cepher Yovheliym (Jubilees). The Book of Jubilees (in Ivriyt (Hebrew): Cepher Ha’Yovheliym) is also known as: The Little Genesis. It is an ancient Jewish religious work. Until the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls, the only surviving manuscripts of Yovheliym (Jubilees) were four complete Ge'ez texts dating to the 15th and 16th centuries, and several fragmentary quotations in Greek, mainly found in a work by Epiphanius, but also found in others by Justin Martyr, Origen, Diodorus of Tarsus, Isidore of Alexandria, Isidore of Seville, Eutychius of Alexandria, Yochanan Malalas, George Syncellus, and George Kedrenos. There is also a preserved fragment of a Latin translation of the Greek that contains about a quarter of the whole work. It is considered canonical in the Ethiopian Orthodox Church, where it is known as the Book of Division (Ge'ez: Mets'hafe Kufale). The Ethiopic texts, now numbering twenty-seven, are the primary basis for translations into English. Passages in the texts of Yovheliym (Jubilees) that are directly parallel to verses in Genesis do not directly reproduce either of the two surviving manuscript traditions. A further fragment in Arammiyth (Syriac) in the British Museum, titled Names of the women of the patriarchs according to the Hebrew books called Jubilees suggests that there once existed a Syriac translation. How much is missing can be guessed from the Stichometry of Nicephorus, where 4300 stichoi or lines are attributed to The Cepher Yovheliym (Jubilees). Between 1947 and 1956, approximately 15 Yovheliym scrolls were found in five caves at Qumran, all written in Ivriyt. The large quantity of these manuscripts (more than for any biblical books except for Psalms, Deuteronomy, Isaiah, Exodus, and Genesis, in descending order) indicates that Jubilees was widely used at Qumran. A comparison of the Qumran texts with the Ethiopic version, performed by James Vander Kam, found that the Ethiopic was in most respects an accurate and literalistic translation.
The Cepher Yovheliym (Jubilees) presents "the history of the division of the days of the Torah, of the events of the years, the year-weeks, and the jubilees of the world" as secretly revealed to Mosheh by Yahuah while Mosheh was on Mount Ciynai for forty days and forty nights. The chronology given in Jubilees is heptadic, based on multiples of seven; the Jubilee year is the Shabbath year that follows periods of 49 years, seven 'year-weeks', into which all of time has been divided.
Yashar (Jasher)
The Cepher Yashar (Jasher) is also set forth in the את CEPHER. The traditions of construction in the world of the Ivriym was by oral tradition (all scholars readily admitting that the “oral law” was transmitted this way between the generations for centuries on centuries). Some scholars believe that the transmission of the Cepher Yashar may have been at some time done this way. One of those scholars who acknowledged the ancient origin of the cepher, according to M. M. Noah, was Yocephus, who had written in respect of the Cepher Yashar that “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." “Without giving it to the world as a work of Divine inspiration, or assuming the responsibility to say that it is not an inspired book, I have no hesitation in pronouncing it a work of great antiquity and interest, and a work that is entitled, even regarding it as a literary curiosity, to a great circulation among those who take pleasure in studying the Scriptures.” Noah, Mordekai M., preface to Cepher Jasher (New York, 1840), reprinted in Authentic Annals, p. xv.
The account of the discovery of the Cepher Yashar begins when Titus destroyed Yerushalayim in AD 70. According to an account taken from the preface to the Hebrew edition of 1625 (sometimes listed as 1613), as translated and included in the 1840 English edition, but omitted from the 1887 reprint, an officer named Sidrus discovered a hidden library complete with a scholar hiding within. The officer had mercy on the man and took him and the books to his residence at what is now Sevilla, Spain, but was then called Hispalis, capital of the Roman province Hispalensis. The manuscript was donated to the Jewish college at Cordoba, Spain, and after printing was invented, the Jewish scholars had the book printed in Hebrew in Venice in 1625. There was also reportedly a 1552 Hebrew edition printed in Naples, but all of today's versions come from the 1625 printing. The transfer of the manuscript to Cordoba was mentioned in Mordekai Noah’s preface.
