[SummaScriptura]

If the Biblical Enoch is the author of the book bearing his name, one might well expect the book’s contents to be consistent with the books of the Bible. Not only do we find the Book of Enoch to be consistent with the Bible, but as it turns out, familiarity with the contents of the book aids in understanding certain difficult passages of the Bible. Does this intriguing fact point to a familiarity with the Book of Enoch on the part of the writers of the Bible?


There are quite a number of subjects in the Old and New Testaments concerning which the Biblical writers seem to assume a certain level of prior knowledge on the part of their readers. It is the lack of this prior knowledge in our day that creates problems for us in understanding these texts. There are a surprising number of these passages of scripture which knowledge of the contents of the Book of Enoch resolves. Here are a few examples:

• The nature of the sin of the “sons of God” in Genesis 6
• The curious origin of the Old Testament giants
• The origin of demons nowhere expressly stated in the Bible
• The pervasive use by Christ of the term Son of Man
• The nature of the angels’ sin mentioned in Jude and 2 Peter 2
• The sending of the scapegoat to Azazel in Leviticus 16
• The identity of the seven angels in the books of Ezekiel and Revelation
• Jude’s classifying of Enoch as one of the prophets
• The Book of Revelation’s singular mention of a “bottomless pit”

If one is unfamiliar with the contents of the Book of Enoch each of the above-mentioned subjects poses questions which cannot be definitively answered from the 66 books of the Bible. If one is willing to refer to the Book of Enoch on these questions, however, none of these examples pose serious problems. Modern readers do well to bear in mind, by the time of Christ, the subject matter of the Book of Enoch was well-known and would have provided a well-spring of conceptual background for readers and hearers of the Scriptures in first century Israel.

Copyright © 2006-2012, R.I. Burns. All rights reserved.
http://www.thebookofenoch.info/

[Guyver]

I think the fact that no one knows is why the book of Enoch is not found in the Bible.

[Lazy afternoon]

Originally Posted by Gojira69

If the Biblical Enoch is the author of the book bearing his name, one might well expect the book’s contents to be consistent with the books of the Bible. Not only do we find the Book of Enoch to be consistent with the Bible, but as it turns out, familiarity with the contents of the book aids in understanding certain difficult passages of the Bible. Does this intriguing fact point to a familiarity with the Book of Enoch on the part of the writers of the Bible?


There are quite a number of subjects in the Old and New Testaments concerning which the Biblical writers seem to assume a certain level of prior knowledge on the part of their readers. It is the lack of this prior knowledge in our day that creates problems for us in understanding these texts. There are a surprising number of these passages of scripture which knowledge of the contents of the Book of Enoch resolves. Here are a few examples:

• The nature of the sin of the “sons of God”[/url] in Genesis 6
• The curious origin[/url] of the Old Testament giants
• The origin of demons[/url] nowhere expressly stated in the Bible
• The pervasive use by Christ of the term Son of Man[/url]
• The nature of the angels’ sin[/url] mentioned in Jude and 2 Peter 2
• The sending of the scapegoat[/url] to Azazel in Leviticus 16
• The identity of the seven angels[/url] in the books of Ezekiel and Revelation
• Jude’s classifying of Enoch[/url] as one of the prophets
• The Book of Revelation’s singular mention of a “bottomless pit”[/url]

If one is unfamiliar with the contents of the Book of Enoch each of the above-mentioned subjects poses questions which cannot be definitively answered from the 66 books of the Bible. If one is willing to refer to the Book of Enoch on these questions, however, none of these examples pose serious problems. Modern readers do well to bear in mind, by the time of Christ, the subject matter of the Book of Enoch was well-known and would have provided a well-spring of conceptual background for readers and hearers of the Scriptures in first century Israel.

Copyright © 2006-2012, R.I. Burns. All rights reserved.
http://www.thebookofenoch.info/

All the questions above are dealt with in the 66 books of the Bible.

The error of many is that they seek the truth in a book like Enoch, and then think that they learnt something when they only learnt spiritism.

The placing of some truth in the book does not make the whole book to be truth.

LA

[SummaScriptura]

Originally Posted by Gojira69

• The nature of the sin of the “sons of God”[/url] in Genesis 6
• The curious origin[/url] of the Old Testament giants
• The origin of demons[/url] nowhere expressly stated in the Bible
• The pervasive use by Christ of the term Son of Man[/url]
• The nature of the angels’ sin[/url] mentioned in Jude and 2 Peter 2
• The sending of the scapegoat[/url] to Azazel in Leviticus 16
• The identity of the seven angels[/url] in the books of Ezekiel and Revelation
• Jude’s classifying of Enoch[/url] as one of the prophets
• The Book of Revelation’s singular mention of a “bottomless pit”[/url]

Originally Posted by Lazy afternoon

All the questions above are dealt with in the 66 books of the Bible.

Well then we disagree. I'm not sure what is meant by "dealt with". That's a pretty broad brush. So, just to limit the scope of my response... I will ask, where in the 66-book Bible common to Westerners do we find anything about the origin of demons? I've been studying the Bible for 40 years and haven't found it yet.

