The
purpose of this Group is to examine the claims made by the
pseudepigraphical book of Enoch which many Messanics view as inspired
scripture (this ministry does not). We shall here examine the claims
and the evidence and why occultists love it...
Introduction to the Book of Enoch
The Book of Enoch (also 1 Enoch[1]) is a pseudepigraphic work ascribed
to Enoch, the great-grandfather of Noah and son of Jared (Genesis 5:18).
While this book today is non-canonical in most Christian Churches, it
was explicitly quoted[2]:8 in the New Testament (Letter of Jude
1:14-15) and by many of the early Church Fathers. The Ethiopian
Orthodox Church to this day regards it to be canonical.
It is wholly extant only in the Ge'ez language, with Aramaic fragments
from the Dead Sea Scrolls and a few Greek and Latin fragments. There is
no consensus among Western scholars about the original language: some
propose Aramaic, others Hebrew, while the probable thesis according to
E. Isaac is that 1 Enoch, as Daniel, was composed partially in Aramaic
and partially in Hebrew[2]:6. Ethiopian scholars 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 been found[3].
According to Western scholars 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 1st century BC[4]; It is
argued that all the writers of the New Testament were familiar with it
and were influenced by it in thought and diction.[5] - see Wikipedia Book of Enoch.
Comment by Lev/Christopher on July 11, 2009 at 12:54am
I think we must be careful about any assumptions we draw about
quotations in scripture. Paul paraphrased and misquoted scripture all
the time which have led some people to reject him. The point of any
revelation is the revelation being given - that is, the concept which
is truth and therefore life-giving. All we know with any certainty is
that the quotation given by Jude is authentic.
Jude 14-15
"Behold, the Lord comes with ten thousands of His saints, 15 to execute
judgment on all, to convict all who are ungodly among them of all their
ungodly deeds which they have committed in an ungodly way, and of all
the harsh things which ungodly sinners have spoken against Him."
NKJV
we do NOT know what he was quoting from. It could easily have been a
text which the writer(s) of the current 'Book of Enoch' took extracts
from themselves and then rewrote with goodness knows what agenda. We
knpw for a fact that the current 'Book of Enoch' was not written by
Enoch himself - scholars almost universally (and rightly so) describe
it as a pseudepigraph - a text written by someone other than the author
whose name it bears. We know that a lot of pseudepigraphic expansion of
earlier materials existed at this time and that some of the
non-caninical scriptures (like Maccabees) were simply propagandistic
tractates created to boost Pharisaic theocratic/political claims. Just
because a passage is found in the NT that appears in an older writing
does not prove that it came from that earlier writing. Jude's quote may
equally have come from a collection or compilation of sayings similar
to the Gospel of Thomas. We just do not know. To assume that a MS of
unknown provenance with internal contradictions must be authentic
simply because it contains Jude's quotation requires a huge leap of
faith.
I can understand why the Book of Enoch is to attractive not only to
some Christians and Messianics but also to occultists. It's a
compelling story! Yet none of us have asked the question: why did Moses
say almost nothing about the life of Enoch in Genesis? Could it have
been because Yahweh foreknew that a fraudulent text would later appear
that would mislead people? Could it have been because we didn't need to
know? The proponents of the Book of Enoch often fall back to occultic
justifications of the need for a vulgar text for the masses and the
deeper stuff reserved for the 'elect'. That's a risky mindset because
it is the basis of all secret occult systems what lead to major
disjunctions between the exoteric stuff or the masses and the (usually)
satanic stuff for the initiates. It's how Mormonism and Freemasonry
work. There can be no contradictions between the exo- and esoteric -
they must agree. That's why we can throw out kabbalistic writings with
its pantheism and reincarnation. It's why we can throw out the Book of
Mormon and other pretended scriptures. The 'Book of Enoch' has to be
subjected to the same tests. I believe it may very well have genuine
material in it but I who wants truth from a polluted source with the
risk of getting contaminated from the dirt? Will any of us agree which
parts of the book are from Yahweh and which are from Satan? Which
versions do we use? Can we trust the DSS compilers?
This is one reason a firmly believe we MUST stick with the Protestant
Canon, even with better attested books like the Book of Jasher. We can
for sure cite epigrapha as historical materials with the caveat that
they may not be kosher. In my experience as a minister tampering with
the canon just leads to more disuinity. Since nearly all believers -
Christian and Messianic - accept the Protestant Canon, we should stick
with that for the sake of the Good News. The few esoterica we get out
of works like the Book of Enoch...how are they going to enhance our
witness? Will they persaude people to accept Christ? Not when they have
a different mode of redemption - I see the book as only creating more
stumbling blocks.
