[CS-FSLUG] The Book of Enoch - Seven's question.

[Fred A. Miller]

I didn't know all of the history associated with The Book of Enoch, and
wanted an accurate thorough answer regarding it, so asked my brother
about it. Here's his answer.

Fred

The Book of Enoch was very popular in the first couple centuries of the
Church, but its popularity then declined, so it was excluded from the
Canon of Scripture when it was adopted by the Fathers at the Ecumenical
Councils held at the end of the fourth and beginning of the fifth
centuries. At this point, only the Ethiopians consider the Book of Enoch
to be canonical. I’m going to borrow from Dr John Oakes to explain why.

First of all, the Jews, who chose the books of the Old Testament by
consensus, did not include Enoch. They did not leave behind a record of
how they chose the books we have in our canonical Old Testament. A good
guess is that Enoch was written well beyond the date of the last book
which ended up in the Old Testament. Scholars have placed the book in
the second century BC–about three hundred years after the canonical Old
Testament was completed. The Jews were not adding to their Canon of
Scripture at that time. It was considered by many to be closed (although
some would have argued this point). Another possible reason Enoch is not
in the Old Testament is that it is not inspired by God. Remember that,
although God used human beings to write and to collect the books of the
Bible, ultimately, God had a hand in both the writing of the books, and
presumably in the process by which they were collected. II Peter
1:19-21 talks about the inspiration of the Old Testament, as does II
Timothy 3:16. But the Book of Enoch is pseudepigriphal. This is a fancy
word which means that the book was written as if it were from Enoch,
when anyone reading the book knows that Enoch had nothing to do with
this book. It is hard to imagine a book which is falsely attributed to
an author ending up in the Bible and this was, in fact, one of the
criteria applied by the Fathers for admission into the Canon of Scripture.

So, you’re probably wondering why Jude quoted from (or, more precisely,
allude to) the Book of Enoch? Is Jude imputing inspiration to Enoch? It
is not at all unusual for preachers to quote from non-inspired books in
sermons in order to make a point. We do not always carefully remind the
reader that the quote is from a non-inspired book, but rely on the
knowledge of our hearers to make the distinction at times. It is
possible that the things referred to in Enoch are true, while the book
itself is not inspired. It is also possible (though not likely in my
opinion, for what it is worth) that the Book of Enoch is in fact
inspired, yet never made it into the Hebrew Canon of Scripture. It is
hard to say. What we do know is that Jude referenced a story in Enoch as
if it were a true story. Whether he does so simply to make a point or to
actually imply that this is a factual event is a bit hard to say.

One last comment about Enoch and apocryphal books in general. The Jews
did not hold the identical view to most of us on the idea of
inspiration. They saw inspiration (to use a word they would not have in
their vocabulary, as far as I know) on different levels. The Pentateuch
(the first five books) was held in highest regard. The former and latter
prophets were considered inspired, ie, from God, but of lesser weight,
while the writings were perhaps even a step down from there. The Jews
may have considered such books as I Macabees, Judith, Ecclesiasticus and
perhaps I Enoch as useful–carrying some weight from God as well. It is
possible that they saw things more on a continuum, while we, with our
Western mindset, tend to see things more as ones and zeros: totally
inspired, end of story, or definitely not considered inspired
at all. Which is the correct perspective, I am not absolutely sure, but
it is worth bearing in mind that we think differently on this than the
Jews in the time of Jesus.

I pray this answers your question.

-- 
"Where's The Birth Certificate?"