Book of Enoch chapters 37-71 called the book of parables is blasphemous

[Anthony16]

Well okay I’m sure after reading that title you like what how is it blasphemous? I will tell why it is. Okay so I read the first part of 1Enoch which is called the book of the watchers which was really interesting and Jude himself in his Epistle quotes from it. It was found in the Dead Sea scrolls so it was definitely written before out Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. It did not seem to go against the Bible and it seemed like it could be legit. So after enjoying it I decided to read the next part of 1 Enoch which is called the book of parables. Okay this part was not found in the Dead Sea Scrolls unlike the other four parts and most historians say it was written after Christ (which I agree with) and was a later addition. At first it starts out okay but something is up. It seems to have too much of a familiarity with Daniel, Revelation, the Wisdom books. It definitely also takes the idea of Leviathan and Behemoth from Isaiah, the Psalms, and Job. It is with out a doubt the book of parables taking from those books rather then those books taking from it. But that’s not the strangest part it also contradicts the book of the watchers as well. In Chapter 68 it has a whole different list of fallen angels then chapter 6 has and also it say that writing was taught by the fallen angels which is just weird. And in the last chapters 70-71 it says that Enoch is the son of man which is just blasphemous. This part seems to have a very different character then the book of watchers. Possibly the rest of the book of Enoch is inspired but this later addition written after Christ is definitely not inspired nor was Jude familiar with this work. It is just junk. It reads especially towards the end more like 3 Enoch a Jewish Kabbalah book. I have heard that the book of Enoch flows better without this book so possibly the rest of this book could be inspired?

 

[Jude1:3Contendforthefaith]

And in the last chapters 70-71 it says that Enoch is the son of man which is just blasphemous.

What verse particularly says that Enoch is the son of man ?

Books of Enoch

 

[Anthony16]

What verse particularly says that Enoch is the son of man ?

Books of Enoch

Enoch 70:13-
“13. Then I fell upon my face, while all my flesh was dissolved, and my spirit became changed.

14. I cried out with a loud voice, with a powerful spirit, blessing, glorifying, and exalting.

15. And those blessings, which proceeded from my mouth, became acceptable in the presence of the Ancient of days.

16. The Ancient of days came with Michael and Gabriel, Raphael and Phanuel, with thousands of thousands, and myriads of myriads, which could not be numbered.


17. Then that angel came to me, and with his voice saluted me, saying, Thou art the offspring of man, who art born for righteousness, and righteousness has rested on thee.

18. The righteousness of the Ancient of days shall not forsake thee.

19. He said, On thee shall he confer peace in the name of the existing world; for from thence has peace gone forth since the world was created.

20. And thus shall it happen to thee for ever and ever.

21. All who shall exist, and who shall walk in thy path of righteousness, shall not forsake thee for ever.

22. With thee shall be their habitations, with thee their lot; nor from thee shall they be separated for ever and ever.

23. And thus shall length of days be with the offspring of man.

24. Peace shall be to the righteous; and the path of integrity shall the righteous pursue, in the name of the Lord of spirits, for ever and ever.”

 

[Tolworth John]

It did not seem to go against the Bible and it seemed like it could be legit.

I have heard that the book of Enoch flows better without this book so possibly the rest of this book could be inspired?

The book claims to have been written before the flood. Yet parts are dated to the 3rd centuary AD.
Which should tell you it is bogus and to leave it alone.

 

[Anthony16]

The book claims to have been written before the flood. Yet parts are dated to the 3rd centuary AD.
Which should tell you it is bogus and to leave it alone.

Well that’s only the oldest copies we have of it. We don’t have the original copies of Genesis or Exodus because original copies overtime crumble and eventually you need new copies. So parts of the book of Enoch could have possibly been written before the flood and throughout history people made copies of it. Even if it is legit it would make sense why the copies aren’t that old.
Edit: I shouldn’t have read so fast you said AD which only the book of parables is written after Christ. The rest was found in the Dead Sea Scrolls so it’s definitely BC. Also Jude quotes and alludes to the book of watchers in his Epistle. It also seems Peter and maybe even Jesus had familiarity with the book of the watchers.

 

[Tolworth John]

Well that’s only the oldest copies we have of it. We don’t have the original copies of Genesis or Exodus because original copies overtime crumble and eventually you need new copies. So parts of the book of Enoch could have possibly been written before the flood and throughout history people made copies of it. Even if it is legit it would make sense why the copies aren’t that old.
Edit: I shouldn’t have read so fast you said AD which only the book of parables is written after Christ. The rest was found in the Dead Sea Scrolls so it’s definitely BC. Also Jude quotes and alludes to the book of watchers in his Epistle. It also seems Peter and maybe even Jesus had familiarity with the book of the watchers.

