Posted on 08/27/2003 11:33:41 AM PDT by Alamo-Girl
That's a very kind offer. I have also inquired about this text to my priest and a few others with very strong Biblical understanding.
The text I found online is found here:
http://www.johnpratt.com/items/docs/enoch.html
Indeed, that is the Laurence translation (1883). It is based on the Ethiopian version of I Enoch (as I recall).
In Charlesworth's Pseudepigrapha collection, the translation of I Enoch by E. Isaac (1983) considers not only the Ethiopic, but the Aramaic fragments found in the Dead Sea Scrolls, as well as the Greek and Latin fragments.
The Charlesworth collection also has a translation of 2 Enoch, a Slavonic version unlike the Ethiopic 1 Enoch - gathered from about 20 different manuscripts.
Also in the Charlesworth collection is a translation of 3 Enoch which doesn't look anything like the other two; it is a Hebrew apocalypse of Enoch - a story of the ascension of Ishmael.
Very interesting. I'll have to buy the book and read it (when I'm not playing with a two-year old, that is...)
Thanks again.
I look forward to any comments you may have regardless of the version you are using!
So how is it going?
Things are going well for me. How about you?
It is Wwll,
I saw your thread on Enoch 1, and as I am into Enoch also, I wondered how it was going.
I’m glad to see that you are still here, as I just joined and began posting.
“well” =I hate preview post time so don’t do it, much, then see the errors.
Pleased to meet you. Indeed, I am interested in Enoch (all three) and other ancient manuscripts as well.
Enoch 1 -or 1 Enoch- and the true book of Jasher [lots of false ones of both] are my main interests.
Also, I use the book of Jubilees for information only, because it is not written by an angel, but is written to try to prove the Enochian calendar to the apostate rulers in Israel [written by an Essene?]It does have lots of information in it which contradicts the OT, Enoch and Jasher, but there is information in it which is useful on the dates and calendar, as the author had those facts before the temple and books were destroyed.
The translations I've seen online are much older (pre-Dead Sea Scrolls) - lack footnotes and archeological context - and very often are promoted with various forms of New Age mysticism. sigh...
Enoch is a legitimate - authenticated by DSS carbon dating - ancient manuscript which was well known and understood while Christ was enfleshed. Then it fell into disfavor and was lost to the church until sometime in the 1700's. Naturally, by then, a lot of doctrines and traditions of men developed to "fill-in-the-blanks" of Genesis 6 et al.
Then again, the first chapter of Enoch 1 indicates that it addressed to our age. And Daniel speaks of a book hidden until the end times. Whether that is Enoch I cannot say - but I do know that all things work together for the good for those who love God and are called according to His purpose (Romans 8)
I'm pinging Godzilla and Colofornian, in case they are willing to discuss these issues.
Thanks MHGinTN!
I use the Enoch online at http://www.ccel.org/c/charles/otpseudepig/enoch/ENOCH_1.HTM
but at home I use this one http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/096757370X/ref=cm_rdp_product_img
Genesis 6 is really plain about what happened, though redacted in it’s inforamtion, the Hebrew states that ben elohim took wives of bath Adam -sons of God took wives of daughters of Adam, both before and after the flood.
The big difference between Charlesworth's and most sources is the scholarly approach to the material at hand. His does not have a theological predisposition at all.
I have seen nothing to compare with Charlesworth's collection of ancient manuscripts, exhaustive research and footnotes - though I am not familiar with Ronald K. Brown - your second source.
On the second point, Enoch reveals that the ben Elohim ("sons of God") in Genesis 6 are angels who were sent by God to look after banished Adamic men. The angels taught men all kinds of things they were not supposed to know, including weapons and warfare, adornments and such. And they bred with the female offspring of Adamic men producing ravenous giants.
All of those angels who bred with women and produced giants are chained in darkness until the judgment. They were not on earth after the Flood - and are not out there now - breeding and making more giants.
For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast [them] down to hell, and delivered [them] into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment; - 2 Peter 2:4
As I recall, their offspring, the giants physically died in the Noah flood but their spirits survived until the judgment. These are the demons, for instance:
Of course the scholars exclude theology as "fact" on principle ("methodological naturalism") and thus lean to a comet explanation. However, they have no explanation for the destruction happening simultaneously, world-wide.
At some time around 2300 BC, give or take a century or two, a large number of the major civilisations of the world collapsed, simultaneously it seems. The Akkadian Empire in Mesopotamia, the Old Kingdom in Egypt, the Early Bronze Age civilisation in Israel, Anatolia and Greece, as well as the Indus Valley civilisation in India, the Hilmand civilisation in Afghanistan and the Hongshan Culture in China - the first urban civilisations in the world - all fell into ruin at more or less the same time. Why? …
Some decades ago, the hunt for clues passed largely into the hands of natural scientists. Concentrating on the earlier set of Bronze Age collapses, researchers began to find a range of evidence that suggested that natural causes rather than human actions, may have been initially responsible. There began to be talk of climate change, volcanic activity, and earthquakes - and some of this material has now found its way into standard historical accounts of the period.
Agreement, however, there has never been. Some researchers favoured one type of natural cause, others favoured another, and the problem remained that no single explanation appeared to account for all the evidence….
The hunt for natural causes for these human disasters began when the Frenchman Claude Schaeffer, one of the leading archaeologists of his time, published his book ‘Stratigraphie Comparee et Chronologie L’Asie Occidentale’ in 1948. Schaeffer analysed and compared the destruction layers of more than 40 archaeological sites in the Near and Middle East, from Troy to Tepe Hissar on the Caspian Sea and from the Levant to Mesopotamia. He was the first scholar to detect that all had been totally destroyed several times in the Early, Middle and Late Bronze Age, apparently simultaneously.
Since the damage was far too excessive and did not show signs of military or human involvement, he argued that repeated earthquakes might have been responsible for these events. At the time he published, Schaeffer was not taken seriously by the world of archaeology. Since then, however, natural scientists have found widespread and unambiguous evidence for abrupt climate change, sudden sea level changes, catastrophic inundations, widespread seismic activity and evidence for massive volcanic activity at several periods since the last Ice Age, but particularly at around 2200BC, give or take 200 years.
Areas such as the Sahara, or around the Dead Sea, were once farmed but became deserts. Tree rings show disastrous growth conditions at c 2350BC, while sediment cores from lakes and rivers in Europe and Africa show a catastrophic drop in water levels at this time. In Mesopotamia, vast areas of land appear to have been devastated, inundated, or totally burned...
You might be interested in this sidebar, dear brother in Christ.
Thanks much. I hope to get to it later this evening or Friday, Sat at the latest.
Thanks for the enlightening post. I made it that far.
I, of course, agree with your points.
Thx.
Thank you so much for your encouragements, dear brother in Christ!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
