Book of Enoch & Book of Jashar

[M30USA]

The Book of Enoch and the Book of Jashar (along with many others) are not in the standard canon used in America. For the first decade of being a Christian I didn't put any weight in these books at all. I believed the standard line of reasoning that most apologeticists used which goes something like this: "God supernaturally preserved the books he wanted and had them formed into the canon that we have today."

 

A quick look at a few simple facts shows the problem with this line of reasoning:

 

Firstly, there are cultures in the world today (and ancient times) which include the Book of Enoch in their canon--such as the Ethiopian Orthodox Jews, who, by the way, are the most genetically pure Jews on the planet and are believed to be the direct descendents of King Solomon. Also the Catholic Church includes the Book of Enoch in its canon.

 

Secondly, the canonical Bible makes blatant reference to some of these books. For example, Jude 1:14 takes a direct quote from the Book of Enoch. Also the Book of Jashar is quoted by name (verbatim) in the following verses:

 

a) "And the sun stood still, and the moon stopped, until the nation took vengeance on their enemies. Is this not written in the Book of Jashar? The sun stopped in the midst of heaven and did not hurry to set for about a whole day." (Joshua 10:13)

 

b) "Then David chanted with this lament over Saul and Jonathan his son, and he told them to teach the sons of Judah the song of the bow; behold, it is written in the Book of Jashar." (2 Samuel 1:17-18)

 

Thirdly, the Book of Enoch was discovered with Dead Sea Scrolls. This proves that the Book of Enoch was not forged for at least the last 2000 years since most scholars believe the Dead Sea Scrolls were penned around 250 BC. There are only two options here: either it was forged PRIOR to 250 BC or it's truly legitimate, inspired Scripture.

 

In summary, I believe this subject requires a lot of investigation and you CANNOT or SHOULD NOT make a generalized, sweeping conclusion prematurely. The most reasonable conclusion is that these books (especially the Book of Enoch and the Book of Jashar) are historical aids and ancillary references with regard to Scripture. At the very least, these books were formerly accepted as authentic by early Jews and even Paul since they were directly quoted in canonized Scripture. Some of the lesser known books, I admit, seem sketchy and of uncertain origin (thus the term "apocryphal").

 

Fortunately, the authenticity of these books (or lack thereof) doesn't hold any bearing on the core doctrinal principles of Scripture such as salvation or identity of Jesus Christ. At least we can all agree on that. It is interesting, however, that the Book of Enoch, unlike many OT books, is rife with references to the Messiah. He is referred to in Enoch as the "Son of Man", "the Annointed One", etc, and it would have made it clear to any Jew at the time exactly who the verses were talking about. Interestingly enough, the sect of Jews who accepted the Book of Enoch (namely the Essenian Jews) were the very ones who also accepted Jesus Christ. It was the mainstream Jews, including the Pharisees and Sadducees, who didn't accept either the Book of Enoch or Jesus Christ as Lord. Coincidence? I believe not.

Edited July 1, 2014 by M30USA

[Glinda.Good]

Ethiopian Orthodox Jews, who, by the way, are the most genetically pure Jews on the planet

 

Can you elaborate on what you mean by "genetically pure Jews"?

 

What about all the impure Jews?

 

Are there more and less genetically pure adherents to your own religious sect, whatever that may be?

[M30USA]

Can you elaborate on what you mean by "genetically pure Jews"?

 

As in, the highest genetic match to original 12 tribes of Israel.

 

It's interesting to look at a picture of Ethiopian Jews. Their skin is very dark. Even darker than most middle eastern people. I find these people to be the most fascinating of any group on earth. They are completely Jewish in every way, yet they believe Jesus Christ is the Messiah. They still practice most ancient Jewish customs. They even claim to have the original arc of the covenant in their main temple which is guarded 24/7 by their army. Do they really have it? I don't know. But they claim to.

 

One thing I'd like to also add. If I had to make a BLIND guess, I would predict that the 144,000 sealed Jews spoken of in Revelation will come from Ethiopia where these people are.

 

What about all the impure Jews?

I used the word "pure" in a biological sense, just like how you might hear someone call themselves a pure-blooded Brit. It has no spiritual or moral connotation whatsoever.

 

Are there more and less genetically pure adherents to your own religious sect, whatever that may be?

I don't understand. Edited July 1, 2014 by M30USA

[Glinda.Good]

 

I don't understand.

 

Judaism is a religion, just like yours. Sure there is a genetic component because of geography, but "Jewish" is not a race. So I find it odd that you are talking about "genetically pure Jews."

[pureinheart]

As in, the highest genetic match to original 12 tribes of Israel.

 

It's interesting to look at a picture of Ethiopian Jews. Their skin is very dark. Even darker than most middle eastern people. I find these people to be the most fascinating of any group on earth. They are completely Jewish in every way, yet they believe Jesus Christ is the Messiah. They still practice most ancient Jewish customs. They even claim to have the original arc of the covenant in their main temple which is guarded 24/7 by their army. Do they really have it? I don't know. But they claim to.