[lifeisgood]

Originally Posted by Gojira69

So, just to limit the scope of my response... I will ask, where in the 66-book Bible common to Westerners do we find anything about the origin of demons?

Don't know if this would help:

Fallen angels are much more powerful than demons. Jesus commanded to cast out demons. Jude tells us to be careful in our confrontations with fallen angels.

Jude says,

“Likewise also these filthy dreamers defile the flesh, despise dominion, and speak evil of dignities. Yet Michael the Archangel, when contending with the Devil he disputed about the body of Moses, did not bring against him (against Satan) a railing accusation, but said, The Lord rebuke you.”

It is proper to rebuke demons but not proper to rebuke fallen angels.

Fallen angels (Lucifer for example) have their own celestial bodies; therefore they have no need to inhabit bodies. Yet demons seek bodies desperately; and, if need be, they will settle for the bodies of animals (Mark 5:12-13).

Jesus says concerning demons, "When the unclean spirit is gone out of a man, he walketh through dry places, seeking rest, and findeth none" (Matthew 12:43, KJV).

Some people say that fallen angels fly [I don’t know about that, so will not comment on it.]

Paul makes a distinction between these two classes of beings:

“For we wrestle not against flesh and blood (our foes are not human; however, Satan constantly uses human beings to carry out his dirty work), but against principalities (beings of the highest rank and order in Satan’s kingdom; they answer to Satan himself), against powers (the rank immediately below the “principalities”), against the rulers of the darkness of this world (the ones that carry out the instructions of the “powers”), against spiritual wickedness in high places (demon spirits.)” (Ephesians 6:12).

Demons spirits are the powers of this dark world, while fallen angels are the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms.

At least that's the way I understand it. Don't know if I would be able to find the 'origin of demons,' but I do believe the Bible teaches the concept of demons.

[OMEGA]

Enoch lived before the Flood,
so the book was probably very Soggy. LOL.

[Tambora]

Originally Posted by OMEGA

Enoch lived before the Flood,
so the book was probably very Soggy. LOL.

Enoch (Noah's g-grandfather) was alive for over 100 years during the life of Noah.
Noah could have easily had the book with him on the ark.

I can't remember where (probably from the book of Enoch), but I read that Enoch wrote on stone.
Seems logical since that was the common mode of writing then.
And that his words were to be taught and remembered through generation to generation.

It is possible that the book of Enoch that we have was written by Noah (either copying or remembering the words of his g-grandfather).

[SummaScriptura]

Originally Posted by Tambora

Enoch (Noah's g-grandfather) was alive for over 100 years during the life of Noah.
Noah could have easily had the book with him on the ark.

I can't remember where (probably from the book of Enoch), but I read that Enoch wrote on stone.
Seems logical since that was the common mode of writing then.
And that his words were to be taught and remembered through generation to generation.

It is possible that the book of Enoch that we have was written by Noah (either copying or remembering the words of his g-grandfather).

Going by the numbers laid down in Genesis 5, I have Enoch being caught up 687 years before the flood, and Noah being born more than 100 years later. None of the solutions you suggest are necessary though. Given the fact the shelf-life of a scroll made of parchment can survive for centuries, I'd say it is possible Methuselah, Noah's son, could hand-off the first editions of all of Enoch's writings to Noah in person, regardless of what medium was used for books in those days. I can hear Methuselah now, "these books have been in my ownership since the day I received them new. There's no highlighting or other markings in them. They are from a smoke-free home. Now their yours. Enjoy! Please be sure to give me positive feedback."

[Tambora]

Originally Posted by Gojira69

Going by the numbers laid down in Genesis 5, I have Enoch being caught up 687 years before the flood, and Noah being born more than 100 years later.

I constucted a chart awhile back.




After 1st set of "...." - (age of father at birth + year father was born) = birth year of person
After 2nd set of "...." - (birth year of person + how many years he lived) = year died

1.Adam……….…….........................0………….0 + 930(GEN 5:5) = 930
2.Seth.......……..130(GEN 5:3) +0=130………..130+912(GEN 5:8) =1042
3.Enos ………..105(GEN 5:6) +130=235……...235+905(GEN 5:11) =1140
4.Cainan ……….90(GEN 5:9) +235=325………325+910(GEN 5:14) =1235
5.Mahalalel....….70(GEN 5:12) +325=395…….395+895(GEN 5:17) =1290
6.Jared............65(GEN5:15) +395=460……..460+962(GEN 5:20) =1422
7.Enoch ........…162(GEN 5:18) +460=622……622+365(GEN 5:23) = 987*1
8.Methuselah .….65(GEN 5:21)+622=687…….687+969(GEN 5:27) =1656*2
9.Lamech ……...187(GEN 5:25) +687=874……874+777(GEN 5:31) =1651

(Notice that all of the above were born before Adam died. All were capable of hearing 1st hand knowledge of the garden of Eden.)

