Books of Enoch

Anybody read the Books of Enoch supposedly found with the dead sea scrolls? What is your take on them? I ran across a guy called the reluctant messenger and he had published them on the web? Are these for real "scripture"???? Really strange but interesting stuff... don't want to waste my time though if it's a hoax? thanks...

__________________
Kathleen7

Lets first see what they say. Where can we see them??

__________________
If you are interested in the rapture, my new book unveils new discoveries of many new clues about the rapture. Get ready for a ground-breaking Bible prophecy breakthrough! These secrets have been right under our noses all this time, hidden in God's Word for a time such as this. The official release date of my book is Jan. 10, 2012, but it's available now for pre-release sales through the publisher at the following link:
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

The Book of Enoch is considered by all Christians to be pseudepigraphical (not really what it claims to be), written much, much after Enoch to Jews. The author's purpose in calling himself Enoch was to make sure he was taken more seriously than he would be if it was called, "The Book of Obed" or something. However, it's very interesting that Jude 1:14-15 is actually taken from the Book of Enoch. Very curious.

thunder, you can find them at reluctant-messenger.com/1enoch01-60.htm strange stuff... seems a lot of people consider it a lost book of the Bible... tell me what you think...

__________________
Kathleen7

The Books of Enoch were NOT found with the Dead Sea Scrolls. It is a myth perpetrated by the authors of the books. There is no trace of these books existing prior to the 1960's. It is thought that they were originally written as a work of fiction which was then absorbed into literature posing as non-fiction.

__________________
Carry only love. Hate is a burden that is tremendously heavy.

If you want to live like Jesus, love your enemies and give up your life for them.

Actually, how can Jude then reference to the Book of Enoch if the book of Jude was written prior to the 1960s?

I personally believe, by the evidence of its history, that the "Book of Enoch", or it's original relative, was part of a collection of books Noah saved on the ark and has been passed down as legendary titles. Other books and documents included would have been the history of the world prior to the Flood, namely, the account of Adam and Eve, of Cain and Abel. These stories would have been written down, or remembered in oral tradition, or both; and I can almost bet that the oldest known writing ever produced by mankind lies in the first chapter of Genesis.

Enoch would have been a tradition in Noah's family, if it were true. As such, the knowledge of the ledgend would have been around even when Moses compiled Gensis and wrote about little blurb that tells us about Enoch. So we can say with some assurances that there was knowledge and thus probably a story that went with the Enoch story found in Genesis and later Jude, a story perhaps credible enough to be considered in possible existence in book form on or shortly after the time of the ark.

Of course its scriptural content adds nothing to the bible other than an historical understanding of fallen angels and the reasons for the flood. And it is quite possible that since this book was not canonized by even the Jews, that revisions to the story (if there are) would go more unnoticed since not many people would be looking to it for spiritual answers, rather just legendary history.

But often, legend is founded on the historic. I personally believe Enoch is a good source for getting a "traditional" perspective on Enoch and the reasons for the flood, since this "tradition" was well known even in Jesus' time and probably even in Moses's time... and Moses is only 8-12? generations removed from Noah - the savior of what ever documents he choose to preserve through the Flood. Family histories, historical accounts of those histories, the Beginning, etc; whatever was in his possession as a family heir and descendent of the line mentioned from Adam to Enoch to Noah.

Josephus wrote

No offense, but I think this is kind of extreme. This proposition is a little unnecessarily fantastical. I mean, what's wrong with Jude quoting a piece of non-sacred literature such as Paul did? Paul put a lot of stock in secular writing (quoting Euripides, et al), and I suspect Jude did, as well. I have never heard anyone argue what you're proposing, simply because even the Jews of Jude's time did not believe in 1 & 2 Enoch's historicity.

__________________

Oh dear... so is the book of enoch from God or not? If it is not, it might worsen our perception of God's words. But if it is God's words, why in the first place will it be lost?

__________________

The books being published under the title The Books of Enoch are not the same book. They are not the ancient writings refered to in Jude. They were works of fiction that were written in modern times to simulate what those lost books might have been. The authors of the "Enoch books" have even stepped forward and said that they wrote them and never intended them to be taken as scripture, they were just trying to write and interesting version of what ancient literature might have been like. They said they didn't even try to follow scripture because neither of them was religious. They are both non-practicing Jews who were in their twenties back then, and looking for a way to jab or hoax the establishment. Lots of young people in the 60's did things like that. It was a time of rebellion against tradition and "the establishment." I can't remember their first names but their last names are Heisel and Friedman. This all came out about 20 or 30 years ago, but the younger generation is falling for the hoax all over again.

__________________
Carry only love. Hate is a burden that is tremendously heavy.

If you want to live like Jesus, love your enemies and give up your life for them.

lambslove,

I don't know where you got that information, but it's spurious. I assure you that biblical scholars consider 1 and 2 Enoch to have already existed long before the twentieth century. Their existence has been known for an extremely long time. I don't doubt that Heisel and Friedman were involved in some hoax, but it wasn't this. Check your sources.

__________________