Book(s) of Enoch

IMO it speaks of a pretrib rapture in Chapters L and LIII, with the latter chapter linking the rapture with the removal of the restrainer of 2 Thessalonians 2 ("after this the Righteous and Elect One shall cause the house of his congregation to appear: henceforth they shall be no more hindered in the name of the Lord of Spirits")

Chap L - Glorification and Victory of the Righteous: Repentance of the Gentiles

1. And in those days a change shall take place for the holy and elect,
And the light of days shall abide upon them,
And glory and honour shall turn to the holy,
2. On the day of affliction on which evil shall have been treasured up against the sinners.

And the righteous shall be victorious in the name of the Lord of Spirits:
And He will cause the others to witness (this)
That they may repent
And forgo the works of their hands.

3. They shall have no honour through the name of the Lord of Spirits,
Yet through His name shall they be saved,
And the Lord of Spirits will have compassion on them,
For His compassion is great.
4. And He is righteous also in His judgement,
And in the presence of His glory unrighteousness also shall not maintain itself:
At His judgement the unrepentant shall perish before Him.
5. And from henceforth I will have no mercy on them, saith the Lord of Spirits.


Chap LIII - The Valley of Judgement: the Angels of Punishment: the Communities of the Elect One.

1. There mine eyes saw a deep valley with open mouths, and all who dwell on the earth and sea and islands shall bring to him gifts and presents and tokens of homage, but that deep valley shall not become full.

2. And their hands commit lawless deeds,
And the sinners devour all whom they lawlessly oppress:
Yet the sinners shall be destroyed before the face of the Lord of Spirits,
And they shall be banished from off the face of His earth,
And they shall perish for ever and ever.

3. For I saw all the angels of punishment abiding (there) and preparing all the instruments of Satan.
4. And I asked the angel of peace who went with me: 'For whom are they preparing these instruments?'
5. And he said unto me: 'They prepare these for the kings and the mighty of this earth, that they may thereby be destroyed.

6. And after this the Righteous and Elect One shall cause the house of his congregation to appear: henceforth they shall be no more hindered in the name of the Lord of Spirits.

7. And these mountains shall not stand as the earth before his righteousness,
But the hills shall be as a fountain of water,
And the righteous shall have rest from the oppression of sinners.'

The book of Enoch is NOT part of the Holy Canon and for a good reason. That is why God exhorts us NOT to interpret Scripture by anything that man says. It does not matter whether it is John Calvin, the Encyclopedia Britannica, The Westminster confession, the book of Enoch, or Josephus. Let God be true and every man a liar. Yet man has continued to make the exact same mistakes throughout "Biblical" history, in that he is always attempting to define God's Word by the Words of men, by Church traditions or by secular historical writing.

My warning is... when we put our trust in secular writing, no matter how faithful they may appear, we set ourselves up for error. This is WHY we have the folly of the 70 A.D interpretations, and all the erroneous expositions Rome and the Papal system, third temple, antichrist, left behind, and massive military bloodbath, etc. History is biased, and seldom occurred exactly as it was written, except it be "BIBLICAL HISTORY." Only then can we assured that it happened exactly the way God inspired it be written.

JM said:

Where, if at all, do the Book(s) of Enoch fit into your prophetic scheme?

Yours in the Lord,

jm

Click to expand...

Matthew 22:28 Therefore, in the resurrection, whose wife of the seven will she be? For they all had her.”

29 Jesus answered and said to them, “You are mistaken, not knowing the Scriptures nor the power of God. 30 For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels of God in heaven.

Jesus said, "in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels of God in heaven," and this should be known by knowing the scriptures. Where, in scripture, are these two subjects written about?

One, in the resurrection man becomes like the angels.
Two, angels are not given to marriage.
Thus, the Sadducees should have known the answer to their question, by the scriptures.

Outside of Enoch, where are these things written? If they are not written outside of Enoch, did Jesus essentially call Enoch scripture?

Acts29 said:

One, in the resurrection man becomes like the angels.
Two, angels are not given to marriage.
Thus, the Sadducees should have known the answer to their question, by the scriptures.

Outside of Enoch, where are these things written? If they are not written outside of Enoch, did Jesus essentially call Enoch scripture?

Click to expand...

A VERY good question, and one I had not considered before. I have my own theory about how the writings of Enoch had been preserved for the disciples like Jude to be quoting examples from Enoch's writing so clearly.

Enoch, who was the only man who would ever be translated so that he should not see death, was re-introduced to the world later as the high priest Melchizedek with no recorded beginning of days, nor end of life, nor any obvious descendants. As "priest of the Most High God", Melchizedek / Enoch would provide the type for Christ the Great High Priest after the order of Melchizedek, who would live forever in that role as our mediator.

