Jump to content
Quasar93

About the writings of Enoch

Recommended Posts

Genesis 5:18-24 [18] Jared lived one hundred and sixty-two years, and begot Enoch. [19] After he begot Enoch, Jared lived eight hundred years, and had sons and daughters. [20] So all the days of Jared were nine hundred and sixty-two years; and he died. [21] Enoch lived sixty-five years, and begot Methuselah. [22] After he begot Methuselah, Enoch walked with God three hundred years, and had sons and daughters. [23] So all the days of Enoch were three hundred and sixty-five years. [24] And Enoch walked with God; and he was not, for God took him.

Hebrews 11:5 By faith Enoch was taken away so that he did not see death, "and was not found, because God had taken him"; for before he was taken he had this testimony, that he pleased God.

Jude 1:14-15 [14] Now Enoch, the seventh from Adam, prophesied about these men also, saying, "Behold, the Lord comes with ten thousands of His saints, [15] to execute judgment on all, to convict all who are ungodly among them of all their ungodly deeds which they have committed in an ungodly way, and of all the harsh things which ungodly sinners have spoken against Him."

We first learn of Enoch in Genesis 5 but it leaves us with questions. Hebrews 11 has the answers and Jude quotes Enoch! How did Jude come to know the words of Enoch? They are not in the Bible. The answer of course, is The Book of Enoch. A book which is actually quoted by Jude in the New Testament. What is the Book of Enoch and where did it come from?

Enoch was the great-grandfather of Noah. The Book of Enoch chapter 68:1 "And after that my great-grandfather Enoch gave me all the secrets in the book and in the parables which had been given to him, and he put them together for me in the words of the book of the parables."

The Book of Enoch was extant centuries before the birth of Christ and yet is considered by many to be more Christian in its theology than Jewish. It was considered scripture by many early Christians. The earliest literature of the so-called "Church Fathers" is filled with references to this mysterious book. The early second century "Epistle of Barnabus" makes much use of the Book of Enoch. Second and Third Century "Church Fathers" like Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Origin and Clement of Alexandria all make use of the Book of Enoch. Tertullian (160-230 C.E) even called the Book of Enoch "Holy Scripture". The Ethiopic Church even added the Book of Enoch to its official canon. It was widely known and read the first three centuries after Christ. This and many other books became discredited after the Council of Laodicea. And being under ban of the authorities, afterwards it gradually passed out of circulation.

At about the time of the Protestant Reformation, there came to be a renewed interest in the Book of Enoch which had long since been lost to the modern world. By the late 1400's rumors began to spread that somewhere a copy of the long lost Book of Enoch might still exist. During this time many books arose claiming to be the long lost book and were later found to be forgeries.

The return of the long lost Book of Enoch to the modern western world is credited to the famous explorer James Bruce, who in 1773 returned from six years in Abyssinia with three Ethiopic copies of the lost book. In 1821 Richard Laurence published the first English translation. The famous R.H. Charles edition was published in 1912. In the following years several portions of the Greek text surfaced. Then with the discovery of cave 4 of the Dead Sea Scrolls, seven fragmentary copies of the Aramaic text were discovered.

There are scholars who believe the Book of Enoch was published before the Christian era by some great unknown of Semetic race, who believing himself to be inspired in a post-prophetic age, borrowed the name of an antediluvian patriarch to authenticate his own enthusiastic forcast of the coming Messiah. The Book of Enoch is divided into five basic parts, but it is the The Book of Parables (37-71) which gives scholars the most trouble for it is primarily concerned with a figure called "the messiah"; "the righteous one"; "the chosen one" and "the son of man."

