Peter, the calendar and Enoch

Ian Hutchesson mc2499 at mclink.it
Sat Jun 26 07:54:02 EDT 1999


Dear Peter,

You wrote:

>I will download the book of Enoch and skim through it. Yes, I'm sure 
>you're right that it is important, though I am not sure about the 
>calendar.

My copy is an online edition, ie meant to be accessed easily on the web and
is therefore broken down chapter by chapter, though there is a link to
Wesley somewhere there. This might be useful for a single text file: 

               http://wesley.nnc.edu/noncanon.htm

Incidentally, the Astronomical Book, known as the "Book of the Courses of
the Heavenly Luminaries" in the Ethiopic version, is found in Chs 72-82. It
is not easy reading. Here's a summary:

72. an attempt to quantify the sun's movements related to the amount 
    of light over a year; 364 days
73. the moon's movements related to the light over a month
74. comparison of the moon's movements related to the sun's, showing
    how the moon falls behind in relation to the years
75. the importance of the four intercalary days
76. description of the twelve winds
77. structure of the world
78. the sun and the moon; and the moon's phases
79. conclusion of heavenly revelations and synopsis
80. "the whole order of the stars shall be concealed from sinners"
81. Enoch taken back to the earth to teach what he has learnt
82. part of the teaching: the 4 days, the stars and their seasons

You can skim #76, #77, and #81, if you are interested more in the cosmology
and the calendar. Ch 80 reads to me like a later insertion, but interesting.

The DSS findings show that it was not at that time attached to the other
books of Enoch (which now is a pentateuch), having a separate life, and
that the book was more complete than it is today -- a lot more listing of
the movements and quantities of light, etc.

>The dates with no month given add nothing to the argument, i.e. 
>subtract nothing from the probability, as there is way that such a 
>date could be shown to fall on a sabbath.

Now, Peter, there is *no possibility*. You now have the calendar structure.
In both instances there are the same three possibilities. Can you see *any*
way of making a Sabbath out of those dates using the calendar information
you now have?

If you need more evidence other than Ezekiel, here's what I can find in the
Hexateuch (omitting prescriptions for feast days):

there are five dates in Genesis, all in the flood story, 
1 Sun, 2 Wed, 2 Fri; (the flood started on the first day of the week)

five dates in Numbers (1:1, 1:18, 10:11, 33:3, 33:38), 
2 Wed, 3 Fri; 

one in Deut1:3, 
1 Fri; 

one in Josh4:19, 
1 Fri; 
-------------------------------
total of twelve days:
1 Sun, 4 Wed, 7 Fri.

Obviously not random. 

If one adds these twelve days to the thirteen in Ezekiel, we have a better
sample to show the non-randomness of the distribution of days. However,
there is less guarantee, given the spread of these dates over six books,
that we are dealing with strict use of the solar calendar and not just the
following of forms. (That all five dates in Genesis occur in the flood
story suggests a separate source.)

>The probability that at least 6 out of 11 random dates falls on the 
>same day of the week is not hard to calculate, but I don't know the 
>exact formula. I doubt if it will show strong statistical 
>significance. Do you actually know enough statistics to say "The 
>evidence is quite clear that there is nothing random", or are you 
>making assumptions?

Yes, I'm making assumptions, but they are not of the unfounded category. If
there are thirteen dates, then on average there should be almost two (13 *
1/7 = 1.857) of any day, ie rather high probability <grin>. That two days
won't appear the calculation, using your 11 days, is ((6/7)^11)^2 or about
0.033627, and using my 13 days is 0.018147. Let's not add the 12 days from
the Hexateuch.

>Please don't assume I rely on western media for news about Serbia; I 
>don't. It is clear from newspapers published in Russia that the 
>Russians think that the Serbs are relying on them. Maybe Milosevic 
>actually has more sense.

He was hoping that Russia could be drawn into the affair, but Russia's
financial situation made their position predictable. (Sitting here in Rome
I received advice: if things start to look hot because of the Russians,
come home! It did raise a smile.)


Ian




More information about the b-hebrew mailing list