Other commentators have said the following:
It is believed that the Book of Jasher was first discovered during the Great Jewish Revolt (alluded to earlier), in which Roman forces led by Titus destroyed the Temple at Jerusalem around 70 AD. The book was believed to have been carried off along with other Roman spoils ultimately making its way to Spain, where the Jews had already established themselves through trade since the time of King Solomon. It was kept for centuries in the Hebrew College of Cordova, and from there was transported to Venice where it was discovered and first printed in 1613. Because the Book of Jasher had not been known to early theologians and scholars, it was never considered for entry into Church canonical listings. In other words, Church leaders did not have the opportunity to make pronouncements regarding whether or not they thought it was the inspired Word of God. As result, it remains excluded from both canonical and apocryphal listings to this day.
The Cepher Yashar actually has a Hebrew Text, called Sefer HaYashar which was first printed in Naples in 1552, and has a traceable history from there. This Hebrew version was then translated by Moses Samuel into the English language and published in 1840 under Mordecai Manuel Noah’s publication firm and name, and it is this manuscript that is known as “the Book of Jasher” today. This is the underlying text found in the את CEPHER, except that we have removed all editorial comment, including the comments that were added by the Neapolitan editors, to provide only the text.
Shemu’el was in the process of translation in Liverpool, England when a fraudulent work now known as Pseudo-Jasher, a book on Hebrew ethics, was republished in England in 1829. Before Shemu’el saw it, he published a letter stating that he was also translating the same book, unaware that it was a complete hoax. Pseudo-Jasher was published in 1751 by Jacob Ilive and the text itself reveals it to be a specious forgery. This edition was discredited and seemingly forgotten until a New Age-metaphysics research order called the “Ancient Mystical Order of the Rosae Crucis” (also the “one universal Rosicrucian Order”) reprinted it in 1934. Since then, only this order and New Age Gnostics have even bothered with it, as it is filled with anti-religious views, such as: A’dam and Chuah (Eve) did not sin; Elohiym did not Create the Universe but was formed on the same day as Humans by natural evolutionary processes; and Noach only invented shipping. Jacob Ilive was sentenced to three years imprisonment for committing fraud and for heresy, after writing the book, and several accompanying pamphlets. By 1833 booklets were published to expose the fraudulent claims of Pseudo-Jasher, making it difficult for Shemu’el to publish the legitimate version in England. Because of the hostile British climate, Shemu’el sold his translation to Mordekai M. Noah, a New York publisher, and it was published there in 1840, away from the scandal. It was the first English translation of the Cepher Yashar ever published.
The Cepher Yashar contains many authentic Hebraic traditions. Hugh Nibley, for example, stated after quoting material about Slavonic Chanok from Yashar (3:5-10), “Passages such as this which closely follow both the Hebrew and the Slavonic Chanok show that the book of Yashar used very ancient sources and was far more than a medieval romance." Collected Works of Hugh Nibley, Vol. 2, p. 301, fn. 380. It is definitely not a modern fiction, as was the 1751 book of the same name. Ginzberg in his landmark collection Legends of the Yahudiym quotes from it freely and it is listed in Jewish encyclopedias as an authentic source. The Jewish Encyclopedia (NY: Funk and Wagnall, 1905), XII:588-9; The Universal Jewish Encyclopedia (NY: Universal Jewish Encyclopedia Co., 1942), 6:41.
Shemu’el, the translator of the 1840 edition maintained that this book is indeed the book mentioned in the Old Testament. He concludes that “the book is, with the exception of some doubtful parts, a venerable monument of antiquity; and that, notwithstanding that some few additions may have been made to it in comparatively modern times, it still retains sufficient authenticity to prove it a copy of the book referred to in Yahusha 10 and Shemu’el Sheniy 1."
These are the two places where Yashar is quoted in the Old Testament.
And the sun stood still, and the moon stayed, until the people had avenged themselves upon their enemies. Is not this written in the Cepher of Yashar? So the sun stood still in the midst of heaven, and hastened not to come about a whole day.
Yahusha (Joshua) 10:13
The Cepher Yashar records this thusly:
And when they were smiting, the day was declining toward evening, and Yahusha said in the sight of all the people, Sun, stand you still upon Giv`on, and you moon in the valley of Ayalon, until the nation shall have revenged itself upon its enemies. 64 And Yahuah hearkened to the voice of Yahusha, and the sun stood still in the midst of the heavens, and it stood still six and thirty moments, and the moon also stood still and hastened not to go down a whole day.