10.Noah ........…...182(GEN 5:28) +874=1056……....1056+950(GEN 9:29) = 2006
11.Shem............ 502(GEN 5:32)*3 +1056=1558…...1556+600(GEN 11:11) =2156
12.Arphaxad ..... 100(GEN 11:10) +1558=1658…...1658+438(GEN 11:13) =2096
13.Salah ............…35(GEN 11:12) +1658=1693…..1693+433(GEN 11:15) =2126
14.Eber ..............…30(GEN 11:14) +1693=1723…..1723+464(GEN 11:17) =2187
15.Peleg ............….34(GEN 11:16) +1723=1757… .1757+239(GEN 11:19) =1966
16Reu ................….30(GEN 11:18) +1757=1787…..1787+239(GEN 11:21) =2026
17.Serug ............…32(GEN11:20) +1787=1819……1819+230(GEN 11:23) =2049
18.Nahor ............…30(GEN 11:22) +1819=1849…..1849+148(GEN 11:25) =1997
19.Terah ....…….….29(GEN 11:24) +1849=1878…...1878+205(GEN 11:32) =2083
20.Abram ........130(GEN 11:26 *4) +1878=2008…...2008+175(GEN 25:7) =2183

(Notice that all of the above were born before Noah’s son died. All were capable of hearing 1st hand knowledge of the flood.)

21.Isaac…………100(GEN 21:5) +2008=2108…..2108+180(GEN 35:28) =2288
22.Jacob…………60(GEN 25:26) +2108=2168….2168+147(GEN 47:28) =2315



*1
Dispute of whether Enoch actually died or was translated to heaven (GEN 5:23-24).
Either way, he was gone from the earth.



* 2
YEAR OF FLOOD - 1656

Gen 7:6 And Noah was six hundred years old when the flood of waters was upon the earth.

(Noah was born in the year 1056. 600 years after his birth was the flood. 1056 + 600 = 1656.)

Gen.11: 10. These are the generations of Shem: Shem was an hundred years old, and begat Arphaxad two years after the flood:

Arphazad was born in the year 1658. His birth was 2 years after the flood.
1658 – 2 = 1656.)



*3
GEN 5:32 says Noah was 500 when he begot Shem, Ham, and Japheth.
GEN 10:21 says Japheth was the elder.
GEN 9:24 says that Ham was the youngest.
So we can conclude that they were not triplets all born at the same time.
Added to GEN 11:10 which says that Shem was 100 when he begot his son Arphaxad,
and this was 2 years AFTER the flood, we can conclude that Noah had the elder
Japheth at age 500, then Shem at age 502, then Ham after that.



*4
Gen 11:26 And Terah lived seventy years, and begat Abram, Nahor, and Haran.

(Though Abram is listed first, he was not the first son of Terah)

Gen 11:32 And the days of Terah were two hundred and five years: and Terah died in Haran.

Terah had first son when he was 70 years old.
Abram was not his first son.
He was 130 years old when he had Abram.

Abram stayed in Haran until his father died at age 205.
Actc 7
3 And said unto him, Get thee out of thy country, and from thy kindred, and come into the land which I shall show thee.
4 Then came he out of the land of the Chaldeans, and dwelt in Haran: and from thence, when his father was dead, he removed him into this land, wherein ye now dwell.

How old was Abram when he left?
Gen 12:4 So Abram departed, as the LORD had spoken unto him; and Lot went with him: and Abram [was] seventy and five years old when he departed out of Haran.

75 years old.
205 – 75 = 130

[SummaScriptura]

I read your post with interest.

I'm usure though if you still feel Noah and Enoch were contemporary, your dates imply they were not.

In the Book of Enoch, it says Noah took a journey into heaven (sometime before the flood), where he and Enoch communicated. But that's another story... ;-)

[Tambora]

Originally Posted by Gojira69

I'm usure though if you still feel Noah and Enoch were contemporary, your dates imply they were not.

Oh oh oh, I see what you are saying.
You are right, Enoch was gone before Noah was born.

But his son and grandson were alive during the time of Noah.

I think it is reasonable to assume that whatever writings Enoch made were kept in the family and passed to generation to generation.

[This Charming Manc]

Seeing as we have no writings pre moses that is an awfully big assumption.

Did writing even exist when Enoch was alive?

Most serious study shows the book of Enoch was an inter-testemental book, dating in 3rd or 4th century BC.

Its also consider to mentioned events from the return from exile.

sometimes its worrying what passes for theology round here.

'spurious rambelings online' anyone?

Originally Posted by Tambora

.
I think it is reasonable to assume that whatever writings Enoch made were kept in the family and passed to generation to generation.

[themuzicman]

Yeah, minor technical issue in that man hadn't actually discovered written communication when Enoch was alive...

[SummaScriptura]

Originally Posted by This Charming Manc

Seeing as we have no writings pre moses that is an awfully big assumption.<snip>

Or, so you assume.

[SummaScriptura]

Originally Posted by themuzicman

Yeah, minor technical issue in that man hadn't actually discovered written communication when Enoch was alive...

Really? Can you identify who was the discoverer of writing?

On another technical note, how does one determine when writing was first "discovered", if we can call it discovery. Also, there are still pre-literate societies in the world today, so, how does one determine the first-off of something like writing?