not to start another topic, but first off, what is the Word of God? It was invented by human canonists wishing to collect God-inspired writing to be used for teaching and for doctrine.
The word of God is not the book bound between two leather covers. Granted, His words are in there, but the real Word is written on the tablets of our hearts, and it is from there that the scripture we read when we read the canonized collection of writings resonates with our understanding the Truth of God as He has revealed to all men. In short, the bible is not God.
I always ruffle a few feathers when I say that, and it's because it takes a lot of people a second glance to reread what I just wrote to finally understand what I am saying.
Enoch, and other apochraphyl writings are very much susceptible to error since through the thousands of years we've had access to them, countless people have decided for themselves what is necessary for teaching and doctrine, and what makes for good 'traditional' reading. We need to take the whole picture into account, and not see God's words to us, and our history as written by others, through the narrow viewpoint of hundreds of opinions over thousands of years. The Truth is evident. It makes itself known. Jesus is truth, and I hope that last sentence now makes itself clear.
For the purposes of this discussion, I agree with didi on a few issues. Enoch and other books (praise God we live now in an information free society where these things are comming out of obscurity - perhaps for such a time as this?) were traditional histories, taken to be legendary, or true; but not helpful for accepted and proven doctrine. For example, Homer's Odessey is not included in the bible because although it is considered by many to be a historical legend somehow based on a fact, it does nothing to add to the known and proven truth of doctrine other works in the bible are in fact helpful in using to teach. Same with the book(s) of Enoch, though from my own study the second book of enoch and it's known revisions/additions lead me to conclude that it is gnostic in origin, however, I'm not about to throw the baby out with the bathwater (if you know what I mean).
I find these discussions interesting. Please, let's see what else is there. If anything, I've found the apochrapha good 'background' reading in maybe shedding light on a few scriptures and stories I've always wondered about. If anything, at least we are getting a good idea of what some of the common traditional beliefs about these things have been throughout the millennia.