Why isn't the book of Enoch in the Bible?

originally posted by: TheChrome

originally posted by: Raggedyman

originally posted by: TheChrome


I agree and disagree. I agree the book of Enoch is baseless. However, the Hebrew/Aramaic Scriptures and the Greek Scriptures are in harmony and provide the complete guide for God's followers. If the Jews follow the "Old Testament" and Christendom follows the "New Testament" then both of them are not understanding the full context of the scripture.

I am sorry
I dont believe the law can be in harmony with grace, not in any context

Old testament under the law, death and severe justice metered out by humanity and God
New Testament, Grace poured out onto humanity and christians to be a living walking Gospel of Gods grace through Christs to humanity
The OT points to Jesus. The Jews are following the old laws and that is the problem, they deny Jesus, they do not understand the full context of scripture

The Law foreshadowed Christ:

(Colossians 2:17) "These are a shadow of the things that were to come; the reality, however, is found in Christ.

(Romans 10:4) "Christ is the end of the law so that there may be righteousness for everyone who believes."

These scriptures do not in any way negate the contents of the Old Testament, rather it points to the fulfillment of it in Christ.

The law was made for man not man for the law

Jesus set humanity free from the law, follow Him, obey Him and be His.

The law is not in harmony with grace, christians are under grace, not the law.

The OT was history, the NT doesnt negate history, doesnt negate the law, just provides christians grace.
Grace and the law do not mix.

originally posted by: Akragon
a reply to: DrogoTheNorman

Simply put....

the book of Enoch teaches things that Christianity does not believe in

It also tells about things that are complete nonsense... even to a Christian

This pretty much sums it up.
The authorship of the book is also an issue. Books that were accepted into the Canon were, by and large, of apostolic or prophetic authorship. Books of questionable origin (e.g. The Gospel of Thomas) were left out for that same reason. It's the same with Enoch. The first book of Enoch could very well have been written *by* Enoch. The latter books aren't even in the same literary style, and are definitely not of the same authorship.

Perhaps more important to this conversation is the fact that the Holy Spirit, in inspiring Scripture, picks and chooses things based sometimes on their truthfulness, other times on their usefulness. There are HUNDREDS of quotes in the Bible from various sources - and the function differs in each instance. In some cases it absolutely does attest to its truthfulness (e.g. what you've quoted, or Paul quoting "in Him we live and move and have our being" - quoted from Epimenides the Cretian) and in others it's just utilizing pop culture (e.g. "Cretans are always liars, evil beasts, lazy gluttons" (Titus 1:12) to demonstrate a point.

Hope that helps!

originally posted by: stormbringer1701

originally posted by: Miccey
Imho you are all wrong. The book isnt
there cause it didnt fit the agenda of
the leaders at the time.. And never will...

except... i think i said that.

However many scholars believe it was excluded due to a schism of philosophy among the early church fathers. One faction believed that the spirit and the flesh were mutually exclusive and could not mix. Another faction felt that spirit could mingle with flesh. the latter lost out and because the book of Enoch contradicted the prevailing belief it was banished from canon.

Ahh well...Ok kinda....
Honestly, i didnt read the entire thread....
Usually never do in these matters....

a reply to: windword

Is spirit mingling with flesh supernatural?

That is how I would define it, providing we are defining the Supernatural, in a traditional sense.

a reply to: windword

I could go into detail
But like rain on a hot tin roof

Believe what you want

a reply to: DrogoTheNorman

I can't believe nobody went there yet, so I do:
Because he talks about things which are not usefull in controlling the masses. Like what if there is no place like heaven or hell, but Sheol:

... in the Hebrew Bible, is a place of darkness to which all the dead go, both the righteous and the unrighteous, regardless of the moral choices made in life, a place of stillness and darkness cut off from life and from the Hebrew God.[1]
The inhabitants of Sheol are the "shades" (rephaim), entities without personality or strength.[2] Under some circumstances they are thought to be able to be contacted by the living, as the Witch of Endor contacts the shade of Samuel for Saul, but such practices are forbidden (Deuteronomy 18:10).[3]

and in the first book it is a lot about Earth and humans getting corrupted from "angels":

