What Augustine said about the Book of Enoch

[SummaScriptura]

In Augustine, “City of God”, I, XV, XXIII, we have Augustine’s opinion of the Book of Enoch.

Let us omit, then, the fables of those scriptures which are called apocryphal, because their obscure origin was unknown to the fathers from whom the authority of the true Scriptures has been transmitted to us by a most certain and well-ascertained succession. For though there is some truth in these apocryphal writings, yet they contain so many false statements, that they have no canonical authority. We cannot deny that Enoch, the seventh from Adam, left some divine writings, for this is asserted by the Apostle Jude in his canonical epistle. But it is not without reason that these writings have no place in that canon of Scripture which was preserved in the temple of the Hebrew people by the diligence of successive priests; for their antiquity brought them under suspicion, and it was impossible to ascertain whether these were his genuine writings, and they were not brought forward as genuine by the persons who were found to have carefully preserved the canonical books by a successive transmission. So that the writings which are produced under his name, and which contain these fables about the giants, saying that their fathers were not men; are properly judged by prudent men to be not genuine.

I find it interesting that Augustine first says, "We cannot deny that Enoch, the seventh from Adam, left some divine writings, for this is asserted by the Apostle Jude in his canonical epistle". Then oddly he poses a strange justification for rejecting the Book of Enoch, saying, the Book of Enoch and other books were rejected by the Jews because “their antiquity brought them under suspicion.” In effect Augustine says, the Book of Enoch is too old to verify its origin. It should be noted by the reader that if the rest of the books of the Old Testament were judged by the same standard they too would come under the same umbrella of suspicion. Also, it is well known we do not have an unbroken record of “succession” even now as to how each of the books of the Old Testament were preserved by the Jews.

I find it revealing that just a few sentences later, Augustine tells us the real reason he finds the Book of Enoch objectionable. He writes the “fables about the giants, saying that their fathers were not men; are properly judged by prudent men to be not genuine.” It seems the old Jewish belief concerning the ability of angels to fall into sins of the flesh is the real reason Augustine rejects the Book of Enoch. In this quote by Augustine we have the likely reason the Book of Enoch became a lost book in Greek and Latin Christianity. Influential clerics such as Augustine and Jerome won the day, in no small part it is certain, due to their position and power within Christendom. Greek philosophical ideas about spirit and flesh were more the cause than good hermeneutics.

 

[Winken]

We are blessed that the Book of Enoch is not included in our Christian witness. One Lord, One Faith, One Holy Spirit Transformation. Case closed.

 

[Neal of Zebulun]

In Augustine, “City of God”, I, XV, XXIII, we have Augustine’s opinion of the Book of Enoch.I find it interesting that Augustine first says, "We cannot deny that Enoch, the seventh from Adam, left some divine writings, for this is asserted by the Apostle Jude in his canonical epistle". Then oddly he poses a strange justification for rejecting the Book of Enoch, saying, the Book of Enoch and other books were rejected by the Jews because “their antiquity brought them under suspicion.” In effect Augustine says, the Book of Enoch is too old to verify its origin. It should be noted by the reader that if the rest of the books of the Old Testament were judged by the same standard they too would come under the same umbrella of suspicion. Also, it is well known we do not have an unbroken record of “succession” even now as to how each of the books of the Old Testament were preserved by the Jews.

I find it revealing that just a few sentences later, Augustine tells us the real reason he finds the Book of Enoch objectionable. He writes the “fables about the giants, saying that their fathers were not men; are properly judged by prudent men to be not genuine.” It seems the old Jewish belief concerning the ability of angels to fall into sins of the flesh is the real reason Augustine rejects the Book of Enoch. In this quote by Augustine we have the likely reason the Book of Enoch became a lost book in Greek and Latin Christianity. Influential clerics such as Augustine and Jerome won the day, in no small part it is certain, due to their position and power within Christendom. Greek philosophical ideas about spirit and flesh were more the cause than good hermeneutics.

Good thing Augustine's writings aren't considered Scriptural. With his logic, I guess that means we should just ignore him?

 

[WilliamBo]

I think the 1st and 2nd Enoch are holy books. 3rd Enoch is very strange, going to great detail about the different ''parts'' of all the galaxies in the universe and the different angels that run each star and each galaxy in the universe which is really strange and very hard to understand...

