Book of Enoch

Moxy

Someone mentioned the Jude quotation of the non-canonical Book of Enoch recently and i noticed the latest WT (9/15/01) article on Enoch addressed this. I also found a 98 reference to this which suggested that Enoch was actually written AFTER Jude, a stance which they seem to have abondoned. In fact, the whole thing seems like a very typical post-Franz, 'we don't know, ok. stop asking us stupid questions' kind of response. i also find it humorous how many other canonical books of the bible the reasoning in the first paragraph could be applied to. try it for yourself!

Does the Bible Quote From the Book of Enoch?
The Book of Enoch is an apocryphal and pseudepigraphic text. It is falsely ascribed to Enoch. Produced probably sometime during the second and first centuries B.C.E., it is a collection of extravagant and unhistorical Jewish myths, evidently the product of exegetical elaborations on the brief Genesis reference to Enoch. This alone is suffucuent for lovers of God's inspired Word to dismiss it.
In the Bible, only the book of Jude contains Enoch's prophetic words: "Look! Jehovah came with his holy myriads, to execute judgement against all, and to convict all the ungodly concerning all their ungodly deeds that they did in an ungodly way, and concerning all the shocking things that ungodly sinners spoke against him." (Jude 14,15) Many scholars contend that Enoch's prophecy against his ungodly contemporaries is quoted directly from the Book of Enoch. Is it possible that Jude used an unreliable book as his source?
How Jude knew of Enoch's prophecy is not revealed in the Scriptures. He may simply have quoted a common source, a reliable tradition handed down from remote antiquity. Paul evidently did something similar when he named Jannes and Jambres as the otherwise anonymous magicians of Pharaoh's court who opposed Moses. If the writer of the Boook of Enoch had access to an ancient source of this kind, why should we deny it to Jude*--Exodus 7:11, 22; 2 Timothy 3:8.
How Jude received the information about Enoch's message to the ungodly is a minor matter. Its reliability is attested to by the fact that Jude wrote under divine inspiration. (2 Timothy 3:16) God's holy spirit guarded him from stating anything that was not true.
-----
* The disciple Stephen also provided information found nowhere in the Hebrew Scriptures. It concerned Moses' Egyptian education, his being 40 years old when he fled Egypt, the 40-year duration of his stay in Midian, and the angelic role in transmitting the Mosaic Law. --Acts 7:22, 23, 30, 38.

mox

jayhawk1

That sounds contradictory. First, they say that the book of Enoch is unreliable and full of myths. Then they say that because Jude was inspired that this one quotation from the book of Enoch is accurate. How stupid to reason that a book that is almost all fiction has one fact in it, therefore it can be quoted.

"Hand me that whiskey, I need to consult the spirit."-J.F. Rutherford

Satanus

Mox

Where are all those christian apologists. Let's see some mental acrobatics here.

S

Zep

Jude ripped the book of Enoch off...yup. It's as plain as day.

TheOldHippie

Jayhawk1, it is not contradictory, as you have failed to notice the difference between the so-called "Book of Enoch" and quoting from an other source which contained words spoken by Enoch. Those are two different things.

nytelecom1

does that mean a inspired christian writer could never use outside sources such as an "encyclopedia".

Lindy

"The Book of Enoch is an apocryphal and pseudepigraphic text. It is falsely ascribed to Enoch. Produced probably sometime during the second and first centuries B.C.E., it is a collection of extravagant and unhistorical Jewish myths, evidently the product of exegetical elaborations on the brief Genesis reference to Enoch. This alone is suffucuent for lovers of God's inspired Word to dismiss it."

Okay, the critical thinker may want to know: Where they get the source of information that states the above. WHO says it is an apocryphal and pseudepigraphic text? WHO says it is falsely ascribed to Enoch? Is PROBABLY produced sometime between the first and second century BCE? Probably? Probably is not a certainty is it? Would new research and new, possible hidden, evidence prove otherwise? WHO were these men that sat around and decided back in the olden days which text to accept and which to throw out? What were their motives for such choices? Political control? Religious control? Control over the poor and weak? Control over women, over youth, over the masses in general? Etc?
Tell me WHERE I can find this information so that I can see if it is reasonable by today’s standards of reason and thinking. Were their choices back then archaic now? Is there any new evidence to make the choices different today?
I read the book of Enoch and I have read several other texts considered "out" by the old antiquated standards. There is some interesting stuff in these texts that most people don't know because they are automatically excluded by most religions. Shoot, there are tons of people out there that don't even know that these texts even exist for them to look at because they are intentionally kept from their eyes. How convenient for the religious leaders of today to say that just certain writings rule when the people do discover they were written. It keeps the status quo doesn't it? We wouldn't want people making informed choices would we? Money and power for these "holders of truth" would go right down the drain!

Just my opinion from my own reading and my own experiences in life. I will now step down from my soapbox.
Lindy

Utopian Reformist

My sentiments exactly Lindy!

Seeker

How do they know the book of Jude was written under inspiration and the book of Enoch wasnt?
Because Jude is in the Bible and Enoch isn't. And everything in the Bible canon is considered inspired.

How did the book of Jude make it into the canon and the book of Enoch did not?
Because in the 2nd and 3rd centuries, the Christian community decided so.

Isn't it true that the Bible said after the apostles died the apostasy would flourish?
Yes, it does.

Isn't it true that by the 3rd century, the apostasy was in full bloom, according to the WTS?
Yes, it is true.

So doesn't that mean the Bible canon was decided by apostates?
Uh, what's your point?

That the book of Jude was considered canonical by apostates, and the book of Enoch was not considered canonical by apostates.
Yeah, so?

So the reason we know the book of Jude is inspired is because some apostates said so.

Moxy

the situation is even worse with Enoch. it maintained a position of high esteem until the 4th century, being quoted by many post-apostolic fathers as well. canonicity questions just seem like a joke. look at the reasons for and against canonicity:

'Produced probably sometime during the second and first centuries B.C.E.'

based on scholarly analysis? the same scholarly analysis that places the authorship of the entire canon in or after the 7th century? the same scholarly analysis that we bluntly dismiss when need be?

'it is a collection of extravagant and unhistorical Jewish myths'

define 'extravagant' and 'unhistorical' and 'myth' and then show me genesis again.

'the product of exegetical elaborations'

how do you distinguish exegetical elaborations from 'a reliable tradition handed down from remote antiquity?' because ones in the bible and the other isnt?

now look at the criteria the si book normally uses to establish canonicity:

the main ones are:
uses jehovahs name
contains accurate prophecy
is quoted by NT writers
is quoted by apostolic fathers

subsidiary ones are:
is in harmony with the rest of scripture (with lots of lee-way on this one)
is traditionally regarded as sacred (very subjective, this one)

Enoch has support on all counts if you think about it. Ruth has support on only the subsidiary criteria. no solid reasons are offered for including ruth in the canon other than it was there already.

why not just forget about trying to find evidence for what's canonical and apocryphal and just say 'we dont know. lets just stick to the bible we have because we have it already, dagnabbit!' -- oh wait, i guess thats what they did.

mox

Book of Enoch

Share this