Shayla: What is the book of Enoch?

The scriptures are inspired by God, but Enoch is not included (except for certain quotes).  Does that mean those quotes are inspired?  Or the use of them is inspired?  But not the entire book?

 

Meforshim:

The man named Enoch is mentioned in Genesis 5:21-24, Hebrews 11:5, and Jude 1:14. You’ll find another Enoch at Genesis 4:17-18, but it’s a different one. That Enoch is the son of Cain after whom Cain named a city. The Enoch we’re interested in is Enoch ben Jared. His line can be found in Genesis 5 and generally goes like this: Enoch, son of Jared, son of Mahalel, son of Kenan, son of Enosh, son of Seth, son of Adam, son of God.

From the passages above, we can derive the following facts about Enoch.

  1. He was the son of a godly line of men.
  2. He lived for a total of 365 years
  3. He did not die in the normal fashion but instead was “taken”.
  4. He was the father of Methuselah, the longest living man ever.
  5. He was a righteous man, pleasing to God and having Hashem’s approval.
  6. He was a prophet who was given the ability to see the end of time from very nearly the beginning of human history!

All these things are fascinating in and of themselves and can teach us a lot about our own d’vekut. However, your question is not about the author, but the book.

Copies of the book of Enoch were discovered along with the Dead Sea Scrolls. Those copies were written somewhere between 150 and 180 BC. Obviously, our Enoch (who lived before the Flood) couldn’t have written it.

Books that are written in the name of another person (a common practice in ancient times) are referred to as “pseudepigraphical” works. In this particular case, both Protestants and Catholics agree that the book of Enoch should not belong in the Scriptural canon. Though the Catholic Church allows more books in than the Protestants do, the book of Enoch didn’t even make THEIR cut. For a more thorough discussion on why pseudepigraphical books are not included in the canon of Scripture see:

http://www.pastorpauley.com/sermons/canon.pdf

http://www.pastorpauley.com/blogs/what_jesus_read.pdf

http://pastorpauley.com/topics/apocrypha.htm

Jude also referred to the pseudepigraphical work “The Assumption of Moses” and/or “The Testament of Moses”, but he directly quoted from Enoch. Some will argue that Jude, through the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, simply quoted Enoch directly without recourse to 1 Enoch. While that may be, I don’t think that it’s a necessary argument and I think that it can lead us into a weak position, apologetically speaking. The book of Enoch was well known in Jude’s day and was commonly found in Jewish households. Compare Jude’s quote to what can be found at Enoch 1:9:

"And behold! He cometh with ten thousands of His holy ones To execute judgment upon all, And to destroy all the ungodly: And to convict all flesh Of all the works of their ungodliness which they have ungodly committed, And of all the hard things which ungodly sinners have spoken against Him."

To say that Jude had never seen it or ignored it as he made an almost direct quote from it seems fatuous to me.

I believe that Jude knew of the work and referred to this particular prophecy in part because it was important to his opponents and he was using their literature against them much as Paul quoted Aratus’ Phaenomena 5 in Acts 17:28, Menander in 1 Corinthians 15:33, and Epimenides in Titus 1:12.

In regards to Jude or Paul quoting these extrabiblical works giving them some stamp of approval, I have to pull up short there. First of all, the truth stated in the prophecy is very basic, vague and obvious. Gee, let’s see, has God ever stated that at some point He was going to come back with tons of angels and judge us? You see what I mean? It’s a very general statement that could be backed up by any number of Scriptures, but Jude was quoting his adversaries’ favored author so that he could imply, “Hey! Even your own guys admit to this!”

Besides, just because it’s in the Bible doesn’t necessarily make it so. Before you jump to conclusions, hear me out. I believe that the original text of the Bible is the divinely inspired, inerrant Word of God. I believe that the sacred Scriptures are able to instruct us for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus, that all Scripture is inspired by God, and that the Scriptures are profitable for teaching, for rebuking, for correcting, for training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work.” (2 Timothy 3:15-17)

However, not every individual statement in the Bible is true. For instance, the serpent’s suggestion that the forbidden fruit would turn mankind into gods – was that true? Job’s friends telling him that his troubles were all his fault – was that true? Peter rebuking the Christ and telling Him that “this mustn’t be” – was he correct? How about the Pharisees describing the Master as illegitimate or demon possessed, or Jesus’ family declaring Him to be insane? Or how about Quoheleth’s idea that we should just eat, drink and be merry? Was that sound doctrine or was it written to describe what human philosophy leads us to – vanity and uselessness?

This is a fundamental problem in much of the theology we find in today’s Christianity. This is why we have 20,000 flavors of Christianity available. Someone finds some random statement in the Bible (say – baptism for the dead) and builds an entire religion out of it (like the Mormons did).

The Scriptures must be used with discernment. Jesus claimed to be “the door.” Does this mean He is literally composed of wood? Similarly, He claimed the wine was His “blood” and certain denominations have jumped to the conclusion that they can literally eat and drink God!

Even Peter complained that some of Paul’s teaching was “hard to understand” and that “the untaught and unstable twist them to their own destruction, as they also do with the rest of the Scriptures.” (2 Peter 3:16)

We must approach the Scriptures humbly recognizing our ignorance and calling on the Holy One to instruct us. The Scriptures must be approached carefully, neither adding to His words, lest He rebuke us, nor detracting, lest we fall short of saving grace.

While the truth of God’s coming judgment is obvious, just because the book of Enoch appears once in the Scriptures doesn’t mean we should jump to the conclusion that the whole thing should have been included.

So in conclusion:

1.      There was a real prophet named Enoch but he didn’t write the book named after him.

2.      Jude likely knew the book and was quoting from it, but was likely using his adversaries’ favorite works against them.

3.      Jude or Paul quoting from extrabiblical works doesn’t necessarily put a stamp of approval upon them.

4.      In fact, not every statement in the Bible is necessarily true because the Bible also records the devil’s lies, so we need to exercise judgment by using the entire context and not picking and choosing our favored verses.