PDA

View Full Version : Who wrote the book of Enoch?



rom826
Jul 13th 2009, 10:33 AM
I had read the other day on the internet that the book of Enoch was written in 200 B.C. I don't know if that date is true or not (if someone knows let me know). Anyways, Enoch lived long before then so if that date is right, Enoch could not have written it. If Enoch didn't write the book, who did. Also why would they call it "the book of Enoch if Enoch didn't write it?

Br. Barnabas
Jul 13th 2009, 12:52 PM
Its called pseudopigraphical, meaning that it is written under and assumed name. This happened a lot at this time in history. It also happened with the works about Jesus and the Apostles too.

Just because there is a name on something does not mean that it was written by that person.

The date for the books of Enoch, it is more a collection of smaller works all put together under one large book title. range from about 200 BC to I think 100 AD it has been a while since I looked at the dates for it.

It is mainly a work of fiction with some history thrown in. It also has some information that was important for the Essences.

It is named after Enoch because some no body wrote the book, but wanted people to read it and believe it was older than it appeared so they said Enoch wrote it, to try and make it more believable.

The Mighty Sword
Jul 13th 2009, 05:21 PM
Its called pseudopigraphical, meaning that it is written under and assumed name. This happened a lot at this time in history. It also happened with the works about Jesus and the Apostles too.

Just because there is a name on something does not mean that it was written by that person.

The date for the books of Enoch, it is more a collection of smaller works all put together under one large book title. range from about 200 BC to I think 100 AD it has been a while since I looked at the dates for it.

It is mainly a work of fiction with some history thrown in. It also has some information that was important for the Essences.

It is named after Enoch because some no body wrote the book, but wanted people to read it and believe it was older than it appeared so they said Enoch wrote it, to try and make it more believable.

I think the Book Of Enoch has more truth in than we think, but that is just my opinion, the canon chose not to utilize The Book fear it might create division and he would be seen or viewed as the Messiah.

MarleVVLL
Jul 13th 2009, 05:26 PM
Especially because Jude quotes it...

The Mighty Sword
Jul 13th 2009, 05:31 PM
Especially because Jude quotes it...

It goes deeper that that,

Quotes from Jesus and Enoch.

(JC), Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth. (Mat 5:5)
(E)The elect shall possess light, joy and peace, and they shall inherit the earth. (Enoch 5:7 {6:9})
(JC)The Father judgeth no man, but hath committed all judgment unto the son (John 5:22).
(E)The principal part of the judgment was assigned to him, the Son of man. (Enoch 69:27 {68:39})
(JC)Shall inherit everlasting life (Mat. 19:29)
(E)Those who will inherit eternal life (Enoch 40:9 {40:9}) "
(JC)Woe unto you that are rich! for ye have received your consolation. (Luke 6:24)
(E)Woe to you who are rich, for in your riches have you trusted; but from your riches you shall be removed. (Enoch 94:8 {93:7}).
(JC)Ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel. (Mat. 19:28)
(E)I will place each of them on a throne of glory (Enoch 108:12 {105:26})
(JC)Woe unto that man through whom the Son of man is betrayed! It had been good for that man if he had not been born. (Mat. 26:24)
(E)Where will the habitation of sinners be . . . who have rejected the Lord of spirits. It would have been better for them, had they never been born. (Enoch 38:2 {38:2})
(JC)Between us and you there is a great gulf fixed. (Luke 16:26)
(E)by a chasm . . . [are] their souls are separated (Enoch 22: 9,11{22:10,12})
(JC)In my Father's house are many mansions (John 14:2)
(E)In that day shall the Elect One sit upon a throne of glory, and shall choose their conditions and countless habitations. (Enoch 45:3 {45:3})
(JC)That ye may be called the children of light (John 12:36)
(E)The good from the generation of light (Enoch 108:11 {105: 25})
(JC)The water that I shall give him shall be in him a well of water springing up into everlasting life. (John 4:14)
(E)All the thirsty drank, and were filled with wisdom, having their habitation with the righteous, the elect, and the holy. (Enoch 48:1 {48:1})

MarleVVLL
Jul 13th 2009, 06:06 PM
I don't understand your post.

The Mighty Sword
Jul 13th 2009, 06:14 PM
I don't understand your post.


