The Book of Enoch Not Having Any Place in Bible

[ViaCrucis]

Been seeing more things about the book of Enoch, he clearly existed as he is named in scripture. What is the reason/s for the book not being recognized as having any authority?

Outside of some very rare and rather idiosyncratic cases, the book(s)* of Enoch have never been accepted as Scripture. It wasn't read in the churches, it wasn't retained and confessed, and believed to be Scripture. As such, outside of the Ethiopian and Eritrean Churches, it has never been received as Scripture. Since it's never been received as Scripture throughout most of the Churches in the ancient world, it's never been in any recognized Christian Bible. This is, in part, reflected that outside of the Ethiopic languages the book has rarely been preserved.

*what is called "The Book of Enoch" isn't, strictly speaking, a single work, but rather refers to a number of works which have, at times, been lumped together as "Enoch"

While there is a Biblical Enoch, and the figure of Enoch in the Enochian literature is intended to be as though from the Biblical Enoch, it absolutely wasn't written by him. The earliest parts of the book(s) of Enoch only date to 200-300 years before Jesus, and the most recent parts of Enoch were probably written in the late first century, decades into the life of the Church.

There is value in the material, not as Scripture, but as helping us understand the development of important Jewish ideas in the 2nd Temple Period which directly feed into the Jewish world of the first century in which the New Testament takes place and was written.

So, for example, we see in Enoch a description of Paradise/the Garden of Eden being located in "the third heaven" in the apocalyptic portions of the work. In the ancient Near Eastern world, including the Hebrew, the shamayim--the heavens--were often counted as being many, usually seven heavens. In Enoch we see that idea being used, and to describe the Garden of Eden in the third heaven. This is interesting because of what St. Paul writes in 2 Corinthians, where he speaks of a man who was taken (Paul says "whether in the body or out of the body I do not know") into the third heaven and beheld Paradise and unspeakable mysteries. That language is consistent with what we know with 2nd Temple Period Judaism, Paul isn't introducing a new idea, but speaking in a language that would have been recognizable in the 1st century Jewish world.

So Enoch is important for its historical value as an important work of 2nd Temple period Jewish literature, and how it (and other works of that period) helped to inform the Jewish world of the 1st century. The world Jesus was part of, the world of the earliest generation of Christians. And thus while not inspired, is nevertheless helpful at times to give us a larger picture and perspective of the context of the New Testament.

Lots of works can be of historical value for a variety of reasons, some works can even be recognize as being faithful confession and expressions of faith; such as we have with the Creeds of the Church and the language of the Ecumenical Councils of the ancient Church. But there is always a very firm distinction between a valuable work on the one hand, an important and even authoritatively speaking work (in its faithfulness to Scripture as true confession of faith) on the other; and then even further than that, the divine inspiration and divine authority of Scripture. Scripture isn't just valuable, or even just authoritative in a doctrinal and confessional sense; it's divinely authoritative for the Church. Which is why we confess it to be the very written word of God.


-CryptoLutheran

 

[ViaCrucis]

I’ve read several books from the apocrypha and haven’t undergone spiritual attack and I’m conversant in warfare. Sin, associations, and holy works are the common reason for its occurrence.

Not all apocrypha is made equal. It's a supremely broad category that can include anything from rather orthodox works to completely wackadoodle heretical nonsense. And all the in-between.

I don't believe it wise to tell people it is "dangerous" to read something, for a number of reasons; but one of them is that when you put the word "forbidden" in front of something, it really just makes something more tempting. I think, if anything, by giving many works more exposure, and providing education and information about them through good and careful exposition, we bring illumination and also clarity of the truth of our faith. By eliminating the romantic sense of the mystique of these things--like a click-bait YouTube video titled, "Top 10 books the Church doesn't want you to read"--you rob any power that they could have over the minds of the Faithful.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[SkyWriting]

Scripture isn't just valuable, or even just authoritative in a doctrinal and confessional sense; it's divinely authoritative for the Church. Which is why we confess it to be the very written word of God.

But mostly ignored in a lot of places, by most writers, for whatever reason.

Romans 1:20
For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse.

Romans 1:19
For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them.

Isaiah 40:26
Lift up your eyes on high and see: who created these? He who brings out their host by number, calling them all by name, by the greatness of his might, and because he is strong in power not one is missing.

