Why The Books of Enoch Were Dropped

[Enow]

This is for any out there reading the books of Enoch which are not included in the Bible today as well as for those believing that false teaching that angels, (the sons of God) can mix with the daughters of man.

This is for those that are reading the Books of Enoch. If you are not reading it, don't bother. The errors will be explained below.

One thing that stood out was the Third heaven description as in the Terrible Place where the wicked are tortured in the Books of Enoch.

Below is the refutation by the scriptures as to why those books were dropped for they were contrary to the Word of God: even Jesus' own words.

John 3:12If I have told you earthly things, and ye believe not, how shall ye believe, if I tell you of heavenly things? 13And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven.

Ephesians 4:8Wherefore he saith, When he ascended up on high, he led captivity captive, and gave gifts unto men. 9(Now that he ascended, what is it but that he also descended first into the lower parts of the earth? 10He that descended is the same also that ascended up far above all heavens, that he might fill all things.)

1 Corinthians 15:20But now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the firstfruits of them that slept. 21For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead. 22For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive. 23But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming.

Matthew 27:50Jesus, when he had cried again with a loud voice, yielded up the ghost. 51And, behold, the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom; and the earth did quake, and the rocks rent; 52And the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept arose, 53And came out of the graves after his resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many. 54Now when the centurion, and they that were with him, watching Jesus, saw the earthquake, and those things that were done, they feared greatly, saying, Truly this was the Son of God.

So then I wondered about how Enoch could have been in Heaven or seeing the Terrible Place in Heaven where the wicked are tortured when no man has ascended yet. Christ descended first and became the firstfruits of those Old Testament saints that were risen. So how could Enoch have seen anyone there above?

I looked to the Genesis and found this:

Genesis 5:21And Enoch lived sixty and five years, and begat Methuselah: 22And Enoch walked with God after he begat Methuselah three hundred years, and begat sons and daughters: 23And all the days of Enoch were three hundred sixty and five years: 24And Enoch walked with God: and he was not; for God took him.

That is all that was written was that God took him, but did not say where.

Hebrews 11:5By faith Enoch was translated that he should not see death; and was not found, because God had translated him: for before his translation he had this testimony, that he pleased God.

So then I have to wonder about once being translated, he was not coming back nor did he as Genesis testified. The only other reference was Enoch testifying before he was translated speaking in this wise:

Jude 1:14And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints, 15To execute judgment upon all, and to convince all that are ungodly among them of all their ungodly deeds which they have ungodly committed, and of all their hard speeches which ungodly sinners have spoken against him. 16These are murmurers, complainers, walking after their own lusts; and their mouth speaketh great swelling words, having men's persons in admiration because of advantage.

That is it from the scriptures. Anything else is left wide open for someone to fill in with the Books of Enoch which is contrary to the milk of the word.

Then there were references in the Book of Enochs about angels mingling with the daughters of man. Scriptures do not support that at all.

Matthew 22: 29Jesus answered and said unto them, Ye do err, not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of God. 30For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven.

So then we go to Jude as to why believers think angels did mingled.

Jude 1:4For there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ. 5I will therefore put you in remembrance, though ye once knew this, how that the Lord, having saved the people out of the land of Egypt, afterward destroyed them that believed not.

If we follow the format given, we see how the reference to carnality in verse 4 in regards to our relationship with Christ which is evidence of not walking in the Spirit nor abiding in Christ as comparable to the format of verse 5 whereas they sinned against the Lord and thus missed out in inheritting the Promised Land. This deviation had nothing to do with carnality of the sexual nature at all, but of their original standing with God to inherit the Pormised Land for being delivered out of the land of Egypt for that purpose as God's people.

6And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day.

And so it is referring to that relationship with God that one can lose their standing with God. When reading the verse 4 with five and the five with six, I can see by His grace that the angels that lost their place in Heaven was when they were in league with Lucifer... not for committing sexual sins.

7Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.

I believe it was this verse 7 that gave the impression of the loss of standing with God being of the sexual nature with "in like manner" as tying in with verse 6, but in actuality, by His grace, I see God was just referring to the surrounding cities that followed after Sodom and Gomorrah in like manner. "In like manner" had nothing to do with verse 6.

Anyway... as marriage goes... man can only reproduce after his own kind as God commanded of His creation when He formed everything. If angels cannot be given in marriage, then neither can fallen angels... for surely God would not joined the two to become one flesh anymore than same sex couples. Nothing is going to happen as far as reproduction goes. God has ordained it.

Matthew 19:4And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female, 5And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh? 6Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.

So then we go to the Genesis account as to why believers think angels mingled with man.

Genesis 6:1And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them, 2That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose.

I have heard the argument that the sons of God were angels. Why is it that God was not angry with angels but man then? Did He overlooked Satan when He tempted Eve? Then why would He overlook this transgressions by angels if the sons of God were angels? All that is mentioned was man.

3And the LORD said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years. 4There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown. 5And God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. 6And it repented the LORD that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart. 7And the LORD said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth; both man, and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air; for it repenteth me that I have made them. 8But Noah found grace in the eyes of the LORD.

The fact that angels cannot reproduce after its own kind and man can only reproduce after his own kind, one can see why angels were hardly mentioned at all as being on the end of this judgment from God.

So then.. who were the sons of God?

So then who were the sons of God?

Luke 3:38Which was the son of Enos, which was the son of Seth, which was the son of Adam, which was the son of God.

The sons of God was just referring to the righteous lineage that came from Adam. There were other sons and daughters, but since Seth replaced Abel, then he became the lineage of the sons of God from Adam.

Believers would argue that there had to be other couples made by God besides Adam and Eve, but not so.

Genesis 3:20 And Adam called his wife's name Eve; because she was the mother of all living.

Malachi 2:10 Have we not all one father? hath not one God created us? why do we deal treacherously every man against his brother, by profaning the covenant of our fathers?

Some would argue that God would not permit incest, but that law did not come into effect until later.. even after Abraham and Sarah when there was enough people upon the earth as well as within lineage of the nation of Israel.

Genesis 20: 11And Abraham said, Because I thought, Surely the fear of God is not in this place; and they will slay me for my wife's sake. 12And yet indeed she is my sister; she is the daughter of my father, but not the daughter of my mother; and she became my wife.

That is scripture above as much as anyone may get mad at me for saying so.

Leviticus 18:1And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying, 2Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them, I am the LORD your God. 3After the doings of the land of Egypt, wherein ye dwelt, shall ye not do: and after the doings of the land of Canaan, whither I bring you, shall ye not do: neither shall ye walk in their ordinances. 4Ye shall do my judgments, and keep mine ordinances, to walk therein: I am the LORD your God. 5Ye shall therefore keep my statutes, and my judgments: which if a man do, he shall live in them: I am the LORD. 6None of you shall approach to any that is near of kin to him, to uncover their nakedness: I am the LORD. 7The nakedness of thy father, or the nakedness of thy mother, shalt thou not uncover: she is thy mother; thou shalt not uncover her nakedness. 8The nakedness of thy father's wife shalt thou not uncover: it is thy father's nakedness. 9The nakedness of thy sister, the daughter of thy father, or daughter of thy mother, whether she be born at home, or born abroad, even their nakedness thou shalt not uncover.

And thus the law handed down through Moses regarding the sin of incest when Israel was practically a nation after being led out of the land of Egypt.

So there were no other couples as we are all related to Adam and Eve. Being how Noah and seven other people survived the Flood, we are all descendents of him and his family as well.. which, of course, goes back to Adam and Eve.

1 Peter 3:20 Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water.

Thus those other fables I have come across in other forums about other couples being on the ark as if two of all the living meant other familes were saved is debunked.

