Posted on 08/27/2003 11:33:41 AM PDT by Alamo-Girl
Several Freepers are engaged in a research project to evaluate whether the book of astronomy in 1 Enoch gives the modern day reader any clues concerning its authenticity. Perhaps you would like to participate in the research or keep tabs with the progress as we move along. Enoch is quoted directly in the book of Jude and about 100 passages in the New Testament are rooted in the 1 Enoch phrasing. Why is the authenticity of Enoch relevant to Christians today?
But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, [even] to the time of the end: many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased. - Daniel 12:4
Obviously we are in a time of unprecedented knowledge and travel, thus many have been curious whether the hidden text mentioned in Daniel has already been revealed to any extent. Some have proposed that the Bible Code (Equidistant Letter Sequence) is the hidden text mentioned in Daniel. So far I believe the search has been limited to a simple matrix but there was some talk of looking for any patterns in a holographic. As I recall, Newton suspected there was a code in the Pentateuch. Still others have mentioned the book of Enoch which was rediscovered in 1773 in Ethopia and further authenticated by copies found at Qumran (Dead Sea Scrolls). Enoch begins:
The blessing of Enoch; with which he blessed the elect and the righteous who would be present on the day of tribulation at (the time of) the removal of all the ungodly ones. And Enoch, the blessed and righteous man of the Lord, took up (his parable) while his eyes were open and he saw, and said "(This is) a holy vision from the heavens which the angels showed me; and I heard from them everything and I understood. I look not for this generation but for the distant one that is coming. I speak about the elect ones and concerning them. (The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha, Volume I, 1 Enoch) Chaps. 72-82 The Astronomical Book, like the Book of Watchers, may date from the third century BCE; the oldest copy of it seems to have been made not long after 200 BCE. Sizable portions of the text are preserved on four copies, written in Aramaic, from Qumran cave 4. The Aramaic original appears to have been much different and much longer than the Ethiopic text, adding far more astronomical details." - James C. Vanderkam
At one time Enoch was considered Scripture but it fell into disfavor. I pulled the following excerpt from this link a few years back:
The Book of Enoch (also known as 1 Enoch) was once cherished by Jews and Christians alike, this book later fell into disfavor with powerful theologians–precisely because of its controversial statements on the nature and deeds of the fallen angels… The theme of the Book of Enoch dealing with the nature and deeds of the fallen angels so infuriated the later Church fathers that one, Filastrius, actually condemned it openly as heresy (Filastrius, Liber de Haeresibus, no. 108). Nor did the rabbis deign to give credence to the book’s teaching about angels. Rabbi Simeon ben Jochai in the second century A.D. pronounced a curse upon those who believed it (Delitzsch, p. 223). So the book was denounced, banned, cursed, no doubt burned and shredded–and last but not least, lost (and conveniently forgotten) for a thousand years. But with an uncanny persistence, the Book of Enoch found its way back into circulation two centuries ago. In 1773, rumors of a surviving copy of the book drew Scottish explorer James Bruce to distant Ethiopia. True to hearsay, the Book of Enoch had been preserved by the Ethiopic church, which put it right alongside the other books of the Bible… Though it was once believed to be post-Christian (the similarities to Christian terminology and teaching are striking), recent discoveries of copies of the book among the Dead Sea Scrolls found at Qumran prove that the book was in existence before the time of Jesus Christ. But the date of the original writing upon which the second century B.C. Qumran copies were based is shrouded in obscurity. It is, in a word, old… There is abundant proof that Christ approved of the Book of Enoch. Over a hundred phrases in the New Testament find precedents in the Book of Enoch. Another remarkable bit of evidence for the early Christians’ acceptance of the Book of Enoch was for many years buried under the King James Bible’s mistranslation of Luke 9:35, describing the transfiguration of Christ: "And there came a voice out of the cloud, saying, ‘This is my beloved Son: hear him." Apparently the translator here wished to make this verse agree with a similar verse in Matthew and Mark. But Luke’s verse in the original Greek reads: "This is my Son, the Elect One (from the Greek ho eklelegmenos, lit., "the elect one"): hear him." The "Elect One" is a most significant term (found fourteen times) in the Book of Enoch. If the book was indeed known to the apostles of Christ, with its abundant descriptions of the Elect One who should "sit upon the throne of glory" and the Elect One who should "dwell in the midst of them," then the great scriptural authenticity is accorded to the Book of Enoch when the "voice out of the cloud" tells the apostles, "This is my Son, the Elect One"–the one promised in the Book of Enoch. The Book of Jude tells us in vs. 14 that "Enoch, the seventh from Adam, prophesied…" Jude also, in vs. 15, makes a direct reference to the Book of Enoch (2:1), where he writes, "to execute judgment on all, to convict all who are ungodly…" … Many of the early church fathers also supported the Enochian writings. Justin Martyr ascribed all evil to demons whom he alleged to be the offspring of the angels who fell through lust for women (from the Ibid.)