Psalm 19:1-6
To the choirmaster. A Psalm of David. The heavens declare the glory of God, and the sky above proclaims his handiwork. Day to day pours out speech, and night to night reveals knowledge. There is no speech, nor are there words, whose voice is not heard. Their voice goes out through all the earth, and their words to the end of the world. In them he has set a tent for the sun, which comes out like a bridegroom leaving his chamber, and, like a strong man, runs its course with joy.

Psalm 33:6-9
By the word of the Lord the heavens were made, and by the breath of his mouth all their host. He gathers the waters of the sea as a heap; he puts the deeps in storehouses. Let all the earth fear the Lord; let all the inhabitants of the world stand in awe of him! For he spoke, and it came to be; he commanded, and it stood firm.

Psalm 8:3
When I look at your heavens, the work of your fingers, the moon and the stars, which you have set in place,

Romans 2:15
They show that the work of the law is written on their hearts, while their conscience also bears witness, and their conflicting thoughts accuse or even excuse them

1 Timothy 1:17
To the King of ages, immortal, invisible, the only God, be honor and glory forever and ever. Amen.

Psalm 119:90
Your faithfulness endures to all generations; you have established the earth, and it stands fast.

Psalm 104:5
He set the earth on its foundations, so that it should never be moved.

Deuteronomy 4:19
And beware lest you raise your eyes to heaven, and when you see the sun and the moon and the stars, all the host of heaven, you be drawn away and bow down to them and serve them, things that the Lord your God has allotted to all the peoples under the whole heaven.

1 Timothy 6:16
who alone has immortality, who dwells in unapproachable light, whom no one has ever seen or can see. To him be honor and eternal dominion. Amen.

Hebrews 9:14
how much more will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without blemish to God, purify our conscience from dead works to serve the living God.

Psalm 148:8-12
fire and hail, snow and mist, stormy wind fulfilling his word! Mountains and all hills, fruit trees and all cedars! Beasts and all livestock, creeping things and flying birds! Kings of the earth and all peoples, princes and all rulers of the earth! Young men and maidens together, old men and children!

Psalm 104:31
May the glory of the Lord endure forever; may the Lord rejoice in his works,

Psalm 90:2
Before the mountains were brought forth, or ever you had formed the earth and the world, from everlasting to everlasting you are God.

Matthew 5:45
so that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven. For he makes his sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust.

 

[Saint Steven]

While there is a Biblical Enoch, and the figure of Enoch in the Enochian literature is intended to be as though from the Biblical Enoch, it absolutely wasn't written by him. The earliest parts of the book(s) of Enoch only date to 200-300 years before Jesus, and the most recent parts of Enoch were probably written in the late first century, decades into the life of the Church.

That being the case, what do you make of the reference in Jude?

Jude 1:14-15 NIV
Enoch, the seventh from Adam, prophesied about them: “See, the Lord is coming with thousands upon thousands of his holy ones 15 to judge everyone, and to convict all of them of all the ungodly acts they have committed in their ungodliness, and of all the defiant words ungodly sinners have spoken against him.”

Footnotes

1. Jude 1:15 From the Jewish First Book of Enoch (approximately the first century b.c.)

 

[Der Alte]

There is no "Book of Enoch". The Book of Enoch is actually a series of separate books sort of spliced together. Parts of it are mentioned in the bible but it is not clear which "book" exactly it is referring to. Enoch was not part of the Septuagint so it is not part of the Christian old testament.

The book of Enoch is quoted as authoritative by the Jewish Encyclopedia.

[1]1917 Jewish Encyclopedia, Gehenna
The place where children were sacrificed to the god Moloch … in the "valley of the sons of Hinnom," to the south of Jerusalem (Josh. xv. 8, passim; II Kings xxiii. 10; Jer. ii. 23; vii. 31-32; xix. 6, 13-14). … the valley was deemed to be accursed, and "Gehenna" therefore soon became a figurative equivalent for "hell." Hell, like paradise, was created by God (Sotah 22a);[“Soon” in this paragraph would be about 700 BC +/-, DA]​

Note: This is according to the ancient Jews, long before the Christian era, NOT any assumed/alleged bias of “modern” Christian translators. DA
This refutes the false narrative that when Jesus mentioned “Gehenna” He was supposedly referring to nonexistent continually burning fires in the valley of GeHinnom where trash and bodies were disposed of.

