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).
For more information, please read our booklet Is the Bible True?
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?
I agree with Andrew. They cannot marry, but they did something absolutely detestable, which is why they were punished and imprisoned (1 Peter 3:19). Some people believe that the fallen angels currently held in the abussos are the ones who had committed sexual sins with the women in Noah's day, producing Nephilim. Peter and Jude also give information as well. These are the ones to be released in Revelation at the 5th trumpet. Whatever the truth may be, we will have our answer one day :)
People often quote Matthew 22:30 to rebuke the idea of angels mingling with the daughters of men, thus producing the nephilim:
"For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels in heaven."
But notice that Jesus did not say "CANNOT" marry.
Just simply they don't. There's a difference.
An analogy:
"A law enforcement does not do cocaine."
Usually true, but does that statement mean that the officer CANNOT do cocaine? False, he could but he would be transgressing his given authority in the law.
Same idea with the angels. They simply were not meant to be with the daughters of man, they could but only by transgressing their own angelic authorities given by God.
2 cents dropped.
I agree with the above statement... Where did the giants come from if not from angels reproducing with humanity... In the beginning we don't see God making a giant kind. Please answer and thank you. God bless :-)
I don't know if this helps but i recently found a book called enochian majic. At first thought i was taken aback with the name. How could a man well known in the bible be put with the detestible work of magic. Once i opened the pages i was shocked to see that, it was lists and rules on envoking demons. All the names and powers they posess. So to any one who may have questions on the books of enoch i give great warning they are not of God.
Hi Everybody.
I would be very careful about Enochian Majic.
We know Enoch Walked with God, we also know from the Bible there were two Enochs, the one who walked with God and the other Son of Cain, the line from Adam that became corrupt with the Fallen Angels and whom God destroyed in the Great Deluge.
The True Enoch transcribed the word of God to Man which passed down to Methusalah, Lamech, and Noah. If you read the book with an open mind you can see how th text changes and is obviously finished by subsequent writers. In this case probably Noah who carried it in the Arc. It is certain that Moses had access to this book and inconceivable that the first writings of this world happened 1000 years after Enoch. Between the Flood and Moses confusion of language was set in due to Babel.
Who is this Dee and Kelly Person do they now know that this Encoh came from Cains Line and not Seth?????
The bible has been diluted by man over the centuries.
Remember the first bible as a book was not until 1500AD before that there were just scrolls,[as in Dead Sea 900+] the old testament was not defined as such, until the new came on line in 200-300AD.
Its inconceivable that Moses [1520-1400AD] did not know about the ancient writings from 4000BC and don't forget, there was confusion at Babel before then when the Sumerian language was confounded. Abraham provided the continuity as Gods chosen line and likely passed the Enoch/Noah scrolls to Moses. Why would Moses hark back to an old era where mankind failed. Genesis is just a summary of ancient times precisely because they had all the other scrolls to hand.
Ask yourself who has the most to gain from suppressing Enoch?
Then remind yourself about the inquisition set up after Constantine, and then remind yourself again that those who thought the world was round were burnt, hung drawn or quartered
When you read Enoch with modern eyes considering what they might have known then, its difficult to dismiss it. The Ethiopic church still include it, because they missed the inquisition in Europe.
Enoch from Seth's line were rightous, the Enoch from Cain's line was destroyed ! We know who is behind confusion but evaluate it for yourselves, and most of all remember Enoch walked with God.
Ok let's all look at it this way. Why did the flood occur?
Well,apparently there were alot of false religions cripping up then too. Well, do you think that those religions just died out during the flood. Who is to say that Noah's family didn't carry those false religions into the new world. Otherwise how do you think Noah's grandson/great grandson Nimrod would have started his own religion he got his idea from somewhere.
History is repeating itself again and now we have more religious ideas than before with some ancient ones as well.
The Holy Bible is our owners manuel and can be trusted for reproof, edification, inspiration, and self-esteem in humility, honesty, and God's way of life. Thus changing the inner man to become more Christ like.
Hello Ward Shamblin,
For a textual comparison chart, you can google “1 Enoch Parallels in the New Testament and the Apostolic Fathers” although frankly, you may not even want to waste your time after reading Chapter 32 of the Book of Enoch (notice how he goes all gaga over the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil and its so-called ‘holy’ fruit):
Literarily, the reader has just been breathlessly catapulted down a “gushing” whitewater cascade, tossed “rushing along a copious watercourse,” and sent soaring into the sky along with “clouds and dew ascend[ing] on every side”—sweeping swiftly “over the summits of…[seven] mountains”—flying ascendant even above an angel (Isaiah 14:13For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north:
See All...?). Meanwhile, a sensually dramatic buildup – featuring “aromatic trees exhaling the fragrance of frankincense and myrrh,” “groves” full of “flow[ing]…nectar,” and “a heady aroma “sweeter than any [fragrance]” – presages the climactic revelation of something even more appealing than the sweetest fragrance on earth: “…And I came to the Garden of Righteousness…and great-two trees there, very great, beautiful, and glorious, and magnificent” – notice the Tree of Life is not even deigned to be mentioned by name (as observed by one commentator) – “and the tree of knowledge, whose holy fruit they eat and know great wisdom. 4 That tree is in height like the fir… and its fruit 5 is like the clusters of the vine, very beautiful: and the fragrance of the tree penetrates afar. Then 6 I said: 'How beautiful is the tree, and how attractive is its look!' Then Raphael the holy angel, who was with me, answered me and said: ‘This is the tree of wisdom, of which thy father old (in years) and thy aged mother, who were before thee, have eaten, and they learnt wisdom and their eyes were opened, and they knew that they were naked and they were driven out of the garden.’”
"To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them" (Isaiah 8:20To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.
See All... KJV)--"the truth hasn't dawned on them" (ISV 2010)--"their minds are spiritually darkened" (NET 2008) by "Satan, who deceives the whole world" (Revelation 12:9And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.
See All..., LEB 2010). Century after century, our arch-adversary keeps on using the same hideously evil arguments, gift wrapping them to make them look more appealing and less venomous:
http://www.ucg.org/booklet/there-really-devil/enemy-mankind/whole-world-...
One thing I did not see while reading this forum, along with others, is what I think would be the most important answer to this "Book of Enoch" debate:
Revelations 22:18 - "For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: (19) And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book."
The book of enoch does not appear in the Bible, therefore by adding it and saying it should or ought to be considered sacred text for whatever reason, I think Revelation 22:18-19 [18] For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:
[19] And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.
See All... gives us the clearest answer to what the book really is, doesn't it?