–directly referencing the Enochian writings. Athenagoras, writing in his work called Legatio in about 170 A.D., regards Enoch as a true prophet. He describes the angels which "violated both their own nature and their office." In his writings, he goes into detail about the nature of fallen angels and the cause of their fall, which comes directly from the Enochian writings. Many other church fathers: Tatian (110-172); Irenaeus, Bishop of Lyons (115-185); Clement of Alexandria (150-220); Tertullian (160-230); Origen (186-255); Lactantius (260-330); in addition to: Methodius of Philippi, Minucius Felix, Commodianus, and Ambrose of Milanalso–also approved of and supported the Enochian writings… One by one the arguments against the Book of Enoch fade away. The day may soon arrive when the final complaints about the Book of Enoch’s lack of historicity and "late date" are also silenced by new evidence of the book’s real antiquity.
Here is a current day Jewish perspective on Enoch:
The oldest known Jewish work not included in the Bible is the Book of Enoch. This is a complex work, written in the third (or perhaps even the late fourth) century BCE, after the return from the Babylonian Exile and the establishment of the Second Jewish Commonwealth (6th-5th centuries BCE) and before the Maccabean revolt in 172 BCE. The oldest copies of the Book of Enoch, dating from the third century BCE, were discovered among the Dead Sea Scrolls (see below). The Dead Sea ScrollsBy Ayala Sussman and Ruth Peled The Qumran sect's origins are postulated by some scholars to be in the communities of the Hasidim, the pious anti-Hellenistic circles formed in the early days of the Maccabees. The Hasidim may have been the precursors of the Essenes, who were concerned about growing Hellenization and strove to abide by the Torah. Archeological and historical evidence indicates that Qumran was founded in the second half of the second century B.C.E., during the time of the Maccabean dynasty. A hiatus in the occupation of the site is linked to evidence of a huge earthquake. Qumran was abandoned about the time of the Roman incursion of 68 C.E., two years before the collapse of Jewish self-government in Judea and the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem in 70 C.E…. The historian Josephus relates the division of the Jews of the Second Temple period into three orders: the Sadducees, the Pharisees, and the Essenes. The Sadducees included mainly the priestly and aristocratic families; the Pharisees constituted the Jay circles; and the Essenes were a separatist group, part of which formed an ascetic monastic community that retreated to the wilderness. The exact political and religious affinities of each of these groups, as well as their development and interrelationships, are still relatively obscure and arc the source of widely disparate scholarly views.
Here is Tertullian’s explanation of why Enoch didn’t make it into the canon:
Early Church Father, Tertullian 155-160 CE The Book of Enoch & the Church Fathers Tertullian, for example, wrote, "I am aware that the Scripture of Enoch, which has assigned this order (of action) to angels, is not received by some, because it is not admitted into the Jewish canon either. I suppose they did not think that, having been published before the deluge, it could have safely survived that world-wide calamity, the abolisher of all things. If that is the reason (for rejecting it), let them recall to their memory that Noah, the survivor of the deluge, was the great-grandson of Enoch himself; and he, of course, had heard and remembered, from domestic renown and hereditary tradition, concerning his own great-grandfather's "grace in the sight of God," and concerning all his preachings; since Enoch had given no other charge to Methuselah than that he should hand on the knowledge of them to his posterity. Noah therefore, no doubt, might have succeeded in the trusteeship of (his) preaching; or, had the case been otherwise, he would not have been silent alike concerning the disposition (of things) made by God, his Preserver, and concerning the particular glory of his own house. "If (Noah) had not had this (conservative power) by so short a route, there would (still) be this (consideration) to warrant our assertion of (the genuineness of) this Scripture: he could equally have renewed it, under the Spirit's inspiration, after it had been destroyed by the violence of the deluge, as, after the destruction of Jerusalem by the Babylonian storming of it, every document of the Jewish literature is generally agreed to have been restored through Ezra. "But since Enoch in the same Scripture has preached likewise concerning the Lord, nothing at all must be rejected by us which pertains to us; and we read that "every Scripture suitable for edification is divinely inspired". By the Jews it may now seem to have been rejected for that (very) reason, just like all the other (portions) nearly which tell of Christ. Nor, of course, is this fact wonderful, that they did not receive some Scriptures which spake of Him whom even in person, speaking in their presence, they were not to receive. To these considerations is added the fact that Enoch possesses a testimony in the Apostle Jude."
