jules?

my first post!

i need some additional research to fill in a few holes.

Is the pre-existence of Christ an issue or not? and if not why was the book of Enoch banned? The church fathers, Jude, and the early church seem to have valued the text and then it became, so uncool. Angels, too Jewish, man gets to talk to god and the pre-existance business all seem to have been issues but having gome to a number of Christians on the subject I am just as confused what the issue was.

I welcome opinion whether academic or otherwise but definatives would be great with referances.
thanks.
jules

Toto

The Book of Enoch appears to have been banned because of its description of angels. It was later rediscovered in Ethiopia, and is now much beloved by UFO'ists and others for whom the Revelation of John is not lurid enough.

Book of Enoch on Amazon (or via: amazon.co.uk)I'm not sure how this relates to the pre-existence of Christ.

jules?

the pre-existant christ is the son of man mentioned by Enoch, and i am familiar with the text, but thanks anyway. as for angels i am not entirely convinced that it was the reason for the ban. Rabbanical judaism also banned the book and they don't seem to have much of a problem with angels and the four archangels were embraced by the church. admitably the later Medieval books [2&3] took angel lore to the extreme complete with the freaky Metron and all those eyes and wings [all the better to see you sin with] but this doesn't address the 3rd century ban.

Pre-existance seems to be the most likely problem, but and there are plenty of buts, John's Gospel makes the Word pre-existant yet it was accepted. The god-man jesus cannot come into existance unitl birth which obviously a bit of conflict with the Jewish Cosmic Christ awaiting a return. I checked out Newadvent for a straight answer on pre-existance but did'nt find one.

mountainman

Controversies happened with ancient texts that did not specifically
mention the new testament "christian" packaging of ancient ways
according to a number of criteria, which Christian aopogetics refer
to as "Canonisation" of the New testament.

The Book of Enoch is generally thought to pre-date the existence
of "christianity" and have been extant at least in the first century BCE.

You must also be aware that there is absolutely no agreement
between academics and scholars as to the actual date of composition
of the core gospels that form the core of the "NT Canon".
Some think they were written in the first century, while
others hypothesise that they were written in the second.

It is an interesting situation.



Your first question:
Is the pre-existence of Christ an issue or not?
is an interesting question.

My opinion is that the pre-existence of Christ is
an unexamined postulate of Eusebian Ecclesiastical
historiography.

For many people the existence of Christ is a "given".
This happens for a number of reasons. Others prefer
to approach the question with a certain degree of
skepticism, and a varying degree of critical skepticism.

"The Search for the Historical Jesus" is a search phrase
by which in an evening, much might be reviewed in
the area of the sedimentary deposit of academic
opinion on the issue over the last few hundred years.

The commentary on the commentary on the commentary
(and it does get regressive) is a little tedious at times,
but it serves to show that all such academic endeavour
has been subservient to the existence and authority of,
Christian based Universities, Religious Institutations and
other sponsorships, which have existed on this planet Earth,
since at least the time of Constantine, 325 CE.

Opinion is diverse. We are after all human.
Best wishes,



Pete Brown

spin

The book of Enoch is a composite work, much of which was written by the time of the Dead Sea Scrolls (it was a favourite at Qumran). However, what is now the second part of the work wasn't found at Qumran and its interest in the son of man shows that it was a christian development. The Jews didn't take Daniel 7:13's son of man as messianic as christians did (at least in the period I'm interested in, ancient times).

It wasn't banned. It was simply not accepted in the same way as those texts which came to be the Tanak.


spin

Toto

from here

But, as you say, Jesus is pre-existant in John's gospel. I doubt that anyone really could wrap their minds around what pre-existant meant, in any case. It's too ethereal to be really dangerous.

In Augustine's City of God I, book 15, chapter 23, he gives this reason for rejecting Enoch:

mountainman

prolific

Magdlyn

:grin: :grin: :grin: Thanks for the giggle.

*Raises glass to lurid lit!*

jules?

which part of the book is a late christian addition : "The Book of Noah"; "Similitudes"; "The Dream Visions"; "Apocalypse of the Weeks"; or "The Book of the Heavenly Luminaries." ? evidently there is some repeating of the themes indicating a common source and multiple copies. And when did the 'son of man' come into existance, historically that is.

Thanks for that, I struggled to read City of God, [preferred the film!!!] Augustine reasons make sense although i wonder if it is covering something else. Revelation nearly didnt make it which gives me the impression that it was important almost central to early belief that then became a bit of problem what with the lack of an End Time and perhaps Enoch's message suddenly became offmessage when the Church evolved into an institution and it's importance in the early church needed to be deflected.

As for pre-existance it was probably a good move to have an orthodox gospel with the platonic Word at its heart. It certainly makes more sense to me in the context of Maths and Logos. I still dont know what the official positions on the subject are. Fundis seem to say yes without reserve but when i asked my local Anglican vicar i received a rather vague history lesson.

jules?

I have experienced the main interest coming from those interested in Stone /circles linking the great portals to Stonehenge. Jesus was a druid etc [and did those feet in ancient times walk upon England' cricket greens etc]
jules