Q. I was reading in Chronicles today and it references “the records of Samuel the seer,” “the records of Nathan the prophet,” and “the records of Gad the seer.” Are these books in evidence in the historical record anywhere? And what is a “seer,” from a biblical perspective?
There are no surviving copies of the actual books listed there in Chronicles. Nor do we have copies of other books mentioned as sources in the Bible, for example, “the book of Jashar” that is referenced in Joshua and Samuel-Kings. It’s clear, however, that these books once were available to the believing community and that they were among the sources that went into writing the long history of the monarchy in Samuel-Kings as well as the parallel history you’re reading now in Chronicles-Ezra-Nehemiah.
While we don’t have these books, the references to them within the Bible do show that the biblical authors used available written sources as they composed their own works. (To give another example, Luke explains in the dedication to his gospel that he has examined the “accounts” that others have undertaken to “draw up” about the life of Jesus and the early growth of the community of his followers.)
In other words, the biblical books didn’t just drop fully formed out of heaven. They are in many cases the product of the same kind of research that goes into scholarly historical works today. The statement you’re asking about, in fact, is the ancient equivalent of a footnote, acknowledging the sources that were used for a certain part of the history and referring readers to them for further information.
As for the meaning of the term “seer,” it is an older term that, as the narrative in Samuel-Kings explains, means the same thing as “prophet”: “Formerly in Israel, if someone went to inquire of God, they would say, ‘Come, let us go to the seer,’ because the prophet of today used to be called a seer.” So the titles in Chronicles actually mean, for example, ”the records of Samuel the prophet,” etc. The use of the archaic term “seer,” which has to be explained to later readers, suggests that the source books themselves are significantly older than the final products–more evidence that biblical books like these are the result of careful historical research. Here we see the human side of the Bible’s composition.
The book of Jasher you refer to above is available both on the web and in print if indeed it is the same one.
Actually, the book of Jasher mentioned and quoted briefly in the Bible has been lost. Several other works were composed under that title after biblical times, and these are the ones available on the web.
Thank you for this excellent explanation I too was reading this account in Chronicals and had this very same question. I love being able to Google and then receive accurate information.
I’m glad the post was helpful to you.
Yes so do I . Read the sake thing …googled the same question and got this great answer.
Please verify the source or provide some literature about the lost book ‘Jasher’ versus the one available now on the web.
D, Simpson
I’ll send you to Wikipedia for this one: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Jasher_(biblical_references). Basically there is an ancient book of Jasher, now lost, known only through two quotations in the Bible; a less ancient Hebrew midrash (commentary on the Bible) named after the lost book, filling in some gaps from Jewish legends; and a forgery created in the 1700s that claims to be a translation of the lost book, known as Pseudo-Jasher. A translation of the Hebrew midrash can be found here, and the text of the much later forgery seems to be available here.
Dr. Ken Johnson has a new book titled “Gad the Seer”…..Just sayin
I respect his work and his teaching. You might find it as interesting and informative as I did…