English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Should the Book Of Enoch be included in modern Bibles? It was obviously considered truth by early Christians in that Jude quoted from it (Jude 1:14-15), which he would not have done if it was not an inspired book, either that or the Epistle of Jude should not be included either.
It's not like we don't have the Book of Enoch around today as it still exists from several different manuscripts, and can even be bought (ISBN 091351067X). So why is it not included in modern bibles?

2006-10-15 09:41:41 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture Religion & Spirituality

"And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints,
To execute judgment upon all, and to convince all that are ungodly among them of all their ungodly deeds which they have ungodly committed, and of all their hard speeches which ungodly sinners have spoken against him." Jude 1:14-15
"Behold, he comes with ten thousands of his saints, to execute judgement upon them, and destroy the wicked, and reprove all the carnel for everything which the sinful and ungodly have done, and committed against him." Enoch 2:1

2006-10-15 10:12:08 · update #1

10 answers

It should be included along with all the other books that have been removed over the years. My families bible has a book in it called Bel and the Dragon. This bible is over 100 years old! The bible is rewritten to fit the times and to turn the message to the way the writer wants it relayed. If the bible was put back together in the way it was say even 80 years ago it would be labeled as heresy.

2006-10-15 11:17:15 · answer #1 · answered by ldyrhiannon 4 · 0 1

Many people feel Jude quoted from the "Book of Enoch." The Bible does not say how Jude knew of Enoch's prophecy but the fact that he did does not necessarily mean he quoted from an apocryphal book.

Paul did something similar when he spoke of Jannes and Jambres as the magicians of Pharaoh. If whoever wrote the book of Enoch had access to some ancient source, why couldn't Jude have access to the same thing? (Compare Exodus 7:11, 22 with 2 Timothy 3:8.)

Stephen the disciple also provided information about Moses' Egyptian education and his forty years in Midian - which is found nowhere else in the Bible. That does not mean he got it from some apocryphal source. (Acts 7:22,23, 30, 38).

Hannah

2006-10-15 16:52:09 · answer #2 · answered by Hannah J Paul 7 · 1 1

The Book of Enoch is an apocryphal and pseudepigraphic text. It is falsely ascribed to Enoch. Produced probably sometime during the second and first centuries B.C.E., it is a collection of extravagant and unhistorical Jewish myths, evidently the product of exegetical elaborations on the brief Genesis reference to Enoch. This alone is sufficient for lovers of God’s inspired Word to dismiss it.

In the Bible, only the book of Jude contains Enoch’s prophetic words: “Look! Jehovah came with his holy myriads, to execute judgment against all, and to convict all the ungodly concerning all their ungodly deeds that they did in an ungodly way, and concerning all the shocking things that ungodly sinners spoke against him.” (Jude 14, 15) Many scholars contend that Enoch’s prophecy against his ungodly contemporaries is quoted directly from the Book of Enoch. Is it possible that Jude used an unreliable apocryphal book as his source?

How Jude knew of Enoch’s prophecy is not revealed in the Scriptures. He may simply have quoted a common source, a reliable tradition handed down from remote antiquity.

Hope this helps.

2006-10-15 17:11:23 · answer #3 · answered by Frax 4 · 1 0

Although Jude does quote from the book of Enoch it still isn't considered canonical. This is because the book of Enoch, like many other books of it's time, do contain some truth. But it's not considered inspired. It would be like your pastor or priest quoting from a good Christian book in their sermon. The book itself may be insightful and help full but that doesn't make it the inspired Word of God. Same holds true with the book of Enoch.

2006-10-15 16:55:14 · answer #4 · answered by stpolycarp77 6 · 1 0

Isn't that one with the Seven Heavens?
Most folks have tunnel vision when it comes to the Bible.
I think all the omitted Books should be put back into the Bible then it might clear up a lot of people's questions.
Such as the Apocrypha.
Try reading the Book of Adam and Eve.

2006-10-15 16:54:47 · answer #5 · answered by ? 3 · 0 0

Sometime in its beginning, the American Bible Society decided to remove some books from the 1611 Bible. I don't remember the year, but in the 1800's.

2006-10-15 16:43:55 · answer #6 · answered by Royal Racer Hell=Grave © 7 · 0 1

If you understand prophecy, you would realize that many pagans have similar visions as those recorded in Scripture. It would, therefore, not be surprising for someone to quote from outside sources, as this was a very typical Jewish custom.

2006-10-15 16:50:42 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

The Enoch mentioned in the Bible NEVER WROTE A BOOK OF THE BIBLE THATS WHY THE INSPIRED WORD OF GOD CONSISTS OF ONLY AND EXCLUSIVELY 66 BOOKS OF THE BIBLE FROM GENESIS TO REVELATION ANY ONE WHO ADDS TO THIS IS DOING SO FRADULENTLY DO YOUR HOMEWORK THOSE OTHERS ARE REJECTED BY ALL LEGITIMATE BIBLE SCHOLARS Gorbalizer

2006-10-15 16:52:57 · answer #8 · answered by gorbalizer 5 · 1 1

o my I had not even noticed that but not to worry I will try and look it up on line

2006-10-15 16:48:25 · answer #9 · answered by Mim 7 · 0 0

isnt enoch the god that the mormons belived was before god? if so, there is why because THERE WAS AND IS NO OTHER GOD.

2006-10-15 16:44:00 · answer #10 · answered by lpxerounderground 3 · 0 1

fedest.com, questions and answers