Difference between revisions of "Enoch restitutus (1836 Murray), book"

From 4 Enoch: : The Online Encyclopedia of Second Temple Judaism, and Christian and Islamic Origins
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 2: Line 2:


==Abstract==
==Abstract==
In this work the Anglican clergyman Edward Murray suggested that the now published book of Henoch should be seen only as a corrupted version of the “original” mentioned by the Letter of Jude and other ancient authors. It was the final and failed attempt to harmonize the Hermetic tradition of the antiquity of Henoch-Hermes and his writings with the new discoveries. Murray’s book was poorly received; a tradition that for centuries had been at the center of scholarly debate suddenly appeared a worthless, fanciful theory with no legitimacy in Enochic scholarship.


==Editions ==
==Editions ==

Revision as of 06:54, 31 May 2014

Enoch restitutus; or, An Attempt to Separate from the books of Enoch, the Book quoted by St. Jude. Also a Comparison of the Chronology of Enoch with the Hebrew Computation, and with the Periods Mentioned in the Book of Daniel and in the Apocalypse (1836) is a book by Edward Murray.

Abstract

In this work the Anglican clergyman Edward Murray suggested that the now published book of Henoch should be seen only as a corrupted version of the “original” mentioned by the Letter of Jude and other ancient authors. It was the final and failed attempt to harmonize the Hermetic tradition of the antiquity of Henoch-Hermes and his writings with the new discoveries. Murray’s book was poorly received; a tradition that for centuries had been at the center of scholarly debate suddenly appeared a worthless, fanciful theory with no legitimacy in Enochic scholarship.

Editions

Published in London [England]: Rivington, 1836.

Table of contents

External links