The study of 1 Enoch should not be placed in the Unorthodox Theology Forum

[a_ntv]

I began asking God to show me whether I should receive that book as from Him. Specifically, I wondered if there were something of the prophetic to be found in its pages that would demonstrate the touch of the divine upon this book.

I personally disagree with this attitude in reading the Book of Enoch, a text I love. We cannot read it with the mind of the protestant of the 19-20th century that read every prophecy in a literal way looking for confirmation. If we use the same method we can find some fulfilled prophecies also in the Book of Mormon and even in the Koran.

We shall read the Book of Enoch as Christ himself and the people of his age have read it. We have to forgett two thousand years of history and our rationale and scientific Greek methods of though.
We have to learn the imaginary that is used by the Book of Enoch, as well as by other inter-testamental texts of the same time.

Now, after the discovery of the Qurman texts and the re-evaluation of the apocalyptic litterature, we have the tools to decrypt the mystic imaginary that is under these texts. Of course this can be done only if we are not bound by the 16th-century limits of the Sola Scriptura.

I strongly suggest some texts of Margaret Barker (as Christmas The Original Story ) or any her writing we can find free online (link). There are many other scholars that start to understand the true nature of the Enochic Judaism (as G.Boccaccini), but the work of M. Barker gives you the base tools to understand such literature.

 

[SummaScriptura]

I personally disagree with this attitude in reading the Book of Enoch, a text I love. We cannot read it with the mind of the protestant of the 19-20th century that read every prophecy in a literal way looking for confirmation. If we use the same method we can find some fulfilled prophecies also in the Book of Mormon and even in the Koran.<snip>

Then we certainly do disagree.

I try not to spiritualize scripture. I think early gentile commentators on the Bible erred in taking scripture exposition and exegisis down that alley-way. Allegorizing scripture opens the door on scripture interpretation too wide, I feel. I know I'm out-of-place in this regard with about 90&#37; of the posters in these fora, alas.

I think the Jews developed a proper exegetical methodology before Christ came; recapturing that methodology and eschewing the gentile one is a goal of mine. The Jews were the recipients and caretakers of the lively oracles of God. The error of the Pharisees was not in their understanding of scripture, which they understood pretty well, but their error was in rejecting Messiah due to greed and envy; the error of the Pharisees' teaching was due to their efforts to "build a fence" around the law of Moses, causing human tradition to trump God's word, (which they understood).

Enoch 6 shows that angels fell through sin and corrupted their way through sexual intercourse with human women. It sounds to me as if you'd have a problem with this. I do not, though once I did.

My methodology invalidates the revelation by Moroni as well as the one to Mohammed, and there are no fulfilled prophecies in the Quran or Book of Mormon, by the way.