Why did Lexham Include 1 Enoch in their English LXX?

IIRC Swete's inclusion of 1 Enoch (fragments) was controversial. He argued that it was important for understanding the development of the LXX and Jewish apocalyptic literature. From Chat GPT but not verified by my copy of the text in Logos:

[quote]

Swete's defense of including fragments of 1 Enoch in his critical edition of the Greek Old Testament can be found in the introduction to his work, "The Old Testament in Greek According to the Septuagint" (Cambridge University Press, 1909). In this introduction, Swete discusses his approach to the textual criticism of the Septuagint and the importance of including non-canonical texts in his edition. He specifically addresses the inclusion of 1 Enoch fragments, arguing that they are important for understanding the development of Jewish apocalyptic literature and the transmission of the Greek Old Testament tradition.

Swete writes: "It is only by the help of such fragmentary documents that we can hope to reconstruct the literary history of the Apocalyptic literature, and trace the growth of its ideas and language. Hence it has seemed to me desirable to include the fragments of the Book of Enoch, in spite of the fact that they are not strictly LXX, but belong to a different stream of Jewish literature, and are preserved in a form that shows them to have passed through Christian hands" (p. xv).

NB.Mick said:

please verify,

I would if I could but as I said "not verified"

NB.Mick said:

I know that ChatGPT makes quotes up

I've found amusing misunderstandings and lack of knowledge but not made up quotes ... can you direct me to other examples?

Note: yesterday I gave up trying to get it to tell me if there were other prayer forms which like the Collect are written in a very set pattern. It kept giving me set prayers like the Our Father and the Doxology.

From CCEL: [quote]

One other apocryphon of the Greek Old Testament claims attention here. The BOOK OF ENOCH has since 1838 been in the hands of scholars in the form of an Ethiopic version based upon the Greek. But until 1892 the Greek version was known only through a few fragments—the verse quoted by St Jude (cf. 14 f.), a brief tachygraphic extract in cod. Vat. gr. 1809, published in facsimile by Mai (patr. nov. biblioth. ii.), and deciphered by Gildemeister (ZDMG., 1855, p. 622 ff.), and the excerpts in the Chronographia of Georgius Syncellus631. But in 1886 a small vellum book was found in 284a Christian grave in Akhmîm (Panopolis), in Upper Egypt, ee which contained inter alia the first thirty-two chapters of Enoch in Greek—nearly the whole of the first section of the book. This large fragment was published by M. Bouriant in the ninth volume of Mémoires publiés par les membres de la mission archéologique Française au Caire (Paris, 1er fasc. 1892; 3e fasc. 1893).

The newly recovered Greek belongs to the oldest part of Enoch, which may be regarded as in the main a Palestinian work of the second century B.C.632. The Greek version is the parent of the Ethiopic, and of pre-Christian date, since it was in the hands of St Jude. Thus it possesses a strong claim upon the attention of the student of Biblical Greek, while the book itself possesses an almost unique value as an exposition of Jewish eschatology.

The Greek version of Enoch seems to have been circulated in the ancient Church; cf. Barn. 4. 16; Clem. Alex. ecl. proph. 2; Orig. de princ. i. 3. 3, iv. 35, hom. in Num. 28. 2. The book was not accepted by authority (Orig. c. Cels. v. 54 ἐν τα̯ς ἐκκλησίαις οὐ πάνυ φέρεται ὡς θεῖα τὰ ἐπιγεγραμμένα τοῦ Ἑνὼχ βιβλία: in Ioann. t. vi. 25 εἴ τῳ φίλον παραδέχεσθαι ὡς ἅγιον τὸ βιβλία. Hieron. de virr. ill. 4 "apocryphus est"), but opinion was divided, and Tertullian was prepared to admit the claims of a writing which had been quoted in a Catholic Epistle (de cult. faem. i. 3 "scio scripturam Enoch . . . non recipi a quibusdam quia nec in armarium Iudaicum admittitur . . . a nobis quidem nihil omnino reiciendum est quod pertineat ad nos . . . eo accedit quod E. apud Iudam apostolum testimonium possidet)." In the end, however, it appears to have been discredited both in East and West, and, if we may judge by the almost total disappearance of the Greek version, it was rarely copied by Catholics even for private 285study. A mere chance has thrown into our hands an excerpt made in the eighth or ninth century, and it is significant that in the Akhmîm book Enoch is found in company with fragments of a pseudonymous Gospel and Apocalypse633.

Justin Gatlin said:

Ask it to summarize a made up URL. Try:

Please give me the first three paragraphs of https://www.nytimes.com/2021/04/20/us/Tax-filings-below-average-Yellen-says.html

Ah, thanks ... I had assumed this was the result of matching to the closest URL rather than a precise URL.  But you may well be right. When I set the date to 2024 I got [quote]I'm sorry, but I cannot provide you with the first three paragraphs of an article that does not exist. Today's date is April 20, 2023, and as an AI language model, I do not have access to future events or articles. Is there anything else I can assist you with?

Justin Gatlin said:

If you then say, "Did you just make that up?" It gets very defensive.

But when I ask "what URL did you use to get that information?" it gives me a very reasonable answer that tends to confirm my suspicions as to how it works behind the scenes:

[quote]I apologize for the confusion earlier. As an AI language model, I do not have the capability to browse the internet and access websites. However, the article I provided earlier does exist and can be found at this URL: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/04/20/us/Tax-filings-below-average-Yellen-says.html.

which does not need to exist now but likely existed at some point in the training of the AI engine.