Book of Enoch

[psalms 91]

Do these verses agree?

Genesis 6:1
And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them,

2 That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose.

3 And 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.

4 There 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.


Enoch 7:1. It happened after the sons of men had multiplied in those days, that daughters were born to them, elegant and beautiful.

2. And when the angels, the sons of heaven, beheld them, they became enamoured of them, saying to each other, Come, let us select for ourselves wives from the progeny of men, and let us beget children.

10. Then they took wives, each choosing for himself; whom they began to approach, and with whom they cohabited; teaching them sorcery, incantations, and the dividing of roots and trees.

11. And the women conceiving brought forth giants,

Yup they sure do

 

[Alithis]

Do these verses agree?

Genesis 6:1
And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them,

2 That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose.

3 And 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.

4 There 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.


Enoch 7:1. It happened after the sons of men had multiplied in those days, that daughters were born to them, elegant and beautiful.

2. And when the angels, the sons of heaven, beheld them, they became enamoured of them, saying to each other, Come, let us select for ourselves wives from the progeny of men, and let us beget children.

10. Then they took wives, each choosing for himself; whom they began to approach, and with whom they cohabited; teaching them sorcery, incantations, and the dividing of roots and trees.

11. And the women conceiving brought forth giants,

again.. -i agree with the part of the book of enoch which agree with the sciptures ..

they are not opposed to the scriptures .
..but those few verses do not validate the entire book..
but again.. i dont wish you to be unnecessarily defensive ,im not saying it is not a valid book.. im saying we simply do not know if the versions we have are a correct account of if they have been tampered with . so "we dont build doctrine based on them" its ok to questions such things

the book of enoch had the offspring of the fallen angels at 400 feet tall and stands on two legs not Four ... that's taller then a redwood tree
is that true ?

for comparison -here is a link to a picture of the thigh bone of the largest dinosaur ever discovered

https://www.theguardian.com/science/2016/jan/17/dinosaur-titanosaur-largest-animal-ever-walk-earth-argentina#img-2

that beast is estimated to be 120 feet long .. (with thighs the size of cedar tree trunks it could be a leviathan-whose to say ..
but your talking an offspring that grows to 400 feet tall ?

so we have
a.either a mythical beast
b- a beast of gargantuan proportions (and there were supposed to be many ) with bones that would be so Huge they could not be without evidence left .and im not saying it is not possible )

OR c- simply an incorrect copy of the original text ,ie error .

imo- its the last option .All options are conjecture .

the point remains ,there is not enough to validate everything in the versions of the book we have available .
so dont go building a doctrine on it .

 

[Josiah]

For various reasons, the Book of Enoch was in the canon but later cast out.


.

Coptic Orthodox Church still has it in their canon.

Okay. How does that document that CHRISTIANS all had it in THEIR Bible - but at some point, officially REMOVED it?

So far, there's been nothing to show the premise of the OP is true...

Now.... IF the Coptic Orthodox Church (ONE small denomination) HAD it - and still HAS it - then it was never in the Christian Bible (all Christians, all denominations) and never taken out of the one it was in.




.

 

[Brighten04]

Here goes the circular argument. <sigh>

 

[Brighten04]

again.. -i agree with the part of the book of enoch which agree with the sciptures ..

they are not opposed to the scriptures .
..but those few verses do not validate the entire book..
but again.. i dont wish you to be unnecessarily defensive ,im not saying it is not a valid book.. im saying we simply do not know if the versions we have are a correct account of if they have been tampered with . so "we dont build doctrine based on them" its ok to questions such things

the book of enoch had the offspring of the fallen angels at 400 feet tall and stands on two legs not Four ... that's taller then a redwood tree
is that true ?

for comparison -here is a link to a picture of the thigh bone of the largest dinosaur ever discovered

https://www.theguardian.com/science/2016/jan/17/dinosaur-titanosaur-largest-animal-ever-walk-earth-argentina#img-2

that beast is estimated to be 120 feet long .. (with thighs the size of cedar tree trunks it could be a leviathan-whose to say ..
but your talking an offspring that grows to 400 feet tall ?

so we have
a.either a mythical beast
b- a beast of gargantuan proportions (and there were supposed to be many ) with bones that would be so Huge they could not be without evidence left .and im not saying it is not possible )

OR c- simply an incorrect copy of the original text ,ie error .

imo- its the last option .All options are conjecture .

the point remains ,there is not enough to validate everything in the versions of the book we have available .
so dont go building a doctrine on it .

We are NOT building doctrine here. This is a discussion forum. You are going all around the corner to keep form saying yes you agree that the verses I asked you about agree with each other. All of thos words were not necessary. What is with you all not being able to answer yes or no, or I don't know?

 

[Alithis]

We are NOT building doctrine here. This is a discussion forum. You are going all around the corner to keep form saying yes you agree that the verses I asked you about agree with each other. All of thos words were not necessary. What is with you all not being able to answer yes or no, or I don't know?

umm i just said .. I agree with the verses in Enoch that agree with the scriptures ..I assumed you would taker that for what it is .. those verses agree with scriptures ..so i agree with them

all i have done .. as a part of the discussion about the book ,is caution people about putting "too much stock" in it ..
accept the caution and move on .

 

[Brighten04]

umm i just said .. I agree with the verses in Enoch that agree with the scriptures ..I assumed you would taker that for what it is .. those verses agree with scriptures ..so i agree with them

all i have done .. as a part of the discussion about the book ,is caution people about putting "too much stock" in it ..
accept the caution and move on .