Titus 1:This witness is true. Wherefore rebuke them sharply, that they may be sound in the faith; 14Not giving heed to Jewish fables, and commandments of men, that turn from the truth. 15Unto the pure all things are pure: but unto them that are defiled and unbelieving is nothing pure; but even their mind and conscience is defiled. 16They profess that they know God; but in works they deny him, being abominable, and disobedient, and unto every good work reprobate.

Anyway, I can see why the Books of Enoch were not included in the Bible.

Angels cannot mingle with mankind and Enoch did not come back after being translated as the description of the many layers of Heavens is a fairy tale in the Books of Enoch. Can anyone think of Dante in the many layers of Hell? Scriptures debunks the Books of Enoch as evidence of poetic license is at work here. I can see one of the reasons why the lost books were lost. We have what we need in the King James Bible.
<!-- / message --><!-- edit note -->

 

[Coconut]

You just piqued my curiosity Enow...very interesting study!

I`m going to put a quote here, and can you tell me what your thoughts are on the part I highlight?


"Despite its unknown origins, Christians once accepted the words of this Book of Enoch as authentic scripture, especially the part about the fallen angels and their prophesied judgment. In fact, many of the key concepts used by Jesus Christ himself seem directly connected to terms and ideas in the Book of Enoch. Thus, it is hard to avoid the conclusion that Jesus had not only studied the book, but also respected it highly enough to adopt and elaborate on its specific descriptions of the coming kingdom and its theme of inevitable judgment descending upon "the wicked" - the term most often used in the Old Testament to describe the Watchers.

There is abundant proof that Christ approved of the Book of Enoch. Over a hundred phrases in the New Testament find precedents in the Book of Enoch. Another remarkable bit of evidence for the early Christians' acceptance of the Book of Enoch was for many years buried under the King James Bible's mistranslation of Luke 9:35, describing the
transfiguration of Christ: "And there came a voice out of the cloud, saying, 'This is my beloved Son: hear him." Apparently the translator here wished to make this verse agree with a similar verse in Matthew and Mark. But Luke's verse in the original Greek reads: "This is my Son, the Elect One (from the Greek ho eklelegmenos, lit., "the elect one"): hear him." The "Elect One" is a most significant term (found fourteen times) in the Book of Enoch. If the book was indeed known to the apostles of Christ, with its abundant descriptions of the Elect One who should "sit upon the throne of glory" and the Elect One who should "dwell in the midst of them," then the great scriptural authenticity is accorded to the Book of Enoch when the "voice out of the cloud" tells the apostles, "This is my Son, the Elect One" - the one promised in the Book of Enoch."

I found this here: The Book of Enoch and The Secrets of Enoch

If I seem ignorant on this subject, it would be because I am :embarasse

 

[jiggyfly]

Jude 14&15
14*Now Enoch, who lived seven generations after Adam, prophesied about these people. He said,
“Look, the Lord is coming
with thousands of his holy ones.
15* He will bring the people of the world
to judgment.
He will convict the ungodly of all the evil things
they have done in rebellion
and of all the insults that godless sinners
have spoken against him.”*

Jude quoted Enoch.

 

[Boanerges]

Although some of the Apocryphal (spurious) writings were occasionally quoted in scripture they were rejected by the Jewish people as scripture. Since the bible tells us that they were the entrusted with the Word of God (Rom 3:2). Also one must consider the myriad of strange doctrine and contradiction that is introduced when trying to add these books into the Word.
The Jews rejected them as scripture, the early church rejected them as scripture and on that basis so do I. Some have historical significance and some are myths plain and simple. Those who advocated their inclusion in scripture were generally small sects . I do however consider them an interesting read but only as long as one does not confuse them with the Bible. One must remember that the Word of God specifically warns about adding to the words written therein.