Yashar (Jasher) 88:63-64
And David lamented with this lamentation over Sha’ul and over Yahunathan his son: 18 (Also he bade them teach the children of Yahudah the use of the bow: behold, it is written in the Cepher of Yashar.)
Shemu’el Sheniy (2 Samuel) 1:17-18
The Cepher Yashar records this thusly:
And Ya`aqov said unto Yahudah, I know my son that you are a mighty man for your brethren; reign over them, and your sons shall reign over their sons forever. Only teach your sons the bow and all the weapons of war, in order that they may fight the battles of their brother who will rule over his enemies.
Yashar (Jasher) 56:8-9
This is similar but not identical to the text found in Yashar 56:8-9 which has:
And Jacob said unto Judah, I know my son that thou art a mighty man for thy brethren; reign over them, and thy sons shall reign over their sons forever. 9 Only teach thy sons the bow and all the weapons of war, in order that they may fight the battles of their brother who will rule over his enemies.
Yashar (Jasher) 56:8-9
There is an ancient midrash which makes reference to the passage in Shemu’el Sheniy (2 Sam.) 1:18:
Also he bade them teach the children of Yahudah the use of the bow: behold, it is written in the Cepher of Yashar.
Shemu’el Sheniy (2 Sam.) 1:18
The Sefaria provides a transcript of the ancient midrash of the Rashi, who relies upon the midrash of Rav Yochonon in Avoda Zarah. In this midrash, we have a specific designation that the language found in the modern Cepher Yashar is what was known to be there at the time of his writing. Here is the midrash:
Rashi on 2 Samuel 1:18
“He said, 'To teach the Bnei Yehudah archery.' David said, 'Now that might among Yisroel have fallen, the Bnei Yehudah need to be taught how to make war and how to pull back a bow.'"
Behold it is written in the Seifer HaYoshor. This is written in Seifer Bereishis, which is the Seifer of the righteous [Rashi is citing the opinion of Rav Yochonon in Avoda Zarah, 25a] Avraham, Yitzchok and Yaakov. And where [In Bereishis] is it hinted at? ‘Your hand will be on the neck of your enemies.’ [Bere’shiyth 49:8] What type of warfare is it where he places his hand next to his forehead, [When pulling back the string of his bow. Rashi in Avodah Zarah, ibid writes the archer places his hand next to his eyes. This is how they sight their targets] which is opposite his neck? [This interpretation reads the verse in Bere’shiyth differently: ‘your hand will be on your neck.’ See Marsho, Avodah Zarah, ibid.] One must say: this is archery.”
So, this ancient midrash from Talmudic sources gives solid credence to the discussion that the teaching of the bow to the sons of Yahudah (Judah) was found in a text referred to as Sefer HaYashar - the Cepher Yashar - whether or not it had been later published by a Rabbi in Naples.
But these are not the only indicia of validity (or inspiration, should one choose that form of understanding). Consider the words of Pa’al in Timotheus Sheniy:
Now as Iannes and Iambres withstood Mosheh, so do these also resist the Truth: men of corrupt minds, reprobate concerning the belief.
Timotheus Sheniy (2 Timothy) 3:8
The Cepher Yashar makes this record:
And when they had gone Phar`oh sent for Bil`am the magician and to Iannes and Iambres his sons, and to all the magicians and conjurors and counselors which belonged to the king, and they all came and sat before the king.
Yashar (Jasher) 79:27
For those who claim that this is a reconstructed forgery by the Yahudiym (Jews) who wrote the Zohar, there is a bit of an issue here. Which Yahudiy (Jew) in Spain would reconstruct a book in order to give credence to the words of Pa’al? Where did Pa’al get the names Iannes and Iambres (Jannes and Jambres)? Did Pa’al make them up? Is his work fiction, fake, and phony?
Unbeknownst to the modern commentators on Yashar is an additional quote from Yashar that is also found word for word in the Cepher of the Prophet Yechezq’el:
Speak, and say, Thus says Adonai Yahuah; Behold, I am against you, Phar`oh king of Mitsrayim,the great dragon that lies in the midst of his rivers, which has said: My river is my own, and I have made it for myself.
