Should the Book of Enoch be in the Bible canon?

[tonychanyt]

Wiki:

The Book of Enoch ... is an ancient Hebrew apocalyptic religious text, ascribed by tradition to Enoch, the great-grandfather of Noah.

before 3000 BC

The older sections (mainly in the Book of the Watchers) of the text are estimated to date from about 300–200 BC

The book of Enoch could not have been written by the great-grandfather of Noah. To me, this is a weighty reason for excluding it from the canon. The author of the book of Enoch was not inspired by God.

Why was the book of Enoch quoted in Jude, yet not included in the official canon?

John 1:1 seems to allude to Philo's writing in De Profugis

the Logos of the living God is the bond of everything, holding all things together and binding all the parts, and prevents them from being dissolved and separated.

Should De Profugis be considered part of the canon?

There is another allusion in Titus 1:

12 One of Crete’s own prophets has said it: “Cretans are always liars, evil brutes, lazy gluttons.”

Expositor's Greek Testament:

The whole line occurs, according to Jerome, in the περὶ χρησμῶν of Epimenides, a native of Cnossus in Crete. ... It is generally agreed that St. Paul was referring to Epimenides.

Should we put Epimenides' περὶ χρησμῶν into the Bible canon?

No. Allusions and citations are not sufficient conditions to be part of the Protestant canon.

Does the Book of Enoch have any validity?

I don't just dismiss anything. I put a weight on everything.

Wiki:

It is not part of the biblical canon used by Jews, apart from Beta Israel (Ethiopian Jews). While the Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church and Eritrean Orthodox Tewahedo Church consider the Book of Enoch as canonical, other Christian groups regard it as non-canonical or non-inspired, but may accept it as having some historical or theological interest.

 

[Lukaris]

While there are differences between the Bibles of different churches, these have been settled for centuries. These should remain as they are; I believe a cautious & discerning respect can be observed by different believers. The New Testament is the same for all Trinitarian Christians and that should be the ultimate scripture authority ( as far as I know).

Anyway, I believe the book of Enoch is worthy of some consideration to be carefully studied and worthy of some reference where it conforms to the Bible known by various Trinitarian Christians. One major example is the Ancient of Days mentioned in greater detail in Enoch appears to be God as was known by Daniel in Daniel 7:9-14.

For ex. from Enoch 46 per the Anglican Archbishop Bishop Laurence ( 1830s):

CHAP. XLVI.​

1. There I beheld the Ancient of days, 3 whose head was like white wool, and with him another, whose countenance resembled that of man. His countenance was full of grace, like that of one of the holy angels. Then I inquired of one of the angels, 4 who went with me, and who showed me every secret thing, concerning this Son of man; who he was; whence he was; and why he accompanied the Ancient of days.

2. He answered and said to me, This is the Son of man, to whom righteousness belongs; with whom righteousness has dwelt; and who will reveal all the treasures of that which is concealed: for the Lord of spirits has chosen him; and his portion has









p. 51

surpassed 1 all before the Lord of spirits in everlasting uprightness.

3. This Son of man, whom thou beholdest, shall raise up kings and the mighty from their couches, and the powerful from their thrones; shall loosen the bridles of the powerful, and break in pieces the teeth of sinners.

The Book of Enoch the Prophet: Chapters XLI-LX

The Book of Enoch the Prophet, tr. by Richard Laurence, [1883], full text etext at sacred-texts.com

www.sacred-texts.com

There may be puzzling aspects of the excerpt I pasted from Enoch but the prophet Amos said, “I saw the Lord” ( Amos 9:1) then compare John 1:18. I believe Enoch is worthy of study but should be approached with caution.

 

[Maria Billingsley]

Wiki:

before 3000 BC


The book of Enoch could not have been written by the great-grandfather of Noah. To me, this is a weighty reason for excluding it from the canon. The author of the book of Enoch was not inspired by God.

Why was the book of Enoch quoted in Jude, yet not included in the official canon?

John 1:1 seems to allude to Philo's writing in De Profugis


Should De Profugis be considered part of the canon?

There is another allusion in Titus 1:


Expositor's Greek Testament:


Should we put Epimenides' περὶ χρησμῶν into the Bible canon?

No. Allusions and citations are not sufficient conditions to be part of the Protestant canon.

Does the Book of Enoch have any validity?

I don't just dismiss anything. I put a weight on everything.

Wiki:

The book was written during the Intertestamental Period so it can not be part of the Torah. There are prophesies in the OT that have a specific date of when the Messiah would be born. If that date is in any way altered or manipulated in this book it is false. Additionally all the fantasies about angles and such are a clue, this book is fiction.
Blessings.

 

[Paul4JC]

We can't undo history. Doesn't need to be. So deemed, so-called church fathers even though Jude called it prophecy decided to change that. (The Apostles were never called church fathers so why this group 2 centuries later?) It is not canon. Neither is every sermon preached or any Christian book written. I believed is it inspired by the Holy Spirit.