”(I)n general …sinners go to hell immediately after their death. The famous teacher Johanan b. Zakkai [30 BC-90 AD] wept before his death because he did not know whether he would go to paradise or to hell (Ber. 28b). The pious go to paradise, and sinners to hell(B.M. 83b).
“But as regards the heretics, etc., and Jeroboam, Nebat's son, hell shall pass away, but they shall not pass away" (R. H. 17a; comp. Shab [Talmud]. 33b). All that descend into Gehenna shall come up again, with the exception of three classes of men: those who have committed adultery, or shamed their neighbors, or vilified them (B. M. 58b).[/i]
“… heretics and the Roman oppressors go to Gehenna, and the same fate awaits the Persians, the oppressors of the Babylonian Jews (Ber. 8b).[Talmud] “When Nebuchadnezzar descended into hell, [שאול/Sheol] all its inhabitants were afraid that he was coming to rule over them (Shab. 149a; [Talmud] comp. Isa. xiv. 9-10). The Book of Enoch [x. 6, xci. 9, etal] also says that it is chiefly the heathen who are to be cast into the fiery pool on the Day of Judgment (x. 6, xci. 9, et al). "The Lord, the Almighty, will punish them on the Day of Judgment by putting fire and worms into their flesh, so that they cry out with pain unto all eternity" (Judith xvi. 17). The sinners in Gehenna will be filled with pain when God puts back the souls into the dead bodies on the Day of Judgment, according toIsa. xxxiii. 11 (Sanh. 108b)[Talmud].
Link: Jewish Encyclopedia Online
Note, scripture references are highlighted in blue.
= = = = = = = = = =
[2]1972 Encyclopedia Judaica:
Gehinnom (Heb. גֵּי בֶן־הִנֹּם, גֵּי בְנֵי הִנֹּם, גֵּיא בֶן־הִנֹּם, גֵּיא הִנֹּם; Gr. Γέεννα; "Valley of Ben-Hinnom, Valley of [the Son (s) of] Hinnom," Gehenna), a valley south of Jerusalem on one of the borders between the territories of Judah and Benjamin, between the Valley of *Rephaim and *En-Rogel (Josh. 15:8; 18:16). It is identified with Wadi er-Rababi.
…..During the time of the Monarchy, Gehinnom, at a place called Topheth, was the site of a cult which involved the burning of children (II Kings 23:10; Jer. 7:31; 32:35 et al.; ). Jeremiah repeatedly condemned this cult and predicted that on its account Topheth and the Valley of the Son of Hinnom would be called the Valley of the "Slaughter" (Jer. 19:5–6).
In Judaism the name Gehinnom is generally used as an appellation of the place of torment reserved for the wicked after death. The New Testament used the Greek form Gehenna in the same sense.
Link:
Gehinnom
http://www.jevzajcg.me/enciklopedia/Encyclopaedia Judaica, v. 07 (Fey-Gor).pdf​

 

[ViaCrucis]

That being the case, what do you make of the reference in Jude?

Jude 1:14-15 NIV
Enoch, the seventh from Adam, prophesied about them: “See, the Lord is coming with thousands upon thousands of his holy ones 15 to judge everyone, and to convict all of them of all the ungodly acts they have committed in their ungodliness, and of all the defiant words ungodly sinners have spoken against him.”

Footnotes

1. Jude 1:15 From the Jewish First Book of Enoch (approximately the first century b.c.)

A clear example of the popularity of Enoch in the first couple centuries AD.

The Epistle of Jude itself was one of the more contested books to be accepted into the New Testament. Modern scholars generally think that the work is probably dated to the first quarter of the 2nd century and is often compared with 2 Peter (another disputed book in antiquity, while 1 Peter received generally universal acceptance, 2 Peter was frequently regarded as spurious in the ancient Church). However both Jude and 2 Peter are most certainly Scripture, because they actually have been accepted as Scripture into the Christian Church--hence why both books are in the Bible.