We know that Melchizedek was still living in the days of the disciples, because Hebrews 7:8 testified of Melchizedek that "...he LIVETH" - present tense in those days when Hebrews was written. If Melchizedek truly was the same as the man Enoch, then Enoch would have still been alive when Hebrews was written, and perfectly capable of passing on his writings to the disciples to incorporate them into their own writings.

Granted, there may have been pseudo-texts attributing authorship to Enoch that may be spurious material, but I do believe that Enoch's genuine writings should have been given equal consideration when the canon was compiled. If God did not allow this to happen at the time, that is His prerogative to bring about this editing of His own scriptures. If the world itself could not contain the books which could be written about Christ's works while on earth, we would not be able to carry around such a mammoth amount of material. Probably "less is more", in this case.

3 Resurrections said:

A VERY good question, and one I had not considered before. I have my own theory about how the writings of Enoch had been preserved for the disciples like Jude to be quoting examples from Enoch's writing so clearly.

Click to expand...

Thanks. I posed this as a question to see if anyone would consider it. However, I am convinced Enoch is scripture according to Jesus. God is supremely clever and an expert at hiding things in plain sight. For example, the very next statement of Jesus:

Matthew 22:31 But concerning the resurrection of the dead, have you not read what was spoken to you by God, saying, 32 ‘I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob’? God is not the God of the dead, but of the living.” 33 And when the multitudes heard this, they were astonished at His teaching.

Proverbs 25:2 It is the glory of God to conceal a matter, But the glory of kings is to search out a matter.

Careful study of scripture, with faith, ends up being a treasure hunt essentially. The amount of revelation in the pages of scripture is enormous.

3 Resurrections said:

Enoch, who was the only man who would ever be translated so that he should not see death, was re-introduced to the world later as the high priest Melchizedek with no recorded beginning of days, nor end of life, nor any obvious descendants. As "priest of the Most High God", Melchizedek / Enoch would provide the type for Christ the Great High Priest after the order of Melchizedek, who would live forever in that role as our mediator.

We know that Melchizedek was still living in the days of the disciples, because Hebrews 7:8 testified of Melchizedek that "...he LIVETH" - present tense in those days when Hebrews was written. If Melchizedek truly was the same as the man Enoch, then Enoch would have still been alive when Hebrews was written, and perfectly capable of passing on his writings to the disciples to incorporate them into their own writings.

Click to expand...

Even if Enoch was not on the earth at that time, it would still be correct to say "he liveth." I'm not sure there is a compelling connection between the two people. However, if Enoch was Melchizedek, he would be the only person to live on the earth more than once. One, Elijah and John the Baptist. Two, Zachariah will live again and be killed between the Temple and altar as Jesus said. Three, Nebuchadnezzar will be the head of gold at the beginning of the Millennium. (Daniel 2 is the Millennium from the land of the Chaldeans.) There are others as well. Plus, all the ones who will live again for the Millennium. With God, all things are possible.

3 Resurrections said:

Granted, there may have been pseudo-texts attributing authorship to Enoch that may be spurious material, but I do believe that Enoch's genuine writings should have been given equal consideration when the canon was compiled. If God did not allow this to happen at the time, that is His prerogative to bring about this editing of His own scriptures. If the world itself could not contain the books which could be written about Christ's works while on earth, we would not be able to carry around such a mammoth amount of material. Probably "less is more", in this case.

Click to expand...

There was no prophet at the Nicene Counsel, so they made decisions themselves. I wouldn't blame God for their choices on the cannon. Same for the protestant reformation. In fact, God has never indicated the need to combine many books into one book. People just did this for simplicity and/or control.

There are a couple of different versions of Enoch. (Mostly the same though.) Since I believe Enoch himself wrote the Book, I can understand the enormous amount of time it has been passed down. I would expect to see some variations over 5500 years. People are not perfect. There is a big difference in the order of text in his third parable, for example. Also, a few places where a line or two is out of order. Simple human error stuff we should expect from such an ancient text. These things do not bother me in the slightest. Perfect preservation of text is only important to those who serve a dead god, imo.

When I deeply studied Enoch there were a few times that I was confused about something. So I asked God to explain the matter to me, after I gave my all to understand. He answered me several times. One example, the "500th year" in Enoch 60 didn't make sense. He told me it originally said "50th year." So, a simple error in numbers. No big deal. God is well able and willing to teach. The book has tremendous value. For example, if you want to know why in Ezekiel 39 the enemies all have wooden weapons, read Enoch 51 (52 in some versions.)