A Jewish story of angels coming down to earth rather than being cast down, referred to as the story of angelic descent,[16] is found chiefly in the Jewish pseudepigraphic Book of Enoch, 6-9 and the Qumran Book of Giants and perhaps in Genesis 6:1-4.[17] These Watchers became "enamored" with human women (1 Enoch 7.2),[18] and had intercourse with them. The offspring of these unions, and the knowledge they were given, corrupted human beings and the earth (1 Enoch 10.11-12).[18] A number of apocryphal works, including 1 Enoch (10.4)[18] link this transgression with the Great Deluge.[19] This fact was adopted by early Christianity, but abandoned by Rabbinic Judaism and later Christianity.[20] During the period immediately before the rise of Christianity, the intercourse between these Watchers and human women was often seen as the first fall of the angels.[21]

Giant, by the way doesn't necessarilly mean tall,

Heb. nephilim, meaning "violent" or "causing to fall" ( Genesis 6:4 ). These were the violent tyrants of those days, those who fell upon others. The word may also be derived from a root signifying "wonder," and hence "monsters" or "prodigies." In Numbers 13:33 this name is given to a Canaanitish tribe, a race of large stature, "the sons of Anak." The Revised Version, in these passages, simply transliterates the original, and reads "Nephilim." Heb. rephaim, a race of giants ( Deuteronomy 3:11 ) who lived on the east of Jordan, from whom Og was descended. They were probably the original inhabitants of the land before the immigration of the Canaanites. They were conquered by Chedorlaomer ( Genesis 14:5 ), and their territories were promised as a possession to Abraham ( 15:20 ).
The Anakim, Zuzim, and Emim were branches of this stock. In Job 26:5 (RSV, "they that are deceased;" marg., "the shades," the "Rephaim") and Isaiah 14:9 this Hebrew word is rendered (A.V.) "dead." It means here "the shades," the departed spirits in Sheol. In Sam Isaiah 21:16 Isaiah 21:18 Isaiah 21:20 Isaiah 21:33 , "the giant" is (A.V.) the rendering of the singular form ha raphah , which may possibly be the name of the father of the four giants referred to here, or of the founder of the Rephaim. The Vulgate here reads "Arapha," whence Milton (in Samson Agonistes) has borrowed the name "Harapha." (See also 1 Chronicles 20:5 1 Chronicles 20:6 1 Chronicles 20:8 ; Deuteronomy 2:11 Deuteronomy 2:20 ; 3:13 ; Joshua 15:8 , etc., where the word is similarly rendered "giant.") It is rendered "dead" in (A.V.) Psalms 88:10 ; Proverbs 2:18 ; 9:18 ; 21:16 : in all these places the Revised Version marg. has "the shades." (See also Isaiah 26:14 .)

Notice something?
If humans interbreed with angels,they become shades. Invincible to the normal human. But humans also learned a lot from them:

And Azâzêl taught men to make swords, and knives, and shields, and breastplates, and made known to them the metals of the earth and the art of working them, and bracelets, and ornaments, and the use of antimony, and the beautifying of the eyelids, and all kinds of costly stones, and all colouring tinctures. And there arose much godlessness, and they committed fornication, and they were led astray, and became corrupt in all their ways. Semjâzâ taught enchantments, and root-cuttings, Armârôs the resolving of enchantments, Barâqîjâl, taught astrology, Kôkabêl the constellations, Ezêqêêl the knowledge of the clouds, Araqiêl the signs of the earth, Shamsiêl the signs of the sun, and Sariêl the course of the moon.

Which basically tells the story how humans were mere animals, living in connection with god(=their environment), untill these "beings" came from "heaven", breeding with them and taught them everything that started us building civilisations.

oops, sorry sources:
wiki
biblestudytools

originally posted by: Akragon


Not understanding something... and believing people were once 450 feet tall, or a snake and a donkey once had a little chat with men are hardly the same thing

That's whats so alluring about these texts. It's not like scribes were a dime a dozen, they were likely writing something meaningful, perhaps of a realm we cannot fathom in our contemporary limited world view. When I read what seems like nonsense, I presume there is something deeper beyond my current comprehension. Or maybe it is nonsense, but what ancient scribe would waste his valuable time writing such?

