The Books of Enoch.

[Ahwatukee]

The Book of Genesis I wonder if you would consider this the many names for God, man, and angels

The earliest name for God we see in Genesis is Elohim which means also gods Yet the word El - God doesn't fully describe the one true God as the word El Shaddi, or Yewha? because the knowledge of God by man was limited. As man lived and his relationship with grew so did How God revealed Himself to man.

man then had more understanding and revelation of God. Yet man could not know God fully because of the fall. Every man after Adam

sin push God further away but love provided Grace. But Sin also became more wicked and evil. mans heart was corrupted.
God holiness we see and righteous anger brought judgment on man, for what man has done.

Well, I personally don't believe that God flooded the earth for the basic sins of mankind. The information regarding the 'sons of God' taking human wives, they bearing children who became giants, makes a whole lot of sense, with Enoch giving a detailed account of all that the angels taught mankind, which corrupted all their ways. By their taking wives and begetting giants, teaching things that mankind was not supposed to know, the world became altered and corrupted. And as I posted earlier, the title of "sons of God' in Job 1:6 & 2:1 does strengthen the fact that the 'sons of God' in Genesis 6:1-2 as being angelic beings. They presented themselves to God (before His throne) and Satan came with them to present himself. That would not be man presenting themselves with Satan, but other angels presenting themselves with Satan.

On top of that, we have the information contained in the books of Enoch regarding these angels and all that they did and which matches up with the Genesis account, which to me is the word of God. Jude quoted from Enoch which also lends credence to its validity.

 

[CS1]

Well, I personally don't believe that God flooded the earth for the basic sins of mankind. The information regarding the 'sons of God' taking human wives, they bearing children who became giants, makes a whole lot of sense, with Enoch giving a detailed account of all that the angels taught mankind, which corrupted all their ways. By their taking wives and begetting giants, teaching things that mankind was not supposed to know, the world became altered and corrupted. And as I posted earlier, the title of "sons of God' in Job 1:6 & 2:1 does strengthen the fact that the 'sons of God' in Genesis 6:1-2 as being angelic beings. They presented themselves to God (before His throne) and Satan came with them to present himself. That would not be man presenting themselves with Satan, but other angels presenting themselves with Satan.

On top of that, we have the information contained in the books of Enoch regarding these angels and all that they did and which matches up with the Genesis account, which to me is the word of God. Jude quoted from Enoch which also lends credence to its validity.

Ok,
I find that odd yet I'm supposed to believe that angel had sex with women but God did not flood the earth as Jesus said to happen in the gospel of Matthew. I would suggest there is more proof Biblically and scientifically of a flood than there is that angel slept with women.

I want to ask you can angel do what God did not make them able to do? How do angels have the God-like qualities to create?

 

[Ahwatukee]

That is fine

But you do know it was not Adam or eve who was doing what we read in Genesis six?
God is judging man for what man is doing at that time. as I said before the earliest context for man before the fall and immediately after the fall was most likely sons of God or those created by God as angels were and as man was made a little lower than them.

You still cannot use the words sons of god in JOB and make it the same in Genesis six.

Yes, I can. And because the same title is used identifying the 'sons of God' as being angels. Likewise, Genesis 6:1-2 is making a distinction between the 'sons of God' and 'the daughters of men,' i.e. the sons of God are not of mankind.

Then when you get into the information in Enoch, it all makes sense. Enoch reads the same as Genesis 6:1-2, with a little more detail. Compare:

Genesis 6:1-2
"When man began to multiply on the face of the land and daughters were born to them, 2the sons of God saw that the daughters of man were attractive. And they took as their wives any they chose. 3Then the LORD said, “My Spirit shall not abide in man forever, for he is flesh: his days shall be 120 years.” 4The Nephilim were on the earth in those days, and also afterward, when the sons of God came in to the daughters of man and they bore children to them. These were the mighty men who were of old, the men of renown.

Enoch 7:1-2
It happened after the sons of men had multiplied in those days, that daughters were born to them, elegant and beautiful. And when the angels, the sons of heaven, beheld them, they became enamored of them, saying to each other: Come, let us select for ourselves wives from the progeny of men, and let us beget children.

Now, I know for a fact from reading the preface on how Ethiopic Enoch was obtained and restored and the fact that Jude quotes him, that this is also the word of God and give more detail in regards to what happened and why God flooded the world. No one will ever convince me otherwise, because I have done the studies and the Spirit also confirms the truth with my spirit.

