Robert H. Charles wrote a very long and, some might say, speculative, introduction to his translation of Enoch's and Noah's writings in Oxford's Pseudepigrapha. Charles' attempt to discredit both of these writers is obvious. His claim is that this document was written about 200 B.C. by a group of writers or scribes, pretending to be Enoch or Noah. However, it is nearly impossible to support such ideas because that would force us to conclude that all the other books of the Hebrew Scriptures would have been written on or about the same time. And if we can believe IV Ezra, they at least were restored by scribes after the return from exile. The other conclusion, which most scholars seem to miss, is that ancient writings had to have been copied from earlier manuscripts to be preserved. That these writers or "scribes" may have included their own comments or "corrections" is not in question. Those who copied the Torah and the rest of the Hebrew Scriptures did that in many places. However, evidence shows that the writings of Enoch were preserved by Noah and his sons, and known by Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob and his twelve sons, and quoted by Moses, the Prophets, and the Apostles. The book is a completely edited and revised translation of the Book of Enoch based upon the translation by R. H. Charles. Obsolete and obscure words were replaced by their modern counterparts. Old English phrases, pronouns and verbs were also replaced. In some cases it appeared that the translators did not understand what they were translating causing syntax to suffer. This new work makes Enoch's writing come alive and clear. The book also contains introductory commentaries for each of the five "books" and chapters providing evidence of Enoch's writings in the Bible, and the Book of Jasher, the Book of Jubilees, and The Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs.
Robert H. Charles wrote a very long and, some might say, speculative, introduction to his translation of Enoch's and Noah's writings in Oxford's Pseudepigrapha. Charles' attempt to discredit both of these writers is obvious. His claim is that this document was written about 200 B.C. by a group of writers or scribes, pretending to be Enoch or Noah. However, it is nearly impossible to support such ideas because that would force us to conclude that all the other books of the Hebrew Scriptures would have been written on or about the same time. And if we can believe IV Ezra, they at least were restored by scribes after the return from exile. The other conclusion, which most scholars seem to miss, is that ancient writings had to have been copied from earlier manuscripts to be preserved. That these writers or "scribes" may have included their own comments or "corrections" is not in question. Those who copied the Torah and the rest of the Hebrew Scriptures did that in many places. However, evidence shows that the writings of Enoch were preserved by Noah and his sons, and known by Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob and his twelve sons, and quoted by Moses, the Prophets, and the Apostles. The book is a completely edited and revised translation of the Book of Enoch based upon the translation by R. H. Charles. Obsolete and obscure words were replaced by their modern counterparts. Old English phrases, pronouns and verbs were also replaced. In some cases it appeared that the translators did not understand what they were translating causing syntax to suffer. This new work makes Enoch's writing come alive and clear. The book also contains introductory commentaries for each of the five "books" and chapters providing evidence of Enoch's writings in the Bible, and the Book of Jasher, the Book of Jubilees, and The Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs.
