MachineGod

Doesn’t this back literalists in the corner?

Genesis 5:24 - And Enoch walked with God: and he was not; for God took him.
Jude 1:14 - And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints,

Enoch was one of two (Isaiah was the other) that supposedly walked with god in such a way that God simply “took him� in some mysterious way.

The Book of Enoch, written during the second century B.C.E., is one of the most important non-canonical apocryphal works, and probably had a huge influence on early Christian, particularly Gnostic beliefs. Filled with hallucinatory visions of heaven and hell, angels and devils, Enoch introduced concepts such as fallen angels, the appearance of a Messiah, Resurrection, a Final Judgment, and a Heavenly Kingdom on Earth. Interspersed with this material are quasi-scientific digressions on calendrical systems, geography, cosmology, astronomy, and meteorology.

The portions of the book "The Apocalypse of Weeks." and fragments of "The Book of Noah." are Pre-Maccabæan.

They were preserved in three forms.
- Greek Version preserved In Syncellus
- Greek Version discovered at Akhmîm, and deposited in the Gizeh Museum, Cairo
- Ethiopic Version, discovered in Africa, preserved still as part of the Old Testament.

Therefore it is apparent that any original Hebrew text, since the above are translations themselves, was quite possibly older than the Pre-Maccabæan, and was circulated and included as scripture for it to be written in the book of Jude. The book of Jude, if one considers the bible text reliable, gives authority to this work, although the originals are no longer available. Anyone who reads the text will easily see the undeniable likeness to the entire New Testament teaching, also saturated with the traditional thoughts and ideas of the Old Testament, showing that this book inspired the whole of the content of the canonized book of Revelation, while detailing what is thought by some as trivial events concerning events in the book of Genesis.

To me it seems this is devastating to any literalist view of any part of the Bible, as I’m sure is obvious, but if not, I will try to elaborate if you’d like. A more liberal view might not have difficulty dealing with it, because one must admit that the Bible may be unreliable at least in part, by any rational conclusion, if nothing else, merely on the fact that part of the word of God was taken away, and to say it is useless denies the validity of at least the book of Jude. And to include it opens up a whooole mess of worms. It was tossed aside by Jews and Christians alike as well as by Muslims, but of course, most of them already deny much validity in the Bible, despite their Quran giving it authority.

Views? Discuss.
http://www.sacred-texts.com/bib/boe/

andrewcriddle

We are no longer confined to speculation about the Hebrew text of Enoch.

Hebrew fragments of Enoch (the oldest from around 200 BCE) have been discovered among the Dead Sea Scrolls.

Andrew Criddle

Wallener

Alternate translation...

Don't see much of a problem here. Ton of stuff on Enoch's origins, I'm in no position to discuss the accuracy of this...

http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/vi...d=384&letter=E