Interpreting Scripture in Jubilees

A Second-Temple Commentary?

Jubilees, a book found among the Pseudepigrapha, recounts what an angel, the angel of presence, supposedly delivered to Moses on Mount Sinai and is largely a retelling of Genesis and a brief overview of the beginning of Exodus. This retelling, naturally, elaborates, omits, supplements, abbreviates, etc. the Genesis and Exodus account for the author’s own purposes.

The book of Jubilees could be considered apocalyptic in that it shares certain characteristics with that genre such as, revelation through an angelic mediator and division of history into time periods.¹ However, it is not eschatological (end-times) but historical in nature, retelling the primeval history as the grounds for certain laws given to Israel.

It is better described as narrative Midrash containing halakah and haggadah.² The halakah, laws, are supported from the primeval history. The haggadic interpretation supplements gaps in Genesis, such as the talking serpent and where Cain’s wife came from.

The text of Jubilees is preserved fully in 16th century Ethiopic manuscripts, however earlier Latin manuscripts exist. Over 15 fragments were also found in Hebrew among the Qumran caves, the earliest coming from about 100 B.C.

Jubilees cannot have been composed at Qumran, however, because there are some differences between the text of Jubilees and Qumran calendars, so it must predate this community. Most scholars agree that the Damascus Document refers to Jubilees (CD 16:2–4) and so Jubilees must also predate that work. Wintermute supposes a date before the Essene and Maccabean split around 161–140 BC.³ Gurtner also notes that Jubilees has “influenced Josephus in his retelling of Genesis and the beginning of Exodus.”⁴

Interpretation in Jubilees

In retelling Genesis and Exodus, the interpretation and hermeneutic of Jubilees becomes manifest.

Jubilees uses the narrative of Genesis to support Mosaic laws, often elaborating the narrative account of Genesis to make its case. For example, the account of Bilhah and Reuben is narrated to support the laws against incest. However, the rationale is given that Reuben was not punished for his incest according to the law of Leviticus 18 because the “law had not been revealed” yet (Jub 33:16). Similarly, Judah is not put to death for uncovering the nakedness of his son by sleeping with Tamar because Er and Onan apparently (contrary to the claim of Genesis!) “had not lain with her” (Jub 41:27) and because Judah acted with “integrity”(!) because he wanted to have Tamar burned (Jub 41:28). Even the date of the Day of Atonement, the 10^th day of the seventh month, is said to occur on that day because that was the day when Jacob lamented for his son Joseph, assuming him to be dead when his brothers sold him to Egypt (Jub 34:18).

Filling in Gaps in Scripture

Jubilees also seeks to fill in apparent “gaps” in Genesis and seeks to reconcile apparent “problems.”

For example, to the delight of C.S. Lewis fans everywhere, Jubilees recounts that the animals previously spoke but ceased to speak on the day of the fall (Jub 3:28). This addition to Genesis is likely provided to explain how the serpent spoke.

Another perennial problem is where did Cain and Abel get their wives from? Jubilees plainly states what is the most likely answer given the data in Genesis, that they married their sisters (Jub 4:1, 8, 9, 11).

Jubilees also adds angels to the days of creation, stating that they were created on the first day of creation (Jub 2:2).

What about the claim of God to Adam that he would die on the day he ate the forbidden fruit, and then it appears he did not die? Modern interpreters argue that Adam did die spiritually, or that his body began to decay on that day. Jubilees likewise recognizes this “problem” and solves it a unique way. Jubilees explains that a thousand years is like a day to the Lord, and so, Adam technically did die in the day he ate from the fruit (Gen 2:17) because he died at 930 years old (Gen 5:5), which is 70 years prior to a thousand years—a day in God’s sight—so he did in fact die on the day (1000 years) he ate it (Jub 4:30).

Or, why did the Israelites carry up Jacob’s bones to Canaan when he died (Gen 47:29–30), but they did not carry up Joseph’s bones until the time of the Exodus (Gen 50:25)? Jubilees explains this because there was a war between the ruler of Egypt and Canaan and so no-one “could leave or enter Egypt” (Jub 46:6–7). However, it was not until this war ceased were Jacob’s bones taken up (Jub 46:9), but Joseph’s bones were not—possibly because Joseph’s request was made when no-one could enter of leave Egypt.

