Why wasn't Enoch included?

[Hematoma]

Can anyone tell me? I know that all the books were put up for review and approval during the initial cannonization period but I'm curious as to why Enoch wasn't approved. From what I've heard it's in some copies of the Torah or hebrew versions of the Bible. I really only want to learn about it here or from personal contacts as most info on the net seems fairly sketchy. I figured this was the best place to come for less chance of a biased answer or one with false info.

 

[Aras]

I'm not sure. But if you need to find it here is a link containing alot of religious test. I believe it has Enoch in it.

 

[DeaconDean]

One explaination is because it is considered a "pseudepigraphal" work. Meaning that it is unable to varify whom the author is exactly. Enoch may or may not have been the author. And because it is "pseudepigraphal" that is the main reason it was left out of the canon. The Ethopic Book of Enoch pseudepigraphal work (not included in any canon of scripture) whose only complete extant version is an Ethiopic translation of a previous Greek translation made in Palestine from the original Hebrew or Aramaic.
Enoch also deals with secret knowledge given only to Enoch and leads the reader to believe in "UFO'S." It deals with fallen angels and etc. It also tells of Enoch walking through seven different levels of heaven.

One main reason it was left out of the canon is because it contributes nothing to the glory of God, or His plan for the salvation of men through Jesus Christ.

I hope this helps.

 

[Dad Ernie]

Can anyone tell me? I know that all the books were put up for review and approval during the initial cannonization period but I'm curious as to why Enoch wasn't approved. From what I've heard it's in some copies of the Torah or hebrew versions of the Bible. I really only want to learn about it here or from personal contacts as most info on the net seems fairly sketchy. I figured this was the best place to come for less chance of a biased answer or one with false info.

Greetings Hematoma,

I only scanned the following web page, but many of the things mentioned, I have heard from other sources. My own belief is that Moses was charged with the Torah, and from that time on the maintenance of the Tenakh went to the Jews, eliminating the possibility of Enoch contributing to the Canon.

The Pseudepigraphical Book of Enoch
http://www.mystae.com/restricted/streams/scripts/enoch.html

This page also has some very interesting links for those interested.

Blessings,

Dad Ernie

 

[Hematoma]

oh. That makes sense. I'd always heard info about it concerning things which are somewhat exclusive to Enoch, but considering the grounds on which it wasnt cannonized that actually makes a lot of sense. Thanks.

 

[PaladinValer]

It wasn't included because:

1. It wasn't in the OT Septuagint
2. It wasn't considered at all by any Church Father or Mother
3. It wasn't considered at all by any regional council or local synod

 

[ps139]

Enoch is not in the Bible because the Holy Spirit did not want it in the Bible. It is really as plain as that.

 

[clayharryman]

Wow -- funny you should ask!

Friday, my wife and I were reading 1, 2 Peter and Jude. It appeared that their discussion of the fallen angels being bound until the Judgment Day was common knowledge. How did they get that knowledge? Well, Jude mentions the book of Enoch. I asked a friend of mine, a bible scholar, and he replied that the Jews were aware of the contents of that book. It was common knowledge among first-century Jews, so it could be referred to off-handedly by the writers of these epistles.

I went online to read the book and found it extremely interesting. I asked my friend about its validity. He said it is not considered scripture because (as is mentioned above) the authorship is in question, and therefore the authenticity of the contents is in question. He said it is fun to read, just as it is fun to watch "Hamburger Hill" and realize it's about a war that actually took place, but not necessarily a true story.

Having said that, here is the standard disclaimer: Don't accept the book of Enoch as 'inspired' Word. I don't recommend reading any 'lost', apocryphal or pseudepigraphal (sp?) books until you have a firm grip on the 66 books of the Holy Bible. Reading something that is not canon can warp your mind's acceptance of scripture. Outside of the canon is a great deal of contradictory information.

 

[Deep_MindQuest]

http://www.endtimeprophecy.net/EPN-1/Articles/Articles-Apoc/enoch-00.html#anchor1234567 The Book Of Enoch : Truth Or Heresy? ................................ http://www.eaec.org/bibleanswers/Noah.htm AS THE DAYS OF NOAH

SOME FACTS ABOUT THE BOOK OF ENOCH
Book One of Enoch is found complete only in the Ethiopic (Ge’ez) version, for which more that forty manuscripts are known to exist as of 1983. The original language was Hebrew, while some argue that the book was written in a mixture of Hebrew and Aramaic, like the book of Daniel. Fragments of I Enoch were found among the Dead Sea Scrolls, which date back to around 200 years before Christ.

Common sense should tell us that the written history of Adam and Eve, as found in the book of Genesis, did not survive in its original writings. Instead the knowledge was passed on from generation to generation, and it was Moses, who around 2600 years after Adam, wrote down what is today known as the book of Genesis.

Therefore, my understanding is that the same process must have been true for the first book of Enoch. Just as the so-called Bible scholars are trying to "DEBUNK" the Bible, they are doing the same thing with the book of Enoch.