Enoch, however, has never been accepted as Scripture. Even as Jude and 2 Peter experienced suspicion and took some time to be fully admitted into the Canon; Enoch cannot be found in the canonical lists of the ancient Church, or in the various biblical codices and other early versions of the Bible. The sole exception to this is its more general acceptance in the Ethiopian Church, and it appears that Tertullian of Carthage also regarded it as Scripture: though this same Tertullian also became a heretic by joining the Montanist cult, and it isn't always easy to tell which of his writings were written while he was orthodox, and when he was a heretic, and many of the things he writes in his works have frequently been held as deeply problematic. This is the reason why Tertullian is one of the few church fathers to not be called a "Saint".

-CryptoLutheran

 

[ChetSinger]

That being the case, what do you make of the reference in Jude?

Jude 1:14-15 NIV
Enoch, the seventh from Adam, prophesied about them: “See, the Lord is coming with thousands upon thousands of his holy ones 15 to judge everyone, and to convict all of them of all the ungodly acts they have committed in their ungodliness, and of all the defiant words ungodly sinners have spoken against him.”

Footnotes

1. Jude 1:15 From the Jewish First Book of Enoch (approximately the first century b.c.)

I think the references in 2 Peter and Jude put a New Testament stamp of approval on the angelic interpretation of Genesis 6. That interpretation was also taught by early church fathers who wrote of it.

But that's as far as I'll go. Enoch expands greatly on Genesis 6 and I have no reason to consider those expansions inspired, or even true. For example, it lists the names of some of the rebellious angels. I consider such expansions to be Jewish folklore until demonstrated otherwise.

 

[Paul4JC]

In Genesis 6:4 Moses, out of nowhere, mentions the Nephilim. Obviously, this was because he presumed his audience already understood the background story which is in 1 Enoch. Since it was written before the flood and given to Methuselah then to Noah, it's as ancient as it gets. That we have as much as we do is miraculous enough. It's not in the so-called canon, yet it is authoritative as Scripture. There are many books in the Bible whose authorship is unknown or debatable, yet we still read them. It does not make them false writings, neither is 1 Enoch.

.....................................................​

1 Enoch: A Commentary on the Book of 1 Enoch, Hermeneia—a Critical and Historical Commentary on the Bible George W. E. Nickelsburg, ed. Klaus Baltzer, (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress, 2001), 21–22.

3.1. Literary History of the Corpus

The traditions and documents collected in 1 Enoch were accumulated in stages. This section will suggest an explanation for the literary logic that presided over the developing corpus of Enochic traditions.

3.1.1. The Manuscript Evidence
3.1.1.1. The Ethiopic Version
Although only twenty-nine of the forty-five MSS. of the Ethiopic version cataloged by Uhlig contain all 108 chapters (so divided by Dillmann),1 there is no doubt that the Ethiopic archetype contained all of these 108 chapters. According to a broad consensus, these 108 chapters divide into the seven major literary units described above in §1.0.

3.1.1.2. The Greek Manuscripts
Each of the two major Greek texts of 1 Enoch preserves the largest part of one of the seven divisions (see §2.2). The Akhmim Codex contains 1:1–32:6, almost all of the Book of the Watchers. The Chester Beatty–Michigan Papyrus, of which the first seven leaves (fourteen pages) have been lost, contains two component sections, i.e., most of the Epistle (97:6–104:13) and the story of Noah’s birth (chaps. 106–107). Other Greek testimonies are in the form of quotations or excerpts, which tell us nothing about the content and extent of the Greek MS. traditions available (§2.2.1.2, 2.2.2, 2.2.3).

3.1.1.3. The Qumran Aramaic Manuscripts
Table 2 tabulates the more complex Aramaic codicological evidence with a view toward the literary analysis that follows.

In addition to these fragments, Milik identified fragments of several MSS. of an Enochic Book of Giants not contained in 1 Enoch (see §§1.8, 2.1.2.3), and he showed that one group of the Qumran fragments (4QEnGiantsa) “formed part of the same scroll as that of 4QEnc.”

Two facts in this Aramaic codicological evidence are important for the literary history of the Enoch traditions. First, no part of the Book of Parables (chaps. 37–71) has been preserved on any Qumran MS. Second, in the preserved fragments, the Book of the Luminaries (chaps. 72–82) is always written on separate MSS. that contain no other part of 1 Enoch.


