The Book Of Enoch (2): The Sin Of The Watchers

THE BOOK OF THE WATCHERS

Last time we began by speaking about “the Jewish scene in the time of Jesus”[1] and the necessity to understand who else was on this scene besides the followers of Jesus, and to grasp the ideas and the concepts that existed on the scene at this time. We would all understand that the New Testament writers were influenced by these ideas and concepts, simply because they belonged to this period and to this community. No New Testament text can be understood properly outside of this context—we miss so much if we read it without knowledge of the historical and cultural background; without being aware of the prevailing theologies of the day; without understanding who else, besides “Jesus folk,”[2]  was on this scene.

As promised, today we will be discussing the first part of the book of Enoch: The Book of the Watchers. Just to remind you, the First Book of Enoch, or Ethiopic Enochis in fact a compilation of several books, each of which appears with its own title and usually its own conclusion. These books, known as the Book of the Watchers (chaps. 1-36), the Similitudes (also known as Parables, chaps. 37-71), the Book of the Luminaries (chaps.72-82), the Book of the Dreams (chaps. 83-90), and the Epistle of Enoch (chaps. 92-105), are combined into a single work in the Ethiopic version, in which alone the whole is preserved.

So the book of Watchers is the first part of 1 Enoch. There is a remarkably large portion of common content with the Hebrew Bible in this book: e.g. Adam and Eve; Cain and Abel; the marriage of the angels with the daughters of men. However, it is precisely the differences and the additions in the retelling of the well-known biblical narratives which draw our attention, and can possibly point to some specific patterns and concepts in Second Temple Jewish thought. The most striking example of this discrepancy we find in the infamous beginning of chapter 6 of the book of Genesis. While this story occupies just a few verses in Genesis, it becomes the main narrative in the Book of the Watchers, where Chapters 6-9 tell the story (in fact, two interwoven stories) about the fall of the evil angels. Let us read together a few verses from 1 Enoch 6-7 in order to see how the writer expands upon Genesis 6:1-4:

1 Enoch 6:1 And when the sons of men had multiplied, in those days, beautiful and comely daughters were born to them. 2 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 for ourselves children.”… 5 Then they all swore together and bound one another with a curse. 6 And they were, all of them, two hundred, who descended in the days of Jared onto the peak of Mount Hermon.[ 53]… 1 Enoch 7: 1 These and all the others with them took for themselves wives from among them such as they chose. And they began to go in to 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. 2 And they conceived from them and bore to them great giants. And the giants begat Nephilim…

 

THE SIN OF THE WATCHERS

Before proceeding any further, I would like to mention once again, and also recommend to my readers, a wonderful book by a brilliant scholar, Dr. Michael Heiser,  “Reversing Hermon: Enoch, the Watchers, and the Forgotten Mission of Jesus Christ”. This particular article draws heavily on this book.

In my last post I mentioned that, even though the supernatural interpretation of Genesis 6:1-4 (that the “sons of God” were angels or some kind of divine beings) is not very popular in either modern Christianity or modern Judaism, this was not the case in Second Temple Judaism. According to the book of Enoch, the Watchers (“the sons of God” of Genesis) “are clearly celestial (nonhuman) beings whose actions are regarded not only as morally evil, but spiritually destructive”[3]. The Book of the Watchers describes the revolt of the heavenly Watchers, which leads to evil on the earth and foretells God’s judgment. The Watchers produce giants on earth by their union with human women, and these giants are evil. Then, in Chapter 10, God finally intervenes, and the familiar story of Noah begins.

However, Second Temple Judaism saw in Genesis 6:1-4, not only the story of a supernatural rebellion, but one of the central passages in biblical theology and in understanding God’s plan in history. Here is a very important quotation from Michael Heiser’s introduction to his book, explaining why this topic is so important: “If one were to ask a modern Christian, ‘Why is the world and all humanity so thoroughly wicked?’ the chances are very high that an answer of ‘the Fall’ would be forthcoming. We have been conditioned by church history (ancient and modern) to look only to Genesis 3 for such theology. But if you asked a Jew living in the Second Temple Period the same question, the answer would be dramatically different. Yes, the entrance of sin into God’s good world occurred in Eden, but the unanimous testimony of Second Temple Judaism is that the Watchers are to blame for the proliferation of evil on the earth.”[4]

Since the New Testament writers belonged to Second Temple Judaism, this understanding of the Watchers being responsible for the spread of evil on earth  had to be part of their theology. “Consequently, for New Testament writers, the coming of Jesus… meant not only reversing the curse of death brought upon humanity by the sin of Adam, but also the undoing of depravity.”[5] Next time, we will try to read the New Testament through Second Temple Jewish eyes, and to see the traces of this concept on its pages.

