PREFACE

This collection of writings in the ‫ את‬Cepher (pronounced et' sef’er) is a restoration of the
books traditionally recognized as set-apart Scripture and also includes certain writings
retained in the Dead Sea Scrolls (Chanok and Yovheliym), together with the recaptured
writing of the Cepher Ha’Yashar (Yashar) and the Apocalypse of Baruk (2 Baruk), the
recapture of those books recognized in the Septuagint, and is completed with the last two
writings of the Makkabiym (3 and 4 Makkabiym). The ‫ את‬Cepher sets forth the set-apart
name and set-apart identities in an English transliteration and restores the names of
people and places found in the original Ivriyt tongue, 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) 32:13

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
The Name of Yahuah
We make mention herein of the name Yahuah (‫)יהוה‬. This Hebraic name 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,
Shemoth (Exodus) 15:2; 17:16; Yesha’yahu (Isaiah) 12:2; 26:4; 38:11Tehilliym (Psalms)
68:4; 68:18; 77:11; 89:8; 94:7; 94:12; 102:18; 104:35; 105:45; 106:1; 106:48; 111:1; 112:1;
113:1; 113:9; 115:17; 115:18; 116:19; 117:2; 118:5; 118:14; 118:17; 118:18; 118:19;
122:4; 130:3; 135:1; 135:3; 135:4; 135:21; 146:1; 146:10; 147:1; 147:20; 148:1; 148:14;
149:1; 149:9; 150:1; 150:6;.
In Shemoth (Exodus) 3:14, Elohiym gives his name as ‫( אהיה אשר אהיה‬Ehayah 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 (‫ )יהוה‬and 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 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
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 (‫ )י‬hey (‫ )ה‬vav (‫)ו‬
shin (‫ )ש‬vav (‫ )ו‬ayin (‫ )ע‬or 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 (‫))יה‬,
which is the shortened name of the Father, Hu (in the Ivriyt (‫)הו‬, which means “he”), and
finally Shua (in the Ivriyt (‫))שוע‬, 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 ‫( ישע‬yâ sha’) 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 1:1011
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 Elohiym. 10
For he that is entered into his rest, he also has ceased from his own works, as Elohiym
did from his.
Ivriym (Hebrews) 4:810
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 (216 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 (‫ )יחיד‬which
in its use declares tremendous meaning. In its first use, we find it in Bere’shiyth (Genesis)
with the instruction to Avraham, saying:
And he said, Take now your son, your yachiyd Yitschaq, whom you love, and get you
into the land of Moriyah; and offer him there for an ascending smoke 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 (Judges) 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 (Proverbs) 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 ‫ את‬whom 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 Elohiym so loved the world, that he gave his 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) 17:2022
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. 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! (‫ )שחר ילל‬how
art thou cut down to the ground, which did weaken the nations!
Isaiah 14:12 (KJV)
The term ‫ הילל‬reading right to left looks conspicuously like hey, yod, lamed, lamed hyll, 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 ‫ –ילל‬yawlal, set with the hey as a
prefix meaning the. This word is not referenced or interpreted in any other English text
besides this ‫ את‬CEPHER. The word ‫ –ילל‬yawlal 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
Dead Sea Scrolls
You will also find references to books that you may not recognize if you are an adherent to
the post19th 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 54 books from Ivriyt 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 Laodikeia in 360 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 Laodikeia. 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. 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 7thcentury 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.
For many reasons, this method of inclusion or exclusion, has relegated significant books to
the dust bin. For instance, the justification for eliminating the Makkabiym (Maccabees) is
not found in the decision of the councils. The claim that the Makkabiym are merely
historical ignores 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 are deuterocanonical in other parts of the world. Both
Chanok (Enoch) and 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 the Cepher of the Prophet Chanok (also known as 1 Enoch).
While some historians have rejected Chanok (Enoch) as heresy, Kepha Sheniy (2 Peter)
2:45 indicates that one of the believers in Chanok (Enoch) was Kepha himself, for he states
“. . . For if Elohiym 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). Some fragments are disparate, yet the
Ethiopian text comports with these fragments.
The Cepher of the Prophet Chanok (Enoch) was 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) 1415
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] 1415, 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] 4:1314 / Chanok 49:1; the new
heaven and new earth, Chizayon [Revelation] 21:1 / Chanok 93:1617; and several of the
Beatitudes. Mattithyahu [Matthew] 5, Luqas [Luke] 6 / Chanok 6:9, 96:8.