Don't believe me believe the linguistic experts. wiki shows:- in 1976, J.T. Milik dated the Book of Parables to the third century. He believed that the events in the parables were linked to historic events dating from 260 to 270 CE.[72] This theory is in line with the beliefs of many scholars of the 19th century, including Lucke (1832), Hofman (1852), Wiesse (1856), and Phillippe (1868). According to this theory, these chapters were written in later Christian times by a Jewish Christian to enhance Christian beliefs with Enoch's authoritative name.

So you should be able to trace there books reports and learn more about how false the book of enoch is.

 

[Jude1:3Contendforthefaith]

Enoch 70:13-
“13. Then I fell upon my face, while all my flesh was dissolved, and my spirit became changed.

14. I cried out with a loud voice, with a powerful spirit, blessing, glorifying, and exalting.

15. And those blessings, which proceeded from my mouth, became acceptable in the presence of the Ancient of days.

16. The Ancient of days came with Michael and Gabriel, Raphael and Phanuel, with thousands of thousands, and myriads of myriads, which could not be numbered.


17. Then that angel came to me, and with his voice saluted me, saying, Thou art the offspring of man, who art born for righteousness, and righteousness has rested on thee.

18. The righteousness of the Ancient of days shall not forsake thee.

19. He said, On thee shall he confer peace in the name of the existing world; for from thence has peace gone forth since the world was created.

20. And thus shall it happen to thee for ever and ever.

21. All who shall exist, and who shall walk in thy path of righteousness, shall not forsake thee for ever.

22. With thee shall be their habitations, with thee their lot; nor from thee shall they be separated for ever and ever.

23. And thus shall length of days be with the offspring of man.

24. Peace shall be to the righteous; and the path of integrity shall the righteous pursue, in the name of the Lord of spirits, for ever and ever.”

He says that he is the "offspring of man".

17. Then that angel came to me, and with his voice saluted me, saying, Thou art the offspring of man, who art born for righteousness, and righteousness has rested on thee.



I don't really know though.

 

[Anthony16]

He says that he is the "offspring of man".

17. Then that angel came to me, and with his voice saluted me, saying, Thou art the offspring of man, who art born for righteousness, and righteousness has rested on thee.



I don't really know though.

Also to notes is that I am using the Richard Laurence translation which probably wanted to make it less obvious so it wouldn’t get people upset.

 

[Anthony16]

Don't believe me believe the linguistic experts. wiki shows:- in 1976, J.T. Milik dated the Book of Parables to the third century. He believed that the events in the parables were linked to historic events dating from 260 to 270 CE.[72] This theory is in line with the beliefs of many scholars of the 19th century, including Lucke (1832), Hofman (1852), Wiesse (1856), and Phillippe (1868). According to this theory, these chapters were written in later Christian times by a Jewish Christian to enhance Christian beliefs with Enoch's authoritative name.

So you should be able to trace there books reports and learn more about how false the book of enoch is.

Well of course the third book of parables is definitely written after Christ. I am not denying that. But still Jude quotes from the book of watchers which was at least 400 years BC.

 

[Anthony16]

I just finished up the last three parts of Enoch called the Astronomical book, the book of dream visions, and the epistle of Enoch. They are definitely not inspired. The book of dream visions and the epistle definitely borrows from the Wisdom books a lot and includes concepts that I wouldn’t think a man before the flood would know about. Plus about the Astronomical book in the book of the watchers it says that fallen angels taught man Astrology so why is Enoch doing something that is wrong? Plus it’s just so boring. The only part of 1 Enoch that has any chance of being inspired is the book of the watchers which is the oldest part of 1Enoch and Jude quotes from it but the rest is junk.

 

[Jude1:3Contendforthefaith]

Also to notes is that I am using the Richard Laurence translation which probably wanted to make it less obvious so it wouldn’t get people upset.

I don't think the Richard Laurence translation is very good. The R H Charles Version says this :

Chapter 71:12-15

12 And these blessings which went forth out of my mouth were well pleasing before that Head of Days. And that Head of Days came with Michael and Gabriel, Raphael and Phanuel, thousands and ten thousands of angels without number.

[Lost passage wherein the Son of Man was described as accompanying the Head of Days, and Enoch asked one of the angels (as in xlvi. 3) concerning the Son of Man as to who he was.]

14 And he (i.e. the angel) came to me and greeted me with His voice, and said unto me '
This is the Son of Man who is born unto righteousness,
And righteousness abides over him,
And the righteousness of the Head of Days forsakes him not.'
15 And he said unto me:
' He proclaims unto thee peace in the name of the world to come;
For from hence has proceeded peace since the creation of the world,
And so shall it be unto thee for ever and for ever and ever.


So, it appears that The Richard Laurence Translation is a little bit different then The R H Charles Translation :

Books of Enoch

 

[Anthony16]

I don't think the Richard Laurence translation is very good. The R H Charles Version says this :

Chapter 71:12-15

12 And these blessings which went forth out of my mouth were well pleasing before that Head of Days. And that Head of Days came with Michael and Gabriel, Raphael and Phanuel, thousands and ten thousands of angels without number.