originally posted by: Peeple
a reply to: DrogoTheNorman

I can't believe nobody went there yet, so I do:
Because he talks about things which are not usefull in controlling the masses. Like what if there is no place like heaven or hell, but Sheol:

... in the Hebrew Bible, is a place of darkness to which all the dead go, both the righteous and the unrighteous, regardless of the moral choices made in life, a place of stillness and darkness cut off from life and from the Hebrew God.[1]
The inhabitants of Sheol are the "shades" (rephaim), entities without personality or strength.[2] Under some circumstances they are thought to be able to be contacted by the living, as the Witch of Endor contacts the shade of Samuel for Saul, but such practices are forbidden (Deuteronomy 18:10).[3]

and in the first book it is a lot about Earth and humans getting corrupted from "angels":

A Jewish story of angels coming down to earth rather than being cast down, referred to as the story of angelic descent,[16] is found chiefly in the Jewish pseudepigraphic Book of Enoch, 6-9 and the Qumran Book of Giants and perhaps in Genesis 6:1-4.[17] These Watchers became "enamored" with human women (1 Enoch 7.2),[18] and had intercourse with them. The offspring of these unions, and the knowledge they were given, corrupted human beings and the earth (1 Enoch 10.11-12).[18] A number of apocryphal works, including 1 Enoch (10.4)[18] link this transgression with the Great Deluge.[19] This fact was adopted by early Christianity, but abandoned by Rabbinic Judaism and later Christianity.[20] During the period immediately before the rise of Christianity, the intercourse between these Watchers and human women was often seen as the first fall of the angels.[21]

Giant, by the way doesn't necessarilly mean tall,

Heb. nephilim, meaning "violent" or "causing to fall" ( Genesis 6:4 ). These were the violent tyrants of those days, those who fell upon others. The word may also be derived from a root signifying "wonder," and hence "monsters" or "prodigies." In Numbers 13:33 this name is given to a Canaanitish tribe, a race of large stature, "the sons of Anak." The Revised Version, in these passages, simply transliterates the original, and reads "Nephilim." Heb. rephaim, a race of giants ( Deuteronomy 3:11 ) who lived on the east of Jordan, from whom Og was descended. They were probably the original inhabitants of the land before the immigration of the Canaanites. They were conquered by Chedorlaomer ( Genesis 14:5 ), and their territories were promised as a possession to Abraham ( 15:20 ).
The Anakim, Zuzim, and Emim were branches of this stock. In Job 26:5 (RSV, "they that are deceased;" marg., "the shades," the "Rephaim") and Isaiah 14:9 this Hebrew word is rendered (A.V.) "dead." It means here "the shades," the departed spirits in Sheol. In Sam Isaiah 21:16 Isaiah 21:18 Isaiah 21:20 Isaiah 21:33 , "the giant" is (A.V.) the rendering of the singular form ha raphah , which may possibly be the name of the father of the four giants referred to here, or of the founder of the Rephaim. The Vulgate here reads "Arapha," whence Milton (in Samson Agonistes) has borrowed the name "Harapha." (See also 1 Chronicles 20:5 1 Chronicles 20:6 1 Chronicles 20:8 ; Deuteronomy 2:11 Deuteronomy 2:20 ; 3:13 ; Joshua 15:8 , etc., where the word is similarly rendered "giant.") It is rendered "dead" in (A.V.) Psalms 88:10 ; Proverbs 2:18 ; 9:18 ; 21:16 : in all these places the Revised Version marg. has "the shades." (See also Isaiah 26:14 .)

Notice something?
If humans interbreed with angels,they become shades. Invincible to the normal human. But humans also learned a lot from them:

And Azâzêl taught men to make swords, and knives, and shields, and breastplates, and made known to them the metals of the earth and the art of working them, and bracelets, and ornaments, and the use of antimony, and the beautifying of the eyelids, and all kinds of costly stones, and all colouring tinctures. And there arose much godlessness, and they committed fornication, and they were led astray, and became corrupt in all their ways. Semjâzâ taught enchantments, and root-cuttings, Armârôs the resolving of enchantments, Barâqîjâl, taught astrology, Kôkabêl the constellations, Ezêqêêl the knowledge of the clouds, Araqiêl the signs of the earth, Shamsiêl the signs of the sun, and Sariêl the course of the moon.

