What I learned about the lost books of the bible
By: Pastor Micah Anthony Sr.
What I've learned About the Lost Books of the Bible
presented by Pastor Micah B Anthony SR.
INTRO: To get a better understanding, watch the following video to become introduced to both sides of this issue.…
Wes Huff PROVES Sam Shamoun Wrong? | Bible has MORE than 66 Books?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yy2peSZ61Ww
Now continue to read the five section study below to learn more facts that can help you find the truth of which side is more consistent with the sixty six books that are proven by Yahshua the Messiah and His disciples, to be accepted as scripture canon:
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/canon
3[Middle English, from Late Latin, from Latin, standard]
a: an authoritative list of books accepted as Holy Scripture
In both my proactive outreach ministry, as well as casual reactive conversations I might have with my barber or fellow employees when religious conversation occurs, whether they are people who do or don't attend church, I’ve encountered quite a few who have brought up how archaeology has unearthed ancient biblical texts giving them reason to doubt our current canon of scripture (the Bible).
There are many who entertain the possibility that Christians today don't have the true Bible; and use this excuse to form their own aberrant belief system or spirituality. Browsing through the religious section in your local bookstore, or even on Netflix or the History channel, you’re likely to stumble on a handful of titles that suggest the discovery of “lost books” of the Bible.
Generally, these represent works that were “politically incorrect” according to the theological notions of the time. Branded as spurious by early church leaders, they were discredited and destroyed. Luckily, a handful of copies survived. Archaeologists have rescued these previously “lost books” of the Bible. The Gospel of Thomas, unearthed in the Nag Hammadi library in Upper Egypt in 1945, would be an example.
Invariably, this sends a jolt through the system of many Christians who begin to question, could it be that archaeology has unearthed ancient biblical texts that cast doubt on the current canon of Scripture? Is it possible the Bible we Christians have is incomplete? To begin to answer this question about the so-called lost or hidden books of the Bible, I will first present...
SECTION 1: REASONING
In this study we are going to look at quite a few of these books their history and content. It may be hard to believe, but this question can be answered without ever reading any of the books in question. No research needs to be done, no ancient tomes addressed, no works of antiquity perused. Curiously, the entire issue can be answered by a close look at one word: Bible.
The Bible Divine
The whole question of alleged lost books of the Bible hinges on what one means by the word “Bible.” It can only mean one of two things.
1)There is a religious understanding of the word...
When one asks a Christian what the Bible is, he or she is likely to say simply, “It’s Yahweh’s Word.” When pressed for a more theologically precise definition, he might add that Yahweh Elohim superintended the writing of Scripture so that the human authors, using their own style, personalities and resources, wrote down, word for word, exactly what Elohim intended them to write in the originals.
Added to this verbal explanation of inspiration would be many scriptures that show how the Bible says this about itself; along with proofs of why the Bible is divine rather than man made in origin. This is a vital part of the Christian understanding of the definition of the word “Bible.”
The key concept for our discussion is the phrase “exactly what Yahweh intended them to write.” This is a critical element of this understanding of “Bible” is the idea that Yahweh was not limited by the fact that human authors were involved in the process.
2) Then there is an opposing secular definition or view of the Bible. In this view, a common objection to the notion of inspiration is that the Bible was only written by men, and men make mistakes. This complaint misses the mark for two reasons.
First, it does not logically follow that because humans were involved in the writing process, the Bible must necessarily be in error. A thorough research on how the Scriptures have endured will reveal minor Mistakes in translation of a word here or there, but these minor fixable mistakes don't compromise the integrity of the scriptures word as a whole being divine rather than man made in origin. To assume error in all human writing is also a self-defeating argument. The humanly derived statement, “The Bible was written by men, and men make mistakes,” would be suspect by the same strict standards. The fact is, human beings can and do produce writing with no errors. It happens all the time.
Further, the challenge that men make mistakes ignores the main issue—whether or not the Bible was written only by men. The Christian accepts that humans are limited, but by faith denies that man’s limitations are significant in this case because inspiration implies that Yahweh Elohim’s power supersedes man’s liabilities.
A simple question serves to illustrate this: “Are you saying that if Yahweh exists, He’s not capable of writing what He wants through imperfect men?” This seems hard to affirm. The notion of an omnipotent Elohim not being able to accomplish such a simple task is ludicrous. If, on the other hand, the answer is “No, I think He is able,” then the objection vanishes. If Yahweh is capable, then man’s limitations are not a limit on Elohim.
The Divine Inspiration of the Bible
If we can offer good reasons the Bible was from Yahweh Elohim to begin with, this automatically solves the problem of human involvement. If Yahweh ensures the results, it doesn’t matter if men or monkeys do the writing, they will still write exactly what Yahweh intends. That is part of what it means for the Bible to be divinely inspired.
The important thing for our purpose here is not to defend the notion of divine inspiration, but to understand that Yahweh’s authorship and supernatural preservation are necessarily entailed in the first definition of the word “Bible.” The Bible is the 66 individual books contained under one cover that are supernaturally inspired by Yahweh Elohim, and are preserved and protected by His power. On this understanding, man’s limitations are irrelevant.
There are multiple Bible verses that mention Elohim preserving his word, including:
A book that didn’t make the cut was rejected for two basic reasons: Early Christians couldn’t trace authorship to an Apostle or eyewitness accounts, and the theology differed from what had been handed down from the Apostles. Christianity is no different from other religions that have collections of authoritative writings. Even individual professions identify certain books as—"bibles," if you will—as official representations of their respective fields. The Bible, then, is in that category—merely a collection of books chosen by the early church leaders to represent their own beliefs.
So we have two possible meanings for the word “Bible,” a supernatural one and a natural one. Either the Bible is divinely given and divinely preserved—the conservative Christian view—or it’s merely a human document representing the beliefs of a religious group known by the label “Christianity”—the view of just about everyone else. The next question we should ask ourselves is given either of these two definitions, could any books of the Bible be lost?
No Lost Books
Start with the first meaning, the supernatural definition of the Bible. Is it possible that books could be lost from a Bible of this sort? The answer is certainly no. Remember, on this view Yahweh Elohim Himself is supernaturally preserving and protecting the integrity of His work.
Regardless of whether the Christian claim about inspiration is accurate or not, it is obvious that in this definition it is not possible Yahweh would misplace His own book. The “lost books” thesis would thus be reduced to, “Certain books that almighty Yahweh was responsible to preserve and protect got lost.”
This is silly. The view makes Yahweh both almighty and inept at the same time. If the Bible is in fact the inspired Word of Yahweh, then the power of Elohim Himself guarantees that no portion of it will ever be lost. There will always be a fully adequate testimony of His Word in every generation.
Could there be lost books given the second definition? What if Christians are wrong in attributing Yahweh Elohim’s stewardship to the Scriptures? What if the Bible ultimately turns out to be merely a product of human design? If that’s the case, then the term “Bible” refers not to the Word of Yahweh (the first definition), but to the canon of beliefs of the leaders of the early church (the second definition). Is it possible that books could be lost from a Bible of this sort?
The answer again is certainly not. The “lost books” thesis would be reduced to this: “Early church leaders rejected certain books as unrepresentative of their beliefs; and kept only those that they actually believed reflected their beliefs.’
If the Bible is a collection of books the early church leaders decided would represent their point of view, then they have the final word on what is included. Any books they rejected were never part of their Bible to begin with, so even by the second definition, “lost books” of the Bible would be a misnomer.
Consider this scenario. You decide to write a book about your personal beliefs drawing from stacks of notes containing reflections you’ve collected over the years. After recording the ones you agree with, you discard the rest. Later, someone rummaging through your trash comes upon your discarded notes. Could he claim he’d stumbled upon your lost beliefs?
“No,” you respond, “these were not lost. They were rejected. If they were really my beliefs, they’d be in the book, not in the garbage.”
It’s ironic that “lost books” advocates often point out that rediscovered texts were missing because the early Church Fathers suppressed them. It’s true; they did. Critics think this strengthens their case, but it doesn’t. Instead it destroys their position by proving that the “lost books” were not lost but discarded, rejected as not representative of Christian beliefs. Therefore, they did not belong in the Christian Bible. If they never were in the Bible in the first place they couldn’t be lost from the Bible.
Recall Vote?
Another approach to Scripture is worth mentioning. Some academics, like those of the Jesus Seminar, reject the idea that the Bible has supernatural origins. Since the Bible is just man’s opinion anyway, why not have a recall vote? Amend the text to fix what is now considered defective or out of step with the times.
Such a reshuffling of the biblical deck—tossing out some books and including others to reflect what the church currently believes about spiritual truth—is certainly an alternative to a naturalistic view of the Scripture. If the members of the Jesus Seminar want to include the Gospel of Thomas in their bible, they’re welcome to. Keep in mind though, they would not be restoring a “lost book” of the Bible, but merely redefining the canon to fit modern tastes.
Regardless of how you view the Scripture—as supernatural or as natural—there is no sense in which there could be lost books of the Bible. If the Bible is supernatural—if Yahweh Elohim is responsible for its writing, its transmission, and its survival—then Yahweh, being Elohim, doesn’t fail. He doesn’t make mistakes, He doesn’t forget things, and He’s not constrained by man’s limitations. Yahweh can’t lose his lessons.
However, if the Bible is not supernatural—as many will contend, especially those who claim to have found lost books—one faces a different problem. By what standard do we claim these are bona fide lost books of the canon of the early church? If, from a human perspective, the Bible is that collection of writings reflecting the beliefs of early Christianity, then any writings discarded by the church fathers are not books of their Bible by very definition.
Has archaeology unearthed previously unknown ancient texts? Certainly. Are they interesting, noteworthy, and valuable? Some. Are they missing books of the Bible? The answer is no. Two thousand years later, the rediscovery of something like the Gospel of Thomas may be archaeologically significant. It might be a lost book of antiquity, a great find, even a wonderful piece of literature.
But it is not a lost book of the Bible.***
SECTION 2: THE APOCRYPHA BOOKS
Without looking at the books we've come up with a reasonable argument as to why they are not lost books of the Bible. Keeping this in mind, let's now see what happens when we actually take a little time to research from a historic and Biblical point of view these so called lost or hidden books of the Bible to see what the evidence presents?
THE APOCRYPHA BOOKS- Introduction
Here is a list of the so-called "hidden books".
The English-language King James Version (KJV) of 1611 followed the lead of the Luther Bible in using an inter-testamental section labelled "Books called Apocrypha", or just "Apocrypha" at the running page header.[33] The KJV followed the Geneva Bible of 1560 almost exactly (variations are marked below). The section contains the following:[34]
·1 Esdras (Vulgate 3 Esdras)
·2 Esdras (Vulgate 4 Esdras)
·Tobit
·Judith ("Judeth" in Geneva)
·Rest of Esther (Vulgate Esther 10:4 – 16:24)
·Wisdom
·Ecclesiasticus (also known as Sirach)
·Baruch and the Epistle of Jeremy ("Jeremiah" in Geneva) (all part of Vulgate Baruch)
·Song of the Three Children (Vulgate Daniel 3:24–90)
·Story of Susanna (Vulgate Daniel 13)
·The Idol Bel and the Dragon (Vulgate Daniel 14)
·Prayer of Manasses (Daniel)
·1 Maccabees
·2 Maccabees
Why are there these extra books in the Old testament of the Catholic Bible and not in the Protestant Bible?
THE APOCRYPHA BOOKS- Why the Difference?
The Protestant Old Testament, which contains 39 books, comes from the Palestinian Canon — which (as the name would indicate) is the set of scriptures which originated from Palestine and which were recognized by the Jews.
The Catholic Old Testament, however, derives its books from the Alexandrian Canon — the Greek listing of Old Testament books, which was supposedly drawn up in Alexandria, Egypt. Along with the 39 books of the Palestinian Canon, the Alexandrian Canon contains 14 or 15 additional books that are collectively known as the “apocrypha,” which simply means “hidden.”
THE APOCRYPHA BOOKS- Some Discrepancies
Of these 14 or 15 books, three are not included in the Catholic Bible. Also, some of these apocryphal books have been made into a single book, such as Baruch and the Letter of Jeremiah. Still others were simply tagged onto the books of the Palestinian or Hebrew Canon.
For example, the apocryphal book called Bel and the Dragon was made into the fourteenth chapter of the Book of Daniel. This explains why there are only seven additional books listed in the Catholic Old Testament.
THE APOCRYPHA BOOKS- Why Are They Excluded?
As you will see, there are many reasons why these apocryphal books are not part of our Bible. Let me mention First of all, that they contain teachings that are clearly unbiblical — As we progress through this study we will look at quite a few examples such as encouraging prayers for the dead, and teaching salvation by works.
Secondly, we will take a look at the fact that there have been a number of authoritative testimonies against the acceptance of these books, including those from the Jewish scholars of Jamnia, as well as many of the church fathers and scholars, like Athanasius and Jerome.
And, of course, the most important fact is that these books were never directly quoted by YAHSHUA or by any of the New Testament writers. Finally, we'll see how it’s important to note that even the Catholic church itself didn’t canonize them until the Council of Trent, after the Reformation began.
The Reformation, also called Protestant Reformation, the religious revolution that took place in the Western church in the 16th century (1517 – 1648).
THE APOCRYPHA BOOKS- Summary
By the end of this study, you will have looked at evidence that supports the conclusion, that while some of these apocryphal books do have some benefit of giving us some insight about the historical events that occurred during the period between the Old and New Testaments, they are definitely not the Word of Yahweh.
So, it is very important for all of us to recognize that there is a vast distinction between the apocrypha, or the “hidden books,” and the Divinely inspired Canon of Scriptures that we have.
Twenty Six Reasons Why the Books of the Apocrypha Were Rejected as Holy Scripture by the Protestants
The Old Testament Apocrypha consists of eleven or twelve books, depending upon how they are divided, that the Roman Catholic Church adds to the Old Testament. The Protestants reject these books as Holy Scripture for the following reasons.
1. The Apocrypha Has Different Doctrine And Practices Than Holy Scripture
There are doctrines and practices contained in the Apocrypha that are contrary to what the Scripture teaches. They include the following.
They Teach A Person Is Saved By Works
In the Apocrypha proof texts can be found to support the Roman Catholic doctrine of justification by human works and not faith alone. The Apocrypha contains the following verses.
For almsgiving saves from death and purges away every sin. Those who give alms will enjoy a full life (Tobit 12:9).
In another place in Tobit it says.
So now, my children see what almsgiving accomplishes, and what injustice does it brings death! (Tobit 14:11).
The Non-biblical Doctrine Of Purgatory Is Taught In The Apocrypha
The doctrine of purgatory - a place of purging between heaven and hell - is taught in the Apocrypha. It says.
So they all blessed the ways of the Lord, the righteous judge, who reveals the things that are hidden; and they turned to supplication, praying that the sin that had been committed might be wholly blotted out. The noble Judas exhorted the people to keep themselves free from sin, for they had seen with their own eyes what had happened as the result of the sin of those who had fallen. He also took up a collection, man by man, to the amount of two thousand drachmas of silver, and sent it to Jerusalem to provide for a sin offering. In doing this he acted very well and honorably, taking account of the resurrection. For if he were not expecting that those who had fallen would rise again, it would have been superfluous and foolish to pray for the dead. But if he was looking to the splendid reward that is laid up for those who fall asleep in godliness, it was a holy and pious thought. Therefore he made atonement for the dead, so that they might be delivered from their sin (Second Maccabees 12:41-45).
The Bible teaches that, upon death eternal judgment is final, one either goes to be with the Lord in paradise or is sent away from Him to a place of the wicked dead- there is no middle place where the living can make atonement for the forgiveness of the wicked dead. The writer to the Hebrews stated.
Just as man is destined to die once, and after that to face judgment (Hebrews 9:27).
According To The Apocrypha Yahweh Hears The Prayers Of The wicked Dead
We find the Book of Baruch teaching that Elohim hears the prayers of those who have died.
O Lord Almighty, God of Israel, hear now the prayer of the dead of Israel, the children of those who sinned before you, who did not heed the voice of the Lord their God, so that calamities have clung to us (Baruch 3:4).
The Bible teaches that the prayers of the dead wicked or not, have no response from Yahweh that would benefit the living. Only the living upon the earth pray for the other living ones on the earth.
Luke 16:22 One day the beggar died and was carried by the angels to Abraham’s side. And the rich man also died and was buried. 23 In Hades, where he was in torment, he looked up and saw Abraham from afar, with Lazarus by his side.24 So he cried out, ‘Father Abraham, have mercy on me and send Lazarus to dip the tip of his finger in water and cool my tongue. For I am in agony in this fire.’25 But Abraham answered, ‘Child, remember that during your lifetime you received your good things, while Lazarus received bad things. But now he is comforted here, while you are left to suffer. 26 And besides all this, a great chasm has been fixed between us and you, so that even those who wish cannot cross from here to you, nor can anyone cross from there to us.’27 ‘Then I beg you, father,’ he said, ‘send Lazarus to my father’s house, 28 for I have five brothers. Let him warn them so they will not also end up in this place of torment.’29 But Abraham replied, ‘They have Moses and the prophets; let your brothers listen to them.’30‘No, father Abraham,’ he said, ‘but if someone is sent to them from the dead, they will repent.’ 31Then Abraham said to him, ‘If they do not listen to Moses and the prophets, they will not be persuaded even if someone rises from the dead.’”
The Apocrypha Teaches The Pre-existence Of Souls
The doctrine of the pre-existence of souls is found in the Apocrypha.
As a child I was naturally gifted, and a good soul fell to my lot; or rather, being good, I entered an undefiled body (Wisdom 8:19,20).
Scripture does not teach that souls have any existence before they are united into a body.
The Apocrypha Teaches Creation Out Of Pre-Existent Matter
The doctrine of creation out of pre-existent matter...
For your all-powerful hand, which created the world out of formless matter, did not lack the means to send upon them a multitude of bears, or bold lions (Wisdom 11:17).
The Bible says that Elohim's creation was out of nothing.
By faith we understand that the worlds were prepared by the word of Elohim, so that what is seen was not made out of things which are visible (Hebrews 11:3).
There are even more than these doctrines of the Apocrypha that are listed as contrary to the teaching of Holy Scripture.
2. The Apocrypha Is Never Cited In The New Testament As Scripture
Though the New Testament cites directly, or alludes to, almost every book of the Old Testament as Scripture, it never cites the books of the Apocrypha as being Yahweh's Word. The Apocrypha was not the Bible of Yahshua or His apostles. While Yahshua and His apostles often quoted from the Septuagint, they never quoted from the Apocrypha.
Allusions Are Not The Same As Scripture
al·lu·sion/əˈlo͞oZHən/ an expression designed to call something to mind without mentioning it explicitly; an indirect or passing reference.
1. i.e,..The apostle Paul made an allusion to Greek poets in Acts 17:28,"‘For in Him we live and move and have our being.’ As some of your own poets have said, ‘We are His offspring.’
While there may be some allusions to the apocryphal books by New Testament writers there is no direct quote from them. An allusion is not the same as a direct quote.
No Statement Introduced By "It Is Written"
In addition, no New Testament writer ever refers to any of these books as authoritative. Quotes from the accepted books are usually introduced by the phrase, "It is written," or the passage is quoted to prove a point. But never do the New Testament writers quote the Apocrypha in this way.
Furthermore no book of the Apocrypha is mentioned by name in the New Testament.
If the writers of the New Testament considered any book in the Apocrypha to be Scripture, we would certainly expect them to refer to it in some way. However we find no direct quotations. This is in contrast to over 250 quotations from the authoritative Old Testament Scriptures.
The fact that the present canon was repeatedly quoted as being divinely authoritative as well as the absence of any direct quote is another indication of the extent of the canon - it did not include the Apocrypha.
3. The Apocrypha Has Always Been Rejected By The Jews As Scripture
The Jews have never considered these works to be divinely inspired. On the contrary, they denied their authority. At the time of Messiah Yahshua we have the testimony of the Jewish writer Flavius Josephus that there were only twenty-two books divinely inspired by Elohim. These books are the same as our thirty-nine in the Old Testament. The books of the Apocrypha were not among these. The same testimony is found in Second Esdras - the Ezra legend. This work was written in A.D. 100. Therefore these books were never part of the Hebrew canon of Scripture.
4. The Books Of The Apocrypha Were Written During The Silent Years
The books of the Apocrypha were written during the four hundred silent years between the Book of Malachi and the announcement of the birth of John the Baptist. Jewish and New Testament sources both agree that no divinely inspired prophetic utterance occurred during this time.
5. The Septuagint Translation Proves Nothing
The fact that the Apocrypha is found in the Septuagint translation does not prove anything. It merely testifies that the Alexandrian Jews translated other religious material into Greek apart from the Old Testament Scripture. A Greek translation is not the same thing as a book being part of the Hebrew canon.
6. There Is No Evidence The Apocrypha Was In Septuagint At The Time Of Messiah
There is no evidence that the books of the Apocrypha were in the Septuagint as early as the time of Messiah. The earliest manuscripts that contain them date back to the fourth century A.D. This does not demonstrate that the books of the Apocrypha were part of the Septuagint in pre-Christian times. Even if they were in the Septuagint at this early date, it is noteworthy that neither Christ nor the apostles ever quoted from them as they did with most of the Old Testament books. In addition, books were merely translated in Alexandria, Egypt - they were not canonized there.
There is no clear answer as to what the first century Septuagint contained. The fourth or fifth century Greek manuscripts, in which the Apocrypha appears, have no consistency with the number of books or their order.
7. There Is No Evidence Of A Greater Alexandrian Canon
It has been argued that the canon of the Alexandrian Jews was larger than the present Hebrew Old Testament. However, there is no evidence that the Jews in Alexandria, Egypt had a wider canon than the Jews living in Israel. Philo of Alexandria, who lived in the first century A.D., wrote on a number of subjects. He acknowledged the Jews believed in the divine authority of the Hebrew canon.
However, he gave no indication that there was a wider canon used by the Jews living in Egypt. From Philo we find that the canon in Alexandria, Egypt was the same as in Palestine. He knows the threefold division of the Old Testament and ascribes divine inspiration to many of the books. In addition, he says nothing about the Apocrypha. Consequently there is no evidence anywhere that the Alexandrian Jews accepted the Apocrypha as Holy Scripture.
It must be remembered that it was not the Jews in Egypt but rather some of the Greek-speaking Christians who gave some measure of authoritative status to certain of these books translated with the Septuagint plus. To the Jews, these books were never considered divinely inspired Scripture.
8. They Are Not On The Early Canonical Lists
In the early years of the church it drew up various lists of the books it considered to be Old Testament Scripture. The books of the Apocrypha do not appear on any list until late in the fourth century. This demonstrates the acceptance of these writings was not immediate.
The Apocrypha Is Missing From The Earliest List
The earliest existing list of the Old Testament canon comes from a man named Melito, a bishop of Sardis. In approximately A.D. 170 he wrote the following.
"When I came to the east and reached the place where these things were preached and done, and learned accurately the books of the Old Testament, I set down the facts and sent them to you.
These are their names: the five books of Moses, Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, Joshua the son of Nun, Judges, Ruth, four books of the Kingdom, two books of Chronicles, the Psalms of David, the Proverbs of Solomon and his wisdom, Ecclesiastes, the Song of Songs, Job, the prophets Isaiah, Jeremiah, The Twelve in a single book, Daniel, Ezekiel, Ezra."
This list of Melito is highly instructive. He includes all the books of the present canon except Esther. The reference to the four books of the kingdom would be 1,2 Samuel and 1,2 Kings. Ezra was the common way to refer to Ezra-Nehemiah. Wisdom was merely a fuller description of the Book of Proverbs - not the Apocryphal book by that name. Among ancient writers Proverbs was often called Wisdom.
While including all of the books of the present Old Testament canon (except Esther) Melito nowhere mentions any of the books of the Apocrypha.
9. They Were Rejected By Most Church Leaders
While a few of the early leaders of the church accepted some of the books of Apocrypha as Scripture, most of the great church leaders did not-Athanasius, Origen, and Jerome, to name a few. Many great church leaders spoke out against the Apocrypha. Those who do cite the Apocrypha as Scripture were few in number.
It is also worth noting that none of the church fathers that quoted the Apocrypha as Scripture knew any Hebrew.
The Clear Testimony Of Athanasius Toward The Apocrypha
In A.D. 367, the great defender of orthodox belief, Athanasius bishop of Alexandria, wrote a letter. In this letter he affirmed all the books of the present Old Testament canon (except Esther) as well as all the books of the present New Testament canon. He also mentioned some of the books of the Apocrypha. Of those he said.
"[They are] not included in the canon, but appointed by the Fathers to be read by those who newly join us, and who wish instruction in the world of godliness."
This is another ancient and powerful testimony that the books of the Apocrypha were not considered to be Holy Scripture.
10. There Are Other Books Apart From The Apocrypha That Are Cited As Scripture By Some Church Fathers
Again, a few of the Church Fathers did not restrict themselves to the books that now make up the Apocrypha. Authors such as Justin, Tertullian, and Clement of Alexandria occasionally use books outside the present Apocrypha - especially the Book of Enoch and First Esdras (Third Esdras).
Clement of Alexandria accepted Second Esdras (Fourth Esdras). Origen believed that the books of First and Second Maccabees, as well as the Letter to Jeremiah, were part of Holy Scripture. Irenaeus cited the Book of Wisdom as being divinely inspired. Therefore appeal to the church fathers cannot settle the matter, seeing that they give conflicting evidence.
(Side note) The Pseudepigrapha
There Are Others Books Directly Quoted Apart From Apocrypha
Add to this, there are certain books that both Protestants and the Roman Catholic Church reject as Scripture that some say are actually cited in the New Testament.
Paul cites the passed down through the ages names that tradition gives the magicians of Pharaoh who opposed Moses.
Just as Jannes and Jambres opposed Moses, so also these men oppose the truth - men of depraved minds, who, as far as the faith is concerned, are rejected (2 Timothy 3:8).
These names are not mentioned in the Old Testament but is used as a name of a so called lost book categorized as apart of a whole other separate set of Apocryphal books known as the .Pseudepigrapha[edit]
Technically, a pseudepigraphon is a book written in a biblical style and ascribed to an author who did not write it. In common usage, however, the term pseudepigrapha is often used by way of distinction to refer to apocryphal writings that do not appear in printed editions of the Bible, as opposed to the texts listed above. Examples[47] include:
·Apocalypse of Abraham
·Apocalypse of Moses
·Letter of Aristeas
·Martyrdom and Ascension of Isaiah
·Joseph and Aseneth
·Life of Adam and Eve
·Lives of the Prophets
·Ladder of Jacob
·Jannes and Jambres
·History of the Captivity in Babylon
·History of the Rechabites
·Eldad and Modad
·History of Joseph
·Odes of Solomon
·Prayer of Joseph
·Prayer of Jacob
·Vision of Ezra
Often included among the pseudepigrapha are 3 and 4 Maccabees because they are not traditionally found in western Bibles, although they are in the Septuagint. Similarly, the Book of Enoch, Book of Jubilees and 4 Baruch are often listed with the pseudepigrapha although they are commonly included in Ethiopian Bibles. The Psalms of Solomon are found in some editions of the Septuagint.
Starting in SECTION 3 of this study, we will later talk more about one or two of the books found among the pseudepigrapha; but for now let’s turn our attention back number eleven of the Twenty Six Reasons Why the Books of the Apocrypha Were Rejected as Holy Scripture by the Protestants.
11. The Early Greek Manuscripts Are Not Decisive
The fact that some of the books from the Apocrypha are found in early Greek manuscripts of the Bible is not decisive. These manuscripts also contain other written works that are neither part of the Scripture nor part of the Apocrypha - everyone rejects them as having any divine authority.
For example, 3 and 4 Maccabees and the Psalms of Solomon are found in these early Greek manuscripts along with the Greek Old Testament and the Apocrypha. If someone points to the inclusion of the Apocrypha among these early manuscripts as proof of their divine authority, then what do they do with these other works? Should they also be added to the Old Testament?
The Books Have A Different Order And Content
In the three most important Greek manuscripts the order and the contents of the books are different.
In Vaticanus we find: Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Judith, Tobit, Baruch, and the Letter to Jeremiah.
In Sinaiaticus the list includes: Tobit, Judith, First Maccabees, Fourth Maccabees, Wisdom, and Ecclesiasticus.
In Alexandrinus the order is: Tobit, Judith, First Maccabees, Second Maccabees, Third Maccabees, Fourth Maccabees, Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, and the Psalms of Solomon.
Therefore the early Greek manuscripts give no consistent testimony.
12. The Apocrypha Is Not A Well-Defined Unit
One of the main problems with accepting the Apocrypha as Scripture is that it is not a well-defined unit. Three of the books in the Septuagint plus were excluded as Holy Scripture - First and Second Esdras and the Prayer of Manasseh. If the books in the Septuagint plus should be made part of the Old Testament then why are these three books omitted?
The Latin Vulgate contains First and Second Esdras and the Prayer of Manasseh in the Apocrypha. First and Second Esdras are found in most Latin manuscripts of Scripture. In addition, they are placed with the Apocrypha when the full King JamesVersion is printed.
However the Roman Catholic Church does not call these three books Scripture. Sometimes these three books are printed as an appendix to Roman Catholic Bibles after the New Testament. Sometimes they are omitted entirely.
In addition, not every church Father, which accepted the Apocrypha as canonical, had exactly the same list of books in mind. This adds to the problem as to the exact content of the Apocrypha.
13. The Councils At Hippo And Carthage Are Not Definitive
The fact that the councils of Hippo and Carthage accepted the canonical status of the Apocrypha is not decisive. First, they were not larger more representative councils. In addition, these councils had no qualified Hebrew scholar in attendance. Basically the Apocrypha was canonized at these councils because of the influence of one person - Saint Augustine.
14. The Ambiguous Testimony Of Saint Augustine
It is often argued that the great scholar, St. Augustine, accepted the books of the Apocrypha as authoritative.
However, Augustine seemed to have changed his mind about the authority of the Apocrypha. At one point he implied that the Apocrypha did not have the same status as Holy Scripture (City of God 18.36). At best his testimony is ambiguous. Moreover Augustine's testimony, while important, is certainly not the last word on the matter.
Augustine mistakenly accepted the miraculous account of the origin of the Septuagint. While this was a popular thing to do at his time, no one today takes the story seriously.
15. The Clear Rejection By A Real Authority - Jerome
There was one great Hebrew scholar among the Christian Church living in the era of Saint Augustine - Jerome the translator of the Latin Vulgate. Jerome rejected the Apocrypha as Holy Scripture in the strongest of terms. He refused to place it in his translation of the Old Testament. It was only after the death of Jerome that the Apocrypha was placed in the Vulgate - the official translation of the Roman Catholic Church. His expert testimony was rejected.
16. Early Christian Art Is Not A Test Of Divine Truth
The fact that stories from the Apocrypha were depicted in early Christian art only shows that they were considered valuable in some sense by believers. However the divine authority of any work is not determined by whether it is included or missing in art collections by Christians.
17. They Were Rejected By Many Catholic Scholars Through The Protestant Reformation
Many Roman Catholic scholars, through the Protestant Reformation, rejected the Apocrypha as Scripture. Even the Roman Catholic Church made a distinction between the Apocrypha and the other books of the Bible prior to the Protestant Reformation. An example of this is Cardinal Cajetan. He is the man who opposed Martin Luther at Augsburg. In 1518, he published A Commentary on all the Authentic Historical Books of the Old Testament. His commentary, however, did not include the Apocrypha.
Cardinal Ximenes made a distinction between the Apocrypha and the Old Testament in his work called the Complutensian Polyglot (1514-1517).
Thus there was no unanimity of opinion among Roman Catholic scholars that these books should be considered Scripture. Consequently, before the Protestant Reformation these books were not considered canonical by all of the church authorities.
18. They Were Not Officially Accepted By The Roman Catholic Church Until The 16th Century
While councils at Hippo (393) and Carthage (397) listed the Apocrypha as canonical, this was not the stated view of the entire church. As we have seen there were Roman Catholic works at the time of the Protestant Reformation that did not include the Apocrypha with the Old Testament.
It is only since the Council of Trent that the Apocrypha has had an authoritative status. The first official council of the Roman Catholic Church to ratify these books was at the Council of Trent in 1546-1563. There is no official record of the acceptance of the writings as authoritative Scripture before this time.
Why Were Certain Books Of The Septuagint Plus Rejected?
In addition, the decision at Trent has many problems. Rather than accepting the entire fourteen or fifteen books of the Septuagint plus as Holy Scripture they rejected First and Second Esdras (which they call Third and Fourth Esdras) and the Prayer of Manasseh. It is interesting to note that Second Esdras, or Fourth Esdras in Roman Catholic reckoning, contains a strong objection against prayers for the dead - one of the important doctrines practiced by the Roman Catholic Church at that time.
Again, Second Esdras also limits the Old Testament canon to twenty-four books.
2 Esdras refers to the canon of 24 books which likely refers to the same canon as the Talmud has.[25] Beckwith, Roger T. (2008-11-01). The Old Testament Canon of the New Testament Church: and its Background in Early Judaism. Wipf and Stock Publishers. ISBN 978-1-60608-249-2.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Development_of_the_Old_Testament_canon
This of course, would exclude the Apocrypha among which it itself is named.
It must also be noted that at the Council of Trent there seems to have been no Hebrew scholars and only a few good Greek scholars.
19. There Are Other Books, Apart From Scripture, Found Among The Dead Sea Scrolls
Most scholars believe that the people who lived at the place near the Dead Sea, where the Dead Sea Scrolls were found, were the Essenes. Although they were rivals of mainstream Judaism they accepted the same books as Holy Scripture.
While it is true that the books of the Apocrypha were found among the scrolls left by this group, they're not the only non-canonical books that were found among the Dead Sea Scrolls. The materials found at Qumran were part of a library - they were not merely books of Scripture.
While commentaries of the biblical books have been found at Qumran no commentary has thus far been found on the Apocryphal books. Consequently there is no evidence whatsoever that the Dead Sea Community held the books of the Apocrypha to be divinely inspired.
Even if evidence were someday found that showed the Essenes believed the Apocrypha to be divine, this alone would prove nothing. This group was a sect that was not in the mainstream of Jewish thinking.
20. The Protestants Have Always Rejected The Divine Authority Of The Apocrypha
While some Protestants may find some use of the Apocrypha, such as printing it between the testaments and using it in some measure in public worship, it has never been accepted as Holy Scripture. The use by Protestants of the Apocrypha has never been to establish doctrine or settle doctrinal issues. The use of the Apocrypha is limited. The Church of England in their Bible readings say the Apocrypha is to be used for example of life, but not to establish any doctrine.
The Westminster Confession goes even further. It states.
The books commonly called the Apocrypha . . . [are not] to be any otherwise approved, or made use of, than other human writings (Westminster Confession 1:3).
This is the Protestant position.
21. There Are Demonstrable Historical Errors In The Apocrypha
The Apocrypha also contains demonstrable historical errors. We can cite a number of examples.
The Age Of Tobit When He Died Is A Contradiction
For example, Tobit was supposedly alive when Jeroboam staged his revolt in 931 B.C.
I, Tobit, walked in the ways of truth and righteousness all the days of my life. I performed many acts of charity for my kindred and my people who had gone with me in exile to Nineveh in the land of the Assyrians. When I was in my own country, in the land of Israel, while I was still a young man, the whole tribe of my ancestor Naphtali deserted the house of David and Jerusalem. This city had been chosen from among all the tribes of Israel, where all the tribes of Israel should offer sacrifice and where the temple, the dwelling of God, had been consecrated and established for all generations forever. All my kindred and our ancestral house of Naphtali sacrificed to the calf that King Jeroboam of Israel had erected in Dan and on all the mountains of Galilee (Tobit 1:3-5).
Yet the text says that Tobit was still alive when the Assyrians captured the northern kingdom of Israel in 721 B.C. This means that he lived over two hundred years!
However, the Book of Tobit says he lived only 112 years.
So ended Tobit's words of praise. Tobit died in peace when he was one hundred twelve years old, and was buried with great honor in Nineveh (Tobit 14:1,2).
This is an obvious contradiction. Those who believe in an inerrant Scripture cannot accept the Apocrypha as Yahweh's Word.
Errors In The Book Of Judith
Another example can be found in the opening verse of the Book of Judith.
It was the twelfth year of the reign of Nebuchadnezzar, who ruled over the Assyrians in the great city of Nineveh. In those days Arphaxad ruled over the Medes in Ecbatana (Judith 1:1).
There are two historical errors in this verse. Nebuchadnezzar was the ruler of the Babylonians, not the Assyrians, and he ruled from Babylon, not Nineveh.
It Is Not Possible To Defend The Historical Accuracy Of The Apocrypha
While it is possible for Bible scholars, using the most up-to-date archaeological knowledge, to defend the historical accuracy of the books of the Bible, it is not possible to argue for the historical accuracy of the books of the Apocrypha. Many of them have demonstrable errors that cannot be reconciled.
22. There Is Sub-Biblical Content In The Books Of The Apocrypha
The content of the books of the Apocrypha is below that of canonical Scripture. Several of the books including Judith, Tobit, Susanna, and Bel and the Dragon read like legends or myths. When one reads these books alongside canonical Scripture the differences become obvious.
23. There Is No Objective Evidence Of Divine Authority In The Apocrypha
The books of the Apocrypha do not contain anything like predictive prophecy, or the firsthand testimony of miracles, that would give evidence of their divine authority. If Yahweh divinely inspired these books, then we should expect to see some internal evidence confirming it. But there is none.
24. None Of The Books Of The Apocrypha Claim Divine Authority
From the documents themselves we find no claim of authority. This is in contrast to the books of the Old Testament that claim to record the words that Yahweh Elohim spoke and the deeds that He performed among the people. Therefore it is not logical to attribute Yahweh's authority to the books of the Apocrypha when they themselves make no claim to divine authority.
25. There Was No Hebrew Original For All Of The Books Of the Apocrypha
While the books of the present Old Testament canon were written in Hebrew, with small parts in Aramaic, some of the books of the Apocrypha have no Hebrew original behind them. They were composed in Greek. These include Susanna, the Letter of Jeremiah, and the additions to Esther.
While the Hebrew language is not a determining factor as to what books should be part of the Old Testament canon, all of the undisputed books of the Old Testament were composed in Hebrew - none of them were composed in Greek. Greek did not become the international language till about 330 B.C. This was about seventy years after the close of the Old Testament. The fact that a number of the books of the Apocrypha were originally written in Greek shows their late date and their lack of claim to be part of the Old Testament.
26. Yahshua ' Testimony Is Definitive
It is clear that in the first century the Old Testament was complete. Yahshua put His stamp of approval on the books of the Hebrew Old Testament but said nothing concerning the Apocrypha. However, He did say that the Scriptures were the authoritative Word of Elohim and they could not be broken. Any adding to that which Elohim has revealed is denounced in the strongest of terms. Yahshua asked the religious leaders a penetrating question.
Why do you break the command of Elohim for the sake of your tradition? (Matthew 15:3).
Yahshua' And The Extent Of The Old Testament
A statement by Yahshua seemingly gives His belief in the extent of the Old Testament.
Therefore I send you prophets, sages, and scribes, some of whom you will kill and crucify, and some you will flog in your synagogues and pursue from town to town, so that upon you may come all the righteous blood shed on earth, from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zechariah son of Barachiah, whom you murdered between the sanctuary and the altar. Truly I tell you, all this will come upon this generation (Matthew 23:34-36).
He mentions Abel and Zechariah as the first and last murder messengers of Yahweh Elohim that were murdered. Abel's murder is mentioned in Genesis while Zechariah's was in 2 Chronicles - the last Old Testament book in the Hebrew canonical order.
The fact that these two are specifically mentioned is particularly significant. There are other murders of Elohim's messengers recorded in the Apocrypha. Yahshua does not mention them. This strongly suggests He did not consider the books of the Apocrypha as part of Old Testament Scripture as with the books from Genesis to 2 Chronicles.
There Was More Testimony From Yahshua
Yahshua gave further testimony of the extent of the Old Testament canon in the day of His resurrection. He said.
How foolish you are, and how slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken! . . . And beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, he explained to them what was said in all the Scriptures concerning himself (Luke 24:25,27).
Note Yahshua' emphasis on "all that the prophets had spoken." Later He explained the extent of "all that the prophets had said."
He said to them, "This is what I told you while I was still with you: Everything must be fulfilled that is written about me in the Law of Moses, the Prophets and the Psalms" (Luke 24:44).
This is a reference to the threefold division of the Hebrew Scripture. They constitute "all that the prophets said." There is no reference to the Apocrypha. It would not have been part of the threefold division of the Old Testament.
The Old Testament Apocrypha Is Not Scripture
As the evidence is examined it becomes clear that the books of the Apocrypha should not be accepted with the same divine authority as the books found in the Hebrew Old Testament. There is no evidence whatsoever that they belong in Holy Scripture. To the contrary, all the evidence speaks to their exclusion. Because they are not Scripture it is wrong to have them bound in a single volume with Holy Scripture. Doing so will only mislead believers.
The Apocrypha Does Have Value
The fact that the Apocrypha is not considered to be Holy Scripture does not mean that it is entirely worthless. The books do have some value. For example, the Book of First Maccabees has some valuable historical references about the period between the testaments. However any value these books do have are as historical works only - not divinely inspired Scripture.
It Is An Important Matter
The issue as to which books belong in Holy Scripture is more than a historical issue. The books of the Bible are divinely revealed books - all other books are not. The Scripture gives Yahweh's truth in an error-free manner - no other book can claim this. The Scripture is the final authority to solve all doctrinal and behavioral issues. Therefore it is of primary importance that we know the extent of Scripture.
Summary
The books of the Apocrypha should not be considered as Holy Scripture because they do not give any evidence as being authoritative. Protestants deny the canonical status of these books on the basis of both internal and external evidence. This evidence includes the following.
First, the Apocrypha contains doctrines and practices that contradict what has been previously revealed in Scripture. Add to this the Apocrypha is never cited in the New Testament as Holy Scripture. This is in contrast to the canonical books - almost all of them are cited.
The Jews rejected the Apocrypha as being part of Yahweh's Word. For one reason, these books were written after Yahweh had ceased giving divine revelation. In these years Yahweh was not giving any authoritative word to His people.
The fact that the Apocrypha is found in the manuscripts of the Septuagint proves nothing - we do not know the content of the Septuagint in pre-Christian times. Furthermore there is no evidence of a wider Alexandrian canon of Scripture. The Jews, wherever they lived, used the same Hebrew canon that did not include the Apocrypha.
The Apocrypha was not on any early list of Christian books that were considered Scripture. While a few church fathers quoted them as authoritative, most did not. In addition, none of those fathers who cited the Apocrypha as authoritative Scripture knew any Hebrew.
There is also the problem with the exact content of the Apocrypha. The books contained in the Apocrypha are not well defined - not everyone can agree on which books are authoritative.
Augustine, while a great thinker, did not read Hebrew and knew very little Greek. Furthermore he accepted the fanciful account of the origin of the Septuagint. Jerome, a real Hebrew scholar, rejected the books outright.
Many Roman Catholic scholars, to the time of the Protestant Reformation, rejected the Apocrypha as Scripture.
While some Protestants make some use of the Apocrypha it has always been rejected as Scripture.
Another major problem for the Apocrypha is demonstrable historical errors in it. This is not consistent with Yahweh's Word being error-free. Furthermore there is no evidence in these books of divine authority - fulfilled prophecy is lacking. Add to this there is no claim within the books of Yahweh's authority.
Finally we have the testimony of Yahshua. He said the Scriptures were true and could not be broken. However the Apocrypha was not Scripture to Him. Since neither the Jews, Yahshua, or His apostles considered these writings as part of the Old Testament neither should we.
Again, all this evidence against the so-called lost or hidden books is another huge reason why I conclude that the present thirty-nine books of the Old Testament are the complete Scripture that Yahweh Elohim has given us. There are no other lost or hidden divinely authoritative books of Scripture that belong to the Old Testament.
