Decades ago, the indwelling Spirit nudged me to read many, many ancient manuscripts - which I have. And He has drawn me to some but not all information in some but not all of those books - as if a background or context only. Most of it was informative as to the thinking of the day. But a few were particularly engaging.
With Enoch, it was background to Genesis 6 and the blessing for the end times. In another, it was the background of Genesis 12 why Abraham was called. In another, it was the background to Job, why Satan was upset with him. In another, it was a physical feature the anti-Christ will not be able to change. In another, it was the origin of Mechelzedek.
But none of these ancient manuscripts compare with Scripture. When I read Scripture, the Spirit Himself brings the words of God alive within me as my eyes pass over the text. He authenticates them all. There is no comparison.
Thus I have nothing to discuss with you vis-à-vis your theology which relies so heavily on Enoch and Jasher. For me, it would be like trying to discuss theology with a Mormon – where there is some agreement on texts but Mormons hold many other texts as Holy writ which are not authenticated to me by the indwelling Spirit.
The object of this research project was not theology or prophesy but rather the legitimacy of the Enoch manuscript itself – and particularly whether the astronomy section contained any evidence that it could not have been fabricated with the knowledge of the day, i.e. 200 BC – the carbon-date of the copy of that section found at Qumran.
If was obviously held in high regard by the early Christians, being cited expressly by Jude and indirectly in many, many places throughout the New Testament. But the custody of the book has been horrid and the question lingers whether the manuscripts we have today, on which the translations have been based, are faithful to what the people in Christ's time enfleshed here on earth had available to them. Many scholars say yes to all but the Similitudes. Some say yes to the Similitude. And so on.
Thus I was enjoying the banter with Godzilla over translations, manuscripts, archeology and professional researchers. But it also became apparent to me that Godzilla has a theology which cannot accept Enoch at all, even as insight or background to the Scriptures – almost as if it were anathema to his theology.
So likewise, there is no point to discussing Enoch from a theological viewpoint there either.
Nevertheless, if either of you want to write an article on theology for the Religion Forum, please ping me.
Thanks for the ping to your fitting points, Dear Sister in Christ.
Thank you for the reply.
How do I write an article on theology in the religion forum?