 

 

If you like  my articles on this blog, you might enjoy also my books,  you  can get  them  through my page on this blog,  https://blog.israelbiblicalstudies.com/julia-blum/   

 

 

 

[1] Boyarin, Daniel. The Jewish Gospels (Kindle Location 1103). The New Press. Kindle Edition.

[2] Ibid.

[3] Heiser, Michael S. Reversing Hermon: Enoch, the Watchers, and the Forgotten Mission of Jesus Christ (Kindle Locations 302).

[4] Ibid., Kindle  location 101-107

[5] Ibid. Kindle location 931-933

About the author

Julia BlumJulia is a teacher and an author of several books on biblical topics. She teaches two biblical courses at the Israel Institute of Biblical Studies, “Discovering the Hebrew Bible” and “Jewish Background of the New Testament”, and writes Hebrew insights for these courses.

You might also be interested in:

Torah Portion In Real Time: Toldot

By Julia Blum

Torah Portion In Real Time:...

By Julia Blum

Join the conversation (20 comments)

Leave a Reply

  1. Elizabeth I. Seibel-Ross

    Are these watchers the same beings that we read about in Revelation as fallen angels cast down from Heaven with their prince?

  2. Peter Mojassamian

    How would one reconcile Yeshua’s statement that in Heaven there is no marriage and that we’ll be like angels (in his answer to the 7 brothers who all died having married one woman) and the suggestion that these angelic beings married human daughters?

    1. Julia Blum

      Peter, the text of Matthew does not say angels cannot have sexual relations; it says they don’t have them in the spiritual world, in the realm of divine beings, that Jesus is talking about. However, Genesis 6 speaks about

      “the angels who did not keep their proper domain, but left their own abode” (as we read in Jude 1:6), – and in this physical world, they are perfectly able to marry human women.

      1. Junior

        @JULIA BLUM As a student of the Biblical Greek who is a born again believer, i disagree sharply with your position that apparently angels can have sexual relations in the physical realm and that they are perfectly able to marry daughters of Adam, for it would seem you are performing eisegesis not exegesis with Jude 1:6 and what Jesus stated regarding the angels in Heaven (Matthew 22:30), for Jesus never taught a doctrine is made by one verse. Angels are celestial spirits meaning they are immaterial, meaning they do not have physical bodies made of physical matter which means they would not have the physical reproductive ‘plumbing’ to mate with a woman who has a natural earthly body which in turn means the evil angels could not plant seminal fluid into a woman. Sure the angels who went to Sodom and Gomorrah to destroy it manifested in the physical, but this doesn’t now mean they had earthly bodies with the plumbing to mate with a woman and bear offspring and to think such, is reading something into the verses that the verses are not explicitly stating. The two angels that appeared by the LORD God when He went to go see Abraham and Sarah, sure they manifested physically, but again, it doesn’t mean now that they were equipped with an earthly body including plumbing to mate with women. Just because the Greek word for “Angel” (angelos) is always in the masculine gender form, never a feminine form, doesn’t mean that the angels have the earthly body with the reproductive plumbing to give seminal fluid to an earthly woman, for we have no explicit parts in the Holy Bible that tell us the angels had the physical plumbing for this, this has to be read into the Scriptures as part of fanciful Judean fables. In Matthew 22:30 Jesus is making clear that the glorious resurrection body is going to be immortal. So since there will be no more death, man will not have to be reproduced and thus marriage, accordingly, will be a matter of the past. So in not marrying and not being given in marriage the blessed will therefore resemble the angels, for they too do not marry. The saved will be like the angels in this one way; yes, like the angels who do not reproduce. Further amplified by the below verses by Paul;

        1Co 15:39 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.
        1Co 15:40 There are also celestial bodies, and bodies terrestrial: but the glory of the celestial is one, and the glory of the terrestrial is another.
        1Co 15:41 There is one glory of the sun, and another glory of the moon, and another glory of the stars: for one star differeth from another star in glory.
        1Co 15:42 So also is the resurrection of the dead. It is sown in corruption; it is raised in incorruption:
        1Co 15:43 It is sown in dishonour; it is raised in glory: it is sown in weakness; it is raised in power:
        1Co 15:44 It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body.
        1Co 15:45 And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.
        1Co 15:46 Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual.
        1Co 15:47 The first man is of the earth, earthy: the second man is the Lord from heaven.
        1Co 15:48 As is the earthy, such are they also that are earthy: and as is the heavenly, such are they also that are heavenly.
        1Co 15:49 And as we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly.