SECTION 3:The Book of Enoch
Now it's time to deal with perhaps the most famous pseudepigrapha, called the Book of Enoch and the teaching contained in it concerning the Sons of Elohim. Of all the so-called lost or hidden books, I have researched this one the most; and have found serious evidence why beyond a reasonable doubt we should have reservations against what many Christians today believe to be the absolute authentic book of Enoch.
Without even looking at the contents of this Book I've already given enough evidence for why I don't believe this so-called lost book and its fellow categorized books are the inspired scriptures of Elohim. Here in SECTION 3, I want to primarily focus on a very popular teaching that I consider to be a non-biblical theory that promotes fallen angels having the ability to have physical relations with other species called humans, and re-producing offspring.
I will give you an alternative theory to consider which I deem more scripturally sound; and involves less assumption and conflict with existing Biblical principles.
After you read this, I think you'll begin to understand even more why I even see the doctrine on this subject has the potential to be a stumbling block concerning the salvation of many. Before getting into the non-biblical teaching found in the so-called Book of Enoch, let us first remind ourselves of...
The Fact the Book of Enoch is listed as apart of a group of books categorized as the Pseudepigrapha
Technically, a pseudepigraphon is a book written in a biblical style and ascribed to an author who did not write it. In common usage, however, the term pseudepigrapha is often used by way of distinction to refer to apocryphal writings that do not appear in printed editions of the Bible, as opposed to the texts listed above.
Often included among the pseudepigrapha are 3 and 4 Maccabees because they are not traditionally found in western Bibles, although they are in the Septuagint.
Similarly, the Book of Enoch, Book of Jubilees and 4 Baruch are often listed with the pseudepigrapha although they are commonly included in Ethiopian Bibles. The Psalms of Solomon are found in some editions of the Septuagint.
Where To Read The Book of Enoch:
https://bookofenochreferences.wordpress.com/category/the-book-of-enoch-with-biblical-references-chapters-10-to-20/chapter-10/
Despite all the non-hidden evidence against it, I've conversed with many people who haven't thoroughly studied what the book teaches against the truth of the Bible, who believe in this Book of Enoch without question. We will now begin to familiarize ourselves with this book. Afterwards we will look at more teachings within this book that go against the Bible.
The Background History of the Book of Enoch?
At first I thought why isn’t the book of enoch in the scripture? Enoch was referenced in the Bible, why was it judged as unqualified in the canon of scripture. Is it another grievous error concocted by the Catholic church? “Why did the church suppress the Book of Enoch?
After all, there are various references to Enoch throughout the Old and New Testament .I want to specifically look at and address this question regarding the Book of Enoch. Why was this book rejected as Scripture?
Then when I began reading and researching the Book for myself and came across certain facts and writings made me begin to see why.
The first fact I came across was there are actually three different books by that name. Scholars have named these books 1 Enoch, 2 Enoch, and 3 Enoch to differentiate them from each other. 1 Enoch, which is the proper title for the book, is typically what everyone is referring to when they talk about the “Book of Enoch.”
To give some basic information about these other two books before we move on to the main topic, here is what the Anchor Yale Bible Dictionary has to say concerning 2 Enoch:
“The origins of 2 Enoch are unknown. Research has not reached any consensus about the time, place, or contents of its first published form. The options range from Charles’ theory that the longer recension was written by an Alexandria Jew in the 1st century through belief that it was a Christian rewrite of 1 Enoch, probably in Greek, made anywhere from the 2nd century A.D. (in Syria?) to the 10th (in Byzantium), up to the denial that it is anything more than a home-grown product of Slavic religious culture.”
-Francis I. Andersen, “Enoch, Second Book Of,” Anchor Yale Bible Dictionary
In regard to 3 Enoch, The Anchor Yale Bible Dictionary states that it is:
“A late Jewish apocalypse in Hebrew, probably compiled in the 6th or 7th century A.D. in Babylonia.”
-Philip S. Alexander, “Enoch, Third Book Of,” Anchor Yale Bible Dictionary
While interesting on their own, 2 & 3 Enoch are not really relevant to our current study. Like we said, when people talk about “the Book of Enoch,” typically they are referring to 1 Enoch. The content of 1 Enoch is what most people are familiar with and curious about. Moreover, the writings that make up 1 Enoch are what the early believers in Yahshua were familiar with.
So with that said, who was Enoch? What is the Book of Enoch? What was the significance of this book to the early followers of Yahshua? What is the significance of this book to believers today? What can we learn from it—if anything?
Let’s begin with that first question: Who was Enoch?
We don’t have a lot of information on Enoch, but here is what we know from Scripture:
• He was the great-great-great-great-grandson of Adam and the great-grandfather of Noah (Genesis 5:18-29).
• He “walked faithfully with Elohim” and then was mysteriously taken away by Elohim (Genesis 5:22- 24).
Genesis 5:22-24 Enoch walked with Elohim after he fathered Methuselah 300 years and had other sons and daughters. Thus all the days of Enoch were 365 years. Enoch walked with Elohim, and he was not, for Elohim took him.
• The author of Hebrews elaborates on this event, saying that Enoch did not experience death (Hebrews 11:5). Although, some believe that eventually, he did die later based on (Hebrews 9:27; 11:13).
• He was known as a man of faith who lived a life pleasing to Elohim (Hebrews 11:5).
• Most importantly, in regards to our study, he was NOT the author of the Book of Enoch.
That last point might shock those who haven’t really studied this topic. But it’s a simple fact that the Enoch of the Bible could not have been the author of what we call the Book of Enoch. Why? Well there are a number of reasons.
First, the Book of Enoch contains anachronisms. For instance, the Book of Enoch makes clear use of biblical passages from the prophets like Isaiah, Zechariah, and Ezekiel, which were obviously written long after Enoch’s time. Places like Mount Sinai are even mentioned by name…
Of course, such places and future writings of future born prophets that the patriarch Enoch would have had no knowledge of.
Second, scholars are able to determine the historical setting and date of the Enochic texts by studying the grammar, syntax, and doctrinal content of those writings in light of other historical data. Enochic scholar, George W. E. Nickelsburg, writes:
The Enochic use of pagan mythological motifs and its preachments against Gentile oppression are clear marks of this text’s setting in the Hellenistic world and of its complex interaction with the events and culture of that world.
-George W. E. Nickelsburg, “Jewish Literature Between the Bible and the Mishnah,” p. 53
So again, when you look at the History of the Book of Enoch, you can't escape the fact that it is a fictional book that was not written by the Enoch who lived before the flood.
So that brings us to our second question. If the book of Enoch is not some special revelation written by the patriarch Enoch himself, what is it? Again, the Book of Enoch is what’s known as “pseudepigrapha,” which means that it is a falsely attributed text. That is to say, it is a text whose claimed author is not the true author. The true author of the text attributed the work to a figure of the past—in this case, the patriarch Enoch. These types of pseudepigraphal works were very common between 200 BCE to 200 CE. It is not a hidden fact that the book is listed as a pseudepigraphal work. i.e. a work with a false author (or written under a pen name).
Also there is the fact that there are a number of these pseudepigraphal works written around the same time frame dated from the time between the Old and New Testament through the first few centuries. This shows two prevailing truths about that time, these types of fictitious works were created ...
1. It appears to have been a writing fad for a while.
2. People used the names of famous people, such as characters from the Bible, to lend credibility to the work – to make it appear more authentic.
As a result, throughout history, very few well educated people actually believe the book to have been written by Enoch. Let's entertain this already established by the experts as false scenario why don't we.
If it was an actual book hand written by the Enoch whose relationship with Yahweh Elohim was righteous enough to be miraculously taken away by Yahweh(Genesis 5:24), it would have to have existed all those years, before the oldest recorded Biblical book of Job, before Yahweh even commanded Moses to preserve the holy commandments of His law in written form; it would have had to survive the flood.
It is not admitted into the Jewish canon, for a reason. Given who Enoch was, I'm sure that if there was even a hint of authenticity about the book of Enoch the Jewish scholars would have put it right up there with the inspired writings such as the book of Job and Moses.
Obviously they did not think that this book of Enoch was inspired scripture that was possibly written before the deluge, or that it could have safely survived that worldwide calamity, the destroyer of all things. People who want to defend this book argue this point by saying remember that Noah, who survived the deluge, was the great-grandson of Enoch himself.
They assert that this scripture could be genuine because Noah could have " rewritten it, under the Spirit's inspiration, if it had been destroyed by the violence of the deluge." [Tertullian, about 198 A.D.] Even Tertullian, one of the few church fathers to support the Book of Enoch, admits that the Jews never accepted it as authentic and that Christians of his time also rejected it.
Even though the Book of Enoch was well know by early Christian writers, most rejected the book as being from Elohim. Athanasius, Origen, and Jerome all argued against the book being considered Scripture.
In fact it appears that only Tertullian and Augustine thought the work was inspired and Augustine waffled on the point. Even the Roman Catholic Church who added twelve books to their Old Testament, didn’t consider this book – likely because of the early rejection.
Again, there are several books that go by the name “The Book of Enoch” Most refer to copies of a book found in 1773 in Ethiopia.These copies are a translation of a Greek text that was in turn a translation of an Aramaic text.
Small fragments of this large book were found among the Dead Sea scrolls. These fragments contained Parts of chapter 2, verses 12-14 and chapter 3 verse 13-16; but the book has 108 chapters. Most scholars date the book to between 300 B.C. and 100 B.C.
Larger portions of the book survived in Greek, but again, not nearly the whole. They also date from a later period (after the church was founded). The only whole version are the Ethiopian translations.
Nickelsburg explains:
The components of 1 Enoch were composed in Aramaic and then translated into Greek, and from Greek into ancient Ethiopic (Ge’ez). The entire collection is extant only in manuscripts of the Ethiopic Bible, of which this text is a part. Approximately ninety such manuscripts from the fifteenth to the twentieth centuries are available to scholars in the West […] Roughly twenty-five percent of 1 Enoch has survived in two Greek manuscripts from the fourth and fifth/sixth centuries (chaps 1:1-32:6; 97:6-107:3) and a few fragments of other parts. Eleven manuscripts from Qumran contain substantial as well as tiny fragments of the Aramaic of parts of chapters 1- 36, 72-82, 85-90, and 91-107. A fragment of a sixth/seventh-century Coptic manuscript (93:3-8), an extract in a ninth-century Latin manuscript (106:1-18), and a twelfth-century Syriac excerpt (6:1-6) have also survived.
- George W. E. Nickelsburg and James C. VanderKam, “1 Enoch: The Hermeneia Translation,” p. 13
A comparison of the Ethiopian translations to the Aramaic and Greek fragments show the Ethiopian translation is fairly, but not entirely, accurate.
Most scholars note that the Book of Enoch, as it currently exists, is a disjointed work. This means it doesn’t have a unifying flow, such as would be found in the writings of one author. It is generally agreed to be a composition of several works by multiple authors, but exactly who wrote which portions is heavily debated.
As mentioned, it is part of the pseudepigraphal literature. According to scholars, it was written by numerous authors and pieced together over the last few centuries BCE. Nickelsburg writes:
1 Enoch is a collection of apocalyptic (revelatory) texts that were composed between the late fourth century B.C.E and the turn of the era. The size of the collection, the diversity of its contents, and its many implications for the study of ancient Judaism and Christian origins make it arguably the most important Jewish writing that has survived from the Greco-Roman period
- George W. E. Nickelsburg and James C. VanderKam, “1 Enoch: The Hermeneia Translation,” p. Vii
To go on a quick rabbit trail, it’s worth mentioning that the translations of the Book of Enoch we have today are derived primarily from these late Ethiopic manuscripts from the fifteenth to the twentieth centuries CE. While scholars and translators consult the few fragments from earlier Greek and Aramaic manuscripts, they don’t really have a lot to work with.
This ought to impact how much weight we put on the version of the Book of Enoch we have today when considering how it might fit into the first century. That is to say, we should proceed with caution, and not blindly assume, that the version of Enoch we have today is a 100% accurate representation of the version of Enoch they had in the first century.
For instance, if a significant chunk of Enoch has been preserved only in manuscripts from the fifteenth century or later, we cannot be confident that the content contained in those later manuscripts were not edited or added to much later than the first century.
Contrast this with the New Testament, which has nearly 6,000 complete Greek manuscripts that have been cataloged in addition to over 20,000 ancient translations in other languages, which makes it by far the most attested literature of the ancient world. Moreover, many of the New Testament manuscripts are quite early. Scholar and theologian, Dr. Matt Waymeyer, explains:
We currently possess as many as a dozen manuscripts from the second century, 64 from the third century, and 48 from the fourth century, for a total of 124 manuscripts within 300 years of the composition of the New Testament. The earliest New Testament fragment is separated from the original by only 50 years; the earliest books are separated by only 100 years; and the earliest complete New Testament is separated by only 225 years. By way of comparison, only ten manuscripts of Thucydides’ History of the Peloponnesian War exist (the earliest dating 1,300 years after Thucydides); only eight manuscripts of Herodotus’ History exist (the earliest dating 1,300 years after Herodotus); and only two manuscripts of Tacitus’ Histories and Annals exist (the earliest dating 700 years after Tacitus). The unparalleled number and early date of the biblical manuscripts makes it clear that the New Testament is easily the most remarkably preserved book of the ancient world.
-Matt Waymeyer, “Can We Trust the New Testament Text?” www.expositors.org.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rEdwBu2AP8c
The Bible: Why Does It Endure? | Day of Discovery (PART 1)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qDMd3gCxN-s
The Bible: Why Does It Endure? | Day of Discovery (PART 2)
The incredible abundance of New Testament manuscripts that we have, some going back very early, is extremely valuable in textual criticism—that is, the process of ascertaining the original wording of a text. The fewer the manuscripts and the later the dates of those manuscripts, the more difficult it is to be confident that we’ve reconstructed the original.
It’s worth keeping that in mind as we read modern translations of the Book of Enoch. Unfortunately, much of it is derived from only a limited amount of manuscripts, which are not only translations of translations, but also over a thousand years separated from the original.
Moving forward, the actual content of the Book of Enoch is composed of 108 chapters that are divided into 5 sections followed by two short appendices. Nickelsburg summarizes the teaching of the Book of Enoch as such:
The sections represent developing stages of the Enochic tradition, each one building on the earlier ones—though not in the order in which they presently stand in the collection. Overall they express a common worldview that characterizes this present world and age as evil and unjust and in need of divine adjudication and renewal. With the possible exception of the Book of the Luminaries, they focus on the common concern and expectation that a coming divine judgment will eradicate evil and injustice from the earth and will return the world to God’s created intention. Their authority lies in their claim that they transmit divine revelation, which the patriarch Enoch received in primordial times (Gen 5:21-24) and which is made public in the last times to constitute the eschatological community of the chosen.
-George W. E. Nickelsburg and James C. VanderKam, “1 Enoch: The Hermeneia Translation,” p. 1
So basically, the authors of this composite work claim to have received this special revelation from the patriarch Enoch. As we’ll learn a little later, it’s taught that Enoch ascended into heaven and was shown these heavenly secrets. He then descended from heaven to transmit this revelation, which is now written in the Book of Enoch.
The sectarian community that wrote and followed these teachings claims that this revelation was made public in their time, long after the patriarch Enoch. Why? So that they could establish an end-times community and proclaim these special teachings. The goal was to prepare the “righteous chosen,” i.e. the sectarian community who followed these teachings, for God’s soon-coming judgment that they believed was upon them. Here’s what the introduction in the first verse of the Book of Enoch says:
The words of the blessing with which Enoch blessed the righteous chosen who will be present on the day of tribulation, to remove all the enemies; and the righteous will be saved. -1 Enoch 1:1, George W.E. Nickelsburg & James C. VanderKam, “1 Enoch: The Hermeneia Translation,” pp. 19
Perhaps a good modern analogy to the Book of Enoch would be the Book of Mormon. According to Mormonism, Joseph Smith claimed that an angel by the name of Moroni visited him and directed him to find golden plates containing special revelation from God, which he then translated into the Book of Mormon. The sectarian community that developed from these teachings believes to this day that they are part of an end-times community—the Latter-Day Saints—commissioned with the task of proclaiming the teachings of Mormonism
The difference is that the writers of the Book of Enoch claim to have received their revelation from an actual biblical character—the patriarch Enoch. Joseph Smith claims that a character, Moroni, which is only revealed in the Mormon literature, was the one who directed him to the Mormon revelation. In either case, both books claim special revelation that has been made public to a chosen few in order to establish an end-times community around particular doctrines.
True Christians who are interested in the Book of Enoch, should be willing to ...
1 Thessalonians 5:21,"but test all things. Hold fast to the good."
The first question we’ll look at is the question of canonicity. What is believed about the Book of Enoch’s inspiration and authority? Today, only the Ethiopian Church, and—interestingly enough—the Mormon religion, consider the Enochic writings to be authoritative. Aside from that, most of Christianity has rejected the Book of Enoch as inspired or authoritative, which is why it isn’t included in the Bible.
Historically, the writings that make up the Book of Enoch were never considered to be inspired in any universal way. While the writings were revered, especially among some sectarian Jewish communities, they were never considered to be part of “Scripture.”
For instance, the books that make up the TANAKH are referred to in the New Testament and other Second Temple era Jewish literature as the Torah, Nevi’im, and Ketuvim—that is, the Law, the Prophets, and the Psalms. One place we see a reference to this threefold designation of the Scriptures is in the gospel of Luke:
Luke 24:44-45 Then he said to them, “These are my words that I spoke to you while I was still with you, that everything written about me in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms must be fulfilled. Then He opened their minds to understand the Scriptures.
But this threefold designation was used to define the canon of Scripture long before the New Testament times. For instance, Ben Sira, the author of the Apocryphal book, the Wisdom of Sirach, or Ecclesiasticus, had a grandson who translated his grandfather’s writings into Greek around 130 BCE. This translator wrote his own prologue to the translation, which makes reference to the three parts of the Old Testament canon.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2CVDL6m6EYM
The Bible: Why Does It Endure? | Day of Discovery (PART 3)
In regard to this prologue, Scholar Roger T. Beckwith writes:
It appears, then, that for this writer there are three groups of books which have a unique authority, and that his grandfather wrote only after gaining great familiarity with them, as their interpreter not as their rival. The translator explicitly distinguishes ‘these things’ (i.e. Ecclesiasticus, or uncanonical Hebrew compositions such as Ecclesiasticus) from ‘the Law itself and the Prophecies and the rest of the Books’ […] And not only does he state that in his own day there was this threefold canon, distinguished from all other writings, in which even the Hagiographa formed a closed collection of old books, but he implies that such was the case in his grandfather’s time also.
-Roger T. Beckwith, “The Old Testament Canon of the New Testament Church” p. 111
You’ll notice that by the time of around 130 BCE when this prologue was written, there was already an idea of a “closed” canon of Scripture, which was uniquely sacred and distinct from any additional writings such as the apocryphal writings. And this idea of a closed canon was apparently affirmed even earlier in Ben Sira’s time, according to his grandson.
As far as we know there is no manuscript or historical evidence indicating that the Enochic writings were ever accepted as part of this threefold canon of “Scripture.” Neither the Greek Septuagint nor the Hebrew Masoretic texts included the Enochic writings in their sets.
Moreover, the first century Jewish historian Josephus wrote that there was already a defined Hebrew canon in his time. Here’s a passage from “Against Apion,” which was written by Josephus in the 90’s CE:
Our books, those which are justly believed, are only 22, and contain the record of all time. Of these, five are the books of Moses, comprising the laws and the traditional history from the birth of man down to Moses’s death. This period falls only a little short of 3,000 years. From the death of Moses down to Artaxerxes who followed Xerxes the king of Persia, the prophets after Moses wrote the events of their own times in thirteen books. The remaining four books contain hymns to God and precepts for the conduct of human life. From Artaxerxes down to our own time, the complete history has been written, but has not been deemed worthy of like trust with the earlier records, because of the failure of the exact succession of the prophets. We have given practical proof of our reverence for our own Scriptures. For, although such long ages have now passed, no one has ventured to add, or to remove, or to alter anything, and it is an instinct with every Jew, from the day of his birth, to regard them as the decrees of God, to abide by them, and (if need be) cheerfully to die for them.
-Josephus, Against Apion 1.7f., or 1. 37-43; Thackeray’s translation, corrected.
You’ll notice that Josephus divides Scriptures into three categories: the five books of Moses, the Books of the prophets after Moses, and the books of hymns to God and precepts for the conduct of human life. This of course is basically the same threefold designation of the Scriptures that we see in the gospels and other early Jewish literature.
Perhaps the most interesting thing about this passage is that Josephus limits these inspired books to a certain number—twenty-two. This number, of course, is different than the number of books we have in our current Old Testament canon, which is thirty-nine books. But that’s because Josephus’ canon combined certain books that are separated in our current canon. For instance, Lamentations was likely attached to Jeremiah, Ruth with Judges, and so on.
The point, however, is that this is significant evidence from a primary source that by the 90’s CE, there were a specific number of books that were already considered to be uniquely authoritative. And, according to Josephus, all Jews accepted this. While there is some debate over which books would have been included or excluded from Josephus’ list, no scholar believes that any book that’s not already part of the Old Testament canon we have today would have been part of this first century canon.
But wait! There’s more! Even the Qumran community, which certainly revered the Book of Enoch, shockingly did not include it in their canon of Scripture either.
To unpack all of the evidence is beyond the scope of this teaching. But Roger T. Beckwith presents the evidence that proves this to be the case in his massive scholarly work, “The Old Testament Canon of the New Testament Church,” specifically in pages 358-366
To summarize only a few of his arguments:
1) In their own writings, the Qumran community didn’t treat the pseudepigrapha the same way they treated Scripture. Beckwith writes:
Though the Qumran literature (like other Jewish literature of its period) quotes the canonical Scriptures with great frequency, and uses conventional formulas for the purpose, it only rarely quotes the Essene pseudepigrapha, never using such formulas or giving any other clear indication that the works quoted were of prophetic or canonical authority.
-Roger T. Beckwith, “The Old Testament Canon of the New Testament Church,” p. 364
2) According to historical evidence, the Qumran community acknowledged the threefold canon of Scripture, and they are recorded as grouping their pseudepigrapha in a separate appendix to the canon, indicating that these additional writings were not part of the canon as they saw it. Beckwith writes:
The use by the Therapeutae or the Essence of the standard three divisions of the canon, and of one of the standard counts of the canonical books, and their grouping of their own pseudepigrapha in a separate appendix, imply that the three sections and the standard count were already agreed and settled among the Jews before the Essenes separated from the rest about 152 BC. Three of the books of 1 Enoch had been written by that time, but the Essenes had evidently not attempted to include them in any of the three sections of the canon, or to number them in the count of the canonical books, since they did nothing of the kind after the separation, either with these pseudepigrapha or subsequent pseudepigrapha.
-Roger T. Beckwith, “The Old Testament Canon of the New Testament Church,” p. 365
3) The Qumran community, which likely emerged from the very community that produced the Enochic writings, viewed some of the pseudepigrapha like Enoch as divinely revealed, but not on the same level as the Scriptures themselves. They viewed it as merely the correct interpretation of the Scriptures. Beckwith writes:
It is now clear that the main purpose of some of the pseudepigrapha, lately identified as Essene or proto-Essene, was to expound and maintain the Essene interpretation of the Pentateuch, over against rival interpretations. This is particularly clear in the case of the newly-discovered Qumran Temple Scroll, but it also applies to the Astronomical Book in 1 Enoch (1 En. 72-82), to Jubilees and to an extensive section of the Aramaic Testament of Levi (verses 13-57, Charles’s text) […] If this is true, it means that the Essenes were not really meaning to add to Old Testament prophecy, any more than to Old Testament law. As regards the Pentateuch, what their pseudonymous legal writings offered was an interpretation of it—a revealed interpretation, certainly, but not more than an interpretation. As regards Old Testament prophecy, what their pseudonymous apocalyptic writings offered was again an interpretation of it—supplemented perhaps, but only from natural sources, like arithmetic and astrology, not from supernatural. This interpretation, too, was evidently held to be a revealed interpretation, but an interpretation was all that it aimed to be.
-Roger T. Beckwith, “The Old Testament Canon of the New Testament Church,” p. 360, 362
So historically we see that the Book of Enoch has never been considered “Scripture” in the Jewish world, not even among the Qumran community, which certainly held the Enochic writings in high regard.
The Qumran community’s view on the Book of Enoch could perhaps be compared to some rabbinic views of the oral Torah. Orthodox Judaism claims, for instance, that at least portions of the oral Torah were given to Moses on Mount Sinai and passed down from generation to generation. The oral Torah is therefore considered to have a divine authority in Orthodox Judaism, but no Jew thinks of the oral Torah as being the same as Scripture—it’s just the revealed interpretation of Scripture.
In the same way, the Qumran community, which in all likelihood was connected to the very community that produced the Enochic writings, claimed that the Enochic writings were divinely revealed to the patriarch Enoch. This claim to divine authority was possibly an attempt to rival other Jewish communities who claimed that their own traditions and interpretations had divine authority. It’s kind of like saying, “Oh you say your revelation goes back to Moses, huh? Well ours goes all the way back to Enoch!” In either case, there was a distinction between Scripture and the pseudepigrapha in the minds of the Qumran community, even though they valued the pseudepigrapha as divinely revealed.
What can we infer from this? It seems clear that the idea that the Book of Enoch ought to be part of the Bible is seriously lacking historical support. Not even the sectarian communities that produced and followed these writings considered them to be on the same level of Scripture. Therefore, why should we view the Book of Enoch as Scripture when not even those sectarian communities intended it to be viewed that way?
But what about the early believers in Yahshua? What did they think of the Book of Enoch? And didn’t Jude quote Enoch in the New Testament? Wouldn’t that indicate that these writings had some divine authority? Let’s look at the passage from Jude:
When you read Jude 14-15…
____________________________________________________
Jude 14-15 It was also about these that Enoch, the seventh from Adam, prophesied, saying, “Behold, the Lord comes with ten thousands of his holy ones, to execute judgment on all and to convict all the ungodly of all their deeds of ungodliness that they have committed in such an ungodly way, and of all the harsh things that ungodly sinners have spoken against him.”
We just read the Bible passage of Jude above. Now here is the passage from the Book of Enoch that Jude is said to be quoting:
Look, he comes with the myriads of his holy ones, to execute judgment on all, and to destroy all the wicked, and to convict all humanity for all the wicked deeds that they have done, and the proud and hard words that wicked sinners spoke against him.
--1 Enoch 1:9, George W.E. Nickelsburg & James C. VanderKam, “1 Enoch: The Hermeneia Translation,” p. 20
There are a couple of things to point out here. First, some scholars insist that Jude was in fact quoting directly from the Book of Enoch. But other scholars dispute this.
The scholars that dispute this point out, for example, that Jude never mentions a book or scroll of Enoch. He doesn’t mention what is written, only what is said, or what Enoch said. So rather than assuming that Jude quoted a so-called book of Enoch, scholars argue that Jude and the so called Book of Enoch are actually referencing the same oral tradition. In other words, scholars beleive Jude wasn’t relying on the Enochic writings for this saying of Enoch. Jude and the author of that particular passage in the Book of Enoch were perhaps both relying on the widely held tradition of what the actual Enoch said.
However, even if Jude did directly quote from the Book of Enoch, there’s still no reason to suggest that the Book of Enoch is inspired or should be part of the Bible. The biblical authors quoted plenty of material that nobody would consider sacred or inspired by Elohim. Semitic scholar, Dr. Michael Heiser, puts this point well:
Just as preachers today quote commentaries, journals, news periodicals, or even television shows to drive home or illustrate a point, so the biblical writers used external material to draw attention and make a statement. Paul quotes from pagan Greek poets. The psalmists and prophets borrow vocabulary and paraphrase material from ancient Egyptian, Mesopotamian, and Syrian literature. Jude quotes a book from the Pseudepigrapha (ancient writings that falsely claim authorship by a biblical character). The people of biblical times knew the quoted material wasn’t inspired, but it had meaning for them and their audience.
-Dr. Michael Hesier, “What’s Ugaritic Got to Do with Anything?” www.logos.com
The same logic used to argue that we ought to view the Book of Enoch as inspired on the basis that it’s quoted in the Bible can also be applied to a pagan poem. Look at what Paul is recorded to have said in the book of Acts when addressing the Athenians:
Acts 17:28 For “in him we live and move and have our being’; as even some of your own poets have said, “For we are indeed his offspring.”
These quotes are said to come from Greek poets writing about Zeus! Paul took the quotes and applied them to the Elohim of Israel. Obviously, it would be absurd to say that a pagan poem should be in the Bible just because an apostle quotes it—so why would it be different with the Book of Enoch?
Some might argue that the passage from Jude indicates that the quote from Enoch must be authentic since he says that Enoch prophesied. And it could certainly be argued that some of the original sayings of Enoch, like what Jude quoted, were preserved in the book of Enoch. But again, even if Jude quoted directly from the book of Enoch, it still doesn’t follow from that that the entire Book of Enoch is inspired or true, only the part that Jude quoted. And again, Enoch saying what was, perhaps, a widely held oral tradition, that wasn’t exclusive to the so called book of Enoch.
Others argue that there is no Biblical proof that an actual written book of Enoch exists. The existence of such a writing is not necessary for this quote from Jude to be authentically given…
"14Enoch, the seventh from Adam, also prophesied about them: “Behold, the Lord is coming with myriads of His holy ones 15 to execute judgment on everyone, and to convict all the ungodly of every ungodly act of wickedness and every harsh word spoken against Him by ungodly sinners.”d
1. Again, notice that Jude doesn’t state he is quoting from a writing of Enoch
2. Since multiple Enochs are mentioned in the Bible, he clarifies which one he is quoting.
How could Jude who lived 4,000 years later, know what Enoch said? Just like Moses, Jude is inspired of the Holy Spirit, so therefore the obvious answer is that Elohim told him (I Corinthians 2:12-13).
Same reason how Moses, ascribed to be the recorder of Genesis, was able to write words of people such as Adam and Abraham who lived hundreds of years before him.
Thus, it seems that the reasoning often used to suggest that the Book of Enoch should be considered sacred Scripture is severely underwhelming. The apostles didn’t view it that way. The smaller Jewish communities that followed the Book of Enoch didn’t view it that way either. There’s simply no reason that we should.
Others argue that the passage of the proven book of Jude is inaccurately quoted by the unproven book of Enoch which further proves that the so-called book of Enoch must not be inspired by Elohim...
When people read...
Enoch 1:9: “And behold! He cometh with ten thousands of His holy ones to execute judgment 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.”
1. They get all excited by this line. Jude must be quoting from the Book of Enoch!
2. Note that the quote is not a literal reproduction, even allowing for multiple translations.
3. Jude says Elohim will judge all and convict the ungodly among them.
4. The Book of Enoch says Elohim is judging all and will convict all of their ungodliness. Not quite the same.
What we need to ask is, if the Ethiopian copies a bad translation? Then can we trust the rest? Do we say Jude is bad at quoting? Then it wouldn’t be an inspired book and then what happens to the support for the Book of Enoch?
Now, there are other ways that Jude could have gotten this information about Enoch. Jude was actually Yahshua’s half-brother. He grew up with Yahshua. Yahshua was the Word that became flesh and dwelt among us. Yahshua knew Enoch personally and was there when Enoch walked the earth. Yahshua could easily have told Jude what actually was prophesied, okay?
Another way, a former prophet of Israel may have informed the Jewish people, in generations past about this prophecy; and it was known commonly among the Jewish people because the prophets, not everything that the prophets ever spoke was written down. So other prophets may have informed the Jewish people of this prophecy, and they just knew because it was told generation to generation. In fact a lot of things were told generation to generation. Not everything was true.
Again, we already see that the Book of Enoch, right here says – …He comes with ten thousands of His saints to execute judgment upon all, and to destroy all the unrighteous… – Whereas Jude (1:15) has “convict all who are impious.” And so, if he destroyed all the unrighteous there wouldn’t be anybody for us to reign over. So, it contradicts Scripture. And so, Jude would actually make the correction here. And there’s a big difference between “destroy” and “convict.”
When Yahshua says (John 16:8) “when the Holy Spirit comes, He will convict the world of sin,” it’s different from “He will destroy the world of sin,” right? It’s a different word with a different meaning and a different outcome.
And so, I think Yahshua informed Jude of the actual thing Enoch said. And the Jews, in their traditions, you know, maybe had a little zeal wanting to see the world destroyed, and added some things that weren't really there.
Now, I’ve seen where some would say “The Book of Enoch is inspired because it talks about fourteen different kinds of evergreen trees. And here we are today, science has not found any more than fourteen kinds of evergreen trees.” Well, that could have been something handed down. Or it could be that yeah, back then that was all the kinds of evergreen trees a man could find. And still to this day no one has found any more than fourteen. It doesn’t mean the whole book is inspired! Okay?
Another interestingly fact is none of the fragments, Aramaic or Greek, contain Enoch 1:9.The only version to have it are the Ethiopian copies.There is insufficient evidence whether the phrase is in the original Book of Enoch or whether a person knowledgeable of Christianity “enhanced” an older version.
Because the quote in Jude is unstable evidence, people have tried to prop up their cause by stating that the New Testament is filled with allusions to the Book of Enoch. By this, they mean that they compiled a set of catch phrases and conclude that books using similar catch phrases must come from the Book of Enoch.
For example, several cited the use of the phrase “son of man.” But this phrase is used heavily in Ezekiel. It is used in the Psalms a few times in reference to the Messiah.
A person trying to forge the biblical style will of course use wording similar to the Bible. However, it doesn’t serve as proof. You can’t conclude who borrowed from whom.
Could the Book of Enoch be Scripture?
Again, if the date of 300 B.C. to 100 B.C. is correct, then it comes during the years of silence.
1. Amos 8:11-12 - Yahweh said He would stop talking to the Israelites.
2. Micah 3:5-7 - It was because of all the false prophets. It would prove who was true and who was false.
Malachi was the last Old Testament prophet. Until the coming of John the Baptist, and Yahshua, prophecy disappeared. The Jews knew this...
I Maccabees 9:27: “So there was great distress in Israel, such as had not been since the time that prophets ceased to appear among them.”
I Maccabees 14:41: “The Jews and their priests have resolved that Simon should be their leader and high priest forever, until a trustworthy prophet should arise.”
If the Book of Enoch was written in the years of silence, then it follows that it could not have been an inspired book because no prophets existed. If it was written during the years of silence, then it’s claim to be written by Enoch is a falsehood.
1. John 17:17 - Elohim’s word is truth
2. II Timothy 3:16 - Scripture comes from the breath of Elohim
3. I Corinthians 2:12-13 - Elohim gives the very words
4. Titus 1:2 - Elohim cannot lie
Thus Yahweh would not record a message under a false name, nor would there ever have been a need to do so. Yahweh Elohim doesn’t need the reputation of Enoch to enhance His message!
__________________________________________________
Let’s move forward. Now we’re going to give a chronological summary of chapter sections of the Book of Enoch, breaking them down to point out inconsistencies not only within itself but more importantly with the Bible.
http://qbible.com/enoch/7.html
In the very first chapter of Enoch there is a contradiction of Scripture. Enoch 1:6 – the high mountains shall be shaken, the high hills be made low, And shall melt like wax before the flame 7 And the earth shall be wholly rent in sunder, And all that is upon the earth shall perish – talking about the day of Yahweh here – And there shall be judgment upon all men. –
What does Zechariah say though? Zechariah says (Zechariah 14:16) – it came to pass that everyone who is left – everyone who is left, that’s the ones that were not taken, okay – of all the nations that came against Jerusalem shall go up from year to year to worship the King, Yahweh of hosts, and to keep the Feasts of Tabernacles. – This is after the day of Yahweh, and there are some who are left, and these are the ones that we as believers are going to be ruling and reigning over.
Because it says in Revelation chapter 20(:4-5) – And I saw thrones, and they sat on them, and judgment was committed to them. Then I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded for their witness to Yahshua and for the word of Elohim, who had not worshiped the beast or his image, and had not received his mark on their foreheads or on their hands. And they lived and reigned with Messiah for a thousand years.
5 But the rest of the dead did not live again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection.
And so, who are we ruling and reigning over? Ourselves? Well, according to Enoch nobody’s left. All that’s upon the earth would perish. So if Enoch’s prophecy came true, we wouldn’t have anybody to rule and reign over!
The Book of the Watchers (1 Enoch 1-36) This section is believed to have been composed in the third century BCE. It is primarily an elaborate interpretation of Genesis 6. It tells the story of the rebellion of angels, who according to the book of Enoch are called “Watchers,” which led to Yahweh Elohim judging the earth by sending the flood in Genesis 6.
"1Now when men began to multiply on the face of the earth and daughters were born to them, 2 the sons of Elohim saw that the daughters of men were beautiful, and they took as wives whomever they chose.
3So Yahweh said, “My Spirit will not contend with man forever, for he is mortal; his days shall be 120 years.”
4The Nephilim were on the earth in those days, and afterward as well, when the sons of Elohim had relations with the daughters of men. And they bore them children who became the mighty men of old, men of renown.5 Then Yahweh saw that the wickedness of man was great upon the earth, and that every inclination of the thoughts of his heart was altogether evil all the time. 6 And Yahweh regretted that He had made man on the earth, and He was grieved in His heart. 7 So Yahweh said, “I will blot out man, whom I have created, from the face of the earth—every man and beast and crawling creature and bird of the air—for I am grieved that I have made them.”"
The following is the so called Book of Enoch's explanation of Genesis 6:1-7.
-1 Enoch 6:1-2, When the sons of men had multiplied, in those days, beautiful and comely daughters were born to them. And the watchers, the sons of heaven, saw them and desired them. And they said to one another, “Come, let us choose for ourselves wives from the daughters of men, and let us beget children for ourselves” […] And they began to go into them, and to defile themselves through them, and to teach them sorcery and charms, and to reveal to them the cutting of roots and plants. And they conceived from them and bore to them great giants.
THE BOOK OF ENOCH. CHAPTER 7.
1 Enoch 7:1," And they took wives for themselves and everyone chose for himself one each. And they began to go into them and were promiscuous with them. And they taught them charms and spells, and they showed them the cutting of roots and trees.
2 And they became pregnant and bore large giants. And their height was three thousand cubits.3 These devoured all the toil of men; until men were unable to sustain them. 4 And the giants turned against them in order to devour men.
5 And they began to sin against birds, and against animals, and against reptiles, and against fish, and they devoured one another’s flesh, and drank the blood from it.6 Then the Earth complained about the lawless ones."
-1 Enoch 6:1-2; 7:1-2, George W.E. Nickelsburg & James C. VanderKam, “1 Enoch: The Hermeneia Translation,” pp. 23-24
CHAPTER 10
1 And then the Most High, the Great and Holy One, spoke and sent Arsyalalyur to the son of Lamech, and said to him:2 “Say to him in my name; hide yourself! And reveal to him the end, which is coming, because the whole earth will be destroyed. A deluge is about to come on all the earth; and all that is in it will be destroyed.
VIEW 1: THE FALLEN ANGEL INTERPRETATION
According to the Book of Enoch, the ‘sons of Elohim’ of Genesis verses 2 and 4 are fallen angels, which have taken the form of masculine human-like creatures. These angels came to Earth and lusted after and married women of the human race (either Cainites or Sethites) and the resulting offspring were the ones who became Nephilim (giants). The Nephilim were part angel part human giants with physical superiority and therefore established themselves as men of renown for their physical prowess and military might. The fallen angels then teach humans about magic and how to make weapons and jewelry, promoting violence and promiscuity among the people of the earth(1 Enoch 7:1). This race of half human creatures was wiped out by the flood, along with mankind in general, who were sinners in their own right (Genesi 6:11,12)...
This 1 Enoch explanation of Genesis CH 6, is one that I find objectionable as far as the Bible is concerned.The Book of Enoch's view creates a lot of conflict with existing biblical principles...
-The Book of Enoch’s claim that back in Genesis 6, angels intermarried with earthly human women to produce giant half-breeds (1 Enoch 6), conflicts with Yahshua statement that angels do not marry (Mark 12:25)
Since from the beginning when Elohim made man, the Bible shows that one of the main purposes within marriage is for sexual relations & procreation(Gen. 1:27-28;2:18-25).
Matthew 22:30,”For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels of Elohim in heaven.”
Yahshua statement (Matthew 22:30;Mark 12:25), implies that when we’re in heaven with our new resurrected spiritual bodies, we, like the angels who aren’t designed to be marriage mates with each other, will also not be created for marriage or procreation with each other. Apparently Yahweh Elohim had no need for the angels to mate with each other and procreate to fill anything, so there was no reason for Him to create them with such a capacity. The angels were unlike Adam or man in Genesis who was all alone without any of his own kind in which he could mate with and produce children. Yahweh Elohim only created mankind that way because he wanted mankind to be fruitful and multiply filling the Earth. This is why Elohim Created and established the institution of marriage and arranged the first marriage by creating Eve as a suitable female helpmate who could get pregnant by Adam and produce more humans. Yahweh never created angels as male and female with such a designed function as being able to mate with each other in marriage and procreate. So if unlike mankind, Elohim never created the heavenly angels to be married, mate, and procreate with those of their own kind, how much less would He have created them with the ability to do so with another completely different Earthly species called humans- Mark 12:25
-Spiritual beings such as Fallen angels being able to procreating with human women conflicts with the Biblical principle of Elohim's law that they would have to be powerful enough to override such divine prerogatives as...Elohim alone is Creator and Father of all Spirits Zechariah 12:1;Hebrews 12:9; He alone open and closes the womb. Genesis 30:1-2;. ;Isaiah 66:9;
All creatures work together with their own kind in order to re-produce children after their own kind. Genesis 1:21,24-25. including Elohim. Genesis 1:26-27 . and man. Genesis 2:18-24; 5:3.
We also read in 1st Corinthians 15:39-40,…
"All flesh is not the same flesh: but there is one kind of flesh of men, another flesh of beasts, another of fishes, and another of birds. There are also celestial bodies, and bodies terrestrial: but the glory of the celestial is one, and the glory of the terrestrial is another."
There you have it ... celestial (heavenly) and terrestrial (earthly) are NOT compatible. Just as a fish cannot breed with a horse, or a cow with a whale, so cannot a spiritual angel breed with a human woman.
We read in chapter 7:12-15 of the Book of Enoch...
7:12," Whose stature was each three hundred cubits. These devoured all which the labor of men produced; until it became impossible to feed them;13 When they turned themselves against men, in order to devour them;14 And began to injure birds, beasts, reptiles, and fishes, to eat their flesh one after another, and to drink their blood.15 Then the earth reproved the unrighteous."
First of all this last line doesn’t make sense, or line up with known proven scripture. The earth didn’t reprove the unrighteous, only Elohim the Creator of the Earth should get credit for doing that. This smacks more along the line of the Mother earth cults that teach the earth is angry at men who violate nature and therefore nature fights back.
But this wasn’t the worst of it. After reading the description in 1 Enoch 7, verses 12-14, I began to think perhaps this is where they think dinosaurs came from. Maybe some of the bones we have stored and labeled as Dinosaurs in Museums are really the human angel inbreds buried long ago?
These supposed inbreds were the extremely inhumanly disfigured half angel half human children whose bones we perhaps mistaken for T- Rex and the heavy eating Brontosaurus.
A "cubit" is 1.5 feet. The ark which Noah built was 300 cubits long (Genesis 6:15).
Do you mean to tell me that some women had children who were as tall as the ark was long? This book of Enoch smacks of Greek Mythology such as the race of beings known as the Titans.
The so-called book of Enoch’s description of People 450-Feet Tall sounds like Greek Mythology?
I thought this is ridiculous, are we really gullible enough to assume and believe that fallen angels had physical intimacy with earthly women that produced offspring 450-feet tall? Furthermore, how could a human woman give birth to a normal size baby that would then grow to be as tall as half the length of a football field? 'Come on, the birth would be extremely harsh for the Mother considering that such a baby would probably be born larger than that of a baby elephant or giraffe whose growth rate is a lot faster than that of a normal human. Even given the fast growth of a baby giraffe or Elephant they still don’t even reach that size full grown. Although the Bible does contain many miraculous and startling events (e.g., the flood), they are all explainable and have rationale.