 

One thing I'd like to also add. If I had to make a BLIND guess, I would predict that the 144,000 sealed Jews spoken of in Revelation will come from Ethiopia where these people are.

I used the word "pure" in a biological sense, just like how you might hear someone call themselves a pure-blooded Brit. It has no spiritual or moral connotation whatsoever.

 

I don't understand.

 

I'd say your "guess" is correct, it's the only thing that would make sense since basically the Trib goes back in most ways to O/T times- the Temple, cleansing rituals etc.. Again it makes sense that God would want and has in fact preserved them. Back to Solomon eh? That is beyond interesting, Ill have to do an in-depth study to get the connection...oh wait, didn't Solomon marry an Ethiopian lady? If that's true, that would be the connection and origins...now I need to figure out the Spiritual significance, meaning why Solomon?

 

I think the Ethiopians do have the Ark of the Covenant, it's just a feeling. I watched a documentary around the same time you were discussing this possibility and it lines up IMO.

 

I'm perplexed about something though. After recently reading an article, it stated that the Jews had lost the ashes of the nine Red Heifers used in the cleansing prior to Jesus. I had always assumed the ashes were contained in the Ark of the Covenant. As far as I know, the ashes from the previous nine Red Heifers are essential... the rest they've replicated which isn't a big deal, but those ashes are different I thought.

 

Anyway, this is awesome info...thank you very, very much!

[pureinheart]

M30, if I remember correctly you are a mid-Tribber, so just to let you know, that wasn't the reason for posting this article. I thought you might like the stuff about Enoch...to critique if needed.

 

 

Enoch, Noah, the Church, and Israel - The Omega Letter

[M30USA]

M30, if I remember correctly you are a mid-Tribber, so just to let you know, that wasn't the reason for posting this article. I thought you might like the stuff about Enoch...to critique if needed.

 

 

Enoch, Noah, the Church, and Israel - The Omega Letter

 

I'm actually pre-trib. (Can you believe it? As "harsh" as I am?)

 

I think what you might have been referring to is when I said that pre-trib and mid-trib are the only possibilities. Post-trib is out of the question for anybody who bothers to take 5 minutes of time to research. I just personally believe in pre-trib.

[Thegreatestthing]

I read the book of Enoch because it was written in Church Slavonic it was really fantastical full if giants and multiple heavens etc,really strange probably why they left it out.

[OpenBook]

I read the book of Enoch because it was written in Church Slavonic it was really fantastical full if giants and multiple heavens etc,really strange probably why they left it out.

 

Yeah I could see that, multiple heavens. God is so infinitely creative!

 

"In my Father's house are many mansions." -Jesus (John 14:2)

 

Giants I don't know about.

[M30USA]

I read the book of Enoch because it was written in Church Slavonic it was really fantastical full if giants and multiple heavens etc,really strange probably why they left it out.

 

The manuscripts found in the Dead Sea Scrolls for the Book of Enoch are in Aramaic from before Christ. These are the earliest copies we have. It's most likely they were originally in Hebrew. And I do know translations were made later into Slavonic and Ethiopian before we had the English translation.

Edited July 10, 2014 by M30USA

[Madman81]

M30, if I remember correctly you are a mid-Tribber, so just to let you know, that wasn't the reason for posting this article. I thought you might like the stuff about Enoch...to critique if needed.

 

 

Enoch, Noah, the Church, and Israel - The Omega Letter

A question: what's a "Tribber"?

 

I googled it, but all that came up was a sexual practice between two women. (I'm not kidding.) That's probably not what you're referring to.

 

Thanks.

[GorillaTheater]

A question: what's a "Tribber"?

 

It's from an old Star Trek episode, "The Trouble With Tribbers".

 

It's an interesting subject, M30, how some books make the cut and others don't.

[pureinheart]

I'm actually pre-trib. (Can you believe it? As "harsh" as I am?)

 

I think what you might have been referring to is when I said that pre-trib and mid-trib are the only possibilities. Post-trib is out of the question for anybody who bothers to take 5 minutes of time to research. I just personally believe in pre-trib.

 

I don't think you're harsh at all. Pre-trib is the one that made the most sense to me and because I respect your studies/interpretation of Scripture, it did make make me feel better to hear this because the Bible doesn't spell it out...

[pureinheart]

A question: what's a "Tribber"?

 

I googled it, but all that came up was a sexual practice between two women. (I'm not kidding.) That's probably not what you're referring to.

 

Thanks.

 

This is too funny MM. Tribber = Tribulation period, and the belief of the Rapture prior to the Tribulation dispensation (some believe it could be in the middle of the Tribulation period also).

[M30USA]

It's an interesting subject, M30, how some books make the cut and others don't.

