01-23-2026, 04:03 AM
River, that’s an excellent essay.
Wikipedia also tells me that the book of Enoch is canon in the Ethiopian Bible
The vulgate and the codex Sinaiticus which incudes the Septuagint as the OT date from about the same time. We know when the vulgate was written, but there’s a hundred year range for the dating of the CS. So the vulgate is as legit, IMO. We don’t know what earlier editions of the Septuagint read like.
The book of Enoch is a favourite one of conspiracy theorists and general nutcases because it talks about giants, ergo “history is bunk. Giant sloth fossils are actually Giant skeletons. NASA wants to hide the truth”.
My question to you is: why would you not use the Vulgate for the OT in preference to the Septuagint, when the earliest manuscripts of the latter date from about the same time and have no properly identifiable author?
Wikipedia also tells me that the book of Enoch is canon in the Ethiopian Bible
The vulgate and the codex Sinaiticus which incudes the Septuagint as the OT date from about the same time. We know when the vulgate was written, but there’s a hundred year range for the dating of the CS. So the vulgate is as legit, IMO. We don’t know what earlier editions of the Septuagint read like.
The book of Enoch is a favourite one of conspiracy theorists and general nutcases because it talks about giants, ergo “history is bunk. Giant sloth fossils are actually Giant skeletons. NASA wants to hide the truth”.
My question to you is: why would you not use the Vulgate for the OT in preference to the Septuagint, when the earliest manuscripts of the latter date from about the same time and have no properly identifiable author?