Create Your Account and begin asking questions today, for free!
Want to ask a question on this web site? Create Your Account today to begin asking questions.
Is it possible that the information in the book of Enoch is accurate and is acceptable for us to believe in the Lord's sight?
Share This Page
Comments
That is very dangerous
That is very dangerous ground, my friend. Yes, some of it may make sense. But there are a few verses that cause major problems:
Enoch 40:9- "...seen and whose words I have heard and written down?’ And he said to me: ‘This first is Michael, the merciful and long-suffering: and the second, who is set over all the diseases and all the wounds of the children of men, is Raphael: and the third, who is set over all the powers, is Gabriel: and the fourth, who is set over the repentance unto hope of those who inherit eternal life, is named Phanuel."
Now look at John 14:6 and John 17:3. Jesus is the only way to salvation. And yet "Enoch" (the writer of Enoch is uncertain) mentions an "angel" who is for that purpose. Why on earth did Jesus have to die then? The whole New Testament was just undermined!
Jesus' wounds healed us (Isaiah 53:5-6). The flogging and nails were done by human hands- not an angel (Raphael missed an appointment).
Enoch 48:1-3 "1 And in that place I saw the fountain of righteousness Which was inexhaustible: And around it were many fountains of wisdom: And all the thirsty drank of them, And were filled with wisdom, And their dwellings were with the righteous and holy and elect. 2 And at that hour that Son of Man was named In the presence of the Lord of Spirits, And his name before the Head of Days. 3 Yea, before the sun and the signs were created, Before the stars of the heaven were made, His name was named before the Lord of Spirits."
Revelation 1:8. John 1:1-5; 10-14. Jesus is eternal. But he was named? Things with a new life are named. God, who has no beginning and no end, was not named "God" one day. Why would Jesus, who is also eternal, suddenly be named? Head of Days is not found in the Bible. And besides, if the Word was with God, and was God, how can He be in God's presence to be named? "God was in God's presence...to name himself" It doesn't make sense. John and Enoch don't mesh.
Enoch 69:8-9a- "And the fourth was named Penemue: he taught the 9 children of men the bitter and the sweet, and he taught them all the secrets of their wisdom...
So much for Eve biting that fruit, eh? "Penemue" was the one who taught us "the bitter and the sweet...all the secrets of their wisdom."
Look up Genesis 2:16-17 and Genesis 3:4-11. Wisdom and the knowledge of good and evil came about when Eve and Adam ate the forbidden fruit. There was no teacher there. Only a serpent, fruit and a bite. I spy a contradiction...
Enoch 69:9b-10 "And he instructed mankind in writing with ink and paper, and thereby many sinned from eternity to 10 eternity and until this day. For men were not created for such a purpose, to give confirmation 11 to their good faith with pen and ink..
Writing is a sin? Then pray tell, why is the Bible not in verbal format? Why would the holy Word of God be written down? It is interesting how Jesus (in John 8:6) would write and still be blameless.
Enoch 69:11-12 "11 to their good faith with pen and ink. For men were created exactly like the angels, to the intent that they should continue pure and righteous, and death, which destroys everything, could not have taken hold of them, but through this their knowledge they are perishing, and through this power
12 it is consuming me.
Mankind was created like angels? According to Genesis 1: 25-28, man was created in God's image. God and angels are more then a bit different. One more point: Angels do not have free will, but we, man, do. Besides, the intent of our creation was for His pleasure (Colossians 1:16). Eternal life and pureness are part of it, but not the reason.
If the book was supposed to be in the Bible, God would have seen to it that the manuscript made it in. If the book of Enoch is the inspired word of God, it would not contain errors.
Besides, Enoch is non-canonical; unless you happen to go the Ethiopian Orthodox Church.
Galatians 1:7-9. The end.
Enoch 40 details the division
Enoch 40 details the division of responsibilities among the archangels. It says nothing about there being another way of salvation. In the passage the term "set over" simply means "ministers to". To further the problem, the syntax of the sentence in our English translation is a bit stilted as well. To paraphrase the sentence it might read something like, "who ministers to those who are appointed to repentance leading to inherit eternal life".