Further, there are substantial Messianic prophecies set out in Chanok:
At that time my eyes beheld the dwelling of the elect, of truth, faith, and righteousness.
6 Countless shall be the number of the holy and the elect, in the presence of Elohiym
forever and ever.
Chanok (Enoch) 39:56
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) 40:37
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) 45:34
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) 49:14
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) 51:13
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 splendor, 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) 61:812
 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) 46:13; 48:2; 62:910; 63:15, 69:3841; 70:1; 71:17; 48:11; and 52:4.
In Daniy’el 12:910, the text refers to words that are sealed 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) 12:910
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 ninety-two 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 (4 Ezra/2 Esdras) 14:4448
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
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 postdated. 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, 67:3135). 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,
67:4446). 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, 4243). 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 34 Ezra, the
Prayer of Menashsheh and 34 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 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).
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 Yahusha
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 (160230 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: 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 Ivriyt 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 this ‫ את‬CEPHER. 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 Ivriym 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 Ivriyt 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 Ivriyt in Venice in 1625. There was also reportedly a 1552 Ivriyt 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 an Ivriyt Text, called Sefer HaYashar which was first
printed in Naples in 1552, and has a traceable history from there. This Ivriyt 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 ‫ את‬CEPHER, 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 Ivriy 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 antireligious 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 (3:510), “Passages such as
this which closely follow both the Ivriyt 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:5889; 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) 88:6364
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) 1:1718
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. 9 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) 56:89
There is an ancient midrash which makes reference to the passage in Shemu’el Sheniy (2
Samuel) 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 Samuel) 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 faith.
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 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
Mits¬rayim, 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?”
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):
‫עֵדּות בִּ יהֹוסֵ ף שָׂ מֹו בְּ צֵ אתֹו עַל־אֶ ֶרץ מִּ צְּ ָׂריִּם ְּשפַת ל ֹא־יָׂדַ עְּ ִּתי אֶ ְּשמָׂ ע׃‬
The word found here is Yahuceph (‫( )ביהוסף‬technically b’Yahuceph with the prefix “b”
meaning “in”). The name Yoceph (Joseph) is spelled throughout the entirety of the Ivriyt
text as (‫( )יוסף‬Strong’s H3130); i.e., yod-vav-camek-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 ‫ את‬CEPHER) 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 adoniy’s (master's) house in the dungeon,
for his adoniy (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) 49:1314
The name Yashar is worthy of a 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) 33:26
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
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 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 (12:113:2 and 13:1114:3) 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”.
Brit Chadashah (New Testament)
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.
Matthew 23:13 KJV
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) 23:13
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.
Romans 10:4 KJV
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) 15:2324
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.
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 is wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast: for
it is the number of a man; and his number is Six hundred threescore and six.
Revelation 13:18 KJV
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 word found
here is cepher. This term also means number in this application.
The Aleph Tav ‫את‬
One Ivriyt word which has escaped translation in all English texts, is the word “eth”, which
is spelled in the Ivriyt as Aleph Tav (‫)את‬. The Aleph ‫ א‬is the ox head, the symbol of strength
and is often construed as a crown of leadership, and the Tav (an ex or cross) ‫ ת‬means the
mark, or sign, or covenant. It is our election, therefore, to include all of the Aleph Tavs ‫את‬
that show up in the text in the Tanakh, including the presence of the Aleph Tav ‫( את‬Ivriyt
translation from the Greek Textus Receptus) in the text in the Brit Chadashah without
benefit of direct translation. For example:
 In the beginning Elohiym created ‫ את‬the heavens and ‫ את‬the earth.
Bere’shiyth (Genesis) 1:1
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with ‫ את‬Elohiym, and Elohiym
was the Word.
Yochanon (John) 1:1
I am the ‫( א‬Aleph) and the ‫( ת‬Tav), the beginning and the ending, says Yahuah Elohiym,
which is, and which was, and which is to come, Yahuah Tseva’oth.
Chizayon (Revelation) 1:8
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 (‫( יה‬I AM), shar (‫( )שר‬for prince), Yashar (‫)ישר‬
(the prince of Yah), and Yasharun (‫( )ישרון‬the 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 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 Ivriyt. Sha’ul was schooled in Ivriyt under Gamliy’el (Ma’asiym (Acts)
22:3). Sha’ul took the Ivriy name Pa’al (‫()פעל‬Strong’s G6466), which means worker.
Because his nature was Hebraic, we have used the Ivriyt Pa’al instead of the Greek Paulos.
These, then, are some of the corrections in the ‫ את‬CEPHER. 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?
Mishlei (Proverbs) 30:4