Sorry,




The similarities is what I was getting at.

MarleVVLL
Jul 13th 2009, 06:34 PM
Ah. Yeah, I noticed those. Perhaps I should read that book, haha.

The Mighty Sword
Jul 13th 2009, 06:35 PM
Ah. Yeah, I noticed those. Perhaps I should read that book, haha.

There's an Idea :idea:

Br. Barnabas
Jul 13th 2009, 06:55 PM
Some of the teachings are the same but the issue is mainly the idea of the adventures of Enoch, which are not dealth with in the Torah. Also the building of a long story off a single verse about sons of God and daughters of men in Genesis. It also goes against the Temple cult/the established Jewish beliefs of the day. Jesus did this also but he also kept the Law and took part in the worship that took part in the Temple and the sacrifices that happened there.

th1bill
Jul 13th 2009, 07:08 PM
There's an Idea :idea:
... There is an age old truth that I learned, as young man, in the Army. Propaganda is an easy sell. It will be believed with as little as about 10% truth in it, just enough that the hearer or reader can relate to. As for these books that did not make the Canon, there is a god reason that the learned me of that day rejected them. Malachi 3:6 - "For I am the Lord, I change not; therefore ye sons of Jacob are not consumed." Unlike man, God never changes. So I ask, knowing that these books, Enoch, Thomas and others contain lies, what is the profit in studyig them?

MarleVVLL
Jul 14th 2009, 06:10 AM
The gospel of Thomas and the book of Enoch, in my opinion, are two completely separate cases. Thomas is filled with heresy, while the book of Enoch is actually quoted in the NT. Sure, it wasn't put into Scripture, but I'm sure there is profit to be gained by reading it.

th1bill
Jul 14th 2009, 06:21 AM
The gospel of Thomas and the book of Enoch, in my opinion, are two completely separate cases. Thomas is filled with heresy, while the book of Enoch is actually quoted in the NT. Sure, it wasn't put into Scripture, but I'm sure there is profit to be gained by reading it.
... Not trying to be cute but the truth is that as men we all have opinions but some, as have I, have chosen t follow God with all that we can and those books, not in the Bible, might have historical merit but they are not part of God's Word.

MarleVVLL
Jul 14th 2009, 06:23 AM
I completely agree. However, I would imagine there are items to be gained by reading, say, Enoch's book. Jude quoted it. It has to be worth something.

;)

nzyr
Jul 14th 2009, 12:14 PM
I had read the other day on the internet that the book of Enoch was written in 200 B.C. I don't know if that date is true or not (if someone knows let me know). Anyways, Enoch lived long before then so if that date is right, Enoch could not have written it. If Enoch didn't write the book, who did. Also why would they call it "the book of Enoch if Enoch didn't write it?No one really knows who wrote it. And it's not considered scripture in the Jewish, catholic, or protestant bibles.

The Mighty Sword
Jul 14th 2009, 03:21 PM
No one really knows who wrote it. And it's not considered scripture in the Jewish, catholic, or protestant bibles.

I believe the beginning of Genesis was taken from the book of Enoch and that Enoch himself wrote it or how else would anyone have known Enochs role, some of Enoch writings were in angelic script or Enochian script, who can translate that is the real question and when he gets into the season and calendar year it's real easy to get lost in it, who knew that kind of stuff then, one thing is for sure, it's deep and his prayers are like no other prayers in scripture, My other opinion on Enoch I believe in Revelation when it speaks of two prophets are murdered and left in the street and are resurrected I believe that t is Enoch and Elijah, the only two prophets who never knew death.

markedward
Jul 14th 2009, 04:32 PM
I believe the beginning of Genesis was taken from the book of Enoch and that Enoch himself wrote it or how else would anyone have known Enochs role,... Moses was given revelation from God... hence, it's called the "books of Moses".

The Mighty Sword
Jul 14th 2009, 05:02 PM
... Moses was given revelation from God... hence, it's called the "books of Moses".


Good to know........

th1bill
Jul 14th 2009, 06:37 PM
I completely agree. However, I would imagine there are items to be gained by reading, say, Enoch's book. Jude quoted it. It has to be worth something.