Yechezq’el (Ezekiel) 29:3
The Cepher Yashar records it thusly:
And the anger of the king was kindled at their words, and he said to them, But who amongst all the elohiym of nations can do this? My river is my own, and I have made it for myself.
Yashar (Jasher) 79:51
If the Cepher Yashar was reverse engineered and merely copied from the text, then why not copy the whole of the verse? Why only the fragment? Why not a discussion on the dragon? Why not the use of the term Phar`oh? And let us not forget to ask the question: How did Yechezq’el (Ezekiel) know this is what the Phar`oh had said? Which Scripture did Yechezq’el rely on to make the claim that the Phar`oh had said: “My river is my own, and I have made it for myself?”
Yahuceph
One of the most outstanding evidences of true inspiration is found in the following Tehillah (Psalm):
This he ordained in Yahuceph for a testimony, when he went out through the land of Mitsrayim: where I heard a language that I understood not.
Tehilliym (Psalms) 81:5
Here is the underlying Ivriyt (this verse is numbered as 81:6 in the Masoretic text):
עֵדוּת בִּיהוֹסֵף שָׂמוֹ בְּצֵאתוֹ עַל־אֶרֶץ מִצְרָיִם שְׂפַת לֹא־יָדַעְתִּי אֶשְׁמָע׃
The word found here is Yahuceph (בִּיהוֹסֵף) (technically b’Yahuceph with the prefix “b” meaning “in”). The name Yoceph (Joseph) is spelled throughout the entirety of the Ivriyt text as (יוֹסֵף) (Strong’s H3130); i.e., yod-vav-camek-final pey. Yet, in this passage, the name is spelled yod-hey-vav-camek-final pey. Is this a different person other than Yoceph? None of the other English Bibles believe so, as the name Joseph is used in all English translations. The only text which recognizes the “hey” in the word (other than the את CEPHER) is the Complete Jewish Bible, which sets out the text as “He placed it as a testimony in Y’hosef when he went out against the land of Egypt. I heard an unfamiliar voice say,” [delineated as 81:6].
The Cepher Yashar makes the following record:
And on that night Yahuah sent one of his ministering angels, and he came into the land of Mitsrayim unto Yoceph, and the angel of Yahuah stood over Yoceph, and behold Yoceph was lying in the bed at night in his master's house in the dungeon, for his master had put him back into the dungeon on account of his woman. 14 And the angel roused him from his sleep, and Yoceph rose up and stood upon his legs, and behold the angel of Yahuah was standing opposite to him; and the angel of Yahuah spoke with Yoceph, and he taught him all the languages of man in that night, and he called his name Yahuceph.
Yashar (Jasher) 49:13-14
The name Yashar is worthy of a darash (comparative meaning) discussion. Consider in comparison the name Yasharun (Jeshurun) and its use in Devariym (Deuteronomy):
But Yasharun waxed fat, and kicked: you are waxen fat, you are grown thick, you are covered with fatness; then he forsook Eloah which made him, and lightly esteemed the Rock of his yeshu`ah.
Devariym (Deuteronomy) 32:15
And he was king in Yasharun, when the heads of the people and the tribes of Yashar’el were gathered together.
Devariym (Deuteronomy) 33:5
There is none like unto the El of Yasharun, who rides upon the heavens in your help, and in his excellency on the sky.
Devariym (Deuteronomy) 33:26z
Ezra (Esdras)
The Cepheriym of Ezra are also necessarily included in order to consider the initial realization of the famous prophecy set forth in Daniy’el 9, where reference is made to the additional Books of Ezra (Esdras).
Although not belonging to the Canon, Ezra Sheliyshiy (3 Ezra) is made up almost entirely from materials existing in canonical books. Ezra Sheliyshiy (3 Ezra) provides a history of the Temple from the time of Yo’shiyahu (Josiah) down to Nechemyahu (Nehemiah) and was freely quoted by the early fathers, and included in Origen's Hexapla.