 

[Ahwatukee]

Ok,
I find that odd yet I'm supposed to believe that angel had sex with women but God did not flood the earth as Jesus said to happen in the gospel of Matthew. I would suggest there is more proof Biblically and scientifically of a flood than there is that angel slept with women.

I want to ask you can angel do what God did not make them able to do? How do angels have the God-like qualities to create?

Well, the angels obviously had free will, because aside from angels taking human wives, you know very well that a third of them rebelled against God, with Satan as their leader.

 

[Diakonos]

Chuck Missler, and his false teachings, in the Nephilim.

The teaching that Angel's procreate with humans is (Greek Mythology)

Do you think everything in Greek Mythology is false?
Did you ever consider that Greek Mythology got some of its content from the Hebrew Scriptures?

The Bible mentions Leviathan and Tartarus (the deepest recesses of Sheol) and the flood etc. Are these also false because the Greeks decided to talk about them in their literature?

Most of Greek mythology is just fiction. But there are some examples of Biblical truth in it. Certain Biblical examples are not explained accurately within Greek mythology, but the existence of those examples is certainly real. We can only know the details with certainty from the Bible. For example, Leviathan, according to the Bible, is a multi-headed sea creature that rarely accends for man to see. I don't need Greek mythology to know that. But the Greeks did happen to mention Leviathan in their mythology. So that part is true, but not because the Greeks invented the idea. As for the Nephilim, we don't need Greek mythology to understand who they were. They are mentioned throughout the OT: King Agag, Goliath, and his brothers, the Anakites, the Rephidim, etc. They are described as beings who were between 9-20ft tall.
Greek mythology happens to mention them, but their understanding of their origin was skewed. They thought they were the offspring of deity and mankind, and they called them "demigods". This is incorrect. They were not half-gods, they were half-angels.
In conclusion, the Greeks mostly made up their own myths and also drew from other cultures to form their ideas (including the Hebrews and their Scriptures). Sometimes they were absolutely correct, sometimes they were right but expressed the "myths" inaccurately, sometimes they were totally wrong. In this case, they were right about the hybrids, but their explanation of their origin was incorrect.

 

[iamsoandso]

Actually, those angels are bound in Tartarus until the great white throne judgment, which doesn't take place until after the millennial kingdom.

Also, much of the content of the book is given over to angelology and demonology. Enoch lends support to the Genesis account and more detail to what the angels did and why God flooded the earth.

And Enoch mentions that he spoke with God, so, why wouldn't He know the Son of God before He became human?

I'm curious how you would answer this... the Serpent in the garden in https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis 3&version=KJV is he the same as in Job? And is he the same Serpent who is in Revelation? https://biblehub.com/revelation/20-2.htm

Here's the issue though if the "serpent"(Gen. 3) is among the angels who took unto themselves wives then is he bound in chains as in Jude and 2 Peter https://book-ofenoch.com/chapter-10/ ,,, or is he not in the same group with those who took wive's of the DoM and he wont be bound in chains until right before the millennial kingdom?

 

[CS1]

Yes, I can. And because the same title is used identifying the 'sons of God' as being angels. Likewise, Genesis 6:1-2 is making a distinction between the 'sons of God' and 'the daughters of men,' i.e. the sons of God are not of mankind.

Then when you get into the information in Enoch, it all makes sense. Enoch reads the same as Genesis 6:1-2, with a little more detail. Compare:

Genesis 6:1-2
"When man began to multiply on the face of the land and daughters were born to them, 2the sons of God saw that the daughters of man were attractive. And they took as their wives any they chose. 3Then the LORD said, “My Spirit shall not abide in man forever, for he is flesh: his days shall be 120 years.” 4The Nephilim were on the earth in those days, and also afterward, when the sons of God came in to the daughters of man and they bore children to them. These were the mighty men who were of old, the men of renown.

Enoch 7:1-2
It happened after the sons of men had multiplied in those days, that daughters were born to them, elegant and beautiful. And when the angels, the sons of heaven, beheld them, they became enamored of them, saying to each other: Come, let us select for ourselves wives from the progeny of men, and let us beget children.

Now, I know for a fact from reading the preface on how Ethiopic Enoch was obtained and restored and the fact that Jude quotes him, that this is also the word of God and give more detail in regards to what happened and why God flooded the world. No one will ever convince me otherwise, because I have done the studies and the Spirit also confirms the truth with my spirit.

not Genesis six.

 

[KingdomBrat]

Talmud (Heb., "instruction)
there are two of them Judaism produced. one Jewish and the other Palestine.
They are oral traditions made up from a digest of topically arranged oral traditions. The Mishnah and it's Aramaic commentary, the Gemara.

