Why Lexham's Book of Enoch skips chapters 33-88, 90-108?

Page 1 of 1 (5 items)
This post has 4 Replies | 1 Follower

Posts 16
G.E. | Forum Activity | Posted: Sat, Apr 11 2020 5:23 PM

Just wondering why the The Lexham English Septuagint's Book of Enoch skips chapters 33-88, 90-108?

It jumps from chapter 32 to chapter 89, and nothing after chapter 89.

Online versions show that these chapters exist.

Posts 11433
DMB | Forum Activity | Replied: Sat, Apr 11 2020 5:41 PM

Enoch is a composite. The LXX had what you're finding. The 'missing' chapters were believed subsequent, and are largely drawn form the later Ethiopian. As a result, scholars spend considerable ink on dating the 'missing' chapters (typically 1st century ce).

"God will save his fallen angels and their broken wings He'll mend."

Posts 1188
Kiyah | Forum Activity | Replied: Sat, Apr 11 2020 5:44 PM

G.E.:

Just wondering why the The Lexham English Septuagint's Book of Enoch skips chapters 33-88, 90-108?

It jumps from chapter 32 to chapter 89, and nothing after chapter 89.

Online versions show that these chapters exist.

The greek version of the Book of Enoch (contained in the Lexham English Septuagint) has only survived partially from antiquity. The only language in which there are complete copies of Enoch is Ethiopic. Since the LES is translated from the greek and not ethiopic, there are chapters missing. If you own the Old Testament Pseudepigrapha edited by James Charlesworh (a critical edition that uses all the sources--ethiopic, greek, and aramaic) then you will have all the chapters. Here's a portion of the article within this work on Enoch:

Texts

1 Enoch is found complete only in the Ethiopic (Geʾez) Version, for which more than forty manuscripts are known to exist as of this writing. However, fragments of the work are also found in Aramaic, Greek, and Latin.

1. Aramaic: Aramaic fragments of 1 Enoch were found at Qumran and have been recently published, together with a major study of the text and history of 1 Enoch.

2. Ethiopic: As has been indicated above, the complete version of 1 Enoch is preserved only in Ethiopic. Below are a list of five major and important manuscripts, one of which (A) has been utilized as the base text of the present English translation, and another of which (C) has been used very extensively in the same work:

A. Kebrān 9/II (Hammerschmidt—Ṭānāsee 9/II); fifteenth century.
B. Princeton Ethiopic 3 (Garrett collection—Isaac 3); eighteenth or nineteenth century.
C. EMML 2080; fifteenth (possibly 14th) century.
D. Abbadianus 55; possibly fifteenth century.
E. British Museum Orient 485 (Wright 6); first half of the sixteenth century.

3. Greek: The Greek fragments are found principally in the following:

a. Codex Panopolitanus (two 8th-cent. or later MSS, found in 1886–87 in a Christian grave in Akhmim, Egypt), containing 1 Enoch 1:1–32:6 (designated Ga in this work).
b. Chronographia of Georgius Syncellus (c. 800), containing 1 Enoch 6:1–10:14; 15:8–16:1 (designated Gs in this work).
c. Chester Beatty papyrus of 1 Enoch containing 97:6–104; 106f. (published by C. Bonner, The Last Chapters of Enoch in Greek) (designated Gp in this work).
d. Vatican Greek MS 1809, containing 1 Enoch 89:42–49.

4. Latin: a Latin fragment, containing 1 Enoch 106:1–18, found in an eighth-century manuscript.

Posts 16
G.E. | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Sep 10 2020 6:37 AM

I'm basing this question off the premise that the apostles had access to the Septuagint. So my question is: (i) was Enoch chapters 33-88, 90-108 not in the Septuagint at the time the apostles read the Septuagint -- or (ii) that the portion of the Septuagint that has survived to our time does not have those chapters?

In other words, is the omission of Enoch chapters 33-88, 90-108 from the Septuagint because it wasn't in the 1st Century version, or that it is not in the fragments that survived to this day?

Posts 11433
DMB | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Sep 10 2020 7:11 AM

0. Chicken or the egg: Were the Enochian Parables reflective of 1st century (BCE/CE) thinking, or the base for Enochian Judaism, if there was such. Who knows?

1. Judging from epistle usage and arguments, the epistle writers had access to a version of the LXX. Which one? Was Enoch included? Who knows.

2. If you examine Jude, you'll notice that the usage doesn't include the Parables, etc. Why? Who knows.

3. From the Ethiopian 'discoveries', the argument concerning Parables dating goes on and on, largely due to very few dating clues. And its absense at Qumran doesn't help much. Who knows?

4. But for good authors and great discussion; not too pricey:

https://www.logos.com/product/163725/parables-of-enoch-a-paradigm-shift 

"God will save his fallen angels and their broken wings He'll mend."

Page 1 of 1 (5 items) | RSS