It is clear that many unsaved scholars today are trying to discredit the Bible as a book of fables, which is what the Book of Enoch certainly is. The Word of Yahweh is untouchable, unchangeable, and incorruptible!
We know that after the flood there were giants mentioned in the Old Testament scriptures (Numbers 13:33). Though Goliath the Philistine was described as a descendant of giants (1st Samuel 17:4;2 Samuel 21:16-22), he was only 9' 6" tall (not 450 feet).
Both before and after the flood, giants in the Old Testament were NOT the result of fallen angels marrying human women. And think about this, if fallen angels did have physical relations with earthly women, then why doesn't it still occur today? There is no such thing as a succubus or an incubus (i.e. sexual relations between demons and humans).
Poor normal human mothers giving birth to such huge babies that would grow to sizes larger than many dinosaurs, I don't think so! By comparison Goliath and the Giant people who lived in the land of Canaan when the 12 spies searched the land were normal people.
We've got to be joking! Such foolish conjecture is a violation of the simplest teachings of the Bible. In Genesis 6: we read,...
"There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of Elohim 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."
Pastor J. Vernon McGee’s gives his interpretation of this Scripture...
He says, “There were giants in the earth in those days,” but it does not say they are the offspring of the sons of God and the daughters of men. It does say this about the offspring: “the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown.”
These were not monstrosities; they were men. The record here makes it very clear that the giants were in the earth before this took place, and it simply means that these offspring were outstanding individuals.
Humanity has a tremendous capacity. Man is fearfully and wonderfully made—that is a great truth we have lost sight of. This idea that man has come up from some protoplasm out of a garbage can or seaweed is utterly preposterous. It is the belief of some scientists that evolution will be repudiated, and some folk are going to look ridiculous at that time.
Evolution is nothing in the world but a theory as far as science is concerned. Nothing has been conclusive about it. It is a philosophy like any other philosophy, and it can be accepted or rejected. When it is accepted, it certainly leads to some very crazy solutions to the problems of the world, and it has gotten my country into trouble throughout the world.
Anyone would think that we are the white knight riding through the world straightening out wrongs. We are wrong on the inside ourselves! I do not know why in this country today we have an intelligentsia in our colleges, our government, our news media, and our military who think they are super, that somehow or another they have arrived.
It is the delusion of the hour that men think that they are greater than they really are. Man is suffering from a fall, an awful fall. He is totally depraved today, and until that is taken into consideration, we are in trouble all the way along.
Then what do we have here in verse 4? As I see it, Genesis is a book of genealogies—it is a book of the families. The sons of God are the godly line who have come down from Adam through Seth, and the daughters of men belong to the line of Cain. What you have here now is an intermingling and intermarriage of these two lines, until finally the entire line is totally corrupted (well, not totally; there is one exception). That is the picture that is presented to us here."
SOURCE: McGee, J. Vernon, Thru the Bible with J. Vernon McGee, (Nashville: Thomas Nelson Publishers) 2000, c1981.
-What about the fact that Yahweh has not provided His plan of redemption for Satan and his fellow fallen angels? Could someone believing this teaching from the Book of Enoch consider themselves unredeemable because perhaps they are one of the people living on the Earth today who still have a portion of fallen angel blood in their system? I'm telling you this is how Satan can use these false teachings to play with gullible people's minds.
VIEW 2:THIS IS THE BIBLE'S FIRST RECORDED INSTANCES OF UNEQUALLY YOKED MARRIAGES BETWEEN GODLY MEN AND UNGODLY DAUGHTERS OF MEN (with a Dinosaur addendum)
Here the ‘sons of Elohim’ are generally viewed to be the godly men of the Sethite line. The ‘daughters of men’ are thought to be the daughters of the ungodly Cainite. The Nephilim are just the ungodly and violent men who are the product of this unholy union.
Who are the ‘Sons of Elohim’?
The interpretation of verses 1-8 hinges upon the definition of three key terms, ‘the sons of Elohim’ (verses 2,4), ‘the daughters of men’ (verses 2,4), and the ‘Nephilim’ (verse 4). My basic presupposition in approaching our text is that we should let the Bible define its own terms; as well as look for contextual clues within the language of the immediate passages of scripture to help steer or lead us in the most accurate biblical interpretation or definition of a particular word or phrase. The Bible elsewhere does give two possible definitions for the term or phrase ‘the sons of Elohim’ for us.
Definition 1.“Sons of Elohim” can refer to spiritual beings such as angels Job 1:6," One day the sons of Elohim came to present themselves before Yahweh, and Satan also came with them."
Definition 2. ...Or to righteous people Hosea 1:10,"Yet the number of the Israelites will be like the sand of the sea, which cannot be measured or numbered. And in the very place where it was said to them, ‘You are not My people,’ they will be called ‘sons of the living Elohim.’ "
The major support for which definition we should use to interpret the passage in Genesis 6, is the language and context of the surrounding chapters 4,5 and 6. Chapter four describes the ungodly generation of Cain, while in chapter five we see the godly Sethite line. The language of chapter five also helps us set the proper context immediately when it starts off with...
Genesis 5:1"This is the book of the generations(8435. toledoth ) of Adam. In the day that Elohim created man, He made him in His own likeness. 2Male and female He created them, and He blessed them. And in the day they were created, He called them “man.”a
8435. Toledoth Lexical Summary
toledoth: Generations, descendants, genealogies, account
Original Word: תּוֹלְדָה
Part of Speech: Noun Feminine
Transliteration: towldah
Pronunciation: toh-led-oth
Phonetic Spelling: (to-led-aw')
KJV: birth, generations
NASB: generations, genealogical registration, genealogies, account, birth, order of their birth
Word Origin: [from H3205 (יָלַד - became the father)]
1. (plural only) descent, i.e. family
2. (figuratively) history
From the beginning, the context of the Book of Genesis shows itself to be about the generations/genealogy/ children of men, not the so-called children of fallen angels.
It tells us "this is the book of the generations of Adam" Adam is the Hebrew word for Man.There is no mention of Fallen angels marrying human women and producing their own generation of giant inbred cannibalistic angel-human children...
In Genesis 6:4, “Nephilim” does mean “giants”...Strong's Exhaustive Concordance Or nphil {nef-eel'}; from naphal; properly, a feller, i.e. A bully or tyrant -- giant.see HEBREW naphal but it can mean giants in stature or giants in fame or reputation, as in “he was a giant among men.”
Again if we let the language in Genesis 6:4 guide us, it tells us which interpretation best fits the context at the end of the verse...
" And they bore them children who became the mighty men of old, men of renown."
Also notice that the Nephilim came first, then after is mentioned the “sons of Elohim” married the “daughters of men.” Most purposely ignore the time order.
As a side note, among those who don’t ignore the time sequence, some theorize that during these pre-flood times the giants in the land could be interpreted as describing giant in stature like those described in the oldest dated Bible book of Job; …
Job 40:15“Look now at the behemoth, which I made along with you;
He eats grass like an ox.
16See now, his strength is in his hips,
And his power is in his stomach muscles.
17He moves his tail like a cedar;
The sinews of his thighs are tightly knit.
18 His bones are like beams of bronze,
His ribs like bars of iron.
19He is the first of the ways of Elohim;
Only He who made him can bring near His sword.
20 Surely the mountains yield food for him,
And all the beasts of the field play there.
21He lies under the lotus trees,
In a covert of reeds and marsh.
22 The lotus trees cover him with their shade;
The willows by the brook surround him.
23 Indeed the river may rage,
Yet he is not disturbed;
He is confident, though the Jordan gushes into his mouth,
24 Though he takes it in his eyes,
Or one pierces his nose with a snare.
Job 41:1“Can you draw out Leviathan with a hook,
Or snare his tongue with a line which you lower?
2Can you put a reed through his nose,
Or pierce his jaw with a hook? 7Can you fill his skin with harpoons,
Or his head with fishing spears?
8 Lay your hand on him;
Remember the battle—
Never do it again!12“I will not conceal his limbs,
His mighty power, or his graceful proportions.
13 Who can remove his outer coat?
Who can approach him with a double bridle?
14 Who can open the doors of his face,
With his terrible teeth all around?
15 His rows of scales are his pride,
Shut up tightly as with a seal;
16 One is so near another
That no air can come between them;
17They are joined one to another,
They stick together and cannot be parted.
18His sneezings flash forth light,
And his eyes are like the eyelids of the morning.
19 Out of his mouth go burning lights;
Sparks of fire shoot out.
20 Smoke goes out of his nostrils,
As from a boiling pot and burning rushes.
21His breath kindles coals,
And a flame goes out of his mouth.
22Strength dwells in his neck,
And sorrow dances before him.
23 The folds of his flesh are joined together;
They are firm on him and cannot be moved.
24His heart is as hard as stone,
Even as hard as the lower millstone.
25 When he raises himself up, the mighty are afraid;
Because of his crashings they are beside themselves.
26 Though the sword reaches him, it cannot avail;
Nor does spear, dart, or javelin.
27He regards iron as straw,
And bronze as rotten wood.
28The arrow cannot make him flee;
Slingstones become like stubble to him.
29 Darts are regarded as straw;
He laughs at the threat of javelins.
30His undersides are like sharp potsherds;
He spreads pointed marks in the mire.
31He makes the deep boil like a pot;
He makes the sea like a pot of ointment.
32He leaves a shining wake behind him;
One would think the deep had white hair.
33On earth there is nothing like him,
Which is made without fear.
34He beholds every high thing;
He is king over all the children of pride.”
Genesis (NKJ) 6: 4 There were giants (Nephilim)on the earth in those days, and also afterward, when the sons of Elohim came into the daughters of men and they bore children to them. Those were the mighty men who were of old, men of renown.
Believing the “giants” (Nephilim) mentioned first Genesis 6:4 above are Dinosaurs, makes a lot more sense than believing they are the children born out of a marriage union between angels and their human wives.
Generally when it comes to genealogy the Bible mentions the father or parents first and then the children are mentioned as being born or coming after...
Genesis 4:1 And Adam had relations with his wife Eve, and she conceived and gave birth to Cain.“With the help of Yahweh I have brought forth a man,” she said.2Later she gave birth to Cain’s brother Abel.”
The Descendants of Cain
17 And Cain had relations with his wife, and she conceived and gave birth to Enoch. Then Cain built a city and named it after his son Enoch.
18Now to Enoch was born Irad, and Irad was the father of Mehujael, and Mehujael was the father of Methusael, and Methusael was the father of Lamech. 19 And Lamech married two women, one named Adah and the other Zillah.20Adah gave birth to Jabal;”
In Genesis 6, below the time sequence shows the Giants or Nephilim that are mentioned as existing first can’t be speaking of the children that afterwards would be born of the marriage union between the Sons of Elohim and the daughters of men. The scriptures suggest the Giants were creatures that already existed on the earth before the marriage events that follow occurred.…
Genesis (NKJ) 6: 4 “There were giants (Nephilim)on the earth in those days, and also afterward, when the sons of God came in to the daughters of men and they bore children to them. Those were the mighty men who were of old, men of renown.”
It’s almost as if Yahweh Elohim is saying by the way there were giants on the earth and afterwards the separate or unrelated events concerning the Sons of Elohim marrying daughters of men and having children, are described as happening or following after.
So some based on the pattern or context of the scriptures in Genesis, interpret this passage as Yahweh Elohim is looking at both man and the animals or beast he gave man dominion over. Among the beasts, Elohim specifically highlights that there were Giants which are possibly beasts that we in modern times would describe as dinosaurs.
Since after the fall, the Earth became corrupted by sin, the nature of animals who previously were no threat to man, now had the capacity to turn against men (Genesis 9:5). Being omniscient, Elohim knew that the size of these giant beasts made them an even greater threat to mankind; originally made in His image. As Elohim looks upon the sinful nature of both beast and mankind whom he originally created to dwell together as good, He is now sorry he made them…
Genesis 6:7,So Yahweh said, “I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth, both man and beast, creeping thing and birds of the air, for I am sorry that I have made them.”
After the flood the animals he allows to survive and thrive he assures Noah that…
Genesis 9:1So God blessed Noah and his sons, and said to them: “Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth. 2 And the fear of you and the dread of you shall be on every beast of the earth, on every bird of the air, on all that move on the earth, and on all the fish of the sea. They are given into your hand.”
So other than being dinosaurs, the only other reasonable explanation is that the Giants mentioned first would be describing specific men of giant reputation who became the husbands of the daughters of men and the fathers of the future children born from their union.
This interpretation may even follow the context of Genesis better than the dinosaur theory. Again the idea is that the giants mentioned to have been on the Earth before the event of the Sons of Elohim marrying the daughters of men and having children, is describing men who would become the fathers.
Remember…
In Genesis 6:4, “Nephilim” does mean “giants”...Strong's Exhaustive Concordance Or nphil {nef-eel'}; from naphal; properly, a feller, i.e. A bully or tyrant -- giant.see HEBREW naphal but it can mean giants in stature or giants in fame or reputation, as in “he was a giant among men.”
Again if we let the language in Genesis 6:4 guide us, it tells us which interpretation best fits the context at the end of the verse...
" And they bore them children who became the mighty men of old, men of renown."
Thus following the time order along with the Hebrew word definitions and contextual language surrounding the passage, this interpretation is the better fit in concluding that first it is mentioned that there were men of famous or giant reputation who married and had children who also grew up became famous or giant in reputation.
This order is similar to what we see in Genesis 4:15," wherein Cain who is infamous for committing the first murder, was mentioned first about how Yahweh gave him a mark that let everyone know that whoever kills Cain would receive seven times worse of vengeance. In verse 17, Cain had relations with his wife and produced descendants; one of whom wanted to build a reputation that was even bigger than his infamous great, great Grand Father's...
23Then Lamech said to his wives: “Adah and Zillah, hear my voice; wives of Lamech, listen to my speech. For I have slain a man for wounding me,a young man for striking me.24If Cain is avenged sevenfold, then Lamech seventy-sevenfold.”
After the fall and the death of Abel which was the first murder ever, for good or bad, fame or infamy, for the first time in man's history, there were men now trying to be known as someone dangerous or not to mess with. No doubt many were wicked men like Lamech who chose unjust means to build a giant reputation for himself by killing other men and enforcing their will upon others through the spread of fear.
Genesis 6: 5Then Yahweh saw that the wickedness of man was great upon the earth, and that every inclination of the thoughts of his heart was altogether evil all the time. "
Notice unlike in 1 Enoch 6, in Genesis 6, just the wickedness of men is mentioned. There's no mention of the wickedness of fallen angels marrying the daughters of men who according to the Book of Enoch caused the creation of giant cannibal children.
“Sons of God” can refer to angels (Job 1:6) or to the righteous (Hosea 1:10)
Again, we must let the context of the Book of Genesis determine the meaning.
The “sons of Elohim” are the descendants of Seth.
Genesis 4:25 And Adam knew his wife again, and she bore a son and named him Seth, “For Elohim has appointed another seed for me instead of Abel, whom Cain killed.” 26 And as for Seth, to him also a son was born; and he named him Enosh. Then men began to call on the name of Yahweh.”
The “Sons of Elohim” are godly descendants of Seth who are human beings only. Their unequally yoked marriages to “daughters of man” would be human marriages, and their offspring would be human children. If the Nephilim are considered the offspring of these unions, the Nephilim are not supernatural beings.
The distinction between the “sons of Elohim” and “daughters of man” is a spiritual one. The godly line of Seth would be intermarrying with the daughters of man, and “of man” emphasizes that these “daughters” do not know Yahweh.
The first historic instance of unequally yoked human marriages.
2 Corinthians 6:14,”Do not be unequally yoked together with unbelievers. For what fellowship has righteousness with lawlessness? And what communion has light with darkness? “
Deuteronomy 22:10,”Do not plow with an ox and a donkey yoked together.”
Amos 3:3,”Can two walk together without agreeing where to go?”
1 Corinthians 15:33,”Do not be deceived: “Bad company corrupts good character.”
Exodus 34:16,”And thou take of their daughters unto thy sons, and their daughters go a whoring after their gods, and make thy sons go a whoring after their gods.”
Deuteronomy 7:2-4,”And when Yahweh thy Elohim shall deliver them before thee; thou shalt smite them, and utterly destroy them; thou shalt make no covenant with them, nor shew mercy unto them:3Do not intermarry with them. Do not give your daughters to their sons or take their daughters for your sons, 4because they will turn your sons away from following Me to serve other gods. Then the anger of the LORD will burn against you, and He will swiftly destroy you. …”
Again, part of the reason Yahweh destroyed the Earth with a flood was these unequally yoked marriages displease Him because they involve the joining together of believers and unbelievers.
More support for this view comes, first of all, from the immediately preceding chapter. In Genesis 5, the genealogy of Adam through Seth is traced to Noah. Genesis 5 reports family descent through birth of human “sons” and human “daughters.” Second, the prior chapters of Genesis have been interested in conflicting spiritual lines. We see Cain and Abel in Genesis 4. After Abel dies, Yahweh gives Eve another son, Seth. And in Genesis 4, we see the respective lines of descent for Cain and Seth, lines we should contrast into two types of people on the Earth, those who worshipped and acknowledge Yahweh and those who don’t.
Genesis 6:2,”1Now it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born to them, 2 that the sons of Elohim saw the daughters of men, that they were beautiful(2896. towb); and they took wives for themselves of all whom they chose.
Strong's Exhaustive Concordance
beautiful, best, better, bountiful, cheerful, at ease, fair word, be in favor,
From towb; good (as an adjective) in the widest sense; used likewise as a noun, both in the masculine and the feminine, the singular and the plural (good, a good or good thing, a good man or woman; the good, goods or good things, good men or women), also as an adverb (well) -- beautiful, best, better, bountiful, cheerful, at ease, X fair (word), (be in) favour, fine, glad, good (deed, -lier, -liest, -ly, -ness, -s), graciously, joyful, kindly, kindness, liketh (best), loving, merry, X most, pleasant, + pleaseth, pleasure, precious, prosperity, ready, sweet, wealth, welfare, (be) well ((-favoured)).
Is it an interesting coincidence that in Genesis 4:22, Cain had a Great, great, great, Great granddaughter named Naamah…
https://www.abarim-publications.com/Meaning/Naamah.html
Etymology of the name Naamah
Na'amah:The verb נעם (na'em) means to be pleasant, delightful or sweet, beautiful. Derived nouns נעם (no'am) and נעמן (na'aman) mean pleasantness. Adjective נעים (na'im), means pleasant. The plural noun מנעמים (man'ammim) describes "sweets" or dainties. The adjective נעים (na'im) describes a soft or pleasant sound.
After this mention of how righteous men intermarried and had children with worldly ungodly women, there is given the predictable result of less and less godly people in the world, as already stated in Genesis 6:5. This leads to...
6 And Yahweh regretted that He had made man on the earth, and He was grieved in His heart. 7So Yahweh said, “I will blot out man, whom I have created, from the face of the earth—every man and beast and crawling creature and bird of the air—for I am grieved that I have made them.”
Still no mention of regret about the fallen angels and their bi-species children. Wouldn't the fallen angels have to share some responsibility in making the unnatural children? If according to the book of Enoch Yahweh used the flood to wipe out their handy work in creating Giant children from off the face of the Earth, why was it only man that He mentioned as blotting out; and regretting to make?
Because it wasn't the inbred children of fallen angels that was described here, but believers marrying unbelievers that is being addressed. Years later in Israel, Yahweh's written law remains consistent commanding the separation of His people from not marrying strange women who did not have Yahweh as their Elohim. This was a vital part of the religious responsibility of purity and holiness for those who truly worshiped Yahweh.
What took place in chapter six was the breakdown in the separation of righteous godly people with ungodly people; which threatened the godly seed through whom Messiah was to be born. This breakdown was the cause of the flood which would follow. It destroyed the ungodly world and preserved righteous Noah and his family, through whom the promise of Genesis 3:15 would be fulfilled.
Unlike the opposing view, one of the great points of this interpretation is it has the commendable feature of explaining the passage without creating any doctrinal or theological problems.
Getting back to our critique of the Book of Enoch…
The so-called Book of Enoch has internal contradictions...
1. Enoch 6:7-8 gives a list of 19 angels who lead the fall of man.
“7 And these are the names of their leaders: Semyaza, who was their leader, Urakiba, Ramiel, Kokabiel, Tamiel, Ramiel, Daniel, Ezeqiel, Baraqiel, Asael, Armaros, Ananel, Zaqiel, Samsiel, Satael, Turiel, Yomiel, Araziel. 8 These are the leaders of the two hundred Angels and of all the others with them. “
2. Enoch 69:2-3 gives a list of 21 angels who were supposed to be the same group. Not only are there more names, the names are almost completely different!
“2. And behold, the names of those Angels: – The first of them is Semyaza, and the second Artaqifa, and the third Armen, and the fourth Kokabiel, and the fifth Turiel, and the sixth Ramiel, and the seventh Daniel, and the eighth Nuqael, and the ninth Baraqiel, and the tenth Azazel, and the eleventh Armaros, the twelfth Batriel, the thirteenth Basasael, the fourteenth Ananel, the fifteenth Turiel, the sixteenth Samsiel, the seventeenth Yetarel, the eighteenth Tumiel, the nineteenth Turiel, the twentieth Rumiel, the twenty-first Azazel.
3. And these are the chiefs of their Angels, and the names of the leaders of hundreds, and their leaders of fifties, and their leaders of tens “
We already showed that the books knowledge about angels goes beyond simply getting their names wrong, but we find also the books knowledge about the origin of sin is wrong.The Book of Enoch states that the intermixing of angel and human seed created sin and the angels spread sin by teaching forbidden topics to men. Lamech is told to hide so that his pure seed could be preserved. God would then wipe the world with a flood, thus removing sin (chapter 8-10).
I John 3:4 - Sin comes from breaking the law
Romans 5:12 - Sin began when one man broke Elohim’s law and continued because all sin
In order for a book to be inspired it has to be in unity with the rest of Scripture. There can’t be even one contradiction. It has to be in unity with the rest of Scripture.
Unity with Scripture is not what I found when I was examining Enoch and the tenor of it; I mean, while the rest of the Bible places focus on Yahweh’s relationship with man, it seems like Enoch spends much of its time talking about angels and other scenarios that are not typically found in other books.
And so while angels are mentioned on occasion in Scripture, they seem to take center stage in the Book of Enoch; particularly the first half or so. Even devolving to the point where men are praying to angels. I think Paul talked about this, something about worship of angels, being something not right?
In the Book of Enoch chapter 9 and starting at verse 1 it says – And then Michael, Uriel, Raphael, and Gabriel looked down from heaven and saw much blood being 2 shed upon the earth, and all lawlessness being wrought upon the earth. And they said to one another: ‘The earth made without inhabitant cries the voice of their crying up to the gates of heaven. 3 And now to you, the holy ones of heaven, the souls of men complain, saying, “Bring our cause 4 before the Most High.” –
And so men are crying out to these angels, these holy ones in heaven, and are complaining, saying, “Bring our cause, be our intercessor. Step in and do something. Bring our cause to the Most High.”
Now, why are men talking to angels and say, “Hey, go bring justice for us”? That does not seem right, it’s out of order. Scripture says (Psalm 50:15) – Call upon me in the day of trouble; I will deliver you, and you shall glorify Me. –
Scripture says (1 Timothy 2:5) – There is one Elohim and – one Intercessor – one Mediator between Elohim and men, the Man Yahshua Messiah. – Right? He’s the Mediator, He’s the one, He’s the go between, not angels, Yahshua. So there’s a problem right there.
Next we have Azazel, who in the Book of Enoch, introduced various technologies like weapons, and cosmetics, and jewelry, and the uses of metals. And it speaks of these things as if they’re awful, awful things, sinful things, taught by demons. And then other watchers are teaching astrology and magic. And it says here in Enoch 10:8-9 – Watchers have disclosed and have taught their sons. And the whole earth has been corrupted through the works that were taught by Azazel: to him ascribe all sin. – Really? All sin is because of Azazel?
So, the Book of Enoch is taking sin’s origin from humanity’s hands, and saying “to Azazel ascribe all sin.” But giving people technology does not even create sin, you know. Someone has to make the choice to actually do something with that technology that’s evil.
And so, if we have say, internet, is internet evil? No! It’s what you do with the internet. Whether you choose evil or whether you choose good, okay?
So all those things could have been taught, and no one did anything evil with it. Now of course astrology, yes that’s evil, and those other things, but that’s not what Azazel has done. He taught weapons, okay. Using of metals, okay. If someone wants to kill you it’s not a bad thing to have a weapon in your hand. If someone wants to use metal for something positive, there’s nothing wrong with it.
As we continue through the story, we see that God commands the archangel, Michael, to capture the fallen angels and bind them for seventy generations, after which they’ll be judged:
And to Michael he said, “Go, Michael, bind Shemihazah and the others with him, who have mated with the daughters of men, so that they were defiled by them in their uncleanness. And when their sons perish and they see the destruction of their beloved ones, bind them for seventy generations in the valleys of the earth, until the day of their judgment and consummation, until the everlasting judgment is consummated.
-1 Enoch 10:11-12, George W.E. Nickelsburg & James C. VanderKam, “1 Enoch: The Hermeneia Translation,” p. 29
As the narrative continues, we read about how Enoch had ascended into heaven. There, the angels tell him that he must go proclaim God’s judgment against the fallen angels who had married human women (1 Enoch 12:1-6). So Enoch goes to speak to the fallen angels, and they ask him to write a petition on their behalf, pleading for mercy and that God would spare them.
Enoch agrees to write the petition for them. As he’s reciting the petition he had just written, he falls asleep and receives a vision from God (1 Enoch 13:4-8). In the vision, Enoch goes before the throne of YHWH, and He tells him to tell the fallen angels that He has denied their petition (1 Enoch 14:4-7). God also told them that their children, the giants, would become evil spirits on earth:
And the spirits of the giants lead astray, do violence, make desolate, and attack and wrestle and hurl upon the earth and cause illnesses. They eat nothing, but abstain from food and are thirsty and smite. These spirits (will) rise up against the sons of men and against the women, for they have come forth from them.
-1 Enoch 15:11-12, George W.E. Nickelsburg & James C. VanderKam, “1 Enoch: The Hermeneia Translation,” p. 37
I've heard people argue that the mixed seed was not completely wiped out by the flood and that's why the Nephilim return after the flood. I’ve heard some Black Isrealites claim that white people are the demon or serpent seed. This thinking contradicts both the Bible and the Book of Enoch. Only eight people were saved and the Book of Enoch says that none of the mixed race survived. In fact according to the Book of Enoch, they were supposed to have wiped themselves out before the flood in some epic battle.
The rest of the Book of the Watchers tells how Enoch is then accompanied by interpreting angels and taken on a journey where heavenly secrets are revealed to him.
Chapter 22 describes what the afterlife is supposedly like and where the souls of the dead go, which is a mountain with four hollow chambers. Depending on how righteous or wicked a person was during their lifetime will determine which chamber their soul will gather in.
The books knowledge of the realm of the dead is wrong.The Book of Enoch states that the grave is divided into four realms:
(1) Righteous martyrs, such as Abel
(2) The righteous who were not martyrs
(3) Sinners who died without suffering the consequences of their sins
(4) Sinners who died after suffering from the consequences of their sins.
Of the last group, it says, “but their spirits shall not be slain in the day of judgment nor shall they be raised from thence” (Enoch 22:13)
c. Luke 16:19-31 shows hades divided into two states.
d. John 5:28-29 - All the dead, good and bad will be judged
e. Acts 24:15 - This was Paul’s hope, a resurrection of the just and unjust
On this journey, Enoch is also taken to the mountain of God and the Tree of Life in a New Jerusalem as well as to primordial Eden where he is shown the tree of knowledge of good and evil. The section concludes with Enoch’s journey to the ends of the earth where he encounters great beasts, observes gates in the heavens from which the stars emerge, and sees other gates that serve as the sources of rain and wind on the earth.
So Enoch 32 says – I came to the Garden of Righteousness, and from afar off trees more numerous than I these trees and great two trees were there, very great, beautiful, and glorious, and magnificent, and the tree of knowledge, whose holy fruit they eat and know great wisdom…–
The tree of knowledge has holy fruit and gives great wisdom?! That’s probably what the devil would say about it!
Who is the author of Enoch anyway? Doesn’t sound like Yahweh.
It’s actually a repeat of the satanic lie that Eve believed, isn’t it? Seems to betray that maybe the author of Enoch isn’t Yahweh after all. Satan always leaves a tail, if you’re paying attention. He leaves a tail.
The Book of Parables (37-71)
This section is believed to have been composed in the first century BCE. It consists of three parables that were allegedly given to Enoch. In the first parable, he’s shown more heavenly secrets such as how the elements of the weather on earth originate in the heavens.
More disagreements with the Bible...
We read in chapter 40 of the Book of Enoch...
"1 And after that I saw thousands of thousands and ten thousand times ten thousand, I saw a multitude 2 beyond number and reckoning, who stood before the Lord of Spirits. And on the four sides of the Lord of Spirits I saw four presences, different from those that sleep not, and I learnt their names: for the angel that went with me made known to me their names, and showed me all the hidden things. 3 And I heard the voices of those four presences as they uttered praises before the Lord of glory. 4 The first voice blesses the Lord of Spirits for ever and ever. 5 And the second voice I heard blessing 6 the Elect One and the elect ones who hang upon the Lord of Spirits. And the third voice I heard pray and intercede for those who dwell on the earth and supplicate in the name of the Lord of Spirits. 7 And I heard the fourth voice fending off the Satans and forbidding them to come before the Lord 8 of Spirits to accuse them who dwell on the earth. After that I asked the angel of peace who went with me, who showed me everything that is hidden: ‘Who are these four presences which I have
9 seen and whose words I have heard and written down?’ And he said to me: ‘This first is Michael, the merciful and long-suffering: and the second, who is set over all the diseases and all the wounds of the children of men, is Raphael: and the third, who is set over all the powers, is Gabriel: and the fourth, who is set over the repentance unto hope of those who inherit eternal life, is named Phanuel.’ 10 And these are the four angels of the Lord of Spirits and the four voices I heard in those days."
When I first read this I thought the Bible never mentions an angel named Phanuel, let alone an angel who is set over the repentance of those who inherit eternal life.
Now there are millions of angels so I suppose there must be more angel names than mentioned in the Bible; but what he was set over was the hardest part of the statement for me to swallow. When I read in chapter 40:9 of the Book of Enoch that an angel named Phanuel is "set over the repentance unto hope of those who inherit eternal life" ... It re-enforced my suspicions that the Book of Enoch was fraudulent. This statement in itself contradicts some very important teachings in the Word of Yahweh.
Salvation is found ONLY in Messiah Yahshua
Acts 4:10, "Be it known unto you all, and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of Yahshua Messiah of Nazareth, whom ye crucified, whom Elohim raised from the dead, even by him doth this man stand here before you whole. 11 This is the stone which was set at nought of you builders, which is become the head of the corner. 12 Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved."
King David said in Psalm 62:6, "He (Yahshua) only is my rock and my salvation: he is my defence; I shall not be moved."
Perhaps this is why we have so many man made traditions involving praying to the angel of this and that; when we should only be praying to the heavenly Father. Phanuel... like the book you're mentioned in, you're a fraud! Yahshua is the ONLY Way, Truth, and Life (John 14:6).
We read in 1st Timothy 2:5 that Yahshua Christ is the ONLY Mediator between Elohim and men, not some angel named Phanuel...
"For there is one Elohim, and one mediator between Elohim and men, the man Messiah Yahshua."
Repentance is strictly between a man and Yahshua Messiah alone. Only Yahshua died for our sins, and shed His blood to pay for them (1st Peter 1:18-19); therefore, we must be diligent to guard and defend against LIARS and imposters who would lead people to believe otherwise.
1st John 2:22 clearly indicts all Messiah-deniers as LIARS, guilty before Elohim. The Author of this book cannot be trusted.
I John 4:1,"Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from Elohim, because many false prophets have gone out into the world. 2 By this you know the Spirit of Elohim: every spirit that confesses that Yahshua’s Messiah has come in the flesh is from Elohim;
3 and every spirit that does not confess Yahshua is not from Elohim; this is the spirit of the antichrist, of which you have heard that it is coming, and now it is already in the world."
Let's continue in the so-called book of Enoch…
In the second parable, Enoch is shown how a “Chosen One” will sit on a throne of glory and judge the deeds of the wicked people who have rejected God. Afterward, he will come to earth to dwell with the righteous people (1 Enoch 45:3-6).
Then, according to chapter 46, Enoch sees a figure referred to as the “Son of Man.” An angel explains to Enoch that this Son of Man reveals secret treasures to the righteous people of the Lord:
And I asked the angel of peace, who went with me and showed me all the hidden things, about that son of man—who he was and whence he was (and) why he went with the Head of Days. And he answered me and said to me, “This is the son of man who has righteousness, and righteousness dwells with him. And all the treasuries of what is hidden he will reveal; For the Lord of Spirits has chosen him, and his lot has prevailed through truth in the presence of the Lord of Spirits forever.
-1 Enoch 46:2-3, George W.E. Nickelsburg & James C. VanderKam, “1 Enoch: The Hermeneia Translation,” pp. 59-60
It’s apparent from the text that the titles “Chosen One” and “Son of Man” both refer to this same end times figure.
The Book of Parables goes on to describe how this Son of Man/Chosen One will destroy sinners and strike down kings and rulers because they do not praise God (1 Enoch 46:4-5). It says that he was named before the world was created and that he will be a light to the nations (1 Enoch 48:3-4). He will be worshipped by “all who dwell on the earth” (1 Enoch 48:5). And in his name, the righteous will have salvation:
And the wisdom of the Lord of Spirits has revealed him to the holy and the righteous; for he has preserved the lot of the righteous. For they have hated and despised this age of unrighteousness; Indeed, all its deeds and its ways they have hated in the name of the Lord of Spirits. For in his name they are saved, and he is the vindicator of their lives.
-1 Enoch 48:7, George W.E. Nickelsburg & James C. VanderKam, “1 Enoch: The Hermeneia Translation,” p. 62
And again, the Book of the Parables goes on to describe that this Chosen One/Son of Man will sit on God’s throne and judge between the righteous and wicked:
“In those days, the earth will give back what has been entrusted to it, and Sheol will give back what has been entrusted to it, and destruction will restore what it owes. For in those days, my Chosen One will arise and choose the righteous and holy from among them, for the day on which they will be saved has drawn near. And the Chosen One, in those days, will sit upon my throne, and all the secrets of wisdom will go forth from the counsel of his mouth, for the Lord of Spirits has given (them) to him and glorified him.”
-1 Enoch 51:1-3, George W.E. Nickelsburg & James C. VanderKam, “1 Enoch: The Hermeneia Translation,” p. 65
In a little while, we’ll get back to discovering who this chosen one mentioned in the so-called book of Enoch is, but first…
Another contradiction, Enoch 60 in some translations 58 verse 1 says – In the year 500, in the seventh month, on the fourteenth day of the month in the life of Enoch. – Year 500? Why would there be a year 500? Because all the days of Enoch were 365 years. Directly contradicting what Scripture says. Which one do I believe? I believe Scripture.
Now some say “it was the 500th year since the creation of the world.” Which is sort of a problem because if you lay everyone’s birth out on a timeline, you’ll discover Enoch wasn’t even born until 626 years after Adam was created. So, that wouldn’t work.
Then we have a very egregious sin, very sad, terrible sin. (Enoch 65:1-5) – In those days Noah saw the earth that it had sunk down and its destruction was nigh. 2 And he arose from there and went to the ends of the earth, and cried aloud – to Yahweh? No – to his grandfather Enoch: – who is supposed to be in heaven, right? – 3 and Noah said three times with an embittered voice: ‘Hear me, hear me, hear me.’ – to Enoch, the guy that went up to heaven – And he said to him: ‘Tell me what is it that is falling out on the earth that the earth is in such evil plight 4 and shaken, lest by chance I shall perish with it?’ And there was a great commotion on the earth, and a voice was heard from heaven, and I fell on my face. – And guess what? – Enoch his granddad came and stood by him. – Hi, guy, how are you doing, grandson? I know I’m dead already. Wait a minute. No, I’m not. – ‘Why have you cried unto me with a bitter cry and weeping?’
That’s a really good question. Because that’s called “necromancy,” buddy. That’s called “necromancy.” You’re not supposed to contact the dead!
Scripture says (Isaiah 8:19-20) – And when they say to you, “Seek those who are mediums and wizards, who whisper and mutter,” should not a people seek their Elohim? Should they seek the dead on behalf of the living? – Tell you what, I agree with this verse 20 right here. –
20 To the law and the testimony! If they speak not according to this word, there is no light in them. – There’s no light in Enoch. You can’t trust it. You can’t trust it.
This is not who we call upon. You can call upon Enoch right now, that would be okay. How about you all, if you all start praying to Enoch, would that be okay? Of course not.
Now, normally a person would seek out a medium to talk to the dead, like King Saul had done. But in the above case we see here that Noah himself is the medium, calling out to Enoch three times because he’s timid, he’s afraid.
Who do you call when you’re afraid, Enoch or Yahweh? Next thing you know, a voice from heaven, he bows to worship and Enoch himself standing there. To me, that’s pretty spooky, man.
Isn’t this what Catholic people do, pray to the dead saints? That they perceive are in heaven to help them when they need something? Thereby taking the place of Yahweh.
So already we have people praying to angels, with their cooperation, them being the mediator; and people praying to Enoch. I don’t listen to them. I don’t listen to them.
(Deuteronomy 18:10-12) – There shall not be found among you anyone who makes his son or his daughter pass through the fire, or one who practices witchcraft, or a soothsayer, or one who interprets omens, or a sorcerer, 11 or one who conjures spells, or a medium, or a spiritist, or one who calls up the dead.
12 For all who do these things are an abomination to Yahweh, and because of these abominations Yahweh your Elohim drives them out from before you.
Now, here it says (Enoch 67:1-2) – In those days the word of Elohim came to me, and said to me: “Noah, thy lot has come up before Me, a lot without blame, a lot of love and uprightness.
2 And now the angels are making a wooden (building), – the ark – and when they have completed, and when they have completed their task I will place My hand upon it and preserve it, and there shall come forth from it the seed of life, and a change shall set in so the earth will not remain without inhabitant. –
So here we have angels making the ark. Could they both have been builders of the ark? That’s what many people try to claim. But at this time Noah’s being informed—“Guess what? They’re building an ark for you.” Whereas in Scripture Yahweh said “Go find you some of this wood and then build yourself an ark,” and gave the dimensions and gave– If they’ve already started building why give Noah any dimensions at all? He didn’t need dimensions, it was already being built by the angels.
I guess the author of Enoch thought, you know, “How could one guy build all that?” you know, he didn’t hardly believe it was possible. What is this fascination with “angel-everything?” It’s like “angel-happy.” What is this?
In the Bible it says (Genesis 6:14-16) – “Make yourself an ark of gopherwood. – Make it for yourself. Go – make rooms in the ark, and cover it inside and outside with tar.
15 Here is how you make it: The length of the ark is three hundred cubits, its width is fifty cubits, its height thirty cubits.
16 Make a window for the ark, and complete it to a cubit from above. – He didn’t need any of those instructions, according to Enoch it’s already built for you. Or at least part of it. Go help him out. – Set the door of the ark in its side. Make it with lower, second, and third decks.”
22 Thus Noah did; – It says “Noah did it!”
Things are not looking good for the Book of Enoch. And I’m not done yet. But it just seems like the angel-happy Enoch has the angels just taking the place of man doing all kinds of things. To them ascribe all the sin. To them they made the ark, and even replacing Yahshua himself: “O please, go help us out. Go tell Yahweh how terrible it is down here.”
We read in the Book of Enoch, chapter 69:4-6..
https://www.angelfire.com/pokemon/trexcity/demon.html.
4 The name of the first Jeqon: that is, the one who led astray [all] the sons of God, and brought them 5 down to the earth, and led them astray through the daughters of men. And the second was named Asbeel: he imparted to the holy sons of God evil counsel, and led them astray so that they defiled 6 their bodies with the daughters of men. And the third was named Gadreel: he it is who showed the children of men all the blows of death, and he led astray Eve, and showed [the weapons of death to the sons of men] the shield and the coat of mail, and the sword for battle, and all the weapons.
Without a doubt, the primary claim of the Book of Enoch is that fallen angels had sex with human women and produced 450-feet tall giants upon the earth. As we’ve already shown, this teaching is ridiculous, unscriptural, and has no solid evidence to support it (Biblically or scientifically).
This is another good reason why the Book of Enoch should continue to be rejected. It is nonsense.
Also, notice in 69:6 above that the Book of Enoch claims that a demon named Gadreel led Eve astray and introduced weaponry to mankind. How absurd. The Bible identifies the serpent which deceived Eve in the Garden of Eden as Satan (Ezekiel 28:13).
We read in the Book of Enoch, chapter 69:8-12...
"8 ...And the fourth was named Penemue: he taught the 9 children of men the bitter and the sweet, and he taught them all the secrets of their wisdom. And he instructed mankind in writing with ink and paper, and thereby many sinned from eternity to 10 eternity and until this day.
For men were not created for such a purpose, to give confirmation 11 to their good faith with pen and ink. For men were created exactly like the angels, to the intent that they should continue pure and righteous, and death, which destroys everything, could not have taken hold of them, but through this their knowledge they are perishing, and through this power 12 it is consuming me."
Huh? Isn’t the Bible pen and ink? I think, in fact, Enoch’s pen and ink!
So, it’s like, wait a minute. The Book of Enoch even condemns itself, but for me it almost seems like Satan cannot stand that Bible. So you’ve got to throw a little dig, you know, “You’re not supposed to give confirmation to your faith with pen and ink.
(Exodus 34:27) – Yahweh told Mosheh, “Write these words, for according to the tenor of these words I have made a covenant with you and with Israel.”
I don’t see Enoch matching the tenor of Yahweh’s Word. I just don’t see it. And if Enoch was not inspired by unclean spirit, at best it was an ancient form of historical fiction. There’s a whole genre of historical fiction today. People writing books, adding a bunch of stories, backstories to the Scriptures, and all kinds of things. And we all look at it and know it’s just meant to be fiction not supposed to be real.
Maybe it was written to compete with the grandiose mythological tales of Greek culture, Roman culture. And trying to present an alternative so that the Jewish faith would be attractive to the pagans.
In fact, you’ll find some of the books found among the Dead Sea Scrolls even mention Gilgamesh in the Book of the Giants. So, listen. I know, the Dead Sea Scrolls, they have these things called “Parables of Enoch.” Actually, it wasn’t found in Dead Sea Scrolls. Dead Sea Scrolls do contain the Book of Enoch, about 20 percent of the Book of Enoch. 20 percent.
But the Dead Sea Scrolls had a lot of stuff in it, like the Genesis Apocryphon. It expands Genesis 12 to 15, Abraham’s travels, Sarah’s beauty dazzling kings, and Noah’s birth glowing like an angel. You see that in Enoch chapter 106 as well.
There’s one called the Book of Giants, a spinoff of Enoch 6-11, fallen angels’ giant offspring, are bickering, they dream of doom and face judgment. And names like Gilgamesh pop up in this mythological tale. Gilgamesh is from pagan mythology, by the way. And like Enoch, it’s found also in the Ethiopic Bible, this Book of Giants.
And so, listen, the Greek culture spread epic tales like, you know, Odyssey, all these things, Titans, cosmic battles. And I think they felt pressure, Jewish writers, to kind of pick up on some of this and write some of these tales. Watchers, angels abating, Enoch shuttling back and forth, you know, kind of feels theatrical, you know. And so Enoch’s sound more like myths.
Here’s another one, “Testament of the Twelve Patriarchs,” that adds moral tales to the patriarch’s life, and prophecies such as Levi’s; Levi having ordination through angels.
And so, again, I just think it’s historical fiction. May not have been believed by anyone, but kind of interesting little ideas, maybees, couldbees, like the movie The Chosen, you know, a bunch of stuff could be, maybe, really isn’t, we’re not taking it seriously. But some people may take them seriously, because they were, you know, into that kind of stuff.
But Scripture talks about Jewish fables. Titus chapter 1:12 – One of them, a prophet of their own, said, “Cretans are always liars, evil beasts, lazy gluttons.”