The Cepher Ezra Reviy`iy (4 Ezra)(also reckoned as 2 Esdras) is often called the Apocalypse of Ezra. This remarkable work has not been preserved in the original Greek text; but has been found in Latin, Syriac, Arabic (two independent versions), Ethiopian, and Armenian translations. The body of the book, the unity of which appears to be unquestionable, is made up of seven visions which Ezra is to have seen at Babel, the thirtieth year after the destruction of Yerushalayim at the hands of the people of Babel.
Cepher Ezra Reviy`iy (4 Ezra) is reckoned among the most beautiful productions of Hebraic literature. Widely known in the early Christian ages and frequently quoted by the fathers, it may be said to have framed the popular belief of the Middle Ages concerning the end times.
There is great discussion concerning “The Missing Fragment" of Ezra Reviy’iy. This fragment of seventy verses was not entirely unknown in the West, particularly when, in 1865, Professor Johann Gildemeister discovered that a leaf had been excised from the Codex Sangermanensis, a Vulgate manuscript from the Benedictine monastery of St. Germain des Pres, and the missing leaf created a gap within the verses of the Fourth Chapter of the text. He concluded that all manuscripts of Ezra Reviy’iy (4 Erza) [Second Esdras] that did not contain the missing text must have necessarily relied upon the redaction found within the Codex Sangermanensis, reprinting only that text that remained after it had been mutilated (indicating that the leaf had been cut out very early in the volume's history around AD 822).
Robert L. Bensly published the 70 missing verses from the Latin text from the Codex Colbertinus in 1875. After Bensly's death in 1893, Cambridge published his critical edition of the whole Latin text of Esdras (or, 4 Ezra) in 1895, restoring the lost verses; the Stuttgart edition of Latin Vulgate that would follow this publication would also include this Latin text.
Beside the Codex Colbertinus, the excised text was also found in the Codex Ambianensis at Amiens. Several other ancient manuscripts also included the missing text of Esdras (or, 4 Ezra), have come including the Syriac, Ethiopic, Arabic, Armenian and Spanish provenance editions. The presence of these multiple witnesses have confirmed the authenticity of these excised verses sufficient to allow the restoration of the text herein.
Baruk (Baruch)
Another cepher referenced herein is Baruk Ri’shon (1 Baruk), also known as “the Prophecy of Baruk." Baruk Ri’shon presents a certain unity in point of subject-matter, so that most of those who maintain that the whole work was written in Ivriyt (Hebrew) admit also its unity of composition. Contemporary critics believe that the work was a compilatory process, and that its unity is due to the final editor, who put together the various documents which centered upon the Jewish exile. This method of composition does not necessarily conflict with the traditional authorship of the Cepher Baruk Ri’shon. Many of the sacred writers of what is commonly considered “the Bible” were compilers, and Baruk may be numbered among them.
While the Prophecies of Baruk are important to this book, the Apocalypse of Baruk, also known as Baruk Sheniy (2 Baruk) stands out as vital. A. F. J. Klijn writes: “Until recently the Apocalypse of Baruk was only known from a Syriac manuscript dating from the sixth or seventh century AD. Since the beginning of this century two fragments have come to light in Greek (12:1-13:2 and 13:11-14:3) from the fourth or fifth century. Small fragments of the text, again in Syriac, have been discovered in lectionaries of the Jacobite Church. However, no fewer than thirty-six manuscripts are known because it once belonged to the canon of Scriptures in the Syriac-speaking church”.
In this text, there are other changes of substance in the Brit Chadashah (the New Testament) as well. One change is made in Mattithyahu 23:1. Originally, the text read as follows:
Then spake Jesus to the multitude, and to his disciples, Saying, The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses’ seat: All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not.
Mattithyahu (Matthew) 23:1-3
This mitsvah of the New Testament presents an interesting conundrum for those who believe in the inerrancy of Scripture, as it directs the believer to observe whatever the scribes and Pharisees bid. An explicit read puts the believer at odds with the remaining context of the chapter. A more careful review indicates that the word “they” was actually the word “he.” The second sentence provided that people should not do after the takanoth (reforms) and the ma’asiym (traditions) of the Parashiym (Pharisees). We made the following correction:
Then spoke Yahusha to the multitude, and to his Talmidiym, Saying, The scribes and the Parashiym sit in Mosheh’s seat: All therefore whatsoever he bids you guard, that diligently guard and do; but do not ye after their reforms and traditions: for they say, and do not.
