Book Of Enoch?

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Jun 1, 2016
5,032
121
0
#81
I've always accepted 66 books in the bible as being the complete word of God. In fact, all these books are all that we need for salvation and instruction in righteousness. They are consistent, they flow together even when you consider the years between when they were written.

This is just curiosity as I'm content with the 66 books.

I noticed that in Jude 1:14, Enoch is referred to as having prophesied. There is reference to him here... "Now Enoch, the seventh from Adam, prophesied about these men also, saying, “Behold, the Lord comes with ten thousands of His saints" - so would this make the book of Enoch legitimate since they mention him in Jude and no doubt other books also? I haven't read this Enoch book.

What are your thoughts on it?

i think if we look at history, we probably have lost more than we have retained as far as scripture of the ancient faith. enochs time period was before Moses ever wrote Genesis or the first 5 books of the Bible. i personally have read the different sections of the book of enoch. it is an interesting read and intruiging to be honest. it seems consistant that God would have Him record what He saw when He was taken away to be with God. thats what God has always done, even as late as John he calls Him into Heaven, and has Him record the things He sees.


this is true of ezekeil who looked up into heaven and saw the throne, of Isaiah who did the same and a few others also. each time we have an account of something spectacular and Heavenly its because God chose someone and showed them, and commanded them to write it down. part of the book of enoch is supposed to have been authored by His Grandson Noah after the flood. its really an interesting read giving accounts of things we read briefly of in the scripture, but in detail. whether its credible or not, Jude certainly wuoted from it and its dated in agreement to the latest at 2oo years prior to the coming of Jesus.

this of course means it was accepted scripture and Jude even labels it prophetic. its a direct quote from the book, and there are several other areas that it is apparent John, and peter both had read it because they use terminology and imagery only found in enoch, and not in the other scriptures. to me it should be read and considered prayerfully and yet not held to the value we find from genesis to revelation because God is able to Get His entire message to us in His written Word.


i have looked into some other texts also the books of adam and eve, some of the apocryphal books, the macabeean books. there is alot of ancient jewish text dated after malichi, but before the events of matthew. in those 400 years of silence in the bible, there are alot of jewish texts that hold immense value though shouldnt be considered equal at least in my mind to the books of the Bible.


there are things in some of them, that really make you start to think they are legitamate, because they flow with the same rythym you are saying in your op, the same points like the bible does again and again, but with different aspects of the same subjects, definately ancient scripture or text from the jewish time periods we read of in the bible is of great value for discernment and helps understand things we read in the bible because much of those type of texts are historical records and accounts of events that happened between malachi, ( the end of the prophets,) and matthew the start of the fulfillment of Gods Word through the prophets.
 

Endoscopy

Senior Member
Oct 13, 2017
4,028
400
83
#82
​All books of the Canon must be consistent with the rest of the Canon. Also each book has self proving information in it. That information consists of details of clothing, buildings, vegetation, customs, and other information. One false gospel was written about 700 AD in France. Enoch fails miserably on all counts!!
 

Endoscopy

Senior Member
Oct 13, 2017
4,028
400
83
#83
i think if we look at history, we probably have lost more than we have retained as far as scripture of the ancient faith. enochs time period was before Moses ever wrote Genesis or the first 5 books of the Bible. i personally have read the different sections of the book of enoch. it is an interesting read and intruiging to be honest. it seems consistant that God would have Him record what He saw when He was taken away to be with God. thats what God has always done, even as late as John he calls Him into Heaven, and has Him record the things He sees.


this is true of ezekeil who looked up into heaven and saw the throne, of Isaiah who did the same and a few others also. each time we have an account of something spectacular and Heavenly its because God chose someone and showed them, and commanded them to write it down. part of the book of enoch is supposed to have been authored by His Grandson Noah after the flood. its really an interesting read giving accounts of things we read briefly of in the scripture, but in detail. whether its credible or not, Jude certainly wuoted from it and its dated in agreement to the latest at 2oo years prior to the coming of Jesus.

this of course means it was accepted scripture and Jude even labels it prophetic. its a direct quote from the book, and there are several other areas that it is apparent John, and peter both had read it because they use terminology and imagery only found in enoch, and not in the other scriptures. to me it should be read and considered prayerfully and yet not held to the value we find from genesis to revelation because God is able to Get His entire message to us in His written Word.


i have looked into some other texts also the books of adam and eve, some of the apocryphal books, the macabeean books. there is alot of ancient jewish text dated after malichi, but before the events of matthew. in those 400 years of silence in the bible, there are alot of jewish texts that hold immense value though shouldnt be considered equal at least in my mind to the books of the Bible.


there are things in some of them, that really make you start to think they are legitamate, because they flow with the same rythym you are saying in your op, the same points like the bible does again and again, but with different aspects of the same subjects, definately ancient scripture or text from the jewish time periods we read of in the bible is of great value for discernment and helps understand things we read in the bible because much of those type of texts are historical records and accounts of events that happened between malachi, ( the end of the prophets,) and matthew the start of the fulfillment of Gods Word through the prophets.
The books of the Bible have many ancient texts and fragments. A fragment can be a small part of the text to a full text with a small portion missing. There are thousands of them. The oldest Greek text of the New Testament is Textus Receptus. It dates to 400 AD. Also there are thousands of fragments of the New Testament matching this text. Letters written by believers to each other quoting the New Testament have all except a few verses in Corinthians missing. These New Testament fragments go to within about 200 years of time. Compare this to other ancient texts. They date much later and have comparatively much fewer texts and fragments. A few hundred dating much later. Some are incomplete.