OK, caution so noted. Thank you. Now back to the discussion.

Now Lord Jesus referred to the days of Noah in Matt. 24. Obviously, since we have two witnesses to those times, more was happening than eating, drinking marrying and giving in marriage. But we do not discuss that today. Should we not be on the look out for similar types of things today?

 

[psalms 91]

OK, caution so noted. Thank you. Now back to the discussion.

Niot hard to beloeive that we are exactly as in the days of Noah today

 

[Brighten04]

OK, caution so noted. Thank you. Now back to the discussion.

Niot hard to beloeive that we are exactly as in the days of Noah today

Especially with the "breakthroughs/discoveries" in the science and technology fields. There were giants in the land in those days. Today we see men over 7 ft. tall. Look at the NBA for examples. When I was a teenager, I had a boyfriend who is not considered very tall by NBA standards for he was only 6 ft 6 in. tall. But walking next to him was like walking next to a tree.

 

[popsthebuilder]

Alithis,

You mentioned contradictions between Canon and the book of Enoch.

Could you list them with references, or without? I haven't found contradictions so much as different ways that the same things are said.

Just curious.

Thanks,

Peace brother.

Faith in selfless Unity for Good.

 

[Josiah]

I'm STILL waiting for the opening poster to substantiate the premise of the thread: that a Book of Enoch was ONCE in the canon of all Christians - but at some point, was specifically REMOVED from Christian canons. If the premise is wrong, then there's nothing to discuss. But so far, the opening poster has been unwilling to substantiate the premise.

 

[Alithis]

OK, caution so noted. Thank you. Now back to the discussion.

Niot hard to beloeive that we are exactly as in the days of Noah today

cant disagree there

 

[Brighten04]

There are really bizarre things happening in the world today of men corrupting God's way. I read a story where the wife got the husband pregnant! WHAT??? I am still confused by that.

 

[psalms 91]

Yeah right is wrong and wrong is right it seems any more and you even get arguments on things that are clear in the bible from those who profess, go figure.

 

[visionary]

I'm STILL waiting for the opening poster to substantiate the premise of the thread: that a Book of Enoch was ONCE in the canon of all Christians - but at some point, was specifically REMOVED from Christian canons. If the premise is wrong, then there's nothing to discuss. But so far, the opening poster has been unwilling to substantiate the premise.

For all Christians... or just the Jews who wrote the NT would quote it or make references reflecting it as the source? Your request will be difficult as that is a scholarly argument for or against that has been going on for centuries.

"Prior to the eighteenth century, scholars had believed the Book of Enoch to be irretrievably lost: composed long before the birth of Christ, and considered to be one of the most important pieces of Jewish mystical literature, it was only known from fragments and from references to it in other texts. James Bruce changed all this by procuring several copies of the missing work during his stay in Ethiopia. These were the first complete editions of the Book of Enoch ever to be seen in Europe."
- Graham Hancock, The Sign and the Seal

 

[visionary]

"The original Aramaic version was lost until the Dead Sea fragments were discovered."
"The original language of most of this work was, in all likelihood, Aramaic (an early Semitic language). Although the original version was lost in antiquity, portions of a Greek translation were discovered in Egypt and quotations were known from the Church Fathers. The discovery of the texts from Qumran Cave 4 has finally provided parts of the Aramaic original. ...Humankind is called on to observe how unchanging nature follows God's will."
- Milik, Jazef. T., ed. The Books of Enoch: Aramaic Fragments of Qumran Cave 4

 

[visionary]

"The Aramaic Book of Enoch...very considerably influenced the idiom of the New Testament and patristic literature, more so in fact than any other writing of the Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha."
- Norman Golb, Who Wrote the Dead Sea Scrolls?, (1995) p. 366

 

[visionary]

"Chaps. 1-36 The Book of the Watchers may date from the third century BCE. Parts of its text have been identified on several copies from Qumran cave 4; the earliest fragmentary manuscript (4QEnocha) dates, according to the editor J.T. Milk, to between 200 and 150 BCE. All Qumran copies are in the Aramaic language."
- James C. Vanderkam

 

[visionary]

"Chaps. 72-82 The Astronomical Book, like the Book of Watchers, may date from the third century BCE; the oldest copy of it seems to have been made not long after 200 BCE. Sizable portions of the text are preserved on four copies, written in Aramaic, from Qumran cave 4. The Aramaic original appears to have been much different and much longer than the Ethiopic text, adding far more astronomical details."
- James C. Vanderkam

 

[visionary]

"The Book of Enoch, like so many canonical books of Christians and Jews, is an allegorical and metaphorical document about the calendrical battles fought for so many years between those who insisted that holy days be calculated according to the ancient astronomy and those who insisted that holy days be calculated according to the improved mathematical understandings of solar-lunar-astral periodicities. The 'Watchers,' 'Archers,' or 'Tetramorphs,' whom Ezekiel and the early Christian astronomers expressed as Lion, Ox, Man, and Eagle, are the four 'Guardian Stars' (Regulus, Aldebaran, Fomalhaut, and Antares) which fixed the two solstices and the two equinoxes to the wheel of time, the Zodiac or Ecliptic, back when archaic astronomy first was learning (the hard way) about precession of the equinoxes."
- Lee Perry, Jesus Silenced (private correspondence)