JM said:

Where, if at all, do the Book(s) of Enoch fit into your prophetic scheme?

Yours in the Lord,

jm

Click to expand...

Nowhere.

JM said:

It doesn't add historical context to ideas found in early Christian theology?

Click to expand...

Perhaps, but I've never read any of the apocrypha...

I'm a bit soured on reading such materials as Mohammed based a lot of his ideas on the apocrypha and other non-Scriptural Christian texts.

It leaves me not wanting anything to do with that stuff. I stick with known church fathers and such for reading outside scriptures.

JM said:

Many early Christians believed Enoch 1 was scripture and remains in the Coptic canon.

Click to expand...

I'll give it consideration and prayer. I just don't want to go astray.

3 Resurrections said:

A VERY good question, and one I had not considered before. I have my own theory about how the writings of Enoch had been preserved for the disciples like Jude to be quoting examples from Enoch's writing so clearly.

Enoch, who was the only man who would ever be translated so that he should not see death, was re-introduced to the world later as the high priest Melchizedek with no recorded beginning of days, nor end of life, nor any obvious descendants. As "priest of the Most High God", Melchizedek / Enoch would provide the type for Christ the Great High Priest after the order of Melchizedek, who would live forever in that role as our mediator.

We know that Melchizedek was still living in the days of the disciples, because Hebrews 7:8 testified of Melchizedek that "...he LIVETH" - present tense in those days when Hebrews was written. If Melchizedek truly was the same as the man Enoch, then Enoch would have still been alive when Hebrews was written, and perfectly capable of passing on his writings to the disciples to incorporate them into their own writings.

Granted, there may have been pseudo-texts attributing authorship to Enoch that may be spurious material, but I do believe that Enoch's genuine writings should have been given equal consideration when the canon was compiled. If God did not allow this to happen at the time, that is His prerogative to bring about this editing of His own scriptures. If the world itself could not contain the books which could be written about Christ's works while on earth, we would not be able to carry around such a mammoth amount of material. Probably "less is more", in this case.

Click to expand...

It is Elijah who comes and goes, not Melchizedek who was actually Shem. Shem was the founder of "Jerusalem" after the Flood. In fact he lived for 500 years after the Flood. Eber was the only other person who could have outlived Shem, and could prove Shem was the son of Noah. Eber would have been the originator of "Hebrew", who left the region of Assyria and Canaan and crossed over the Euphrates to Ur and greater Mesopotamia.

Shem would be like Christopher Coloumbus living today and it would be like he was never born. Going by another name, as he was still the one carrying on the office of priest from Noah. Noah lived 350 years after the Flood, but also was dead 100 years before Shem was known as Melchizedek. Very few people lived to 120, but Shem lived 500 years after the Flood. Abraham lived 175 years, probably the last to live way past 120. Moses enjoyed life for 120 years. The point was Shem was still living in Salem, when Abraham rescued those kings in the area who had rebelled against the current empire of the day.

Abraham was the 9th generation removed from Shem, yet Shem was still alive, the king of Salem. He had been king so long, over 400 years, his Parents Noah, and Mrs. Noah were no longer remembered. There would have been several empires to come and go, including Nimrod and all the Nations of Mesopotamia since the Flood. So long that even Abraham's family had lost touch, and lived in Ur of the Chaldees, the heart of Mesopotamia. Even Abraham may not have known it was Shem, even though he was a direct descendant.

Abraham was called out as an alien headed to Canaan, a strange land, when his ancestors in Canaan had already been replaced by Ham's family, except Shem founder of Salem, which became Jerusalem, when another direct descendant, David finally made it the seat of his kingdom. Not only did Abraham's line get lost in Egypt, but had gotten lost in Mesopotamia as well. Abraham came back almost 500 years after the Flood just in time to meet Shem, but the birth of Ishmael caused the Hebrews to wait 600 more years, until Jericho was captured about 1400 years before Christ.

BTW the so called writings of Enoch, were not written prior to the Flood nor by Enoch.

Acts29 said:

Even if Enoch was not on the earth at that time, it would still be correct to say "he liveth." I'm not sure there is a compelling connection between the two people. However, if Enoch was Melchizedek, he would be the only person to live on the earth more than once. One, Elijah and John the Baptist. Two, Zachariah will live again and be killed between the Temple and altar as Jesus said. Three, Nebuchadnezzar will be the head of gold at the beginning of the Millennium. (Daniel 2 is the Millennium from the land of the Chaldeans.) There are others as well. Plus, all the ones who will live again for the Millennium. With God, all things are possible.