The issue was it was incomplete and made its appearance around AD450: The Babylonian Talmud nearly four times larger was completed around AD500.

In Jewish Tradition, not all hold
Oral Torah vs. Written Torah

We know in the Old Testament the Scribe Amos recopied the Written work at hand. We know Yeshua read from Isaiah Scroll, we know Peter describes what the angel(s) of Genesis 6 did to earn them eternal darkness in hell until judgement in 2nd Peter 2.

My point is, tradition or not, oral or written, completed Torah/Tanakh or not, Jesus read from current materials, Peter describes an event worthy enough it's in the Bible itself concerning the pre-LAW earth before the Flood. It's not like these materials just appeared and were written in the 4th Century and became a Talmud. These materials were available to Jesus, Paul was taught with them, Peter even quotes [ORAL TRADITION] like it's Gospel in his day and time maybe 10 years from the Ascension of Christ.

It's ALL Relevant!.

 

[CS1]

Yes, I can. And because the same title is used identifying the 'sons of God' as being angels. Likewise, Genesis 6:1-2 is making a distinction between the 'sons of God' and 'the daughters of men,' i.e. the sons of God are not of mankind.

Then when you get into the information in Enoch, it all makes sense. Enoch reads the same as Genesis 6:1-2, with a little more detail. Compare:

Genesis 6:1-2
"When man began to multiply on the face of the land and daughters were born to them, 2the sons of God saw that the daughters of man were attractive. And they took as their wives any they chose. 3Then the LORD said, “My Spirit shall not abide in man forever, for he is flesh: his days shall be 120 years.” 4The Nephilim were on the earth in those days, and also afterward, when the sons of God came in to the daughters of man and they bore children to them. These were the mighty men who were of old, the men of renown.

Enoch 7:1-2
It happened after the sons of men had multiplied in those days, that daughters were born to them, elegant and beautiful. And when the angels, the sons of heaven, beheld them, they became enamored of them, saying to each other: Come, let us select for ourselves wives from the progeny of men, and let us beget children.

Now, I know for a fact from reading the preface on how Ethiopic Enoch was obtained and restored and the fact that Jude quotes him, that this is also the word of God and give more detail in regards to what happened and why God flooded the world. No one will ever convince me otherwise, because I have done the studies and the Spirit also confirms the truth with my spirit.

Enoch is not inspired it is gnostic

It never was in the Old Testament or in the Tanakh. It was one of many ancient sacred texts omitted from the Bible. The Book of Enoch was discovered in the 18th century and most assumed it was penned after the beginning of the Christian era because it had quotes and paraphrases as well as concepts found in the New Testament. However, the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls found at Qumran proved the book was in existence long before Jesus sometime in the 2nd or 3rd Century BC.

 

[CS1]

Well, the angels obviously had free will, because aside from angels taking human wives, you know very well that a third of them rebelled against God, with Satan as their leader.

free will is not the same as having the ability to procreate. They were not sexual being with a physical body they were spiritual beings with the spiritual body.

 

[CS1]

We know in the Old Testament the Scribe Amos recopied the Written work at hand. We know Yeshua read from Isaiah Scroll, we know Peter describes what the angel(s) of Genesis 6 did to earn them eternal darkness in hell until judgement in 2nd Peter 2.

My point is, tradition or not, oral or written, completed Torah/Tanakh or not, Jesus read from current materials, Peter describes an event worthy enough it's in the Bible itself concerning the pre-LAW earth before the Flood. It's not like these materials just appeared and were written in the 4th Century and became a Talmud. These materials were available to Jesus, Paul was taught with them, Peter even quotes [ORAL TRADITION] like it's Gospel in his day and time maybe 10 years from the Ascension of Christ.

It's ALL Relevant!.

Jesus reading something and Jesu quoting something written is two different things and if any writing takes away from the Aurotiative words of Christ whenever HE is speaking is to be seen as wrong hermeneutics.

If you say context matter then that is the end of the discussion because the context will not be the same IF you make sons of God be angelic being over men who slept with worldly women.

If you take the word Nephilim and make it to mean 11 feet giants when it means mighty men of war. Notices the word Men in the context of Nephilim.

 

[KingdomBrat]

If you take the word Nephilim and make it to mean 11 feet giants when it means mighty men of war. Notices the word Men in the context of Nephilim.

I take it to mean NOBLES or the Hebrew word Cherem!

יחיד = "Nobles" is the translation of the Hebrew cherem [Herem or cherem (Hebrew: חרם, ḥērem)] (occurring only in the plural) = Herem or cherem (Hebrew: חרם, ḥērem), as used in the Tanakh, means 'devote' or 'destroy' in an act of war.