13 This testimony is true. Therefore rebuke them sharply, that they may be sound in the faith,
14 not giving heed to Jewish fables and commandments of men who turn from the truth.
Now, Enoch has multiple sections—there’s an astronomical book, there’s a parable book, different books; I think parables was written after, I think probably written by Christians, because it’s not found in Dead Sea Scrolls at all. Not found in Dead Sea Scrolls. So, Jewish fables.
Now with this I thought, what ... man's wisdom came from a demon named Penemue? That's crazy! Did using ink and paper cause the fall of the human race? Whoa ... I'd better throw all my fine-point pens away immediately! It was Adam's sin that brought sin into the world (Romans 5:12); not evil literature. Father Yahweh even commands John the Revelator to use pen and paper:
Rev 1:11," Saying, I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last: and, What thou seest, write in a book, and send it unto the seven churches which are in Asia; unto Ephesus, and unto Smyrna, and unto Pergamos, and unto Thyatira, and unto Sardis, and unto Philadelphia, and unto Laodicea."
Mankind is inherently evil of himself, prone to the works of the flesh (Galatians 5:19-21). Many people give far too much credit to demons for the sinful actions of men. They believe that every sin a person commits is evidence of demon-possession.
That is absurd! Men and women sin because they are sinners! (Romans 3:10,23). Although demons definitely can and do help influence mankind to do evil, the ultimate decision is OURS. The Devil cannot force anyone to sin.
People need to stop blaming demons and the Devil for their sins, and start looking into the mirror. Elohim has promised to help His children live right...
"There hath no temptation taken you but such as is common to man: but Elohim is faithful, who will not suffer you to be tempted above that ye are able; but will with the temptation also make a way to escape, that ye may be able to bear it" (1st Corinthians 10:13).
No excuses!
Getting back to the Identity of the Son of Man/ Chosen One…
Several chapters later, we read a concluding summary of this end-times judgment. The Son of Man is revealed to the chosen community of righteous believers. He sits on his throne, destroys the wicked, and ushers in an era of peace:
And they had great joy, and they blessed and glorified and exalted, because the name of that Son of Man had been revealed to them. And he sat on the throne of his glory, and the whole judgment was given to the Son of Man, and he will make sinners vanish and perish from the face of the earth. And those who led the world astray will be bound in chains, and in the assembly place of their destruction they will be shut up; and all their works will vanish from the face of the earth, And from then on there will be nothing that is corruptible; for that Son of Man has appeared. And he has sat down on the throne of his glory, and all evil will vanish from his presence. And the word of that Son of Man will go forth and will prevail in the presence of the Lord of Spirits. This is the third parable of Enoch.
-1 Enoch 69:26-29, George W.E. Nickelsburg & James C. VanderKam, “1 Enoch: The Hermeneia Translation,” pp. 91-92
So, the author of this the Book of Parables is clearly drawing upon Messianic prophecies from the TANAKH to describe this Chosen One/Son of Man figure.
At the end of the Book of Parables, Enoch is taken up again to heaven in the presence of the angels and the Lord of Spirits (1 Enoch 71:1-2).
Another issue I have is Enoch 71 verse 1 says – And it came to pass after this that his name during his lifetime was raised aloft to that of the Son of 2 Man and to the Master of Spirits from among those who dwell on the earth. And he – is talking about Enoch – was raised aloft 3 on the chariots of the spirit and his name vanished among them. And from that day I was no longer numbered amongst them. –
Most people believe Enoch was raised to heaven. Yahshua said (John 3:13) – “No one has ascended to heaven but He who came down from heaven, that is, the Son of Man who is in heaven.”
So, how do we reconcile Yahshua’s words with that of Enoch, and with that of other Scriptures that maybe at first glance might cause you to think that’s what happened. Let’s take a look.
Hebrews chapter 11 verse 5 says – By faith Enoch was taken away – taken away – so that he did not see death, – taken away, so he did not see death – “and was not found – actually the Hebrew reads ‘was not’ – because Elohim had taken him”; – taken – and before he was taken he had this testimony, he pleased Elohim.
And then we have Hebrews 11:13 that says – These – talking about all those that was written before in this chapter, all what? They – all died in faith, – They’re all dead. Well how did Enoch get taken, supposedly to heaven, and didn’t die, didn’t see death? Yet it says “all died, these all died. How they all die and he not see death.”
First we have to understand. We also will not see death. Yahshua said (John 8:51) – “Most assuredly, I say to you, if anyone keeps My word he shall never see death.” – How about that? It just means you’re not going to be found in the lake of fire. You’re going to inherit eternal life. Enoch pleased Elohim. He died young, he died young, he did. But he’s not going to see death because he pleased Elohim.
Again, what’s it mean “to be taken away?” It says – By faith Enoch was taken away. – What’s that mean? What’s it mean? It means this: (Matthew 24:38-39) – For as in the days before the flood, they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noah entered the ark,
39 “and did not know until the flood came and – what? – took them all away, – Were they caught away into heaven? No. They were killed. They died, that’s what it means. They died. And the Hebrew agrees. Let me share this first.
Luke 17(:34-37) He says – “I tell you, in that night two men will be in one bed: the one will be taken – Who’s the ones taken in the flood? The ones that died, right? – the other will be left.
35 Two women will be grinding together: the one will be taken – that’s the ones that die – and the other left.
36 Two men will be in the field: one will be taken – that’s those that died – and the other left.” – And so like, well,
37 …“Where, Master?” And He said to them, “Wherever the body is, there the eagles will be gathered together.”
They’re dead! Talking about the carcasses. It’s not talking about being zipped up into heaven. It’s talking about being killed.
Alright. So, let’s take a look at the actual text in Genesis 5:24 – Enoch walked with Elohim; and he was not. Hebrew reads “ve’einennu”, “he was not.” This is what’s translated in the Septuagint “he was not found”, okay. But the actual Hebrew reads “he was not”, “ve’einennu”.
Alright. That same exact Hebrew phrase is found here (Job 24:24) – They are exalted for a little while, and then they are gone. – ve’einennu – They are brought low; They are taken out of the way – taken, once again, taken out of the way – like all the others; They dry out like the heads of grain.
Also, Job 27:19 – The rich man will lie down, But not be gathered up; He opens his eyes, and – he’s a dead man, it’s over – he is no more.
And so, Hebrews 11 was correct: these all died in faith. They all died, it’s just that Enoch died young. And he’s letting you know, he pleased Elohim, Yahweh took him. We say that these days, “For some reason Yahweh took him. He was not very old, but for some reason Yahweh took him.” We say that even in our own language. It doesn’t mean that He pulled him out and took him up into heaven immediately. It just means he was taken.
Continue in Enoch…
Then Michael the archangel reveals to Enoch more heavenly secrets (1 Enoch 71:3-4). Finally, Enoch is taken to the “heaven of heavens” where he sees a fiery heavenly palace. There, Enoch is greeted by God, the four archangels, and innumerable other angels. Surprisingly, Enoch is greeted as this Son of Man figure:
And the Head of Days came with Michael and Raphael and Gabriel and Phanuel, and thousands and tens of thousands of angels without number. And he came to me and greeted me with his voice and said to me, “You (are) that Son of Man who was born for righteousness, and righteousness dwells on you, and the righteousness of the Head of Days will not forsake you.”
(Duulane)
-1 Enoch 71:13-14, George W.E. Nickelsburg & James C. VanderKam, “1 Enoch: The Hermeneia Translation,” p. 95
This quote comes from The Hermeneia Translation. If this translation of 1 Enoch 71:14 is correct when it identifies Enoch as this Messianic figure, then this should impact how much significance we place on these writings. Think about it. If the author of The Parables of Enoch intended to identify Enoch as this figure who fulfills these Messianic prophecies, then that puts The Parables of Enoch in direct conflict with the teachings of the New Testament. The New Testament identifies Yahshua as the Messianic Son of Man who fulfills these prophecies. And Enoch and Yahshua obviously can’t both be the Messiah. So the question comes down to this: do we have good reasons to accept this translation of 1 Enoch 71:14 as correct?
1 Enoch 71:14. That has massive implications for the question of whether we should consider 1 Enoch to be divinely inspired. How could we if it contradicts Scripture? So concerning this Messianic figure described in the Parables of Enoch, the teaching contained in 1 Enoch contradicts the teaching of the apostles. The author of The Parables of Enoch presents Enoch as the individual who fulfills Messianic prophecies contained in Daniel, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and so forth. The apostles, however, taught that Yahshua is the fulfillment of these prophecies. This would lead to the conclusion that 1 Enoch is not inspired by God and therefore should not be considered to be a source of sound doctrine and theology. And there are several other reasons for this conclusion
The Book of the Luminaries (72-82)
This section of the Book of Enoch is believed to have been composed in the third century BCE, and is likely the earliest of the Enochic texts. It describes Enoch’s journey through the heavens with the guidance of the interpreting angel Uriel. This section is focused almost exclusively on explaining the astronomical laws governing the solar calendar that was favored by the sectarian community who produced and followed the Book of Enoch. This calendar was made up of 364 days—12 months of 30 days each with one extra day in the third, sixth, ninth, and twelfth months.
The Dream Visions (83-90)
This section of the Book of Enoch is believed to have been composed in the second century BCE. In this section, Enoch tells his son Methuselah about two dreams concerning future events. The first dream is of the world’s destruction in the Flood of Noah (1 Enoch 83-84). The second dream is an allegorical telling of the history of humanity from Adam to the final judgment, which has come to be known as the “Animal Apocalypse.” In the allegory humans are represented as animals, the fallen angels are represented as fallen stars, and the archangels are represented as human beings. The dream concludes with a final judgment and God ushering in a new world of peace.
The Epistle of Enoch (91-105)
This section is believed to have been in composed in the second century BCE. It is an exhortation from Enoch to his sons to remain righteous in their wicked generation. He then lists a series of woes against the wicked because they oppress the righteous. The section concludes with a reference to Enoch’s books being given to the righteous during the end times.
The Birth of Noah (106-107)
This section details the miraculous birth of Noah. When Noah was born, his face and hair are said to glow white. He immediately stands up from the hands of the midwife and praises the Lord (1 Enoch 106:1-3).
This frightens Noah’s father, Lamech, who assumes that Noah must be a child of one of the fallen angels. So he begs his father Methuselah to speak with Enoch to learn the truth (1 Enoch 106:4-7). Enoch assures Methuselah that Noah is in fact Lamech’s son, and that Noah is just super holy, hence his glowing, and that he’s called to preserve the human race (1 Enoch 106:13-19).
Does the Book of Enoch match the Bible?
1. Deuteronomy 13:1-3 - Elohim’s messages are always consistent.
2. Time line wrong
Using Genesis 5, we know that Enoch was born about 622 years after the creation. He lived 365 years before Elohim took him - Genesis 5:23-24
https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Book_of_Enoch_(Charles)/Chapter_107
Enoch 107:2-3 (Enoch speaking to Methuselah): “'And now, my son, go and announce to thy son Lamech, that this son who is born is really his, and that this is not a falsehood.' And when Methuselah had heard the words of his father Enoch -- for he had shown him everything that was secret -- he returned, after his having seen him, and called the name of that son Noah, for he will make glad the earth for all destruction.”
Noah was born about 1056 years after the creation, 69 years after Enoch left the earth! According to the Bible, this event could not have happened!
Another Book by Enoch (108)
This final section of the book of Enoch is an additional exhortation from Enoch to his son Methuselah regarding God’s judgment in the end days. Nickelsburg writes:
This “other book that Enoch wrote” is actually a summarizing and interpretive conclusion to the corpus, which exhorts the righteous who live “in the end of days” to endure in their expectation because the judgment will soon vindicate them and eradicate sin and the sinners who have troubled and oppressed them
-George W. E. Nickelsburg and James C. VanderKam, “1 Enoch: The Hermeneia Translation,” pp. 12-13
Summation:
Father Yahweh could not be behind such a book! The Book of Enoch is the product of Satanically inspired men; that was rightly rejected as uninspired writing.The reason why the early church fathers and the King James Bible translators rejected the Book of Enoch as inspired of Elohim, WASN'T to hide the truth; BUT, because it isn't the truth.
It didn’t take long for me to begin to judge the Book of Enoch as a fraud, an imposter, possibly inspired by pagan influences creeping into the doctrine of the church.
The truth is that Satan is a murderous thief, who's sole purpose of existence now is to kill, steal, and destroy (John 10:10). Satan hates the Word of Yahweh, because It is his greatest enemy in this world. Therefore, Satan seeks to destroy the Bible.
If he cannot destroy the Bible, then he tries to corrupt the Bible by changing it (Romans 1:25; 2nd Peter 3:16).
If Satan cannot destroy or corrupt the Bible, then he tries to introduce "new" so-called "lost books" of the Bible to confuse people. I can't tell you how many times I've seen people who hardly know a lick of the Bible and seem put off by study get all fired up for the false Book of Enoch.
It is NO coincidence nowadays, in this time of great apostasy--when homosexuals are being given in marriage, when babies are being murdered by the hundreds-of-millions worldwide through abortion, when witchcraft is all around us, when booze and gambling are commonplace, when sexual sins and lasciviousness have saturated society, when churches are silent concerning sin and false religion--that we should see all these "new" so-called revelations concerning the Bible.
So called lost or hidden books like Enoch can stay lost, Father Yahweh promised in Psalm 12:6,7 to preserve His Word unto all generations, and He wonderfully has. Praise Yahweh!!!
As a person progresses deeper into the Pseudepigrapha, they will eventually find the Books of Adam and Eve fascinating as well, and then they will be into even deeper New Age occultism without even realizing it. Don't be fooled friend, the Book of Enoch is occult material that will lead you into the senseless mysticism of pagan religions.
Just look at some of the non-scriptural outlines written here, particularly those I marked with an* in front of them…
Hidden Mysteries Books
https://www.gutenberg.org/files/398/398-h/398-h.htm https://sarata.com/bible/web/chapter/1_Adam_and_Eve.40.html
The First Book of Adam and Eve
Part 1
Table of Contents
Prologue
Part 1
*Chapter I - The crystal sea, God commands Adam, expelled from Eden, to live in the Cave of Treasures.
Chapter II - Adam and Eve faint when they leave the Garden. God sends His Word to encourage them.
Chapter III - Concerning the promise of the great five and a half days.
Chapter IV - Adam mourns over the changed conditions. Adam and Eve enter the Cave of Treasures.
Chapter V - Eve makes a noble and emotional intercession, taking the blame on herself.
Chapter VI - God's reprimand to Adam and Eve in which he points out how and why they sinned.
*Chapter VII - The beasts are appeased.
Chapter VIII - The "Bright Nature" of man is taken away.
*Chapter IX - Water from the Tree of Life. Adam and Eve near drowning.
Part 2
*Chapter X - Their bodies need water after they leave the garden.
Chapter XI - A recollection of the glorious days in the Garden.
Chapter XII - How darkness came between Adam and Eve.
Chapter XIII - The fall of Adam. Why night and day were created.
Chapter XIV - The earliest prophesy of the coming of Christ.
Chapter XV - Adam and Eve grieve over the suffering of God to save them from their sins.
*Chapter XVI - The first sunrise. Adam and Eve think it is a fire coming to burn them.
Chapter XVII - The Chapter of the Serpent.
*Chapter XVIII - The mortal combat with the serpent.
Part 3
Chapter XIX - Beasts made subject to Adam.
Chapter XX - Adam wishes to protect Eve.
*Chapter XXI - Adam and Eve attempt suicide.
Chapter XXII - Adam in a gracious mood.
Chapter XXIII - Adam and Eve strengthen themselves and make the first altar ever built.
Chapter XXIV - A vivid prophecy of the life and death of Christ.
Chapter XXV - God represented as merciful and loving. The establishing of worship.
Chapter XXVI - A beautiful prophecy of eternal life and joy (v. 15). The fall of night.
*Chapter XXVII - The second tempting of Adam and Eve. The devil takes on the form of a beguiling light
SECTION 4: Book of Jubilees
Another book that is not typically included in the standard 66 books of the bible. Is the pseudepigrapha book of Jubilees.
To test whether or not something is from YHWH, we need to determine if it teaches the law of Yahweh Elohim, or if it teaches sin. Sin is defined as breaking the law of Elohim.
1 John 3:4 “For sin is the transgression of the law."
So we need to determine whether or not Jubilees holds up to the test.
Jubilees. Jubilees (2:31) says – The Creator of all things blessed it, but he did not sanctify all peoples and nations to keep the Sabbath, – Did not sanctify all peoples and nations to keep the Sabbath? Really? Didn’t Yahshua say the Sabbath was made for man? Not for Jews alone, but the Sabbath was made for man? It says – but Israel alone: them alone he permitted to eat and drink and keep the Sabbath. – I feel bad for the people who can’t eat and drink.
Come on, this is nonsense! It’s like saying, “Israel alone he permitted to honor their parents. To Israel alone he permitted to only worship one Elohim.”
Actually, the Book of Jubilees in one other place says he actually purposely misled the Gentiles to worship other gods. Basically making Yahweh the one at fault. There was a lot of, I think, anti-Semitism going on, you know. This is written around the time that, you know, Maccabees and things, they’re being ruled by Gentiles and such.
Scripture says (Isaiah 56:6-7) – “the sons of the foreigner Who join themselves to Yahweh, to serve Him, And to love the name of Yahweh, to be His servants– Everyone who keeps from defiling the Sabbath, and holds fast to My covenant—
7 Even them I will bring to My holy mountain, And make them joyful in My house of prayer. Their burnt offerings and their sacrifices Will be accepted on My altar; For My house shall be called a house of prayer for all nations.” – Direct contradiction with the Book of Jubilees.
Jubilees also promotes a calendar I don’t think is anywhere in the Bible. It adds angels to the first day of creation, in Jubilees chapter 2.
To the surprise of many, it is rather well supported that the book of Jubilees was written around the Maccabean period. That the book of Jubilees was written sometime in the first half of the second century BCE is confirmed by the fact that for the author, Hellenization still appears to be a dominant threat, as it has not receded into the collective memory of the Jewish people to become a past event.
The contentious argument against Hellenizing Jews can be found in Jubilees 3:31 which is against public nakedness. In Jubilees chapter 15:33-34, against not circumcising. So, the nature of Jubilees incorporates a sentiment that could only have developed in the coming out of the Maccabean period. In addition, the eschatological perspective of the book of Jubilees presupposes that only a short period of time between the beginning of the anticipated national revolt and the composition of the text has elapsed.
It says that a Satan-like angel moved Yahweh to test Abraham by telling him to offer his son Isaac, in Jubilees 17.
It claims an angel told Abraham to do circumcision.
In Jubilees chapter 23:16-32, it is said that after national apostasy or Hellenization, the younger generation will arise and return to God. As a result, God will progressively bring about the end times blessings promised by the Prophets. Thus from the author's standpoint, the benefits occasioned by national repentance and renewed obedience to the law will occur in the near future. Since these end times blessings did not come as expected, the author must be writing at a time when the possibility that they would come, still existed. That is, shortly after the beginnings of the Maccabean revolt.
Forbids men from taking any Gentile as a wife (in Jubilees 30:13-14). Can’t take any Gentile as a wife. Really? What about Boaz? I guess they forgot about that one.
It excuses Reuben, in Jubilees 33, for committing adultery with his father’s wife by saying, “Well, there’s no ordinance against it in those days.” Yes there was, it’s called adultery.
And repeats the giant claim.
And forbids Gentiles from keeping the Shabbat.
Sounds like an anti-Gentile book to me.
So, Yahweh wanted to reach the Gentiles. And actually it was a problem in the first century, a major problem. The Jewish people were very strongly so anti-Gentile that they were ready to throw Yahshua off a cliff for even saying, you know, “he wasn’t sent to any of the lepers but that Gentile Naaman.” And they got so angry, they were ready to throw him off a cliff; in Luke chapter 4. And even the apostles were kind of infected with this wrong mindset still, to the point that Yahweh had to send Peter a vision about the sheet and everything in order to get him to go to the Gentiles and talk to them about the Gospel. And so, it’s definitely present in the Book of Jubilees.
And so for me, these lost books, so-called “lost books,” are nothing more than Jewish fables that turn people from the truth.
Timothy, Paul talked to Timothy about it. He said (1st Timothy 1:3-4) – As I urged you when I went into Macedonia– remain in Ephesus that you may charge some that they teach no other doctrine,7 nor give heed to fables and endless genealogies, which cause disputes rather than pious edification which is in faith.
Thus, unless Moses was resurrected, wrote Jubilees, and then died again, we should be cautious about gleaning new instructions from this book.
One might ask, "Why is this important?" Our Messiah Yahshua commanded us to follow the law of Moses, not the law of the book of Jubilees.
Matthew 23:1-3 “Then Yahshua said to the crowds and to his disciples, "The scribes and the Pharisees sit on Moses' seat, so do and observe whatever they tell you, but not the works they do. For they preach, but do not practice."
Yahshua always corrected and instructed from what was written by Moses.
Mark 10:3 “He answered them, "What did Moses command you?"
In Mark 7 we find that when one adds or takes away from Moses, that Yahshua called that, simply put, a very bad thing. He said it was nullifying the Word of God in order to follow the commandments and traditions of men.
Mark 7:8-13 “You leave the commandment of God and hold to the tradition of men. And he said to them, "You have a fine way of rejecting the commandment of God in order to establish your tradition! For Moses said, "Honor your father and your mother", and, "Whoever reviles father or mother must surely die." But you say, "If a man tells his father or his mother, "Whatever you would have gained from me is Corban" (that is, given to God)- then you no longer permit him to do anything for his father or mother, thus making void the Word of God by your tradition that you have handed down. And many such things you do."
It should go without saying but, nullifying the Word of God in order to follow commandments and traditions of men, is a very bad thing. It's the whole basis of Matthew 23 in which the Pharisees were called hypocrites and brood of vipers and destined to hell.
Deuteronomy 13 spends a chapter detailing what is defined as a true prophet. A true prophet teaches only the law of God. Nothing more, and nothing less, despite any signs and wonders that may accompany the individual. However, if an individual has true prophecy, and amazing signs and wonders, yet the person does not teach the law of God as written by Moses, nothing more or nothing less, then that individual is a false prophet. Unfortunately, in some instances, the author of Jubilees adds to the Torah, the law of Moses. For example, in Jubilees chapter 50:8 it is stated that if a man lays with his wife on Shabbat, that is sin, meaning breaking the law of God and merits death.
Jubilees 50:8 "In it ye shall do no manner of work, ye and your sons, and your men- (8) servants and your maid-servants, and all your cattle and the sojourner also who is with you. And the man that does any work on it shall die; whoever desecrates that day, whoever lies with (his) wife, or whoever says he will do something on it, that he will set out on a journey thereon in regard to any buying or selling: and whoever draws water thereon which he had not prepared for himself on the sixth day, and whoever takes up any burden to carry it out of his tent or out of his house shall die."
Of course, no such command is found nowhere in the Torah. It’s a commandment and tradition of men, and it is actually violating the law of God.
Deuteronomy 4:2 "You shall not add to the word that I command you, nor take from it, that you may keep the commandments of Yahweh your Elohim that I command you."
And, chapter 12:32
Deuteronomy 12:32 "Everything that I command you, you shall be careful to do. You shall not add to it or take from it."
Thus, Jubilees is breaking the law of Yahweh, by adding to the law of Yahweh... and also recall, sin is defined as breaking the law of God.
1 John 3:4 "...for sin is the transgression of the law."
Thus, out of our love for the Word of Yahweh, and all that is established as truth, we cannot recommend the book of Jubilees.
Some attempt to defend against Jubilees breaking Torah and attempt to protect it by sighting Isaiah.
Isaiah 58:13 "If you turn back your foot from the Sabbath, from doing your pleasure on my holy day, and call the Sabbath a delight and the holy day of Yahweh honorable; if you honor it, not going your own ways, or seeking your own pleasure, or talking idly;"
The theory is that Yahweh, through Isaiah, commands his people to abstain from pleasure on His Sabbath day. Thus when Jubilees states that the Torah of Yahweh commands a man to not lie with his wife on Shabbat, then that is no different than what Isaiah wrote in chapter 58:13.
Now, most footnotes mention that pleasure refers to activities of business, not pleasure as in lying with one's wife. Not only that, but if Isaiah was stating that one should not entertain any form of pleasure on the Sabbath, we would then have a greater problem than Jubilees adding to the Torah. Now, we would have Isaiah adding to the Torah, and thus be a false prophet. But Isaiah is not speaking of pleasure in general, but according to the context, is referring to having other people work for you. Which of course, is against Torah.
Isaiah 58:3 "Behold, in the day of your fast you seek your own pleasure, and oppress all your workers."
Thus Isaiah is not adding to the Torah, thus breaking the Torah, but in fact only teaching Torah. So what we have then, is Isaiah teaching Torah, but Jubilees adding to and breaking Torah.
Not only is the book of Jubilees not written by Moses, which is the foundation of the Torah Yahshua instructed and corrected from in his ministry, but the book of Jubilees actually adds to the Torah, breaking Deuteronomy chapters 4 and 12 by entering into territory of a false prophet as defined by Deuteronomy 13.
That is not to say that there is not good information or teaching that could be gleaned from the book of Jubilees. It is however, clearly not a book that one would want to set as an authority over one's life. The Torah, light, or Word of Yahweh is our authority. Anything against Torah should be rejected as false or darkness, however it must be read through a discerning heart and mind.
Is not the way of the adversary to mix what is truth, with what is false?
Our Messiah, as our example, never once quoted the book of Jubilees, never set it up as an authority, and in fact, based on the Torah, the book of Jubilees fails the test by adding to the Word of Yahweh. It is in this realization that we recommend strong caution with this book, and be sure that anything gleaned from the book is tested to what Moses wrote; which seems to suggest that it might be a better practice to do what Yahshua did: study and teach Moses and the Prophets instead, lest we be carried away by unprofitable doctrine contrary to Yahshua and Moses.
It might also be said that Jubilees is quoted in 2 Peter referring to Jubilees chapter 4:30.
2 Peter 3:8 "But do not overlook this one fact, beloved, that with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day."
Now let's read Job, which was written hundreds of years earlier than the book of Jubilees.
Job 5:19"He will deliver you from six troubles; in seven no evil shall touch you."
It is more likely that both 2 Peter and Jubilees were quoting the same ancient sources, and not Peter quoting Jubilees.
Psalm 90:4 "For a thousand years in your sight are but as yesterday when it is past, or as a watch in the night."
The book of Jubilees and several other lost books were not considered popular in the first century. They were known, but not popular, as evidenced by a lack of sighting Jubilees and other books as any form of authority.
A group called the Essenes retained these books, whereas most Jewish sects did not place any authority on them as valid witnesses. In reading their writings, we learn that the Essenes harbored contempt for the Jewish sects that retained influence and power in the first century. Namely, the Sadducees and Pharisees.
They strongly disagreed with their usage of the calendar practiced in Yahshua's time. To be fair, Yahshua also voiced very strong doctrinal concerns about the Sadducees and Pharisees. At every opportunity, Yahshua intentionally violated their traditions. Such as instructing others to pick up their mat on the Sabbath, rubbing grain between their fingers on the Sabbath, or even not concerning oneself with washing one's hands before eating.
In the midst of all this, however, Yahshua never, not once, spoke against the calendar being employed in the first century.
In fact, as a testimony against the Essenes, Yahshua ate the Passover lamb on the 15TH ABIb just like the rest of the Jews of His time. Our Messiah kept Shabbat on the same day as the Pharisees. Yahshua did not seem to harbor the same opinion of the calendar as the Essenes. For example:
John 13:1-2 "Now before the Feast of the Passover (parenthesis mine:the general name for Unleavened Bread), when Yahshua knew that His hour had come that He should depart from this world to the Father, having loved His own who were in the world, He loved them to the end. And supper being ended, the devil having already put it into the heart of Judas Iscariot, Simon's son, to betray him."
John 19: 31,42 "Therefore, because it was the Preparation Day (parenthesis mine: the 6TH day of the week-FRI), that the bodies should not remain on the cross on the Sabbath (for that Sabbath was a high day: weekly sabbath in the midst of a feast), the Jews asked Pilate that their legs might be broken, and that they might be taken away. So there they laid Yahshua, because of the Jews' Preparation Day, for the tomb was nearby."
Many scholars speculate that the books such as Enoch and Jubilees were added onto. As the evidence suggests that the authorship does not appear to be consistent. Both books, Enoch and Jubilees, interestingly enough, place a high degree of emphasis on a calendar that was not compatible with the dominant calendar used in the first century. The Essenes were very much against the calendar employed in the first century, and the Essenes were the ones that harbored and retained these books and considered them sacred.
However, our Messiah disagreed with the Essene calendar and agreed with the calendar the Pharisees employed in 30 A.D.
The reality is, based on books that consist of what is normally defined as the New Testament, or the Brit Hadashah, we find that Yahshua in 30 A.D. became our Passover lamb on the day that the Pharisees defined as Passover (Feast of Unleavened Bread); testifying against the authority of the calendars that the Essenes favored. So whether there was some original validity to the books such as Enoch and Jubilees, it is very possible that additions to the books were simply to perpetuate and inject false authority to a calendar that was not compatible with Moses or Yahshua.
With that, for whatever it is worth, we simply recommend caution and discernment. We fully realize that we are not any type of authority, or may have no credibility in your eyes. But the Torah is our authority in our lives. If it says to not add to, or take away from the Word of Yahweh, or it is false, then we have to live by what the Torah instructs.
You know, these things have consequences. I mean, if Enoch and Jasher can talk to the dead and pray to the dead saints, why can’t you? And if Isaac can marry a ten-year-old, why can’t you? You know? These have consequences. This is profane.I’ve heard about people who say “Yeah, yeah, those two parts, I don’t think they’re inspired, but the rest was pretty good.”
I’m like, you know, it’s like saying, “Yeah, it promotes necromancy and pedophilia. Other than that, it’s a great book.” Crazy! I mean, how do you go there? I mean, once it has that, there’s no Scripture book that had any story like that anywhere, in either case; except to condemn it, you know. And so, no. No, no, a thousand times no. Take the Book of Jasher and burn it! That’s what we need to do with it.
Well, where’s the fables? If it’s not Jubilees, Jasher, you know, there was no Jasher found in the Dead Sea Scrolls, by the way; it’s not any older than 1750.
So these cause disputes rather than pious edification, and that’s exactly what bringing Enoch and Jubilees and all this stuff into our faith has done. It’s caused disputes between people who would otherwise be at peace with each other.
And we also have 2nd Peter 1:16 – For we did not follow cunningly devised fables – we didn’t follow the fables – when we made known to you the power and coming of our Master Yahshua Messiah, but were eyewitnesses of His majesty. – There’s no fables in the New Testament. They’re eyewitness accounts confirmed by many eyewitnesses.
You know what we need? We need the true Word of Yahweh. The true unleavened bread. You know unleavened bread can be a little dry, not a lot of pizzazz, but it’s the truth. It’s the truth. No wild fantasy stories, just the real food that Yahweh wanted to sustain us with.
I agree with Proverbs 30:8 – Remove falsehood and lies far from me; Give me neither poverty nor riches– Feed me with the food allotted to me. – That’s what I want.
Job 23:12 – I have not departed from the commandment of His lips; I have treasured the words of His mouth More than my necessary food, – probably food.
(Psalm 119:72) – The law of Your mouth is better to me Than thousands of coins of gold and silver. – That’s what I want.
CONCLUSION:
What about the Bible? Why are there 66 books? You know, I came upon a fellow brother (Tom Martincic) in the faith’s research on this same subject. Like him I already knew that, you know, originally books like 1st Kings and 2nd Kings were originally one book. 1st and 2nd Chronicles was originally one book. In fact, Ezra and Nehemiah were originally just one book. So 66 would not be the correct total. I will end this study in his own words and prayer…
https://eliyah.com/archives/major-problems-in-enoch-jasher-and-jubilees/
“So I got to, you know, researching. How many books were actually in the Old Testament called “the Tanakh?” Well, you got the five books: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, that’s the Torah. You got the Nevi’im, that’s the prophets, that’s: Joshua, Judges, Samuel, Kings, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and 12 Minor Prophets. They’re all counted as one book. There’s 11 other books called “Writings”: Psalms, Proverbs, Job, Song of Songs, Ruth, Lamentations, Ecclesiastes, Esther, Daniel, Ezra –Ezra and Nehemiah were together– and Chronicles.
So, in light of that, how many books were in the Old Testament? 24 Books. 24.
New Testament had 27 books, but I say 26 books. Why? Because Luke also wrote the Book of Acts. And so the Book of Luke and the Book of Acts would be one book.
So, 24 plus 26: there’s actually 50 books. 50 Books in our Bible today. If you go according to the way it used to be compiled.
So, that means the 50th book is Revelation. Revelation tells us about our future. Fifty, in the Bible is known as “the Jubilee.”
And it just so happens, Revelation, I would call that the “Jubilee book of the Canon.” Because it has a trumpet blast, the seven trumpet blasts. It details a time when Yahweh will set the whole world free from sin and slavery, and that’s what the Jubilee does. There’s a trumpet blast, it sets the world free from slavery. It sets the slaves free, they can go free. And all of humanity is returned to its original owner. Just like the Jubilee year, that all the land goes back to its original owner. And all will be at rest, a year of rest.
So, we have, basically, Revelation giving us the Jubilee Revelation. And we are from the earth, right? We were made from dust. Correct? And since we’re made from dust, and this dust is dust that Yahweh owns, we’re actually from the land.
And so, in Jubilees, the Jubilee year, the land goes back to its original owner, and we see here in this Jubilee book called “Revelation,” all of the earth goes back, including us, we’re part of the earth, to its original owner. Coincidence?! I don’t think so. I don’t think so at all. I think it’s amazing, actually, that there are 50 books in the Canon.
Also, when it comes to deciding which books are in the Canon, Romans chapter 3:1-2 says – What advantage then has the Jew, or what is the profit of circumcision?
2 Much in every way! Chiefly because to them were committed the oracles of Elohim.
Now, since the Jews were given the oracles of Elohim, He would inform them what the oracles actually were, right? So, therefore, it makes perfect sense we can trust the books that the Jewish people preserved as Scripture, as the oracles, would be the inspired Words of Yahweh.
So what we call “the Old Testament,” what they call “the Tanakh,” to them were given the oracles; we can trust, in spite of them, right, because yeah they had years and years of idolatry, in spite of them, Yahweh preserved His word through them.
That being the case, we can trust that these Johnny-come-lately ideal books, you know, Tobith and Judith and all these, whatever these, Ecclesiasticus and all this stuff, they never accepted those books as inspired books; and they are the ones that were given the oracles. And I can critique each of those books one day. But for now, this is one reason I believe that we can trust the Canon that we have today.
Now, what about the New Testament? By and large, the Jewish people rejected the Messiah. And so, those that were committed to the testimony of Yahshua, and the record of how the early apostles lived, and what the early apostles taught, would belong to those who would be believers in Messiah Yahshua, right? And so, Levitical priesthood preserved the Old Testament writings for us, and the Melchizedek would have handled the testimony of Yahshua and the apostles.
Both religions on an overall scale had much corruption, and still do. But Yahweh used it anyway to preserve His Word, to the point where I read these Scriptures, and I come to a very different set of doctrines than both Judaism and Christianity, because Yahweh preserved the truth of His Word for us today. Even though it contradicts many of what is being taught in the synagogues and churches in the world today.
And so, I’m not going to rely on Catholics to tell me what’s true in the Old Testament, because they are not given the oracles of Elohim. The Jews were.
And so, to me that’s a very convincing point that clears up the confusion. And what I discovered this week with actually being 50 books in the Bible, you know, the unity of Scripture amazes me. It’s like, when you dig into the Scriptures, and the more that you dig in, it’s like looking at a microscope, and the more you uncover, the more you discover. There is a lifetime of learning, just in what we know is the Word of Yahweh.
We don’t need these other things to muddy the picture. And you end up hanging your whole doctrine, your whole life, and the way you live your life, on these other things that come lately, you know. The book of Jasher was lost until just a few hundred years ago, you know.
I love the Word, and we should love the Word that we know is Scripture.
(Psalm 119:111) – Your testimonies I have taken as a heritage forever, For they are the rejoicing of my heart.
Psalm 119:131 – I opened my mouth and panted, For I longed for Your commandments.
Jeremiah 15:16 – Your words were found, and I ate them, – unleavened bread – And Your word was to me the joy and rejoicing of my heart; For I am called by Your name, O YAHWEH of hosts.
Beautiful! Beautiful! I concur! I concur. We don’t need a 51st book, we don’t need a 52nd, 53rd, 54th, or any other book. There are serious problems with these other books.
Listen, Yahweh has preserved down through the ages just what we need in order to do justly, love mercy, and walk humbly with our Elohim. Just what we need! It’s that simple!
The words of Yahweh are awesome! They are pure words, like silver tried in the furnace of earth. – Psalm 12, I don’t have it up there, but – purified seven times. – Psalm 12:6 says – You shall keep them, – verse 7 says – You shall keep them, O Yahweh, you shall preserve them from this generation forever. – And He has, He has kept them. He has preserved them.
What happened to Jasher? Lost, 1700 years lost! Wasn’t even found in Dead Sea Scrolls. Probably just a Jewish midrash making a bunch of stuff up. Jubilees, lost till the 1840s. Enoch, lost until 1773; found in Ethiopic Canon.
The 50 books? Never lost. He preserved them, He kept them. And made them available to every generation from the time they were written until this very day.
If former generations didn’t need them, I don’t need them either. Blessed be the name of Yahweh.
So I say let’s avoid the so-called “lost books” that probably, from what I can tell, from what I’m seeing here, are nothing more than Jewish fables. And let’s instead feed on the 50 books containing unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.
So I say (1st Corinthians 5:7-8) – purge out the old leaven, – of Enoch, Jasher, and Jubilees and these others – that we may be a new lump, since we truly are unleavened. For indeed Messiah, our Passover, was sacrificed for us.
8 Therefore let us keep the feast, – let us keep the feast – not with old leaven, nor with the leaven of malice and wickedness, but with the unleavened bread – the unleavened words – of sincerity and – most important – truth.
John 17:17 Yahshua said – “Your word is truth.” – He said “The Scripture cannot be broken.” These things He taught, and I believe them.
Let’s pray. Heavenly Father Yahweh, kadosh, kadosh, kadosh be Your great name. We praise You, we praise Your Word. O Yahweh guard us, protect us, keep us from things that are not from You. We want Your Word, Your truth, Your light. Let not our hearts be thirsty for things that deceive us. But let our hearts be thirsty and our hearts be hungry for the truth of Your Word and for the living waters given to us by Your Spirit.
We know Abba Yahweh, it's so important that we repent. We repent for believing anything that’s deception and lies. We repent of any and all transgression.
Take away the confusion amongst the believers, and restore, restore, restore everyone back to what is good, what is holy, what is just and what is true.
Glorify Your great name. We trust in Messiah Yahshua for forgiveness of sin…For truly we know and we are sure, Yours is the Kingdom, Yours is the power and Yours is the glory forever and ever, in Yahshua’s great name we pray. Amein.”
presented by Pastor Micah B Anthony SR.
INTRO: To get a better understanding, watch the following video to become introduced to both sides of this issue.…
Wes Huff PROVES Sam Shamoun Wrong? | Bible has MORE than 66 Books?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yy2peSZ61Ww
Now continue to read the five section study below to learn more facts that can help you find the truth of which side is more consistent with the sixty six books that are proven by Yahshua the Messiah and His disciples, to be accepted as scripture canon:
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/canon
3[Middle English, from Late Latin, from Latin, standard]
a: an authoritative list of books accepted as Holy Scripture
In both my proactive outreach ministry, as well as casual reactive conversations I might have with my barber or fellow employees when religious conversation occurs, whether they are people who do or don't attend church, I’ve encountered quite a few who have brought up how archaeology has unearthed ancient biblical texts giving them reason to doubt our current canon of scripture (the Bible).
There are many who entertain the possibility that Christians today don't have the true Bible; and use this excuse to form their own aberrant belief system or spirituality. Browsing through the religious section in your local bookstore, or even on Netflix or the History channel, you’re likely to stumble on a handful of titles that suggest the discovery of “lost books” of the Bible.
Generally, these represent works that were “politically incorrect” according to the theological notions of the time. Branded as spurious by early church leaders, they were discredited and destroyed. Luckily, a handful of copies survived. Archaeologists have rescued these previously “lost books” of the Bible. The Gospel of Thomas, unearthed in the Nag Hammadi library in Upper Egypt in 1945, would be an example.
Invariably, this sends a jolt through the system of many Christians who begin to question, could it be that archaeology has unearthed ancient biblical texts that cast doubt on the current canon of Scripture? Is it possible the Bible we Christians have is incomplete? To begin to answer this question about the so-called lost or hidden books of the Bible, I will first present...
SECTION 1: REASONING
In this study we are going to look at quite a few of these books their history and content. It may be hard to believe, but this question can be answered without ever reading any of the books in question. No research needs to be done, no ancient tomes addressed, no works of antiquity perused. Curiously, the entire issue can be answered by a close look at one word: Bible.
The Bible Divine
The whole question of alleged lost books of the Bible hinges on what one means by the word “Bible.” It can only mean one of two things.
1)There is a religious understanding of the word...
When one asks a Christian what the Bible is, he or she is likely to say simply, “It’s Yahweh’s Word.” When pressed for a more theologically precise definition, he might add that Yahweh Elohim superintended the writing of Scripture so that the human authors, using their own style, personalities and resources, wrote down, word for word, exactly what Elohim intended them to write in the originals.
Added to this verbal explanation of inspiration would be many scriptures that show how the Bible says this about itself; along with proofs of why the Bible is divine rather than man made in origin. This is a vital part of the Christian understanding of the definition of the word “Bible.”
The key concept for our discussion is the phrase “exactly what Yahweh intended them to write.” This is a critical element of this understanding of “Bible” is the idea that Yahweh was not limited by the fact that human authors were involved in the process.
2) Then there is an opposing secular definition or view of the Bible. In this view, a common objection to the notion of inspiration is that the Bible was only written by men, and men make mistakes. This complaint misses the mark for two reasons.
First, it does not logically follow that because humans were involved in the writing process, the Bible must necessarily be in error. A thorough research on how the Scriptures have endured will reveal minor Mistakes in translation of a word here or there, but these minor fixable mistakes don't compromise the integrity of the scriptures word as a whole being divine rather than man made in origin. To assume error in all human writing is also a self-defeating argument. The humanly derived statement, “The Bible was written by men, and men make mistakes,” would be suspect by the same strict standards. The fact is, human beings can and do produce writing with no errors. It happens all the time.
Further, the challenge that men make mistakes ignores the main issue—whether or not the Bible was written only by men. The Christian accepts that humans are limited, but by faith denies that man’s limitations are significant in this case because inspiration implies that Yahweh Elohim’s power supersedes man’s liabilities.
A simple question serves to illustrate this: “Are you saying that if Yahweh exists, He’s not capable of writing what He wants through imperfect men?” This seems hard to affirm. The notion of an omnipotent Elohim not being able to accomplish such a simple task is ludicrous. If, on the other hand, the answer is “No, I think He is able,” then the objection vanishes. If Yahweh is capable, then man’s limitations are not a limit on Elohim.
The Divine Inspiration of the Bible
If we can offer good reasons the Bible was from Yahweh Elohim to begin with, this automatically solves the problem of human involvement. If Yahweh ensures the results, it doesn’t matter if men or monkeys do the writing, they will still write exactly what Yahweh intends. That is part of what it means for the Bible to be divinely inspired.
The important thing for our purpose here is not to defend the notion of divine inspiration, but to understand that Yahweh’s authorship and supernatural preservation are necessarily entailed in the first definition of the word “Bible.” The Bible is the 66 individual books contained under one cover that are supernaturally inspired by Yahweh Elohim, and are preserved and protected by His power. On this understanding, man’s limitations are irrelevant.
There are multiple Bible verses that mention Elohim preserving his word, including:
- Matthew 24:35-Yahshua says, "Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will never pass away".