 

[jiggyfly]

Although some of the Apocryphal (spurious) writings were occasionally quoted in scripture they were rejected by the Jewish people as scripture. Since the bible tells us that they were the entrusted with the Word of God (Rom 3:2). Also one must consider the myriad of strange doctrine and contradiction that is introduced when trying to add these books into the Word.
The Jews rejected them as scripture, the early church rejected them as scripture and on that basis so do I. Some have historical significance and some are myths plain and simple. Those who advocated their inclusion in scripture were generally small sects . I do however consider them an interesting read but only as long as one does not confuse them with the Bible. One must remember that the Word of God specifically warns about adding to the words written therein.

I agree with you, I like to read them also but they really have not offered any advantage to spiritual growth.

One must remember that the Word of God specifically warns about adding to the words written therein.

I don't agree with you here because you are treating the bible as one book. At the time this scripture was written the bible had not been compilated. So to apply it to more than the book of Revelation would mean that the bible itself is in error of this. One very important thing concerning the bible especially when it comes to interpretative study is that it is more than one book, it is a compilation of books, letters, scripts and scrolls written in various ages, linguistic grammars and writing styles such as documentary, poetic, prose, ect...

 

[Boanerges]

It is okay if we do not agree, we are brothers and that is what counts.


The way brother Larry sees it (my opinion only):
As far as the one book statement I believe the Words either came from God and were part of His Book or they were not. 66 books written over a span of centuries by writers who were seperated by thousands of miles and yet they flow quite seemlessly.Truly this is the hand of God and the hand of man can only muddle this up.

 

[Enow]

I`m going to put a quote here, and can you tell me what your thoughts are on the part I highlight?

"Despite its unknown origins, Christians once accepted the words of this Book of Enoch as authentic scripture, especially the part about the fallen angels and their prophesied judgment. In fact, many of the key concepts used by Jesus Christ himself seem directly connected to terms and ideas in the Book of Enoch. Thus, it is hard to avoid the conclusion that Jesus had not only studied the book, but also respected it highly enough to adopt and elaborate on its specific descriptions of the coming kingdom and its theme of inevitable judgment descending upon "the wicked" - the term most often used in the Old Testament to describe the Watchers.

There is abundant proof that Christ approved of the Book of Enoch. Over a hundred phrases in the New Testament find precedents in the Book of Enoch.
If I seem ignorant on this subject, it would be because I am :embarasse

Well, I did not mean to inspire anyone to read the Books of Enoch.

One of the things noted is the lack of documents in Hebrew writings. Seeing how the writings of the Old Testament and the New are available in Greek and Hebrews, it is not that unfathomable to see someone taking poetic licenses in creating frauds.

Looking at the reasons why Apocrypha was left out of the Bible are listed on page 185-186 of the book Translators Revived, by Alexander McClure. The seven reasons are basically as follows:

1. Not one of them is in the Hebrew language like the rest of the Old Testament books.
2. Not one of the writers lays any claim to inspiration.
3. These books were never acknowledged as sacred Scriptures by the Jewish church, and therefore were never sanctioned by our Lord.
4. They were not allowed a place among the sacred books, during the first four centuries of the Christian church.
5. They contain fabulous statements, and statements which contradict not only the canonical Scriptures, but themselves. For example, in the Books of Maccabees alone, Antiochus Epiphanes dies three times in three places!
6. It inculcates doctrines at variance with the Bible, such as prayers for the dead and sinless perfection. 7. It teaches immoral practices, such as lying, suicide, assassination and magical incantation.


Another thing about Enoch is that when the fallen angels mingled with women, they gave births to demons. That is a far cry from giants.

John 3:6That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.

If the Jews did not keep up with the copying of the Books of Enoch, one has to wonder why. There are Jewish fables and so one must keep that in mind.

Being how Enoch was before the Flood, one has to wonder how his writings can be continued when Israel was not a nation yet to have that practise in place. God inspired Moses and yet where is the references to Enoch's writings being carried over? If God commanded the seed of Enoch to keep the writings sealed as Daniel was instructed, and yet Daniel was not hidden from being read as it was kept up by scholars... how is it that the Books of Enoch is not in Hebrew, but in Greek and Latin translations? Latin?