[Jde 1:14 NIV] 14 Enoch, the seventh from Adam, prophesied about them: "See, the Lord is coming with thousands upon thousands of his holy ones

[2Pe 1:21 NIV] For prophecy never had its origin in the human will, but prophets, though human, spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.

 

[tonychanyt]

I believed is it inspired by the Holy Spirit.

Who wrote the Book of Enoch?

 

[Paul4JC]

The same question can be made of so many books of the bible.

Jude says it was Enoch

[Jde 1:14a NIV] Enoch, the seventh from Adam, prophesied about them:

The book of Jubilees says Enoch wrote it.

Jubiless Chapter 4:18. “And he (Enoch) was the first to write a testimony, and he testified to the sons of men among the generations of the earth, and recounted the weeks of the jubilees, and made known to them the days of the years, and set in order the months and recounted the Sabbaths of the years as we made (them) known to him. 19. And what was and what will be he saw in a vision of his sleep, as it will happen to the children of men throughout their generations until the day of judgment; he saw and understood everything, and wrote his testimony, and placed the testimony on earth for all the children of men and for their generations”.

Otherwise, it's dated to 3BC

George W.E Nickelsburg who spent about 30 years studying the book and compiling a massive commentary on the same says, “It is one the oldest preserved examples of a form of biblical exposition that interprets a narrative by retelling it in an elaborated form.” [1]

---

[1] Nickelsburg, George W.E.. 1 Enoch 1: A Commentary on the Book of 1 Enoch, Chapters 1-36; 81-108 pg 29


2.1.1. Aramaic the Original Language? Since the Ethiopic version of 1 Enoch was first introduced to the West at the beginning of the nineteenth century, scholars have almost universally acknowledged that the Ethiopic version derives from a Greek translation of a Semitic original, although they have debated whether that original was in Hebrew or Aramaic. The discovery of the Qumran Aramaic Enoch mss. makes it virtually certain that Aramaic was the language in which chaps. 1–36, the Book of Giants, and chaps. 72–107 were composed, although the authors may have drawn on some Hebrew sources. Whether the Book of Parables (chaps. 37–71) and chap. 108 were composed in Hebrew or Aramaic is less certain, since no Aramaic fragments of either section were found at Qumran.

George W. E. Nickelsburg, 1 Enoch: A Commentary on the Book of 1 Enoch, ed. Klaus Baltzer, Hermeneia—a Critical and Historical Commentary on the Bible (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress, 2001), 9.

 

[tonychanyt]

The same question can be made of so many books of the bible.

Jude says it was Enoch

[Jde 1:14a NIV] Enoch, the seventh from Adam, prophesied about them:

The book of Jubilees says Enoch wrote it.

Jubiless Chapter 4:18. “And he (Enoch) was the first to write a testimony, and he testified to the sons of men among the generations of the earth, and recounted the weeks of the jubilees, and made known to them the days of the years, and set in order the months and recounted the Sabbaths of the years as we made (them) known to him. 19. And what was and what will be he saw in a vision of his sleep, as it will happen to the children of men throughout their generations until the day of judgment; he saw and understood everything, and wrote his testimony, and placed the testimony on earth for all the children of men and for their generations”.

Otherwise, it's dated to 3BC

George W.E Nickelsburg who spent about 30 years studying the book and compiling a massive commentary on the same says, “It is one the oldest preserved examples of a form of biblical exposition that interprets a narrative by retelling it in an elaborated form.” [1]

---

[1] Nickelsburg, George W.E.. 1 Enoch 1: A Commentary on the Book of 1 Enoch, Chapters 1-36; 81-108 pg 29


2.1.1. Aramaic the Original Language? Since the Ethiopic version of 1 Enoch was first introduced to the West at the beginning of the nineteenth century, scholars have almost universally acknowledged that the Ethiopic version derives from a Greek translation of a Semitic original, although they have debated whether that original was in Hebrew or Aramaic. The discovery of the Qumran Aramaic Enoch mss. makes it virtually certain that Aramaic was the language in which chaps. 1–36, the Book of Giants, and chaps. 72–107 were composed, although the authors may have drawn on some Hebrew sources. Whether the Book of Parables (chaps. 37–71) and chap. 108 were composed in Hebrew or Aramaic is less certain, since no Aramaic fragments of either section were found at Qumran.

George W. E. Nickelsburg, 1 Enoch: A Commentary on the Book of 1 Enoch, ed. Klaus Baltzer, Hermeneia—a Critical and Historical Commentary on the Bible (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress, 2001), 9.

Wiki:

The Book of Enoch ... is an ancient Hebrew apocalyptic religious text, ascribed by tradition to Enoch, the great-grandfather of Noah.

before 3000 BC

The older sections (mainly in the Book of the Watchers) of the text are estimated to date from about 300–200 BC

The book of Enoch could not have been written by the great-grandfather of Noah. To me, this is a weighty reason for excluding it from the canon.