Mattithyahu (Matthew) 23:1-3
A review of the passage found in Romaiym (Romans) 10:4 also revealed a more complete phrasing to correctly display the meaning of the text.
For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone that believeth.
Romaiym (Romans) 10:4
The word that became an issue was the word telos τελος. Strong's Greek Dictionary 5056 provides that the word telos is derived from a primary tello (to set out for a definite point or goal); properly, the point aimed at as a limit, i.e. (by implication) the conclusion of an act or state (termination ((literally, figuratively or indefinitely), result (immediate, ultimate or prophetic), purpose)); specially, an impost or levy (as paid), continual, custom, end(-ing), finally, or uttermost. As a result of a review, the correction that was made reads as follow:
For Mashiach is the goal of the Torah for righteousness to everyone that believes.
Romaiym (Romans) 10:4
Ma’asiym (Acts) 29
This text also includes a passage of Scripture known as Acts 29. T.G. Cole, writing in 1801, said this about Acts Chapter 29: “In bringing to the notice of the Christian public the document known by the name of the Long-Lost chapter of the Acts of the Apostles, we felt that we are fulfilling a duty to Christ and rendering a service to our fellows”. In all probability, not one percent of Christian believers, not to speak of the general public, have ever heard of the Sonnini Manuscript; yet how many earnest believers would be delighted to have corroborative evidence of the visit of the Great Apostle to the other nations of these lands. The document referred to purports to be the concluding portion of the Acts of the Apostles, and gives an account of Pa’al’s (Paul’s) journeys after his two years enforced residence in Rome in his own hired house. It is written in the style of the Acts and reads like a continuation of it. It was found interleaved in a copy of manuscripts from Sonnini’s travels in Turkey and Greece, and purchased at the sale of the library and effects of the late Right Hon. Sir John Newport, Bart., in Ireland, whose family arms were engraved on the cover of the book, and in whose possession it had been for more than thirty years, with a copy of the firman of the sultan of Turkey, which granted to C.S. Sonnini an original Greek manuscript which was found in the Archives at Constantinople, and was presented to him by the Sultan Abdoul Achmet. In Sonnini’s work, the English translation of the document was found: “Travels in Turkey and Greece undertaken by order of Louis XVI, and with the authority of the Ottoman Court by C.S. Sonnini, member of several scientific or literary societies of the Society of Agriculture of Paris, and of the Observers of Men”. Mores moltorum videt et ubes. Hor., London; Printed for T.N. Longman and O. Rees, Patermoster Row, 1801.
The claim in the 29th chapter of Acts is that Pa’al (Paul) traveled into Spain, surviving his trial before Nero. We rely on three witnesses to corroborate this chapter. First, is a statement from the Muratorian Fragment from the 5th century: What (27) marvel is it then, if John so consistently (28) mentions these particular points also in his Epistles, (29) saying about himself, 'What we have seen with our eyes (30) and heard with our ears and our hands (31) have handled, these things we have written to you? (32) For in this way he professes [himself] to be not only an eyewitness and hearer, (33) but also a writer of all the marvelous deeds of the Lord, in their order. (34) Moreover, the acts of all the apostles (35) were written in one book. For 'most excellent Theophilus' Luke compiled (36) the individual events that took place in his presence — (37) as he plainly shows by omitting the martyrdom of Peter (38) as well as the departure of Paul from the city [of Rome] (39) when he journeyed to Spain.
Pa’al (Paul) intended to travel into Spain. Consider his discussion in Romaiym (Romans) 15:
But now having no more place in these parts, and having a great desire these many years to come unto you; 24 Whensoever I take my journey into Spain, I will come to you: for I trust to see you in my journey, and to be brought on my way thitherward by you, if first I be somewhat filled with your company.
Romaiym (Romans) 15:23-24
Finally, the third witness is found in Acts 28, which, unlike the other Scriptures of the New Testament, does not end with the resounding Amein. This difficulty is cured with the addition of the 29th chapter.
Mishlei (Proverbs) 30:4