        Therefore; The apostle certainly does not speak of celestial and terrestrial bodies in the sense in which we use those terms: we invariably mean by the former the sun, moon, planets, and stars; by the latter, masses of inanimate matter. But the apostle speaks of mankind beings, some of which were clothed with celestial, others with terrestrial bodies. It is suggested by the grammatical context of how Paul is stating what he is that therefore, that he means by the celestial bodies such as those refined bodies of man with which Enoch, Elijeh, and the Christ Himself, appear in the realms of glory: to which we may add the bodies of those saints which arose after our Lord’s resurrection; and, after having appeared to many, doubtless were taken up to paradise. By terrestrial bodies the linguistic exegesis shows it is to be understood those in which the saints now live.

        A plenitude of operational scientific studies by young earth accredited creationist scientists are showing today that the oxygen content of the atmosphere at the time of Noe and before Noe was quite high which a higher compression of that oxygen which was substantiated by finding oxygen trapped in amber rocks, and controlled experiments were performed that showed that when the scientists attempted to give that same amount of high oxygen under the pressure they discovered that the atmosphere was at at the time of Noe and before that was in the amber rocks to fish in a fish tank, they grew massively large, far above average than their supposed limit size, which further adds proof that the reason why we had giants on a operational demonstrated scientific level, is not because celestial immaterial spirits who manifested who were evil angels all of a sudden had physical reproductive plumbing parts of man to excrete seminal fluid to mate with earthly natural women, but rather there is a much more non-fable understanding that plant life and creatures were much bigger, hence why creation scientists have shown fossils of dragonfly’s that had 4 foot wide wingspans, hence why the dragons/dinosaurs were so large because the way the atmosphere was at that time with such a high oxygen content under pressure, creatures could be that large w/o any problems compared to today for the earth was much more like a hyperbaric chamber.

        It’s great what you can learn when factual operational biblical creation science is applied to such parts of history done by believers in God a.k.a. creation scientists which doesn’t require fanciful fables to explain such things.

  3. Roger L Todd

    As is stated, the intent of this article is to understand 1st century Jewish thought and theology, not necessarily to defend the veracity of the book of Enoch. We tend to interpret so much of the holy scriptures in light of our own experiences and expectations that we miss the incredible opportunity to see through the eyes of people who lived thousands of years ago.

  4. Andrés Caicedo

    Hi Julia, is it probably that dinosaurs coud be result of that depravation? I mean, if Giants and Nephiliim are the result of join between watchers and women, why not dinosaurs are result of watchers and animals?. probably that’s wath Gen 6:7 wants to explain. every flesh, man and creatures were in depravation. not only men. and the flood wanted to restore the original creation of God? cause the dinosaurs were an abomination for God?

    1. Julia Blum

      I don’t know Andres, honestly, I’ve never thought of it. Maybe, you are right , the Scripture does say that the whole earth was corrupt, that “all flesh had corrupted their way upon the earth” – even though we don’t have any explicit mention of dinosaurs. It’s definitely not the main focus of the story: we are told that “the Lord saw that the wickedness of man was great on the earth”, – but it still might be something to consider.

    2. Junior

      @ANDRES CAICEDO The word “Dinosaur” was coined in 1841 by Sir Richard Owens, an early biologist who knew as anybody did in his time frame, that they were called “Dragons” in literature before Richard coined “Dinosaurs” (Terrible Lizards). Marco Polo wrote that Chinese Emperors had dragons, not a fable story. So again, the word “Dinosauria” was coined by Sir Richard Owens in 1841 to mean “Terrible, powerful, wondrous lizards” _(inferring huge size)_ . The word derives from 2 words in the classical Greek “DEINOS” which is “Terrible, Powerful, Wondrous” + (sauros) “Lizard”. In literature before 1841, they tended to be called “dragons”, see the following documentary to see the hard evidence yourself;

