Book of Enoch

[enoob57]

brother enoob, given how you view extra-biblical writings, how do you feel about 'modern' (last few hundred years) commentary on the scriptures? I feel that some of them have added their own interpretations to the scriptures & have resulted in leading a lot of people away from what the scripture really means. Therefore the Body has become so separated by doctrines of men that becoming "One in Him' seems to be an impossible feat. ( Thank God that He is in charge of bringing this about & not man.)

It seems more appropriate to view all material in the light of what God has claimed to be His Own Word:

love not the world, Love God with all for He is jealous (how wonderful this truth He wants all of us! Praise God cause I want all of Him!), Love others equally as self, fear only Him, He will keep us in the day of trial, etc etc etc all combined equals >Father< Our Father which keeps us from all that would separate us for Him... His Word creates living and abiding hope in all The Words Substance "all things possible for our Father"

I had much rather read from people that had, in my opinion, a much closer relationship with God than many can claim today. The Word of God says Enoch was a man of faith & 'walked with God' for 300 years. Do you think that was just thrown in as an interesting tidbit or was there a more substantial reason? I am examining the extra-biblical works in light of the scripture to see for myself whether there is anything to gain from them. After all Enoch was quoted by Jude as being prophetic.

Yes satan is ever working to deceive & we are to be guarding our hearts with all diligence. Just tune in to some of the "preachers" of today & really listen. There is so much subtle deception it turns the stomach!

The Word of God exceeds every aspect of me on a daily basis and the more I attend to The requirements of learning The Teachings->that within the apparent bounded borders yet unbounded somehow!!!

I grow smaller in myself and desperately fear The Lord Who has written such a Book-> for it truly testifies that The Word is His Word and The Majesty in Which It Speaks to all of life in different times and epochs shrinks me to reverence for This His Work.... When in the council of face to Face with Christ I suspect the realities shall show forth that although bound within books Genesis - Revelation all of the eternities are also framed in the perfect concepts of Witnessed Faith procured in The Pleasure of Christ Jesus The Living Text of Light and Life given Unto The Father... it is indeed my flashlight to all truth so in view of this "the book of enoch" I believe this to be wise council

They Reject Divine Authority (Jude 8-11) ->excerpt<-

Bible scholars tell us that this quotation is from an apocryphal book called The Book of Enoch. The fact that Jude quoted from this non biblical book does not mean the book is inspired and

trustworthy, any more than Paul's quotations from the Greek poets put God's "seal of approval" on everything they wrote. The Spirit of God led Jude to use this quotation and make it a part of the inspired Scriptures.

(from The Bible Exposition Commentary. Copyright

[Durant]

I want to admit I have not read this yet but intend to. I have a something that someone made and converted to esword. Anyway this is something that I found out a few years ago that may add something of interest regarding height of people. I was listening to a trusted christian speaker and he said that there is a good chance that Noah and his wife's remains were found. They were found near one of the arch locations (the one that I am dead positive is the right one) I dont remember the height of Noah but his wife was 12' If this is truly them and there is no way to know for sure. a 12 foot woman as a norm sure adds a dimension to what giants may have been

want some feedback on what you think of The Book of Enoch. Do you consider it to be genuine? Why was it left out of modern translations of scripture?

We know Enoch walked with God 300 years & God took him. Seems to me God would have revealed a lot to him.

Anybody?

Personally I think the first book of Enoch is the handed down knowledge that Enoch left us through oral transmission. There are obvious things in it that appear to be exaggerations or mis translations such as 300 foot high giants (which is more likely 25 to 30 feet.

Personally I consider it about as reliable as the New York Times. Gives a pretty good overall story, but the details leave it a bit lacking to make it part of the Bible.

Books two and three, I haven't made up my mind about at all.

[OldEnglishSheepdog]

I think Steven and AyinJade are making a very good point here.

If you're reading commentaries or the writings of Christian thinkers, they're commenting on the Bible.

The book of Enoch is not. It either claims to contribute to the Bible or distract from the Bible.

It doesn't really work to compare commentaries on scripture to something that's not commenting on scripture.

What's introduced by such a text either contributes (adds to) what God's revealed to us, or detracts from that. Since it's not a commentary it's not a matter of being an opinon, but whether or not it is a distortion or enhancement of our worldview.

I agree with the caution exercised around this text. Whether or not someone is intentionally putting it on par with scripture, it still has greatly influenced the assumptions with which we approach the text, and I think has impacted those assumptions much more than most people realize.

A lot of the assumptions we carry are extra-biblical cultural baggage that clings to our perceptions, and which we read into the Bible unknowingly. Paradise Lost, the Divine Comedy, even pop cultural depictions all colour the assumptions we bring to the text, instead of combate with the text.

When people read things that are not simply comments on the Bible but offer illumination in the form of extra information, therein lies danger. It's critical we understand in advance what information we're treating as commenting on scripture (contributing to understanding), versus contributing to the very lense through which we view scripture (contributing to information).

And I also agree with Steven that the warning in Revelation applies.

