Book of Enoch

[other one]

and so you put his actions on the rest of us.....        that's not really a good thing to do.....     I know a lot of people who accept Enoch as.....   hummmmmmmm....   usable information lets say.     I would not say that the book is inspired, but the overall teaching is or Jesus would not have quoted it...

I have not kept my feelings a secret from anyone, and I have not left my church or separated myself from anyone.....       It's a shame we don't know each other well for I could offset your experience with the other person and you might have to consider things a bit deeper before you make such harsh statements....

 

Just sayin........

 

 

Oh, and btw I know people just like the guy you are speaking of that act that way just because they read and speak Greek or Hebrew.....

[thereselittleflower]

No one denies its acceptance in the early church.   The problem is that the early church was rife with false doctrine and as such is not a very good barometer for testing what is good and acceptable.  

 

The book of Enoch's value is like that of other early writings.  It allows us a glimpse into the mindset of early Christians. It has historical value.

 

The problems we start running into is when we start using things like the book of Enoch to fill in the blanks, in areas where the Bible is silent.    To take a book that is not Scripture that has theological errors in it, and use it as a supplemental source alongside the Bible to fill in the missing information that the Bible doesn't give us really doesn't make for a good way of handling that document

 

 

What exactly do you mean by

 

"the early church was rife with false doctrine?"

[Joshua-777]

and so you put his actions on the rest of us.....        that's not really a good thing to do.....     I know a lot of people who accept Enoch as.....   hummmmmmmm....   usable information lets say.     I would not say that the book is inspired, but the overall teaching is or Jesus would not have quoted it...

I have not kept my feelings a secret from anyone, and I have not left my church or separated myself from anyone.....       It's a shame we don't know each other well for I could offset your experience with the other person and you might have to consider things a bit deeper before you make such harsh statements....

 

Just sayin........

 

 

Oh, and btw I know people just like the guy you are speaking of that act that way just because they read and speak Greek or Hebrew.....

It is a shame we don't know each other well because my opinion on this is really is subject to change. It wasn't just one person though that have fallen in this, I've seen more than a few. I also am not denying that there is usable information in it, or else Jude wouldn't have quoted it. 

[Rev2015]

Be very care how you interpret what you are reading, nowhere in scripture does it indicate, the Enoch of Genesis ever wrote a book. 

Jude 1:
14 And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints,
15 To execute judgment upon all, and to convince all that are ungodly among them of all their ungodly deeds which they have ungodly committed, and of all their hard speeches which ungodly sinners have spoken against him.

It does not say Enoch wrote a book. It says Enoch prophesied, or spoke. If Jude would have been referring to a book written by Enoch, scripture would have followed the precedent set forth in the Old Testament. If Jude would have been quoting out of a book by Enoch. He would have said, as it is written in the book of Enoch. Not that Enoch prophesied. When we allude to someone prophesying today, we interpret that as speech, not as authorship. 

The precedent is established in the following verses, this is the only book outside the canon that I have found mentioned in the bible. The book of Jasher. I do not believe this is an inspired book, but it must have had at least some historical significant prevalence at that time, for God to have allowed it’s mention twice, in two different books.

Joshua 10:
12 Then spake Joshua to the Lord in the day when the Lord delivered up the Amorites before the children of Israel, and he said in the sight of Israel, Sun, stand thou still upon Gibeon; and thou, Moon, in the valley of Ajalon.
13 And the sun stood still, and the moon stayed, until the people had avenged themselves upon their enemies. Is not this written in the book of Jasher? So the sun stood still in the midst of heaven, and hasted not to go down about a whole day.

2 Samuel 1:
17 And David lamented with this lamentation over Saul and over Jonathan his son:
18 (Also he bade them teach the children of Judah the use of the bow: behold, it is written in the book of Jasher.)

 

[other one]

Be very care how you interpret what you are reading, nowhere in scripture does it indicate, the Enoch of Genesis ever wrote a book. 

 

Tertullian and the Book of Enoch

 

Tertullian, an early church father and founder of Latin Christianity, wrote a few positive things concerning the Book of Enoch. Tertulian writes as follows in his 2nd century work, On the Apparel of Women I 3:1-3.

