See also:work of the Old Testament . The
See also:Book of
See also:Jubilees is the most advanced pre-Christian representative of the Midrashic tendency, which had already been at work in the Old Testament
See also:Chronicles . As the chronicler had rewritten the
See also:history of
See also:Israel and
See also:Judah from the stand-point of the Priests'
See also:Code, so our author re-edited from the Pharisaic standpoint of his
See also:time the history of the
See also:world from the creation to the publication of the
See also:Law on
See also:Sinai . His work constitutes the
See also:oldest commentary in the world on
See also:Genesis and
See also:part of Exodus, an enlarged
See also:Targum on these books, in which difficulties in the biblical narration are solved, gaps supplied, dogmatically offensive elements removed and the genuine spirit of later Judaism infused into the
See also:primitive history of the world . Titles of the Book.—The book is variously entitled . First, it is known as Ta 'Iwfrt).aia, of 'Iwf3t7AaZot, Heb . ^'»•n . This name is admirably adapted to our book, as it divides into
See also:jubilee periods of
See also:forty-nine years each the history of the world from the creation to the legislation on Sinai . Secondly, it is frequently designated " The Little Genesis," i1 Xei'rTi FiPevcs or i1 MtKpoy vecns, Heb. mu n• 's . This title may have arisen from its dealing more fully with details and minutiae than the biblical work . For the other names by which it is referred to, such as The Apocalypse of Moses, The Testament of Moses, The Book of
See also:Adam's Daughters and the
See also:Life of Adam, the reader may consult
See also:Charles's The Book of Jubilees, pp. xvii.-xx .
See also:Object.—The object of our author was the defence and exposition of Judaism from the Pharisaic standpoint of the 2nd century B.C. against the disintegrating effects of
See also:Hellenism .
In his elaborate defence of Judaism our author glorifiescircumcision and the
See also:sabbath, the bulwarks of Judaism, as heavenly ordinances, the sphere of which was so far extended as to embrace Israel on
See also:earth . The Law, as a whole, was to our author the realization in time of what was in a sense timeless and eternal . Though revealed in time it was
See also:superior to time . Before it had been made known in sundry portions to the fathers, it had been kept in
See also:heaven by the angels, and to its observance there was no limit in time or in eternity . Our author next defends Judaism by his glorification of Israel . Whereas the various nations of the Gentiles were subject to angels, Israel was subject to
See also:God alone . Israel was God's son, and not only did the nation stand in this relation to God, but also its individual members . Israel received circumcision as a sign that they were the
See also:Lord's, and this
See also:privilege of circumcision they enjoyed in
See also:common with the two highest orders of angels . Hence Israel was to unite with God and these two orders in the observance of the sabbath . Finally the destinies of the world were bound up with Israel . The world was renewed in the creation of the true man Jacob, and its final renewal was to synchronize with the setting-up of God's sanctuary in
See also:Zion and the
See also:establishment of the Messianic
See also:kingdom . In this kingdom the Gentiles had neither part nor lot .
See also:Syriac, Ethiopic and Latin.—Numerous fragments of the Greek Version have come down to us in
See also:Origen, Diodorus of
See also:Antioch, Isidore of Alexandria,
See also:John of Malala,
See also:Syncellus and others . This version was the
See also:parent of the Ethiopic and Latin . The Ethiopic Version is most accurate and trustworthy, and indeed, as a
See also:rule, slavishly literal . It has naturally suffered from the corruptions incident to transmission through
See also:MSS . Thus dittographies are frequent and lacunae of occasional occurrence, but the version is singularly
See also:free from the glosses and corrections of unscrupulous
See also:scribes . The Latin Version, of which about one-
See also:fourth has been preserved, is where it exists of almost equal value with the Ethiopic . It has, however, suffered more at the hands of correctors . Notwithstanding, it attests a long array of passages in which it preserves the true text over against corruptions or omissions in the Ethiopic Version . Finally, as regards the Syriac Version, the evidence for its existence is not conclusive . It is based on the fact that a
See also:British Museum MS. contains a Syriac fragment entitled " Names of the wives of the Patriarchs according to the
See also:Hebrew Book of Jubilees." The Ethiopic and Latin Versions:
See also:Translations from the Greek.—The Ethiopic Version is translated from the Greek, for Greek words such as 8p0s, ,BaXavos, Mu', &c., are transliterated in the Greek . Secondly, many passages must be retranslated into Greek before we can discover the source of the various corruptions . And finally, proper names are transliterated as they appear in Greek and not in Hebrew .
That the Latin is also a
See also:translation from the Greek is no less obvious . Thus in xxxix . 12 timoris=Sachs, corrupt for 5ouXstas; in xxxviii . 13 honorem =rcµity, but ri n i' should here have been rendered by tributum, as the Ethiopic and the context require; in xxxii . 26, celavit = gspv>Ge, corrupt for Iypa¢e (so Ethiopic) . The Greek a Translation from the Hebrew.—The early date of our book—the 2nd century B.c.—and its place of composition speak for a Semitic
See also:original, and the evidence bearing on this subject is conclusive . But the question at once arises, was the original Aramaic or Hebrew ? Certain proper names in the Latin Version ending in -in seem to bespeak an Aramaic original, as Cettin, Filistin, &c . But since in all these cases the Ethiopic transliterations end in -m and not in -n, it is not improbable that the Aramaism in the Latin Version is due to the translator, who, it has been concluded on other grounds, was a Palestinian
See also:Jew.' The grounds, on the other
See also:hand, for a Hebrew original are weighty and numerous . (I) A work which claims to be from the hand of Moses would naturally be in Hebrew, for Hebrew according to our author was the sacred and
See also:national language . (2) The revival of the national spirit of a nation is universally, so far as we know, accompanied by a revival of the national language . (3) The text must be retranslated into Hebrew in
See also:order to explain unintelligible expressions and restore the true text .