Click to expand...

If Enoch came back it would have been Elijah. Elijah had no named mother nor father. The post Babylonian Jews claimed Elijah came and left earth several times. Enoch would have been authored by Elijah to be credible.

It is common today for spiritual leaders to quote the world. Just because authors in the NT quoted sources whom their readers would have been familiar with, outside of the canon, does not make those sources canon worthy.

John the Baptist was not Enoch nor Elijah. The father of John the Baptist was Zacharias. More than likely killed by Herod between the altar and the temple. A Herod even killed John the Baptist. John's father probably died trying to protect John, so he could be the one who declared the Messiah, and baptize Jesus. John the Baptist still ended up dead by a Herod, but after he fulfilled what was prophecied of Elijah. Still does not mean John was Elijah.

Timtofly said:

John the Baptist still ended up dead by a Herod, but after he fulfilled what was prophecied of Elijah. Still does not mean John was Elijah.

Click to expand...

These statements seem to contradict. How could John be Elijah and not be Elijah at the same time?

Gabriel said John would come in the spirit and power of Elijah. A spirit is a person. So, John would come in the person and power of Elijah. Neither of these occurred 2000 years ago. John said plainly that he was not Elijah, and also it is written John performed NO sign. Further, John restored nothing, let alone all things. Malachi records that Elijah will return before the great and terrible Day of the Lord, which hasn't happened yet. The answer to these things is quite obvious. John will return in the person and power of Elijah to restore all things before Jesus returns. If you are willing to receive it.

JM said:

Where, if at all, do the Book(s) of Enoch fit into your prophetic scheme?

Yours in the Lord,

jm

Click to expand...

Very prophetic book.

1 Enoch 1:9 Look, he comes with the myriads of his holy ones, to execute judgment on all, and to destroy all the wicked, and to convict all humanity for all the wicked deeds that they have done, and the proud and hard words that wicked sinners spoke against him.

Nickelsburg, George W.E.; VanderKam, James C. 1 Enoch . Fortress Press.


9 And behold! He cometh with ten thousands of His holy ones To execute judgement upon all, And to destroy all the ungodly: And to convict all flesh Of all the works of their ungodliness which they have ungodly committed, And of all the hard things which ungodly sinners have spoken against Him.

The Book of Enoch (R. H. Charles)


Enoch 2:1 Behold, he comes with ten thousands of his saints, to execute judgment upon them, and destroy the wicked, and reprove all the carnal for everything which the sinful and ungodly have done, and committed against him.

Book of Enoch (Richard Laurence)


[Jude 1:14-15 KJV] 14 And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints, 15 To execute judgment upon all, and to convince all that are ungodly among them of all their ungodly deeds which they have ungodly committed, and of all their hard [speeches] which ungodly sinners have spoken against him.

Acts29 said:

These statements seem to contradict. How could John be Elijah and not be Elijah at the same time?

Gabriel said John would come in the spirit and power of Elijah. A spirit is a person. So, John would come in the person and power of Elijah. Neither of these occurred 2000 years ago. John said plainly that he was not Elijah, and also it is written John performed NO sign. Further, John restored nothing, let alone all things. Malachi records that Elijah will return before the great and terrible Day of the Lord, which hasn't happened yet. The answer to these things is quite obvious. John will return in the person and power of Elijah to restore all things before Jesus returns. If you are willing to receive it.

Click to expand...

Either that or someone will come in the spirit of John the Baptist or Elijah, just like John the Baptist did.

JM said:

Where, if at all, do the Book(s) of Enoch fit into your prophetic scheme?

Yours in the Lord,

jm

Click to expand...

They don't. They were contrived by a 2nd Temple Jewish sect who was concerned primarily about the priesthood in Jerusalem and the use of a 364-day solar calendar. Further, their calendar was wrong (an actual solar year is 365.24217 days) so their carefully calculated feast days and Sabbaths drifted year to year compared to the actual solar year. They were aware of this and rather than conclude their solar calendar was simply wrong, they conjured up a story about the stars in heaven being angels who rebelled against God by showing up at the wrong time.

Has little to nothing to do with Christian eschatology as far as I can tell. The problem here is that some Christians like to read the parts of Enoch that use somewhat familiar angel names and other seemingly familiar terms while not reading the not-so-interesting dry parts about calendars. The comparison is tempting because both this Jewish sect and Christianity find their roots in a general 2nd Temple Jewish worldview. So they share a common theological language, but the theological particulars are not the same.