;)
... It might be an interesting book, I don't know but the problem with that thought is how far do you carry it? Did God recommend it? We know that God inspired the writers of the Bible and we know that God allowed their personalities and styles to influence their writings. So if you read it, how much importance should it hold? Also, in the case of the Bible, we have over six thousand partial and complete original manuscript that verify the New Testament ad we have the Dead Sea Scrolls that verify the Old Testament. Add to this the known fact that God has preserved His Word and the oft over looked obvious question comes to the surface, "What evidence do we have that the Book of Enoch is authentic?" We already know tha Enoch did not write it, don't we?

MarleVVLL
Jul 14th 2009, 07:46 PM
I completely agree with you. Of course, the 66 books of the Bible are the revelation of God to man. They are to be held in highest esteem and every command (in regards to NT revelation) must be fulfilled unless it is sin - period.

The book of Enoch, however, is not such a book. God did not allow it to enter into the Canon and there are good reasons why.

However, I don't see why it is not profitable to read this book. I read books written by Christians all the time - David Pawson is a prime example (all Christians need to read his book concerning Islam). David's books are not in Scripture. There are likely to be errors in it. However, they are still profitable to me if I function in discernment while reading and love Jesus all the way through it without looking back.

Br. Barnabas
Jul 14th 2009, 09:04 PM
... It might be an interesting book, I don't know but the problem with that thought is how far do you carry it? Did God recommend it? We know that God inspired the writers of the Bible and we know that God allowed their personalities and styles to influence their writings. So if you read it, how much importance should it hold? Also, in the case of the Bible, we have over six thousand partial and complete original manuscript that verify the New Testament ad we have the Dead Sea Scrolls that verify the Old Testament. Add to this the known fact that God has preserved His Word and the oft over looked obvious question comes to the surface, "What evidence do we have that the Book of Enoch is authentic?" We already know tha Enoch did not write it, don't we?

Good points, however, reading the Book of Enoch can have some benefit, it can help us to understand the history of the NT and what people were thinking around the time it was written. Also the Book of Enoch was found with the DSS. There is no evidence that it is authentic in fact there is a lot of evidence that it is not authentic. All scholars of the book and of 2nd Temple Judaism agrees that it was not written by Enoch and not written before 300 BC.

th1bill
Jul 14th 2009, 10:53 PM
... I admit that I do not understand why you posted but it was about to reach the point that I was going to need to dig the research out to demonstrate the cause for my concerns but you did it for me, thank-you.

nzyr
Jul 15th 2009, 06:21 AM
I believe the beginning of Genesis was taken from the book of Enoch and that Enoch himself wrote it or how else would anyone have known Enochs role, some of Enoch writings were in angelic script or Enochian script, who can translate that is the real question and when he gets into the season and calendar year it's real easy to get lost in it, who knew that kind of stuff then, one thing is for sure, it's deep and his prayers are like no other prayers in scripture, My other opinion on Enoch I believe in Revelation when it speaks of two prophets are murdered and left in the street and are resurrected I believe that t is Enoch and Elijah, the only two prophets who never knew death.I believe that Genesis was written before the book of Enoch. And it sounds like the two witnesses in Revelation are Elijah and Moses.

These have power to shut heaven, that it rain not in the days of their prophecy: and have power over waters to turn them to blood, and to smite the earth with all plagues , as often as they will. -Revelation 11:6

daughter
Jul 15th 2009, 07:15 AM
I believe the beginning of Genesis was taken from the book of Enoch and that Enoch himself wrote it or how else would anyone have known Enochs role, some of Enoch writings were in angelic script or Enochian script, who can translate that is the real question and when he gets into the season and calendar year it's real easy to get lost in it, who knew that kind of stuff then, one thing is for sure, it's deep and his prayers are like no other prayers in scripture, My other opinion on Enoch I believe in Revelation when it speaks of two prophets are murdered and left in the street and are resurrected I believe that t is Enoch and Elijah, the only two prophets who never knew death.
Hi there Mighty Sword.

Please don't take this the wrong way, but it seems you haven't read the whole Bible yet. If you had done, you would have known that Moses wrote the first five books, not Enoch... Jesus talks about Moses as the author, and I would have thought He'd know better than us.