You should have taken a queue from the phrase in the sentence that reads "who inherit eternal life". To inherit eternal life means it is something that is not the work of man. There is now and there has always been one way of salvation, it is inherited by reason of the grace of God.
In your view does Hebrews 1:14, tell us there is another path to salvation too? It is very similar in tone to the verse in Enoch with which you have a problem. In speaking of the angels it says, "are they not all ministering spirits sent out to serve for the sake of those who are to inherit salvation?"
Thank you so much for taking
Thank you so much for taking the time to answer my question. I really appreciate your insight. This is something that I have not been able to take my mind off of day and night. I have been searching for an answer as to whether or not to believe what is in this book. I do have a disagreement with one thing that you pointed out though. How could Satan and the fallen angels disobey God if they did not have free will? I have read the book of Enoch and have read hundreds of opinions on the book from both ends of the spectrum. From those who believe that it was hidden purposely by the fallen angels just so we "mankind" could not find secrets as to what they may be attempting to do in the future that will lead up to the coming of the antichrist. I have also read the people who believe that is complete heresy. I personally as of right now based on the information in which I have learned about this subject up until this point in time, believe that there is some truth to the book. But I also believe that it has several inconsistences as you pointed out which obviously means it cannot be fully inspired word of God. But what if the original version of the book of Enoch has been tampered with somewhere along the line? Perhaps if someone were to change some of the meanings in the book they may just make Christians think that the entire story is false? I am just trying to keep my mind open so I know how best to defend myself in this spiritual battle that we are all a part of. Lets face it we have Dinosaur bones, Nephilim bones, and video of UFO's. This one book could explain all three of these topics that non-beleivers use against the Bible each and every day. This book could help support the Bible if you just take it for the story that it is trying to get across. I know that there are tons of inconsistencies with the Bible but the Devil also knows that we "Christians" will not accept a book that is inconsistent with the Bible as inspired word of God, so perhaps he changed bits and pieces of the book to create inconsistencies for that very reason. Can I please get some of your thoughts on these matters? Keep in mind I am completely undecided as to whether or not I believe that anything in the book of Enoch is true up until this point in time. Thanks so much and God Bless!!!
If Enoch was tampered with
If Enoch was tampered with long ago, we can not be certain of any portion within it. Now, if Enoch is one of the missing books of Scripture, then it might injure more then help. The book is surrounded by strange circumstances and controversy. Since you have read so much about it, you will know that it does carry a shining not reputation.
If Enoch is the inspired word of God, it can not tampered with either by Satan or man. If it was, the rest of the Bible would come into question. One of the keys of the church would break. If the perfection of the Bible is questioned, people can easily come up with their own occultish philosophies which would split and cripple the church. The fall of the church was prove Jesus statement that the church shall prevail false. And thus, a chain reaction (of unhelpful results) of events would follow.
If Enoch is the inspired word of God, it would be flawless. And yet, as presented above, it has serious doctrinal issues. God is a perfect being incapable of authoring an imperfect document; even through human authors. They can be now "half divinely inspired" manuscripts. If so, then the accusations of the Bible being fairy tales would be partial true. You might as well write your attachment to the Bible, is such "half-breed" documents (that isn't a literal suggestion). Truthfulness and righteousness are undeniable characteristics of God. Enoch possesses inconsistances. If it is the inspired word of God, then the book would make God a lier due to those very inconsistances (to be blatant: errors).
My theory on dinosaurs: Like any other creature, God created dinosaurs within the six, twenty-four hour days. Then of course came the fall and conditions went from perfect to wounded. But pre-flood conditions were still tropical to a great extent. Noah built his ark and took dinosaurs aboard- as young individuals or even eggs. The flood was a massive event and sudden death- which explains fossil graveyards and the many incomplete skeletal remains. The flood caused drastic climate changes and thus, when the arc landed, it was no longer a dinosaur's favorite habitat. The size of and special requirements loaned to dinosaur extinction. On top of it, people slue and hunted the surviving dinosaurs- maybe even bringing them to extinction (hence, the worldwide legends of dragons and dragon slaying). Job, the oldest book in the Bible, has references to large, unknown creatures. Descriptions of which fit certian dinosaur types.