1 Enoch 1.9 is quoted in Jude. Jude was the brother of Jesus. The sermon on the mount also has lots of quotes from the book of Enoch. It takes a lot of discernment from the Holy Spirit to understand the book of Enoch. I guess not all Christians can understand it or see it as a holy book. I get that. But I have a physical copy of it and have studied it in great detail- taking notes, highlighting, etc. It's an amazing book with lots of insight into the history of the world, the original sins of man, fallen angels, the nephilim giants, noahs flood, the order of the universe, and other interesting topics

 

[~Anastasia~]

You should ask someone who is Oriental Orthodox and has actually maintained it as part of their canon. They would know how Christianity regarded it from the start, which the water is said to be purest at the source, right?

I'm not positive as it wasn't a huge point of interest for me, but I'm pretty sure that they regard certain parts of Enoch as allegorical. I just don't know whether the parts about angels fathering giants fell into that category.

But it has been retained by them in the canon of Scripture, so it would be worth understanding how they regard those issues, at least.



And for that matter, certain things were rejected, considered with skepticism, or at least held at arm's length for the sake of not confusing people. This is one reason why the Revelation of St. John is not part of the regular readings during the Church service. It was the job of the early Church to recognize what was legitimately Scripture, since there were about as many forgeries as there were authentic documents circulated.

 

[nonaeroterraqueous]

In effect Augustine says, the Book of Enoch is too old to verify its origin.

At this point, even the writings of Augustine are too old to verify their origin.

He writes the “fables about the giants, saying that their fathers were not men; are properly judged by prudent men to be not genuine.”

That's the same logic we hear today about why a lot of canonical scriptures are mere myth, not to be accepted by enlightened modern thinking. C. S. Lewis rightly noted that every generation arrogantly assumes itself to be more intelligent than all previous generations. Previous generations may have been more poorly informed, but they were not stupid (probably more intelligent, in fact). The argument that the Book of Enoch must be false, simply because it does not fit our paradigm, as Augustine assumed, is an a priori argument. In other words, it can't be true, because we just know it can't. That kind of thinking is behind a lot of the reason why people in this forum can never come to an agreement. Whatever the logic, the other guy must be wrong, because he just seems wrong.

I'm not going to say that the Book of Enoch should be canon. I've got my reasons against it. In fact, I think a lot of it might be quite false. However, there is one very useful aspect to it that can shed an enormous amount of light on one very small passage of scripture, even if the whole thing is a complete work of fiction. It tells us of a very old understanding of what the "Sons of God" were, as accepted by the people who were closest to the original writing of that scripture, linguistically, culturally, temporally and geographically. As it stands, half of all Christendom wants to discard the whole thing, without regard to the very important clue that it provides.

Truth, to some degree, can be found in many other places than the Bible, and it doesn't have to be canon to have some value. Otherwise, we would have to argue that even Augustine's writings ought to be burned.

 

[WilliamBo]

Also, the Book of Enoch is still part of the Ethiopian Bible today. It was widely circulated in the Christian church for roughly 500 years after Christ died but kind of ''dissappeared'' for rougly 1000 years... then it was one of the only FULL books found in the dead sea scrolls in the 1960s, and now we have the full copy of it in English today. Pretty interesting

This is the cave where the full Book of Enoch in the dead sea scrolls was found in the 1960s

 

[SummaScriptura]

We are blessed that the Book of Enoch is not included in our Christian witness. One Lord, One Faith, One Holy Spirit Transformation. Case closed.

The connection is?

 

[Jipsah]

Good thing Augustine's writings aren't considered Scriptural. With his logic, I guess that means we should just ignore him?

If you're taking Augustine's writing as holy writ, yeah, you'd be better offf ignoring them.

 

[WhoIsLikeGod?]

I think the 1st and 2nd Enoch are holy books. 3rd Enoch is very strange, going to great detail about the different ''parts'' of all the galaxies in the universe and the different angels that run each star and each galaxy in the universe which is really strange and very hard to understand...

1 Enoch 1.9 is quoted in Jude. Jude was the brother of Jesus. The sermon on the mount also has lots of quotes from the book of Enoch. It takes a lot of discernment from the Holy Spirit to understand the book of Enoch. I guess not all Christians can understand it or see it as a holy book. I get that. But I have a physical copy of it and have studied it in great detail- taking notes, highlighting, etc. It's an amazing book with lots of insight into the history of the world, the original sins of man, fallen angels, the nephilim giants, noahs flood, the order of the universe, and other interesting topics

The Book of Enoch says that the dimensions of the sun and the moon are the same.

 

[SummaScriptura]

The Book of Enoch says that the dimensions of the sun and the moon are the same.

They appear the same. When a solar eclipse occurs earthbound viewers are able to safely look at the sun for two minutes as the moon neatly covers the disk of the sun, leaving its corona in view. Enoch's reference is to the fact the sun and moon appear to be the same size from a geocentric perspective, not an astronomical one.

