Oldalképek
PDF
ePub

the idea that it must have belonged to a far earlier age, than those with which it is associated; the errors or absurdities contained in the latter need in no degree affect the credit of the former book; since they only serve to prove the ignorance or carelessness of those who added them, in not discerning the many evidences, from which it might have been concluded that both could not be the productions of the same author.

Whatever may be our opinion of the comparative authority of this composition, it will probably be admitted, that it is not only without trace of any such rabbinical interpretation of Scripture, as might be expected to characterise the work of a Jewish Christian after the second century; but that the coincidence of its pages with those of the Scripture, is also very remarkably characterised, by the absence of any signs of a previous knowledge of those passages which have a similar meaning.

I shall endeavour hereafter to shew that the arguments which arise from the chronology followed in this book, are not such as ought to induce us to fix the date of its composition, on that ac

count, after the Christian æra; and I shall now proceed to collect such external evidence as may tend towards the conclusion that a much earlier date ought to be assigned, at least to some portions of it.

If some of the passages contained in the next chapter should appear to have but a slight reference to the question at issue; or if the testimony to be collected from any single source appears but vague and unsatisfactory; let it be remembered that from materials so scanty and so much interpolated, as all these ancient fragments are, the chief guidance which we can hope for must be obtained from the concurrence of testimony however slight; so that opinions derived from different sources may be valuable on account of their agreement, although taking each singly we might attach but little consequence to it.

CHAPTER II.

I HAVE already endeavoured to state the arguments which arise from the internal evidence attainable from these books; and in describing the principle on which I have proposed to place the several portions of them together, such passages only as were absolutely necessary for illustrating their connexion, have been produced. I have hitherto referred to no authorities which can be attributed to an earlier period than the second century; but in adding such external evidences of an early origin of these books as I have been able to collect, I have principally directed my attention. to the remains of earlier writers; with the hope of showing, that although the nature of this subject forbids us to expect any exact quotations from the books of Enoch under their present name, their contents were yet extant from very ancient times, being referred to in such a manner as may enable us to identify various early fragments, with some portions of these books which are now in our possession.

If, indeed, the passages which I shall produce were found under the name of Enoch, it might be doubted whether they had not been collected by an apocryphal writer of a later age, in order to give to his forgery the appearance of antiquity. But as they are found not only under another name, but as ascribed to various authors, all of whom are, nevertheless, to be traced to the name of Enoch as their prototype; it is evident that they cannot have been subsequently collected, but that they present to us, on the contrary, some of the relics of that common original, which, as I apprehend, we now possess in a comparatively perfect and connected form; and which we may especially recognize in that book, concerning the future judgment at the coming of the Son of man, which I have endeavoured to restore.

I therefore assume, that if we can obtain from different sources various unconnected fragments, which agree in their general meaning, and sometimes in their very words, with the book of Enoch; it will be probable that the rest of those works, now lost, contained also other portions of that book; and especially such as we can still suppose to remain in a state approximating to

their original form. And hence, whatever antiquity may be ascribed to the writings from which these instances of coincidence are drawn, it is obvious that the book to which they thus allude, must have existed before them; for as the names of various authors to whom it will be found that the passages in question were ascribed, must have concealed their relation to the books of Enoch; go it will scarcely be assumed, that an apocryphal writer could have selected by chance, and incorporated with his book, such writings as had already been attributed to Enoch by other writers, although they themselves spoke of him under other names, of the true import of which they were ignorant.

Our first enquiry will be as to the existence of any fragments, such as I have described, among those books, which bear the name of Hermes Trismegistus.

These remains are, indeed, so confused and interpolated, that there is little more than internal evidence by which their ancient portions may be distinguished from those which are more modern; but, from the eagerness and incaution of the early Christians, their additions both to

« ElőzőTovább »