Is the book of Enoch an inspired writing that Christians should study like the Bible?
Answer:
The book of Enoch isn't sacred. That is to say, it isn't a part of inspired Scripture. Rather, it is part of a group of books known as "pseudepigrapha," which means "false writings."
According to Nelson's Illustrated Bible Dictionary, the Pseudepigrapha are "a collection of Jewish books containing various forms of literature, using names of famous people in Israel's history for the titles of the books. The real authors are unknown. Such names as Ezra, Baruch, Enoch, Solomon, Moses, and Adam are used to add authority to the writing" (1986, article "Pseudepigrapha"). In addition to using a pseudonym, the first chapter of the book of Enoch also makes use of a famous statement made by the real Enoch who lived millennia before the oldest known copies of the book of Enoch came into existence.
A similar (albeit not exact) quotation of Enoch exists in the New Testament book of Jude in verses 14-15. We have no doubt that the real Enoch of Genesis 5 spoke these words and that they had been passed on by tradition from his time. However, the commonality of Jude 14-15 with 1 Enoch 1:9 does not make the rest of the pseudepigraphical book of Enoch "God-inspired" any more than Paul's brief quotations of Aratus (Acts 17:28) and Epimenides (Titus 1:12) would sanctify the entirety of those authors' words.
When holding the book of Enoch up to the "Scripture cannot be broken" test (John 10:35b), we find that a major theme in 1 Enoch of sinful angels taking human wives (e.g., 1 Enoch 6:2, 7:1, 12:4, 106:14, etc.) is in direct contradiction to the words of the Word, Jesus Christ, who created "all things…visible and invisible" and knows how they function (Colossians 1:16; compare Hebrews 4:13). In Matthew 22:29-30, Jesus said, "You are mistaken, not knowing the Scriptures nor the power of God…they neither marry nor are given in marriage…like the angels…" (see also Mark 12:24-25, Luke 20:34-36). This rebuttal of a major theme of 1 Enoch by the Creator Himself indicates that the Word that was and is God clearly did not consider those stories in the book of Enoch to be truthful, God-inspired "Scriptures." It also moves those Enochic stories into the realm of "…empty deceit, according to human tradition, according to the elemental spirits of the universe, and not according to Christ" (Colossians 2:8, NRSV). The unhealthy fascination with and exaltation of angels throughout the book also stands in contrast to the message of Colossians 2:18-19, Revelation 19:10, etc. The stories of Enoch's ascent into heaven (1 Enoch 71:1,5) contradicts Jesus Christ's words in John 3:13, and the tales of an actively conscious afterlife of Enoch and others prior to the resurrection (e.g., 1 Enoch 70:3-4; 65:2-5; 22:7-13, etc.) are in conflict with Ecclesiastes 9:5,10, Job 14:14, Hebrews 11:13,39-40, 1 Thessalonians 4:14-16, etc.
A simple example of an Enochic fallacy that very few would sincerely assert as an indisputable, God-inspired fact is the descriptions of Noah as a newborn baby in which "his form and appearance are not like the form of human beings…and his eyes are like the rays of the sun…[which] made the whole house bright. And he stood up from the hands of the midwife and he opened his mouth and praised the Lord of eternity" (1 Enoch 106:10-11,18;107:3).
In summary, when it comes to falsely-attributed writings like the pseudepigraphic book of Enoch, do not "be easily shaken…by any kind of spirit or message or letter allegedly from us" (2 Thessalonians 2:2, NET; compare Galatians 1:8). Also, "Do not be carried about with various and strange doctrines. For it is good that the heart be established by grace, not with foods which have not profited those who have been occupied with them" (Hebrews 13:9).
Copies of the book of Enoch were found with the Dead Sea scrolls. Some of those copies predated the birth of Jesus. Jude wrote his epistle after the death and resurrection of Jesus, so your point doesn't make any sense.
Also, there are more than 100 references to the book of Enoch in the New Testament. I'm not sure if the writer of your article is unaware of these historical facts, or if you are trying to deliberately hide these facts from the people, but there is strong historical evidence to support the valididty of at least Enoch 1 being written on or before 250-325 B.C.. :)
I think that it would be good to list these 100 references in the New Testament and also quote from the Book of Enoch so that a person could compare to see if he agrees that it is a reference to the Book of Enoch.
I used my computer Bible to look up Enoch. The phrase Book of Enoch does not appear anywhere. The name Enoch appears only three times in the NT.
Lu 3:37 the son of Methuselah, the son of Enoch, the son of Jared, the son of Mahalalel, the son of Cainan,
Heb 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 Now Enoch, the seventh from Adam, prophesied about these men also, saying, "Behold, the Lord comes with ten thousands of His saints,
I suppose that quotes from Enoch could be made w/o giving Enoch credit. I just think it would be nice to list those or tell where they could be found.
A first class piece of literature,that is quite correct.
yet I see there are still those who argue against Gods word that is laid down in the Bible.
The book of Enoch is a misrepresentation to which people have fallen for the Devil's cunning deception.
A very good point is made about how Paul's usage of quoting Aratus and Epimenides, does not make their works cannon either. Also when actually finding ancient manuscripts dating back to 250-325 B.C., a person should concider 2Pet 2:1 "But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you,"
Why concider that scripture and how is it relevant to writings of Enoch or any other that date around 250-325 B.C. or even earlier?
Because those false prophets also wrote out their teachings for preservation too.
I've read both the book of Enoch and the book of Adam, and from what I have read in these books were a lot of errors that prove these books were not inspired writings from God but rather from man's silly imagination. While these books were somewhat interesting and amusing at times (amusing in the sense they were absolutely ridiculous), they certainly were not inspired by God.
I'm sure there probably are God inspired books and letters that never made it into the bible for whatever reasons, but as for these ones there are too many errors and fairy tales in them to make them the genuine word of God. Even the Harry Potter books have more credibility than these non-biblical false writings.
If anyone chooses to read any of these books compare them to the bible and you will certainly find the errors. The errors are as clear as day. As for those who don't have an understanding of God's true word these books can be very deceiving, and can lead a person astray. I have a co-worker who reads these books and he believes them because he has very little true biblical knowledge and understanding so it's hard to shake him out of the errors of these books.
Enoch is an interesting book to read but it is not inspired by God, neither does it have any biblical authority or credibility and should not be taken literally.
anyway... who wrote the bible and who got the wright to take some off n chose what is real?n which one is not real?..is funny how some man of god think they know god,some ppl r saying, book of enoch is not inspired by God interesting..read about how the bible came about..
and the old scroll . we r still leaning and seaching family .GOD knowledge ,wisdom and understanding is all we need.stay bless..
Exactly the angels are not married...that exactly the reason that God was angry with them.....anyway how do you explain what is writtend in Genesis 6 about the Sons of God and the Daughter of Man? And about the Giants?