There is evidence to suggest poetic licensing being taken place here. The OT and the NT were available for copying from to create the Books of Enoch to be made out to be a spectacular prophetic book.

Eventually, someone decided to discern the circulated frauds that wormed its way into the assembly by popularity.. no doubt, but when it doesn't line up with the rest of the scriptures, they knew it had to be dropped.

They believed Jesus that they will not marry in the resurrection... and so neither can the angels nor fallen ones. God has spoken in creation on how man was to reproduce after its own kind. The sin of bestiality is known and yet no offsprings can occur because God has ordained it. Therefore God has created the angels to not be able to reproduce. Being fallen doesn't change His ordinance.

 

[Enow]

Jude 14&15
14*Now Enoch, who lived seven generations after Adam, prophesied about these people. He said,
“Look, the Lord is coming
with thousands of his holy ones.
15* He will bring the people of the world
to judgment.
He will convict the ungodly of all the evil things
they have done in rebellion
and of all the insults that godless sinners
have spoken against him.”*

Jude quoted Enoch.

How did Moses write Genesis? How could he quote Adam or Eve or Satan or God?

The same way Jude quoted Enoch.

Why is it that as amazing as the Books of Enoch sounds in that Jesus must have read it, how come He never said... "Is it not written" in reference to Enoch? Or the disciples? They had in regards to other scriptures. Is it not convenient that the Books of Enoch is one way as referencing Christ, but as many times that it has, Jesus did not in return? Nor the disciples?

The Books of Enoch was written after the fact and copied after the OT and NT to gain popularity until someone began lining it up with the scriptures and found it to be a Jewish fable, being how no Hebrew manuscript was found of it, and being written in Greek and Latin?

If Enoch wrote it, who kept it up? If God commanded the seed of Enoch to seal up the writings, how could Jesus have read it or anyone else? There are too many inconsistencies as well as the obvious lies that when the fallen angels mingled with the women, they gave birth to demons... that is a far cry from giants.

I believe Jesus' own words that we will not be marrying in the resurrection, otherwise, His reference to angels would be moot.

 

[Enow]

Although some of the Apocryphal (spurious) writings were occasionally quoted in scripture they were rejected by the Jewish people as scripture. Since the bible tells us that they were the entrusted with the Word of God (Rom 3:2). Also one must consider the myriad of strange doctrine and contradiction that is introduced when trying to add these books into the Word.
The Jews rejected them as scripture, the early church rejected them as scripture and on that basis so do I. Some have historical significance and some are myths plain and simple. Those who advocated their inclusion in scripture were generally small sects . I do however consider them an interesting read but only as long as one does not confuse them with the Bible. One must remember that the Word of God specifically warns about adding to the words written therein.

Thanks for defending the Word in this wise.

Mayhap others shall add knowledge soon. May God cause the increase.

 

[Boanerges]

It was a pleasure Enow. I enjoyed reading your article, thanks.

 

[jari]

Hello brother i read parts of your article and i begin to wonder why is it not possible that the angels coming to sons of men happened someway like this:

the angels, who are spirits came as a spirit to earth. It does not say in the bible that the angels became flesh, now does it (Psa 104:4)

remember the Holy spirit made Mary pregrant and Jesus Christ was born trough Mary.

thank you for considering my question.

God bless your study

 

[Enow]

Hello brother i read parts of your article and i begin to wonder why is it not possible that the angels coming to sons of men happened someway like this:

the angels, who are spirits came as a spirit to earth. It does not say in the bible that the angels became flesh, now does it (Psa 104:4)

remember the Holy spirit made Mary pregrant and Jesus Christ was born trough Mary.

thank you for considering my question.