3.1.2. Literary Macrostructure
3.1.2.1. A Pentateuch?
The fivefold structure of 1 Enoch 1–105 led G. H. Dix and then J. T. Milik to posit the intentional creation of an Enochic Pentateuch, modeled on the Mosaic writings. According to Milik, who compares 4QEnc with 1 Enoch, this Pentateuch was written on two scrolls. The Book of the Watchers, the Book of Giants, the Dream Visions, and the Epistle were written in that order on one scroll, and, because of its size, book 4, the astronomical document, was written on a separate scroll. Later, the Book of Parables replaced the Book of Giants, perhaps because of the latter’s popularity among the Manichaeans. Thus 1 Enoch attained its present content and order.

.....................................................​

 

[adammoon2]

2 Peter 2:4, perhaps.

Second Peter chapter 2. I did not specify the verse... sorry if that created any confusion. In 2 Peter 2:4 is where it is addressed. In fact, the word used there is Tartarus. Interestingly, it is the only time that word is used in the whole Bible. It is often translated as Hell or Pit of Darkness or Abyss or other such, but the word is Tartarus. What is interesting is that Peter knew what Tartarus was. He was familiar with the Greek religion. Tartarus is described in the Greek religion as a dark abode of woe where the Titans are chained. In the Titanomachy (War of the Titans) the elder gods (Titans) fought against the children of Chronos (Kronos) which were the Greek gods we know: Zeus, Poseidon, Hades and the crew. The younger gods (with the help of the Cyclopes and the Hecatonchires) defeat the elder gods and chain them (along with their baby eating daddy, Kronos) in a deep, dark abode of woe that is called Tartarus.

Tartarus is described as being as far below Hades' realm (the underworld) as the earth is below the heavens. Where is that? Don't know, but I don't want to go there.

We can speculate on the use of the word by Peter and many do. Is this the Abyss of Revelation? Unknown. What we do know is that Peter was letting us know that this is a special place reserved for the fathers of the Nephilim that lusted after strange flesh even as Sodom and Gomorrah did. It may (MAY - note the speculation) not be part of the hell humanity goes to, but we don't know for sure.

 

[ChetSinger]

Second Peter chapter 2. I did not specify the verse... sorry if that created any confusion. In 2 Peter 2:4 is where it is addressed. In fact, the word used there is Tartarus. Interestingly, it is the only time that word is used in the whole Bible. It is often translated as Hell or Pit of Darkness or Abyss or other such, but the word is Tartarus. What is interesting is that Peter knew what Tartarus was. He was familiar with the Greek religion. Tartarus is described in the Greek religion as a dark abode of woe where the Titans are chained. In the Titanomachy (War of the Titans) the elder gods (Titans) fought against the children of Chronos (Kronos) which were the Greek gods we know: Zeus, Poseidon, Hades and the crew. The younger gods (with the help of the Cyclopes and the Hecatonchires) defeat the elder gods and chain them (along with their baby eating daddy, Kronos) in a deep, dark abode of woe that is called Tartarus.

Tartarus is described as being as far below Hades' realm (the underworld) as the earth is below the heavens. Where is that? Don't know, but I don't want to go there.

We can speculate on the use of the word by Peter and many do. Is this the Abyss of Revelation? Unknown. What we do know is that Peter was letting us know that this is a special place reserved for the fathers of the Nephilim that lusted after strange flesh even as Sodom and Gomorrah did. It may (MAY - note the speculation) not be part of the hell humanity goes to, but we don't know for sure.

I, too, find it fascinating that Peter used that word. Was he linking the defeated Titans with the defeated sons of God in the book of Enoch? I suspect he was, since the angelic interpretation of Genesis 6 seems to have been shared by everyone during that time and for a couple of centuries afterward.

 

[adammoon2]

I, too, find it fascinating that Peter used that word. Was he linking the defeated Titans with the defeated sons of God in the book of Enoch? I suspect he was, since the angelic interpretation of Genesis 6 seems to have been shared by everyone during that time and for a couple of centuries afterward.