One instance will sufficiently illustrate this statement . In xliii . 11 a certain Ethiopic expression = Ee Eµot, which is a mistranslation of is; for ' in this context, as we know from the parallel passage in Gen. xliv . 18, which our text reproduces almost verbally, =5iopac . We might observe here that our text attests the presence of dittographies already existing in the Hebrew text . (4) Hebraisms survive in the Ethiopic and Latin Versions . In the former nfiba in iv . 4, is a corrupt transliteration of y1 . In the Latin eligere in to in xxii. to is a
See also:reproduction of s nee and in qua . in ipsa in xix . 8=n2 . . .
See also:ems . This idiom could, of course, be explained on the hypothesis of an Aramaic original .
(5) Many paronomasiae discover themselves on retranslation into Hebrew . Textual
See also:Affinities.—A minute study of the text shows that it attests an
See also:form of the Hebrew text of the
See also:Pentateuch . Thus it agrees at times with the Samaritan, or Septuagint, or Syriac, or Vulgate, or even with Onkelos against all the
See also:rest . To be more exact, our book represents some form of the Hebrew text of the Pentateuch midway between the forms presupposed by the Septuagint and the Syriac ; for it agrees more frequently with the Septuagint, or with combinations into which the Septuagint enters, than with 1 In the Ethiopic Version in xxi . 12 it should be observed that in the
See also:list of the twelve trees suitable for burning on the
See also:altar several are transliterated Aramaic names of trees . But in a
See also:late Hebrew work (2nd century B.C.) the popular names of such
See also:objects would naturally be used . In certain cases the Hebrew may have been forgotten, or, where the
See also:tree was of late introduction, been non-existent . any other single authority, or with any combination excluding the Septuagint . Next to the Septuagint it agrees most often with the Syriac or with combinations into which the Syriac enters . On the other hand, its independence of the Septuagint is shown in a large number of passages, where it has the support of the Samaritan and Massoretic, or of these with various combinations of the Syriac Vulgate and Onkelos . From these and other considerations we may conclude that the textual evidence points to the composition of our book at some
See also:period between 250 B.C. and A.D . 100, and at a time nearer the earlier date than the later .
Date.—The book was written between 135 B.C. and the
See also:year of
See also:breach with the
See also:Pharisees . This conclusion is
See also:drawn from the following facts: (1) The book was written during the pontificate of the Maccabean
See also:family, and not earlier than 135 B.C . For in xxxii . 1 Levi is called a "
See also:priest of the Most High God." Now the only high priests who
See also:bore this title were the Maccabean, who appear to have assumed it as reviving the order of
See also:Melchizedek when they displaced the Zadokite order of
See also:Aaron . Jewish tradition ascribes the
See also:assumption of this title to John Hyrcanus . It was retained by his successors down to Hyrcanus II . (2) It was written before 96 B.C . Or some years earlier in the reign of John Hyrcanus; for since our author is of the strictest
See also:sect a Pharisee and at the same time an upholder of the Maccabean pontificate, Jubilees cannot have been written after 96 when the Pharisees and
See also:Alexander Jannaeus came to open strife .
See also:Nay more, it cannot have been written after the open breach between Hyrcanus and the Pharisees, when the former joined the Sadducean party . The above conclusions are confirmed by a large mass of other evidence postulating the same date . We may, however, observe that our book points to the period already past—of stress and persecution that preceded the recovery of national independence under the Maccabees, and presupposes as its
See also:historical back-ground the most flourishing period of the Maccabean
See also:hegemony . Author.—Our author was a Pharisee of the straitest sect .
He maintained the
See also:everlasting validity of the law, he held the strictest views on circumcision, the sabbath, and the
See also:duty of shunning all intercourse with the Gentiles; he believed in angels and in a blessed immortality . In the next place he was an upholder of the Maccabean pontificate . He glorifies Levi's successors as high-priests and
See also:civil rulers, and applies to them the title assumed by the Maccabean princes, though he does not, like the author of the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs, expect the
See also:Messiah to come forth from among them . He may have been a priest . The Views of the Author on the Messianic Kingdom and the Future Life.—According to our author the Messianic kingdom was to be brought about gradually by the progressive spiritual development of man and a corresponding transformation of nature . Its members were to reach the limit of s000 years in happiness and peace . During its continuance the
See also:powers of evil were to be restrained, and the last
See also:judgment was apparently to take place at its close . As regards the
See also:doctrine of a future life, our author adopts a position novel for a Palestinian writer . He abandons the hope of a resurrection of the
See also:body . The souls of the righteous are to enjoy a blessed immortality after
See also:death . This is the earliest attested instance of this expectation in the last two centuries B.C .
We must notice that circumcision is an old Egyptian habit and in early jewish scriptures there is no such thing as immortality and this is clearely an Egyptian idea as shown in famous book known as book of dead or more correctly Pert em hru which means:coming forth by day.In brief,we must consider book of jubilee as a clear evidence of egyptian effect on jews and this is happened in Alexandria under the role of Ptolemies where a large number of jews are considered as residents.
Do not copy, download, transfer, or otherwise replicate the site content in whole or in part.
Links to articles and home page are encouraged.