Genesis 6, 1 Enoch and Reception in the Early Christian Church

[SavedOnebyGrace]

Reference: Genesis 6, 1 Enoch and Reception in the Early Christian Church

Amar Annus, “On the Origin of the Watchers: A Comparative Study of the Antediluvian Wisdom in Mesopotamian and Jewish Traditions,” Journal for the Study of the Pseudepigrapha 19.4 (2010): 277–320

• This is the most important article to date on Gen 6:1-4. It supersedes all work done on the Mesopotamian backdrop — work which frankly pales in comparison to the data that Annus brings to bear on the passage. Annus shows with great clarity how the Mesopotamian apkallu traditions are the backdrop to Gen. 6:1-4 (and, therefore, the supernatural backdrop against which it was written and must be understood), along with how Second Temple Jewish writers comprehended the Mesopotamian backdrop. Subsequent Christian tradition (i.e., the church fathers) knew nothing of this backdrop, and so early church interpretations that produced the Sethite view violated the text’s original context. In short, any non-supernaturalist interpretation of Gen 6:1-4 is inconsistent with the original Mesopotamian context that is the focus of the passage’s polemic.

It's important to read the Bible with its original context understood.  Unless you understand 2nd Temple Jewish thought you would not fully understand what your 15th century or later translation should be.  If the translators are "channeling" the Holy Spirit, every copy should be exactly the same.  This is not Biblical and is something a "New Age" writer would come up with.  For example, Louise Cooper wrote the novel The Book of Paradox was done, she claims, through automatic writing.  Ezekiel is claimed by some critics to have written about Jerusalem by "remote viewing".  This of course is preposterous and deny the power of the God's inspiration.  Angels (Messengers) could be relaying to Ezekiel what's happening in Jerusalem while many hundreds of miles away.  We should not try to normalize miraculous and prophetic occurrences.