Also, I'm concerned about your interest in the secret scripts that you refer to above. Before I was a Christian, I was a witch, but also (unlike most witches) classically trained in historical research.

These "angelic" and "enochian" scripts were invented by medieval magi, and have nothing to do with the ancient languages and texts of the Bible. Linguistically when you analyse the manuscripts written in these languages, there are many markers which indicate that they were invented by Latin/Italian or English speakers.

I'll not bore you with the tedious linguistics... but what I will say is this. You can't believe mystical "stuff" ... please don't take it seriously. Ceremonial magicians made up lots of nonsense, much of which is still in use in magickal circles today (and yes, despite the dishonesty of it's provenance, it does work... demons will come out and play in order to decieve people.)

I'm not saying that you're a ceremonial magician by any means, but you've been taken in by some of the trappings of these charlatans, who were themselves taken in by demons.

Regarding who wrote Enoch... perhaps some of the contents of Enoch as we have received it are original. But the vast bulk of it is not to be trusted. And speculation about secret languages, etc etc, are simply dangerous. The book of Mormon and other false cults rose out of just such lies.

Please, may I suggest that you sit down and make a thorough study of the Bible, as we have received it, from beginning to end, praying carefully before, during and after reading.

And if you do have any connection to the occult, repent of it, and get out!

-SEEKING-
Jul 15th 2009, 02:24 PM
I agree with Daugther as well. Be careful out there. There's a lot of garbage mixed in with good stuff. Pray and ask God what His will is for you and search His word thoroughly.

The Mighty Sword
Jul 15th 2009, 03:21 PM
Hi there Mighty Sword.

Please don't take this the wrong way, but it seems you haven't read the whole Bible yet. If you had done, you would have known that Moses wrote the first five books, not Enoch... Jesus talks about Moses as the author, and I would have thought He'd know better than us.

Also, I'm concerned about your interest in the secret scripts that you refer to above. Before I was a Christian, I was a witch, but also (unlike most witches) classically trained in historical research.

These "angelic" and "enochian" scripts were invented by medieval magi, and have nothing to do with the ancient languages and texts of the Bible. Linguistically when you analyse the manuscripts written in these languages, there are many markers which indicate that they were invented by Latin/Italian or English speakers.

I'll not bore you with the tedious linguistics... but what I will say is this. You can't believe mystical "stuff" ... please don't take it seriously. Ceremonial magicians made up lots of nonsense, much of which is still in use in magickal circles today (and yes, despite the dishonesty of it's provenance, it does work... demons will come out and play in order to decieve people.)

I'm not saying that you're a ceremonial magician by any means, but you've been taken in by some of the trappings of these charlatans, who were themselves taken in by demons.

Regarding who wrote Enoch... perhaps some of the contents of Enoch as we have received it are original. But the vast bulk of it is not to be trusted. And speculation about secret languages, etc etc, are simply dangerous. The book of Mormon and other false cults rose out of just such lies.

Please, may I suggest that you sit down and make a thorough study of the Bible, as we have received it, from beginning to end, praying carefully before, during and after reading.

And if you do have any connection to the occult, repent of it, and get out!

I understand and have read the bible,

"If you had done, you would have known that Moses wrote the first five books"

So is it just coincidence the the beginning of the Book of Enoch corresponds with the fist six chapters of Genesis??? in greater detail no less??? I think not. Moses did more Lawgiving the prophecy, not to take anything away from him.

The question was simple and I answered it.
Who wrote the book of Enoch?
I believe Enoch wrote it period.

"Please, may I suggest that you sit down and make a thorough study of the Bible, as we have received it, from beginning to end, praying carefully before, during and after reading."

"And if you do have any connection to the occult, repent of it, and get out!"

As an Altar Minister I am required to know scripture but I do appreciate your concern.

It's funny how a simple answer could cause such controversy. Thank you.

-SEEKING-
Jul 15th 2009, 03:30 PM
It's funny how a simple answer could cause such controversy. Thank you.

Honestly I think it's genuine concern. That's all. Since most people don't know each other personally, it's hard to know what we all believe. I don't think it was controversy in a negative sense. And if I made it seem like I undermined your knowledge of the bible, then I personally apologize. It certainly wasn't my intent. But having personal experience with non biblical writings I felt that I should say something.