[Lost passage wherein the Son of Man was described as accompanying the Head of Days, and Enoch asked one of the angels (as in xlvi. 3) concerning the Son of Man as to who he was.]

14 And he (i.e. the angel) came to me and greeted me with His voice, and said unto me '
This is the Son of Man who is born unto righteousness,
And righteousness abides over him,
And the righteousness of the Head of Days forsakes him not.'
15 And he said unto me:
' He proclaims unto thee peace in the name of the world to come;
For from hence has proceeded peace since the creation of the world,
And so shall it be unto thee for ever and for ever and ever.


So, it appears that The Richard Laurence Translation is a little bit different then The R H Charles Translation :

Books of Enoch

I read on Wikipedia that that verse is about Enoch becoming the son of man to most scholars and it even linked to metatron a Jewish Kabbalah idea that Enoch became the second most powerful being to God. I also hear some claim that Robert Charles changed the verse so it wouldn’t cause problems and that modern translations make it clear that Enoch becomes the son of man. But there’s got to be something more this because why would the the Orthodox Tewahedo Church include something so blasphemous as that nevermind the early church fathers that read it.

 

[Jude1:3Contendforthefaith]

I read on Wikipedia that that verse is about Enoch becoming the son of man to most scholars and it even linked to metatron a Jewish Kabbalah idea that Enoch became the second most powerful being to God. I also hear some claim that Robert Charles changed the verse so it wouldn’t cause problems and that modern translations make it clear that Enoch becomes the son of man. But there’s got to be something more this because why would the the Orthodox Tewahedo Church include something so blasphemous as that nevermind the early church fathers that read it.

I guess that we need the Ge'ez Version and an Ethiopian Scholar to really find out.

I doubt the Ge'ez would say something like that because in earlier chapters it talks about "The Son Of Man" and it is referring to The Lord Jesus Christ and Isn't talking about Enoch himself in those references.

 

[Anthony16]

I guess that we need the Ge'ez Version and an Ethiopian Scholar to really find out.

I doubt the Ge'ez would say something like that because in earlier chapters it talks about "The Son Of Man" and it is referring to The Lord Jesus Christ and Isn't talking about Enoch himself in those references.

Yeah it’s very strange. Maybe there has been some tampering with the translations so that instead of pointing to Christ they turned it into some Kabbalah junk. I just can’t believe that early church fathers like Tertullian could have claimed such blasphemy as inspired. There probably is something going on, a conspiracy maybe? But I know is that I won’t pay anymore attention to it until a Ethiopian scholar or at least someone trust worthy translates it.

 

[Anto9us]

Ezekiel was also referred to as Son of Man, wasn't he? So that is not blaspemous.
I used to own both the Laurence and Charles translations of Enoch; no longer have them, no longer want to study the names of 200 demons; and it is true we do not know how much/which parts of Enoch Jude had in front of him

all we can say is "some of what we know as Enoch is probably junk"

 

[Anto9us]

Eze 2:3

And he said unto me, Son of man, I send thee to the children of Israel, to a rebellious nation that hath rebelled against me: they and their fathers have transgressed against me, even unto this very day.

Several other places in Ezekiel he is called Son of Man

 

[Anthony16]

Eze 2:3

And he said unto me, Son of man, I send thee to the children of Israel, to a rebellious nation that hath rebelled against me: they and their fathers have transgressed against me, even unto this very day.

Several other places in Ezekiel he is called Son of Man

Yeah but if you read Enoch, the whole book is about glorifying this divine being named the son of man, a angel appears at end and seems tells Enoch that he is that divine being. It’s very strange.

 

[Anto9us]

That does sound strange, Anthony16, like I say, I don't read Enoch anymore.
I just know that Ezekiel was referred to as Son of Man dozens of times; never was it said that Ezekiel was a divine being

 

[Anthony16]

That does sound strange, Anthony16, like I say, I don't read Enoch anymore.
I just know that Ezekiel was referred to as Son of Man dozens of times; never was it said that Ezekiel was a divine being

Personally I’m done with Enoch as well. Just finished it up today and it does not feel inspired at all let alone all the weird stuff in it. I just stick with the scriptures I know for sure are legit.

 

[straykat]

I think there may have been a small Enochian text tradition related to Gen 6. But I also think even BC stuff was highly influenced by Jews who had become reacquainted with the Mesopotamian gods in their Babylonian Exile. And while the Babylonians and Sumerians revered these beings, the Jews harkened back to the Torah and saw it for what it was: the deception of the "watcher" angels, who were not gods, but angels who were meant to guard the nations, and ended up corrupting both men and themselves.

So the exiled Jews elaborated on these stories again, taking Genesis and Babylonian experiences as a base for a new work.. or a "polemic" of sorts.

But yeah, some of it was even added after the Jewish era and well into the common era. Just like the secondary books of Enoch have nothing to do with these original writings either.