An opinion from the Later Day Saints corner:
Modern scholars, beginning with Laurence, all date the origin of the book to the first or second century before Christ, hence it is assigned to the "pseudepigrapha," meaning it is not believed to have been written by the named author. It is dated using standard "scholarly" methods. 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. On the other hand, it was quoted by the Savior and his apostles so it must have been written before their time. Thus Laurence inferred that the book had been written "before the rise of Christianity; most probably at an early period of the reign of Herod."[8] More modern scholarship has concluded that the book was probably written by several authors over the period of about 180-64 B.C.[9] This extremely recent authorship date of course raises the question of how such a late forgery could have been so totally accepted as genuine in just a few decades, which has never been adequately explained. In this article, let us consider the outrageous possibility that the work was actually originally written by the prophet Enoch long before the Great Flood and contains many genuine revelations.[10] It probably also contains some interpolations of men, and has suffered from mistakes introduced by the many hand-made transcriptions. But for the purposes of this article, when it says that an angel revealed to Enoch a divine calendar, those statements will be taken at face value. One scientific way to test a hypothesis is to assume it is true and examine the consequences. Let us now apply that method to the astronomy contained in the Book of Enoch.
For our own counsel, we Freepers may be able to shed some light on the antiquity of Enoch by looking at the book of astronomy. 1 Enoch contains various statements about astronomy which are strangely accurate considering the known age of the manuscript and the language. Page 14 of the following article dates fragment 4Q208, which is from a Qumran copy of 1 Enoch in the book of astronomy section as paleographic age 200 B.C. and is carbon-dated, calibrated 166-102 BC and 186-92 BC.
Radiocarbon dating of scrolls and linen fragments (pdf)
To put it in context, the Essenes at Qumran were evidently piously anti-Hellenistic, which is to say they strongly resisted the influence of Greece – so much so they went into the wilderness. The other two main sects of Jews after they returned from Babylon were Pharisees and Sadducees. So, in terms of influence on the 1 Enoch book of astronomy – if it were a fabrication – the possible influences would include Babylonia and to a lesser extent Greece. Here are the strange observations concerning astronomy recorded in 1 Enoch:
That the light of the moon is a reflection from the sun: "Then Uriel showed me another order (concerning) when light is beamed into the moon, from which direction of the bright sun it is beamed." 1 Enoch 78:10
Research on the forum indicates that the earliest notion that the moon was reflecting light from the sun can be traced to Greece, ca 450 B.C. Anaxagores of Clazomenae. That date would be plenty early enough for an original from which the Qumran copy would be made. The counter point would be the anti-Hellenistic attitude of the Essenes, but then again, they may not have known the origin of the idea.
Orbits. We know that the moon orbits the sun and the sun orbits the Milky Way. It is very strange (to me) that Enoch would say: "They [sun and moon] do not depart from their orbit, neither increase or decrease it; but they keep faith one with another; in accordance with an oath they set and they rise." – 1 Enoch 41:5
Research on the forum shows the earliest notion of heliocentricity came from Greece - Aristarchus of Samos (fl 320-250 B.C.) but that his views were not prominently held until Ptolemy in 150 B.C.
The carbon-dating of 186 B.C. would have to be too old by at least 36 years and even so, the orbit information would need to migrate from Greece to an original Aramaic or Hebrew/Aramaic manuscript to Qumran to be copied to Aramaic. In the alternative, if the 1 Enoch is fake, then the author had to subscribe to the minority view of Aristarchus of Samos, thus not only being Hellenistic but extremely so.
