Book of Enoch

Discussion in 'Bible Study' started by Kevin, Nov 21, 2007.

  1. Book of Enoch

    I was recently listening to a top bible teacher about the book of Genesis. He mentioned the book of Enoch a few times, especially on details about Noah and the flood. Just for clarity, he was not preaching out of Enoch, he just referred to it.

    I have read the book and it has incredible similarities to Genesis. I has a lot more detail on specific things mentioned Genesis.

    The writer of Jude quotes directly out of the book of Enoch. The writer of Hebrews refers to Enoch and we know that Enoch was a very Holy man.

    The early church fathers used the book of Enoch but it was eventually put in the apocrypha and then forgotten.

    Has anybody here studied this book, does it deserve a closer look? Is it God inspired?
  2. The Book of Enoch was part of the Original Hebrew Language Manuscript texts and dates from approximately 160 BC. It was not Cannonized by 'the church' for administrative (biased) reasons which I will not go in to here, but please consider looking at the texts as a purely learning and educational experience and which may enhance your overall understanding of Scripture.

    Further explaination can be found in the first link below as well as the complete text, as located in the second link below:


    Text References:
  3. Thanks,

    I have seen that the Jews removed the book due to the references to the Messiah!
  4. It really depends on who you ask as there are ( as usaul ) alot of varying opinions on this.
    Of the almst 60 translations I use only one includes Apochraphal and other spurious writings so I may be safe in assuming the translators as a whole do not endorse them.
  5. Haven't read it recently, but I thought it was inspired. The author that I read claimed that it was quoted much in the time of the NT - especially the "son of Man" phrase.

    I couldn't see that it really added anything to the Canon as we know it today. Do you see something there that is not already in the Bible?
  6. Nice new avatar Jasher!!!!!
  7. No, it does not add anything to the bible. What I did find intresting was the books explanation of the origin of demons and the origin of witchcraft and astrology.
    Not that these are essential topics for salvation but they are interesting.
    The prophecies for the Messiah are very accurate and the descriptions of heaven are in incredible detail.

    Maybe it is true, maybe it is not. I would not use it for teaching purposes but I feel there is a lot of truth contained within it.
  8. Actualy the witness of the Book is neutral based on the
    N.T., and one has to judge the book on it's own merrits, based on what they decide about the book,

    1) Because Enoch could have said any line at all He wanted, which could have wound up in a book, with only one true quote, or

    2) N.T. facts - could also having previously been in the book of Enoch, offers no proof in and of itself that it was a quote from the Book Of Enoch, but infact the Book could be a fake, which has one or more facts in it

    ----So judge the Book up or down as You Like, and even believe it was quoted in the N.T. if You like

    ----But I simply feel the evidence is too minute to offer that one conclusion.

    -----So with no disrespect intended, it is actualy a matter of faith, I think, for one to believe the Book was quoted from or not -----as it could have just been an unrelated parallel quote of a fact -which the Book Of Enoch does not have exclusive rights to

    So I am not joining in this debate other than to say, it is not proven as being quoted, simply because a "parallel" quote could exist?????????????????

    God Bless,

  9. I don't have time to look it up now, but the Tribes of Israel were positioned using astrological signs - which I understand tell the story of Jesus. Been awhile since I have read this but if there is any interest I will look them up.

    Larry II
  10. Thank you Sir,

    I guess if you keep the file size down the applets will run as avatars.

    Larry II
  11. I have read it, and the Bible certainly does make several references to parts of it. It is not part of our canon though, so I wouldn't suggest treating it as scripture. Reading it may help one better understand certain parts of Genesis though and certain customs of the early church, such as the Catholic tradition of women covering their heads so as to "keep power on them." One of the reasons for this was to prevent angels from lusting after them as the Grigori did. The practice was officially abolished in the Second Vatican Council though.

    As a side note, I believe the book is part of Ethiopia's Canon, along with the book of Jubilee.
  12. true the bible has parallel references, however, that in
    and of itself, can not prove the book one way or the other.

    The Song of Songs, or Song Of Solomon, and other Bible
    passages, have their paralles outside the Bible,

    As well as the Gilgamesh Epic, etc.., also parallel to a
    certain extent the Bible.

    So the whole trick is, because the Bible seems to agree
    with certain Verses in the Book of Enoch, does that
    actualy, prove it as true or false ---and again based on
    such circumstantial evidence as that, does not prove it
    one way or the other.

    Like You said it was not cannonized, which I again believe
    God caused to happen, and again, when the Apocrapha,
    was with us for so long, God again caused it to be

    When Jerome translated the Latin Vulgate, he himslef had
    removed the apocrapha from it, only to have others put it
    back after Him.

    May Christ Richly Bless Those Who Love Him, Amen.

  13. Its not in the Bible, so actually I dont even think Id wanna look at it if it has anything sort of teaching.

Share This Page