God bless your study

What about the sin of bestiality? How come no reproduction can occur there? Because God has ordained that kind can only reproduce after its own kind. If God spoke it, then the angels that fell ... (not because they left Heaven, but they were the ones that rebelled with Lucifer and got their you know what kicked out... ) cannot marry even in their fallen state. Celestial or fallen ones cannot join because God created marriage to be between a man and a woman and thus cannot occur between fallen angels and women to produce any offsprings whatsoever.

As far as Mary and the Holy Ghost, it is still the Lord that made Him. Angels .. fallen or otherwise cannot break His decree about man reproducing after their own kind as with a woman. God has ordained it.

Psalm 127:3 Lo, children are an heritage of the LORD: and the fruit of the womb is his reward.

Isaiah 44:2 Thus saith the LORD that made thee, and formed thee from the womb, which will help thee; Fear not, O Jacob, my servant; and thou, Jesurun, whom I have chosen.....24Thus saith the LORD, thy redeemer, and he that formed thee from the womb, I am the LORD that maketh all things; that stretcheth forth the heavens alone; that spreadeth abroad the earth by myself;

The angels nor the fallen angels can make anything from the womb that is not of His will.

Genesis 20:18 For the LORD had fast closed up all the wombs of the house of Abimelech, because of Sarah Abraham's wife.

Genesis 29:31And when the LORD saw that Leah was hated, he opened her womb: but Rachel was barren.

God has ordained that they cannot marry. They left their first estate, Heaven, when they rebelled with Lucifer. It is that chains they are bound with as they are destined for Hell.

What would be the point of Jesus referencing the angels in regards to the resurrection since the Books of Enoch would make that reference moot?

That is why I believe Jesus over the Books of Enoch.

 

[jiggyfly]

How did Moses write Genesis? How could he quote Adam or Eve or Satan or God?

The same way Jude quoted Enoch.

Why is it that as amazing as the Books of Enoch sounds in that Jesus must have read it, how come He never said... "Is it not written" in reference to Enoch? Or the disciples? They had in regards to other scriptures. Is it not convenient that the Books of Enoch is one way as referencing Christ, but as many times that it has, Jesus did not in return? Nor the disciples?

The Books of Enoch was written after the fact and copied after the OT and NT to gain popularity until someone began lining it up with the scriptures and found it to be a Jewish fable, being how no Hebrew manuscript was found of it, and being written in Greek and Latin?

If Enoch wrote it, who kept it up? If God commanded the seed of Enoch to seal up the writings, how could Jesus have read it or anyone else? There are too many inconsistencies as well as the obvious lies that when the fallen angels mingled with the women, they gave birth to demons... that is a far cry from giants.

I believe Jesus' own words that we will not be marrying in the resurrection, otherwise, His reference to angels would be moot.

I'm not sure what you are trying to say here. Are you saying that Jude was wrong for quoting Enoch or are you denying that Jude quoted Enoch?
Should the letter of Jude be disregarded as scripture because he quoted Enoch?

The only point I wanted to make was that Jude quoted Enoch in his letter so he had to hear or read it somewhere and thought it was relevant and included it in his letter.

 

[Coconut]

Well, I did not mean to inspire anyone to read the Books of Enoch.

LOL, but suggest that I should`nt and I shall

If the Jews did not keep up with the copying of the Books of Enoch, one has to wonder why. There are Jewish fables and so one must keep that in mind.

I hate to be a thorn, but it seems i`m going to remain stuck on why any "Holy Ghost inspired" writer of the NT letters would quote a book regarded as a fable. That would be akin to me quoting Alice in Wonderland in a doctrinal essay. Strange (and ya`ll would think so too)

Eventually, someone decided to discern the circulated frauds that wormed its way into the assembly by popularity...