 

[sdowney717]

The Book of Enoch says that the dimensions of the sun and the moon are the same.

Well. maybe science is wrong about that.
Maybe there is no endless outer space, they looked for God through telescopes and did not see heaven either, then they tried rockets, did not see God yet either. But the scientists say they have gone into the heavens with rockets, we have computer generated images to look at..

John 3:13 No one has ascended to heaven but He who came down from heaven, that is, the Son of Man who is in heaven.

 

[Radagast]

In Augustine, “City of God”, I, XV, XXIII, we have Augustine’s opinion of the Book of Enoch.I find it interesting that Augustine first says, "We cannot deny that Enoch, the seventh from Adam, left some divine writings, for this is asserted by the Apostle Jude in his canonical epistle".

But are the books around in Augustine's day the ones written by Enoch?

Augustine says that "it was impossible to ascertain whether these were his genuine writings, and they were not brought forward as genuine by the persons who were found to have carefully preserved the canonical books by a successive transmission." That is, he doubts authenticity because the extant Enoch is not in the Jewish canon. Very wise of him.

Indeed, he goes further and says that it is not genuine:

"So that the writings which are produced under his name, and which contain these fables about the giants, saying that their fathers were not men, are properly judged by prudent men to be not genuine; just as many writings are produced by heretics under the names both of other prophets, and more recently, under the names of the apostles, all of which, after careful examination, have been set apart from canonical authority under the title of Apocrypha."

 

[Radagast]

At this point, even the writings of Augustine are too old to verify their origin.

Nonsense. We have manuscripts of City of God going back to the year it was written, give or take a year or two.

 

[bcbsr]

In Augustine, “City of God”, I, XV, XXIII, we have Augustine’s opinion of the Book of Enoch.I find it interesting that Augustine first says, "We cannot deny that Enoch, the seventh from Adam, left some divine writings, for this is asserted by the Apostle Jude in his canonical epistle". Then oddly he poses a strange justification for rejecting the Book of Enoch, saying, the Book of Enoch and other books were rejected by the Jews because “their antiquity brought them under suspicion.” In effect Augustine says, the Book of Enoch is too old to verify its origin. It should be noted by the reader that if the rest of the books of the Old Testament were judged by the same standard they too would come under the same umbrella of suspicion. Also, it is well known we do not have an unbroken record of “succession” even now as to how each of the books of the Old Testament were preserved by the Jews.

I find it revealing that just a few sentences later, Augustine tells us the real reason he finds the Book of Enoch objectionable. He writes the “fables about the giants, saying that their fathers were not men; are properly judged by prudent men to be not genuine.” It seems the old Jewish belief concerning the ability of angels to fall into sins of the flesh is the real reason Augustine rejects the Book of Enoch. In this quote by Augustine we have the likely reason the Book of Enoch became a lost book in Greek and Latin Christianity. Influential clerics such as Augustine and Jerome won the day, in no small part it is certain, due to their position and power within Christendom. Greek philosophical ideas about spirit and flesh were more the cause than good hermeneutics.

If you read the Book of Enoch it's weird. I understand where Augustine is coming from. His caveat of "it's mentioned in Jude" is also unconvincing to me. Jude was include, as was James, for reasons of nepotism. Neither were apostles. And Jude in particular is clearly putting 2Peter chapter 2 in his own words, thought for thought, but adding myth (cleverly invented stories, as Peter would say) I agree with Luther concerning Jude and James.

 

[SummaScriptura]

But are the books around in Augustine's day the ones written by Enoch?

Augustine says that "it was impossible to ascertain whether these were his genuine writings, and they were not brought forward as genuine by the persons who were found to have carefully preserved the canonical books by a successive transmission." That is, he doubts authenticity because the extant Enoch is not in the Jewish canon. Very wise of him.

Indeed, he goes further and says that it is not genuine:

"So that the writings which are produced under his name, and which contain these fables about the giants, saying that their fathers were not men, are properly judged by prudent men to be not genuine; just as many writings are produced by heretics under the names both of other prophets, and more recently, under the names of the apostles, all of which, after careful examination, have been set apart from canonical authority under the title of Apocrypha."

So, we should follow the lead of an unbelieving Judaism? Their canon was finalized post-Christ. One reason: to prevent Jews from reading Apostolic writings.

 

[Jipsah]

I really wish people were as interested in the Gospels as they are in "Enoch".

 

[SummaScriptura]

I really wish people were as interested in the Gospels as they are in "Enoch".

I really wish people were as interested in obeying the Gospels rather than insinuating they can read their minds.