That the sun and moon generate energy: "they do not economize (on energy), for their very essence generates new power." – 1 Enoch 41:7
If Enoch had seen a supernova from his heavenly travels, as testified in the manuscript, then he would describe it the way he did - the star explodes into light and cannot gather itself back into being the star. Research on the forum indicates the first observation of a supernova was in China in 4 B.C. but the cause of a supernova wasn’t understood until 1054 A.D. in Japan and China. Freeper Right Wing Professor suggested Enoch’s statement might have been a misinterpretation of a meteor (shooting star.) Further research indicates that the ancients in Egypt, Babylon, Assyria all tied meteor activity to omens and weather and knew that they fell to earth as iron, which they pursued. We have not yet found a hint that the ancients thought stars died or that they died by becoming "lightening." Ancient Astronomical Observations and in particular this page shows that it is difficult to separate astrology and astronomy in ancient literature.
Singularity? And then there is a reference to the end of all that there is (and beginning) which sounds like a singularity: in chapter 18 a place with no measure and no content, a pit "where the heavens come together." He records that the angel explained [v. 14] "this is the ultimate end of heaven and earth; it is the prison house for the stars and the powers of heaven…"
Alexander liberated Israel from the Persian empire around 300 BC and thus from that point forward, the Jews traveled freely in the Greek world and many became culturally Hellenized (paraphrased from a post by PatrickHenry.) There is a Scholar, Chris King, who believes Enoch is Hellenistic and that explains everything:
1 Enoch is an unmistakable product of Hellenistic civilization. A world view so encyclopaediac that it embraced the geography of heaven and earth, astronomy, meteorology, medicine was no part of Jewish tradition - but was familiar to educated Greeks, but attempting to emulate and surpass Greek wisdom, by having an integrating divine plan for destiny, elaborated through an angelic host with which Enoch is in communication through his mystical travels. - Chris King.
IOW, if 1 Enoch is a fake, at the minimum, the writer of Enoch must have been familiar with Greek philosophy. The main Jewish/Greek philosopher prior to 150 BC was Philo. And I believe he would have either written in Hebrew or Greek. The book of Enoch at Qumran was copied in Aramaic. Some scholars believe the original Enoch may have been a combination of Hebrew and Aramaic like the book of Daniel. Since the Essenes went into the wilderness to escape the Hellenization, the counter-point is whether they would have intentionally brought a Hellenized text with them. Or if they believed the text was "kosher" – then there are two significant counter-points: 1. The Jewish calendar is 360 days/year whereas the Enochian calendar calls for 364.
Enoch: a brief textual history The third Enochian book, the Book of Astronomy, is considered the oldest of those preserved, thought to have been written well before the second century. It contains a description of the structure of the universe as well as the details of a 364 day solar calendar, a calendar that seems to have been popular especially in the Dead Sea Scrolls although it is well supported by another pseudepigraphic book, Jubilees.
2. Enoch does not mention Moses specifically and contains no contextual reference to Jewish traditions present in typical pseudepigraphal manuscripts. If the book were written after Moses by a Jewish author, such would be expected because the Jewish traditions would be second nature. Indeed, a Slavonic version of the Enoch, 2 Enoch, is presumed to have been originally written in Greek because the phrasing gives away clues of both the Greek language and culture. In other words, if Enoch were authentic we would expect it to not include more than prophetic metaphoric references to Moses or Jewish law or Babylon, Greece, Rome, etc.