      youtube [DOT] com/watch?v=94I5GK8C0gM

      Andres, all creatures were much more larger then not because of supposedly celestial masculine angels who are immaterial with no reproductive parts mating with earthly women, but rather that the oxygen content of the earth at those times from Noe and before Noe, have been proven by Creation scientists that the oxygen content was far much higher which makes natural vegetation and creatures grow quite huge, hence why Creation scientists have shown fossils were dragonflys have 4 foot wide wingspans, and why dragons/dinosaurs were so huge, because the oxygen content of the atmosphere which was under higher pressure (like a hyperbaric chamber) could support having such huge creatures. Operational studies were done by Creation scientists where they found oxygen in amber rocks that were dated from the time of Noe and before Noe, and the oxygen was very high in oxygen content, and the scientists did controlled experiments where they fed that same level of high level oxygen under pressure into a tank of fish that are only supposed to grow to a certain size today, and the fish grew far far larger than they expected which further confirmed that the creatures in Noe’s time and before were far more larger because of such high level of oxygen under pressure in the atmosphere, not because evil angels who manifested in the physical realm supposedly now had physical reproductive equipment like mankind to inseminate women with seed. I’m not denying there were Nefallim (bullies, tyrants) in those days but there were very large people because of the operational scientific proven facts of how big creatures and vegetation was because of the high level of oxygen content under pressure of the atmospheric environment. You should really look into this.

  5. Ashley

    If the Nephilim were wiped out by the great flood of Noah’s time, where did the giants of Gath come from?

    Just a thought … …

    1. Dot Healy

      I understand that the giants were the the progeny of the Nephilim. Their spirits continued to exist as demonic spirits. Re command you download Heisser’s book that Julia recommends.

    2. N

      Yeah, good question ! That runs through my mind for a long time. I think maybe some could fly? And became aliens ?? I don’t know

    3. Julia Blum

      Ashley, Genesis 6: 4 tells us the Nephilim were on earth before the Flood “and also afterward, when the sons of God went into the daughters of humankind.” The Hebrew word translated as “when” in this verse, is אשר (asher), and it could be translated in different ways: “as when”, “whenever,” “since”, etc. Therefore, we can suggest that Gen.6:4 hints on the repetition of these pre-Flood events after the Flood: the phrasing could mean that the sons of God fathered more Nephilim after the Flood in the same way as they had done it before the Flood

  6. Marcia New

    Excellent, Julia!

  7. Junior

    The Ethopic “Book of Enoch” is a pseudo-pigraphica (written under a false name or pen name) and that much should be at least mentioned for it is a specious and spurious text. The Ethopic pseudo-pigraphica Enoch contradicts the Old Covenant/New Covenant many times. A number of these works date from the time between the Old and New Covenant through the first few centuries appearing to have been a writing fad for awhile. People used the names of famous people, such as characters from the Holy Bible, to lend credibility to the work – to make it appear more authentic. Not many well studied archaeological and literary artifact historians of the Near East in such matters actually believe the book to have been written by Enoch. For it to have existed all those years, it would have had to survive the flood, and we have no evidence in the Scriptures that God told Noe to make sure to bring the pseudo-pigraphica aboard the ark. If there is already much evidence of the speciousness of pseudo-pigraphica of Enoch which is presented by it’s defenders as having alleged unquestionable authenticity, is this not at minimum misleading the bible history ignorant into fables which Jesus’ Spirit through His Apostles declared;

    1Timothy 1:4 *Neither give heed to fables* and endless genealogies, which minister questions, rather than godly edifying which is in faith: so do.

    Titus 1:14 *NOT giving heed to Judean fables, and commandments of men, that turn from the truth.*

    2Peter 1:16 *For we have NOT followed cunningly devised fables, when we made known unto you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus the Christ, but were eyewitnesses of His majesty.

    Something else to considering strongly;

    Tertullian admits that the Hebrews *never* accepted the pseudopigraphica Enoch as authentic *and that Jesus disciples of His time also rejected it.* The very small minority of defenders of the pseudo-pigraphica Enoch state that the “book” was well known by early New Covenant Jesus disciple scribes, which strains credulity, *but they conveniently neglect to state that most rejected the pseudo-pigraphica as being from God.*

    Further to this, 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 which are a translation of a Greek text that was in turn a translation of an Aramaic or Hebrew text but thus far indeterminable. There were small fragments of this large book found among the DSSs, which parts are of Chapter 2, verses 12-14 and Chapter 3, verses 13-16, yet the book seems to have 108 chapters. There were also other texts/documents which cited portions of the pseudo-pigraphica Enoch showing that the book existed. But w/ such small amount of text, it must be emphasized that it is unknown how the complete book read in Aramaic. Most scholars date the pseudo-pigraphica Enoch to circa 300 B.C. and 100 B.C. chronological time frame. There are larger portions of the book that survived in Greek, but again, not nearly the whole. Also they date from a later period (after the church was founded by Jesus & His Apostles). The only whole version are the Ethiopian translations and additionally, a comparison of the Ethiopian translations to the Aramaic and Greek fragments show the Ethiopian translation is fairly, but not entirely, accurate. Most integritous scholars express that the pseudo-pigraphica Enoch, as it currently exists, is a fairly disjointed work and additionally, it doesn’t have a unifying flow, such as would be found in the writings of one author and it generally, it is agreed to be a composition of several works by multiple authors, but exactly who wrote which portions and what time frames in which places, is heavily debated, which only further lends difficulty in trusting the veracity of it’s authors.