Regardless of the spin that the "scholars" put on the book of Enoch, they all agree that it was written down in the first century A.D. by the Christian community. This will pose a great technical problem for the scoffers. During the first century A.D. electricity was not known to men, neither was cloning and genetic engineering known, yet both the Bible and the book of Enoch speak on these subjects. My personal belief is that the information in the Bible is a direct revelation from God, preserved by men through the power of the Holy Spirit. The additional information given in the book of Enoch is in total harmony with the Bible, but gives us more insight into the period between Adam and Noah. (Also see notes from Encyclopedia Britannica). .....................................................

http://www.alienresistance.org/book_of_enoch.htm What other evidences for Enoch's authenticity (as a sacred text) are there? Why isn't it in the Bible today?!!!

 

[SummaScriptura]

<snip>The Ethopic Book of Enoch pseudepigraphal work (not included in any canon of scripture)<snip>

Hmm, well, isn't it in the Ethiopic one?

Enoch also deals with secret knowledge given only to Enoch and leads the reader to believe in "UFO'S."

Phew! Thank God I'm not there yet! I better back off on reading Enoch, huh?

It deals with fallen angels and etc. It also tells of Enoch walking through seven different levels of heaven.

You have it confused with another book here. 1 Enoch does not deal at all with levels of heaven or UFOs!.

One main reason it was left out of the canon is because it contributes nothing to the glory of God, or His plan for the salvation of men through Jesus Christ.

Well, that explains everything. You had not even read the book your putting down at the time you posted this, had you?

Enoch is not in the Bible because the Holy Spirit did not want it in the Bible. It is really as plain as that.

It wasn't left out. The question really is, who's canon of the Bible are you talking about? If you say it was left out of your canon, okay. But it was not left out of eveyone's. Truth is, the Book of Enoch was deemed scripture and preserved in Ethiopia by the Falasha Jews; then when the Falasha were converted to Coptic Orthodoxy, the BOE remained a sacred part of scripture to them and is currently in the Bible of Orthodox Ethiopians. TBOE has always been in someone's list of scripture books since N.T. times.

<snip>I went online to read the book and found it extremely interesting. I asked my friend about its validity. He said it is not considered scripture because (as is mentioned above) the authorship is in question, and therefore the authenticity of the contents is in question.<snip>

Well then you'll have to throw out Ezekiel, Hebrews, 2 Peter, 2 John, 3 John, Jude, and Revelation and some others by that criteria.

 

[GuardianShua]

Can anyone tell me? I know that all the books were put up for review and approval during the initial cannonization period but I'm curious as to why Enoch wasn't approved. From what I've heard it's in some copies of the Torah or hebrew versions of the Bible. I really only want to learn about it here or from personal contacts as most info on the net seems fairly sketchy. I figured this was the best place to come for less chance of a biased answer or one with false info.

The Book of Enoch was written by an unknown prophet about 167 BC. The prophet makes it know that it is not Enoch speaking, but him when he states: "And this is the end of this parable." It was the Catholic Church who decided that the book should not be included into scripture. The book of Enoch was used by Christians for about 700 years. It was one of the most popular among Christians. The Essences and other Jewish sects also used it. It was thought of as to revealing by the Catholic Church and Jewish sects leadership.

 

[SummaScriptura]

"And I, Enoch, alone saw the vision" ~ 19:3​

The Book of Enoch was written by an unknown prophet about 167 BC. The prophet makes it know that it is not Enoch speaking, but him when he states: "And this is the end of this parable."<snip>

This is the second time I've read someone who believed the writer of the Book of Enoch is claiming not to be Enoch, himself. This misunderstanding occurs, I think, due to the way Enoch speaks of himself in the 3rd-person in the prologue ot the book. Admittedly, it is an odd way to speak about oneself, but it is not the only example of this we find in the books of the Bible. Here is the passage I believe is the cause of the misunderstanding:

The words of the blessing of Enoch, wherewith he blessed the elect and righteous, who will be living in the day of tribulation, when all the wicked and godless are to be removed. And he took up his parable and said -Enoch a righteous man, whose eyes were opened by God, saw the vision of the Holy One in the heavens, which the angels showed me, and from them I heard everything, and from them I understood as I saw, but not for this generation, but for a remote one which is for to come. Concerning the elect I said, and took up my parable concerning them: The Holy Great One will come forth from His dwelling, And the eternal God will tread upon the earth, (even) on Mount Sinai, [And appear from His camp] And appear in the strength of His might from the heaven of heavens.

I do not think we can make this represent someone other than Enoch. Here's another biblical example of this sort of thing:

The vision of Isaiah the son of Amoz, which he saw concerning Judah and Jerusalem in the days of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah, kings of Judah.

Now are we to think these are the words of Isaiah that God revealed to someone other than Isaiah? I think not.

Without going throughout the entire Book of Enoch to make this point, which would be too much, here are just s few more examples that leave no doubt to the reader that the writer of the Book of Enoch is claiming to be Enoch.