The Mighty Sword
Jul 15th 2009, 03:33 PM
Honestly I think it's genuine concern. That's all. Since most people don't know each other personally, it's hard to know what we all believe. I don't think it was controversy in a negative sense. And if I made it seem like I undermined your knowledge of the bible, then I personally apologize. It certainly wasn't my intent. But having personal experience with non biblical writings I felt that I should say something.

It's not even like that, my brother, it's all good! and when I said I appreciate her concern I meant that. I stand on The Holy Scriptures, but I also like a good book as well. Peace. One thing, I do appreciate the the fact that GOD took Enoch in the flesh to heaven.

BrckBrln
Jul 15th 2009, 03:36 PM
The question was simple and I answered it.
Who wrote the book of Enoch?
I believe Enoch wrote it period.

When did Enoch live?

The Mighty Sword
Jul 15th 2009, 03:38 PM
When did Enoch live?

Until God took him?, on earth.

BrckBrln
Jul 15th 2009, 03:41 PM
Until God took him?, on earth.

Do you have a date?

The Mighty Sword
Jul 15th 2009, 03:43 PM
Do you have a date?


Friday night me and my wife are going to see a movie, i guess that's a date, what does that have to do with "who wrote the Book of Enoch"?

-SEEKING-
Jul 15th 2009, 03:44 PM
LOL. Sorry but that was pretty funny.

The Mighty Sword
Jul 15th 2009, 03:48 PM
LOL. Sorry but that was pretty funny.

No offense BrckBrln, but I don't think they were into what the year it was back then. We can always carbon date but how accurate is that???

BrckBrln
Jul 15th 2009, 03:51 PM
No offense BrckBrln, but I don't think they were into what the year it was back then. We can always carbon date but how accurate is that???

I think it's pretty accurate, man.

The Mighty Sword
Jul 15th 2009, 04:04 PM
Ok let's get off topic since your curiosity has the better of you, in a good way. Some carbon dating dates man back a million yrs ago, yet biblicaly we go back 6 thousand years, as far as I go, key word "I" none of that concerns me, I'm more concerned in the fact we have a Bible, we have a book of Enoch, and for that matter we have books, as far as I concerned proof are for those with little faith, I don't know how old the earth is but I know it's here, etc.........

BrckBrln
Jul 15th 2009, 04:11 PM
Ok let's get off topic since your curiosity has the better of you, in a good way. Some carbon dating dates man back a million yrs ago, yet biblicaly we go back 6 thousand years, as far as I go, key word "I" none of that concerns me, I'm more concerned in the fact we have a Bible, we have a book of Enoch, and for that matter we have books, as far as I concerned proof are for those with little faith, I don't know how old the earth is but I know it's here, etc.........

Well, it's a mistake to use the chronologies in the Bible to try and date things. That's not what they are for, but this is neither here nor there. Yes, we have a book of Enoch, but it's not written by Enoch. It's a simple fact. There's no use in discussing this because you will believe what you want to believe.

The Mighty Sword
Jul 15th 2009, 04:17 PM
Well, it's a mistake to use the chronologies in the Bible to try and date things. That's not what they are for, but this is neither here nor there. Yes, we have a book of Enoch, but it's not written by Enoch. It's a simple fact. There's no use in discussing this because you will believe what you want to believe.


Thank you. I simply answered the question. Did you??

BrckBrln
Jul 15th 2009, 04:21 PM
Thank you. I simply answered the question. Did you??

Which question? Who wrote the book of Enoch? The answer is not Enoch. It's pseudepigraphical.

The Mighty Sword
Jul 15th 2009, 04:23 PM
Which question? Who wrote the book of Enoch? The answer is not Enoch. It's pseudepigraphical.


Ok, moving right along...................

Rookie78
Jul 15th 2009, 05:08 PM
The book of enoch dates (carbon?) to no earlier than 300 BC, but isn't it more accurate to say that the latest copy we have is dated no earlier than 300 BC? It could be a copy of a copy of a copy that dates back to enoch himself.