- Isaiah 40:8-The prophet Isaiah says, "The grass withers and the flowers fall, but the word of our God stands forever".
- Psalm 12:6-7-David says, "The words of Yahweh are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times. Thou shalt keep them, O Yahweh, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever".
- Psalm 119:89, Says, "Your word, Yahweh, is eternal; it stands firm in the heavens".
- Jeremiah 1:12,”Says, "Then said Yahweh to me, You have seen well, for I am alert and active, watching over My word to perform it".
- Yahweh Elohim was indeed dead serious when He assured David (and all of us!) that He would preserve His pure words forever! Remember also that the Lord Yahshua Himself said:
- For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled (Matthew 5:18).
- And He also insisted that "the scripture cannot be broken" (John 10:35).
A book that didn’t make the cut was rejected for two basic reasons: Early Christians couldn’t trace authorship to an Apostle or eyewitness accounts, and the theology differed from what had been handed down from the Apostles. Christianity is no different from other religions that have collections of authoritative writings. Even individual professions identify certain books as—"bibles," if you will—as official representations of their respective fields. The Bible, then, is in that category—merely a collection of books chosen by the early church leaders to represent their own beliefs.
So we have two possible meanings for the word “Bible,” a supernatural one and a natural one. Either the Bible is divinely given and divinely preserved—the conservative Christian view—or it’s merely a human document representing the beliefs of a religious group known by the label “Christianity”—the view of just about everyone else. The next question we should ask ourselves is given either of these two definitions, could any books of the Bible be lost?
No Lost Books
Start with the first meaning, the supernatural definition of the Bible. Is it possible that books could be lost from a Bible of this sort? The answer is certainly no. Remember, on this view Yahweh Elohim Himself is supernaturally preserving and protecting the integrity of His work.
Regardless of whether the Christian claim about inspiration is accurate or not, it is obvious that in this definition it is not possible Yahweh would misplace His own book. The “lost books” thesis would thus be reduced to, “Certain books that almighty Yahweh was responsible to preserve and protect got lost.”
This is silly. The view makes Yahweh both almighty and inept at the same time. If the Bible is in fact the inspired Word of Yahweh, then the power of Elohim Himself guarantees that no portion of it will ever be lost. There will always be a fully adequate testimony of His Word in every generation.
Could there be lost books given the second definition? What if Christians are wrong in attributing Yahweh Elohim’s stewardship to the Scriptures? What if the Bible ultimately turns out to be merely a product of human design? If that’s the case, then the term “Bible” refers not to the Word of Yahweh (the first definition), but to the canon of beliefs of the leaders of the early church (the second definition). Is it possible that books could be lost from a Bible of this sort?
The answer again is certainly not. The “lost books” thesis would be reduced to this: “Early church leaders rejected certain books as unrepresentative of their beliefs; and kept only those that they actually believed reflected their beliefs.’
If the Bible is a collection of books the early church leaders decided would represent their point of view, then they have the final word on what is included. Any books they rejected were never part of their Bible to begin with, so even by the second definition, “lost books” of the Bible would be a misnomer.
Consider this scenario. You decide to write a book about your personal beliefs drawing from stacks of notes containing reflections you’ve collected over the years. After recording the ones you agree with, you discard the rest. Later, someone rummaging through your trash comes upon your discarded notes. Could he claim he’d stumbled upon your lost beliefs?
“No,” you respond, “these were not lost. They were rejected. If they were really my beliefs, they’d be in the book, not in the garbage.”
It’s ironic that “lost books” advocates often point out that rediscovered texts were missing because the early Church Fathers suppressed them. It’s true; they did. Critics think this strengthens their case, but it doesn’t. Instead it destroys their position by proving that the “lost books” were not lost but discarded, rejected as not representative of Christian beliefs. Therefore, they did not belong in the Christian Bible. If they never were in the Bible in the first place they couldn’t be lost from the Bible.
Recall Vote?
Another approach to Scripture is worth mentioning. Some academics, like those of the Jesus Seminar, reject the idea that the Bible has supernatural origins. Since the Bible is just man’s opinion anyway, why not have a recall vote? Amend the text to fix what is now considered defective or out of step with the times.
Such a reshuffling of the biblical deck—tossing out some books and including others to reflect what the church currently believes about spiritual truth—is certainly an alternative to a naturalistic view of the Scripture. If the members of the Jesus Seminar want to include the Gospel of Thomas in their bible, they’re welcome to. Keep in mind though, they would not be restoring a “lost book” of the Bible, but merely redefining the canon to fit modern tastes.
Regardless of how you view the Scripture—as supernatural or as natural—there is no sense in which there could be lost books of the Bible. If the Bible is supernatural—if Yahweh Elohim is responsible for its writing, its transmission, and its survival—then Yahweh, being Elohim, doesn’t fail. He doesn’t make mistakes, He doesn’t forget things, and He’s not constrained by man’s limitations. Yahweh can’t lose his lessons.
However, if the Bible is not supernatural—as many will contend, especially those who claim to have found lost books—one faces a different problem. By what standard do we claim these are bona fide lost books of the canon of the early church? If, from a human perspective, the Bible is that collection of writings reflecting the beliefs of early Christianity, then any writings discarded by the church fathers are not books of their Bible by very definition.
Has archaeology unearthed previously unknown ancient texts? Certainly. Are they interesting, noteworthy, and valuable? Some. Are they missing books of the Bible? The answer is no. Two thousand years later, the rediscovery of something like the Gospel of Thomas may be archaeologically significant. It might be a lost book of antiquity, a great find, even a wonderful piece of literature.
But it is not a lost book of the Bible.***
SECTION 2: THE APOCRYPHA BOOKS
Without looking at the books we've come up with a reasonable argument as to why they are not lost books of the Bible. Keeping this in mind, let's now see what happens when we actually take a little time to research from a historic and Biblical point of view these so called lost or hidden books of the Bible to see what the evidence presents?
THE APOCRYPHA BOOKS- Introduction
Here is a list of the so-called "hidden books".
The English-language King James Version (KJV) of 1611 followed the lead of the Luther Bible in using an inter-testamental section labelled "Books called Apocrypha", or just "Apocrypha" at the running page header.[33] The KJV followed the Geneva Bible of 1560 almost exactly (variations are marked below). The section contains the following:[34]
·1 Esdras (Vulgate 3 Esdras)
·2 Esdras (Vulgate 4 Esdras)
·Tobit
·Judith ("Judeth" in Geneva)
·Rest of Esther (Vulgate Esther 10:4 – 16:24)
·Wisdom
·Ecclesiasticus (also known as Sirach)
·Baruch and the Epistle of Jeremy ("Jeremiah" in Geneva) (all part of Vulgate Baruch)
·Song of the Three Children (Vulgate Daniel 3:24–90)
·Story of Susanna (Vulgate Daniel 13)
·The Idol Bel and the Dragon (Vulgate Daniel 14)
·Prayer of Manasses (Daniel)
·1 Maccabees
·2 Maccabees
Why are there these extra books in the Old testament of the Catholic Bible and not in the Protestant Bible?
THE APOCRYPHA BOOKS- Why the Difference?
The Protestant Old Testament, which contains 39 books, comes from the Palestinian Canon — which (as the name would indicate) is the set of scriptures which originated from Palestine and which were recognized by the Jews.
The Catholic Old Testament, however, derives its books from the Alexandrian Canon — the Greek listing of Old Testament books, which was supposedly drawn up in Alexandria, Egypt. Along with the 39 books of the Palestinian Canon, the Alexandrian Canon contains 14 or 15 additional books that are collectively known as the “apocrypha,” which simply means “hidden.”
THE APOCRYPHA BOOKS- Some Discrepancies
Of these 14 or 15 books, three are not included in the Catholic Bible. Also, some of these apocryphal books have been made into a single book, such as Baruch and the Letter of Jeremiah. Still others were simply tagged onto the books of the Palestinian or Hebrew Canon.
For example, the apocryphal book called Bel and the Dragon was made into the fourteenth chapter of the Book of Daniel. This explains why there are only seven additional books listed in the Catholic Old Testament.
THE APOCRYPHA BOOKS- Why Are They Excluded?
As you will see, there are many reasons why these apocryphal books are not part of our Bible. Let me mention First of all, that they contain teachings that are clearly unbiblical — As we progress through this study we will look at quite a few examples such as encouraging prayers for the dead, and teaching salvation by works.
Secondly, we will take a look at the fact that there have been a number of authoritative testimonies against the acceptance of these books, including those from the Jewish scholars of Jamnia, as well as many of the church fathers and scholars, like Athanasius and Jerome.
And, of course, the most important fact is that these books were never directly quoted by YAHSHUA or by any of the New Testament writers. Finally, we'll see how it’s important to note that even the Catholic church itself didn’t canonize them until the Council of Trent, after the Reformation began.
The Reformation, also called Protestant Reformation, the religious revolution that took place in the Western church in the 16th century (1517 – 1648).
THE APOCRYPHA BOOKS- Summary
By the end of this study, you will have looked at evidence that supports the conclusion, that while some of these apocryphal books do have some benefit of giving us some insight about the historical events that occurred during the period between the Old and New Testaments, they are definitely not the Word of Yahweh.
So, it is very important for all of us to recognize that there is a vast distinction between the apocrypha, or the “hidden books,” and the Divinely inspired Canon of Scriptures that we have.
Twenty Six Reasons Why the Books of the Apocrypha Were Rejected as Holy Scripture by the Protestants
The Old Testament Apocrypha consists of eleven or twelve books, depending upon how they are divided, that the Roman Catholic Church adds to the Old Testament. The Protestants reject these books as Holy Scripture for the following reasons.
1. The Apocrypha Has Different Doctrine And Practices Than Holy Scripture
There are doctrines and practices contained in the Apocrypha that are contrary to what the Scripture teaches. They include the following.
They Teach A Person Is Saved By Works
In the Apocrypha proof texts can be found to support the Roman Catholic doctrine of justification by human works and not faith alone. The Apocrypha contains the following verses.
For almsgiving saves from death and purges away every sin. Those who give alms will enjoy a full life (Tobit 12:9).
In another place in Tobit it says.
So now, my children see what almsgiving accomplishes, and what injustice does it brings death! (Tobit 14:11).
The Non-biblical Doctrine Of Purgatory Is Taught In The Apocrypha
The doctrine of purgatory - a place of purging between heaven and hell - is taught in the Apocrypha. It says.
So they all blessed the ways of the Lord, the righteous judge, who reveals the things that are hidden; and they turned to supplication, praying that the sin that had been committed might be wholly blotted out. The noble Judas exhorted the people to keep themselves free from sin, for they had seen with their own eyes what had happened as the result of the sin of those who had fallen. He also took up a collection, man by man, to the amount of two thousand drachmas of silver, and sent it to Jerusalem to provide for a sin offering. In doing this he acted very well and honorably, taking account of the resurrection. For if he were not expecting that those who had fallen would rise again, it would have been superfluous and foolish to pray for the dead. But if he was looking to the splendid reward that is laid up for those who fall asleep in godliness, it was a holy and pious thought. Therefore he made atonement for the dead, so that they might be delivered from their sin (Second Maccabees 12:41-45).
The Bible teaches that, upon death eternal judgment is final, one either goes to be with the Lord in paradise or is sent away from Him to a place of the wicked dead- there is no middle place where the living can make atonement for the forgiveness of the wicked dead. The writer to the Hebrews stated.
Just as man is destined to die once, and after that to face judgment (Hebrews 9:27).
According To The Apocrypha Yahweh Hears The Prayers Of The wicked Dead
We find the Book of Baruch teaching that Elohim hears the prayers of those who have died.
O Lord Almighty, God of Israel, hear now the prayer of the dead of Israel, the children of those who sinned before you, who did not heed the voice of the Lord their God, so that calamities have clung to us (Baruch 3:4).
The Bible teaches that the prayers of the dead wicked or not, have no response from Yahweh that would benefit the living. Only the living upon the earth pray for the other living ones on the earth.
Luke 16:22 One day the beggar died and was carried by the angels to Abraham’s side. And the rich man also died and was buried. 23 In Hades, where he was in torment, he looked up and saw Abraham from afar, with Lazarus by his side.24 So he cried out, ‘Father Abraham, have mercy on me and send Lazarus to dip the tip of his finger in water and cool my tongue. For I am in agony in this fire.’25 But Abraham answered, ‘Child, remember that during your lifetime you received your good things, while Lazarus received bad things. But now he is comforted here, while you are left to suffer. 26 And besides all this, a great chasm has been fixed between us and you, so that even those who wish cannot cross from here to you, nor can anyone cross from there to us.’27 ‘Then I beg you, father,’ he said, ‘send Lazarus to my father’s house, 28 for I have five brothers. Let him warn them so they will not also end up in this place of torment.’29 But Abraham replied, ‘They have Moses and the prophets; let your brothers listen to them.’30‘No, father Abraham,’ he said, ‘but if someone is sent to them from the dead, they will repent.’ 31Then Abraham said to him, ‘If they do not listen to Moses and the prophets, they will not be persuaded even if someone rises from the dead.’”
The Apocrypha Teaches The Pre-existence Of Souls
The doctrine of the pre-existence of souls is found in the Apocrypha.
As a child I was naturally gifted, and a good soul fell to my lot; or rather, being good, I entered an undefiled body (Wisdom 8:19,20).
Scripture does not teach that souls have any existence before they are united into a body.
The Apocrypha Teaches Creation Out Of Pre-Existent Matter
The doctrine of creation out of pre-existent matter...
For your all-powerful hand, which created the world out of formless matter, did not lack the means to send upon them a multitude of bears, or bold lions (Wisdom 11:17).
The Bible says that Elohim's creation was out of nothing.
By faith we understand that the worlds were prepared by the word of Elohim, so that what is seen was not made out of things which are visible (Hebrews 11:3).
There are even more than these doctrines of the Apocrypha that are listed as contrary to the teaching of Holy Scripture.
2. The Apocrypha Is Never Cited In The New Testament As Scripture
Though the New Testament cites directly, or alludes to, almost every book of the Old Testament as Scripture, it never cites the books of the Apocrypha as being Yahweh's Word. The Apocrypha was not the Bible of Yahshua or His apostles. While Yahshua and His apostles often quoted from the Septuagint, they never quoted from the Apocrypha.
Allusions Are Not The Same As Scripture
al·lu·sion/əˈlo͞oZHən/ an expression designed to call something to mind without mentioning it explicitly; an indirect or passing reference.
1. i.e,..The apostle Paul made an allusion to Greek poets in Acts 17:28,"‘For in Him we live and move and have our being.’ As some of your own poets have said, ‘We are His offspring.’
synonyms: | reference to, mention of, comment on, remark about, citation of, quotation of, hint at, intimation of, suggestion of; |
While there may be some allusions to the apocryphal books by New Testament writers there is no direct quote from them. An allusion is not the same as a direct quote.
No Statement Introduced By "It Is Written"
In addition, no New Testament writer ever refers to any of these books as authoritative. Quotes from the accepted books are usually introduced by the phrase, "It is written," or the passage is quoted to prove a point. But never do the New Testament writers quote the Apocrypha in this way.
Furthermore no book of the Apocrypha is mentioned by name in the New Testament.
If the writers of the New Testament considered any book in the Apocrypha to be Scripture, we would certainly expect them to refer to it in some way. However we find no direct quotations. This is in contrast to over 250 quotations from the authoritative Old Testament Scriptures.
The fact that the present canon was repeatedly quoted as being divinely authoritative as well as the absence of any direct quote is another indication of the extent of the canon - it did not include the Apocrypha.
3. The Apocrypha Has Always Been Rejected By The Jews As Scripture
The Jews have never considered these works to be divinely inspired. On the contrary, they denied their authority. At the time of Messiah Yahshua we have the testimony of the Jewish writer Flavius Josephus that there were only twenty-two books divinely inspired by Elohim. These books are the same as our thirty-nine in the Old Testament. The books of the Apocrypha were not among these. The same testimony is found in Second Esdras - the Ezra legend. This work was written in A.D. 100. Therefore these books were never part of the Hebrew canon of Scripture.
4. The Books Of The Apocrypha Were Written During The Silent Years
The books of the Apocrypha were written during the four hundred silent years between the Book of Malachi and the announcement of the birth of John the Baptist. Jewish and New Testament sources both agree that no divinely inspired prophetic utterance occurred during this time.
5. The Septuagint Translation Proves Nothing
The fact that the Apocrypha is found in the Septuagint translation does not prove anything. It merely testifies that the Alexandrian Jews translated other religious material into Greek apart from the Old Testament Scripture. A Greek translation is not the same thing as a book being part of the Hebrew canon.
6. There Is No Evidence The Apocrypha Was In Septuagint At The Time Of Messiah
There is no evidence that the books of the Apocrypha were in the Septuagint as early as the time of Messiah. The earliest manuscripts that contain them date back to the fourth century A.D. This does not demonstrate that the books of the Apocrypha were part of the Septuagint in pre-Christian times. Even if they were in the Septuagint at this early date, it is noteworthy that neither Christ nor the apostles ever quoted from them as they did with most of the Old Testament books. In addition, books were merely translated in Alexandria, Egypt - they were not canonized there.
There is no clear answer as to what the first century Septuagint contained. The fourth or fifth century Greek manuscripts, in which the Apocrypha appears, have no consistency with the number of books or their order.
7. There Is No Evidence Of A Greater Alexandrian Canon
It has been argued that the canon of the Alexandrian Jews was larger than the present Hebrew Old Testament. However, there is no evidence that the Jews in Alexandria, Egypt had a wider canon than the Jews living in Israel. Philo of Alexandria, who lived in the first century A.D., wrote on a number of subjects. He acknowledged the Jews believed in the divine authority of the Hebrew canon.
However, he gave no indication that there was a wider canon used by the Jews living in Egypt. From Philo we find that the canon in Alexandria, Egypt was the same as in Palestine. He knows the threefold division of the Old Testament and ascribes divine inspiration to many of the books. In addition, he says nothing about the Apocrypha. Consequently there is no evidence anywhere that the Alexandrian Jews accepted the Apocrypha as Holy Scripture.
It must be remembered that it was not the Jews in Egypt but rather some of the Greek-speaking Christians who gave some measure of authoritative status to certain of these books translated with the Septuagint plus. To the Jews, these books were never considered divinely inspired Scripture.
8. They Are Not On The Early Canonical Lists
In the early years of the church it drew up various lists of the books it considered to be Old Testament Scripture. The books of the Apocrypha do not appear on any list until late in the fourth century. This demonstrates the acceptance of these writings was not immediate.
The Apocrypha Is Missing From The Earliest List
The earliest existing list of the Old Testament canon comes from a man named Melito, a bishop of Sardis. In approximately A.D. 170 he wrote the following.
"When I came to the east and reached the place where these things were preached and done, and learned accurately the books of the Old Testament, I set down the facts and sent them to you.
These are their names: the five books of Moses, Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, Joshua the son of Nun, Judges, Ruth, four books of the Kingdom, two books of Chronicles, the Psalms of David, the Proverbs of Solomon and his wisdom, Ecclesiastes, the Song of Songs, Job, the prophets Isaiah, Jeremiah, The Twelve in a single book, Daniel, Ezekiel, Ezra."
This list of Melito is highly instructive. He includes all the books of the present canon except Esther. The reference to the four books of the kingdom would be 1,2 Samuel and 1,2 Kings. Ezra was the common way to refer to Ezra-Nehemiah. Wisdom was merely a fuller description of the Book of Proverbs - not the Apocryphal book by that name. Among ancient writers Proverbs was often called Wisdom.
While including all of the books of the present Old Testament canon (except Esther) Melito nowhere mentions any of the books of the Apocrypha.
9. They Were Rejected By Most Church Leaders
While a few of the early leaders of the church accepted some of the books of Apocrypha as Scripture, most of the great church leaders did not-Athanasius, Origen, and Jerome, to name a few. Many great church leaders spoke out against the Apocrypha. Those who do cite the Apocrypha as Scripture were few in number.
It is also worth noting that none of the church fathers that quoted the Apocrypha as Scripture knew any Hebrew.
The Clear Testimony Of Athanasius Toward The Apocrypha
In A.D. 367, the great defender of orthodox belief, Athanasius bishop of Alexandria, wrote a letter. In this letter he affirmed all the books of the present Old Testament canon (except Esther) as well as all the books of the present New Testament canon. He also mentioned some of the books of the Apocrypha. Of those he said.
"[They are] not included in the canon, but appointed by the Fathers to be read by those who newly join us, and who wish instruction in the world of godliness."
This is another ancient and powerful testimony that the books of the Apocrypha were not considered to be Holy Scripture.
10. There Are Other Books Apart From The Apocrypha That Are Cited As Scripture By Some Church Fathers
Again, a few of the Church Fathers did not restrict themselves to the books that now make up the Apocrypha. Authors such as Justin, Tertullian, and Clement of Alexandria occasionally use books outside the present Apocrypha - especially the Book of Enoch and First Esdras (Third Esdras).
Clement of Alexandria accepted Second Esdras (Fourth Esdras). Origen believed that the books of First and Second Maccabees, as well as the Letter to Jeremiah, were part of Holy Scripture. Irenaeus cited the Book of Wisdom as being divinely inspired. Therefore appeal to the church fathers cannot settle the matter, seeing that they give conflicting evidence.
(Side note) The Pseudepigrapha
There Are Others Books Directly Quoted Apart From Apocrypha
Add to this, there are certain books that both Protestants and the Roman Catholic Church reject as Scripture that some say are actually cited in the New Testament.
Paul cites the passed down through the ages names that tradition gives the magicians of Pharaoh who opposed Moses.
Just as Jannes and Jambres opposed Moses, so also these men oppose the truth - men of depraved minds, who, as far as the faith is concerned, are rejected (2 Timothy 3:8).
These names are not mentioned in the Old Testament but is used as a name of a so called lost book categorized as apart of a whole other separate set of Apocryphal books known as the .Pseudepigrapha[edit]
Technically, a pseudepigraphon is a book written in a biblical style and ascribed to an author who did not write it. In common usage, however, the term pseudepigrapha is often used by way of distinction to refer to apocryphal writings that do not appear in printed editions of the Bible, as opposed to the texts listed above. Examples[47] include:
·Apocalypse of Abraham
·Apocalypse of Moses
·Letter of Aristeas
·Martyrdom and Ascension of Isaiah
·Joseph and Aseneth
·Life of Adam and Eve
·Lives of the Prophets
·Ladder of Jacob
·Jannes and Jambres
·History of the Captivity in Babylon
·History of the Rechabites
·Eldad and Modad
·History of Joseph
·Odes of Solomon
·Prayer of Joseph
·Prayer of Jacob
·Vision of Ezra
Often included among the pseudepigrapha are 3 and 4 Maccabees because they are not traditionally found in western Bibles, although they are in the Septuagint. Similarly, the Book of Enoch, Book of Jubilees and 4 Baruch are often listed with the pseudepigrapha although they are commonly included in Ethiopian Bibles. The Psalms of Solomon are found in some editions of the Septuagint.
Starting in SECTION 3 of this study, we will later talk more about one or two of the books found among the pseudepigrapha; but for now let’s turn our attention back number eleven of the Twenty Six Reasons Why the Books of the Apocrypha Were Rejected as Holy Scripture by the Protestants.
11. The Early Greek Manuscripts Are Not Decisive
The fact that some of the books from the Apocrypha are found in early Greek manuscripts of the Bible is not decisive. These manuscripts also contain other written works that are neither part of the Scripture nor part of the Apocrypha - everyone rejects them as having any divine authority.
For example, 3 and 4 Maccabees and the Psalms of Solomon are found in these early Greek manuscripts along with the Greek Old Testament and the Apocrypha. If someone points to the inclusion of the Apocrypha among these early manuscripts as proof of their divine authority, then what do they do with these other works? Should they also be added to the Old Testament?
The Books Have A Different Order And Content
In the three most important Greek manuscripts the order and the contents of the books are different.
In Vaticanus we find: Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Judith, Tobit, Baruch, and the Letter to Jeremiah.
In Sinaiaticus the list includes: Tobit, Judith, First Maccabees, Fourth Maccabees, Wisdom, and Ecclesiasticus.
In Alexandrinus the order is: Tobit, Judith, First Maccabees, Second Maccabees, Third Maccabees, Fourth Maccabees, Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, and the Psalms of Solomon.
Therefore the early Greek manuscripts give no consistent testimony.
12. The Apocrypha Is Not A Well-Defined Unit
One of the main problems with accepting the Apocrypha as Scripture is that it is not a well-defined unit. Three of the books in the Septuagint plus were excluded as Holy Scripture - First and Second Esdras and the Prayer of Manasseh. If the books in the Septuagint plus should be made part of the Old Testament then why are these three books omitted?
The Latin Vulgate contains First and Second Esdras and the Prayer of Manasseh in the Apocrypha. First and Second Esdras are found in most Latin manuscripts of Scripture. In addition, they are placed with the Apocrypha when the full King JamesVersion is printed.
However the Roman Catholic Church does not call these three books Scripture. Sometimes these three books are printed as an appendix to Roman Catholic Bibles after the New Testament. Sometimes they are omitted entirely.
In addition, not every church Father, which accepted the Apocrypha as canonical, had exactly the same list of books in mind. This adds to the problem as to the exact content of the Apocrypha.
13. The Councils At Hippo And Carthage Are Not Definitive
The fact that the councils of Hippo and Carthage accepted the canonical status of the Apocrypha is not decisive. First, they were not larger more representative councils. In addition, these councils had no qualified Hebrew scholar in attendance. Basically the Apocrypha was canonized at these councils because of the influence of one person - Saint Augustine.
14. The Ambiguous Testimony Of Saint Augustine
It is often argued that the great scholar, St. Augustine, accepted the books of the Apocrypha as authoritative.
However, Augustine seemed to have changed his mind about the authority of the Apocrypha. At one point he implied that the Apocrypha did not have the same status as Holy Scripture (City of God 18.36). At best his testimony is ambiguous. Moreover Augustine's testimony, while important, is certainly not the last word on the matter.
Augustine mistakenly accepted the miraculous account of the origin of the Septuagint. While this was a popular thing to do at his time, no one today takes the story seriously.
15. The Clear Rejection By A Real Authority - Jerome
There was one great Hebrew scholar among the Christian Church living in the era of Saint Augustine - Jerome the translator of the Latin Vulgate. Jerome rejected the Apocrypha as Holy Scripture in the strongest of terms. He refused to place it in his translation of the Old Testament. It was only after the death of Jerome that the Apocrypha was placed in the Vulgate - the official translation of the Roman Catholic Church. His expert testimony was rejected.
16. Early Christian Art Is Not A Test Of Divine Truth
The fact that stories from the Apocrypha were depicted in early Christian art only shows that they were considered valuable in some sense by believers. However the divine authority of any work is not determined by whether it is included or missing in art collections by Christians.
17. They Were Rejected By Many Catholic Scholars Through The Protestant Reformation
Many Roman Catholic scholars, through the Protestant Reformation, rejected the Apocrypha as Scripture. Even the Roman Catholic Church made a distinction between the Apocrypha and the other books of the Bible prior to the Protestant Reformation. An example of this is Cardinal Cajetan. He is the man who opposed Martin Luther at Augsburg. In 1518, he published A Commentary on all the Authentic Historical Books of the Old Testament. His commentary, however, did not include the Apocrypha.
Cardinal Ximenes made a distinction between the Apocrypha and the Old Testament in his work called the Complutensian Polyglot (1514-1517).
Thus there was no unanimity of opinion among Roman Catholic scholars that these books should be considered Scripture. Consequently, before the Protestant Reformation these books were not considered canonical by all of the church authorities.
18. They Were Not Officially Accepted By The Roman Catholic Church Until The 16th Century
While councils at Hippo (393) and Carthage (397) listed the Apocrypha as canonical, this was not the stated view of the entire church. As we have seen there were Roman Catholic works at the time of the Protestant Reformation that did not include the Apocrypha with the Old Testament.
It is only since the Council of Trent that the Apocrypha has had an authoritative status. The first official council of the Roman Catholic Church to ratify these books was at the Council of Trent in 1546-1563. There is no official record of the acceptance of the writings as authoritative Scripture before this time.
Why Were Certain Books Of The Septuagint Plus Rejected?
In addition, the decision at Trent has many problems. Rather than accepting the entire fourteen or fifteen books of the Septuagint plus as Holy Scripture they rejected First and Second Esdras (which they call Third and Fourth Esdras) and the Prayer of Manasseh. It is interesting to note that Second Esdras, or Fourth Esdras in Roman Catholic reckoning, contains a strong objection against prayers for the dead - one of the important doctrines practiced by the Roman Catholic Church at that time.
Again, Second Esdras also limits the Old Testament canon to twenty-four books.
2 Esdras refers to the canon of 24 books which likely refers to the same canon as the Talmud has.[25] Beckwith, Roger T. (2008-11-01). The Old Testament Canon of the New Testament Church: and its Background in Early Judaism. Wipf and Stock Publishers. ISBN 978-1-60608-249-2.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Development_of_the_Old_Testament_canon
This of course, would exclude the Apocrypha among which it itself is named.
It must also be noted that at the Council of Trent there seems to have been no Hebrew scholars and only a few good Greek scholars.
19. There Are Other Books, Apart From Scripture, Found Among The Dead Sea Scrolls
Most scholars believe that the people who lived at the place near the Dead Sea, where the Dead Sea Scrolls were found, were the Essenes. Although they were rivals of mainstream Judaism they accepted the same books as Holy Scripture.
While it is true that the books of the Apocrypha were found among the scrolls left by this group, they're not the only non-canonical books that were found among the Dead Sea Scrolls. The materials found at Qumran were part of a library - they were not merely books of Scripture.
While commentaries of the biblical books have been found at Qumran no commentary has thus far been found on the Apocryphal books. Consequently there is no evidence whatsoever that the Dead Sea Community held the books of the Apocrypha to be divinely inspired.
Even if evidence were someday found that showed the Essenes believed the Apocrypha to be divine, this alone would prove nothing. This group was a sect that was not in the mainstream of Jewish thinking.
20. The Protestants Have Always Rejected The Divine Authority Of The Apocrypha
While some Protestants may find some use of the Apocrypha, such as printing it between the testaments and using it in some measure in public worship, it has never been accepted as Holy Scripture. The use by Protestants of the Apocrypha has never been to establish doctrine or settle doctrinal issues. The use of the Apocrypha is limited. The Church of England in their Bible readings say the Apocrypha is to be used for example of life, but not to establish any doctrine.
The Westminster Confession goes even further. It states.
The books commonly called the Apocrypha . . . [are not] to be any otherwise approved, or made use of, than other human writings (Westminster Confession 1:3).
This is the Protestant position.
21. There Are Demonstrable Historical Errors In The Apocrypha
The Apocrypha also contains demonstrable historical errors. We can cite a number of examples.
The Age Of Tobit When He Died Is A Contradiction
For example, Tobit was supposedly alive when Jeroboam staged his revolt in 931 B.C.
I, Tobit, walked in the ways of truth and righteousness all the days of my life. I performed many acts of charity for my kindred and my people who had gone with me in exile to Nineveh in the land of the Assyrians. When I was in my own country, in the land of Israel, while I was still a young man, the whole tribe of my ancestor Naphtali deserted the house of David and Jerusalem. This city had been chosen from among all the tribes of Israel, where all the tribes of Israel should offer sacrifice and where the temple, the dwelling of God, had been consecrated and established for all generations forever. All my kindred and our ancestral house of Naphtali sacrificed to the calf that King Jeroboam of Israel had erected in Dan and on all the mountains of Galilee (Tobit 1:3-5).
Yet the text says that Tobit was still alive when the Assyrians captured the northern kingdom of Israel in 721 B.C. This means that he lived over two hundred years!
However, the Book of Tobit says he lived only 112 years.
So ended Tobit's words of praise. Tobit died in peace when he was one hundred twelve years old, and was buried with great honor in Nineveh (Tobit 14:1,2).
This is an obvious contradiction. Those who believe in an inerrant Scripture cannot accept the Apocrypha as Yahweh's Word.
Errors In The Book Of Judith
Another example can be found in the opening verse of the Book of Judith.
It was the twelfth year of the reign of Nebuchadnezzar, who ruled over the Assyrians in the great city of Nineveh. In those days Arphaxad ruled over the Medes in Ecbatana (Judith 1:1).
There are two historical errors in this verse. Nebuchadnezzar was the ruler of the Babylonians, not the Assyrians, and he ruled from Babylon, not Nineveh.
It Is Not Possible To Defend The Historical Accuracy Of The Apocrypha
While it is possible for Bible scholars, using the most up-to-date archaeological knowledge, to defend the historical accuracy of the books of the Bible, it is not possible to argue for the historical accuracy of the books of the Apocrypha. Many of them have demonstrable errors that cannot be reconciled.
22. There Is Sub-Biblical Content In The Books Of The Apocrypha
The content of the books of the Apocrypha is below that of canonical Scripture. Several of the books including Judith, Tobit, Susanna, and Bel and the Dragon read like legends or myths. When one reads these books alongside canonical Scripture the differences become obvious.
23. There Is No Objective Evidence Of Divine Authority In The Apocrypha
The books of the Apocrypha do not contain anything like predictive prophecy, or the firsthand testimony of miracles, that would give evidence of their divine authority. If Yahweh divinely inspired these books, then we should expect to see some internal evidence confirming it. But there is none.
24. None Of The Books Of The Apocrypha Claim Divine Authority
From the documents themselves we find no claim of authority. This is in contrast to the books of the Old Testament that claim to record the words that Yahweh Elohim spoke and the deeds that He performed among the people. Therefore it is not logical to attribute Yahweh's authority to the books of the Apocrypha when they themselves make no claim to divine authority.
25. There Was No Hebrew Original For All Of The Books Of the Apocrypha
While the books of the present Old Testament canon were written in Hebrew, with small parts in Aramaic, some of the books of the Apocrypha have no Hebrew original behind them. They were composed in Greek. These include Susanna, the Letter of Jeremiah, and the additions to Esther.
While the Hebrew language is not a determining factor as to what books should be part of the Old Testament canon, all of the undisputed books of the Old Testament were composed in Hebrew - none of them were composed in Greek. Greek did not become the international language till about 330 B.C. This was about seventy years after the close of the Old Testament. The fact that a number of the books of the Apocrypha were originally written in Greek shows their late date and their lack of claim to be part of the Old Testament.
26. Yahshua ' Testimony Is Definitive
It is clear that in the first century the Old Testament was complete. Yahshua put His stamp of approval on the books of the Hebrew Old Testament but said nothing concerning the Apocrypha. However, He did say that the Scriptures were the authoritative Word of Elohim and they could not be broken. Any adding to that which Elohim has revealed is denounced in the strongest of terms. Yahshua asked the religious leaders a penetrating question.
Why do you break the command of Elohim for the sake of your tradition? (Matthew 15:3).
Yahshua' And The Extent Of The Old Testament
A statement by Yahshua seemingly gives His belief in the extent of the Old Testament.
Therefore I send you prophets, sages, and scribes, some of whom you will kill and crucify, and some you will flog in your synagogues and pursue from town to town, so that upon you may come all the righteous blood shed on earth, from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zechariah son of Barachiah, whom you murdered between the sanctuary and the altar. Truly I tell you, all this will come upon this generation (Matthew 23:34-36).
He mentions Abel and Zechariah as the first and last murder messengers of Yahweh Elohim that were murdered. Abel's murder is mentioned in Genesis while Zechariah's was in 2 Chronicles - the last Old Testament book in the Hebrew canonical order.
The fact that these two are specifically mentioned is particularly significant. There are other murders of Elohim's messengers recorded in the Apocrypha. Yahshua does not mention them. This strongly suggests He did not consider the books of the Apocrypha as part of Old Testament Scripture as with the books from Genesis to 2 Chronicles.
There Was More Testimony From Yahshua
Yahshua gave further testimony of the extent of the Old Testament canon in the day of His resurrection. He said.
How foolish you are, and how slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken! . . . And beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, he explained to them what was said in all the Scriptures concerning himself (Luke 24:25,27).
Note Yahshua' emphasis on "all that the prophets had spoken." Later He explained the extent of "all that the prophets had said."
He said to them, "This is what I told you while I was still with you: Everything must be fulfilled that is written about me in the Law of Moses, the Prophets and the Psalms" (Luke 24:44).
This is a reference to the threefold division of the Hebrew Scripture. They constitute "all that the prophets said." There is no reference to the Apocrypha. It would not have been part of the threefold division of the Old Testament.
The Old Testament Apocrypha Is Not Scripture
As the evidence is examined it becomes clear that the books of the Apocrypha should not be accepted with the same divine authority as the books found in the Hebrew Old Testament. There is no evidence whatsoever that they belong in Holy Scripture. To the contrary, all the evidence speaks to their exclusion. Because they are not Scripture it is wrong to have them bound in a single volume with Holy Scripture. Doing so will only mislead believers.
The Apocrypha Does Have Value
The fact that the Apocrypha is not considered to be Holy Scripture does not mean that it is entirely worthless. The books do have some value. For example, the Book of First Maccabees has some valuable historical references about the period between the testaments. However any value these books do have are as historical works only - not divinely inspired Scripture.
It Is An Important Matter
The issue as to which books belong in Holy Scripture is more than a historical issue. The books of the Bible are divinely revealed books - all other books are not. The Scripture gives Yahweh's truth in an error-free manner - no other book can claim this. The Scripture is the final authority to solve all doctrinal and behavioral issues. Therefore it is of primary importance that we know the extent of Scripture.
Summary
The books of the Apocrypha should not be considered as Holy Scripture because they do not give any evidence as being authoritative. Protestants deny the canonical status of these books on the basis of both internal and external evidence. This evidence includes the following.
First, the Apocrypha contains doctrines and practices that contradict what has been previously revealed in Scripture. Add to this the Apocrypha is never cited in the New Testament as Holy Scripture. This is in contrast to the canonical books - almost all of them are cited.
The Jews rejected the Apocrypha as being part of Yahweh's Word. For one reason, these books were written after Yahweh had ceased giving divine revelation. In these years Yahweh was not giving any authoritative word to His people.
The fact that the Apocrypha is found in the manuscripts of the Septuagint proves nothing - we do not know the content of the Septuagint in pre-Christian times. Furthermore there is no evidence of a wider Alexandrian canon of Scripture. The Jews, wherever they lived, used the same Hebrew canon that did not include the Apocrypha.
The Apocrypha was not on any early list of Christian books that were considered Scripture. While a few church fathers quoted them as authoritative, most did not. In addition, none of those fathers who cited the Apocrypha as authoritative Scripture knew any Hebrew.
There is also the problem with the exact content of the Apocrypha. The books contained in the Apocrypha are not well defined - not everyone can agree on which books are authoritative.
Augustine, while a great thinker, did not read Hebrew and knew very little Greek. Furthermore he accepted the fanciful account of the origin of the Septuagint. Jerome, a real Hebrew scholar, rejected the books outright.
Many Roman Catholic scholars, to the time of the Protestant Reformation, rejected the Apocrypha as Scripture.
While some Protestants make some use of the Apocrypha it has always been rejected as Scripture.
Another major problem for the Apocrypha is demonstrable historical errors in it. This is not consistent with Yahweh's Word being error-free. Furthermore there is no evidence in these books of divine authority - fulfilled prophecy is lacking. Add to this there is no claim within the books of Yahweh's authority.
Finally we have the testimony of Yahshua. He said the Scriptures were true and could not be broken. However the Apocrypha was not Scripture to Him. Since neither the Jews, Yahshua, or His apostles considered these writings as part of the Old Testament neither should we.
Again, all this evidence against the so-called lost or hidden books is another huge reason why I conclude that the present thirty-nine books of the Old Testament are the complete Scripture that Yahweh Elohim has given us. There are no other lost or hidden divinely authoritative books of Scripture that belong to the Old Testament.
SECTION 3:The Book of Enoch
Now it's time to deal with perhaps the most famous pseudepigrapha, called the Book of Enoch and the teaching contained in it concerning the Sons of Elohim. Of all the so-called lost or hidden books, I have researched this one the most; and have found serious evidence why beyond a reasonable doubt we should have reservations against what many Christians today believe to be the absolute authentic book of Enoch.
Without even looking at the contents of this Book I've already given enough evidence for why I don't believe this so-called lost book and its fellow categorized books are the inspired scriptures of Elohim. Here in SECTION 3, I want to primarily focus on a very popular teaching that I consider to be a non-biblical theory that promotes fallen angels having the ability to have physical relations with other species called humans, and re-producing offspring.
I will give you an alternative theory to consider which I deem more scripturally sound; and involves less assumption and conflict with existing Biblical principles.
After you read this, I think you'll begin to understand even more why I even see the doctrine on this subject has the potential to be a stumbling block concerning the salvation of many. Before getting into the non-biblical teaching found in the so-called Book of Enoch, let us first remind ourselves of...
The Fact the Book of Enoch is listed as apart of a group of books categorized as the Pseudepigrapha
Technically, a pseudepigraphon is a book written in a biblical style and ascribed to an author who did not write it. In common usage, however, the term pseudepigrapha is often used by way of distinction to refer to apocryphal writings that do not appear in printed editions of the Bible, as opposed to the texts listed above.
Often included among the pseudepigrapha are 3 and 4 Maccabees because they are not traditionally found in western Bibles, although they are in the Septuagint.
Similarly, the Book of Enoch, Book of Jubilees and 4 Baruch are often listed with the pseudepigrapha although they are commonly included in Ethiopian Bibles. The Psalms of Solomon are found in some editions of the Septuagint.
Where To Read The Book of Enoch:
https://bookofenochreferences.wordpress.com/category/the-book-of-enoch-with-biblical-references-chapters-10-to-20/chapter-10/
Despite all the non-hidden evidence against it, I've conversed with many people who haven't thoroughly studied what the book teaches against the truth of the Bible, who believe in this Book of Enoch without question. We will now begin to familiarize ourselves with this book. Afterwards we will look at more teachings within this book that go against the Bible.
The Background History of the Book of Enoch?
At first I thought why isn’t the book of enoch in the scripture? Enoch was referenced in the Bible, why was it judged as unqualified in the canon of scripture. Is it another grievous error concocted by the Catholic church? “Why did the church suppress the Book of Enoch?
After all, there are various references to Enoch throughout the Old and New Testament .I want to specifically look at and address this question regarding the Book of Enoch. Why was this book rejected as Scripture?
Then when I began reading and researching the Book for myself and came across certain facts and writings made me begin to see why.
The first fact I came across was there are actually three different books by that name. Scholars have named these books 1 Enoch, 2 Enoch, and 3 Enoch to differentiate them from each other. 1 Enoch, which is the proper title for the book, is typically what everyone is referring to when they talk about the “Book of Enoch.”
To give some basic information about these other two books before we move on to the main topic, here is what the Anchor Yale Bible Dictionary has to say concerning 2 Enoch:
“The origins of 2 Enoch are unknown. Research has not reached any consensus about the time, place, or contents of its first published form. The options range from Charles’ theory that the longer recension was written by an Alexandria Jew in the 1st century through belief that it was a Christian rewrite of 1 Enoch, probably in Greek, made anywhere from the 2nd century A.D. (in Syria?) to the 10th (in Byzantium), up to the denial that it is anything more than a home-grown product of Slavic religious culture.”
-Francis I. Andersen, “Enoch, Second Book Of,” Anchor Yale Bible Dictionary
In regard to 3 Enoch, The Anchor Yale Bible Dictionary states that it is:
“A late Jewish apocalypse in Hebrew, probably compiled in the 6th or 7th century A.D. in Babylonia.”
-Philip S. Alexander, “Enoch, Third Book Of,” Anchor Yale Bible Dictionary
While interesting on their own, 2 & 3 Enoch are not really relevant to our current study. Like we said, when people talk about “the Book of Enoch,” typically they are referring to 1 Enoch. The content of 1 Enoch is what most people are familiar with and curious about. Moreover, the writings that make up 1 Enoch are what the early believers in Yahshua were familiar with.
So with that said, who was Enoch? What is the Book of Enoch? What was the significance of this book to the early followers of Yahshua? What is the significance of this book to believers today? What can we learn from it—if anything?
Let’s begin with that first question: Who was Enoch?
