I have wrestled with The Book of Enoch in the past couple of weeks and have found it unsettling and inaccurate in its details (such as the giants were 3000 cubits tall - 10 x size of Noah's ark, more than 1350m tall!). Never has there been mention in canonical scripture of the angels Raphael and Phanuel. "Highest of the angels" named Metatron has never been mentioned in canonical scripture either.
We don't have any original language Book of Enoch available in popular circulation: we only have later translations in language forms which didn't exist back then. YHUH preserved the scripture we know, so if the Book of Enoch were His Word, He'd have preserved it in the original languages, just as He has all His other scripture, right? So, what about the Aramaic Enoch Scroll?
The Aramaic Enoch Scroll is a non-published, complete copy of the Book of Enoch that is rumored to be in the possession of private investors. There is no proof of its existence, but according to the former chief editor of the official Dead Sea Scrolls editorial team, John Strugnell (deceased 2007), the scroll is well preserved, and microfilmed.
Aramaic Enoch Scroll - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aramaic_Enoch_Scroll
No proof of its existence except the word of a dead man? Mmh.
Dating a book depends on the use of language at the time, NOT on the age of the written medium. So if you don't have the original-language texts, you cannot validate the book. Again, because in translation, updated terminology will be used for the contemporary audience. YHUH never gives a book you cannot validate, because then in effect He'd be LYING. He can't demand you test something but then deny you what you need for testing! If you don't have the original-language texts to check, you have no clue whether you are getting the TRUTH. We have no 'counterfeit detector' to verify the Book of Enoch. ALL the texts are in translation, and all of them in languages which are post-Flood and most have variations in them. So, if YHUH really had Enoch write a Book we were supposed to get, then He'd have preserved it, words Enoch himself actually wrote, not a translation.
Next problem is Book of Enoch's contradictory account of same things Bible already explains. For example, "Enoch" versus the Bible account of the Flood in Gen 6 seems very contradictory.
First of all, it appears to be Noah supposedly writing this portion.
66.3 And I came out from before Enoch. 67.1 And in those days, the word of the Lord came to me, and he said to me: "Noah, behold; your lot has come up before me, a lot without reproach, a lot of love and uprightness. 67.2 And now the Angels are making a wooden structure, and when the Angels come out from that task, I will put my hand on it, and keep it safe. And a change shall take place so that the dry ground may not remain empty.
Angels and YHUH built the Ark? But scripture says it took Noah around 100 years to build the Ark:
Gen 6:9 These are the generations of Noah: Noah was a just man and perfect in his generations, and Noah walked with YHUH.
Gen 6:10 And Noah begat three sons, Shem, Ham, and Japheth.
Gen 5:32 And Noah was five hundred years old: and Noah begat Shem, Ham, and Japheth.
Gen 6:3 And YHUH said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be a hundred and twenty years.
The clock started ticking before the flood was to arrive from this point.
Gen 6:11 The earth also was corrupt before YHUH, and the earth was filled with violence.
Gen 6:12 And YHUH looked upon the earth, and, behold, it was corrupt; for all flesh had corrupted his way upon the earth.
Gen 6:13 And YHUH said unto Noah, The end of all flesh is come before me; for the earth is filled with violence through them; and, behold, I will destroy them with the earth.
Gen 6:14 Make thee an ark of gopher wood; rooms shalt thou make in the ark, and shalt pitch it within and without with pitch.
Gen 6:15 And this is the fashion which thou shalt make it of: The length of the ark shall be three hundred cubits, the breadth of it fifty cubits, and the height of it thirty cubits.
Gen 6:16 A window shalt thou make to the ark, and in a cubit shalt thou finish it above; and the door of the ark shalt thou set in the side thereof; with lower, second, and third stories shalt thou make it.
Gen 7:5 And Noah did according unto all that YHUH commanded him.
Gen 7:6 And Noah was six hundred years old when the flood of waters was upon the earth.
Gen 7:11 In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, the seventeenth day of the month, the same day were all the fountains of the great deep broken up, and the windows of shamayim (heaven) were opened.
Why the difference?
Also, there are differences in the writing style, and given from different people’s viewpoints, suggestive of different authors, so maybe part of the book is valid, but part is corrupted (adulterated). At one point it appears Noah is writing, for example. That’s who wrote the passage above, starting: 66.3 And I came out from before Enoch.
Also, I have a serious problem with the following referencing Noah’s birth and his not being a normal, human baby, as follows:
106.1 And after those days my son Methuselah chose a wife for his son Lamech and she became pregnant by him and bore a son. 106.2 And his body was white like snow, and red like the flower of a rose, and the hair of his head was white like wool. And his eyes were beautiful and when he opened his eyes he made the whole house bright, like the Sun, so that the whole house was exceptionally bright. 106.3 And when he was taken from the hand of the midwife he opened his mouth and spoke to the Lord of Righteousness. 106.4 And his father Lamech was afraid of him, and fled, and went to his father Methuselah. 106.5 And he said to him: "I have begotten a strange son; he is not like a man but is like the children of the Angels of Heaven, of a different type and not like us. And his eyes are like the rays of the Sun and his face glorious. 106.6 And it seems to me that he is not sprung from me but from the Angels and I am afraid that something extraordinary may be done on the earth in his days.
Noah is not described anywhere in accepted scripture as being anything but a mortal man.
The varied forms of the Book of Enoch we have are awfully clever it's way smart in some of its usages, particularly with respect to allusive play on Bible verses. Which matters, because this Book of Enoch, if it were valid, would actually be the first-written book of the Bible. So, it shouldn't be alluding to other Bible verses which didn't yet exist.
Most importantly: if there was a genuine Book of Enoch Moses would have mentioned it, for then Moses would not have been the first one to write scripture.
So, maybe it is true that one verse from the Book of Enoch versions got preserved.
Jude 1:14 And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Master cometh with ten thousands of his saints
So, something of the story may be true but YHUH didn't have Moses write scripture on Enoch's ministry. Which would have been necessary, if a true Book of Enoch were out there but lost. Bible always acknowledges other accepted scripturally true writings. Jude quotes Enoch himself; Jude doesn't say he's referring to a quote in some Book of Enoch. This quote needn’t have been in a book. Read Genesis, see how much Moses quotes people he never knew. The Greek phrase using legei can be used to quote from a book or from a person. "It stands written" is definitely intended to mean the person is quoting from a book. But Jude doesn't use that expression. In the Greek all that Jude uses is "legei". That's nowhere near as strong as "it stands written" (latter is always a quote from a BOOK, "gegrapti"). Greek "legei" can be used for indirect discourse, direct discourse, quoting a person's remark. Not necessarily, some book. But you can't say the Bible endorses a book if only one quote in the entire Bible Jude 1:14 is from Enoch. And Bible doesn't claim that there is a book of Enoch anywhere. Further, no other quotes are attributed to Enoch anywhere in the Bible.
Let us remember that Enoch was rejected as a canonical book. If Jude quoted Enoch as a person is doesn’t mean we can use the whole book to justify views on fallen angels, spirits in prison and the Nephilim or any other subject.
We should compare scripture with scripture (ie. the inspired writings as contained within the canonical books), YHUH's Word WITH YHUH's Word. This also applies to the pseudepigraphical writings which are not canonical.
I found these videos below which portray a fairly balanced view:
Please note that I refer to our Creator as YHUH (Yahuah) and His son as Yahushua and I do not refer to Jesus or God and such terminology - the content is otherwise well put together :-)
One last important note - Freemasons have posted this article where they venerate Enoch and explain their interest here:
https://pubs.royle.com/publication/?i=166570&article_id=1450144&view=articleBrowser