    I myself after reading parts of it counted 52 times on one page alone in terms of historical accuracy alone.

    When defenders of the pseudo-pigraphica Enoch quote from Iude/Jude 14-15, they don’t seem to notice that Iude/Jude doesn’t state he is quoting from the pseudo-pigraphica Enoch. Neither do they seem to notice that since multiple Enochs are mentioned in the Holy Bible, Iude/Jude doesn’t clarify which Enoch he’s referring to in an indirect way. Some ask, how could Iude/Jude know what Enoch stated 4000 years later?. Simple, Iude/Jude is inspired by God/Jesus Canon, so therefore God/Jesus told Him (1Corinthians 2:12-13). It’s the same reason how Moses, ascribed to the be writer of Genesis, was able to write of people lived hundreds of years before him.

    There is much more that could be mentioned but here are some other things to consider; Those who defendof pseudo-pigraphica Enoch get excited about this line in the pseudo-pigraphica Enoch;

    Enoch 1:9: “And behold! He cometh wih then 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.”

    …so they get excited about these verses thinking Iude/Jude MUST be quoting from the psuedo-pigraphica of Enoch! Please note though, it is not a literal reproduction,m even allowing for multiple translations. Also, Iude/Jude states that God will judge all and convict the ungodly among them. In pseudo-pigraphica Enoch it states God is judging all and will convict all of their ungodliness. Not quite the same. Further to this, quite interestingly, none of the fragments Aramaic or Greek, contain Enoch 1:9.

    Again there is more than can be stated.. but this should warn it’s readers not to take Judean fables as Biblical Canon.

    1. Ephraim

      Hi GODS people will you expand on this watches who are they how many hours a day and night they watch?

      1. Julia Blum

        Hi Ephraim, this is a good question. Even though we can say that the term “Watchers” is a biblical one, in fact it appears only in the book of Daniel in the Bible (Daniel 4: 13, 17, 23). There they are called “the holy ones” – and consequently, in Daniel they are “good” angels. The Watchers story of 1 Enoch, as you know by now, is an expansion of the episode described in Genesis 6: 1– 4: “Watchers” is the Enochian term for the “sons of God” in Genesis – and here they are bad and rebellious angels, responsible for the spread of the evil on the earth.

    2. Julia Blum

      Thank you for your detailed comment, Junior. You are right, 1 Enoch is part of a grouping of ancient works that scholars call the Pseudepigrapha. However, this term does not mean “false writings” regarding the content; it doesn’t mean that the content of these books is altogether false. Rather, as dr. Heiser writes, “the term refers to the practice of producing written works and then assigning their authorship to someone (real or imagined) other than the actual author”. This practice was very common in the ancient world, and pseudepigrapha has to be distinguished carefully from literary forgeries. Well-known New Testament scholar D. A. Carson writes: “A literary forgery is a work written or modified with the intent to deceive. All literary forgeries are pseudepigraphical, but not all pseudepigrapha are literary forgeries”.

    3. Merrill

      Junior,
      No one is saying that the book of Enoch should be included in the Canon or that it is “inspired Scripture”. It is however highly instrumental in helping us to understand the 1st Century Jewish mindset. I suggest you read Unseen Realm.
      Dr. Heiser provides abundant scholarship to support the importance of Enoch for informing our understanding of both the Old Testament and the New.

      1. Junior

        @Merril With all due honour, i am not one who is a rookie with such histories, but one who is well seasoned in studying, learning, investigating and testing like metal such histories and am a student of the Biblical Hebrew and Greek who wasn’t born speaking English which lends much help in understanding why English is unable to capture the full density, richness, gamut and depth of non-English languages like Biblical Hebrew and Greek. It doesn’t seem you have comprehended my post correctly and ignored quite the important points i mentioned of how many times the text directly contradicts the Holy Bible in many places chronologically, exegetically, historically and contextually etc. It is established fact that there are scholars who claim it should be included in the Canon of the Holy Bible and that it is “inspired Scripture”, which is why i pointed out what i did in what i typed out, which you seem to have missed.