“I am aware that the Scripture of Enoch, which has assigned this order of action to angels, is not received by some, because it is not admitted into the Jewish canon either. I suppose they did not think that, having been published before the deluge, it could have safely survived that world-wide calamity, the abolisher of all things. If that is the reason for rejecting it, let them recall to their memory that Noah, the survivor of the deluge, was the great-grandson of Enoch himself; and he, of course, had heard and remembered, from domestic renown and hereditary tradition, concerning his own great-grandfather’s ‘grace in the sight of God,’ (Genesis 6:8) and concerning all his preachings; since Enoch had given no other charge to Methuselah than that he should hand on the knowledge of them to his posterity. Noah therefore, no doubt, might have succeeded in the trusteeship of his preaching; or, had the case been otherwise, he would not have been silent alike concerning the disposition of things made by God, his Preserver, and concerning the particular glory of his own house.

“If Noah had not had this conservative power by so short a route, there would still be this consideration to warrant our assertion of the genuineness of this Scripture: he could equally have renewed it, under the Spirit’s inspiration, after it had been destroyed by the violence of the deluge, as, after the destruction of Jerusalem by the Babylonian storming of it, every document of the Jewish literature is generally agreed to have been restored through Ezra.

“But since Enoch in the same Scripture has preached likewise concerning the Lord, nothing at all must be rejected by us which pertains to us; and we read that ‘every Scripture suitable for edification is divinely inspired.’ (2 Timothy 3:16) By the Jews it may now seem to have been rejected for that very reason, just like all the other portions nearly which tell of Christ. Nor, of course, is this fact wonderful, that they did not receive some Scriptures which spake of Him whom even in person, speaking in their presence, they were not to receive. To these considerations is added the fact that Enoch possesses a testimony in the Apostle Jude.” (Jude 1:14-15)

Edited August 15, 2015 by other one

[Guest shiloh357]

Endorsement by the early church fathers actually makes the book of Enoch MORE questionable   The early church fathers had some very unbiblical positions.  They were wrong more often than they were right.

There are plenty of ancient documents that we know were not written by the author bearing their names.  Often names of famous people were used to give documents more credibility in the eyes of the readership.   Just because the book of Enoch bears his name, doesn't mean it was authored by him.

Besides, if one takes a modern copy of the book of Enoch and compares it to the biblical quotation, there is a number of significant differences for them to have come from the same document.

 

[OakWood]

Be very care how you interpret what you are reading, nowhere in scripture does it indicate, the Enoch of Genesis ever wrote a book. 

Jude 1:
14 And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints,
15 To execute judgment upon all, and to convince all that are ungodly among them of all their ungodly deeds which they have ungodly committed, and of all their hard speeches which ungodly sinners have spoken against him.

It does not say Enoch wrote a book. It says Enoch prophesied, or spoke. If Jude would have been referring to a book written by Enoch, scripture would have followed the precedent set forth in the Old Testament. If Jude would have been quoting out of a book by Enoch. He would have said, as it is written in the book of Enoch. Not that Enoch prophesied. When we allude to someone prophesying today, we interpret that as speech, not as authorship. 

The precedent is established in the following verses, this is the only book outside the canon that I have found mentioned in the bible. The book of Jasher. I do not believe this is an inspired book, but it must have had at least some historical significant prevalence at that time, for God to have allowed it’s mention twice, in two different books.

Joshua 10:
12 Then spake Joshua to the Lord in the day when the Lord delivered up the Amorites before the children of Israel, and he said in the sight of Israel, Sun, stand thou still upon Gibeon; and thou, Moon, in the valley of Ajalon.
13 And the sun stood still, and the moon stayed, until the people had avenged themselves upon their enemies. Is not this written in the book of Jasher? So the sun stood still in the midst of heaven, and hasted not to go down about a whole day.

2 Samuel 1:
17 And David lamented with this lamentation over Saul and over Jonathan his son:
18 (Also he bade them teach the children of Judah the use of the bow: behold, it is written in the book of Jasher.)

 

No, it doesn't indicate that Enoch ever wrote a book but seeing as Enoch lived in antediluvian times and only Noah and his family survived the Flood how did anybody know what Enoch ever said unless there was a book that had been preserved on the ark?

Jude refers to what Enoch actually said. Without a book, how did he know unless the Noah preserved an oral tradition that passed down for generations? And what has happened to that oral tradition today?

 

[Rev2015]

Be very care how you interpret what you are reading, nowhere in scripture does it indicate, the Enoch of Genesis ever wrote a book. 

Jude 1:
14 And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints,
15 To execute judgment upon all, and to convince all that are ungodly among them of all their ungodly deeds which they have ungodly committed, and of all their hard speeches which ungodly sinners have spoken against him.