"One of the most remarkable features of 1 Enoch is that the law revealed to Moses on Mt. Sinai plays almost no part in it at all. It could be objected that it would be more surprising if it did have a role, since 1 Enoch is, of course, about Enoch who lived before the flood (see Gen 5:21-24) and thus long before the law was revealed. The argument would be that the authors of 1 Enoch were consistent about their pseudepigraphic attribution of the material to Enoch and therefore did not commit the anachronism of having him teach and obey the law of Moses. "But there is a flaw in that argument because at least two places in the book should mention the law revealed on Mt. Sinai. The two places are in the two principal apocalypses, the Apocalypse of Weeks and the Animal Apocalypse. Both of these revelations cover the period when Israel was in the wilderness and, according to the pentateuch, received the covenantal law." - James C. Vanderkam
One comment with regard to Vanderkam's comment: the Enochian Apocalypse of Weeks is a prophesy (forward looking) and thus, IMHO, would not contain more than it does:
93.1 And, after this, Enoch began to speak from the books: 93.2 And Enoch said: "Concerning the sons of righteousness, and concerning the chosen of the world, and concerning the plant of righteousness and uprightness, I will speak these things to you, and make them known to you, my children. I, Enoch, according to that which appeared to me in the Heavenly vision, and that which I know from the words of the Holy Angels, and understanding from the Tablets of Heaven." 93.3 And Enoch then began to speak from the books, and said: "I was born the seventh, in the first week, while justice and righteousness still lasted. 93.4 And, after me, in the second week, great injustice will arise, and deceit will have sprung up. And in it there will be the First End, and in it, a man will be saved. And after it has ended, iniquity will grow, and He will make a law for the sinners. 93.5 And after this in the third week, at its end, a man will be chosen as the Plant of Righteous Judgment, and after him will come the Plant of Righteousness, forever. 93.6 And after this, in the fourth week, at its end, visions of the righteous and Holy will be seen, and a Law for All Generations, and an enclosure will be made for them. 93.7 And after this, in the fifth week, at its end, a House of Glory and Sovereignty will be built forever. 93.8 And after this, in the sixth week, all those who live in it will be blinded. And the hearts of them all, lacking wisdom, will sink into impiety. And in it, a man will ascend, and at its end the House of Sovereignty will be burnt with fire. And in it the whole race of the chosen root will be scattered. 93.9 And after this, in the seventh week, an apostate generation will arise. And many will be its deeds - but all its deeds will be apostasy. 93.10 And at its end, the Chosen Righteous, from the Eternal Plant of Righteousness, will be chosen, to whom will be given sevenfold teaching, concerning his whole creation.
The other thing of course is that over a hundred phrases in the New Testament find precedence in Enoch and Enoch is quoted directly in Jude. So, to the New Testament - Enoch is authentic. The difficulty after 2,000 years is piecing together "the" Enoch. There are two other Enochs - one is Slavonic, 2 Enoch, and the other, 3 Enoch, is a Hebrew Apocalypse of that name written by Rabbi Ishmael in 132 A.D. (approx). Because of that date and known authorship, 3 Enoch isn't relevant to this project. 1 Enoch - is the oldest and most complete. It was first discovered in Ethiopia (in the Ge'ez language) where it had been preserved but was then confirmed by the finding of the 200 B.C. Aramaic copies at Qumran. 1 Enoch as found in Qumran is the best candidate for the one referenced by Jude. It is also the one with the most complete book of astronomy and thus gives us a window to date the original from which it was copied. 2 Enoch is also quite interesting, particularly in its prophesies concerning the 7,000 years allowed for Adamic man (including the 1,000 perfect era at the end.).
An entirely different Enoch manuscript has survived in the Slavonic language. This text, dubbed "2 Enoch" and commonly called "the Slavonic Enoch," was discovered in 1886 by a professor Sokolov in the archives of the Belgrade Public Library. It appears that just as the Ethiopic Enoch ("1 Enoch") had escaped the sixth-century Church suppression of Enoch texts in the Mediterranean area, so a Slavonic Enoch had survived far away, long after the originals from which it was copied were destroyed or hidden away. Specialists in the Enochian texts surmise that the missing original form which the Slavonic was copied was probably a Greek manuscript. This may have been, in turn, based on a Hebrew or Aramaic manuscript…. One of the most fascinating passages of the Slavonic Enoch is the account of the dramatization of eternity found in Chapter 33. As the world was made in six days, so its history would be accomplished in 6,000 years, and this would be followed by 1,000 years of rest, when the balance of conflicting moral forces has been struck and human life has reached the ideal state. (A reference of this conflict is also found in The War Scroll, a future battle between the Sons of Light and the Sons of Darkness. These writings were recently discovered in Qumran Cave 1, which are part of the collection of The Dead Sea Scrolls). At the close of this 7,000 year cycle would begin the 8th Eternal Day, when time should be no more…
Personally, I believe the 1000 year reign of Christ on physical earth (Revelation 20:2-3) is the seventh thousand referred to in 2 Enoch, because it precedes the eternal, new heaven and earth (Revelation 21.) However, Enoch – like Revelation – contains many metaphors and parables and is therefore particularly difficult to read.
You send chills up and down my spine with your reverance and understanding.
Love the comments on this thread-from everyone, and even understand fChristain's commentary on the Ten Commandments :^)
Jam137-Thanks for the comment on the authors who presented King James with their dedicated work to translating the Bible. Oh if only words could cross languages with the exact meaning intact for all to understand.