The Canon is closed for the very good reason that all discoveries of texts fail miserably to meet all of the tests of authenticity. The texts you want to include are way off the mark and violates all tests. That makes me think that you have a non Christian reason for including them.
 
Last edited:

Endoscopy

Senior Member
Oct 13, 2017
4,028
400
83
#84
The Old Testament has several different paths of the text being copied to give us the current text. Also the Samaritans have recently opened their copy of the Torah. Spelling errors and other tiny errors allow the knowledge of when these errors were introduced and allow following the path each text took coming down to today. All texts coming to today allow removing the errors to create a correct text to translate from.
 
Dec 21, 2017
31
0
0
#87
There are a number of books that were read in the first Century apart from those in our Bibles. The book of Enoch is one of them. The only Church today that considers Enoch as being Scripture is the Ethiopian Orthodox Church along with Jubilees, Jasher, 1 Clement and the Shepherd of Hermes plus what we call the Apocrypha

My view is that God can use any writing to get his message across, But just because he uses quotes from a none Biblical source doen't mean that the whole text is inspired. there are hundreds of Christian books in print today that are read by people and influence their lives but that doesn't mean we should include them in our Bibles. A book that started my journey to Christ was written by a none Christian. It was called The Trial of Jesus of Nazareth. I cant remember the authors name now but I am sure that God led me to read it at the time. Whatever we read should be measured against what the the Bible
teaches whether its written by a Christian or not.
I put a lot more credibility in The Book of Enoch than in Your Best Life Now! LOL Jared's son I know, but who's Olsteen?
 
Mar 28, 2016
15,954
1,528
113
#93
I've always accepted 66 books in the bible as being the complete word of God. In fact, all these books are all that we need for salvation and instruction in righteousness. They are consistent, they flow together even when you consider the years between when they were written.

This is just curiosity as I'm content with the 66 books.

I noticed that in Jude 1:14, Enoch is referred to as having prophesied. There is reference to him here... "Now Enoch, the seventh from Adam, prophesied about these men also, saying, “Behold, the Lord comes with ten thousands of His saints" - so would this make the book of Enoch legitimate since they mention him in Jude and no doubt other books also? I haven't read this Enoch book.

What are your thoughts on it?
I would offer what it does not mean is ....there is a book called the “Book of Enoch”. Able’s blood as the seed Christ, as one of the first saints was crying out at that time of Enoch. It declared “Behold, the Lord comes with ten thousands of His saints".... the words the Lord put in Enoch’s mouth the gospel in respect to the suffering of Christ before hand

Prophets prophesy by declaring the revealed will of God, prophecy. The three words prophets, prophesy and prophecy must be understood if we are to hear what the Spirit says to the churches (us)

"Now Enoch, the seventh from Adam, prophesied about those men also, saying, as prophecy (declared by God)“Behold, the Lord comes with ten thousands of His saints". It is the prophecy. I would think no book was hidden.
 

NayborBear

Banned Serpent Seed Heresy
#94
There are a number of books that were read in the first Century apart from those in our Bibles. The book of Enoch is one of them. The only Church today that considers Enoch as being Scripture is the Ethiopian Orthodox Church along with Jubilees, Jasher, 1 Clement and the Shepherd of Hermes plus what we call the Apocrypha

My view is that God can use any writing to get his message across, But just because he uses quotes from a none Biblical source doen't mean that the whole text is inspired. there are hundreds of Christian books in print today that are read by people and influence their lives but that doesn't mean we should include them in our Bibles. A book that started my journey to Christ was written by a none Christian. It was called The Trial of Jesus of Nazareth. I cant remember the authors name now but I am sure that God led me to read it at the time. Whatever we read should be measured against what the the Bible
teaches whether its written by a Christian or not.
I'll go with your words of wisdom "If God leads one into (a) further inquiry", by all means (that) one should! It is merely a supposition, that the "canonnizers" of what we have come to call today's modern Bible? Is "their" gospel, if you will, of that which is common amongst ALL peoples of the earth. That is, the history of the Nation of Israel, the prophecies of the coming Messiah, and the inclusion of those of non-Jewish persuasion, aka gentiles. If the canonized Bible is what seems well enough, for some, for salvation? Fair enough! To go around in some "Holier then thou" mindset, heralding, and proclaiming those 66 books are the inerrant Word of God? And, cessation? Y'all NEEDS to get yer heads examined! IMHO!
 