It does not say Enoch wrote a book. It says Enoch prophesied, or spoke. If Jude would have been referring to a book written by Enoch, scripture would have followed the precedent set forth in the Old Testament. If Jude would have been quoting out of a book by Enoch. He would have said, as it is written in the book of Enoch. Not that Enoch prophesied. When we allude to someone prophesying today, we interpret that as speech, not as authorship. 

The precedent is established in the following verses, this is the only book outside the canon that I have found mentioned in the bible. The book of Jasher. I do not believe this is an inspired book, but it must have had at least some historical significant prevalence at that time, for God to have allowed it’s mention twice, in two different books.

Joshua 10:
12 Then spake Joshua to the Lord in the day when the Lord delivered up the Amorites before the children of Israel, and he said in the sight of Israel, Sun, stand thou still upon Gibeon; and thou, Moon, in the valley of Ajalon.
13 And the sun stood still, and the moon stayed, until the people had avenged themselves upon their enemies. Is not this written in the book of Jasher? So the sun stood still in the midst of heaven, and hasted not to go down about a whole day.

2 Samuel 1:
17 And David lamented with this lamentation over Saul and over Jonathan his son:
18 (Also he bade them teach the children of Judah the use of the bow: behold, it is written in the book of Jasher.)

 

No, it doesn't indicate that Enoch ever wrote a book but seeing as Enoch lived in antediluvian times and only Noah and his family survived the Flood how did anybody know what Enoch ever said unless there was a book that had been preserved on the ark?

Jude refers to what Enoch actually said. Without a book, how did he know unless the Noah preserved an oral tradition that passed down for generations? And what has happened to that oral tradition today?

 

 

I believe its possible the story may have been handed down word of mouth, but, in my humbled opinion, it was direct inspired revelation from God to Jude, as was with all scripture when it was recorded by His servants. Jude did not have to have knowledge of a book or attain information from it. I also considered, when Jesus was on the earth, He never in N.T. scripture mentions a book of Enoch, nor does He correct the O.T. canon.

Edited August 16, 2015 by Rev2015

[thereselittleflower]

Endorsement by the early church fathers actually makes the book of Enoch MORE questionable   The early church fathers had some very unbiblical positions.  They were wrong more often than they were right.

There are plenty of ancient documents that we know were not written by the author bearing their names.  Often names of famous people were used to give documents more credibility in the eyes of the readership.   Just because the book of Enoch bears his name, doesn't mean it was authored by him.

Besides, if one takes a modern copy of the book of Enoch and compares it to the biblical quotation, there is a number of significant differences for them to have come from the same document.

 

 

Endorsement by the early church fathers actually makes the book of Enoch MORE questionable   The early church fathers had some very unbiblical positions.  They were wrong more often than they were right.

It is amazing to me any time someone claims they understand christian truth better than the early christians did who still had the words of the Apostle ringing in their ears.  The closer one to something, the more true one is to it.  We are 2000 years removed, not 100.   That you think you understand christianity better than they did betrays the source of such belief.  The ego.

 

 

Edited August 16, 2015 by thereselittleflower

[Diaste]

Endorsement by the early church fathers actually makes the book of Enoch MORE questionable   The early church fathers had some very unbiblical positions.  They were wrong more often than they were right.

There are plenty of ancient documents that we know were not written by the author bearing their names.  Often names of famous people were used to give documents more credibility in the eyes of the readership.   Just because the book of Enoch bears his name, doesn't mean it was authored by him.

Besides, if one takes a modern copy of the book of Enoch and compares it to the biblical quotation, there is a number of significant differences for them to have come from the same document.

 

 

Endorsement by the early church fathers actually makes the book of Enoch MORE questionable   The early church fathers had some very unbiblical positions.  They were wrong more often than they were right.

It is amazing to me any time someone claims they understand christian truth better than the early christians did who still had the words of the Apostle ringing in their ears.  The closer one to something, the more true one is to it.  We are 2000 years removed, not 100.   That you think you understand christianity better than they did betrays the source of such belief.  The ego.

 

 

Excellent point. The further we are from the point of origin the less attached we are to our beginnings. Understanding of the scriptural concepts of old, that came as easily as breathing to the apostles and the early church, choke contemporary christianity.  Modern scriptural truth is diluted, muddled, fractured and suppressed. Thank you for pointing that out!