We don’t have a lot of information on Enoch, but here is what we know from Scripture:
• He was the great-great-great-great-grandson of Adam and the great-grandfather of Noah (Genesis 5:18-29).
• He “walked faithfully with Elohim” and then was mysteriously taken away by Elohim (Genesis 5:22- 24).
Genesis 5:22-24 Enoch walked with Elohim after he fathered Methuselah 300 years and had other sons and daughters. Thus all the days of Enoch were 365 years. Enoch walked with Elohim, and he was not, for Elohim took him.
• The author of Hebrews elaborates on this event, saying that Enoch did not experience death (Hebrews 11:5). Although, some believe that eventually, he did die later based on (Hebrews 9:27; 11:13).
• He was known as a man of faith who lived a life pleasing to Elohim (Hebrews 11:5).
• Most importantly, in regards to our study, he was NOT the author of the Book of Enoch.
That last point might shock those who haven’t really studied this topic. But it’s a simple fact that the Enoch of the Bible could not have been the author of what we call the Book of Enoch. Why? Well there are a number of reasons.
First, the Book of Enoch contains anachronisms. For instance, the Book of Enoch makes clear use of biblical passages from the prophets like Isaiah, Zechariah, and Ezekiel, which were obviously written long after Enoch’s time. Places like Mount Sinai are even mentioned by name…
1 Enoch 1:4,” And the eternal God will tread upon the earth, (even) on Mount Sinai, |
[And appear from His camp] |
And appear in the strength of His might from the heaven of heavens.” |
Of course, such places and future writings of future born prophets that the patriarch Enoch would have had no knowledge of.
Second, scholars are able to determine the historical setting and date of the Enochic texts by studying the grammar, syntax, and doctrinal content of those writings in light of other historical data. Enochic scholar, George W. E. Nickelsburg, writes:
The Enochic use of pagan mythological motifs and its preachments against Gentile oppression are clear marks of this text’s setting in the Hellenistic world and of its complex interaction with the events and culture of that world.
-George W. E. Nickelsburg, “Jewish Literature Between the Bible and the Mishnah,” p. 53
So again, when you look at the History of the Book of Enoch, you can't escape the fact that it is a fictional book that was not written by the Enoch who lived before the flood.
So that brings us to our second question. If the book of Enoch is not some special revelation written by the patriarch Enoch himself, what is it? Again, the Book of Enoch is what’s known as “pseudepigrapha,” which means that it is a falsely attributed text. That is to say, it is a text whose claimed author is not the true author. The true author of the text attributed the work to a figure of the past—in this case, the patriarch Enoch. These types of pseudepigraphal works were very common between 200 BCE to 200 CE. It is not a hidden fact that the book is listed as a pseudepigraphal work. i.e. a work with a false author (or written under a pen name).
Also there is the fact that there are a number of these pseudepigraphal works written around the same time frame dated from the time between the Old and New Testament through the first few centuries. This shows two prevailing truths about that time, these types of fictitious works were created ...
1. It appears to have been a writing fad for a while.
2. People used the names of famous people, such as characters from the Bible, to lend credibility to the work – to make it appear more authentic.
As a result, throughout history, very few well educated people actually believe the book to have been written by Enoch. Let's entertain this already established by the experts as false scenario why don't we.
If it was an actual book hand written by the Enoch whose relationship with Yahweh Elohim was righteous enough to be miraculously taken away by Yahweh(Genesis 5:24), it would have to have existed all those years, before the oldest recorded Biblical book of Job, before Yahweh even commanded Moses to preserve the holy commandments of His law in written form; it would have had to survive the flood.
It is not admitted into the Jewish canon, for a reason. Given who Enoch was, I'm sure that if there was even a hint of authenticity about the book of Enoch the Jewish scholars would have put it right up there with the inspired writings such as the book of Job and Moses.
Obviously they did not think that this book of Enoch was inspired scripture that was possibly written before the deluge, or that it could have safely survived that worldwide calamity, the destroyer of all things. People who want to defend this book argue this point by saying remember that Noah, who survived the deluge, was the great-grandson of Enoch himself.
They assert that this scripture could be genuine because Noah could have " rewritten it, under the Spirit's inspiration, if it had been destroyed by the violence of the deluge." [Tertullian, about 198 A.D.] Even Tertullian, one of the few church fathers to support the Book of Enoch, admits that the Jews never accepted it as authentic and that Christians of his time also rejected it.
Even though the Book of Enoch was well know by early Christian writers, most rejected the book as being from Elohim. Athanasius, Origen, and Jerome all argued against the book being considered Scripture.
In fact it appears that only Tertullian and Augustine thought the work was inspired and Augustine waffled on the point. Even the Roman Catholic Church who added twelve books to their Old Testament, didn’t consider this book – likely because of the early rejection.
Again, there are several books that go by the name “The Book of Enoch” Most refer to copies of a book found in 1773 in Ethiopia.These copies are a translation of a Greek text that was in turn a translation of an Aramaic text.
Small fragments of this large book were found among the Dead Sea scrolls. These fragments contained Parts of chapter 2, verses 12-14 and chapter 3 verse 13-16; but the book has 108 chapters. Most scholars date the book to between 300 B.C. and 100 B.C.
Larger portions of the book survived in Greek, but again, not nearly the whole. They also date from a later period (after the church was founded). The only whole version are the Ethiopian translations.
Nickelsburg explains:
The components of 1 Enoch were composed in Aramaic and then translated into Greek, and from Greek into ancient Ethiopic (Ge’ez). The entire collection is extant only in manuscripts of the Ethiopic Bible, of which this text is a part. Approximately ninety such manuscripts from the fifteenth to the twentieth centuries are available to scholars in the West […] Roughly twenty-five percent of 1 Enoch has survived in two Greek manuscripts from the fourth and fifth/sixth centuries (chaps 1:1-32:6; 97:6-107:3) and a few fragments of other parts. Eleven manuscripts from Qumran contain substantial as well as tiny fragments of the Aramaic of parts of chapters 1- 36, 72-82, 85-90, and 91-107. A fragment of a sixth/seventh-century Coptic manuscript (93:3-8), an extract in a ninth-century Latin manuscript (106:1-18), and a twelfth-century Syriac excerpt (6:1-6) have also survived.
- George W. E. Nickelsburg and James C. VanderKam, “1 Enoch: The Hermeneia Translation,” p. 13
A comparison of the Ethiopian translations to the Aramaic and Greek fragments show the Ethiopian translation is fairly, but not entirely, accurate.
Most scholars note that the Book of Enoch, as it currently exists, is a disjointed work. This means it doesn’t have a unifying flow, such as would be found in the writings of one author. It is generally agreed to be a composition of several works by multiple authors, but exactly who wrote which portions is heavily debated.
As mentioned, it is part of the pseudepigraphal literature. According to scholars, it was written by numerous authors and pieced together over the last few centuries BCE. Nickelsburg writes:
1 Enoch is a collection of apocalyptic (revelatory) texts that were composed between the late fourth century B.C.E and the turn of the era. The size of the collection, the diversity of its contents, and its many implications for the study of ancient Judaism and Christian origins make it arguably the most important Jewish writing that has survived from the Greco-Roman period
- George W. E. Nickelsburg and James C. VanderKam, “1 Enoch: The Hermeneia Translation,” p. Vii
To go on a quick rabbit trail, it’s worth mentioning that the translations of the Book of Enoch we have today are derived primarily from these late Ethiopic manuscripts from the fifteenth to the twentieth centuries CE. While scholars and translators consult the few fragments from earlier Greek and Aramaic manuscripts, they don’t really have a lot to work with.
This ought to impact how much weight we put on the version of the Book of Enoch we have today when considering how it might fit into the first century. That is to say, we should proceed with caution, and not blindly assume, that the version of Enoch we have today is a 100% accurate representation of the version of Enoch they had in the first century.
For instance, if a significant chunk of Enoch has been preserved only in manuscripts from the fifteenth century or later, we cannot be confident that the content contained in those later manuscripts were not edited or added to much later than the first century.
Contrast this with the New Testament, which has nearly 6,000 complete Greek manuscripts that have been cataloged in addition to over 20,000 ancient translations in other languages, which makes it by far the most attested literature of the ancient world. Moreover, many of the New Testament manuscripts are quite early. Scholar and theologian, Dr. Matt Waymeyer, explains:
We currently possess as many as a dozen manuscripts from the second century, 64 from the third century, and 48 from the fourth century, for a total of 124 manuscripts within 300 years of the composition of the New Testament. The earliest New Testament fragment is separated from the original by only 50 years; the earliest books are separated by only 100 years; and the earliest complete New Testament is separated by only 225 years. By way of comparison, only ten manuscripts of Thucydides’ History of the Peloponnesian War exist (the earliest dating 1,300 years after Thucydides); only eight manuscripts of Herodotus’ History exist (the earliest dating 1,300 years after Herodotus); and only two manuscripts of Tacitus’ Histories and Annals exist (the earliest dating 700 years after Tacitus). The unparalleled number and early date of the biblical manuscripts makes it clear that the New Testament is easily the most remarkably preserved book of the ancient world.
-Matt Waymeyer, “Can We Trust the New Testament Text?” www.expositors.org.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rEdwBu2AP8c
The Bible: Why Does It Endure? | Day of Discovery (PART 1)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qDMd3gCxN-s
The Bible: Why Does It Endure? | Day of Discovery (PART 2)
The incredible abundance of New Testament manuscripts that we have, some going back very early, is extremely valuable in textual criticism—that is, the process of ascertaining the original wording of a text. The fewer the manuscripts and the later the dates of those manuscripts, the more difficult it is to be confident that we’ve reconstructed the original.
It’s worth keeping that in mind as we read modern translations of the Book of Enoch. Unfortunately, much of it is derived from only a limited amount of manuscripts, which are not only translations of translations, but also over a thousand years separated from the original.
Moving forward, the actual content of the Book of Enoch is composed of 108 chapters that are divided into 5 sections followed by two short appendices. Nickelsburg summarizes the teaching of the Book of Enoch as such:
The sections represent developing stages of the Enochic tradition, each one building on the earlier ones—though not in the order in which they presently stand in the collection. Overall they express a common worldview that characterizes this present world and age as evil and unjust and in need of divine adjudication and renewal. With the possible exception of the Book of the Luminaries, they focus on the common concern and expectation that a coming divine judgment will eradicate evil and injustice from the earth and will return the world to God’s created intention. Their authority lies in their claim that they transmit divine revelation, which the patriarch Enoch received in primordial times (Gen 5:21-24) and which is made public in the last times to constitute the eschatological community of the chosen.
-George W. E. Nickelsburg and James C. VanderKam, “1 Enoch: The Hermeneia Translation,” p. 1
So basically, the authors of this composite work claim to have received this special revelation from the patriarch Enoch. As we’ll learn a little later, it’s taught that Enoch ascended into heaven and was shown these heavenly secrets. He then descended from heaven to transmit this revelation, which is now written in the Book of Enoch.
The sectarian community that wrote and followed these teachings claims that this revelation was made public in their time, long after the patriarch Enoch. Why? So that they could establish an end-times community and proclaim these special teachings. The goal was to prepare the “righteous chosen,” i.e. the sectarian community who followed these teachings, for God’s soon-coming judgment that they believed was upon them. Here’s what the introduction in the first verse of the Book of Enoch says:
The words of the blessing with which Enoch blessed the righteous chosen who will be present on the day of tribulation, to remove all the enemies; and the righteous will be saved. -1 Enoch 1:1, George W.E. Nickelsburg & James C. VanderKam, “1 Enoch: The Hermeneia Translation,” pp. 19
Perhaps a good modern analogy to the Book of Enoch would be the Book of Mormon. According to Mormonism, Joseph Smith claimed that an angel by the name of Moroni visited him and directed him to find golden plates containing special revelation from God, which he then translated into the Book of Mormon. The sectarian community that developed from these teachings believes to this day that they are part of an end-times community—the Latter-Day Saints—commissioned with the task of proclaiming the teachings of Mormonism
The difference is that the writers of the Book of Enoch claim to have received their revelation from an actual biblical character—the patriarch Enoch. Joseph Smith claims that a character, Moroni, which is only revealed in the Mormon literature, was the one who directed him to the Mormon revelation. In either case, both books claim special revelation that has been made public to a chosen few in order to establish an end-times community around particular doctrines.
True Christians who are interested in the Book of Enoch, should be willing to ...
1 Thessalonians 5:21,"but test all things. Hold fast to the good."
The first question we’ll look at is the question of canonicity. What is believed about the Book of Enoch’s inspiration and authority? Today, only the Ethiopian Church, and—interestingly enough—the Mormon religion, consider the Enochic writings to be authoritative. Aside from that, most of Christianity has rejected the Book of Enoch as inspired or authoritative, which is why it isn’t included in the Bible.
Historically, the writings that make up the Book of Enoch were never considered to be inspired in any universal way. While the writings were revered, especially among some sectarian Jewish communities, they were never considered to be part of “Scripture.”
For instance, the books that make up the TANAKH are referred to in the New Testament and other Second Temple era Jewish literature as the Torah, Nevi’im, and Ketuvim—that is, the Law, the Prophets, and the Psalms. One place we see a reference to this threefold designation of the Scriptures is in the gospel of Luke:
Luke 24:44-45 Then he said to them, “These are my words that I spoke to you while I was still with you, that everything written about me in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms must be fulfilled. Then He opened their minds to understand the Scriptures.
But this threefold designation was used to define the canon of Scripture long before the New Testament times. For instance, Ben Sira, the author of the Apocryphal book, the Wisdom of Sirach, or Ecclesiasticus, had a grandson who translated his grandfather’s writings into Greek around 130 BCE. This translator wrote his own prologue to the translation, which makes reference to the three parts of the Old Testament canon.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2CVDL6m6EYM
The Bible: Why Does It Endure? | Day of Discovery (PART 3)
In regard to this prologue, Scholar Roger T. Beckwith writes:
It appears, then, that for this writer there are three groups of books which have a unique authority, and that his grandfather wrote only after gaining great familiarity with them, as their interpreter not as their rival. The translator explicitly distinguishes ‘these things’ (i.e. Ecclesiasticus, or uncanonical Hebrew compositions such as Ecclesiasticus) from ‘the Law itself and the Prophecies and the rest of the Books’ […] And not only does he state that in his own day there was this threefold canon, distinguished from all other writings, in which even the Hagiographa formed a closed collection of old books, but he implies that such was the case in his grandfather’s time also.
-Roger T. Beckwith, “The Old Testament Canon of the New Testament Church” p. 111
You’ll notice that by the time of around 130 BCE when this prologue was written, there was already an idea of a “closed” canon of Scripture, which was uniquely sacred and distinct from any additional writings such as the apocryphal writings. And this idea of a closed canon was apparently affirmed even earlier in Ben Sira’s time, according to his grandson.
As far as we know there is no manuscript or historical evidence indicating that the Enochic writings were ever accepted as part of this threefold canon of “Scripture.” Neither the Greek Septuagint nor the Hebrew Masoretic texts included the Enochic writings in their sets.
Moreover, the first century Jewish historian Josephus wrote that there was already a defined Hebrew canon in his time. Here’s a passage from “Against Apion,” which was written by Josephus in the 90’s CE:
Our books, those which are justly believed, are only 22, and contain the record of all time. Of these, five are the books of Moses, comprising the laws and the traditional history from the birth of man down to Moses’s death. This period falls only a little short of 3,000 years. From the death of Moses down to Artaxerxes who followed Xerxes the king of Persia, the prophets after Moses wrote the events of their own times in thirteen books. The remaining four books contain hymns to God and precepts for the conduct of human life. From Artaxerxes down to our own time, the complete history has been written, but has not been deemed worthy of like trust with the earlier records, because of the failure of the exact succession of the prophets. We have given practical proof of our reverence for our own Scriptures. For, although such long ages have now passed, no one has ventured to add, or to remove, or to alter anything, and it is an instinct with every Jew, from the day of his birth, to regard them as the decrees of God, to abide by them, and (if need be) cheerfully to die for them.
-Josephus, Against Apion 1.7f., or 1. 37-43; Thackeray’s translation, corrected.
You’ll notice that Josephus divides Scriptures into three categories: the five books of Moses, the Books of the prophets after Moses, and the books of hymns to God and precepts for the conduct of human life. This of course is basically the same threefold designation of the Scriptures that we see in the gospels and other early Jewish literature.
Perhaps the most interesting thing about this passage is that Josephus limits these inspired books to a certain number—twenty-two. This number, of course, is different than the number of books we have in our current Old Testament canon, which is thirty-nine books. But that’s because Josephus’ canon combined certain books that are separated in our current canon. For instance, Lamentations was likely attached to Jeremiah, Ruth with Judges, and so on.
The point, however, is that this is significant evidence from a primary source that by the 90’s CE, there were a specific number of books that were already considered to be uniquely authoritative. And, according to Josephus, all Jews accepted this. While there is some debate over which books would have been included or excluded from Josephus’ list, no scholar believes that any book that’s not already part of the Old Testament canon we have today would have been part of this first century canon.
But wait! There’s more! Even the Qumran community, which certainly revered the Book of Enoch, shockingly did not include it in their canon of Scripture either.
To unpack all of the evidence is beyond the scope of this teaching. But Roger T. Beckwith presents the evidence that proves this to be the case in his massive scholarly work, “The Old Testament Canon of the New Testament Church,” specifically in pages 358-366
To summarize only a few of his arguments:
1) In their own writings, the Qumran community didn’t treat the pseudepigrapha the same way they treated Scripture. Beckwith writes:
Though the Qumran literature (like other Jewish literature of its period) quotes the canonical Scriptures with great frequency, and uses conventional formulas for the purpose, it only rarely quotes the Essene pseudepigrapha, never using such formulas or giving any other clear indication that the works quoted were of prophetic or canonical authority.
-Roger T. Beckwith, “The Old Testament Canon of the New Testament Church,” p. 364
2) According to historical evidence, the Qumran community acknowledged the threefold canon of Scripture, and they are recorded as grouping their pseudepigrapha in a separate appendix to the canon, indicating that these additional writings were not part of the canon as they saw it. Beckwith writes:
The use by the Therapeutae or the Essence of the standard three divisions of the canon, and of one of the standard counts of the canonical books, and their grouping of their own pseudepigrapha in a separate appendix, imply that the three sections and the standard count were already agreed and settled among the Jews before the Essenes separated from the rest about 152 BC. Three of the books of 1 Enoch had been written by that time, but the Essenes had evidently not attempted to include them in any of the three sections of the canon, or to number them in the count of the canonical books, since they did nothing of the kind after the separation, either with these pseudepigrapha or subsequent pseudepigrapha.
-Roger T. Beckwith, “The Old Testament Canon of the New Testament Church,” p. 365
3) The Qumran community, which likely emerged from the very community that produced the Enochic writings, viewed some of the pseudepigrapha like Enoch as divinely revealed, but not on the same level as the Scriptures themselves. They viewed it as merely the correct interpretation of the Scriptures. Beckwith writes:
It is now clear that the main purpose of some of the pseudepigrapha, lately identified as Essene or proto-Essene, was to expound and maintain the Essene interpretation of the Pentateuch, over against rival interpretations. This is particularly clear in the case of the newly-discovered Qumran Temple Scroll, but it also applies to the Astronomical Book in 1 Enoch (1 En. 72-82), to Jubilees and to an extensive section of the Aramaic Testament of Levi (verses 13-57, Charles’s text) […] If this is true, it means that the Essenes were not really meaning to add to Old Testament prophecy, any more than to Old Testament law. As regards the Pentateuch, what their pseudonymous legal writings offered was an interpretation of it—a revealed interpretation, certainly, but not more than an interpretation. As regards Old Testament prophecy, what their pseudonymous apocalyptic writings offered was again an interpretation of it—supplemented perhaps, but only from natural sources, like arithmetic and astrology, not from supernatural. This interpretation, too, was evidently held to be a revealed interpretation, but an interpretation was all that it aimed to be.
-Roger T. Beckwith, “The Old Testament Canon of the New Testament Church,” p. 360, 362
So historically we see that the Book of Enoch has never been considered “Scripture” in the Jewish world, not even among the Qumran community, which certainly held the Enochic writings in high regard.
The Qumran community’s view on the Book of Enoch could perhaps be compared to some rabbinic views of the oral Torah. Orthodox Judaism claims, for instance, that at least portions of the oral Torah were given to Moses on Mount Sinai and passed down from generation to generation. The oral Torah is therefore considered to have a divine authority in Orthodox Judaism, but no Jew thinks of the oral Torah as being the same as Scripture—it’s just the revealed interpretation of Scripture.
In the same way, the Qumran community, which in all likelihood was connected to the very community that produced the Enochic writings, claimed that the Enochic writings were divinely revealed to the patriarch Enoch. This claim to divine authority was possibly an attempt to rival other Jewish communities who claimed that their own traditions and interpretations had divine authority. It’s kind of like saying, “Oh you say your revelation goes back to Moses, huh? Well ours goes all the way back to Enoch!” In either case, there was a distinction between Scripture and the pseudepigrapha in the minds of the Qumran community, even though they valued the pseudepigrapha as divinely revealed.
What can we infer from this? It seems clear that the idea that the Book of Enoch ought to be part of the Bible is seriously lacking historical support. Not even the sectarian communities that produced and followed these writings considered them to be on the same level of Scripture. Therefore, why should we view the Book of Enoch as Scripture when not even those sectarian communities intended it to be viewed that way?
But what about the early believers in Yahshua? What did they think of the Book of Enoch? And didn’t Jude quote Enoch in the New Testament? Wouldn’t that indicate that these writings had some divine authority? Let’s look at the passage from Jude:
When you read Jude 14-15…
____________________________________________________
Jude 14-15 It was also about these that Enoch, the seventh from Adam, prophesied, saying, “Behold, the Lord comes with ten thousands of his holy ones, to execute judgment on all and to convict all the ungodly of all their deeds of ungodliness that they have committed in such an ungodly way, and of all the harsh things that ungodly sinners have spoken against him.”
We just read the Bible passage of Jude above. Now here is the passage from the Book of Enoch that Jude is said to be quoting:
Look, he comes with the myriads of his holy ones, to execute judgment on all, and to destroy all the wicked, and to convict all humanity for all the wicked deeds that they have done, and the proud and hard words that wicked sinners spoke against him.
--1 Enoch 1:9, George W.E. Nickelsburg & James C. VanderKam, “1 Enoch: The Hermeneia Translation,” p. 20
There are a couple of things to point out here. First, some scholars insist that Jude was in fact quoting directly from the Book of Enoch. But other scholars dispute this.
The scholars that dispute this point out, for example, that Jude never mentions a book or scroll of Enoch. He doesn’t mention what is written, only what is said, or what Enoch said. So rather than assuming that Jude quoted a so-called book of Enoch, scholars argue that Jude and the so called Book of Enoch are actually referencing the same oral tradition. In other words, scholars beleive Jude wasn’t relying on the Enochic writings for this saying of Enoch. Jude and the author of that particular passage in the Book of Enoch were perhaps both relying on the widely held tradition of what the actual Enoch said.
However, even if Jude did directly quote from the Book of Enoch, there’s still no reason to suggest that the Book of Enoch is inspired or should be part of the Bible. The biblical authors quoted plenty of material that nobody would consider sacred or inspired by Elohim. Semitic scholar, Dr. Michael Heiser, puts this point well:
Just as preachers today quote commentaries, journals, news periodicals, or even television shows to drive home or illustrate a point, so the biblical writers used external material to draw attention and make a statement. Paul quotes from pagan Greek poets. The psalmists and prophets borrow vocabulary and paraphrase material from ancient Egyptian, Mesopotamian, and Syrian literature. Jude quotes a book from the Pseudepigrapha (ancient writings that falsely claim authorship by a biblical character). The people of biblical times knew the quoted material wasn’t inspired, but it had meaning for them and their audience.
-Dr. Michael Hesier, “What’s Ugaritic Got to Do with Anything?” www.logos.com
The same logic used to argue that we ought to view the Book of Enoch as inspired on the basis that it’s quoted in the Bible can also be applied to a pagan poem. Look at what Paul is recorded to have said in the book of Acts when addressing the Athenians:
Acts 17:28 For “in him we live and move and have our being’; as even some of your own poets have said, “For we are indeed his offspring.”
These quotes are said to come from Greek poets writing about Zeus! Paul took the quotes and applied them to the Elohim of Israel. Obviously, it would be absurd to say that a pagan poem should be in the Bible just because an apostle quotes it—so why would it be different with the Book of Enoch?
Some might argue that the passage from Jude indicates that the quote from Enoch must be authentic since he says that Enoch prophesied. And it could certainly be argued that some of the original sayings of Enoch, like what Jude quoted, were preserved in the book of Enoch. But again, even if Jude quoted directly from the book of Enoch, it still doesn’t follow from that that the entire Book of Enoch is inspired or true, only the part that Jude quoted. And again, Enoch saying what was, perhaps, a widely held oral tradition, that wasn’t exclusive to the so called book of Enoch.
Others argue that there is no Biblical proof that an actual written book of Enoch exists. The existence of such a writing is not necessary for this quote from Jude to be authentically given…
"14Enoch, the seventh from Adam, also prophesied about them: “Behold, the Lord is coming with myriads of His holy ones 15 to execute judgment on everyone, and to convict all the ungodly of every ungodly act of wickedness and every harsh word spoken against Him by ungodly sinners.”d
1. Again, notice that Jude doesn’t state he is quoting from a writing of Enoch
2. Since multiple Enochs are mentioned in the Bible, he clarifies which one he is quoting.
How could Jude who lived 4,000 years later, know what Enoch said? Just like Moses, Jude is inspired of the Holy Spirit, so therefore the obvious answer is that Elohim told him (I Corinthians 2:12-13).
Same reason how Moses, ascribed to be the recorder of Genesis, was able to write words of people such as Adam and Abraham who lived hundreds of years before him.
Thus, it seems that the reasoning often used to suggest that the Book of Enoch should be considered sacred Scripture is severely underwhelming. The apostles didn’t view it that way. The smaller Jewish communities that followed the Book of Enoch didn’t view it that way either. There’s simply no reason that we should.
Others argue that the passage of the proven book of Jude is inaccurately quoted by the unproven book of Enoch which further proves that the so-called book of Enoch must not be inspired by Elohim...
When people read...
Enoch 1:9: “And behold! He cometh with ten thousands of His holy ones to execute judgment 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.”
1. They get all excited by this line. Jude must be quoting from the Book of Enoch!
2. Note that the quote is not a literal reproduction, even allowing for multiple translations.
3. Jude says Elohim will judge all and convict the ungodly among them.
4. The Book of Enoch says Elohim is judging all and will convict all of their ungodliness. Not quite the same.
What we need to ask is, if the Ethiopian copies a bad translation? Then can we trust the rest? Do we say Jude is bad at quoting? Then it wouldn’t be an inspired book and then what happens to the support for the Book of Enoch?
Now, there are other ways that Jude could have gotten this information about Enoch. Jude was actually Yahshua’s half-brother. He grew up with Yahshua. Yahshua was the Word that became flesh and dwelt among us. Yahshua knew Enoch personally and was there when Enoch walked the earth. Yahshua could easily have told Jude what actually was prophesied, okay?
Another way, a former prophet of Israel may have informed the Jewish people, in generations past about this prophecy; and it was known commonly among the Jewish people because the prophets, not everything that the prophets ever spoke was written down. So other prophets may have informed the Jewish people of this prophecy, and they just knew because it was told generation to generation. In fact a lot of things were told generation to generation. Not everything was true.
Again, we already see that the Book of Enoch, right here says – …He comes with ten thousands of His saints to execute judgment upon all, and to destroy all the unrighteous… – Whereas Jude (1:15) has “convict all who are impious.” And so, if he destroyed all the unrighteous there wouldn’t be anybody for us to reign over. So, it contradicts Scripture. And so, Jude would actually make the correction here. And there’s a big difference between “destroy” and “convict.”
When Yahshua says (John 16:8) “when the Holy Spirit comes, He will convict the world of sin,” it’s different from “He will destroy the world of sin,” right? It’s a different word with a different meaning and a different outcome.
And so, I think Yahshua informed Jude of the actual thing Enoch said. And the Jews, in their traditions, you know, maybe had a little zeal wanting to see the world destroyed, and added some things that weren't really there.
Now, I’ve seen where some would say “The Book of Enoch is inspired because it talks about fourteen different kinds of evergreen trees. And here we are today, science has not found any more than fourteen kinds of evergreen trees.” Well, that could have been something handed down. Or it could be that yeah, back then that was all the kinds of evergreen trees a man could find. And still to this day no one has found any more than fourteen. It doesn’t mean the whole book is inspired! Okay?
Another interestingly fact is none of the fragments, Aramaic or Greek, contain Enoch 1:9.The only version to have it are the Ethiopian copies.There is insufficient evidence whether the phrase is in the original Book of Enoch or whether a person knowledgeable of Christianity “enhanced” an older version.
Because the quote in Jude is unstable evidence, people have tried to prop up their cause by stating that the New Testament is filled with allusions to the Book of Enoch. By this, they mean that they compiled a set of catch phrases and conclude that books using similar catch phrases must come from the Book of Enoch.
For example, several cited the use of the phrase “son of man.” But this phrase is used heavily in Ezekiel. It is used in the Psalms a few times in reference to the Messiah.
A person trying to forge the biblical style will of course use wording similar to the Bible. However, it doesn’t serve as proof. You can’t conclude who borrowed from whom.
Could the Book of Enoch be Scripture?
Again, if the date of 300 B.C. to 100 B.C. is correct, then it comes during the years of silence.
1. Amos 8:11-12 - Yahweh said He would stop talking to the Israelites.
2. Micah 3:5-7 - It was because of all the false prophets. It would prove who was true and who was false.
Malachi was the last Old Testament prophet. Until the coming of John the Baptist, and Yahshua, prophecy disappeared. The Jews knew this...
I Maccabees 9:27: “So there was great distress in Israel, such as had not been since the time that prophets ceased to appear among them.”
I Maccabees 14:41: “The Jews and their priests have resolved that Simon should be their leader and high priest forever, until a trustworthy prophet should arise.”
If the Book of Enoch was written in the years of silence, then it follows that it could not have been an inspired book because no prophets existed. If it was written during the years of silence, then it’s claim to be written by Enoch is a falsehood.
1. John 17:17 - Elohim’s word is truth
2. II Timothy 3:16 - Scripture comes from the breath of Elohim
3. I Corinthians 2:12-13 - Elohim gives the very words
4. Titus 1:2 - Elohim cannot lie
Thus Yahweh would not record a message under a false name, nor would there ever have been a need to do so. Yahweh Elohim doesn’t need the reputation of Enoch to enhance His message!
__________________________________________________
Let’s move forward. Now we’re going to give a chronological summary of chapter sections of the Book of Enoch, breaking them down to point out inconsistencies not only within itself but more importantly with the Bible.
http://qbible.com/enoch/7.html
In the very first chapter of Enoch there is a contradiction of Scripture. Enoch 1:6 – the high mountains shall be shaken, the high hills be made low, And shall melt like wax before the flame 7 And the earth shall be wholly rent in sunder, And all that is upon the earth shall perish – talking about the day of Yahweh here – And there shall be judgment upon all men. –
What does Zechariah say though? Zechariah says (Zechariah 14:16) – it came to pass that everyone who is left – everyone who is left, that’s the ones that were not taken, okay – of all the nations that came against Jerusalem shall go up from year to year to worship the King, Yahweh of hosts, and to keep the Feasts of Tabernacles. – This is after the day of Yahweh, and there are some who are left, and these are the ones that we as believers are going to be ruling and reigning over.
Because it says in Revelation chapter 20(:4-5) – And I saw thrones, and they sat on them, and judgment was committed to them. Then I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded for their witness to Yahshua and for the word of Elohim, who had not worshiped the beast or his image, and had not received his mark on their foreheads or on their hands. And they lived and reigned with Messiah for a thousand years.
5 But the rest of the dead did not live again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection.
And so, who are we ruling and reigning over? Ourselves? Well, according to Enoch nobody’s left. All that’s upon the earth would perish. So if Enoch’s prophecy came true, we wouldn’t have anybody to rule and reign over!
The Book of the Watchers (1 Enoch 1-36) This section is believed to have been composed in the third century BCE. It is primarily an elaborate interpretation of Genesis 6. It tells the story of the rebellion of angels, who according to the book of Enoch are called “Watchers,” which led to Yahweh Elohim judging the earth by sending the flood in Genesis 6.
"1Now when men began to multiply on the face of the earth and daughters were born to them, 2 the sons of Elohim saw that the daughters of men were beautiful, and they took as wives whomever they chose.
3So Yahweh said, “My Spirit will not contend with man forever, for he is mortal; his days shall be 120 years.”
4The Nephilim were on the earth in those days, and afterward as well, when the sons of Elohim had relations with the daughters of men. And they bore them children who became the mighty men of old, men of renown.5 Then Yahweh saw that the wickedness of man was great upon the earth, and that every inclination of the thoughts of his heart was altogether evil all the time. 6 And Yahweh regretted that He had made man on the earth, and He was grieved in His heart. 7 So Yahweh said, “I will blot out man, whom I have created, from the face of the earth—every man and beast and crawling creature and bird of the air—for I am grieved that I have made them.”"
The following is the so called Book of Enoch's explanation of Genesis 6:1-7.
-1 Enoch 6:1-2, When the sons of men had multiplied, in those days, beautiful and comely daughters were born to them. And the watchers, the sons of heaven, saw them and desired them. And they said to one another, “Come, let us choose for ourselves wives from the daughters of men, and let us beget children for ourselves” […] And they began to go into them, and to defile themselves through them, and to teach them sorcery and charms, and to reveal to them the cutting of roots and plants. And they conceived from them and bore to them great giants.
THE BOOK OF ENOCH. CHAPTER 7.
1 Enoch 7:1," And they took wives for themselves and everyone chose for himself one each. And they began to go into them and were promiscuous with them. And they taught them charms and spells, and they showed them the cutting of roots and trees.
2 And they became pregnant and bore large giants. And their height was three thousand cubits.3 These devoured all the toil of men; until men were unable to sustain them. 4 And the giants turned against them in order to devour men.
5 And they began to sin against birds, and against animals, and against reptiles, and against fish, and they devoured one another’s flesh, and drank the blood from it.6 Then the Earth complained about the lawless ones."
-1 Enoch 6:1-2; 7:1-2, George W.E. Nickelsburg & James C. VanderKam, “1 Enoch: The Hermeneia Translation,” pp. 23-24
CHAPTER 10
1 And then the Most High, the Great and Holy One, spoke and sent Arsyalalyur to the son of Lamech, and said to him:2 “Say to him in my name; hide yourself! And reveal to him the end, which is coming, because the whole earth will be destroyed. A deluge is about to come on all the earth; and all that is in it will be destroyed.
VIEW 1: THE FALLEN ANGEL INTERPRETATION
According to the Book of Enoch, the ‘sons of Elohim’ of Genesis verses 2 and 4 are fallen angels, which have taken the form of masculine human-like creatures. These angels came to Earth and lusted after and married women of the human race (either Cainites or Sethites) and the resulting offspring were the ones who became Nephilim (giants). The Nephilim were part angel part human giants with physical superiority and therefore established themselves as men of renown for their physical prowess and military might. The fallen angels then teach humans about magic and how to make weapons and jewelry, promoting violence and promiscuity among the people of the earth(1 Enoch 7:1). This race of half human creatures was wiped out by the flood, along with mankind in general, who were sinners in their own right (Genesi 6:11,12)...
This 1 Enoch explanation of Genesis CH 6, is one that I find objectionable as far as the Bible is concerned.The Book of Enoch's view creates a lot of conflict with existing biblical principles...
-The Book of Enoch’s claim that back in Genesis 6, angels intermarried with earthly human women to produce giant half-breeds (1 Enoch 6), conflicts with Yahshua statement that angels do not marry (Mark 12:25)
Since from the beginning when Elohim made man, the Bible shows that one of the main purposes within marriage is for sexual relations & procreation(Gen. 1:27-28;2:18-25).
Matthew 22:30,”For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels of Elohim in heaven.”
Yahshua statement (Matthew 22:30;Mark 12:25), implies that when we’re in heaven with our new resurrected spiritual bodies, we, like the angels who aren’t designed to be marriage mates with each other, will also not be created for marriage or procreation with each other. Apparently Yahweh Elohim had no need for the angels to mate with each other and procreate to fill anything, so there was no reason for Him to create them with such a capacity. The angels were unlike Adam or man in Genesis who was all alone without any of his own kind in which he could mate with and produce children. Yahweh Elohim only created mankind that way because he wanted mankind to be fruitful and multiply filling the Earth. This is why Elohim Created and established the institution of marriage and arranged the first marriage by creating Eve as a suitable female helpmate who could get pregnant by Adam and produce more humans. Yahweh never created angels as male and female with such a designed function as being able to mate with each other in marriage and procreate. So if unlike mankind, Elohim never created the heavenly angels to be married, mate, and procreate with those of their own kind, how much less would He have created them with the ability to do so with another completely different Earthly species called humans- Mark 12:25
-Spiritual beings such as Fallen angels being able to procreating with human women conflicts with the Biblical principle of Elohim's law that they would have to be powerful enough to override such divine prerogatives as...Elohim alone is Creator and Father of all Spirits Zechariah 12:1;Hebrews 12:9; He alone open and closes the womb. Genesis 30:1-2;. ;Isaiah 66:9;
All creatures work together with their own kind in order to re-produce children after their own kind. Genesis 1:21,24-25. including Elohim. Genesis 1:26-27 . and man. Genesis 2:18-24; 5:3.
We also read in 1st Corinthians 15:39-40,…
"All flesh is not the same flesh: but there is one kind of flesh of men, another flesh of beasts, another of fishes, and another of birds. There are also celestial bodies, and bodies terrestrial: but the glory of the celestial is one, and the glory of the terrestrial is another."
There you have it ... celestial (heavenly) and terrestrial (earthly) are NOT compatible. Just as a fish cannot breed with a horse, or a cow with a whale, so cannot a spiritual angel breed with a human woman.
We read in chapter 7:12-15 of the Book of Enoch...
7:12," Whose stature was each three hundred cubits. These devoured all which the labor of men produced; until it became impossible to feed them;13 When they turned themselves against men, in order to devour them;14 And began to injure birds, beasts, reptiles, and fishes, to eat their flesh one after another, and to drink their blood.15 Then the earth reproved the unrighteous."
First of all this last line doesn’t make sense, or line up with known proven scripture. The earth didn’t reprove the unrighteous, only Elohim the Creator of the Earth should get credit for doing that. This smacks more along the line of the Mother earth cults that teach the earth is angry at men who violate nature and therefore nature fights back.
But this wasn’t the worst of it. After reading the description in 1 Enoch 7, verses 12-14, I began to think perhaps this is where they think dinosaurs came from. Maybe some of the bones we have stored and labeled as Dinosaurs in Museums are really the human angel inbreds buried long ago?
These supposed inbreds were the extremely inhumanly disfigured half angel half human children whose bones we perhaps mistaken for T- Rex and the heavy eating Brontosaurus.
A "cubit" is 1.5 feet. The ark which Noah built was 300 cubits long (Genesis 6:15).
Do you mean to tell me that some women had children who were as tall as the ark was long? This book of Enoch smacks of Greek Mythology such as the race of beings known as the Titans.
The so-called book of Enoch’s description of People 450-Feet Tall sounds like Greek Mythology?
I thought this is ridiculous, are we really gullible enough to assume and believe that fallen angels had physical intimacy with earthly women that produced offspring 450-feet tall? Furthermore, how could a human woman give birth to a normal size baby that would then grow to be as tall as half the length of a football field? 'Come on, the birth would be extremely harsh for the Mother considering that such a baby would probably be born larger than that of a baby elephant or giraffe whose growth rate is a lot faster than that of a normal human. Even given the fast growth of a baby giraffe or Elephant they still don’t even reach that size full grown. Although the Bible does contain many miraculous and startling events (e.g., the flood), they are all explainable and have rationale.
It is clear that many unsaved scholars today are trying to discredit the Bible as a book of fables, which is what the Book of Enoch certainly is. The Word of Yahweh is untouchable, unchangeable, and incorruptible!
We know that after the flood there were giants mentioned in the Old Testament scriptures (Numbers 13:33). Though Goliath the Philistine was described as a descendant of giants (1st Samuel 17:4;2 Samuel 21:16-22), he was only 9' 6" tall (not 450 feet).
Both before and after the flood, giants in the Old Testament were NOT the result of fallen angels marrying human women. And think about this, if fallen angels did have physical relations with earthly women, then why doesn't it still occur today? There is no such thing as a succubus or an incubus (i.e. sexual relations between demons and humans).
Poor normal human mothers giving birth to such huge babies that would grow to sizes larger than many dinosaurs, I don't think so! By comparison Goliath and the Giant people who lived in the land of Canaan when the 12 spies searched the land were normal people.
We've got to be joking! Such foolish conjecture is a violation of the simplest teachings of the Bible. In Genesis 6: we read,...
"There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of Elohim 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."
Pastor J. Vernon McGee’s gives his interpretation of this Scripture...
He says, “There were giants in the earth in those days,” but it does not say they are the offspring of the sons of God and the daughters of men. It does say this about the offspring: “the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown.”
These were not monstrosities; they were men. The record here makes it very clear that the giants were in the earth before this took place, and it simply means that these offspring were outstanding individuals.
Humanity has a tremendous capacity. Man is fearfully and wonderfully made—that is a great truth we have lost sight of. This idea that man has come up from some protoplasm out of a garbage can or seaweed is utterly preposterous. It is the belief of some scientists that evolution will be repudiated, and some folk are going to look ridiculous at that time.
Evolution is nothing in the world but a theory as far as science is concerned. Nothing has been conclusive about it. It is a philosophy like any other philosophy, and it can be accepted or rejected. When it is accepted, it certainly leads to some very crazy solutions to the problems of the world, and it has gotten my country into trouble throughout the world.
Anyone would think that we are the white knight riding through the world straightening out wrongs. We are wrong on the inside ourselves! I do not know why in this country today we have an intelligentsia in our colleges, our government, our news media, and our military who think they are super, that somehow or another they have arrived.
It is the delusion of the hour that men think that they are greater than they really are. Man is suffering from a fall, an awful fall. He is totally depraved today, and until that is taken into consideration, we are in trouble all the way along.
Then what do we have here in verse 4? As I see it, Genesis is a book of genealogies—it is a book of the families. The sons of God are the godly line who have come down from Adam through Seth, and the daughters of men belong to the line of Cain. What you have here now is an intermingling and intermarriage of these two lines, until finally the entire line is totally corrupted (well, not totally; there is one exception). That is the picture that is presented to us here."
SOURCE: McGee, J. Vernon, Thru the Bible with J. Vernon McGee, (Nashville: Thomas Nelson Publishers) 2000, c1981.
-What about the fact that Yahweh has not provided His plan of redemption for Satan and his fellow fallen angels? Could someone believing this teaching from the Book of Enoch consider themselves unredeemable because perhaps they are one of the people living on the Earth today who still have a portion of fallen angel blood in their system? I'm telling you this is how Satan can use these false teachings to play with gullible people's minds.
VIEW 2:THIS IS THE BIBLE'S FIRST RECORDED INSTANCES OF UNEQUALLY YOKED MARRIAGES BETWEEN GODLY MEN AND UNGODLY DAUGHTERS OF MEN (with a Dinosaur addendum)
Here the ‘sons of Elohim’ are generally viewed to be the godly men of the Sethite line. The ‘daughters of men’ are thought to be the daughters of the ungodly Cainite. The Nephilim are just the ungodly and violent men who are the product of this unholy union.
Who are the ‘Sons of Elohim’?
The interpretation of verses 1-8 hinges upon the definition of three key terms, ‘the sons of Elohim’ (verses 2,4), ‘the daughters of men’ (verses 2,4), and the ‘Nephilim’ (verse 4). My basic presupposition in approaching our text is that we should let the Bible define its own terms; as well as look for contextual clues within the language of the immediate passages of scripture to help steer or lead us in the most accurate biblical interpretation or definition of a particular word or phrase. The Bible elsewhere does give two possible definitions for the term or phrase ‘the sons of Elohim’ for us.