Endoscopy

Senior Member
Oct 13, 2017
4,028
400
83
#95
That's what you say
It is obvious that there were no 300 ft. people just for starters. Then there are the wildly inconsistent concepts than the Bible itself has. To be considered part of the Canon ALL books had to pass several tests that Enoch fails. All have to be consistent with the rest of the Bible. The self proving data must be consistent with the time and place where it was supposed to be written. There are actually 3 books. I found a site that has the texts of them. The following is part of the header for the text files. Using the self proving evidence the date of writing was much later than the proposed date of the books.

The Books of Enoch


The Book of Enoch (Enoch 1)
The book of the secrets of Enoch (Enoch 2)
The hebrew book of Enoch (Enoch 3)

2010

Introduction

The Book of Enoch (also 1 Enoch) is an ancient Jewish religious work, ascribed to Enoch, the great-grandfather of Noah. It is not regarded as scripture by Jews or any Christian group, apart from the Ethiopian Orthodox Church, which to this day regards it to be canonical.

Western scholars currently assert that its older sections (mainly in the Book of the Watchers) date from about 300 BC and the latest part (Book of Parables) probably was composed at the end of the 1st century BC. However, Ethiopian scholars generally hold that Ge'ez is the language of the original from which the Greek and Aramaic copies were made, pointing out that it is the only language in which the complete text has yet been found.
 
Last edited:

Demi777

Senior Member
Oct 13, 2014
6,877
1,949
113
Germany
#96
It is obvious that there were no 300 ft. people just for starters. Then there are the wildly inconsistent concepts than the Bible itself has. To be considered part of the Canon ALL books had to pass several tests that Enoch fails. All have to be consistent with the rest of the Bible. The self proving data must be consistent with the time and place where it was supposed to be written. There are actually 3 books. I found a site that has the texts of them. The following is part of the header for the text files. Using the self proving evidence the date of writing was much later than the proposed date of the books.

The Books of Enoch


The Book of Enoch (Enoch 1)
The book of the secrets of Enoch (Enoch 2)
The hebrew book of Enoch (Enoch 3)

2010

Introduction

The Book of Enoch (also 1 Enoch) is an ancient Jewish religious work, ascribed to Enoch, the great-grandfather of Noah. It is not regarded as scripture by Jews or any Christian group, apart from the Ethiopian Orthodox Church, which to this day regards it to be canonical.

Western scholars currently assert that its older sections (mainly in the Book of the Watchers) date from about 300 BC and the latest part (Book of Parables) probably was composed at the end of the 1st century BC. However, Ethiopian scholars generally hold that Ge'ez is the language of the original from which the Greek and Aramaic copies were made, pointing out that it is the only language in which the complete text has yet been found.
What is your point? Man doesnt choose what is true, God does. The concil of trient were people and not God. When God leads someone to read, letvem read. If they werent innspired by him in any way he wouldnt lead anyone to them.
What God uses is God inspired and many of the apocrypha fill gaps in the bible.
 

Endoscopy

Senior Member
Oct 13, 2017
4,028
400
83
#97
What is your point? Man doesnt choose what is true, God does. The concil of trient were people and not God. When God leads someone to read, letvem read. If they werent innspired by him in any way he wouldnt lead anyone to them.
What God uses is God inspired and many of the apocrypha fill gaps in the bible.
The books of Enoch are a lie.
First: They were created 300BC instead of by Enoch. That in and of itself means they are a lie.
Second: Their content about 300 feet people is ludicrous. Never happened.
Third: The books are totally inconsistent with the Bible.

Three strikes and your out. Any one of these makes them not from God. All books of the Bible are God breathed. This one isn't. Archaeological digs prove sites in the Bible are 100% accurate. Nothing in the books of Enoch have ever been found.

Why do you defend these books that are not Biblical?? In fact these kinds of books are pushed by atheists trying to discredit the Bible. You seem to want these gross false failures to be pushed. Why?
 
Last edited:
Dec 21, 2017
31
0
0
#98
​All books of the Canon must be consistent with the rest of the Canon. Also each book has self proving information in it. That information consists of details of clothing, buildings, vegetation, customs, and other information. One false gospel was written about 700 AD in France. Enoch fails miserably on all counts!!
Please cite chapter and verse where Enoch fails. By the way, how does France come into this?
 
Dec 21, 2017
31
0
0
#99
There really is an amazing response to this book. There is often enthusiastic embrace or fearfulness. "There's only 66 books!", "its not inspired!" or "your trying to add to the Word of God!" I really cannot speak for other posters here, but I have not tried to address questions of canonization or inspiration. For me the central question first is, Was the Book of Enoch written by the Biblical Enoch? Answering this we can better approach the other questions. After researching this question, I believe, based on history, fulfilled prophecy, archaeology and and the Scriptures that this book is the legitimate writing of the Biblical Enoch.