Interpreting Scripture

The interpretation of Jubilees is not to be automatically considered correct, but neither should it be automatically rejected. Written prior to the New Testament, it reflects a particular interpretation of the Old Testament, likely the interpretation of a faithful Jewish community who read their Old Testament seeking to put it all together. These interpreters did not write a commentary, but their interpretation is apparent in their reworking of Genesis and Exodus. And these interpreters are closer culturally and historically to the Old Testament than we are and so their readings ought to warrant closer inspection. Below I provide three examples:

i Interpreting a Text: Genesis 9:27

Genesis 9:27 reads in the ESV:

“May God enlarge Japheth, and let him dwell in the tents of Shem, and let Canaan be his servant.”

which accurately translates the Hebrew, leaving the pronoun ambiguous.

 יַפְתְּ אֱלֹהִים לְיֶפֶת וְיִשְׁכֹּן בְּאָהֳלֵי־שֵׁם וִיהִי כְנַעַן עֶבֶד לָמוֹ׃

Who will dwell in the tents of Shem? Usually it is interpreted as Japheth dwelling in the tents of Shem.

The NIV, NLT, and CSB seek to avoid the ambiguity and simply translate the “he” as Japheth: “May God extend Japheth's territory; may Japheth live in the tents of Shem, and may Canaan be the slave of Japheth” (NIV); “Let God extend Japheth; let Japheth dwell in the tents of Shem; let Canaan be Shem's slave” (CSB); May God expand the territory of Japheth! May Japheth share the prosperity of Shem, and may Canaan be his servant” (NLT).

But the most likely antecedent of the pronoun “he,” the subject of the second clause, is the subject of the first clause, namely “God,” not the object of the first clause, “Japheth.” Moreover, what is the “tent of Shem” the father of the Hebrews? Likely the tabernacle is in view here.

This is the interpretation that Jubilees takes. Using the same strategy as the NIV, NLT, and CSB, Jubilees makes the pronoun “he” explicit, but not as “Japheth” but as “The Lord.” Jubilees thus reads “may the Lord dwell in the dwelling place of Shem” (Jub 7:12). This ancient interpretation is compelling and provides evidence for one of the earliest interpretations of this verse.

ii Typological Interpretation: Exodus 12:46

Jubilees recounts that the Passover lamb should be eaten without any broken bones (Exodus 12:46) because “no bone of the children of Israel will be broken” (Jub 49:13). Interestingly they see a deeper significance in the “no breaking of bones” and apply it to God’s people Israel. This is similar to John applying this passage to the death of Jesus in that his bones were not broken (John 19:33–36). John’s interpretation of Exodus 12:46 therefore is not novel per se, nor necessarily spiritual eisegesis, but in line with the deeper significance of the passage applying to Israel, and in John applying to the true Israel.

iii Theological Interpretation: Eden and the Temple

History in Jubilees is described as spanning from the “first creation” until the “sanctuary is built in their midst forever and ever” (Jub 1:27). The end of history, when the sanctuary is built—specifically upon Mount Zion in Jerusalem—is later described as the “new creation” when everything is “renewed” (Jub 1:29). Since the first creation is paralleled with the new creation, and the new creation is paralleled with the rebuilt sanctuary, we can assume the first creation also was considered a sanctuary.

Jubilees also describes how Adam did not enter Eden for 40 days and that Eve remained outside for 80 days. This becomes the rationale for the law of Leviticus 12 regarding how long a woman would remain unclean depending upon the gender of the child given birth to (Jub 3:9–14). Here again, a parallel is drawn between Eden and the sanctuary. And later, Eden is explicitly called the “holy of holies and the dwelling of the Lord” (Jub 8:18).

This early Jewish interpretation confirms and supports the understanding that Eden was a sanctuary, a microcosm, and a type for the entire world in the new creation.

Value of Jubilees

Jubilees is an enjoyable read. Comparing it with Genesis and Exodus one can discern the ancient Jewish interpretation of Genesis and Exodus. While we may not agree with everything, it is interesting to note that the “problems” of Genesis are not “modern” problems that did not bother “ancient man.” But rather, Jubilees wrestled with a number of the same problems in Genesis as we still do. Moreover, as shown above, a number of the interpretations—though presented in a reworked Genesis and not in our expected form of a commentary—are worthy of consideration as accurate interpretations of Scripture.

1. O. S. Wintermute, “Jubilees: A New Translation and Introduction,” in The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha Volume Two, (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 1983), 37.

2. O. S. Wintermute, “Jubilees: A New Translation and Introduction,” in The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha Volume Two, (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 1983), 40.

3. O. S. Wintermute, “Jubilees: A New Translation and Introduction,” in The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha Volume Two, (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 1983), 44.

4. Daniel Gurtner, Introducing the Pseudepigrapha of Second Temple Judaism (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2020), 254.