|
Milik's
Book of Giants |
||
|
I
turn to Joseph Milik's The Books of Enoch to get insight into his
theories concerning the portions of Enochan literature now in question:
the Parables and the Book of Giants.
In the opening paragraphs, Milik immediately turns his attentions
to these: explaining (1)
that, primarily due to the total lack of identification of any part
of the Parables among the "countless mass of fragments of
4Q," chapters 37-71 in the Ethopic version must therefore be of
post-Qumran origin; and, (2)
that the Manichaean Book of Giants of the third century has
its source in a dozen or so cave 4 manuscripts which are also entitled Book
of Giants (siglum 4QEnGiants). This information bears on the works
that compose his (3)
Enochan Pentateuch of the first century B.C.E., including the Astronomical
Book (AB), Book of the Watchers (BW), Book of Giants, Book
of Dreams (BD), and the Epistle of Enoch. (The parables are of course missing from this list.)
He claims that these five books were copied and bound together on
what were once two separate scrolls.
In the Christian era, Giants was eliminated and replaced
with the Parables. -(1) The title "Parables of Enoch" was adapted
from Enoch 1:2 "and taking up his parable" - perhaps an allusion
to Num 23:7, etc. (This title
is from the Greek rendering, "parable" is not found in the
Ethiopic). The original title
chosen by the author is "Second Vision of Enoch" (37:1), which
includes three discourses directed to "those who inhabit dry
land," and "from the first to last generations."
The first (parable) paraphrases several passages in BW, the doings
of the four archangels, the journeys of the patriarch, the astronomical
journeys of Enoch. The second
is a discourse on the fate and folly of sinners ("renegades"). The third returns to BW themes - the "just" are
venerated, Noah journeys widely, Michael repeats the BW's list of angels.
The author
had at his/her disposal an excellent Greek text of the BW (and the LXX).
Passages from other Enochan literature are used cautiously.
Milik also believes the author had access to Giants, citing the
description in 60:7-10 of Leviathan and Behemoth.
The inspiration from the work comes from the synoptic gospels -
common escatalogical titles include "the elect" and "Son of
Man." Since no quotations are recorded in the existing literature
of the first through fourth centuries (quotations from other Enochan
literature are common), Milik dates the Parables very late - perhaps as
late as the middle ages.
The Book of Parables is most closely related to the Sybilline
Oracles, which were especially popular in the second to fourth century.
Milik points out a plethora of common key words, phrases, passages
and ideas between the two. Two
parallels are especially poignant: Sib ii:233-7 and Enoch 61:6, describing
the judgment of Giants; and the war against the holy land and its elect of
Sib iii:663 ff. and Enoch 56:5-7.
Personal
judgment: Certainly the relationship to the Sybillines is much more
obvious in reading the literature than that of the synoptic gospels. The term "Son of man" is certainly not unique to
Matthew. If the Parables are
so late, would we not expect much more borrowing, as the author has
borrowed directly from BW, Sib, etc.? In reading other popular literature
from second to fourth century (such as some of the Nag Hammadi texts), I
recall many and frequent quotations from the gospels, even in
pseudo-historical texts like the Gospel of Nicodemus, etc.
-(a) By
internal evidence, some of the Sybilline Oracles used by the author of the
Parables can be dated accurately; -(b) the
Oracles (at least some of them) are undoubtedly Christian; -(c) yet,
if so, why aren't the Parables more blatantly and obviously Christian than
they are? I recall Collins (I
think) refuting Milik's judgment on this point, observing that the
parables were a sectarian Jewish answer to the claims of Christians that
Jesus was the "son of man" spoken of in Daniel.
This makes more sense to me, though it poses perhaps equally
difficult questions.
-(2) Milik
reconstructs the Book of Giants from twelve fragments found in Qumran cave
4. What has emerged seems to
be an expansion on the story of the fallen angels of Enoch 1 - 36. Although the BW speaks only in the most general terms about
the progeny of the union of Watchers and women, the BG give names, and
recounts the exploits, doctrines, and future destruction by flood and fire
of the nephilim and giants. Shemihaza is a common factor between the
Enochan and Manichaen Giants (in the later, he is Sahmizad), as are the
sons of Shemihaza, the dragon that was fought, and the various angels.
I found the
Manichaen method of evangelism interesting (as described by the author).
Besides the seven books of Mani, missionaries translated other
religious works into whatever the vernacular of the targeted people-group
happened to be (and they proseletized on three continents). They
translated every word, adapting the words of their scriptures to the
common language and mentality of their future disciples, including names
of months, persons, divinities and countries. |