Loved Alamo-girl's response to you about the WORD OF GOD being there since forever, that became so meaningful to me as I read this thread....isn't it amazing how certain parts of scripture suddenly leap out at you....bringing understanding and that certain magnification and satisfaction Alamo-girl spoke of..
I have much to learn, so much and am so GLAD to learn of Enoch in this manner.
As for the Enoch's astronomy and visions relating to his grandson many times removed (Noah), perhaps word of mouth was the way the stories were carried forward from the flood on....does Noah refer to Enoch?
Representative Benjamin Huntington then expressed the view that the Committee's language might "be taken in such latitude as to be extremely hurtful to the cause of religion. He understood the amendment to mean what had been expressed by the gentleman from Virginia; but others might find it convenient to put another construction upon it." Huntington, from Connecticut, was concerned that in the New England States, where state-established religions were the rule rather than the exception, the federal courts might not be able to entertain claims based upon an obligation under the bylaws of a religious organization to contribute to the support of a minister or the building of a place of worship. He hoped that "the amendment would be made in such a way as to secure the rights of conscience, and a free exercise of the rights of religion, but not to * patronize * those who professed no religion at all." Id., at 730-731.
Madison responded that the insertion of the word "national" before the word "religion" in the Committee version should satisfy the minds of those who had criticized the language. "He believed that the people feared one sect might obtain a pre-eminence, or two combine together, and establish a religion to which they would compel others to conform. He thought that if the word 'national' was introduced, it would point the amendment directly to the object it was intended to prevent." Id., at 731. Representative Samuel Livermore expressed himself as dissatisfied with Madison's proposed amendment, and thought it would be better if the Committee language were altered to read that "Congress shall make no laws touching religion, or infringing the rights of conscience." Ibid.
Representative Gerry spoke in opposition to the use of the word "national" because of strong feelings expressed during the ratification debates that a federal government, not a national government, was created by the Constitution. Madison thereby withdrew his proposal but insisted that his reference to a "national religion" only referred to a national establishment and did not mean that the Government was a national one. The question was taken on Representative Livermore's motion, which passed by a vote of 31 for and 20 against. Ibid.
The following week, without any apparent debate, the House voted to alter the language of the Religion Clauses to read "Congress shall make no law establishing religion, or to prevent the free exercise thereof, or to infringe the rights of conscience." Id., at 766. The floor debates in the Senate were secret, and therefore not reported in the Annals. The Senate on September 3, 1789, considered several different forms of the Religion Amendment, and reported this language back to the House:
"Congress shall make no law establishing articles of faith or a mode of worship, or prohibiting the free exercise of religion." C. Antieau, A. Downey, & E. Roberts, Freedom From Federal Establishment 130 (1964).
The House refused to accept the Senate's changes in the Bill of Rights and asked for a conference; the version which emerged from the conference was that which ultimately found its way into the Constitution as a part of the First Amendment.
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or ... prohibiting (( link )) --- the free exercise thereof."
The House and the Senate both accepted this language on successive days, and the Amendment was proposed in this form.
Truly, there is no greater joy than the epiphany when we discover more about Him! Knowing Jesus is more deeply satisfying than anything; He is truly the bread of life (John 6:35).
I do not recall any Scripture or ancient manuscript wherein Noah speaks of his great grandfather Enoch. BTW, I kept saying Noah was Enoch's grandson, but he was his great grandson.
The full text of Enoch would have been a great deal to pass down to generations by memory and word of mouth, but I imagine it would be possible. It appears that the language of the day was largely pictures, like in Egypt - so it is possible that the text was a collection of pictures which had lengthy understood, word-of-mouth, meaning.
And tho we probably should keep this debate to threads centering on this issue-I understand your passion and I share it! This thread has got a mission as stated by Alamo-girl in her opening salvo!
Isn't this unpeeling of Enoch's astronomy, the time line, fascinating? I have so much to learn here!