Definition 1.“Sons of Elohim” can refer to spiritual beings such as angels Job 1:6," One day the sons of Elohim came to present themselves before Yahweh, and Satan also came with them."
Definition 2. ...Or to righteous people Hosea 1:10,"Yet the number of the Israelites will be like the sand of the sea, which cannot be measured or numbered. And in the very place where it was said to them, ‘You are not My people,’ they will be called ‘sons of the living Elohim.’ "
The major support for which definition we should use to interpret the passage in Genesis 6, is the language and context of the surrounding chapters 4,5 and 6. Chapter four describes the ungodly generation of Cain, while in chapter five we see the godly Sethite line. The language of chapter five also helps us set the proper context immediately when it starts off with...
Genesis 5:1"This is the book of the generations(8435. toledoth ) of Adam. In the day that Elohim created man, He made him in His own likeness. 2Male and female He created them, and He blessed them. And in the day they were created, He called them “man.”a
8435. Toledoth Lexical Summary
toledoth: Generations, descendants, genealogies, account
Original Word: תּוֹלְדָה
Part of Speech: Noun Feminine
Transliteration: towldah
Pronunciation: toh-led-oth
Phonetic Spelling: (to-led-aw')
KJV: birth, generations
NASB: generations, genealogical registration, genealogies, account, birth, order of their birth
Word Origin: [from H3205 (יָלַד - became the father)]
1. (plural only) descent, i.e. family
2. (figuratively) history
From the beginning, the context of the Book of Genesis shows itself to be about the generations/genealogy/ children of men, not the so-called children of fallen angels.
It tells us "this is the book of the generations of Adam" Adam is the Hebrew word for Man.There is no mention of Fallen angels marrying human women and producing their own generation of giant inbred cannibalistic angel-human children...
In Genesis 6:4, “Nephilim” does mean “giants”...Strong's Exhaustive Concordance Or nphil {nef-eel'}; from naphal; properly, a feller, i.e. A bully or tyrant -- giant.see HEBREW naphal but it can mean giants in stature or giants in fame or reputation, as in “he was a giant among men.”
Again if we let the language in Genesis 6:4 guide us, it tells us which interpretation best fits the context at the end of the verse...
" And they bore them children who became the mighty men of old, men of renown."
Also notice that the Nephilim came first, then after is mentioned the “sons of Elohim” married the “daughters of men.” Most purposely ignore the time order.
As a side note, among those who don’t ignore the time sequence, some theorize that during these pre-flood times the giants in the land could be interpreted as describing giant in stature like those described in the oldest dated Bible book of Job; …
Job 40:15“Look now at the behemoth, which I made along with you;
He eats grass like an ox.
16See now, his strength is in his hips,
And his power is in his stomach muscles.
17He moves his tail like a cedar;
The sinews of his thighs are tightly knit.
18 His bones are like beams of bronze,
His ribs like bars of iron.
19He is the first of the ways of Elohim;
Only He who made him can bring near His sword.
20 Surely the mountains yield food for him,
And all the beasts of the field play there.
21He lies under the lotus trees,
In a covert of reeds and marsh.
22 The lotus trees cover him with their shade;
The willows by the brook surround him.
23 Indeed the river may rage,
Yet he is not disturbed;
He is confident, though the Jordan gushes into his mouth,
24 Though he takes it in his eyes,
Or one pierces his nose with a snare.
Job 41:1“Can you draw out Leviathan with a hook,
Or snare his tongue with a line which you lower?
2Can you put a reed through his nose,
Or pierce his jaw with a hook? 7Can you fill his skin with harpoons,
Or his head with fishing spears?
8 Lay your hand on him;
Remember the battle—
Never do it again!12“I will not conceal his limbs,
His mighty power, or his graceful proportions.
13 Who can remove his outer coat?
Who can approach him with a double bridle?
14 Who can open the doors of his face,
With his terrible teeth all around?
15 His rows of scales are his pride,
Shut up tightly as with a seal;
16 One is so near another
That no air can come between them;
17They are joined one to another,
They stick together and cannot be parted.
18His sneezings flash forth light,
And his eyes are like the eyelids of the morning.
19 Out of his mouth go burning lights;
Sparks of fire shoot out.
20 Smoke goes out of his nostrils,
As from a boiling pot and burning rushes.
21His breath kindles coals,
And a flame goes out of his mouth.
22Strength dwells in his neck,
And sorrow dances before him.
23 The folds of his flesh are joined together;
They are firm on him and cannot be moved.
24His heart is as hard as stone,
Even as hard as the lower millstone.
25 When he raises himself up, the mighty are afraid;
Because of his crashings they are beside themselves.
26 Though the sword reaches him, it cannot avail;
Nor does spear, dart, or javelin.
27He regards iron as straw,
And bronze as rotten wood.
28The arrow cannot make him flee;
Slingstones become like stubble to him.
29 Darts are regarded as straw;
He laughs at the threat of javelins.
30His undersides are like sharp potsherds;
He spreads pointed marks in the mire.
31He makes the deep boil like a pot;
He makes the sea like a pot of ointment.
32He leaves a shining wake behind him;
One would think the deep had white hair.
33On earth there is nothing like him,
Which is made without fear.
34He beholds every high thing;
He is king over all the children of pride.”
Genesis (NKJ) 6: 4 There were giants (Nephilim)on the earth in those days, and also afterward, when the sons of Elohim came into the daughters of men and they bore children to them. Those were the mighty men who were of old, men of renown.
Believing the “giants” (Nephilim) mentioned first Genesis 6:4 above are Dinosaurs, makes a lot more sense than believing they are the children born out of a marriage union between angels and their human wives.
Generally when it comes to genealogy the Bible mentions the father or parents first and then the children are mentioned as being born or coming after...
Genesis 4:1 And Adam had relations with his wife Eve, and she conceived and gave birth to Cain.“With the help of Yahweh I have brought forth a man,” she said.2Later she gave birth to Cain’s brother Abel.”
The Descendants of Cain
17 And Cain had relations with his wife, and she conceived and gave birth to Enoch. Then Cain built a city and named it after his son Enoch.
18Now to Enoch was born Irad, and Irad was the father of Mehujael, and Mehujael was the father of Methusael, and Methusael was the father of Lamech. 19 And Lamech married two women, one named Adah and the other Zillah.20Adah gave birth to Jabal;”
In Genesis 6, below the time sequence shows the Giants or Nephilim that are mentioned as existing first can’t be speaking of the children that afterwards would be born of the marriage union between the Sons of Elohim and the daughters of men. The scriptures suggest the Giants were creatures that already existed on the earth before the marriage events that follow occurred.…
Genesis (NKJ) 6: 4 “There were giants (Nephilim)on the earth in those days, and also afterward, when the sons of God came in to the daughters of men and they bore children to them. Those were the mighty men who were of old, men of renown.”
It’s almost as if Yahweh Elohim is saying by the way there were giants on the earth and afterwards the separate or unrelated events concerning the Sons of Elohim marrying daughters of men and having children, are described as happening or following after.
So some based on the pattern or context of the scriptures in Genesis, interpret this passage as Yahweh Elohim is looking at both man and the animals or beast he gave man dominion over. Among the beasts, Elohim specifically highlights that there were Giants which are possibly beasts that we in modern times would describe as dinosaurs.
Since after the fall, the Earth became corrupted by sin, the nature of animals who previously were no threat to man, now had the capacity to turn against men (Genesis 9:5). Being omniscient, Elohim knew that the size of these giant beasts made them an even greater threat to mankind; originally made in His image. As Elohim looks upon the sinful nature of both beast and mankind whom he originally created to dwell together as good, He is now sorry he made them…
Genesis 6:7,So Yahweh said, “I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth, both man and beast, creeping thing and birds of the air, for I am sorry that I have made them.”
After the flood the animals he allows to survive and thrive he assures Noah that…
Genesis 9:1So God blessed Noah and his sons, and said to them: “Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth. 2 And the fear of you and the dread of you shall be on every beast of the earth, on every bird of the air, on all that move on the earth, and on all the fish of the sea. They are given into your hand.”
So other than being dinosaurs, the only other reasonable explanation is that the Giants mentioned first would be describing specific men of giant reputation who became the husbands of the daughters of men and the fathers of the future children born from their union.
This interpretation may even follow the context of Genesis better than the dinosaur theory. Again the idea is that the giants mentioned to have been on the Earth before the event of the Sons of Elohim marrying the daughters of men and having children, is describing men who would become the fathers.
Remember…
In Genesis 6:4, “Nephilim” does mean “giants”...Strong's Exhaustive Concordance Or nphil {nef-eel'}; from naphal; properly, a feller, i.e. A bully or tyrant -- giant.see HEBREW naphal but it can mean giants in stature or giants in fame or reputation, as in “he was a giant among men.”
Again if we let the language in Genesis 6:4 guide us, it tells us which interpretation best fits the context at the end of the verse...
" And they bore them children who became the mighty men of old, men of renown."
Thus following the time order along with the Hebrew word definitions and contextual language surrounding the passage, this interpretation is the better fit in concluding that first it is mentioned that there were men of famous or giant reputation who married and had children who also grew up became famous or giant in reputation.
This order is similar to what we see in Genesis 4:15," wherein Cain who is infamous for committing the first murder, was mentioned first about how Yahweh gave him a mark that let everyone know that whoever kills Cain would receive seven times worse of vengeance. In verse 17, Cain had relations with his wife and produced descendants; one of whom wanted to build a reputation that was even bigger than his infamous great, great Grand Father's...
23Then Lamech said to his wives: “Adah and Zillah, hear my voice; wives of Lamech, listen to my speech. For I have slain a man for wounding me,a young man for striking me.24If Cain is avenged sevenfold, then Lamech seventy-sevenfold.”
After the fall and the death of Abel which was the first murder ever, for good or bad, fame or infamy, for the first time in man's history, there were men now trying to be known as someone dangerous or not to mess with. No doubt many were wicked men like Lamech who chose unjust means to build a giant reputation for himself by killing other men and enforcing their will upon others through the spread of fear.
Genesis 6: 5Then Yahweh saw that the wickedness of man was great upon the earth, and that every inclination of the thoughts of his heart was altogether evil all the time. "
Notice unlike in 1 Enoch 6, in Genesis 6, just the wickedness of men is mentioned. There's no mention of the wickedness of fallen angels marrying the daughters of men who according to the Book of Enoch caused the creation of giant cannibal children.
“Sons of God” can refer to angels (Job 1:6) or to the righteous (Hosea 1:10)
Again, we must let the context of the Book of Genesis determine the meaning.
The “sons of Elohim” are the descendants of Seth.
Genesis 4:25 And Adam knew his wife again, and she bore a son and named him Seth, “For Elohim has appointed another seed for me instead of Abel, whom Cain killed.” 26 And as for Seth, to him also a son was born; and he named him Enosh. Then men began to call on the name of Yahweh.”
The “Sons of Elohim” are godly descendants of Seth who are human beings only. Their unequally yoked marriages to “daughters of man” would be human marriages, and their offspring would be human children. If the Nephilim are considered the offspring of these unions, the Nephilim are not supernatural beings.
The distinction between the “sons of Elohim” and “daughters of man” is a spiritual one. The godly line of Seth would be intermarrying with the daughters of man, and “of man” emphasizes that these “daughters” do not know Yahweh.
The first historic instance of unequally yoked human marriages.
2 Corinthians 6:14,”Do not be unequally yoked together with unbelievers. For what fellowship has righteousness with lawlessness? And what communion has light with darkness? “
Deuteronomy 22:10,”Do not plow with an ox and a donkey yoked together.”
Amos 3:3,”Can two walk together without agreeing where to go?”
1 Corinthians 15:33,”Do not be deceived: “Bad company corrupts good character.”
Exodus 34:16,”And thou take of their daughters unto thy sons, and their daughters go a whoring after their gods, and make thy sons go a whoring after their gods.”
Deuteronomy 7:2-4,”And when Yahweh thy Elohim shall deliver them before thee; thou shalt smite them, and utterly destroy them; thou shalt make no covenant with them, nor shew mercy unto them:3Do not intermarry with them. Do not give your daughters to their sons or take their daughters for your sons, 4because they will turn your sons away from following Me to serve other gods. Then the anger of the LORD will burn against you, and He will swiftly destroy you. …”
Again, part of the reason Yahweh destroyed the Earth with a flood was these unequally yoked marriages displease Him because they involve the joining together of believers and unbelievers.
More support for this view comes, first of all, from the immediately preceding chapter. In Genesis 5, the genealogy of Adam through Seth is traced to Noah. Genesis 5 reports family descent through birth of human “sons” and human “daughters.” Second, the prior chapters of Genesis have been interested in conflicting spiritual lines. We see Cain and Abel in Genesis 4. After Abel dies, Yahweh gives Eve another son, Seth. And in Genesis 4, we see the respective lines of descent for Cain and Seth, lines we should contrast into two types of people on the Earth, those who worshipped and acknowledge Yahweh and those who don’t.
Genesis 6:2,”1Now it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born to them, 2 that the sons of Elohim saw the daughters of men, that they were beautiful(2896. towb); and they took wives for themselves of all whom they chose.
Strong's Exhaustive Concordance
beautiful, best, better, bountiful, cheerful, at ease, fair word, be in favor,
From towb; good (as an adjective) in the widest sense; used likewise as a noun, both in the masculine and the feminine, the singular and the plural (good, a good or good thing, a good man or woman; the good, goods or good things, good men or women), also as an adverb (well) -- beautiful, best, better, bountiful, cheerful, at ease, X fair (word), (be in) favour, fine, glad, good (deed, -lier, -liest, -ly, -ness, -s), graciously, joyful, kindly, kindness, liketh (best), loving, merry, X most, pleasant, + pleaseth, pleasure, precious, prosperity, ready, sweet, wealth, welfare, (be) well ((-favoured)).
Is it an interesting coincidence that in Genesis 4:22, Cain had a Great, great, great, Great granddaughter named Naamah…
https://www.abarim-publications.com/Meaning/Naamah.html
Etymology of the name Naamah
Na'amah:The verb נעם (na'em) means to be pleasant, delightful or sweet, beautiful. Derived nouns נעם (no'am) and נעמן (na'aman) mean pleasantness. Adjective נעים (na'im), means pleasant. The plural noun מנעמים (man'ammim) describes "sweets" or dainties. The adjective נעים (na'im) describes a soft or pleasant sound.
After this mention of how righteous men intermarried and had children with worldly ungodly women, there is given the predictable result of less and less godly people in the world, as already stated in Genesis 6:5. This leads to...
6 And Yahweh regretted that He had made man on the earth, and He was grieved in His heart. 7So Yahweh said, “I will blot out man, whom I have created, from the face of the earth—every man and beast and crawling creature and bird of the air—for I am grieved that I have made them.”
Still no mention of regret about the fallen angels and their bi-species children. Wouldn't the fallen angels have to share some responsibility in making the unnatural children? If according to the book of Enoch Yahweh used the flood to wipe out their handy work in creating Giant children from off the face of the Earth, why was it only man that He mentioned as blotting out; and regretting to make?
Because it wasn't the inbred children of fallen angels that was described here, but believers marrying unbelievers that is being addressed. Years later in Israel, Yahweh's written law remains consistent commanding the separation of His people from not marrying strange women who did not have Yahweh as their Elohim. This was a vital part of the religious responsibility of purity and holiness for those who truly worshiped Yahweh.
What took place in chapter six was the breakdown in the separation of righteous godly people with ungodly people; which threatened the godly seed through whom Messiah was to be born. This breakdown was the cause of the flood which would follow. It destroyed the ungodly world and preserved righteous Noah and his family, through whom the promise of Genesis 3:15 would be fulfilled.
Unlike the opposing view, one of the great points of this interpretation is it has the commendable feature of explaining the passage without creating any doctrinal or theological problems.
Getting back to our critique of the Book of Enoch…
The so-called Book of Enoch has internal contradictions...
1. Enoch 6:7-8 gives a list of 19 angels who lead the fall of man.
“7 And these are the names of their leaders: Semyaza, who was their leader, Urakiba, Ramiel, Kokabiel, Tamiel, Ramiel, Daniel, Ezeqiel, Baraqiel, Asael, Armaros, Ananel, Zaqiel, Samsiel, Satael, Turiel, Yomiel, Araziel. 8 These are the leaders of the two hundred Angels and of all the others with them. “
2. Enoch 69:2-3 gives a list of 21 angels who were supposed to be the same group. Not only are there more names, the names are almost completely different!
“2. And behold, the names of those Angels: – The first of them is Semyaza, and the second Artaqifa, and the third Armen, and the fourth Kokabiel, and the fifth Turiel, and the sixth Ramiel, and the seventh Daniel, and the eighth Nuqael, and the ninth Baraqiel, and the tenth Azazel, and the eleventh Armaros, the twelfth Batriel, the thirteenth Basasael, the fourteenth Ananel, the fifteenth Turiel, the sixteenth Samsiel, the seventeenth Yetarel, the eighteenth Tumiel, the nineteenth Turiel, the twentieth Rumiel, the twenty-first Azazel.
3. And these are the chiefs of their Angels, and the names of the leaders of hundreds, and their leaders of fifties, and their leaders of tens “
We already showed that the books knowledge about angels goes beyond simply getting their names wrong, but we find also the books knowledge about the origin of sin is wrong.The Book of Enoch states that the intermixing of angel and human seed created sin and the angels spread sin by teaching forbidden topics to men. Lamech is told to hide so that his pure seed could be preserved. God would then wipe the world with a flood, thus removing sin (chapter 8-10).
I John 3:4 - Sin comes from breaking the law
Romans 5:12 - Sin began when one man broke Elohim’s law and continued because all sin
In order for a book to be inspired it has to be in unity with the rest of Scripture. There can’t be even one contradiction. It has to be in unity with the rest of Scripture.
Unity with Scripture is not what I found when I was examining Enoch and the tenor of it; I mean, while the rest of the Bible places focus on Yahweh’s relationship with man, it seems like Enoch spends much of its time talking about angels and other scenarios that are not typically found in other books.
And so while angels are mentioned on occasion in Scripture, they seem to take center stage in the Book of Enoch; particularly the first half or so. Even devolving to the point where men are praying to angels. I think Paul talked about this, something about worship of angels, being something not right?
- Colossians 2:18 - Paul warns against being disqualified by those who delight in false humility and the worship of angels.
- 1 Timothy 2:5 - He emphasizes that there is one mediator between Elohim and humanity, Messiah Yahshua, implying no need for angelic intercession.
- Galatians 1:8 - Paul states that even if an angel preaches a different gospel, they should be accursed, highlighting the importance of direct communication with God.
- Ephesians 6:12 - He notes that our struggle is not against flesh and blood but against spiritual forces, suggesting a focus on Elohim rather than angels.
- Acts 10:25-26 - When Cornelius falls at Peter's feet, Peter tells him to stand up, indicating that worship should be directed to Elohim alone, not to angels or men.
In the Book of Enoch chapter 9 and starting at verse 1 it says – And then Michael, Uriel, Raphael, and Gabriel looked down from heaven and saw much blood being 2 shed upon the earth, and all lawlessness being wrought upon the earth. And they said to one another: ‘The earth made without inhabitant cries the voice of their crying up to the gates of heaven. 3 And now to you, the holy ones of heaven, the souls of men complain, saying, “Bring our cause 4 before the Most High.” –
And so men are crying out to these angels, these holy ones in heaven, and are complaining, saying, “Bring our cause, be our intercessor. Step in and do something. Bring our cause to the Most High.”
Now, why are men talking to angels and say, “Hey, go bring justice for us”? That does not seem right, it’s out of order. Scripture says (Psalm 50:15) – Call upon me in the day of trouble; I will deliver you, and you shall glorify Me. –
Scripture says (1 Timothy 2:5) – There is one Elohim and – one Intercessor – one Mediator between Elohim and men, the Man Yahshua Messiah. – Right? He’s the Mediator, He’s the one, He’s the go between, not angels, Yahshua. So there’s a problem right there.
Next we have Azazel, who in the Book of Enoch, introduced various technologies like weapons, and cosmetics, and jewelry, and the uses of metals. And it speaks of these things as if they’re awful, awful things, sinful things, taught by demons. And then other watchers are teaching astrology and magic. And it says here in Enoch 10:8-9 – Watchers have disclosed and have taught their sons. And the whole earth has been corrupted through the works that were taught by Azazel: to him ascribe all sin. – Really? All sin is because of Azazel?
So, the Book of Enoch is taking sin’s origin from humanity’s hands, and saying “to Azazel ascribe all sin.” But giving people technology does not even create sin, you know. Someone has to make the choice to actually do something with that technology that’s evil.
And so, if we have say, internet, is internet evil? No! It’s what you do with the internet. Whether you choose evil or whether you choose good, okay?
So all those things could have been taught, and no one did anything evil with it. Now of course astrology, yes that’s evil, and those other things, but that’s not what Azazel has done. He taught weapons, okay. Using of metals, okay. If someone wants to kill you it’s not a bad thing to have a weapon in your hand. If someone wants to use metal for something positive, there’s nothing wrong with it.
As we continue through the story, we see that God commands the archangel, Michael, to capture the fallen angels and bind them for seventy generations, after which they’ll be judged:
And to Michael he said, “Go, Michael, bind Shemihazah and the others with him, who have mated with the daughters of men, so that they were defiled by them in their uncleanness. And when their sons perish and they see the destruction of their beloved ones, bind them for seventy generations in the valleys of the earth, until the day of their judgment and consummation, until the everlasting judgment is consummated.
-1 Enoch 10:11-12, George W.E. Nickelsburg & James C. VanderKam, “1 Enoch: The Hermeneia Translation,” p. 29
As the narrative continues, we read about how Enoch had ascended into heaven. There, the angels tell him that he must go proclaim God’s judgment against the fallen angels who had married human women (1 Enoch 12:1-6). So Enoch goes to speak to the fallen angels, and they ask him to write a petition on their behalf, pleading for mercy and that God would spare them.
Enoch agrees to write the petition for them. As he’s reciting the petition he had just written, he falls asleep and receives a vision from God (1 Enoch 13:4-8). In the vision, Enoch goes before the throne of YHWH, and He tells him to tell the fallen angels that He has denied their petition (1 Enoch 14:4-7). God also told them that their children, the giants, would become evil spirits on earth:
And the spirits of the giants lead astray, do violence, make desolate, and attack and wrestle and hurl upon the earth and cause illnesses. They eat nothing, but abstain from food and are thirsty and smite. These spirits (will) rise up against the sons of men and against the women, for they have come forth from them.
-1 Enoch 15:11-12, George W.E. Nickelsburg & James C. VanderKam, “1 Enoch: The Hermeneia Translation,” p. 37
I've heard people argue that the mixed seed was not completely wiped out by the flood and that's why the Nephilim return after the flood. I’ve heard some Black Isrealites claim that white people are the demon or serpent seed. This thinking contradicts both the Bible and the Book of Enoch. Only eight people were saved and the Book of Enoch says that none of the mixed race survived. In fact according to the Book of Enoch, they were supposed to have wiped themselves out before the flood in some epic battle.
The rest of the Book of the Watchers tells how Enoch is then accompanied by interpreting angels and taken on a journey where heavenly secrets are revealed to him.
Chapter 22 describes what the afterlife is supposedly like and where the souls of the dead go, which is a mountain with four hollow chambers. Depending on how righteous or wicked a person was during their lifetime will determine which chamber their soul will gather in.
The books knowledge of the realm of the dead is wrong.The Book of Enoch states that the grave is divided into four realms:
(1) Righteous martyrs, such as Abel
(2) The righteous who were not martyrs
(3) Sinners who died without suffering the consequences of their sins
(4) Sinners who died after suffering from the consequences of their sins.
Of the last group, it says, “but their spirits shall not be slain in the day of judgment nor shall they be raised from thence” (Enoch 22:13)
c. Luke 16:19-31 shows hades divided into two states.
d. John 5:28-29 - All the dead, good and bad will be judged
e. Acts 24:15 - This was Paul’s hope, a resurrection of the just and unjust
On this journey, Enoch is also taken to the mountain of God and the Tree of Life in a New Jerusalem as well as to primordial Eden where he is shown the tree of knowledge of good and evil. The section concludes with Enoch’s journey to the ends of the earth where he encounters great beasts, observes gates in the heavens from which the stars emerge, and sees other gates that serve as the sources of rain and wind on the earth.
So Enoch 32 says – I came to the Garden of Righteousness, and from afar off trees more numerous than I these trees and great two trees were there, very great, beautiful, and glorious, and magnificent, and the tree of knowledge, whose holy fruit they eat and know great wisdom…–
The tree of knowledge has holy fruit and gives great wisdom?! That’s probably what the devil would say about it!
Who is the author of Enoch anyway? Doesn’t sound like Yahweh.
It’s actually a repeat of the satanic lie that Eve believed, isn’t it? Seems to betray that maybe the author of Enoch isn’t Yahweh after all. Satan always leaves a tail, if you’re paying attention. He leaves a tail.
The Book of Parables (37-71)
This section is believed to have been composed in the first century BCE. It consists of three parables that were allegedly given to Enoch. In the first parable, he’s shown more heavenly secrets such as how the elements of the weather on earth originate in the heavens.
More disagreements with the Bible...
We read in chapter 40 of the Book of Enoch...
"1 And after that I saw thousands of thousands and ten thousand times ten thousand, I saw a multitude 2 beyond number and reckoning, who stood before the Lord of Spirits. And on the four sides of the Lord of Spirits I saw four presences, different from those that sleep not, and I learnt their names: for the angel that went with me made known to me their names, and showed me all the hidden things. 3 And I heard the voices of those four presences as they uttered praises before the Lord of glory. 4 The first voice blesses the Lord of Spirits for ever and ever. 5 And the second voice I heard blessing 6 the Elect One and the elect ones who hang upon the Lord of Spirits. And the third voice I heard pray and intercede for those who dwell on the earth and supplicate in the name of the Lord of Spirits. 7 And I heard the fourth voice fending off the Satans and forbidding them to come before the Lord 8 of Spirits to accuse them who dwell on the earth. After that I asked the angel of peace who went with me, who showed me everything that is hidden: ‘Who are these four presences which I have
9 seen and whose words I have heard and written down?’ And he said to me: ‘This first is Michael, the merciful and long-suffering: and the second, who is set over all the diseases and all the wounds of the children of men, is Raphael: and the third, who is set over all the powers, is Gabriel: and the fourth, who is set over the repentance unto hope of those who inherit eternal life, is named Phanuel.’ 10 And these are the four angels of the Lord of Spirits and the four voices I heard in those days."
When I first read this I thought the Bible never mentions an angel named Phanuel, let alone an angel who is set over the repentance of those who inherit eternal life.
Now there are millions of angels so I suppose there must be more angel names than mentioned in the Bible; but what he was set over was the hardest part of the statement for me to swallow. When I read in chapter 40:9 of the Book of Enoch that an angel named Phanuel is "set over the repentance unto hope of those who inherit eternal life" ... It re-enforced my suspicions that the Book of Enoch was fraudulent. This statement in itself contradicts some very important teachings in the Word of Yahweh.
Salvation is found ONLY in Messiah Yahshua
Acts 4:10, "Be it known unto you all, and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of Yahshua Messiah of Nazareth, whom ye crucified, whom Elohim raised from the dead, even by him doth this man stand here before you whole. 11 This is the stone which was set at nought of you builders, which is become the head of the corner. 12 Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved."
King David said in Psalm 62:6, "He (Yahshua) only is my rock and my salvation: he is my defence; I shall not be moved."
Perhaps this is why we have so many man made traditions involving praying to the angel of this and that; when we should only be praying to the heavenly Father. Phanuel... like the book you're mentioned in, you're a fraud! Yahshua is the ONLY Way, Truth, and Life (John 14:6).
We read in 1st Timothy 2:5 that Yahshua Christ is the ONLY Mediator between Elohim and men, not some angel named Phanuel...
"For there is one Elohim, and one mediator between Elohim and men, the man Messiah Yahshua."
Repentance is strictly between a man and Yahshua Messiah alone. Only Yahshua died for our sins, and shed His blood to pay for them (1st Peter 1:18-19); therefore, we must be diligent to guard and defend against LIARS and imposters who would lead people to believe otherwise.
1st John 2:22 clearly indicts all Messiah-deniers as LIARS, guilty before Elohim. The Author of this book cannot be trusted.
I John 4:1,"Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from Elohim, because many false prophets have gone out into the world. 2 By this you know the Spirit of Elohim: every spirit that confesses that Yahshua’s Messiah has come in the flesh is from Elohim;
3 and every spirit that does not confess Yahshua is not from Elohim; this is the spirit of the antichrist, of which you have heard that it is coming, and now it is already in the world."
Let's continue in the so-called book of Enoch…
In the second parable, Enoch is shown how a “Chosen One” will sit on a throne of glory and judge the deeds of the wicked people who have rejected God. Afterward, he will come to earth to dwell with the righteous people (1 Enoch 45:3-6).
Then, according to chapter 46, Enoch sees a figure referred to as the “Son of Man.” An angel explains to Enoch that this Son of Man reveals secret treasures to the righteous people of the Lord:
And I asked the angel of peace, who went with me and showed me all the hidden things, about that son of man—who he was and whence he was (and) why he went with the Head of Days. And he answered me and said to me, “This is the son of man who has righteousness, and righteousness dwells with him. And all the treasuries of what is hidden he will reveal; For the Lord of Spirits has chosen him, and his lot has prevailed through truth in the presence of the Lord of Spirits forever.
-1 Enoch 46:2-3, George W.E. Nickelsburg & James C. VanderKam, “1 Enoch: The Hermeneia Translation,” pp. 59-60
It’s apparent from the text that the titles “Chosen One” and “Son of Man” both refer to this same end times figure.
The Book of Parables goes on to describe how this Son of Man/Chosen One will destroy sinners and strike down kings and rulers because they do not praise God (1 Enoch 46:4-5). It says that he was named before the world was created and that he will be a light to the nations (1 Enoch 48:3-4). He will be worshipped by “all who dwell on the earth” (1 Enoch 48:5). And in his name, the righteous will have salvation:
And the wisdom of the Lord of Spirits has revealed him to the holy and the righteous; for he has preserved the lot of the righteous. For they have hated and despised this age of unrighteousness; Indeed, all its deeds and its ways they have hated in the name of the Lord of Spirits. For in his name they are saved, and he is the vindicator of their lives.
-1 Enoch 48:7, George W.E. Nickelsburg & James C. VanderKam, “1 Enoch: The Hermeneia Translation,” p. 62
And again, the Book of the Parables goes on to describe that this Chosen One/Son of Man will sit on God’s throne and judge between the righteous and wicked:
“In those days, the earth will give back what has been entrusted to it, and Sheol will give back what has been entrusted to it, and destruction will restore what it owes. For in those days, my Chosen One will arise and choose the righteous and holy from among them, for the day on which they will be saved has drawn near. And the Chosen One, in those days, will sit upon my throne, and all the secrets of wisdom will go forth from the counsel of his mouth, for the Lord of Spirits has given (them) to him and glorified him.”
-1 Enoch 51:1-3, George W.E. Nickelsburg & James C. VanderKam, “1 Enoch: The Hermeneia Translation,” p. 65
In a little while, we’ll get back to discovering who this chosen one mentioned in the so-called book of Enoch is, but first…
Another contradiction, Enoch 60 in some translations 58 verse 1 says – In the year 500, in the seventh month, on the fourteenth day of the month in the life of Enoch. – Year 500? Why would there be a year 500? Because all the days of Enoch were 365 years. Directly contradicting what Scripture says. Which one do I believe? I believe Scripture.
Now some say “it was the 500th year since the creation of the world.” Which is sort of a problem because if you lay everyone’s birth out on a timeline, you’ll discover Enoch wasn’t even born until 626 years after Adam was created. So, that wouldn’t work.
Then we have a very egregious sin, very sad, terrible sin. (Enoch 65:1-5) – In those days Noah saw the earth that it had sunk down and its destruction was nigh. 2 And he arose from there and went to the ends of the earth, and cried aloud – to Yahweh? No – to his grandfather Enoch: – who is supposed to be in heaven, right? – 3 and Noah said three times with an embittered voice: ‘Hear me, hear me, hear me.’ – to Enoch, the guy that went up to heaven – And he said to him: ‘Tell me what is it that is falling out on the earth that the earth is in such evil plight 4 and shaken, lest by chance I shall perish with it?’ And there was a great commotion on the earth, and a voice was heard from heaven, and I fell on my face. – And guess what? – Enoch his granddad came and stood by him. – Hi, guy, how are you doing, grandson? I know I’m dead already. Wait a minute. No, I’m not. – ‘Why have you cried unto me with a bitter cry and weeping?’
That’s a really good question. Because that’s called “necromancy,” buddy. That’s called “necromancy.” You’re not supposed to contact the dead!
Scripture says (Isaiah 8:19-20) – And when they say to you, “Seek those who are mediums and wizards, who whisper and mutter,” should not a people seek their Elohim? Should they seek the dead on behalf of the living? – Tell you what, I agree with this verse 20 right here. –
20 To the law and the testimony! If they speak not according to this word, there is no light in them. – There’s no light in Enoch. You can’t trust it. You can’t trust it.
This is not who we call upon. You can call upon Enoch right now, that would be okay. How about you all, if you all start praying to Enoch, would that be okay? Of course not.
Now, normally a person would seek out a medium to talk to the dead, like King Saul had done. But in the above case we see here that Noah himself is the medium, calling out to Enoch three times because he’s timid, he’s afraid.
Who do you call when you’re afraid, Enoch or Yahweh? Next thing you know, a voice from heaven, he bows to worship and Enoch himself standing there. To me, that’s pretty spooky, man.
Isn’t this what Catholic people do, pray to the dead saints? That they perceive are in heaven to help them when they need something? Thereby taking the place of Yahweh.
So already we have people praying to angels, with their cooperation, them being the mediator; and people praying to Enoch. I don’t listen to them. I don’t listen to them.
(Deuteronomy 18:10-12) – There shall not be found among you anyone who makes his son or his daughter pass through the fire, or one who practices witchcraft, or a soothsayer, or one who interprets omens, or a sorcerer, 11 or one who conjures spells, or a medium, or a spiritist, or one who calls up the dead.
12 For all who do these things are an abomination to Yahweh, and because of these abominations Yahweh your Elohim drives them out from before you.
Now, here it says (Enoch 67:1-2) – In those days the word of Elohim came to me, and said to me: “Noah, thy lot has come up before Me, a lot without blame, a lot of love and uprightness.
2 And now the angels are making a wooden (building), – the ark – and when they have completed, and when they have completed their task I will place My hand upon it and preserve it, and there shall come forth from it the seed of life, and a change shall set in so the earth will not remain without inhabitant. –
So here we have angels making the ark. Could they both have been builders of the ark? That’s what many people try to claim. But at this time Noah’s being informed—“Guess what? They’re building an ark for you.” Whereas in Scripture Yahweh said “Go find you some of this wood and then build yourself an ark,” and gave the dimensions and gave– If they’ve already started building why give Noah any dimensions at all? He didn’t need dimensions, it was already being built by the angels.
I guess the author of Enoch thought, you know, “How could one guy build all that?” you know, he didn’t hardly believe it was possible. What is this fascination with “angel-everything?” It’s like “angel-happy.” What is this?
In the Bible it says (Genesis 6:14-16) – “Make yourself an ark of gopherwood. – Make it for yourself. Go – make rooms in the ark, and cover it inside and outside with tar.
15 Here is how you make it: The length of the ark is three hundred cubits, its width is fifty cubits, its height thirty cubits.
16 Make a window for the ark, and complete it to a cubit from above. – He didn’t need any of those instructions, according to Enoch it’s already built for you. Or at least part of it. Go help him out. – Set the door of the ark in its side. Make it with lower, second, and third decks.”
22 Thus Noah did; – It says “Noah did it!”
Things are not looking good for the Book of Enoch. And I’m not done yet. But it just seems like the angel-happy Enoch has the angels just taking the place of man doing all kinds of things. To them ascribe all the sin. To them they made the ark, and even replacing Yahshua himself: “O please, go help us out. Go tell Yahweh how terrible it is down here.”
We read in the Book of Enoch, chapter 69:4-6..
https://www.angelfire.com/pokemon/trexcity/demon.html.
4 The name of the first Jeqon: that is, the one who led astray [all] the sons of God, and brought them 5 down to the earth, and led them astray through the daughters of men. And the second was named Asbeel: he imparted to the holy sons of God evil counsel, and led them astray so that they defiled 6 their bodies with the daughters of men. And the third was named Gadreel: he it is who showed the children of men all the blows of death, and he led astray Eve, and showed [the weapons of death to the sons of men] the shield and the coat of mail, and the sword for battle, and all the weapons.
Without a doubt, the primary claim of the Book of Enoch is that fallen angels had sex with human women and produced 450-feet tall giants upon the earth. As we’ve already shown, this teaching is ridiculous, unscriptural, and has no solid evidence to support it (Biblically or scientifically).
This is another good reason why the Book of Enoch should continue to be rejected. It is nonsense.
Also, notice in 69:6 above that the Book of Enoch claims that a demon named Gadreel led Eve astray and introduced weaponry to mankind. How absurd. The Bible identifies the serpent which deceived Eve in the Garden of Eden as Satan (Ezekiel 28:13).
We read in the Book of Enoch, chapter 69:8-12...
"8 ...And the fourth was named Penemue: he taught the 9 children of men the bitter and the sweet, and he taught them all the secrets of their wisdom. And he instructed mankind in writing with ink and paper, and thereby many sinned from eternity to 10 eternity and until this day.
For men were not created for such a purpose, to give confirmation 11 to their good faith with pen and ink. For men were created exactly like the angels, to the intent that they should continue pure and righteous, and death, which destroys everything, could not have taken hold of them, but through this their knowledge they are perishing, and through this power 12 it is consuming me."
Huh? Isn’t the Bible pen and ink? I think, in fact, Enoch’s pen and ink!
So, it’s like, wait a minute. The Book of Enoch even condemns itself, but for me it almost seems like Satan cannot stand that Bible. So you’ve got to throw a little dig, you know, “You’re not supposed to give confirmation to your faith with pen and ink.
(Exodus 34:27) – Yahweh told Mosheh, “Write these words, for according to the tenor of these words I have made a covenant with you and with Israel.”
I don’t see Enoch matching the tenor of Yahweh’s Word. I just don’t see it. And if Enoch was not inspired by unclean spirit, at best it was an ancient form of historical fiction. There’s a whole genre of historical fiction today. People writing books, adding a bunch of stories, backstories to the Scriptures, and all kinds of things. And we all look at it and know it’s just meant to be fiction not supposed to be real.
Maybe it was written to compete with the grandiose mythological tales of Greek culture, Roman culture. And trying to present an alternative so that the Jewish faith would be attractive to the pagans.
In fact, you’ll find some of the books found among the Dead Sea Scrolls even mention Gilgamesh in the Book of the Giants. So, listen. I know, the Dead Sea Scrolls, they have these things called “Parables of Enoch.” Actually, it wasn’t found in Dead Sea Scrolls. Dead Sea Scrolls do contain the Book of Enoch, about 20 percent of the Book of Enoch. 20 percent.
But the Dead Sea Scrolls had a lot of stuff in it, like the Genesis Apocryphon. It expands Genesis 12 to 15, Abraham’s travels, Sarah’s beauty dazzling kings, and Noah’s birth glowing like an angel. You see that in Enoch chapter 106 as well.
There’s one called the Book of Giants, a spinoff of Enoch 6-11, fallen angels’ giant offspring, are bickering, they dream of doom and face judgment. And names like Gilgamesh pop up in this mythological tale. Gilgamesh is from pagan mythology, by the way. And like Enoch, it’s found also in the Ethiopic Bible, this Book of Giants.
And so, listen, the Greek culture spread epic tales like, you know, Odyssey, all these things, Titans, cosmic battles. And I think they felt pressure, Jewish writers, to kind of pick up on some of this and write some of these tales. Watchers, angels abating, Enoch shuttling back and forth, you know, kind of feels theatrical, you know. And so Enoch’s sound more like myths.
Here’s another one, “Testament of the Twelve Patriarchs,” that adds moral tales to the patriarch’s life, and prophecies such as Levi’s; Levi having ordination through angels.
And so, again, I just think it’s historical fiction. May not have been believed by anyone, but kind of interesting little ideas, maybees, couldbees, like the movie The Chosen, you know, a bunch of stuff could be, maybe, really isn’t, we’re not taking it seriously. But some people may take them seriously, because they were, you know, into that kind of stuff.
But Scripture talks about Jewish fables. Titus chapter 1:12 – One of them, a prophet of their own, said, “Cretans are always liars, evil beasts, lazy gluttons.”
13 This testimony is true. Therefore rebuke them sharply, that they may be sound in the faith,
14 not giving heed to Jewish fables and commandments of men who turn from the truth.
Now, Enoch has multiple sections—there’s an astronomical book, there’s a parable book, different books; I think parables was written after, I think probably written by Christians, because it’s not found in Dead Sea Scrolls at all. Not found in Dead Sea Scrolls. So, Jewish fables.
Now with this I thought, what ... man's wisdom came from a demon named Penemue? That's crazy! Did using ink and paper cause the fall of the human race? Whoa ... I'd better throw all my fine-point pens away immediately! It was Adam's sin that brought sin into the world (Romans 5:12); not evil literature. Father Yahweh even commands John the Revelator to use pen and paper:
Rev 1:11," Saying, I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last: and, What thou seest, write in a book, and send it unto the seven churches which are in Asia; unto Ephesus, and unto Smyrna, and unto Pergamos, and unto Thyatira, and unto Sardis, and unto Philadelphia, and unto Laodicea."
Mankind is inherently evil of himself, prone to the works of the flesh (Galatians 5:19-21). Many people give far too much credit to demons for the sinful actions of men. They believe that every sin a person commits is evidence of demon-possession.
That is absurd! Men and women sin because they are sinners! (Romans 3:10,23). Although demons definitely can and do help influence mankind to do evil, the ultimate decision is OURS. The Devil cannot force anyone to sin.
People need to stop blaming demons and the Devil for their sins, and start looking into the mirror. Elohim has promised to help His children live right...
"There hath no temptation taken you but such as is common to man: but Elohim is faithful, who will not suffer you to be tempted above that ye are able; but will with the temptation also make a way to escape, that ye may be able to bear it" (1st Corinthians 10:13).
No excuses!
Getting back to the Identity of the Son of Man/ Chosen One…
Several chapters later, we read a concluding summary of this end-times judgment. The Son of Man is revealed to the chosen community of righteous believers. He sits on his throne, destroys the wicked, and ushers in an era of peace:
And they had great joy, and they blessed and glorified and exalted, because the name of that Son of Man had been revealed to them. And he sat on the throne of his glory, and the whole judgment was given to the Son of Man, and he will make sinners vanish and perish from the face of the earth. And those who led the world astray will be bound in chains, and in the assembly place of their destruction they will be shut up; and all their works will vanish from the face of the earth, And from then on there will be nothing that is corruptible; for that Son of Man has appeared. And he has sat down on the throne of his glory, and all evil will vanish from his presence. And the word of that Son of Man will go forth and will prevail in the presence of the Lord of Spirits. This is the third parable of Enoch.
-1 Enoch 69:26-29, George W.E. Nickelsburg & James C. VanderKam, “1 Enoch: The Hermeneia Translation,” pp. 91-92
So, the author of this the Book of Parables is clearly drawing upon Messianic prophecies from the TANAKH to describe this Chosen One/Son of Man figure.
At the end of the Book of Parables, Enoch is taken up again to heaven in the presence of the angels and the Lord of Spirits (1 Enoch 71:1-2).
Another issue I have is Enoch 71 verse 1 says – And it came to pass after this that his name during his lifetime was raised aloft to that of the Son of 2 Man and to the Master of Spirits from among those who dwell on the earth. And he – is talking about Enoch – was raised aloft 3 on the chariots of the spirit and his name vanished among them. And from that day I was no longer numbered amongst them. –
Most people believe Enoch was raised to heaven. Yahshua said (John 3:13) – “No one has ascended to heaven but He who came down from heaven, that is, the Son of Man who is in heaven.”
