An Aramaic Witness for 1 Enoch 1:9

An Appendix to: "Enoch, the seventh from Adam"

One of the most noteworthy discoveries of the Dead Sea Scrolls was identifying pre-Christian Aramaic portions of 1 Enoch, including the passage of Enoch's eschatological prophecy in chapter 1 verse 9, the same prophecy that Jude recorded in his epistle in verses 14-15. These were found among the scrolls in Cave 4, see Figure 1.

Figure 1
Interior of Qumran Cave 4

Thus, we were finally able to move beyond the Ethiopian, Greek and Coptic manuscripts of 1 Enoch that post-dated Jude and peer into material as it would have appeared to Jude. These Cave 4 discoveries were published in 1976 by Josef Milik in The Books of Enoch, Aramaic Fragments of Qumran Cave 4. By far the most remarkable of these is the scroll fragment codified as 4Q204, and by Milik as 4QEn^c 1 i, for this shows a portion of text identified as 1 Enoch 1:9-2:3. Shown below is the relevant part of Plate IX from The Books of Enoch, and an enlarged view^[1] below that. Note lines 15-17:

(Enlarged view)

Below is a translation distinguished in bold type with the missing text tentatively restored:

[Look! He comes with] the myriads of His holy ones, [to execute judgement against all; and He will destroy all the wicked, and will convict all] flesh, with regard to [all their] works [of wickedness which they have committed in deed and in word, and with regard to all] the proud and hard [words which wicked sinners have spoken against Him.

While 4QEn^c 1 i only has twenty-six letters on three lines preserved for 1 Enoch 1:9, this was enough for Milik to appraise it as an Aramaic witness for 1 Enoch 1:9, and, significantly, to say regarding line 17: “The quotation from Jude is closer to the [Aramaic] original than the text of C [Cairo papyrus Greek parchment codex] and E [Ethiopic version].” (Page 186.) Thus, at the very least, Jude had this type of Aramaic text of 1 Enoch 1:9 available to him.

Now, as Jude and other contributors to the Christian Greek Scriptures did not quote this book unreservedly or give it the stamp of approval like they did with books in the Hebrew Canon, it appears they were selective in referring to 1 Enoch. What drove their powers of discernment to identify what was authentic and trustworthy was inspiration from holy spirit. (1 Corinthians 2:13-6) Thus, Jude did not include in his famous quote the anachronous reference to Mt. Sinai in 1 Enoch 1:4, as Enoch would not have known about that mountain.

In conclusion, these are exciting times of discovery and realization, and this is now the best time to study the issues presented here.

Footnote:

^[1] Enlarged view copied from: http://www.deadseascrolls.org.il/explore-the-archive/image/B-284648.
See also the original here: http://www.deadseascrolls.org.il/explore-the-archive/image/B-359527. Black-and-white version: http://www.deadseascrolls.org.il/explore-the-archive/image/B-359528. Notice how illegible the writing is that has been enhanced though photography.

"Enoch, the seventh from Adam"

One of the most noteworthy finds of the Dead Sea Scrolls were fragments of the Book of Enoch, or 1 Enoch. Included in this cache of scraps of text were remains of 1 Enoch 1:9,^[1] a prophecy that was recorded in Jude 14, 15. This demonstrated once and for all that this prophecy found also in 1 Enoch predated Jude, and even Christianity itself.

Could a common source, an authentic depository of Enoch, account for both 1 Enoch and Jude having a prophecy from Enoch? Unfortunately for those who wish that was the case, Jude seems to refer to 1 Enoch in other verses besides 14, 15, namely in Jude 6, 12, 13, and possibly even the introduction in 14a. Additionally, there are other places in the Christian Scriptures that also seem to unmistakably refer to 1 Enoch. Thus it seems that the solution is this: the textual matrix of 1 Enoch contains authentic material from Enoch as well as commentary that harmonizes with divine revelation. So while 1 Enoch as a whole lies beyond the boundary of the canon of Scripture, it seems it does contain some factual and useful information.

How this non-canonical production could have preserved some of the authentic words of the historical, Biblical Enoch may be due to either of these options:

1. It is a corrupted book of Enoch that was preserved through the Noachian Deluge and copied, or
2. It is a text restored at a later date under divine inspiration and then corrupted and infused with uninspired material.

Regarding the later, it is noteworthy that it was first postulated by Tertullian when he wrote:

"If (Noah) had not had this (conservative power) by so short a route, there would (still) be this (consideration) to warrant our assertion of (the genuineness of) this Scripture: he could equally have renewed it, under the Spirit’s inspiration, after it had been destroyed by the violence of the deluge, as, after the destruction of Jerusalem by the Babylonian storming of it, every document of the Jewish literature is generally agreed to have been restored through Ezra."^[2]

Thus he allowed for the possibility of it being restored through divine inspiration, perhaps by Noah or Ezra. In any event, the option of restoration seems more likely than preservation as the book of Enoch was not mentioned by any Bible writer.

Footnotes:
^[1] See: http://www.deadseascrolls.org.il/explore-the-archive/image/B-284648, the first three lines of the uppermost fragment. Also the appendix: An Aramaic Witness for 1 Enoch 1:9.
^[2] Ante-Nicene Fathers. Volume 4, 15-16, seen here: http://oll.libertyfund.org/index.php?option=com_staticxt&staticfile=show.php%3Ftitle=1976&layout=html#chapter_192213