        I disagree strongly it’s ‘highly instrumental in helping us to understand the 1st Century Jewish mindset” since Jesus the Christ who is God Incarnate, gave me His Holy Writ which is both the Old and New Covenant and that is quite the prime source of what anyone needs to comprehend the non born again and born again Israelite mindset (not “Jew’ish”, seeing as how the 1980 “Jew’ish” Almanac on page 3 states “Strictly speaking it is incorrect to call an ancient Israelite a ‘Jew’ or to call a contemporary ‘Jew’ an Israelite or a Hebrew” and since Israeli Schlomo Sand has a very interesting book titled “The Invention of the Jew’ish People”). Secondly i strongly disagree also that it is ‘instrumental’ in assisting to comprehending the 1st century mindset of the Israelite when that mindset you refer to was unsaved thus diametrically opposed more often than not to what Jesus and the Apostles taught since that mindset loved Judean fables which is why i quoted 1Timothy1:4, Titus 1:14, 2Peter1:16 because such mindsets of the unsaved Israelite were heavily influenced by Pharisaical Rabbinic traditions (Judean fables) hence why Jesus declared;

        Mar 7:6 He answered and said unto them, Well hath Esaias prophesied of you hypocrites, as it is written, This people honoureth me with their lips, but their heart is far from me.
        Mar 7:7 Howbeit in vain do they worship me, *teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.*
        Mar 7:8 For laying aside the commandment of God, *ye hold the tradition of men,* as the washing of pots and cups: and many other such like things ye do.
        Mar 7:9 And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, *that ye may keep your own tradition.*

        ..which is also why Jesus had the harshest words for the Pharisee’s and why He taught to call no man “Rabbi” but Him. Thirdly i strongly disagree that It is highly instrumental in helping us to understand the 1st Century Israelite mindset as if such an unsaved mindset w/ it’s contradictory parts to what the Holy Bible OT and NT actually taught that somehow such a mindset has supposedly something good to add to what Jesus taught when Jesus never taught that the remnant elect born again believer should look to unsaved Israelites and their views who openly rejected Jesus, as some source of something beneficial to add on to Jesus’ teachings. Where it is instrumental is in the sense to see how such an unsaved opposed mindset of the unsaved Israelite thought who was enamoured with Judean fables which wasn’t in line with what Jesus actually taught as Father God in the Old Covenant and God Incarnate in the New Covenant.

        As for Heiser, i’m well familiar with his work, and once again i strongly disagree that his ‘abundant scholarship’ in the area of pseudopigraphica Enoch should be treated with such high regard as though it supposedly according to the non-born again has such importance for comprehending the Old and New Covenant when i have Jesus (God) for that to teach me all things by His Spirit and guide me into all truth as i do my history studies like He promised He would, and when Jesus never taught me to hold in high regard the views of the very people who according to Jesus promote the same Pharisaical traditions and views He rebuked most harshly proving such men are not true born again remnant sheep for they preach another Gospel, thus another Jesus and have put a curse on themselves (Galatians 1:7-9). Sure there are things i can glean from Heiser but it doesn’t mean what he puts forth is something that Jesus the Christ would approve of.

        Selah.

        1. Jack Webb

          Material need not be divinely inspired to be of use in understanding a biblical passage. We have secular records that give us details about the ancient world which shed light on many things, fragments of written texts that we look to in order to better understand something in Scripture. We know about Rome and Roman life from secular records, not just what the Bible says about them. We’ve learned about ancient cities mentioned in Scripture from archeological finds, haven’t we?

          Secular records tell us about the reigns of ancient kings and battles recorded in the Bible, don’t they? We don’t reject those records because they’re not part of the Scriptural canon. Enoch is part of the literature from that time which purports to spell out more details of the events of Gen 6, and unless that accounting contradicts what Gen 6 says, there’s every reason to use it.

          We have no idea what Jesus did before age 12, or between age 12 and about age 30 or so. What if we found a work that, from all appearances, filled in much of that authoritatively? Would you automatically reject it because “it’s not in the Bible”? If it helped explain other biblical truths, I’d probably consider it useful…even if I didn’t call it inspired.

          Those who hold their hands over their ears when someone seeks information about a biblical reference from a non-biblical source are going to have a limited understanding of not just the biblical world, but of the whole world.