Theres that great big little word 'discern' thats supposed to carry all the the authority of Heaven to win over any naysayers. :wink:

See my last statement as to why i`m having a lot of trouble with this statement.


edited to add ...almost thou persuadest me to read the Book of Enoch for myself

 

[Enow]

I'm not sure what you are trying to say here. Are you saying that Jude was wrong for quoting Enoch or are you denying that Jude quoted Enoch?
Should the letter of Jude be disregarded as scripture because he quoted Enoch?

The only point I wanted to make was that Jude quoted Enoch in his letter so he had to hear or read it somewhere and thought it was relevant and included it in his letter.

What I was trying to say was how did Moses quoted anyone in Genesis as he wrote Genesis inspired by God when he wasn't there nor were there any scrolls written of the incident seeing how Israel was not a nation before they had left Egypt yet? The answer... Moses was inspired by God to write it in that manner as if he was there, but wasn't because God was giving him the words to write.

So it was for Jude.

Let's look at that one chapter book.

Jude 1: 9Yet Michael the archangel, when contending with the devil he disputed about the body of Moses, durst not bring against him a railing accusation, but said, The Lord rebuke thee.

Where was that written and who was there to witness that event?

Jude 1:13Raging waves of the sea, foaming out their own shame; wandering stars, to whom is reserved the blackness of darkness for ever.

Is that written anywhere? Sounds like God was issuing judgment through Jude.

The thing about Enoch is that it did not say, is it not written? Of course, he did not say that about anything else in that chapter that for some, was obviously written.

But the point is, the claim was that Jesus must have read the Books of Enoch because it looked like He quoted many portions of it and as it turns out, whenever Jesus refer to what is written, He would say so. That is His practise. He may not refer to the Book itself, but He will say, is it not written? and the like...

So I find it strange that portions of Enoch that the Books of Enoch to Jesus can see Him quoting the Book, but by His practise of referrong, we do not see Jesus referring to Enoch by stating is it not written as far as those quotes are saying and supposedly, according from the Books of Enoch to Christ, He quoted many from it.

The only reason the Books of Enoch was exalted was the believers wanted to believe it was sacred scriptures, like the fad that is going on now. Many false teachings are arising out of it, like the Serpent Seed doctrine falsely accusing Eve of having sexual relations with Satan in giving birth to Cain. Because of the Books of Enoch, people are reading that into the Bible and believing it, ignoring how by that belief there were other men and women couples as their rationalization for why there are so many different ethnics and that if Eve did commit adultery, there really wasn't anything stopping Adam from seeking another wife, but Eve didn't and thus thw whole fable collapse under its own weight, but believers will be still following the fables anyway. Even other false teachings arising that the blacks are a different race and not of Noah as they see God having Noah bring two of all the living, to mean other couples of other "races", but

1 Peter 3:20Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water.

...debunks that notion plainly as hard as they try to see other races being on the ark because of the Books of Enoch.

So watch out for those false teachings and the minute you see yourself turning away from the truth of the accepted scriptures, treat it like the plague.

One can give reasonable doubts that there may have been actual writings of Enoch, but forgeries has taken its place BUT there was no practise of the keeping of the scrolls for Israel was not a nation yet to do that. When Moses began it, no record of following the pattern after the scrolls of Enoch were written nor were there any references to it in all the books God inspired Moses to write, and yet the Books of Enoch was being carried over on the ark from the Flood. With such importance to it, God would have made sure ther were Hebrews writings of the Books of Enoch, but instead... we find it only in Greek and Latin... and as if being in Latin isn't enough for anyone to wonder if no one took poetic licensing to the OT and NT to create a convenient book of prophecy where Jesus is seen seemingly quoting alot from it.

There are one too many false teachings coming out those fables, and I can see why it was dropped.

Jude may have reference Enoch, but that is not to say that he was not inspired by God to say that as in not referring to any actual writings. Only Moses could have written it, and he didn't.