Enoch is called to ministry:

And I Enoch was blessing the Lord of majesty and the King of the ages, and lo! the Watchers called me -Enoch the scribe- and said to me: 'Enoch, thou scribe of righteousness, go, declare to the Watchers

Enoch preaches God's decree to the Watchers:

Then I went and spoke to them all together, and they were all afraid, and fear and trembling seized them.

Enoch preaches God's decree to the Watchers:

Then I went and spoke to them all together, and they were all afraid, and fear and trembling seized them. And they besought me to draw up a petition for them that they might find forgiveness, and to read their petition in the presence of the Lord of heaven. For from thenceforward they could not speak (with Him) nor lift up their eyes to heaven for shame of their sins for which they had been condemned. Then I wrote out their petition, and the prayer in regard to their spirits and their deeds individually and in regard to their requests that they should have forgiveness and length. And I went off and sat down at the waters of Dan, in the land of Dan, to the south of the west of Hermon: I read their petition till I fell asleep. And behold a dream came to me, and visions fell down upon me, and I saw visions of chastisement, and a voice came bidding (me) I to tell it to the sons of heaven, and reprimand them. And when I awaked, I came unto them, and they were all sitting gathered together, weeping in Abelsjail, which is between Lebanon and Seneser, with their faces covered. And I recounted before them all the visions which I had seen in sleep, and I began to speak the words of righteousness, and to reprimand the heavenly Watchers.

More:

And I, Enoch, alone saw the vision, the ends of all things: and no man shall see as I have seen.

I will speak these things, Yea, I, Enoch will declare (them) unto you, my sons: According to that which appeared to me in the heavenly vision, And which I have known through the word of the holy angels, And have learnt from the heavenly tablets.'

And I, Enoch, answered and said unto him: 'The Lord will do a new thing on the earth

 

[GuardianShua]

"And I, Enoch, alone saw the vision" ~ 19:3​

This is the second time I've read someone who believed the writer of the Book of Enoch is claiming not to be Enoch, himself. This misunderstanding occurs, I think, due to the way Enoch speaks of himself in the 3rd-person in the prologue ot the book. Admittedly, it is an odd way to speak about oneself, but it is not the only example of this we find in the books of the Bible. Here is the passage I believe is the cause of the misunderstanding:

I do not think we can make this represent someone other than Enoch. Here's another biblical example of this sort of thing:

Now are we to think these are the words of Isaiah that God revealed to someone other than Isaiah? I think not.

Without going throughout the entire Book of Enoch to make this point, which would be too much, here are just s few more examples that leave no doubt to the reader that the writer of the Book of Enoch is claiming to be Enoch.

Enoch is called to ministry:

Enoch preaches God's decree to the Watchers:
Enoch preaches God's decree to the Watchers:
More:

Perhaps it is Enoch speaking. It's that it is unlikly that any record could have survived till then. But not impossible.

 

[Crazy Liz]

Enoch is not in the Bible because the Holy Spirit did not want it in the Bible. It is really as plain as that.

Hey welcome back, ps139!

 

[MamaZ]

was Enoch in the cannon before it was closed? If not then it would not have been in the bible.

 

[SummaScriptura]

was Enoch in the cannon before it was closed? If not then it would not have been in the bible.

Which canon?

There never has been nor is there now a single canonical list of the books of the Bible which all Christians went by.

So, you'll have to get a little more specific.

Whose canon?

The Book of Enoch was deemed scripture and preserved in Ethiopia by the Falasha Jews; then when the Falasha were converted to Coptic Orthodoxy, the BOE remained a sacred book of scripture to them and is currently in the Bible of Orthodox Ethiopians. TBOE has always been in someone's list of scripture books since before N.T. times.

 

[MamaZ]

The Jewish cannon..

 

[Crazy Liz]

The Jewish cannon..

There's not just one Jewish canon.

Most Jews today recognize 3 canons - the Law, the Prophets and the Writings. The first two were closed while the third was being written/compiled. The Septuagint (Greek OT) included the Law, the Prophets, the Writings (with additional material added to several of the Writings) plus several books written during the Hellenistic period that have not been found in Hebrew or Aramaic (to the best of my knowledge) but are believed to have been originally composed in Greek. Maccabees would be an example of this additional group, often called the Apocrypha in English translations.

As posted above, there were regional variations, so that Enoch was included in the canon of the Ethiopian Jews.

Canonicity today is not usually viewed as a question of whether a book is in or out, inspired or not inspired, true or false, but as a question of what community uses it and how that community uses it.

Whether the Book of Enoch was in general circulation and regarded as useful for similar purposes by the same community at the same time the canon of the Writings was closed (probably early Hellenistic period) might answer the question in the OP. Daniel is the only apocalyptic book found in the Writings. Apocalyptic writings seem to have been a later development, and from my understanding Enoch is an apocalyptic book.

 

[MamaZ]

The Jewish cannon was closed to which we have in the scriptures. These other books were written after this time and even the Jewish leaders rejected them. These books were written between the Old and the New.. Therefore they were never considered cannon. That is why they are not in the bible.

 

[Texas Lynn]

Politics. That's all.