What do think about the book of Enoch?

[Stewardofthemystery]

I just read it again for the second time and find it to be interesting. Especially the parts about the angels who left their place in heaven and lusted after women on earth, and their offspring were the giants.

Even Jude mentions the book of Enoch…

Jude 14-15

King James Version

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.”

So what do you think about the book of Enoch?

[RdJ]

I read it once and didn't really like it. They think it's not the original. I don't think it's bad. It's just not a cosy story LOL. Atheists have accused me of being a New Testament sugar christian. They did have a point. I still tend to read the Bible like Corrie ten Boom did when she was 4 years old. Her dad read the Bible at the dinner table and it was all cute and fun. LOL he just skipped all the not so neat texts.

[Stewardofthemystery]

Here is an interesting part to me, where the offspring of the fallen angels would become “evil spirits” on the earth in verse 28 and 29….

24 And go, say to the Watchers of heaven, who have sent thee to intercede for them: 'You should intercede for men, and not men for you. Wherefore have ye left the high, holy, and eternal heaven, and lain with women, and defiled yourselves with the daughters of men and taken to yourselves wives, and done like the children of earth, and begotten giants as your sons.
25 And though ye were holy, spiritual, living the eternal life, you have defiled yourselves with the blood of women, and have begotten with the blood of flesh, and, as the children of men, have lusted after flesh and blood as those also do who die and perish.
26 Therefore have I given them wives also that they might impregnate them, and beget children by them, that thus nothing might be wanting to them on earth.
27 But you were formerly spiritual, living the eternal life, and immortal for all generations of the world. And therefore I have not appointed wives for you; for as for the spiritual ones of the heaven, in heaven is their dwelling.
28 And now, the giants, who are produced from the spirits and flesh, shall be called evil spirits upon the earth, and on the earth shall be their dwelling.
29 Evil spirits have proceeded from their bodies; because they are born from men and from the Watchers is their beginning and primal origin; they shall be evil spirits on earth, and evil spirits shall they be called.
30 And the spirits of the giants afflict, oppress, destroy, attack, do battle, and

work destruction on the earth, and cause trouble. They take no food, but nevertheless hunger and thirst, and cause offences.
31 And these spirits shall rise up against the children of men and against the women, because they have proceeded from them.”

[NConly]

I have read it and thought it gave a a bit more information about certain things that are just a mention in the Bible. Several things to think about and wonder if they could be true. It has been a while so I would need to read it again.

[Marathoner]

37 minutes ago, Stewardofthemystery said:

So what do you think about the book of Enoch?

1 Enoch is a fascinating read. That is the literature quoted by Jude. 

2 Enoch is specious, to put it mildly. It's considered to be nonsense penned hundreds of years after 1 Enoch. 

[RdJ]

7 minutes ago, Marathoner said:

1 Enoch is a fascinating read. That is the literature quoted by Jude. 

2 Enoch is specious, to put it mildly. It's considered to be nonsense penned hundreds of years after 1 Enoch. 

I once read it very quick because I wasn't sure if it was good. I vaguely remember that it looked like Jesus was a created being and I think that's when I stopped reading.

[Marathoner]

4 minutes ago, RdJ said:

I once read it very quick because I wasn't sure if it was good. I vaguely remember that it looked like Jesus was a created being and I think that's when I stopped reading.

If you're referring to 1 Enoch, don't confuse the vision of the Son of Man as anything other than the Word made flesh. There are depictions of the Son of God seated upon the throne. In keeping with NT scripture, no man has seen the Father at any time, but many have witnessed God and lived (Moses and Jacob, to name two). Whom did they witness? The Word of God. Many have seen Him and lived... don't forget that He is the image of the invisible God. 

Edited June 5, 2024 by Marathoner

[farouk]

Paul in Acts quotes from a poet (about Cretans). The fact that such a quote exists does not prove that the poetry about Cretans is canonical.

The Apocryphal books might at times have interesting background information, but they are not to be regarded as on a par with the Word of God itself. The fact that there are similar words i Daniel 7 still does not prove that Enoch is canonical.

Edited June 5, 2024 by farouk

[Stewardofthemystery]

27 minutes ago, Marathoner said:

1 Enoch is a fascinating read. That is the literature quoted by Jude. 

2 Enoch is specious, to put it mildly. It's considered to be nonsense penned hundreds of years after 1 Enoch. 

I read Enoch 1 But not Enoch 2.  I didn’t even know there was a Enoch 2

[other one]

Many of the early church Fathers considered 1Enoch as should have been included in the Bible.  It has always been in the Ethiopian Bible.  When the Bible we have today was put together there were rules set as to what would be included and what not.

Though 1 Enoch failed to fit into all the rules, it does not make it untrue.  The knowledge of the contents of 1 Enoch was common knowledge during the time of Christ, and most likely why it was quoted.  There is scripture that parallels the knowledge of Enoch, and I personally think it is mostly true.  There are a couple of translation problems, but they are obvious and should be overlooked.

I would not argue that it should be included in our Bible, I would argue we should pay attention to its contents.

Only speaking of 1 Enoch.    2 Enoch is a very, very bad put together thing containing some of 1 Enoch, and 3 Enoch is basically post resurrection Jewish Mysticism that is rather dangerous to take serious.   Not that it is all false, but a kind of thing we've been told to stay away from.