Ultimately, the use of Nobles [specifically Cherem] here in Genesis 6 is to [SIGNIFY] an Act of War.

The Ancient Hebrew [יחיד] wants us to view this as War from the Fallen Sons of God (Job gives 3 examples) upon God Himself by trying to [Destroy God's Creation of Humanity]. This WAR ended with the Flood of Noah!

 

[Dino246]

Then you should hold to your understanding. If making a blanket application of a single verse from far later in the scriptural essay is simply poor hermeneutics, then, why are you doing so?

How am I doing so, in your view?

Your whole Biblical point as to angels having sex with women is based on no sold Biblical account but improper exegesis.

Actually, that's not my point. I have merely been refuting trutht7's assertion that "sons of God" can only mean "humans".

You have to also ignore what Jesus said when the self-Righteous scribes came to him with the questions of marriage in the afterlife.
Mark 12:24-25

Jesus answered and said to them, “Are you not therefore mistaken, because you do not know the Scriptures nor the power of God?
“For when they rise from the dead, they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels in heaven.

Matthew 22:29-30 says
Jesus answered and said to them, “You are mistaken, not knowing the Scriptures nor the power of God.
“For in the resurrection, they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels of God in heaven.
The word Angel here is also the same for Messenger yet it is speaking of a spiritual being, not a pastor.

I haven't ignored anything. There are at least three problems with using these passages to prove that the view of "sons of God" in Genesis 6 as non-human entities is wrong:

Firstly, Genesis 6 says, "sons of God", not "angels". They simply are not synonymous terms.

Secondly, Jesus says, "in heaven" not "on earth".

Thirdly, nowhere does Jesus say that angels cannot marry, nor does He make any statement at all about their capacity for procreation. He merely states that the angels in heaven do not marry.

 

[Dino246]

All I need you to do is provide in genesis chapter six where God flooded the whole earth because of angels and not man sin. Please show me in the chapters of 5-7 of Genesis where it was angels who caused God to repent of ever making angels?

You can't use JOB, Jude, Enoch to explain what is given in Genesis. Genesis six.

it's like the sci-fi channel.

I don't need to prove anything that I have not asserted.

 

[Blade]

Hi First I think Enoch is something we should read but its left out for a reason. I knew a man that studied Angels and what not would say so many times "don't believe me you search this you find this out for your self" and he said other things like that. Its ok I understand how and why some can't believe this they are moved by only what they see hear and feel. God will never go against our will.

just looking in to the 'sons of God" which always refers to means angels. Read Job twice talks about the sons of God with Satan come before God. sons of God is a being created by God. So we know Angels left their first estate and took woman and some of those angels had to be put in chains that are right now still in chains. For they will not obey God. What exactly an angel can and can't do we don't know. We do know what they did with women.

Fact.. knowing any of this will change nothing. You will not see it, God will not talk to you about it. He will never go against your free will. You are I are so blessed because we believe in Christ Jesus and yet never seen Him.

 

[Truth7t7]

Do you think everything in Greek Mythology is false?
Did you ever consider that Greek Mythology got some of its content from the Hebrew Scriptures?

The Bible mentions Leviathan and Tartarus (the deepest recesses of Sheol) and the flood etc. Are these also false because the Greeks decided to talk about them in their literature?

Most of Greek mythology is just fiction. But there are some examples of Biblical truth in it. Certain Biblical examples are not explained accurately within Greek mythology, but the existence of those examples is certainly real. We can only know the details with certainty from the Bible. For example, Leviathan, according to the Bible, is a multi-headed sea creature that rarely accends for man to see. I don't need Greek mythology to know that. But the Greeks did happen to mention Leviathan in their mythology. So that part is true, but not because the Greeks invented the idea. As for the Nephilim, we don't need Greek mythology to understand who they were. They are mentioned throughout the OT: King Agag, Goliath, and his brothers, the Anakites, the Rephidim, etc. They are described as beings who were between 9-20ft tall.
Greek mythology happens to mention them, but their understanding of their origin was skewed. They thought they were the offspring of deity and mankind, and they called them "demigods". This is incorrect. They were not half-gods, they were half-angels.
In conclusion, the Greeks mostly made up their own myths and also drew from other cultures to form their ideas (including the Hebrews and their Scriptures). Sometimes they were absolutely correct, sometimes they were right but expressed the "myths" inaccurately, sometimes they were totally wrong. In this case, they were right about the hybrids, but their explanation of their origin was incorrect.