 

I knew something was suspicious with the canon from a pretty young age. When you realize that the Jewish canon was determined by the very people who rejected Jesus (namely the Pharisees and Sadducees), and that we Christians adopted this Old Testament canon FROM these particular Jews, you start thinking a little bit. Our OT was formed by those who rejected and killed Jesus.

 

Interestingly, the Essenian Jews accepted Jesus and they were the ones who did include Enoch in their canon. Their modern day descendants are the Ethiopian Church who have kept Enoch in their canon ever since. They actually have 81 books instead of our 66.

 

The point I'm trying to make is there is a MUCH stronger historical argument for books having been left OUT of the canon than for books being falsely included IN the canon. Books seem to have been gradually dropped over time (since Christ's day) instead of accumulated along the way.

Edited July 10, 2014 by M30USA

[pureinheart]

This is going to sound weird M30, although I have always been uncomfortable with there being 66 books in the Bible. I don't care for the number 6 for many reasons...77 would have been better:D

[M30USA]

I would like to share some of my latest research on the Book of Enoch. I am going to prove beyond any shadow of doubt that, if you claim to accept Scripture as authoritative Word of God, then you have NO CHOICE but to also believe the following:

 

1) The Book of Enoch is authoritative Scripture.

2) The Book of Enoch was written by Enoch HIMSELF. (I understand #2 here might seem very far-fetched, but I can show you that you have NO CHOICE but to believe this.)

 

Follow this line of reasoning...

 

1) Jude, a disciple and half-brother of Jesus, clearly had read the Book of Enoch and, based on the fact that he quoted an entire verse from Enoch in his epistle, we must conclude that Jude considered the Book of Enoch to be holy Scripture. Here are the verses in comparison:

 

"Enoch, the seventh from Adam, prophesied about them: "See, the Lord is coming with thousands upon thousands of his holy ones to judge everyone, and to convict all of them of all the ungodly acts they have committed in their ungodliness, and of all the defiant words ungodly sinners have spoken against him." (Jude 1:14-15)

 

"And behold! He cometh with ten thousands of His holy ones to execute judgement 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." (Enoch 1:9)

 

2) The fact that Jude says in the above verses that Enoch "prophesied" means two things: it elevates the Book of Enoch to the level of prophecy (meaning it's from God) and it also means Enoch, himself, spoke those words. It doesn't say that someone else wrote the book and CLAIMED Enoch said those words (as scholars tell us). It says Enoch HIMSELF prophesied and said those words. This right here is Scriptural proof that the Book of Enoch is NOT "pseudepigraphical" (or written by an known author).

 

3) Since we've shown that the original Book of Enoch is considered to be Scripture by OTHER Scriptures, and since we've also shown that Scripture says Enoch HIMSELF wrote it, the only criticism someone can make at this point is to say that the Book of Enoch once WAS a real book but it was lost and the one we currently have is a fake. I used to believe this, myself, until recently. But this can be debunked easily by the next point.

 

4) As seen in point #1, the disciple Jude read and quoted from the Book of Enoch. So if someone wanted to say that Jude had the original copy of Enoch that he quoted from but that it was lost sometime after Jude wrote this, then they would have to show that our oldest copies of Enoch were dated AFTER Jude wrote his epistles. But the opposite is the case! Jude wrote his epistles around 80 AD; and we have copies of the Book of Enoch from the Dead Sea Scrolls dating ~250 BC. This is proof that the copy of Enoch we have today is the SAME book that Jude read and quoted from in Scripture.

 

5) Getting back to the question of Enoch writing the book, himself, many argue that Enoch lived too long ago for his writings to have been preserved (even by replication). They also argue that, since he was only the 7th generation human being, there's no way humans had written language that early--let alone advanced language as displayed in the Book of Enoch. But keep in mind that, according to Genesis geneology, Enoch didn't live millions of years ago, but a mere 2,300 years before the Dead Sea manuscripts were penned. That is well within the realm of possibility. And Noah could have easily carried these scrolls in the ark with him (interestingly this is what the Ethiopian Orthodox Church claims!). As for the other point, Enoch certainly did have advanced language--since the Bible as well as other books tell us that language, itself, came from God and the angels. An interesting fact is that Alexander the Great wrote that he encountered natives of India who showed him the sepulcher of an ancient king named Cainan, grandson of Seth, and inside this sepulcher were writings in HEBREW. This is astonishing. If true, this means that Hebrew was being spoken already by the 4th generation human being from Adam!

 

To sum up, my position is that you have NO CHOICE to believe that the Book of Enoch is authentic Scripture AND that it was written by Enoch himself. You can believe otherwise, but you must necessarily bend Scripture and ignore what it says. You also must ignore what archeologists have discovered in the last 75 years.

Edited July 11, 2014 by M30USA

[pureinheart]

This is amazing and truly a gift. As soon as I get done with Proverbs, the next is the Book of Enoch. Please keep these revelations coming because I'm seeing the Book of Enoch as vital in these days...