----- Original Message ----- From: "The Fool" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Brin-L" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, January 03, 2002 12:53 AM Subject: Re: Bible translations Re: Tragedy in Israel > > Well, your opinion is not shared by mainstream scripture scholars. My > > daughter has it in her collection of inter-testament literature which > she > > studied as part of her theology degree at a Presbyterian school. I > studied > > it as part of my course in Persian and Hellenistic Judaism. IIRC, the > > general consensus is that it was written around 150 BCE...but I haven't > dug > > my notes out on this. > > When exactly was the Julian calendar implemented? Specifically the > Lengths of the months (which are contained within the book of Enoch)?
Where is it contained? Could you please quote chapter and verse on that? The reason that I'm asking is that I suspect that Enoch refers to the Jewish calendar, which may have some similarities. I'd like to see the verses that your source believes refers to the Julian calendar. The Julian calendar was established in 46 BCE. > This would be the lower bound of when it could have been written. > Well, if this is clearly true, why would so many serious scholars believe Enoch could have been written earlier. Indeed, since the book of Enoch was found in the Dead Sea scrolls, this would have established a lower bound for those works as well. > > The quote in Jude is: > > > > "It was with them in mind that Enoch, the seventh patriarch from Adam, > made > > his prophecy when he said, 'I tell you the Lord will come with all his > holy > > ones in their tens of thousands, to pronounce judgment on all humanity > and > > to sentence the godless for all the godless things they have done, and > for > > all the defiant things said against him by godless sinners.' " > > > > The Jerusalem bible has a foot note that states: > > > > Enoch 1:9, probably quoted from memory. > > Who is to say that the book of Enoch is not quoting Jude? Or that they > both are quoting some other long lost source (like those missing books > quoted by Samuel the prophet)? Well, lets look at the entire first chapter of Enoch from http://www.heaven.net.nz/writings/thebookofenoch.htm 1 The words of the blessing of Enoch, wherewith he blessed the elect and righteous, who will be 2 living in the day of tribulation, when all the wicked and godless are to be removed. And he took up his parable and said -Enoch a righteous man, whose eyes were opened by God, saw the vision of the Holy One in the heavens, which the angels showed me, and from them I heard everything, and from them I understood as I saw, but not for this generation, but for a remote one which is 3 for to come. Concerning the elect I said, and took up my parable concerning them: The Holy Great One will come forth from His dwelling, 4 And the eternal God will tread upon the earth, (even) on Mount Sinai, [And appear from His camp] And appear in the strength of His might from the heaven of heavens. 5 And all shall be smitten with fear And the Watchers shall quake, And great fear and trembling shall seize them unto the ends of the earth. 6 And the high mountains shall be shaken, And the high hills shall be made low, And shall melt like wax before the flame 7 And the earth shall be wholly rent in sunder, And all that is upon the earth shall perish, And there shall be a judgment upon all (men). 8 But with the righteous He will make peace. And will protect the elect, And mercy shall be upon them. And they shall all belong to God, And they shall be prospered, And they shall all be blessed. And He will help them all, And light shall appear unto them, And He will make peace with them'. 9 And behold! He cometh with ten thousands of His holy ones To execute judgment upon all, And to destroy all the ungodly: And to convict all flesh Of all the works of their ungodliness which they have ungodly committed, And of all the hard things which ungodly sinners have spoken against Him. It seems clear to me who is quoting whom. Plus, if one looks at the original text, as these scholars must have, one can tell the parts that don't fit within the language flow. That is at least part of how we know that Paul only wrote about half of the books attributed to him. And, it is hard to think of the Dead Sea scrolls being copied after the fall of the temple, and Enoch doesn't fit within the framework of the writings of the Teacher of Righteousness...etc. etc. One can always postulate an earlier work that was copied in part. But, then the language should bear that out. > > Why would your one source have precedence over the consensus viewpoint > of > > non-fundamentalist scholars? > > Perhaps, perhaps not. Are you saying I am a fundamentalist? > No, I'm just saying that fundamentalists do not fit within that consensus. Basically, since they already know the answer before studying, I don't consider them true scholars. One thing worth noting is that a lot of popular stuff is based on one fact that is ridden into the ground. IMHO, real scholarship takes as many of the facts as possible and tries to match them, instead of picking one that fits one's idea and then going with it. I'd indeed be curious to see how clear the reference to the Julian calendar is. Dan M.