I'm glad you asked if he was linking the Titans with the "angels that sinned." I have wondered that myself. I have long suspected there might be a double purpose in Peter's invoking the name Tartarus. On the one hand it seems it shows these angels are reserved for a special judgement, but I have also wondered if some of the pagan mythologies that parallel the Jewish narrative are adulterated oral histories of the same events. Of course, a third option that I have heard expressed is that Peter was talking to pagans as well or converted pagans and giving them a reference they could relate to. Maybe all three are correct.

I have even gone so far as to wonder if (for example), the gods of ancient myth were stories about real entities. Could Zeus, Poseidon and Hades have been Nephilim living in Greece that became mythologized into gods? Could Oðinn, Þor, Hel, Frey, Njorðr and the other Norse gods be Germanic tribal memories of the "mighty men" of old, the Nephilim? No way to know, unless some really revealing archaeological find pops up, but it is interesting to speculate that a hammer wielding twelve foot tall Nephilim living in Europe could have morphed over centuries into the god of thunder, Þor (Thor).

 

[Bruce Leiter]

Been seeing more things about the book of Enoch, he clearly existed as he is named in scripture. What is the reason/s for the book not being recognized as having any authority?

I haven't read it for a very long time. Tell me how it agrees with the present books, particularly the verses about Enoch in Genesis and Hebrews. How well does it agree with the Old Testament prophets who wrote the rest of the historical books? How spiritual is its message? What spiritual value does it have for our lives? Those are considerations the people who gathered the books together would have thought about. For example, the other books the Catholics accept but the Protestants don't are interesting history perhaps but not with a prophetic tone and instructive for our lives.

 

[ViaCrucis]

It is at least plausible that at least part of Enoch--the Book of Giants if nothing else--does have strong Hellenistic influence on the text. After all, the various texts which make up Enoch were written between the Hellenistic and Roman periods of Second Temple Judaism.

2 Peter's use of Tartarus is likely a direct borrowing of the use of Tartarus in Enoch. As long as we don't take 2 Peter's use of Tartarus as somehow indicating a literal Tartarus or as somehow as a reason to accept Enoch, this really isn't problematic. No more than Jude's direct reference to Enoch.

Enoch isn't Scripture, except in the Ethiopian and Eritrean Tewahedo Churches.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[ChetSinger]

I'm glad you asked if he was linking the Titans with the "angels that sinned." I have wondered that myself. I have long suspected there might be a double purpose in Peter's invoking the name Tartarus. On the one hand it seems it shows these angels are reserved for a special judgement, but I have also wondered if some of the pagan mythologies that parallel the Jewish narrative are adulterated oral histories of the same events. Of course, a third option that I have heard expressed is that Peter was talking to pagans as well or converted pagans and giving them a reference they could relate to. Maybe all three are correct.

I have even gone so far as to wonder if (for example), the gods of ancient myth were stories about real entities. Could Zeus, Poseidon and Hades have been Nephilim living in Greece that became mythologized into gods? Could Oðinn, Þor, Hel, Frey, Njorðr and the other Norse gods be Germanic tribal memories of the "mighty men" of old, the Nephilim? No way to know, unless some really revealing archaeological find pops up, but it is interesting to speculate that a hammer wielding twelve foot tall Nephilim living in Europe could have morphed over centuries into the god of thunder, Þor (Thor).

I also have wondered if the region's legends of gods mating with women, and of heroes with great strength, are dim reflections of Genesis 6. If the Bible is true, and I believe it is, then everyone there had ancestors who lived in the antediluvian world. It makes sense to me that some actual events have been passed on, albeit in incomplete and corrupted form.

 

[Paul4JC]

Indeed a very fascinating study.

[1Pe 3:19 NASB20] in which He also went and made proclamation to the spirits in prison,

Peter here is clearly referring to

1 Enoch 18:14 To me, when I inquired about them, the angel said, “This place is the end of heaven and earth; this has become a prison for the stars and the hosts of heaven.

(from another thread, Did Jesus go to Hades?)

2 Peter 2:4 purposely used the word Tartarus which only points to Greek mythology and to the Watchers tradition of 1 Enoch.