The Book of Enoch Chapter 46:1-2 [1] There I beheld the Ancient of days whose head was like white wool, and with him another, whose countenance resembled that of a man. His countenance was full of grace, like that of one of the holy angels. Then I inquired of one of the angels, who went with me, and who showed me every secret thing, concerning this Son of man; who he was; whence he was; and why he accompanied the Ancient of days. [2] He answered and said to me, This is the Son of man, to whom righteousness belongs; with whom righteousness has dwealt; and who will reveal all the treasures of that which is concealed: for the Lord of spirits has chosen him; and his portion has surpassed all before the Lord of spirits in everlasting uprightness."

The Reluctant Messenger Blog
 
 
 
Quasar93
  • Thumbs Up 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven't read much from the books of Enoch and Jasher, although I think it definitely bears looking into- I know one of them goes into some detail about the fallen angels, or Watchers- and I have to admit, it shines an entirely brighter light on that particular subject matter, although it is a bit of a disturbing read! I need to read up on what, exactly, the Council of Laodicea was responsible for, as well as a lot of their reasoning behind the scriptures that were allowed in what we have today as the bible, and what were left out- although I think we would need to be....prayerful? Insofar as the attitude we read these particular books with, you know?

I'm reminded of Rev. 22: 19,20 where it states about adding to or leaving out anything (from the book) and the curse that would fall on those who do...but I'm just not sure if it is speaking about that particular book only, or...? At the very least, both books (Jasher and Enoch, along with others I'm sure) would most definitely be enlightening as far as commentary and expounding in the subjects are concerned- of course, the biggest concern of all would be how what is said correlates with the bible and whether or not it 'preaches any other gospel', or denies, in any way, what we know to be true of Jesus, etc....

When Paul spoke about the resurrection of the dead, he asked (paraphrased, big time, lol) why people would pray for the dead if they didn't believe in the resurrection..or something along those lines- one gets the distinct impression that Paul does not 'pray for the dead' himself, but that he was, basically, asking them (again, heavy on the paraphrasing, haha) "you pray for the dead...why would you even bother if you don't believe there is going to be a resurrection in the first place?" - what I'm getting at, here, is that even though Jude quoted it in the bible, etc.- it's so hard to say if they saw these books as...commentary, divine scripture...or how much weight they actually carried. 

It is totally fascinating, though- my own thought on it would be that we need to approach it prayerfully asking the Lord for guidance. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

The Book of Enoch was forged by its author and is not a part of the Bible

The "Enoch" of the Bible is different 

Jude

1:14 And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam

 

 

Edited by Daniel 11:36
  • Thumbs Up 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Daniel 11:36 said:

The Book of Enoch was forged by its author and is not a part of the Bible

The "Enoch" of the Bible is different 

Jude

1:14 And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam

 

 

Just for the sake of curiosity..I know it isn't part of the Bible, but how do you know it was forged and that it is a different Enoch?

  • Thumbs Up 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
25 minutes ago, Mystic_Pizza said:

Just for the sake of curiosity..I know it isn't part of the Bible, but how do you know it was forged and that it is a different Enoch?

He does not I am afraid. That is just the party line. The apostles and Yeshua quoted from Enoch. The Jews did not like Enoch because it had a 'messiah' flavor. The RCC did not like it because it ran contrary to their pet doctrines that they later foisted on the church that are still prevalent today.

The Christians have been taught it is bad because it does not belong in the 66. A  66 that was hotly debated. The 84 books that you find in the 1611 scripture were further massacred by the RCC in 1684 when they removed another 14 of them.

The Ethiopian canon has 88 books among which is First Enoch. There are upwards of 10 million Eastern Orthodox Christians, and whilst the RCC could not get at them and interfere early on, the Pope has made overtures to the Eastern church so maybe it will also soon be swallowed up in Roman Pagan doctrines.

The other reason that people have been educated to disavow Enoch is because it is clear about angelic interference in the affairs of mankind. This had a major impact on the self-centered man-adjusted gospel approach. Namely that Yah in the Form Of Yeshua came to save THE WHOLE WORLD and to set at rights the disobedience and travesty of the sinning angelic hosts as well as redeem humanity and destroy those evil angels.

