Posted on 03/04/2011 12:17:51 PM PST by dangus
Nope! The flood happened the year that Methuselah died . . . The literal meaning of his name is "When He Is Dead It Shall Be Sent."
I’ve always enjoyed the connection between Genesis 6, and the sons of man in[Giants] Enoch.
Talmudic tradition teaches that Methuselah died the year of the flood, in fact according to earliest commentaries on the Talmud, the seven day period given in Genesis 7:4 was on the day of Methuselah’s death to give Noah and his family a week of mourning for him.
Enoch is an interesting extra-canonical work, though, and was clearly known in the time of the early Church.
A fascinating read.
The Book of Enoch claims that Giants were spawned from the union of rebel angels and earth women.
Isn’t this date setting, which is supposed to be a no no?
Yup. Genesis 6. Not saying I believe in all of Enoch; I noted that we don’t know how much of what Jude was quoting constitutes the current book we have. But it’s written from the perspective of someone who witnessed the events of Genesis 6, when the Sons of God came down from the Heavens, and took women as wives. It doesn’t then specifically state that Giants were the offspring, but does leap straight off into talking about giants.
I’ve had extensive conversations with Zionist Conspirator about the Catholic Church not knowing what to make of the beginning of Genesis.
ZC, I’m not meaning to start up that conversation, but thought its only good manners to point out when I talk about you.
OK, actually I would like your opinion on this: Whereas the Church and Benedict and John Paul expound quite greatly on the story of Adam and Eve, presuming it to be completely truthful, I can’t say I’ve ever heard anything about the Sons of God having their way with human women, breeding a race of giants. What is a creationist, young earth or not, supposed to make of this? I’ve reconciled young-earth creationism and my background in science, but I’ve not wrestled with giant angelic fornicators (fortunately :^D)
Sorry, but Enoch describes THREE thousand years after the founding of the Church, not TWO. And whatever events happen at the close of the 2nd millennium would probably happen at around 2012, not 2030.
Sorry, but Enoch describes THREE thousand years after the founding of the Church, not TWO. And whatever events happen at the close of the 2nd millennium would probably happen at around 2012, not 2030.
I said that backwards. 2030, not 2012.
Explain? What’s date setting? What does date setting mean?
Oh, OK. What did he die of? Since all the descendants of Enoch died in about the same year (except Noah and company), I’ll admit I presumed that wasn’t just a coincidence.
>> The literal meaning of his name is “When He Is Dead It Shall Be Sent.” <<
Just wondering: Did Methuselah work for UPS?
Umm, you do realize that:
1) Jews do not count Enoch in the Tanakh
2) It is an aprocrapil work - authorship is uncertain
3) Was not written in Hebrew as were the other books of Tanakh
And for those reasons was not included in the canon by the early fathers.
>> The literal meaning of his name is “When He Is Dead It Shall Be Sent.” <<
Just wondering: Did Methuselah work for USPS?
>> 1) Jews do not count Enoch in the Tanakh <<
Yes, I realize that. And even if I cared — which I don’t, because they rejected several books on the grounds that they pointed to an imminent Messiah — I ALSO NOTED that Enoch is not canonical to Catholics (like me), Protestants, or most Orthodox. So what’s your point?
>> 2) It is an aprocrapil work - authorship is uncertain <<
Well, St. Jude seems to have regarded some portion of it as authentic, although AS I NOTED, we don’t know how much of the work we currently have would have been recognized by St. Jude.
>> 3) Was not written in Hebrew as were the other books of Tanakh <<
What we have was written in Ge’ez. Presumably, that’s a translation, since St. Jude probably wouldn’t be citing anything written in Ge’ez.
>> And for those reasons was not included in the canon by the early fathers. <<
Yup. I could mention several other reasons if I though them relevant. What’s interesting is that St. Jude cites a work which plainly wasn’t canonical. Kinda shoots that whole notion of sola scriptura down in a fiery crash.
I cant say Ive ever heard anything about the Sons of God having their way with human women, breeding a race of giants.
You can check out Dr. Michael Heiser video presentation on Genesis 6.
Mention of UFOs in the first twenty seconds of an eighty minute video. No thanks. Wanna give me a little bit of synopsis, preview, some reason to think that Michael Heiser is anything but a stark raving lunatic escaped from the Coast-to-Coast asylum?
(Anytime someone with an unidentifed PhD mentions UFOs...)
Please take your time and watch the video. A FReeper request, he’s not a nut.
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.