Tartarus - The Abyss - Crystalinks

[2Pe 2:4 NIV] 4 For if God did not spare angels when they sinned, but sent them to hell (Tartarus), putting them in chains of darkness to be held for judgment;

1 Enoch Chapter X 13. In those days they shall be led off to the abyss of fire: 〈and〉 to the torment and the prison in which they shall be confined for ever. And whosoever shall be condemned and destroyed will from thenceforth be bound together with them to the end of all generations. 15. And destroy all the spirits of the reprobate and the children of the Watchers, because they have wronged mankind.

1 Enoch Chapter XVIII 14. The angel said: 'This place is the end of heaven and earth: this has become a prison for the stars and the host of heaven. 15. And the stars which roll over the fire are they which have transgressed the commandment of the Lord in the beginning of their rising, because they did not come forth at their appointed times.

This is also clearly alluded by Jude:

[Jde 1:6, 13 NIV] 6 And the angels who did not keep their positions of authority but abandoned their proper dwelling--these he has kept in darkness, bound with everlasting chains for judgment on the great Day. ... 13 They are wild waves of the sea, foaming up their shame; wandering stars, for whom blackest darkness has been reserved forever.

I, too, find it fascinating that Peter used that word. Was he linking the defeated Titans with the defeated sons of God in the book of Enoch? I suspect he was, since the angelic interpretation of Genesis 6 seems to have been shared by everyone during that time and for a couple of centuries afterward.

Yes, many church fathers understood and taught the same. Like Chuck Missler said, "were the daughters of Seth ugly?"

I'm glad you asked if he was linking the Titans with the "angels that sinned." I have wondered that myself. I have long suspected there might be a double purpose in Peter's invoking the name Tartarus. On the one hand it seems it shows these angels are reserved for a special judgement, but I have also wondered if some of the pagan mythologies that parallel the Jewish narrative are adulterated oral histories of the same events. Of course, a third option that I have heard expressed is that Peter was talking to pagans as well or converted pagans and giving them a reference they could relate to. Maybe all three are correct.

I have even gone so far as to wonder if (for example), the gods of ancient myth were stories about real entities. Could Zeus, Poseidon and Hades have been Nephilim living in Greece that became mythologized into gods? Could Oðinn, Þor, Hel, Frey, Njorðr and the other Norse gods be Germanic tribal memories of the "mighty men" of old, the Nephilim? No way to know, unless some really revealing archaeological find pops up, but it is interesting to speculate that a hammer wielding twelve foot tall Nephilim living in Europe could have morphed over centuries into the god of thunder, Þor (Thor).

Thors-day. Yes, we get 5 days of the week from the same. Also, the same attributed gods are found in mythologies all over the world. (I have a small write-up on this.)

 

[Saint Steven]

Portishead - Wandering Star (LYRICS ON SCREEN)
This song is by Portishead and appears on the album Dummy (1994). https://www.discogs.com/Portishead-Du... Portishead lyric videos: https://m.youtube.com/playlist?list=P...

 

[kidkaos2]

The book of Enoch is not part of the cannon of scripture. It is simply not a book which is considered as a source for determining anything doctrinal and it mostly cannot be cross referenced with other books of the cannon of scripture for verifiction. There's a lot of interest in this book, with regard to end times teaching by certain individuals and some religious groups as well.

It's one of those books which makes interesting reading, but as to how trustworthy this book may be is very difficult to determine. It says a lot of strange things!

I don't think Peter and Jude would have quoted it if it wasn't trustworthy. Plus it makes sense of things like Psalm 82 and Genesis 6 that are otherwise undecipherable. The usual interpretations you see of these passages by commentators who don't use Enoch as a source are purely guesses - I've seen the sons of God said to be descendants of Seth and I've seen the sons of God said to be Jewish rabbis and said to be a gathering of kings and princes. It also makes the troubling passages where God orders the Canaanites to be wiped out make sense, which, given the amount of times you see anti-Christians attack the faith with "God supports genocide!!" accusations, is a very good benefit of Enoch. It also gives alternate and/or enhanced meaning (depending on how you look at it) to the flood and tower of Babel narratives. Whether you believe Enoch or not is almost beside the point, it at least gives you answers to what the culture and theology was of the original scripture writers was like and you can use the information to interpret the problem passages according to how literal or metaphorical and how historic or mythological you feel is proper. Whether you believe nephilim were ever real physical beings who lived in the past or not, at least knowing what they are and how they fit into the Old Testament is good. Same with the sons of God.