The Nephilim fit right in. There were giant Cheetahs, giant dinosaurs, king size insects and other creatures, so why not giant humans? The gene pool was not as narrow, conditions not as aged as of present. The angelic heritage is what I question. Why does the Bible never directly mention interbreeding? Lucifer and associates are never recorded as doing such (and that is the only recorded rebellion of angels in heaven). And why has it not happened more then once in history?
UFOs on videos are one thing. Solid, physical evidence is another. SETI has nothing impressive to report, and earth is the only life supporting planet we know off. UFO's hoaxes are plentiful and will most likely continue. The Bible states that Satan can masquerade as an angel of light, so I imagine UFO's are not much or a challenge.
God omnipotent and omnipresent. He is the Alpha and Omega. If Enoch did have dire information that is essential to the well being of the Christian (such pre-Antichrist events), God, with his awesome power, would make sure we received it. According to 1 John 4, the spirit of the Antichrist is already in the world. The victory is already won (Col 2:15) and since it is already secure, a fallen angel conspiracy which involves kidnapping part of the Bible could not and would not succeeded for thousands of years. God guides every process the Scripture takes. There is no secret information. The books He wants us to know, the information He wishes us to realize are in there.
"Enoch" will not disturb my God given peace. :)
Once again I appreciate your
Once again I appreciate your divinely inpired comment. It seems that you have alot of these so called "problems" figured out. I have a couple of other questions that I am looking for answers to. If the Nephilim died out immediately after the flood assuming they were on the ark with Noah then what and who are the descendants of Anak that are spoken of in the Bible when the Isrealites sent out the spies to the view the promised land? Also, where in the Bible is the story of Satan and 1/3 of the angels falling out of the sky? I ask these questions to gain understanding, not for the sake of disagreement. Thank you so much for your previous comments and I will look forward to continuing this conversation in the future. God bless!
Feel free to ask questions. I
Feel free to ask questions. I don't mind it at all. :)
According to Genesis 6:17-19 Noah and his relatives (along with animals) were the only ones on the Arc. So unless, Noah has Nephilim blood, no Nepilims survived.
All the diversity we see in the human race today came from Noah's family. Their genes were diverse and potentially millions of possibilities. Size is one of those possibilities. Since there were giants before the flood, there was genetic material for those giants. The races may have gone extinct, but that does not the genes for great size disappeared with them. As more generations were born and genes became more isolated along the lines, a tall family or even race could have come into existence consistently (along with the other races we see today). Such a race would be well known and feared (the height!) which would be why Anak was familiar to Israel. Even today, the exceptional tall man turns up (10 Tallest Men in the World). They don't likely have an angelic heritage.
Isaiah 14:12-15 describes Lucifer's actions of attempting to conquer God and heaven: and his failure. Revelation 12:7-9 speaks of a battle in heaven- with God's forces upholding victory.
Do you have any answers for
Do you have any answers for the question about Satan and 1/3 of the Angels falling? Where is that in the Bible? Or does the whole story come straight out of the book of Enoch?
As I pointed out in the last
As I pointed out in the last paragraph of my previous answer, Isaiah 14:12-15 describes Satan's (called the mourning star) desire to conquer and rule heaven, and his falling defeat.
Revelation 12:4, 7-9 describes the battle fought between Satan's forces and those of God. Satan, the dragon, was defeated and cast down along with his allied angels. 12:4 talks about the third.
In Luke 10:18, Jesus states he saw Satan fall from the sky.
Enoch, thank the Lord is not the only book to mention this event.
Interesting, I haven't quite
Interesting, I haven't quite made it to the book of Isaiah yet. I read all of the New Testament and then I started in Genesis and I am currently in Psalms. It is very neat how it all fits together so perfectly! I have dismissed the possibility of the book of Enoch being complete fact. I do think there is something behind the book's existence that seems very odd to me though. Thank you for all of your replys!
Glad to help. :)
Glad to help. :)