 

[Paul4JC]

Wiki:

before 3000 BC


The book of Enoch could not have been written by the great-grandfather of Noah. To me, this is a weighty reason for excluding it from the canon.

There are many threads on this subject already. Do a search, if you are truly interested.

I already stated that it doesn't need to be canon. Also, you can't change history. Yet, it is part of the Ethiopian canon.

So according to you, Enoch didn't prophesy as Jude states. Are you rejecting the canon?

The canon points to 1 Enoch and vice versa.

That's enough for me.

 

[tonychanyt]

So according to you, Enoch didn't prophesy as Jude states.

Where did I say that? Can you quote my words?

 

[Paul4JC]

The book of Enoch could not have been written by the great-grandfather of Noah

Maybe we're misunderstanding each other.

The book of 1 Enoch is a book of prophecy.

I'm saying Enoch, the seventh from Adam is the original writer of 1 Enoch, and he passed it to Methuselah, and later it was given to Noah. It came through the flood. No there is no documentation trail until the 3BC when it was compiled by others, but that doesn't mean it originated in 3BC.

God got it to Jude, which is supposed to be canon. (Yet some chose to exclude it which is basically denying Jude's statement) God also got it to us today. We are the "generation/ that is distant."

1 Enoch 1:2-3 And he took up his discourse[1] and said, “Enoch, a righteous man whose eyes were opened by God, who had the vision of the Holy One and of heaven, which he showed me. From the words of the watchers and holy ones I heard everything; and as I heard everything from them, I also understood what I saw. Not for this generation do I expound, but concerning one that is distant I speak. 3 And concerning the chosen I speak now, and concerning them I take up my discourse.

Nickelsburg, George W.E.; VanderKam, James C.. 1 Enoch: The Hermeneia Translation (p. 19). Fortress Press.

 

[tonychanyt]

Maybe we're misunderstanding each other.

The book of 1 Enoch is a book of prophecy.

I'm saying Enoch, the seventh from Adam is the original writer of 1 Enoch, and he passed it to Methuselah, and later it was given to Noah. It came through the flood. No there is no documentation trail until the 3BC when it was compiled by others, but that doesn't mean it originated in 3BC.

Let proposition P1 = Enoch (c. 3000 BCE) is the original writer of the Book of 1 Enoch (c. 300 BCE).

True?

 

[Lukaris]

The early Christian preacher Tertullian on Enoch:

Tertullian on Enoch

The Ante-Nicene Fathers, subtitled “The Writings of the Fathers Down to A.D. 325”, is a collection of books in 10 volumes (one volume is indexes) containing English translations of the …

stefangillies.wordpress.com

 

[PsaltiChrysostom]

What gets me are all these Protestants who reject the Deuteroncanonical books of the Septuagint (Wisdom, Tobit, Maccabees etc.) using the Ethiopian canon (which also includes the DCs) to say we should include Enoch. You dont get one without the other.

 

[tonychanyt]

The early Christian preacher Tertullian on Enoch:

Tertullian on Enoch

The Ante-Nicene Fathers, subtitled “The Writings of the Fathers Down to A.D. 325”, is a collection of books in 10 volumes (one volume is indexes) containing English translations of the …

stefangillies.wordpress.com

Thanks for the link. Can you provide some relevant highlights?

 

[Lukaris]

Thanks for the link. Can you provide some relevant highlights?

Do you mean from the link? If so, maybe, I post usually on the go from my I phone .

 

[tonychanyt]

Do you mean from the link?

Yes.

If so, maybe, I post usually on the go from my I phone .

Take your time

 

[Lukaris]

What gets me are all these Protestants who reject the Deuteroncanonical books of the Septuagint (Wisdom, Tobit, Maccabees etc.) using the Ethiopian canon (which also includes the DCs) to say we should include Enoch. You dont get one without the other.

These books used to at least be respected more and were considered good for teaching & moral instruction.

 

[PsaltiChrysostom]

These books used to at least be respected more and were considered good for teaching & moral instruction.

Yup, Luther listed them at the end of his translation as "Apocrypha, that are books which are not considered equal to the Holy Scriptures, but are useful and good to read."

 

[Paul4JC]

The Book of Enoch?

I'm guessing you're not Orthodox because in the Orthodox church we do not read Revelation at all Liturgically. It's in our Bibles, but we never read it Liturgically. No, not Orthodox as to naming me...Happy for you, though : )

www.christianforums.com

Initially, during the first few centuries of the Christian era, like St. Jude,
Jewish and Christian writers accepted Enoch's storyline as valid...​

Until about AD 400, the Book of Enoch was assumed as true.

ancients.thebookofenoch.info

 

[RileyG]

No.