Small case against online dating dead end dating series
Sizable portions of the text are preserved on four copies, written in Aramaic, from Qumran cave 4.
The Aramaic original appears to have been much different and much longer than the Ethiopic text, adding far more astronomical details.“ – James C.
A theory is something which may have to be revised or abandoned if new information and understanding shows the theory to be flawed.
Years ago, the theory was that Enoch might be inspired, or should be canon, in whole or in part, and that it should be treated as such.
It’s as easily argued that the Sons of Seth theory – or heresy one might argue – was introduced simply to cover up or gloss over what the Bible teaches about the fallen angels in Genesis 6, alone, without also arguing that the Sons of Seth theory is meant to cover up the Book of Enoch as well.
So as to whether or not Enoch can be considered today as either true, reliable, or inspired, there’s really only one way to settle this question in fact: The Bible as we have it today is what we know we can trust, it is the truth we can be sure of, it is the only standard of measure we have for everything else.
But new understanding and information has shown this theory to be flawed.
That information and understanding is what we are going to present to you today.
Parts of its text have been identified on several copies from Qumran cave 4; the earliest fragmentary manuscript (4QEnocha) dates, according to the editor J. Vanderkam The third section, the Astronomical Book, is also an earlier work dating to around 200 BC. 72-82 The Astronomical Book, like the Book of Watchers, may date from the third century BCE; the oldest copy of it seems to have been made not long after 200 BCE.Each of these sections is a separate book, which have been compiled together to form First Enoch as we know it today.“As it now stands, I Enoch appears to consist of the following five major divisions: (1) The Book of the Watchers (chaps. 37-7l)-, (3) The Book of Astronomical Writings (chaps. 83-90); and (5) The Book of the Epistle of Enoch (chaps. Evans, Noncanonical Writings and New Testament Interpretation, (1992) p.But the argument that a limited number of ancient Jews and early Christians used Enoch and that it was canon for the Ethiopic church, is inconclusive as to whether it is inspired scripture.The argument that there was a conspiracy to cover-up the information, using the sons of Seth doctrine, also is inconclusive as to whether it is inspired scripture What I mean is that those can both still be true, but they are not conclusive arguments that can prove and settle the issue.
Also, the Bible teaches that the “sons of God” were imprisoned in the Abyss at the time of the flood, but seems to lack almost any information telling about this event and how it happened.