Replies

But because Enoch lived about 3300 B.C. - if the book of Enoch is authentic - it would predate Moses, the Pentateuch.

I had never read about Enoch before. I had been assuming, ever since you brought this to our attention, that the book was written in historical (classical Greek) times, by a writer claiming to have been an ancestor of Noah. If the author really pre-dated the Flood (which I didn't think you believed) then a very early copy of his text had to be on the ark in order to survive. Is there any reference to books on the ark? What would the original written language be?

Thank you so much for your post!

Indeed, there is only one way Enoch could be authentic and that would be if it were originally written by Enoch who was the uncontested grandfather of Noah. The language of such writings in 3300 B.C. may be lost to us or may simply remain undiscovered. Perhaps we will find a Rosetta stone in Iraq.

The scholars always take the scientific materialism approach to ancient manuscripts. Which is to say that they do not consider prophesy real. Hence the statement in the above Meridian article:

One rule of dating used by modern scholars, is that if anything is prophesied which turns out to be correct, it must have been written after the event, because otherwise the author would really have to have been a prophet! This complete rejection of the entire concept of revelation forced Laurence to put the authorship of the Book of Enoch extremely late because he saw that it prophesied not only the existence of Parthia (250 B.C.), but even the reign of King Herod the Great, which began in 37 B.C.

By the way, Enoch also prophesied about The Elect One (Jesus Christ) and thus using that rule of thumb would have to have been written in the first century A.D.

Since we know that the Enochs at Qumran are copies, and they carbon-date as far back as 186 B.C. - and there exist no older copies from which to work --- the next logical step in further determining whether 1 Enoch could be authentic is to look at the text.

Most of Enoch is like Revelation, speaking in parables and metaphors of future events and supernatural worlds. But Enoch is unique in that it does have the book of astronomy which may allow us to surmise for our own satisfaction whether the author had knowledge which he could not have possessed even at 200 B.C. by any means other than Spiritual revelation.

For Lurkers:

In reading the book of astronomy, I noted several passages which indicated such knowledge and thus I am looking for any other possible explanation:

1. That the light of the moon is a reflection from the sun.

2. That the sun and the moon both orbit.

3. That the sun and the moon generate energy.

4. That the sun shines even when it is not seen.

5. That stars come into existence and die by becoming lightening (supernovae).

6. That the end (or beginning?) of all the heavens is a pit of no measure and no content. (singularity?)

The bottom line is whether all of the above could have been known in 200 B.C.

The original language is edenic, the closest is Hebrew.
all languages are one, mingled, since the flood.

Noah Webster and the founding fathers of the USA believed that Hebrew was the mother tongue, and his dictionary included many Hebrew Etymons for English [the continental congress even voted on what language to establish as our national tongue, and Hebrew, French, and English were voted on], but it is politically incorrect to have Hebrew as the mother tongue, and so the idea fell out of fashion for a time, and has been revived in the work of Isaac Mozeson and associates. I have his dictionary, “The Word”, and His book “The Origin of Speeches” in which he tells of the research in this area [which is of course debunked by skeptics who have nothing more than their opinions to argue with, while he has the science.

In the Book of Jasher, Cush, the son of Ham found a copy of a book written by the Watchers from before the flood [teaching idolatry], and hid it from his father. Nimrod had it later.