Peshitta Forum

Full Version: Why didnt the book of Enoch make the Biblical cut?
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
I asked this question before I did any research of my own, but last I remember, it was strictly the date of the book that proved it to be false? Anywhoo, Im gonna look into it now.
Hi, yes, I have read the book of Enoch and found that it was very edifying. I have given some of my books away and one of them was the book of Enoch, so I will have to purchase another one. I know of a precious brother in the lord, who was told by the lord, to go and buy the book of enoch and to read it, may the Lord Jesus bless you, sean
rungold315 Wrote:I asked this question before I did any research of my own, but last I remember, it was strictly the date of the book that proved it to be false? Anywhoo, Im gonna look into it now.

Well I know they struggeld with revelation, but maybe Enoch was just a bit too much <!-- s:biggrin: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/biggrin.gif" alt=":biggrin:" title="Big Grin" /><!-- s:biggrin: -->
Shlama:
The book of Enoch is not included in the Jewish canon, which closed with Malachi, Zechariah and Haggai at the time of Ezra the scribe. The book of Enoch was part of the corpus of Jewish literature, which includes the Dead Sea Scrolls. Jewish literature written after Ezra the Scribe and later through the Hasmonian Dynastic period was the literary backdrop pointing to the Messianic era.
The Ethiopic Church is credited with the preservation of the book of Enoch in Ge'ez. In my opinion the Ethiopian Church, with its special relationship with ancient Judaism felt compelled to preserve some of the Jewish messianic and apocalyptic literature and with it the "Jewish mindset". The Jewish Bible is unchanged in the Assyrian Church, the Byzantine Church (later western churches) and the Ethiopian church. However, these Christian churches deal differently with "inter-testamental literature". The western Catholic church has preserved the Apocrypha, including Tobit, while the Protestant churches have dropped these books. The Western Five (II Peter, II John, III John, Jude and the book of Revelation) have been preserved in western Christianity while the Assyrian Church of the East has received only the Jewish Bible and the 22 book Aramaic Peshitta. Interestingly, Enoch 1:9 is quoted in the epistle of Jude.
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.heaven.net.nz/writings/thebookofenoch.htm">http://www.heaven.net.nz/writings/thebookofenoch.htm</a><!-- m -->
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://reluctant-messenger.com/enoch.htm">http://reluctant-messenger.com/enoch.htm</a><!-- m -->

Shlama,
Stephen
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.dukhrana.com">http://www.dukhrana.com</a><!-- m -->
Steven, so it CAN very well be true scripture? If Enoch was dead long before the book was created, then yes, I'd believe it to be false. But then again, different canons differ according to different churches as you say, so I'd feel like a very biased American proclaiming our Bible to be more complete or "correct" than anyone else's.
...

As with many or all of the Scrolls that came to be canonized into what we now call the Bible, there is zero proof who wrote the Book of Enoch or when, so to say that it was written long after Enoch was dead, has no merit, and to say that Enoch could not have been the writer is also without merit and can't be proven with any degree of certainty.

If Enoch did indeed write it, it could have very easily been passed down to Noah, then on down the line from there. This can be proven just as certainly as any other scenario...and plus, no one knows if the present form of the writing is the original form.

...