Comment by Scott Ledbetter on July 10, 2009 at 3:35pm
Here is my two cents worth on this. First off, I believe the book of
Jude was written by Jude who was inspired by the Ruach HaKodesh. So it
YHVH, through the Ruach, told Jude to put that particular quote in
Scripture. That tells me that Enoch did indeed write it, or else YHVH
would have had it attributed to someone else and not from Enoch. Just
because we do not have the original language of the book of Enoch does
not mean that what we have is not the actual book that was quoted by
YHVH. Do we have the original copy of the book of Luke, and what are
languages the copies of Luke come in? And why do we consult worldly
scholars for anything? All they do is teach the doctrines and
traditions of men, and they have the wisdom that does not come from
above, but comes from the world. And so what if witches want to use the
book? There are Jewish witches that call themselves kabbalists, and
plenty of Christian mystics. Even the demons know the truth and even
HaSatan can quote Scripture. To sum this up is this way: YHVH told Jude
to include this quote from the book, and it is humans that claim it is
not inspired, so then Jude must not be inspired, or YHVH is not the
truth. Well, let YHVH be true and every man a liar.
Comment by Christian on July 10, 2009 at 7:07am
Which I contend they did not.
Comment by Christian on July 10, 2009 at 7:05am
I don't see what Eve and the fruit of the tree of Good and Evil has to
do with the texts called Book of Enoch's credence.
In response to Angela - if the demons were synonymous with fallen
messengers, then the Apostles would, when given might over the demons,
also been given might over Satan, and the "evil powers in high places"
that Paul mentions.
Comment by Lev/Christopher on July 10, 2009 at 12:30am
1 Peter 3:18-20
18 For Christ also suffered once for sins, the just for the unjust,
that He might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh but made
alive by the Spirit, 19 by whom also He went and preached to the
spirits in prison, 20 who formerly were disobedient, when once the
Divine longsuffering waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was
being prepared, in which a few, that is, eight souls, were saved
through water.
NKJV
As I understand this passage, Yah'shua is not preaching to the fallen
watcher angels but to the disembodied spirits of men and women who were
disobedient in the days of Noah.
Comment by Doug Dayhuff on July 9, 2009 at 7:27pm
So is it not possible that Jesus did also preach to those mentioned in
Jude 6 which to us is a clear reference to these "Watchers". It's
interesting that this little book of Jude is where we also find Enoch
mentioned.
Comment by Doug Dayhuff on July 9, 2009 at 2:19pm
Why wouldn't Jesus deliver a "victory message" to the demons who tried
to destroy mankind through which He would be born?
Comment by Lev/Christopher on July 9, 2009 at 10:49am
I am sure that the fruit was both literal and symbolic - I have written much about these in sermons.
I don't believe Adfam and Eve or the Antediluvians were giants -
genesis specifically says it was the offspring of watchers who were
giants. Huge skeletons have indeed been found to confirm the existence
of huge humanoids.
It is not unusual to have children in the same family with totally
opposite dispositions. Look at Esau and Jacob. I have known strong and
gifted believers fall into the depths of depravity (see my next sermon
which should be available tomorrow). So Cain and Able do not surprise
me. I believe we are ALL a hair's breadth away from hell should we ever
move out of Yah'shua - it's not like accumulated merit can preserve us
- simple choices can made people unrecognisable. Look at Heylel/Lucifer
- the brightest creature to the darkest. So I don't think we need to
invoke complex (and implausible) serpent seed-like doctrines to explain
differences of spirituality in siblings. It may make good science
fiction but it is bad history.
Finally, I don't believe that Yah'shua preached to the angels in hell
(who are beyond redemption) but to humans who perished in the flood
(who yet had the opportunity to accept the Besorah/Good News).
Comment by Doug Dayhuff on July 9, 2009 at 8:12am
The temptation was literal and had to do with obedience and a lust for
what God says not to do. Just like us when we refuse to deliver the
tithes and offerings or when we don't witness... God's right to keep
the tree for Him is His right to do. Just like the tithe-He gives us
all and yet reserves the right to the first fruit, tithes...The test
would have been being able to accept that God reserves certain things
for Himself and will we chose to obey that.
Cain and Abels differences are found in that Cain could not accept by
simple faith that which God had said to offer as a offering. Instead
substituting works for God's simple plan and instruction, Cain chose to
do it his own way. He like Eve,then Adam chose to disobey.
Angels have free will as well and that is why they did this abomination
of mixing with females. We believe these demons are already in hell and
that Chist preached to them at some point during His burial.
Comment by Lev/Christopher on July 9, 2009 at 5:44am
I agree, Doug - I think this was part of the original design of the enemy.