So, how do we reconcile Yahshua’s words with that of Enoch, and with that of other Scriptures that maybe at first glance might cause you to think that’s what happened. Let’s take a look.
Hebrews chapter 11 verse 5 says – By faith Enoch was taken away – taken away – so that he did not see death, – taken away, so he did not see death – “and was not found – actually the Hebrew reads ‘was not’ – because Elohim had taken him”; – taken – and before he was taken he had this testimony, he pleased Elohim.
And then we have Hebrews 11:13 that says – These – talking about all those that was written before in this chapter, all what? They – all died in faith, – They’re all dead. Well how did Enoch get taken, supposedly to heaven, and didn’t die, didn’t see death? Yet it says “all died, these all died. How they all die and he not see death.”
First we have to understand. We also will not see death. Yahshua said (John 8:51) – “Most assuredly, I say to you, if anyone keeps My word he shall never see death.” – How about that? It just means you’re not going to be found in the lake of fire. You’re going to inherit eternal life. Enoch pleased Elohim. He died young, he died young, he did. But he’s not going to see death because he pleased Elohim.
Again, what’s it mean “to be taken away?” It says – By faith Enoch was taken away. – What’s that mean? What’s it mean? It means this: (Matthew 24:38-39) – For as in the days before the flood, they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noah entered the ark,
39 “and did not know until the flood came and – what? – took them all away, – Were they caught away into heaven? No. They were killed. They died, that’s what it means. They died. And the Hebrew agrees. Let me share this first.
Luke 17(:34-37) He says – “I tell you, in that night two men will be in one bed: the one will be taken – Who’s the ones taken in the flood? The ones that died, right? – the other will be left.
35 Two women will be grinding together: the one will be taken – that’s the ones that die – and the other left.
36 Two men will be in the field: one will be taken – that’s those that died – and the other left.” – And so like, well,
37 …“Where, Master?” And He said to them, “Wherever the body is, there the eagles will be gathered together.”
They’re dead! Talking about the carcasses. It’s not talking about being zipped up into heaven. It’s talking about being killed.
Alright. So, let’s take a look at the actual text in Genesis 5:24 – Enoch walked with Elohim; and he was not. Hebrew reads “ve’einennu”, “he was not.” This is what’s translated in the Septuagint “he was not found”, okay. But the actual Hebrew reads “he was not”, “ve’einennu”.
Alright. That same exact Hebrew phrase is found here (Job 24:24) – They are exalted for a little while, and then they are gone. – ve’einennu – They are brought low; They are taken out of the way – taken, once again, taken out of the way – like all the others; They dry out like the heads of grain.
Also, Job 27:19 – The rich man will lie down, But not be gathered up; He opens his eyes, and – he’s a dead man, it’s over – he is no more.
And so, Hebrews 11 was correct: these all died in faith. They all died, it’s just that Enoch died young. And he’s letting you know, he pleased Elohim, Yahweh took him. We say that these days, “For some reason Yahweh took him. He was not very old, but for some reason Yahweh took him.” We say that even in our own language. It doesn’t mean that He pulled him out and took him up into heaven immediately. It just means he was taken.
Continue in Enoch…
Then Michael the archangel reveals to Enoch more heavenly secrets (1 Enoch 71:3-4). Finally, Enoch is taken to the “heaven of heavens” where he sees a fiery heavenly palace. There, Enoch is greeted by God, the four archangels, and innumerable other angels. Surprisingly, Enoch is greeted as this Son of Man figure:
And the Head of Days came with Michael and Raphael and Gabriel and Phanuel, and thousands and tens of thousands of angels without number. And he came to me and greeted me with his voice and said to me, “You (are) that Son of Man who was born for righteousness, and righteousness dwells on you, and the righteousness of the Head of Days will not forsake you.”
(Duulane)
-1 Enoch 71:13-14, George W.E. Nickelsburg & James C. VanderKam, “1 Enoch: The Hermeneia Translation,” p. 95
This quote comes from The Hermeneia Translation. If this translation of 1 Enoch 71:14 is correct when it identifies Enoch as this Messianic figure, then this should impact how much significance we place on these writings. Think about it. If the author of The Parables of Enoch intended to identify Enoch as this figure who fulfills these Messianic prophecies, then that puts The Parables of Enoch in direct conflict with the teachings of the New Testament. The New Testament identifies Yahshua as the Messianic Son of Man who fulfills these prophecies. And Enoch and Yahshua obviously can’t both be the Messiah. So the question comes down to this: do we have good reasons to accept this translation of 1 Enoch 71:14 as correct?
1 Enoch 71:14. That has massive implications for the question of whether we should consider 1 Enoch to be divinely inspired. How could we if it contradicts Scripture? So concerning this Messianic figure described in the Parables of Enoch, the teaching contained in 1 Enoch contradicts the teaching of the apostles. The author of The Parables of Enoch presents Enoch as the individual who fulfills Messianic prophecies contained in Daniel, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and so forth. The apostles, however, taught that Yahshua is the fulfillment of these prophecies. This would lead to the conclusion that 1 Enoch is not inspired by God and therefore should not be considered to be a source of sound doctrine and theology. And there are several other reasons for this conclusion
The Book of the Luminaries (72-82)
This section of the Book of Enoch is believed to have been composed in the third century BCE, and is likely the earliest of the Enochic texts. It describes Enoch’s journey through the heavens with the guidance of the interpreting angel Uriel. This section is focused almost exclusively on explaining the astronomical laws governing the solar calendar that was favored by the sectarian community who produced and followed the Book of Enoch. This calendar was made up of 364 days—12 months of 30 days each with one extra day in the third, sixth, ninth, and twelfth months.
The Dream Visions (83-90)
This section of the Book of Enoch is believed to have been composed in the second century BCE. In this section, Enoch tells his son Methuselah about two dreams concerning future events. The first dream is of the world’s destruction in the Flood of Noah (1 Enoch 83-84). The second dream is an allegorical telling of the history of humanity from Adam to the final judgment, which has come to be known as the “Animal Apocalypse.” In the allegory humans are represented as animals, the fallen angels are represented as fallen stars, and the archangels are represented as human beings. The dream concludes with a final judgment and God ushering in a new world of peace.
The Epistle of Enoch (91-105)
This section is believed to have been in composed in the second century BCE. It is an exhortation from Enoch to his sons to remain righteous in their wicked generation. He then lists a series of woes against the wicked because they oppress the righteous. The section concludes with a reference to Enoch’s books being given to the righteous during the end times.
The Birth of Noah (106-107)
This section details the miraculous birth of Noah. When Noah was born, his face and hair are said to glow white. He immediately stands up from the hands of the midwife and praises the Lord (1 Enoch 106:1-3).
This frightens Noah’s father, Lamech, who assumes that Noah must be a child of one of the fallen angels. So he begs his father Methuselah to speak with Enoch to learn the truth (1 Enoch 106:4-7). Enoch assures Methuselah that Noah is in fact Lamech’s son, and that Noah is just super holy, hence his glowing, and that he’s called to preserve the human race (1 Enoch 106:13-19).
Does the Book of Enoch match the Bible?
1. Deuteronomy 13:1-3 - Elohim’s messages are always consistent.
2. Time line wrong
Using Genesis 5, we know that Enoch was born about 622 years after the creation. He lived 365 years before Elohim took him - Genesis 5:23-24
https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Book_of_Enoch_(Charles)/Chapter_107
Enoch 107:2-3 (Enoch speaking to Methuselah): “'And now, my son, go and announce to thy son Lamech, that this son who is born is really his, and that this is not a falsehood.' And when Methuselah had heard the words of his father Enoch -- for he had shown him everything that was secret -- he returned, after his having seen him, and called the name of that son Noah, for he will make glad the earth for all destruction.”
Noah was born about 1056 years after the creation, 69 years after Enoch left the earth! According to the Bible, this event could not have happened!
Another Book by Enoch (108)
This final section of the book of Enoch is an additional exhortation from Enoch to his son Methuselah regarding God’s judgment in the end days. Nickelsburg writes:
This “other book that Enoch wrote” is actually a summarizing and interpretive conclusion to the corpus, which exhorts the righteous who live “in the end of days” to endure in their expectation because the judgment will soon vindicate them and eradicate sin and the sinners who have troubled and oppressed them
-George W. E. Nickelsburg and James C. VanderKam, “1 Enoch: The Hermeneia Translation,” pp. 12-13
Summation:
Father Yahweh could not be behind such a book! The Book of Enoch is the product of Satanically inspired men; that was rightly rejected as uninspired writing.The reason why the early church fathers and the King James Bible translators rejected the Book of Enoch as inspired of Elohim, WASN'T to hide the truth; BUT, because it isn't the truth.
It didn’t take long for me to begin to judge the Book of Enoch as a fraud, an imposter, possibly inspired by pagan influences creeping into the doctrine of the church.
The truth is that Satan is a murderous thief, who's sole purpose of existence now is to kill, steal, and destroy (John 10:10). Satan hates the Word of Yahweh, because It is his greatest enemy in this world. Therefore, Satan seeks to destroy the Bible.
If he cannot destroy the Bible, then he tries to corrupt the Bible by changing it (Romans 1:25; 2nd Peter 3:16).
If Satan cannot destroy or corrupt the Bible, then he tries to introduce "new" so-called "lost books" of the Bible to confuse people. I can't tell you how many times I've seen people who hardly know a lick of the Bible and seem put off by study get all fired up for the false Book of Enoch.
It is NO coincidence nowadays, in this time of great apostasy--when homosexuals are being given in marriage, when babies are being murdered by the hundreds-of-millions worldwide through abortion, when witchcraft is all around us, when booze and gambling are commonplace, when sexual sins and lasciviousness have saturated society, when churches are silent concerning sin and false religion--that we should see all these "new" so-called revelations concerning the Bible.
So called lost or hidden books like Enoch can stay lost, Father Yahweh promised in Psalm 12:6,7 to preserve His Word unto all generations, and He wonderfully has. Praise Yahweh!!!
As a person progresses deeper into the Pseudepigrapha, they will eventually find the Books of Adam and Eve fascinating as well, and then they will be into even deeper New Age occultism without even realizing it. Don't be fooled friend, the Book of Enoch is occult material that will lead you into the senseless mysticism of pagan religions.
Just look at some of the non-scriptural outlines written here, particularly those I marked with an* in front of them…
Hidden Mysteries Books
https://www.gutenberg.org/files/398/398-h/398-h.htm https://sarata.com/bible/web/chapter/1_Adam_and_Eve.40.html
The First Book of Adam and Eve
Part 1
Table of Contents
Prologue
Part 1
*Chapter I - The crystal sea, God commands Adam, expelled from Eden, to live in the Cave of Treasures.
Chapter II - Adam and Eve faint when they leave the Garden. God sends His Word to encourage them.
Chapter III - Concerning the promise of the great five and a half days.
Chapter IV - Adam mourns over the changed conditions. Adam and Eve enter the Cave of Treasures.
Chapter V - Eve makes a noble and emotional intercession, taking the blame on herself.
Chapter VI - God's reprimand to Adam and Eve in which he points out how and why they sinned.
*Chapter VII - The beasts are appeased.
Chapter VIII - The "Bright Nature" of man is taken away.
*Chapter IX - Water from the Tree of Life. Adam and Eve near drowning.
Part 2
*Chapter X - Their bodies need water after they leave the garden.
Chapter XI - A recollection of the glorious days in the Garden.
Chapter XII - How darkness came between Adam and Eve.
Chapter XIII - The fall of Adam. Why night and day were created.
Chapter XIV - The earliest prophesy of the coming of Christ.
Chapter XV - Adam and Eve grieve over the suffering of God to save them from their sins.
*Chapter XVI - The first sunrise. Adam and Eve think it is a fire coming to burn them.
Chapter XVII - The Chapter of the Serpent.
*Chapter XVIII - The mortal combat with the serpent.
Part 3
Chapter XIX - Beasts made subject to Adam.
Chapter XX - Adam wishes to protect Eve.
*Chapter XXI - Adam and Eve attempt suicide.
Chapter XXII - Adam in a gracious mood.
Chapter XXIII - Adam and Eve strengthen themselves and make the first altar ever built.
Chapter XXIV - A vivid prophecy of the life and death of Christ.
Chapter XXV - God represented as merciful and loving. The establishing of worship.
Chapter XXVI - A beautiful prophecy of eternal life and joy (v. 15). The fall of night.
*Chapter XXVII - The second tempting of Adam and Eve. The devil takes on the form of a beguiling light
SECTION 4: Book of Jubilees
Another book that is not typically included in the standard 66 books of the bible. Is the pseudepigrapha book of Jubilees.
To test whether or not something is from YHWH, we need to determine if it teaches the law of Yahweh Elohim, or if it teaches sin. Sin is defined as breaking the law of Elohim.
1 John 3:4 “For sin is the transgression of the law."
So we need to determine whether or not Jubilees holds up to the test.
Jubilees. Jubilees (2:31) says – The Creator of all things blessed it, but he did not sanctify all peoples and nations to keep the Sabbath, – Did not sanctify all peoples and nations to keep the Sabbath? Really? Didn’t Yahshua say the Sabbath was made for man? Not for Jews alone, but the Sabbath was made for man? It says – but Israel alone: them alone he permitted to eat and drink and keep the Sabbath. – I feel bad for the people who can’t eat and drink.
Come on, this is nonsense! It’s like saying, “Israel alone he permitted to honor their parents. To Israel alone he permitted to only worship one Elohim.”
Actually, the Book of Jubilees in one other place says he actually purposely misled the Gentiles to worship other gods. Basically making Yahweh the one at fault. There was a lot of, I think, anti-Semitism going on, you know. This is written around the time that, you know, Maccabees and things, they’re being ruled by Gentiles and such.
Scripture says (Isaiah 56:6-7) – “the sons of the foreigner Who join themselves to Yahweh, to serve Him, And to love the name of Yahweh, to be His servants– Everyone who keeps from defiling the Sabbath, and holds fast to My covenant—
7 Even them I will bring to My holy mountain, And make them joyful in My house of prayer. Their burnt offerings and their sacrifices Will be accepted on My altar; For My house shall be called a house of prayer for all nations.” – Direct contradiction with the Book of Jubilees.
Jubilees also promotes a calendar I don’t think is anywhere in the Bible. It adds angels to the first day of creation, in Jubilees chapter 2.
To the surprise of many, it is rather well supported that the book of Jubilees was written around the Maccabean period. That the book of Jubilees was written sometime in the first half of the second century BCE is confirmed by the fact that for the author, Hellenization still appears to be a dominant threat, as it has not receded into the collective memory of the Jewish people to become a past event.
The contentious argument against Hellenizing Jews can be found in Jubilees 3:31 which is against public nakedness. In Jubilees chapter 15:33-34, against not circumcising. So, the nature of Jubilees incorporates a sentiment that could only have developed in the coming out of the Maccabean period. In addition, the eschatological perspective of the book of Jubilees presupposes that only a short period of time between the beginning of the anticipated national revolt and the composition of the text has elapsed.
It says that a Satan-like angel moved Yahweh to test Abraham by telling him to offer his son Isaac, in Jubilees 17.
It claims an angel told Abraham to do circumcision.
In Jubilees chapter 23:16-32, it is said that after national apostasy or Hellenization, the younger generation will arise and return to God. As a result, God will progressively bring about the end times blessings promised by the Prophets. Thus from the author's standpoint, the benefits occasioned by national repentance and renewed obedience to the law will occur in the near future. Since these end times blessings did not come as expected, the author must be writing at a time when the possibility that they would come, still existed. That is, shortly after the beginnings of the Maccabean revolt.
Forbids men from taking any Gentile as a wife (in Jubilees 30:13-14). Can’t take any Gentile as a wife. Really? What about Boaz? I guess they forgot about that one.
It excuses Reuben, in Jubilees 33, for committing adultery with his father’s wife by saying, “Well, there’s no ordinance against it in those days.” Yes there was, it’s called adultery.
And repeats the giant claim.
And forbids Gentiles from keeping the Shabbat.
Sounds like an anti-Gentile book to me.
So, Yahweh wanted to reach the Gentiles. And actually it was a problem in the first century, a major problem. The Jewish people were very strongly so anti-Gentile that they were ready to throw Yahshua off a cliff for even saying, you know, “he wasn’t sent to any of the lepers but that Gentile Naaman.” And they got so angry, they were ready to throw him off a cliff; in Luke chapter 4. And even the apostles were kind of infected with this wrong mindset still, to the point that Yahweh had to send Peter a vision about the sheet and everything in order to get him to go to the Gentiles and talk to them about the Gospel. And so, it’s definitely present in the Book of Jubilees.
And so for me, these lost books, so-called “lost books,” are nothing more than Jewish fables that turn people from the truth.
Timothy, Paul talked to Timothy about it. He said (1st Timothy 1:3-4) – As I urged you when I went into Macedonia– remain in Ephesus that you may charge some that they teach no other doctrine,7 nor give heed to fables and endless genealogies, which cause disputes rather than pious edification which is in faith.
Thus, unless Moses was resurrected, wrote Jubilees, and then died again, we should be cautious about gleaning new instructions from this book.
One might ask, "Why is this important?" Our Messiah Yahshua commanded us to follow the law of Moses, not the law of the book of Jubilees.
Matthew 23:1-3 “Then Yahshua said to the crowds and to his disciples, "The scribes and the Pharisees sit on Moses' seat, so do and observe whatever they tell you, but not the works they do. For they preach, but do not practice."
Yahshua always corrected and instructed from what was written by Moses.
Mark 10:3 “He answered them, "What did Moses command you?"
In Mark 7 we find that when one adds or takes away from Moses, that Yahshua called that, simply put, a very bad thing. He said it was nullifying the Word of God in order to follow the commandments and traditions of men.
Mark 7:8-13 “You leave the commandment of God and hold to the tradition of men. And he said to them, "You have a fine way of rejecting the commandment of God in order to establish your tradition! For Moses said, "Honor your father and your mother", and, "Whoever reviles father or mother must surely die." But you say, "If a man tells his father or his mother, "Whatever you would have gained from me is Corban" (that is, given to God)- then you no longer permit him to do anything for his father or mother, thus making void the Word of God by your tradition that you have handed down. And many such things you do."
It should go without saying but, nullifying the Word of God in order to follow commandments and traditions of men, is a very bad thing. It's the whole basis of Matthew 23 in which the Pharisees were called hypocrites and brood of vipers and destined to hell.
Deuteronomy 13 spends a chapter detailing what is defined as a true prophet. A true prophet teaches only the law of God. Nothing more, and nothing less, despite any signs and wonders that may accompany the individual. However, if an individual has true prophecy, and amazing signs and wonders, yet the person does not teach the law of God as written by Moses, nothing more or nothing less, then that individual is a false prophet. Unfortunately, in some instances, the author of Jubilees adds to the Torah, the law of Moses. For example, in Jubilees chapter 50:8 it is stated that if a man lays with his wife on Shabbat, that is sin, meaning breaking the law of God and merits death.
Jubilees 50:8 "In it ye shall do no manner of work, ye and your sons, and your men- (8) servants and your maid-servants, and all your cattle and the sojourner also who is with you. And the man that does any work on it shall die; whoever desecrates that day, whoever lies with (his) wife, or whoever says he will do something on it, that he will set out on a journey thereon in regard to any buying or selling: and whoever draws water thereon which he had not prepared for himself on the sixth day, and whoever takes up any burden to carry it out of his tent or out of his house shall die."
Of course, no such command is found nowhere in the Torah. It’s a commandment and tradition of men, and it is actually violating the law of God.
Deuteronomy 4:2 "You shall not add to the word that I command you, nor take from it, that you may keep the commandments of Yahweh your Elohim that I command you."
And, chapter 12:32
Deuteronomy 12:32 "Everything that I command you, you shall be careful to do. You shall not add to it or take from it."
Thus, Jubilees is breaking the law of Yahweh, by adding to the law of Yahweh... and also recall, sin is defined as breaking the law of God.
1 John 3:4 "...for sin is the transgression of the law."
Thus, out of our love for the Word of Yahweh, and all that is established as truth, we cannot recommend the book of Jubilees.
Some attempt to defend against Jubilees breaking Torah and attempt to protect it by sighting Isaiah.
Isaiah 58:13 "If you turn back your foot from the Sabbath, from doing your pleasure on my holy day, and call the Sabbath a delight and the holy day of Yahweh honorable; if you honor it, not going your own ways, or seeking your own pleasure, or talking idly;"
The theory is that Yahweh, through Isaiah, commands his people to abstain from pleasure on His Sabbath day. Thus when Jubilees states that the Torah of Yahweh commands a man to not lie with his wife on Shabbat, then that is no different than what Isaiah wrote in chapter 58:13.
Now, most footnotes mention that pleasure refers to activities of business, not pleasure as in lying with one's wife. Not only that, but if Isaiah was stating that one should not entertain any form of pleasure on the Sabbath, we would then have a greater problem than Jubilees adding to the Torah. Now, we would have Isaiah adding to the Torah, and thus be a false prophet. But Isaiah is not speaking of pleasure in general, but according to the context, is referring to having other people work for you. Which of course, is against Torah.
Isaiah 58:3 "Behold, in the day of your fast you seek your own pleasure, and oppress all your workers."
Thus Isaiah is not adding to the Torah, thus breaking the Torah, but in fact only teaching Torah. So what we have then, is Isaiah teaching Torah, but Jubilees adding to and breaking Torah.
Not only is the book of Jubilees not written by Moses, which is the foundation of the Torah Yahshua instructed and corrected from in his ministry, but the book of Jubilees actually adds to the Torah, breaking Deuteronomy chapters 4 and 12 by entering into territory of a false prophet as defined by Deuteronomy 13.
That is not to say that there is not good information or teaching that could be gleaned from the book of Jubilees. It is however, clearly not a book that one would want to set as an authority over one's life. The Torah, light, or Word of Yahweh is our authority. Anything against Torah should be rejected as false or darkness, however it must be read through a discerning heart and mind.
Is not the way of the adversary to mix what is truth, with what is false?
Our Messiah, as our example, never once quoted the book of Jubilees, never set it up as an authority, and in fact, based on the Torah, the book of Jubilees fails the test by adding to the Word of Yahweh. It is in this realization that we recommend strong caution with this book, and be sure that anything gleaned from the book is tested to what Moses wrote; which seems to suggest that it might be a better practice to do what Yahshua did: study and teach Moses and the Prophets instead, lest we be carried away by unprofitable doctrine contrary to Yahshua and Moses.
It might also be said that Jubilees is quoted in 2 Peter referring to Jubilees chapter 4:30.
2 Peter 3:8 "But do not overlook this one fact, beloved, that with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day."
Now let's read Job, which was written hundreds of years earlier than the book of Jubilees.
Job 5:19"He will deliver you from six troubles; in seven no evil shall touch you."
It is more likely that both 2 Peter and Jubilees were quoting the same ancient sources, and not Peter quoting Jubilees.
Psalm 90:4 "For a thousand years in your sight are but as yesterday when it is past, or as a watch in the night."
The book of Jubilees and several other lost books were not considered popular in the first century. They were known, but not popular, as evidenced by a lack of sighting Jubilees and other books as any form of authority.
A group called the Essenes retained these books, whereas most Jewish sects did not place any authority on them as valid witnesses. In reading their writings, we learn that the Essenes harbored contempt for the Jewish sects that retained influence and power in the first century. Namely, the Sadducees and Pharisees.
They strongly disagreed with their usage of the calendar practiced in Yahshua's time. To be fair, Yahshua also voiced very strong doctrinal concerns about the Sadducees and Pharisees. At every opportunity, Yahshua intentionally violated their traditions. Such as instructing others to pick up their mat on the Sabbath, rubbing grain between their fingers on the Sabbath, or even not concerning oneself with washing one's hands before eating.
In the midst of all this, however, Yahshua never, not once, spoke against the calendar being employed in the first century.
In fact, as a testimony against the Essenes, Yahshua ate the Passover lamb on the 15TH ABIb just like the rest of the Jews of His time. Our Messiah kept Shabbat on the same day as the Pharisees. Yahshua did not seem to harbor the same opinion of the calendar as the Essenes. For example:
John 13:1-2 "Now before the Feast of the Passover (parenthesis mine:the general name for Unleavened Bread), when Yahshua knew that His hour had come that He should depart from this world to the Father, having loved His own who were in the world, He loved them to the end. And supper being ended, the devil having already put it into the heart of Judas Iscariot, Simon's son, to betray him."
John 19: 31,42 "Therefore, because it was the Preparation Day (parenthesis mine: the 6TH day of the week-FRI), that the bodies should not remain on the cross on the Sabbath (for that Sabbath was a high day: weekly sabbath in the midst of a feast), the Jews asked Pilate that their legs might be broken, and that they might be taken away. So there they laid Yahshua, because of the Jews' Preparation Day, for the tomb was nearby."
Many scholars speculate that the books such as Enoch and Jubilees were added onto. As the evidence suggests that the authorship does not appear to be consistent. Both books, Enoch and Jubilees, interestingly enough, place a high degree of emphasis on a calendar that was not compatible with the dominant calendar used in the first century. The Essenes were very much against the calendar employed in the first century, and the Essenes were the ones that harbored and retained these books and considered them sacred.
However, our Messiah disagreed with the Essene calendar and agreed with the calendar the Pharisees employed in 30 A.D.
The reality is, based on books that consist of what is normally defined as the New Testament, or the Brit Hadashah, we find that Yahshua in 30 A.D. became our Passover lamb on the day that the Pharisees defined as Passover (Feast of Unleavened Bread); testifying against the authority of the calendars that the Essenes favored. So whether there was some original validity to the books such as Enoch and Jubilees, it is very possible that additions to the books were simply to perpetuate and inject false authority to a calendar that was not compatible with Moses or Yahshua.
With that, for whatever it is worth, we simply recommend caution and discernment. We fully realize that we are not any type of authority, or may have no credibility in your eyes. But the Torah is our authority in our lives. If it says to not add to, or take away from the Word of Yahweh, or it is false, then we have to live by what the Torah instructs.
- SECTION 5: Lost Books mentioned in the Bible that are not a part of either the APOCRYPHA or the Pseudepigrapha.
- Book of Jasher
- In the Bible there are two references to an “extra-biblical” book called the Book of Jasher. This book is mentioned in Joshua 10:13 and 2 Samuel 1:18.
- Joshua 10:13 “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 Jasher? The sun stopped in the midst of heaven and did not hurry to set for about a whole day.”
- 2 Samuel 1:18 “And he said it should be taught to the people of Judah; behold, it is written in the Book of Jasher.”
-
- Jasher is the transliterated form of the Hebrew Yashar, which means “upright” or “just.” So an English translation of Sefer HaYashar would be the “Book of the Upright” or the “Book of the Just.”
- The fact that this book is mentioned twice in the Bible is fascinating, especially considering the context of the two passages. It certainly seems that the book was meaningful and well known among the biblical authors and their original audience. Regardless of your view of biblical inspiration and the canon of Scripture, you would have to admit that Jasher would be highly significant with regard to biblical study—at least in terms of giving us a window into the biblical authors’ cultural context and the literature they were familiar with.
- The problem, however, is that this book has unfortunately never been found. Indeed, the book of Jasher mentioned in Scripture has been lost to history. All we know of this lost book is what has been recorded for us in Joshua 10:13 and 2 Samuel 1:18.
- So what do we know about Jasher? Not much. Again if The Bible is the 66 individual books contained under one cover that are supernaturally inspired by Yahweh Elohim, and are preserved and protected by His power. If Yahweh Elohim who by His supernatural power preserves His WORD for mankind, wanted us to have it we would have it.
- Scholars have speculated that the book was most likely a gradual collection of Hebrew songs and poems about heroic individuals in Israel. In his peer-reviewed article, “The Mysterious Book of Jasher,” scholar and rabbi, Arthur Chiel, wrote this:
- “It was traditionally assumed that the title referred to historical, heroic figures of the Biblical period who were the subjects of this work. Yet the actual character of the ancient Sefer haYashar remains uncertain. Some scholars have theorized that it was a written collection begun in pre-monarchic Israel and that it was subsequently expanded. Others have suggested that it was a compilation of oral tradition of a very much later period. Possibly, it was part of sacred literary archives begun during the monarchic period to preserve some of the epics of Israel.”
- -Rabbi Arthur Chiel, The Mysterious Book of Jasher (Judaism: A Quarterly Journal, Issue No. 103, Vol. 26,) p. 368
- As we can see, not much is known about Jasher. Since the book has never been found, scholars can only speculate what it was about.
- Some might say, “But wait! It’s not lost! I’ve read the Book of Jasher!”
- It’s true that some people might have encountered a book by the name of Jasher. In fact, there are at least two books by that name. These books are sometimes said to be the “lost biblical book of Jasher.”
- However, none of these books are the same “Book of Jasher” that is mentioned in the Bible since, again, that book has never been found.
- The first so-called “Book of Jasher” we’ll look at is a Hebrew Midrash, which was written around the 11 th or 12th century. It is essentially a retelling of many early biblical stories, beginning with the events leading up to Cain’s murder of his brother Abel, and ending with the death of Joshua.
- Chiel writes:
- “In total, the Book of Jasher is a richly embellished story of the early part of Biblical history, from Adam to Joshua. Its author had resourcefully collected sundry legends and tales connected with events and persons of the early period and had woven them together with a skillfully constructed narrative.”
- -Rabbi Arthur Chiel, The Mysterious Book of Jasher (Judaism: A Quarterly Journal, Issue No. 103, Vol. 26,) p. 371
- According to scholars, this so-called Book of Jasher is comparable to other Jewish literature that was written around the same time, such as the Zohar. In the middle ages, there was a lot of literature that was produced and then touted as “older tradition.” One of the ways we know that this Book of Jasher is a later rabbinic invention is that it contains anachronisms. For instance, in Jasher 10, the author describes where the descendants of Noah settled, but includes European names from many centuries after the time of Messiah.
- Not only that, there are direct contradictions between this book of Jasher and the Bible. Here are just a few among many:
- • Jasher claims that Abram left Haran at the age of 50 (Jasher 13:5). But the Bible says that Abram left Haran at the age of 75 (Genesis 12:4)
- • Jasher claims that Jacob fled to Eber’s home to escape Esau (Jasher 29:11). But the Bible says that Jacob went to the home of his uncle, Laban (Genesis 28:5).
- • Jasher claims that Yahweh sent 15 plagues upon Egypt (Jasher 80:2-51). But the Bible says that Yahweh sent 10 plagues (Exodus 7-12).
- • Jasher claims that the Red Sea was divided into 12 parts (Jasher 81:38). But the Bible says that the Red Sea was divided into two (Exodus 14:22).
- In addition to contradicting the Bible, this book of Jasher also contains some problematic teachings.
- For instance,Speaking of Jewish fables, here’s the Book of Jasher. Talking about (Jasher 24:40, 44-45) – the young woman – it says – was of very comely appearance, – talking about Rebekah here – she was a virgin, and Rebekah was ten years old in those days. … And Isaac took Rebekah and she became his wife, and he brought her into the tent. And Isaac was forty years old – forty years old – when he took Rebekah, the daughter of his uncle Bethuel, for a wife. –
- Rebekah was how old? Ten. I ain’t buying it. You buying it? I ain’t buying it. Was Isaac a pedophile?! When I saw that, goodbye Book of Jasher!
- I’ll bet somewhere there’s someone justifying pedophile lusting for little girls, because of this Book of Jasher.
- In Jasher 42:30-41, Joseph visits his mother’s grave, and cries out for her to speak to him. Joseph then hears the voice of his mother Rachel from the grave, reassuring him and telling him to trust in the Lord.
- Obviously this is problematic considering the fact that necromancy is considered an abomination to Yahweh and it’s forbidden in the Torah (Deuteronomy 18:11-12). To consider that Joseph committed such an extreme sin and for it only to be recorded in the book of Jasher is rather absurd.
You know, these things have consequences. I mean, if Enoch and Jasher can talk to the dead and pray to the dead saints, why can’t you? And if Isaac can marry a ten-year-old, why can’t you? You know? These have consequences. This is profane.I’ve heard about people who say “Yeah, yeah, those two parts, I don’t think they’re inspired, but the rest was pretty good.”
I’m like, you know, it’s like saying, “Yeah, it promotes necromancy and pedophilia. Other than that, it’s a great book.” Crazy! I mean, how do you go there? I mean, once it has that, there’s no Scripture book that had any story like that anywhere, in either case; except to condemn it, you know. And so, no. No, no, a thousand times no. Take the Book of Jasher and burn it! That’s what we need to do with it.
- There is another book by name of Jasher, which was written by a man named Jacob Ilive (ee-liv). Ilive ran a printing establishment in London, and in 1751 he published a book titled “The Book of Jasher,” which he falsely claimed to have been translated into English from a Hebrew scroll discovered in Gazna
- Ilive was a deist who rejected orthodox Christian theology. He often printed and handed out pamphlets promoting his unorthodox views. Ilive’s Book of Jasher was simply another outlet for him to express his ideas.
- Chiel writes:
- “Ilive’s The Book of Jasher consists of thirty-seven chapters which begin with the Creation story and extend to the rule of “Jasher, the son of Caleb who judged Israel in Shiloh.” Jasher is represented as an adjutant of Moses, along with Joshua. But even a casual reading of this work reveals the book’s real purpose: the rejection of Revelation. Jethro emerges as the “founding father” of Israel’s law code. It is Jethro who convokes Moses and the seventy elders on Mt. Sinai where he instructs them about the governance of Israel. Here, then, was the real intent of The Book of Jasher: to challenge the credibility of the Pentateuch and to diminish altogether the role of Moses.”
- -Rabbi Arthur Chiel, The Mysterious Book of Jasher (Judaism: A Quarterly Journal, Issue No. 103, Vol. 26,) p. 373
- When we examine the books that are called “Jasher” today, it’s easy to see that neither of them are the “lost biblical book.” One is a later rabbinic writing from the Middle Ages, and the other is an obvious hoax written by a heretic to push an anti-biblical agenda. If anyone
- Ilive’s book was quickly recognized as an obvious fabrication, and he was actually sentenced to three years in prison in 1756 for his fraudulent claims.
- In conclusion, there is no evidence that we’ve ever found the book of Jasher mentioned in the Bible. There are no quotes from a book of Jasher and no mention of it throughout early Jewish and Christian history. There’s nothing in the Dead Sea Scrolls, early rabbinic writings, or the Christian church fathers. It’s not until the Middle Ages that Jasher comes on the scene, which not-so-coincidentally was right around the time when lots of other mysterious religious texts were being produced and falsely passed off as older tradition.
- When we examine the books that are called “Jasher” today, it’s easy to see that neither of them are the “lost biblical book.” One is a later rabbinic writing from the Middle Ages, and the other is an obvious hoax written by a heretic to push an anti-biblical agenda. If anyone says they’ve read the Book of Jasher mentioned in the Bible, they haven’t. It’s probably one of these two later books
- Indeed, it seems that all we can really know about the true book of Jasher is what’s recorded for us in Joshua 10:13 and 2 Samuel 1:18.
Well, where’s the fables? If it’s not Jubilees, Jasher, you know, there was no Jasher found in the Dead Sea Scrolls, by the way; it’s not any older than 1750.
So these cause disputes rather than pious edification, and that’s exactly what bringing Enoch and Jubilees and all this stuff into our faith has done. It’s caused disputes between people who would otherwise be at peace with each other.
And we also have 2nd Peter 1:16 – For we did not follow cunningly devised fables – we didn’t follow the fables – when we made known to you the power and coming of our Master Yahshua Messiah, but were eyewitnesses of His majesty. – There’s no fables in the New Testament. They’re eyewitness accounts confirmed by many eyewitnesses.
You know what we need? We need the true Word of Yahweh. The true unleavened bread. You know unleavened bread can be a little dry, not a lot of pizzazz, but it’s the truth. It’s the truth. No wild fantasy stories, just the real food that Yahweh wanted to sustain us with.
I agree with Proverbs 30:8 – Remove falsehood and lies far from me; Give me neither poverty nor riches– Feed me with the food allotted to me. – That’s what I want.
Job 23:12 – I have not departed from the commandment of His lips; I have treasured the words of His mouth More than my necessary food, – probably food.
(Psalm 119:72) – The law of Your mouth is better to me Than thousands of coins of gold and silver. – That’s what I want.
CONCLUSION:
What about the Bible? Why are there 66 books? You know, I came upon a fellow brother (Tom Martincic) in the faith’s research on this same subject. Like him I already knew that, you know, originally books like 1st Kings and 2nd Kings were originally one book. 1st and 2nd Chronicles was originally one book. In fact, Ezra and Nehemiah were originally just one book. So 66 would not be the correct total. I will end this study in his own words and prayer…
https://eliyah.com/archives/major-problems-in-enoch-jasher-and-jubilees/
“So I got to, you know, researching. How many books were actually in the Old Testament called “the Tanakh?” Well, you got the five books: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, that’s the Torah. You got the Nevi’im, that’s the prophets, that’s: Joshua, Judges, Samuel, Kings, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and 12 Minor Prophets. They’re all counted as one book. There’s 11 other books called “Writings”: Psalms, Proverbs, Job, Song of Songs, Ruth, Lamentations, Ecclesiastes, Esther, Daniel, Ezra –Ezra and Nehemiah were together– and Chronicles.
So, in light of that, how many books were in the Old Testament? 24 Books. 24.
New Testament had 27 books, but I say 26 books. Why? Because Luke also wrote the Book of Acts. And so the Book of Luke and the Book of Acts would be one book.
So, 24 plus 26: there’s actually 50 books. 50 Books in our Bible today. If you go according to the way it used to be compiled.
So, that means the 50th book is Revelation. Revelation tells us about our future. Fifty, in the Bible is known as “the Jubilee.”
And it just so happens, Revelation, I would call that the “Jubilee book of the Canon.” Because it has a trumpet blast, the seven trumpet blasts. It details a time when Yahweh will set the whole world free from sin and slavery, and that’s what the Jubilee does. There’s a trumpet blast, it sets the world free from slavery. It sets the slaves free, they can go free. And all of humanity is returned to its original owner. Just like the Jubilee year, that all the land goes back to its original owner. And all will be at rest, a year of rest.
So, we have, basically, Revelation giving us the Jubilee Revelation. And we are from the earth, right? We were made from dust. Correct? And since we’re made from dust, and this dust is dust that Yahweh owns, we’re actually from the land.
And so, in Jubilees, the Jubilee year, the land goes back to its original owner, and we see here in this Jubilee book called “Revelation,” all of the earth goes back, including us, we’re part of the earth, to its original owner. Coincidence?! I don’t think so. I don’t think so at all. I think it’s amazing, actually, that there are 50 books in the Canon.
Also, when it comes to deciding which books are in the Canon, Romans chapter 3:1-2 says – What advantage then has the Jew, or what is the profit of circumcision?
2 Much in every way! Chiefly because to them were committed the oracles of Elohim.
Now, since the Jews were given the oracles of Elohim, He would inform them what the oracles actually were, right? So, therefore, it makes perfect sense we can trust the books that the Jewish people preserved as Scripture, as the oracles, would be the inspired Words of Yahweh.
So what we call “the Old Testament,” what they call “the Tanakh,” to them were given the oracles; we can trust, in spite of them, right, because yeah they had years and years of idolatry, in spite of them, Yahweh preserved His word through them.
That being the case, we can trust that these Johnny-come-lately ideal books, you know, Tobith and Judith and all these, whatever these, Ecclesiasticus and all this stuff, they never accepted those books as inspired books; and they are the ones that were given the oracles. And I can critique each of those books one day. But for now, this is one reason I believe that we can trust the Canon that we have today.
Now, what about the New Testament? By and large, the Jewish people rejected the Messiah. And so, those that were committed to the testimony of Yahshua, and the record of how the early apostles lived, and what the early apostles taught, would belong to those who would be believers in Messiah Yahshua, right? And so, Levitical priesthood preserved the Old Testament writings for us, and the Melchizedek would have handled the testimony of Yahshua and the apostles.
Both religions on an overall scale had much corruption, and still do. But Yahweh used it anyway to preserve His Word, to the point where I read these Scriptures, and I come to a very different set of doctrines than both Judaism and Christianity, because Yahweh preserved the truth of His Word for us today. Even though it contradicts many of what is being taught in the synagogues and churches in the world today.
And so, I’m not going to rely on Catholics to tell me what’s true in the Old Testament, because they are not given the oracles of Elohim. The Jews were.
And so, to me that’s a very convincing point that clears up the confusion. And what I discovered this week with actually being 50 books in the Bible, you know, the unity of Scripture amazes me. It’s like, when you dig into the Scriptures, and the more that you dig in, it’s like looking at a microscope, and the more you uncover, the more you discover. There is a lifetime of learning, just in what we know is the Word of Yahweh.
We don’t need these other things to muddy the picture. And you end up hanging your whole doctrine, your whole life, and the way you live your life, on these other things that come lately, you know. The book of Jasher was lost until just a few hundred years ago, you know.
I love the Word, and we should love the Word that we know is Scripture.
(Psalm 119:111) – Your testimonies I have taken as a heritage forever, For they are the rejoicing of my heart.
Psalm 119:131 – I opened my mouth and panted, For I longed for Your commandments.
Jeremiah 15:16 – Your words were found, and I ate them, – unleavened bread – And Your word was to me the joy and rejoicing of my heart; For I am called by Your name, O YAHWEH of hosts.
Beautiful! Beautiful! I concur! I concur. We don’t need a 51st book, we don’t need a 52nd, 53rd, 54th, or any other book. There are serious problems with these other books.
Listen, Yahweh has preserved down through the ages just what we need in order to do justly, love mercy, and walk humbly with our Elohim. Just what we need! It’s that simple!
The words of Yahweh are awesome! They are pure words, like silver tried in the furnace of earth. – Psalm 12, I don’t have it up there, but – purified seven times. – Psalm 12:6 says – You shall keep them, – verse 7 says – You shall keep them, O Yahweh, you shall preserve them from this generation forever. – And He has, He has kept them. He has preserved them.
What happened to Jasher? Lost, 1700 years lost! Wasn’t even found in Dead Sea Scrolls. Probably just a Jewish midrash making a bunch of stuff up. Jubilees, lost till the 1840s. Enoch, lost until 1773; found in Ethiopic Canon.
The 50 books? Never lost. He preserved them, He kept them. And made them available to every generation from the time they were written until this very day.
If former generations didn’t need them, I don’t need them either. Blessed be the name of Yahweh.
So I say let’s avoid the so-called “lost books” that probably, from what I can tell, from what I’m seeing here, are nothing more than Jewish fables. And let’s instead feed on the 50 books containing unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.
So I say (1st Corinthians 5:7-8) – purge out the old leaven, – of Enoch, Jasher, and Jubilees and these others – that we may be a new lump, since we truly are unleavened. For indeed Messiah, our Passover, was sacrificed for us.
8 Therefore let us keep the feast, – let us keep the feast – not with old leaven, nor with the leaven of malice and wickedness, but with the unleavened bread – the unleavened words – of sincerity and – most important – truth.
John 17:17 Yahshua said – “Your word is truth.” – He said “The Scripture cannot be broken.” These things He taught, and I believe them.
Let’s pray. Heavenly Father Yahweh, kadosh, kadosh, kadosh be Your great name. We praise You, we praise Your Word. O Yahweh guard us, protect us, keep us from things that are not from You. We want Your Word, Your truth, Your light. Let not our hearts be thirsty for things that deceive us. But let our hearts be thirsty and our hearts be hungry for the truth of Your Word and for the living waters given to us by Your Spirit.
We know Abba Yahweh, it's so important that we repent. We repent for believing anything that’s deception and lies. We repent of any and all transgression.
Take away the confusion amongst the believers, and restore, restore, restore everyone back to what is good, what is holy, what is just and what is true.
Glorify Your great name. We trust in Messiah Yahshua for forgiveness of sin…For truly we know and we are sure, Yours is the Kingdom, Yours is the power and Yours is the glory forever and ever, in Yahshua’s great name we pray. Amein.”