One thing we can all agree on is that Enoch did write/prophesy the portion that is quoted in Jude. Where did Jude get his information? Besides the Holy Spirit, he could have well have had a copy of the book of enoch to derive from. Both Peter and Jude could have had copies. They certainly didn't get the idea from other books of the old testament since there is no mention of angels chained in darkness besides enoch.

In no way do I think that the whole of the books of enoch are inspired, but i think that there is validity in assuming that the parts reference by Peter and Jude and their surrounding texts are inspired. Probably the first 16 chapters or so of I Enoch.

The Mighty Sword
Jul 15th 2009, 05:17 PM
The book of enoch dates (carbon?) to no earlier than 300 BC, but isn't it more accurate to say that the latest copy we have is dated no earlier than 300 BC? It could be a copy of a copy of a copy that dates back to enoch himself.

One thing we can all agree on is that Enoch did write/prophesy the portion that is quoted in Jude. Where did Jude get his information? Besides the Holy Spirit, he could have well have had a copy of the book of enoch to derive from. Both Peter and Jude could have had copies. They certainly didn't get the idea from other books of the old testament since there is no mention of angels chained in darkness besides enoch.

In no way do I think that the whole of the books of enoch are inspired, but i think that there is validity in assuming that the parts reference by Peter and Jude and their surrounding texts are inspired. Probably the first 16 chapters or so of I Enoch.

Good points Rookie78, print is not dead, but alive. Keep reading, don't be closed mined, that you may think out of the box, My Pastor say's" we cannot put GOD in a box", if we do, they we might as well call ourselves "Boxed Christians" Good for you.

Br. Barnabas
Jul 15th 2009, 05:53 PM
The book of enoch dates (carbon?) to no earlier than 300 BC, but isn't it more accurate to say that the latest copy we have is dated no earlier than 300 BC? It could be a copy of a copy of a copy that dates back to enoch himself.

One thing we can all agree on is that Enoch did write/prophesy the portion that is quoted in Jude. Where did Jude get his information? Besides the Holy Spirit, he could have well have had a copy of the book of enoch to derive from. Both Peter and Jude could have had copies. They certainly didn't get the idea from other books of the old testament since there is no mention of angels chained in darkness besides enoch.

In no way do I think that the whole of the books of enoch are inspired, but i think that there is validity in assuming that the parts reference by Peter and Jude and their surrounding texts are inspired. Probably the first 16 chapters or so of I Enoch.

No, we can't agree that Enoch wrote part of it. He did not write any part of it. Jude quotes from the Book of Enoch that is how he got it he had a copy or knew of it. There are several reasons that Jude and Peter could have made reference to it. It could have been showing that these works were false and should not be used. Many ancient texts contain quotes of writing they don't agree with. It could also be that since these were popular works of the time they are showing that Jesus is the real Messiah not the messiah that these texts talk about. No part of the book of Enoch is inspired things can contain truth and not be inspired. We can rest assured that the passage Jude quotes contains truth ("'See, the Lord is coming with thousands upon thousands of his holy ones to judge everyone, and to convict all the ungodly of all the ungodly acts they have done in the ungodly way, and of all the harsh words ungodly sinners have spoken against him.'" [Jude 14b-15]) but not that it is inspired. Otherwise the whole book or parts of it would be found in our canon.

The oldest texts of Enoch that have been found are from 300 and those are only certain portions; the book is a hodgepog of several different books. Writen from somewhere between 300 BC and 100 AD.

I think you are missing the point that this is a very popular writing style for this time of history and for this culture. There are books ascribed to other people also that we know did not write them. If these books had been written by the author the work makes claim to then they should have had references in other earlier material however, this is not the case. To people who study 2nd Temple Judaism, it is obvious that the book is making reference to specific events going on at time. Or that they are picking up on a theme that they want to answer questions that they have about the Bible.

For example here are some of the other books that fit into the generea of Pseudopigrapha: Apocalypse of Abraham, Apocalypse of Adam, Apocalypse of Elijah, Apocalypse of Daniel, Vision of Ezra, Questions of Ezra, Revelation of Ezra, Apocalypse of Sedrach, Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs, Testament of Job, Testaments of the Three Patriarchs
Testament of Abraham, Testament of Isaac, Testament of Jacob, Testament of Moses, Testament of Solomon, Testament of Adam, Life of Adam and Eve, The Lives of the Prophets, 4 Baruch, More Psalms of David,
Prayer of Manasseh, Psalms of Solomon, and many more that I did not list. All of these from around 300 to 100AD. They are known Pseudopigrapha, meaning they are written under an assumed name.