Which basically tells the story how humans were mere animals, living in connection with god(=their environment), untill these "beings" came from "heaven", breeding with them and taught them everything that started us building civilisations.

oops, sorry sources:
wiki
biblestudytools

eh; mostly accurate if somewhat slanted. however when you state angels came to earth voluntarily instead of being cast out you seem to demonstrate a lack of understanding in depth of the situation.

The bible actually talks about two falls of angels, The first chronologically takes place before man was even a meat creature. The fall of Lucifer and those he convinced to follow him resulted in one fall the events of which aren't very well covered in the bible because it happened in an age before the current one and so the details aren't germane to the purpose and design of the bible which mostly stays on topic. That fall was not voluntary. Any "non topical" stuff in the bible is for those who plumb the bible for it's mysteries to uncover. Stuff like what exactly did Eve do? Why was all the slaughter in the OT necessary?

Then after mankind in the flesh is a thing; a separate fall of angels occurs because a specific order of angels charged with watching over humans on earth begins to lust after the daughters of men. they take it upon themselves to leave their assigned duties and habitation and manifest on earth. This is what Enoch described.

Soon the angels from the first fall except a few "resigned in chains under the rivers etc" will be forcibly ejected from the spiritual realm to plummet to the earth like lightning by the archangel Micheal. so there will be an encore fall (a third fall) in the end stages of this age. The Arch angel Micheal is powerful enough to utterly own and curb stomp Satan like that; yet he thinks he can defeat Jesus and God. Not very wise if you ask me.

originally posted by: Punisher75
a reply to: windword

Is spirit mingling with flesh supernatural?

That is how I would define it, providing we are defining the Supernatural, in a traditional sense.

What is the traditional definition of "supernatural"? Why would the spirit mingling with the flesh be considered supernatural, if we are ALL spiritual beings? Is every birth, in which a soul is married to flesh upon first breath, a supernatural event?

originally posted by: stormbringer1701
The fall of Lucifer and those he convinced to follow him resulted in one fall the events of which aren't very well covered in the bible because it happened in an age before the current one and so the details aren't germane to the purpose and design of the bible which mostly stays on topic. Any "non topical" stuff in the bible is for those who plumb the bible for it's mysteries to uncover.

Especially since Enoch was "taken by God", surely he was in a higher realm, which would not translate that well, if at all. A great challenge for any hermeneutic

originally posted by: Raggedyman
a reply to: windword

I could go into detail
But like rain on a hot tin roof

Believe what you want

It isn't a matter of belief, it's a matter of historical record.

Ancient Censorship. Great topic. I just took Shahada on January first, because Islam honors Jesus better than christianity. I read everything but Im new to the Koran. Book of Enoch is a great explanation for dinosaur extinction, the pyramids(built by giants) and who wouldn't want to read about Enoch? That mention of him is a tease, like Melchizedeck. But I don't think the churches wanted to talk about the Nephilim, the reason for the flood in the first place. They want us to think it was humans who brought Gods wrath, even though it wasnt. Guilt is powerful. Even ancient guilt.

a reply to: Awen24
The book of Enoch is quoted in Jude, whose writer must have cosidered it scripture, as do I. I don't let other men pick my scripture and if I owned a printing press Id make it a part of the bible myself. Men assembled the books of the bible, and for political reasons.

a reply to: Awen24

Saul was a false prophet. You miss the mark as they say. The Holy Spirit will let you see the truth when you are ready. Be patient, but it never hurts to ask. And its just as likely that the real Apostolic gospels such as found at Nag Hammadi are more reliable than ours today. They are older. And Enoch in no way conflicts with christianity, it predicts and endorses it. It was also found among the DSS, B.C. biblical manuscripts of the old testament except Esther, so you just have fun doing the follower thing while the rest of us learn.

Here is a PDF online translation of the Ethiopian book of Enoch, www.forbiddengate.com...
It is interesting but very hard to comprehend at time's.

Enoch was upset because unlike himself (dark hair and eye's) noah was light haired (blond or white haired) and blue eye's with a red birth mark, he was upset because Noah looked like the angels of God whom had come down unto the daughters of man but God told him it was ok and Noah was his son.