Edited by Justin Adams
  • Thumbs Up 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Mystic_Pizza said:

Just for the sake of curiosity..I know it isn't part of the Bible, but how do you know it was forged and that it is a different Enoch?

Most (real) scholars think that the book of Enoch only dates back to the Dead Sea Scroll period (250-200 BC) and parts of it may actually be more recent than that.  The book of Enoch wasn't even discovered until the 18th Century AD.  

The book was not considered inspired then and is not part of the Jewish canon and for good reason.   It is no more inspired than the Apocrypha.

Furthermore, unlike Scripture, the book of Enoch has no ancient textual witness the way the 66 books of (only) Christian Bible does.   The book of Enoch is valuable to New Agers and occultists and other false religions.   But it does not have the authority of Scripture.  It does not carry the same theological themes that Scripture does and is not in unity with Scripture.   It has none of the earmarks of divine inspiration.

 

  • Thumbs Up 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[1] The Bible says that Enoch lived to be 365 years old and that God "took him" and he could not be found.

[2] The book of Enoch says that Enoch lived to be a minimum of 434 years old, stayed at the "ends of the earth" and WAS found by his son Methuselah when Lamech was frightened at Noah's birth as it claims baby Noah did not look natural and Lamech wanted Methusaleh to "find" Enoch and ask him about it.

Which one is telling the truth?

 

  • Thumbs Up 4
  • This is Worthy 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's my two shekels worf...

It's obvious the Book of Enoch has numerous errors when compared to scripture. Therefore, it's not inerrant nor infallible nor inspired by God. For proof and to try and establish fact, the Hebrews / Jews always required a minimum of two witnesses to establish truth. I've found no witnesses in the Book of Enoch. 

Now that I have that off my chest. I use the Book of Enoch as I do the works of Flavis Josephus, our early church father(s) writings, the Septuagint with Apocrypha, etc., for historical purposes and try to fill in some blanks the scriptures don't go into detail about. The Book of Enoch is not a book of deceitful lies and fantasies I don't believe, just has mistakes, not inspired nor verifiable to its authenticity. 

There's no doubt in my mind Peter and Jude both quoted from the Book of Enoch, therefor it had to be around and a source of information to them in their own time and prior to. If our Holy Scriptures reference the Book of Enoch, I feel it gives us license to read it also. However, as was stated previously in this thread, it's not the "Word of God" and should be treated as such. 

Now since I kept this brief, I gave you two shekels, now I want one of them back...

  • Thumbs Up 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If any errors are found, how can you believe any of it?  Only one answer is possible. 

  • Thumbs Up 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Dennis1209 said:

Here's my two shekels worf...

It's obvious the Book of Enoch has numerous errors when compared to scripture. Therefore, it's not inerrant nor infallible nor inspired by God. For proof and to try and establish fact, the Hebrews / Jews always required a minimum of two witnesses to establish truth. I've found no witnesses in the Book of Enoch. 

Now that I have that off my chest. I use the Book of Enoch as I do the works of Flavis Josephus, our early church father(s) writings, the Septuagint with Apocrypha, etc., for historical purposes and try to fill in some blanks the scriptures don't go into detail about. The Book of Enoch is not a book of deceitful lies and fantasies I don't believe, just has mistakes, not inspired nor verifiable to its authenticity. 

There's no doubt in my mind Peter and Jude both quoted from the Book of Enoch, therefor it had to be around and a source of information to them in their own time and prior to. If our Holy Scriptures reference the Book of Enoch, I feel it gives us license to read it also. However, as was stated previously in this thread, it's not the "Word of God" and should be treated as such. 

Now since I kept this brief, I gave you two shekels, now I want one of them back...

I completely agree with this, I didn't feel that it was 'inspired' either, but more of a...commentary, etc.- thank you, and my shekel is in the mail :D

  • Thumbs Up 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×