The Bible starts at the beginning and ends with the conclusion, mapping out the whole narrative from first to last. At the beginning are stern warnings against adding to scripture, "Do not add to what I command you and do not subtract from it, but keep the commands of the LORD your God that I give you" (Deut. 4:2), in the middle, "Every word of God is flawless; he is a shield to those who take refuge in him. Do not add to his words, or he will rebuke you and prove you a liar" (Proverbs 30:5-6), and at the end in Revelation as discussed.

Since Revelation is the prophesy that takes us to the very conclusion of time as we know it, it's a sealed text and therefore adding within the text is adding to the concluding Revelation given to John.

[Guest Butero]

OldEnglishSheepdog, you make some valid points, but there are a lot of people that treat commentators as gospel. They will put their confidence in the person that wrote the commentary, and will believe everything they say. People take the word of historians as gospel, and believe everything they say to be true. Then there are paraphrases that change the meaning of the text, and people take them as the gospel truth without question. There are people that have come in here and used "The Message" as Biblical text, when it clearly is not. Yes, extra-Biblical books lke Enoch could lead someone astray, but I don't think they are anymore dangerous than commentaries. It is more the way you look at them. As far as that goes, if you place too much confidence in a Pastor or tv evangelist, the same thing can happen. You have to measure everything you read in light of the Bible.

[OldEnglishSheepdog]

There are people that have come in here and used "The Message" as Biblical text, when it clearly is not.

I think you and I just became best friends!

Yes, extra-Biblical books lke Enoch could lead someone astray, but I don't think they are anymore dangerous than commentaries. It is more the way you look at them. As far as that goes, if you place too much confidence in a Pastor or tv evangelist, the same thing can happen. You have to measure everything you read in light of the Bible.

I totally agree that this can and does happen, but it isn't the intention of commentaries for this to happen - and if it is then it's not a commentary so much as cult literature. So certainly the same mistakes can be made with anything, commentaries included, but I'd be just as ready to warn against that too, (and let's look at the verses I'd use, for no other reason than I like quoting scripture!):

"Stop trusting in man, who has but a breath in his nostrils. Of what account is he?" (Isaiah 2:22);

"Do not put your trust in... mortal men, who cannot save" (Psalm 146:3); and

"This is what the LORD says: "Cursed is the one who trusts in man, who depends on flesh for his strength and whose heart turns away from the LORD" (Jeremiah 17:5).

I wouldn't necessarily avoid reading the Book of Enoch, but the approach that some people here are talking is not the same one we should approach a commentary with, so we can't really compare it to reading commentaries - I think this is the point others were making and so I think it's a valid warning.

[Guest Butero]

There are people that have come in here and used "The Message" as Biblical text, when it clearly is not.

I think you and I just became best friends!

Yes, extra-Biblical books lke Enoch could lead someone astray, but I don't think they are anymore dangerous than commentaries. It is more the way you look at them. As far as that goes, if you place too much confidence in a Pastor or tv evangelist, the same thing can happen. You have to measure everything you read in light of the Bible.

I totally agree that this can and does happen, but it isn't the intention of commentaries for this to happen - and if it is then it's not a commentary so much as cult literature. So certainly the same mistakes can be made with anything, commentaries included, but I'd be just as ready to warn against that too.

I wouldn't necessarily avoid reading the Book of Enoch, but the approach that people were talking about is not the same one we should approach a commentary with, so we can't really compare it to reading commentaries.

The intention of a commentary is still an apples to oranges comparison since its a totally different medium then the Book of Enoch which wasn't written as a commentary - which I think is the point others were making.

So you are saying that since the intent of the authors of most commentaries isn't that people look at them as equal to scripture, the author is not responsible because people put too much faith in what they say? On the other hand, the book of Enoch was intended to be taken as an absolute fact, equal to scripture? You have a point. The only books that should be taken as innerant are the 66 books in the cannon, and there is a danger when anyone adds to them.

[OldEnglishSheepdog]

So you are saying that since the intent of the authors of most commentaries isn't that people look at them as equal to scripture, the author is not responsible because people put too much faith in what they say?

Right.

On the other hand, the book of Enoch was intended to be taken as an absolute fact, equal to scripture?

Right, again.

You have a point. The only books that should be taken as innerant are the 66 books in the cannon, and there is a danger when anyone adds to them.

Yep, we're on the same page!

[ayin jade]

You have to measure everything you read in light of the Bible.

Too many people do not. Unless one is thoroughly grounded in the bible, in their faith, then they should not be reading things like the book of enoch.

[enoob57]

You have to measure everything you read in light of the Bible.

Too many people do not. Unless one is thoroughly grounded in the bible, in their faith, then they should not be reading things like the book of enoch.

I believe this to be excellent council from Godly perspectives... Love Steven

[other one]

You have to measure everything you read in light of the Bible.

Too many people do not. Unless one is thoroughly grounded in the bible, in their faith, then they should not be reading things like the book of enoch.

But once grounded one should not neglect other readings...... Especially the book of Enoch.