There is little existing evidence concerning the origin of Aristarchus's belief in a heliocentric system. We know of no earlier hypothesis of this type but in fact the theory was not accepted by the Greeks so apparently never had any popularity. We only know of Aristarchus's theory because of a summary statement made in Archimedes' The Sand-Reckoner and a similar reference by Plutarch.And this website is another scholarly treatment of Aristarchus. It says:
Copernicus himself originally gave credit to Aristarchus in his own heliocentric treatise, De revolutionibus caelestibus , where he had written, "Philolaus [see below] believed in the mobility of the earth, and some even say that Aristarchus of Samos was of that opinion." Interestingly, this passage was crossed out shortly before publication, maybe because Copernicus decided his treatise would stand on its own merit.It also says that Aristarchus claimed: "The moon receives its light from the sun." And:
In terms of heliocentricity or the movement of the earth, the only person to follow Aristarchus' philosophy was Seleucus, who in 150 BC attributed the ocean tides to the stirring of air caused by the rotation of the earth and its interaction with the revolution of the moon. Later, in the first century BC, Seneca mentioned the possibility of a rotating earth, but did not necessarily believe that it was possible.Philolaus (circa 480 BC - circa 405 BC), was a Greek mathematician and philosopher. He was an immediate pupil and transcriber of Pythagoras. He was the first to propound the doctrine of the motion of the Earth; some attribute this doctrine to Pythagoras, but there is no evidence in support of their view. So says the website.
Read what he had to say, and you'll agree that it's very strange indeed, and not at all a description of the solar system. But at least he said the earth moved.
Anyway, those are the predecessors of the orbiting earth theory. Those ideas seem to have been around in plenty of time for the Enoch text.
I agree with you on the identity of the two witnesses in Revelation.
With regard to the "appointed once to die" I agree with Ready2Go on the source (Hebrews 9:27).
In addition to that are the tribulation rapture passages. I am of the pre-trib rapture belief. There are others who are of the mid-trib or post-trib … and perhaps some who expect no rapture at all.
Following are tidbits selected from some of my personal favorite pre-trib passages. Lurkers may want to read the passages before and following each of these to get the full meaning to decide for themselves:
Then we which are alive [and] remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord. – I Thess 4:17
And while they went to buy, the bridegroom came; and they that were ready went in with him to the marriage: and the door was shut. – Matthew 25:10
Then shall two be in the field; the one shall be taken, and the other left. – Matthew 24:40
Because thou hast kept the word of my patience, I also will keep thee from the hour of temptation, which shall come upon all the world, to try them that dwell upon the earth. – Revelation 3:10
For God hath not appointed us to wrath, but to obtain salvation by our Lord Jesus Christ, - I Thess 5:9
I still have found nothing on Enoch's observation that stars rise and die by becoming lightening (supernova) - or that there is a prison house for the heavens without measure or content (singularity?)
I scanned that one, and although there is apparently some good info there, it's very confusing about the dates involved for the various methods being discussed. The author discusses "Babylonian" astronomy during the "Seleucid Era." It's very misleading terminology. If the Seleucid Era is what the article is talking about, as seems to be the case, then this isn't very useful. Because it isn't really Babylonian.
Seleucis (for whom the era is named) was one of Alexander's generals who carved up the world upon the death of Alexander. The Selucids ruled the old Persian empire pretty much until the Romans took it over. Same story for Ptolemy, another of Alexander's generals, whose descendants ruled Egypt until Cleopatra, when the Romans took over.
Anyway, by the time of Alexander (and Seleucis), what we call Babylonia was probably as distant a memory as the time of Charlemagne is for us. And before Babylon there was the very ancient Sumerian empire (Abraham's origin). When Sumer fell, there was a mini dark age of a few centuries, and then Babylon rose (the political entitity mentioned in the Bible). When Babylon fell, another dark age followed, and then the Persian empire rose, and it was this which Alexander conquered. I believe that each new appearance of civilization in the region was largely ignorant of what went before, so there was virtually no intellectual continuity between, say, old Babylon and the later Persian empire (except collaterally, via the Hebrew scriptures).
So, it's misleading -- at least to me -- to speak of "Babylonian" astronomy during the Seleucic era. The Seleucids were Hellenic, so this whole website is consistent with the Enoch text's being of "classical" Greek origin, and this no historical anomolies are presented. (If I've read it correctly.)
Great thread.
I loved the way you described magnifying the bible.It described perfectly my feeling on reading the book of Enoch.I beleived it had credence as it was quoted in Jude,it "magnified the bible" to me.It has it's importance no doubt but it isn't included in the bible so it's importance to me is not on that same level.
However....I will certainly follow this thread as it's something I find fascinating.I also think that it speaks loudly to our times.
To add to your list of scriptures...
Psalm 27:5 "For in the time of trouble He shall hide me in His pavillion;in the secret of His tabernacle shall He hide me;He shall set me upon a rock"
God bless Alamo-Girl,grace and peace to you.
mitch
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.