Of course it is just as well this was not included in the bible as for instance many would have used to justify rabid racism and even slavery (which the twisted passages in the bible to anyway).


Remind's me of the storys of another book, non biblical called the Oora Lindus which was supposedly the tale and history of the Frisian people, the Frisian are a blonde and blue haired northern European tribe, now that book allegedly claimed there homeland had been an island lost in the north atlantic (Greenland or Iceland?) were they had been ruled by a matriarchal council and lived peaceful lives before losing there homeland to a catastrophe (atlantis like), now if that book was a real text or not the Nazi's apparently seized the few copy's (or created them) for propaganda purposes but whatever the case the Oora Lindus vanished after the war, as it had apparently only appeared before it?.

The book of Enoch on the other hand is a rare and genuine text, fragments of it have also been found at sites in the holy land and this translation above was from a copy recovered from the Ethiopian Orthodox Church whom hold it as a sacred text and view it as an old testament work.

Now remember the Ethiopian orthodox priesthood were originally Jewish by faith before the Ethiopian Jew's converted to Christianity independently of the Western church in the early period following the resurrection of Christ.

Did I read someone bring up Lucifer? have they not discovered its a myth of false interpretation and that that was cleared up hundreds of years ago. Wow people just believe anything. The Adversary or Ha-Satan is a being who works for God. There is no fallen angel in Judaism. You have the watchers, but they were swiftly dealt with. Demons, the souls of the dead Nephilim, are not were never angels to fall. Christianity took liberty with the Jewish religion and gave Satan a new image, and now it's a name. The Adversary is the correct translation.

a reply to: LABTECH767you can read 1 and 2 enoch at sacred texts.com

a reply to: cooperton

Lucifer is a myth based on a misunderstanding, and Isaiah 14:12 has nothing to do with Ha Satan. Damn that was cleared uphhundreds of years ago, where have you been?

a reply to: LABTECH767
Minus the racist element.

a reply to: Gnosisisfaith

I do not know if that Racist element if it was even meant as such was present in the original text or not and of course though it is revered by the Ethiopian Orthodoxy even if it was a genuine set of passages then it paint's the blond, blue eye's angels as bad guys for disobeying god, humanity was the new race of his children and so that could actually be interpreted if we put that race hat on in either direction to elevate either group over the other in the sight of God according to the interpretation of the reader.

I am personally no fan of racism and see people as people though I am unashamedly culturist, that said I was painfully aware of the race element and how it can be interpreted and so made mention of the other and probably not real text which was only mentioned in a few conspiracy book's I read years ago to make a point about that racist abuse of story's.


I can't remember though but given your interest in Gnosis (judging by your avatar name) may can you recall weather it was Nag Hamadi, Qumran or another location were they found fragment's of the Book of Enoch that matched the Ethiopian text and validated it as probably a genuine script, though incomplete the were able to match them to section's of the Ethiopian text, that said I do not think the Ethiopian church was quite as isolated as we may think today, especially before the Islamic arrival on the scene they probably had contact with both the Coptic Church and other regional church's including those in Arabia which Islam wiped out.

As for the oora lindus though it was only mentioned as it is a mythical text that was probably nothing but Nazi Propeganda while the Book of Enoch was thought by many scholars to be either lost or else Mythical depending upon there religious stand point.


It is worth noting though that if the fragments of the Enoch text were found at Nag Hamadi in Egypt then it may actually indicate a late period for the book and even perhaps a Gnostic origin as well as a potential route by which it may have made it's way to Ethiopia via the Nile eventually reaching lake Tana and the ancient Ethiopian monastery there, if this is the case it could have been a late work as I say which was written after the time Christ like many Gnostic text's were, the schism in the Church which saw the Gnostic sect's persecuted and mostly wiped out also drove them underground and followers of this particular branch'(s) of Christianity often hid there precious text's in cave's, buried in Jar's and even fled to other nation's such as Ethiopia with there sacred scriptures which of course differed drastically from the main church interpretation's as the path of Gnosis believes in hidden wisdom and that the bible was allegorical rather than exact with hidden knowledge only the initiated could comprehend.