 

[Enow]

I hate to be a thorn, but it seems i`m going to remain stuck on why any "Holy Ghost inspired" writer of the NT letters would quote a book regarded as a fable. That would be akin to me quoting Alice in Wonderland in a doctrinal essay. Strange (and ya`ll would think so too)

edited to add ...almost thou persuadest me to read the Book of Enoch for myself

Why would Moses quote Adam, Eve, God, and Satan? Were there writings? Thus the Holy Spirit inspired Jude to quote Enoch does not necessarily need to refer to any writings.

The Books of Enoch were never found in Hebrew writings. To see it in Greek and Latin gives the timing of those documents a questionable authenticity seeing how Jewish fables do exists. There is every evidence to suggests that the Books of Enoch were forgeries contrived from OT and NT to give it the popularity as a fad among believers as Jesus is seen conveniently quoting alot from it, but not as much from the other OT?

And by Jesus being seen as quoting alot from the Books of Enoch, and yet Jesus did not say He was quoting from it by saying, "Is it not written?" from the Bible that we have, suggests a conveniency for anyone to be using the Books of Enoch to see Jesus from the Bible as quoting from it.

If there ever were any writings of Enoch, then Moses had to have wittten it and he didn't.

 

[jiggyfly]

Mark 7:6&7
6*Jesus replied, “You hypocrites! Isaiah was prophesying about you when he said,
7* ‘These people honor me with their lips,
but their hearts are far away.
Their worship is a farce,
for they replace God’s commands with their own man-made teachings.’*


Here Jesus quotes Isaiah and does not say "it is written", so I think your standard is in error.

 

[Enow]

Mark 7:6&7
6*Jesus replied, “You hypocrites! Isaiah was prophesying about you when he said,
7* ‘These people honor me with their lips,
but their hearts are far away.
Their worship is a farce,
for they replace God’s commands with their own man-made teachings.’*


Here Jesus quotes Isaiah and does not say "it is written", so I think your standard is in error.

This is why I rely on the King James Bible:

Mark 7: 6He answered and said unto them, Well hath Esaias prophesied of you hypocrites, as it is written, This people honoureth me with their lips, but their heart is far from me. 7Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.

When you put your pointer up on that verse reference and a little window pops up, what does the verses say then? It is still in the KJV format, is it not?

In any event, let us say that there was a Book of Enoch and Moses wrote it as inspired by God to write it. For being one of the earliest scrolls, no Hebrew translation has been found. It is lost.

To believe that the Books of Enoch ARE the actual Books of Enoch then they oppose Jesus' own words because He said that in the resurrection, they will not be marrying nor given in marriage but will be like the angels in Heaven. By believing the Books of Enoch over Jesus' own words, then that is not a guarantee of the power of God because they could change their minds and renew their union and their absence of that love. In other words, Jesus referring to the angels about the power of God would be moot, now wouldn't it? Kinds can mingle with other kinds then in creation, but we know that the power of God holds true there.

So the power of God holds true with angels since they were not created to reproduce, and being in a fallen state does not alter that power of God in His creation. The only first estate they left was Heaven: not the ability to not reproduce.

 

[jiggyfly]

Jude may have reference Enoch, but that is not to say that he was not inspired by God to say that as in not referring to any actual writings. Only Moses could have written it, and he didn't.

Did Moses write Job?
Do you know when Moses wrote the Torah?
Do you know when Job was written?

 

[Enow]

Jude may have reference Enoch, but that is not to say that he was not inspired by God to say that as in not referring to any actual writings. Only Moses could have written it, and he didn't.

Did Moses write Job?
Do you know when Moses wrote the Torah?
Do you know when Job was written?

That was not what I had meant.

Yes, Moses wrote Job, but as pertaining to the Books of Enoch as the ones that are claimed to be the actual Books of Enoch, Moses did not write them for the Books of Enoch has been written as declaring Enoch had written it. So if there ever was any actual Book of Enoch written by Moses, it is not available now in Hebrew writings. It is either gone or missing while frauds are being circulated in its place opposing the Bible and Jesus' own words.