It takes more than reading the book to understand what is going on with it we also need to read history and understand 2nd Temple Judaism. A great resource for this are, From Text to Tradition by Lawrence H. Schiffman, The Dead Sea Scrolls Study Edition by Eibert Tigchelaar (or any of his articles he is one of the few real experts (ie scholars) on the book of 1 Enoch), for a book that contains most/all important psedepigrapha, James H. Charlesworth's Pseudepigrapha vols 1 and 2 has all the works I listed above plus more translated from the original language and introductions by scholars.

daughter
Jul 15th 2009, 10:45 PM
Which question? Who wrote the book of Enoch? The answer is not Enoch. It's pseudepigraphical.Indeed. This can be proven by a linguistic analyses of the text... we don't have to rely on carbon dating, which is not to be trusted. However... even if we assume that the earliest version we received is a translation from some earlier text, we find problems attempting to date it any early than three BC. There are grammatical elements in the text which didn't exist in Hebrew of the period the text claims to date from. Compare, even in an English translation, the philological differences between Enoch and Genesis. Enoch cannot have been translated from Hebrew... the style is all wrong. Unless Enoch wrote originally in Greek (which seems a tad unlikely) the book is a third century BC production.

There is one other option... it might be a "retelling" of an earlier Hebrew text... But if so, it would be the equivalent of the Message as against the KJV.

Nobody who has studied the original languages in any depth could believe that Enoch was original. You don't need carbon dating to prove that.

nzyr
Jul 16th 2009, 05:10 AM
The book of Enoch was rejected as scripture by the ministers of the early church and that's good enough for me. Some people seem to think that something is being withheld from them because of this. I don't believe this is the case. The Holy Spirit has given us the bible that we have today. And I believe it is complete.

daughter
Jul 16th 2009, 07:18 AM
Well said, nzyr. God is omniscient, and all powerful. He wants us to have the perfect guide to live by... and conspiracy theories about books being left out because of machinations by the early church, are simply illogical. God's plans cannot be thwarted by human beings. Many humans have attacked the Bible, but it continues through time and eternity. If Enoch was supposed to be in the Bible, does anyone really think mankind has the authority to scupper God's plans?

It seems disrespectful to suggest it. Man is not so big that we could distort God's Bible.

GreekAsianPanda
Jul 16th 2009, 07:34 AM
Its called pseudopigraphical, meaning that it is written under and assumed name. This happened a lot at this time in history. It also happened with the works about Jesus and the Apostles too.

Just because there is a name on something does not mean that it was written by that person.

The date for the books of Enoch, it is more a collection of smaller works all put together under one large book title. range from about 200 BC to I think 100 AD it has been a while since I looked at the dates for it.

It is mainly a work of fiction with some history thrown in. It also has some information that was important for the Essences.

It is named after Enoch because some no body wrote the book, but wanted people to read it and believe it was older than it appeared so they said Enoch wrote it, to try and make it more believable.

Ah, now I know what it's called! Thanks! So, the Gnostic Gospels use pseudopigraphy in their titles, too. Like The Gospel of Thomas, The Gospel of Judas, The Gospel of Philip, The Gospel of Mary Magdalene, and The Gospel of Barnabas. They weren't actually written by those people; their writers were gnostics. Just like the Book of Enoch is not written by Enoch.

Br. Barnabas
Jul 16th 2009, 12:44 PM
Ah, now I know what it's called! Thanks! So, the Gnostic Gospels use pseudopigraphy in their titles, too. Like The Gospel of Thomas, The Gospel of Judas, The Gospel of Philip, The Gospel of Mary Magdalene, and The Gospel of Barnabas. They weren't actually written by those people; their writers were gnostics. Just like the Book of Enoch is not written by Enoch.

Yes they are all written under an assumed name. Pseudepigrapha is usually the term used for 2nd Temple Jewish works. While other works have the same style I am not sure why it is usually only used for works from that period.

Your Advert here


Hosted by Webnet77