They were not half gods, they were half Angel's?

I dont believe scripture describes Angel's as having human sperm, a penis, or ejaculation, perhaps you can post this scripture?

It appears you have been read toooooo much Greek Mythology

The Sons Of God were human men, that married human women

Teaching Angels have sex with human women, and maintaining human sperm is a fairytale in mythology, and false teaching.

Genesis 6:1-6KJV
1 And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them,
2 That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose.
3 And the Lord said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years.
4 There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown.
5 And God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.
6 And it repented the Lord that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart.

"The Sons of God" took wives, Angel's don't marry humans, it's that simple.

Matthew 22:30KJV
30 For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven.

 

[Dino246]

They were not half gods, they were half Angel's?

I dont believe scripture describes Angel's as having human sperm, a penis, or ejaculation, perhaps you can post this scripture?

Making such silly demands doesn't advance the conversation.

 

[Magenta]

People boo hoo and cry about how todays church is so far from what the first century
church was. Guess what? In the first century, Enoch was not considered Scripture.

Why people claim it is inspired is beyond me

Of the Apocrypha, Josephus says: “We do not possess myriads
of inconsistent books, conflicting with each other. Our books,
those which are justly accredited, are but two and twenty
[the equivalent of the 39 books of the Hebrew Scriptures
according to modern division], and contain the record of all time.”

 

[49]

They were not half gods, they were half Angel's?

I dont believe scripture describes Angel's as having human sperm, a penis, or ejaculation, perhaps you can post this scripture?

It appears you have been read toooooo much Greek Mythology

The Sons Of God were human men, that married human women

Teaching Angels have sex with human women, and maintaining human sperm is a fairytale in mythology, and false teaching.

Genesis 6:1-6KJV
1 And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them,
2 That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose.
3 And the Lord said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years.
4 There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown.
5 And God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.
6 And it repented the Lord that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart.

"The Sons of God" took wives, Angel's don't marry humans, it's that simple.

Matthew 22:30KJV
30 For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven.

The Sons Of God were human men, that married human women


Nope.....

 

[Ahwatukee]

I'm curious how you would answer this... the Serpent in the garden in https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis 3&version=KJV is he the same as in Job? And is he the same Serpent who is in Revelation? https://biblehub.com/revelation/20-2.htm

Here's the issue though if the "serpent"(Gen. 3) is among the angels who took unto themselves wives then is he bound in chains as in Jude and 2 Peter https://book-ofenoch.com/chapter-10/ ,,, or is he not in the same group with those who took wive's of the DoM and he wont be bound in chains until right before the millennial kingdom?

Hi iamsoandso!

From what I know, of the angels (plural) that took human wives, though Satan deceived Eve as a serpent and is referred to as 'that ancient serpent' in Revelation, he is not mentioned as being among those 200 angels that took wives, else I suppose that he would also be among those angels who are now in Tartarus. In addition, if he had been one of their number, Peter wouldn't have written about him saying 'your enemy the devil prowls around like a roaring lion seeking whom he may devour.'

Peter states 'the angels that sinned' and Jude states that they did not keep (abandoned) their heavenly positions of authority. From what I understand, both Peter and Jude are speaking about the same group of angels, the ones who took wives and beget giants. Enoch also confirms what both Peter and Jude wrote, regarding their punishment:

===============================================================

Enoch 10:1-5
Then the Most Hight, the Great and Holy One spoke; and sent Arsayalalyur to the son of Lamech (Noah), saying: Say to him in My name; conceal thyself. Then explain to him the consummation (flood) which is about to take place; for all the earth shall perish; the waters of a deluge shall come over the whole earth, and all things which are in it shall be destroyed. And now teach him how he may escape, and how his seed may remain in all the earth.

Enoch 10:6-9
Again the Lord said to Raphael: Bind Azazyel hand and foot; cast him into darkness; and opening the desert which is in Dudael, cast him in there. Throw upon him hurled and pointed stones; covering him with darkness; There shall he remain for ever; cover his face, that he may not see the light. And in the great day of judgment (white throne judgment) let him be cast into the fire (Matt.25:41).

Enoch 10:15
To Michael likewise the Lord said: Go and announce his crime to Samyaza (the leader of the 200) and to the others who are with him, who have been associated with women, that they might be polluted with all their impurity. And when all their sons shall be slain, when they shall see the perdition of their beloved, bind them for seventy generations underneath the earth (Tartartus) even to the day of judgment, and of the consummation, until the judgment, the effect of which will last forever, be completed.