SIDEBAR 8: 1 ENOCH
SIDEBAR 8: 1 ENOCH
1 Enoch is not Apocrypha as defined for this book (because it is not accepted as Scripture by modern Catholics, and I do not have space to do it full justice), but it still relates to our inquiry, since it speaks to whether or not the Apostles actually limited their Scriptures to the 22-Book Protestant/Jewish canon. First, recall this observation from Don Stewart at the Blue Letter Bible website (the logical error of which is discussed in Sidebar 4 above):
No other book outside of the Hebrew canon is ever cited with the formula, “Thus says the Lord,” “It is written,” or “Scripture says.” While some non-canonical writings may have been alluded to by the New Testament writers, these works are never quoted as Scripture or as having some sort of divine authority. This is further testimony that the extent of the Hebrew canon was clear to everyone at the time of Christ.[1]
And yet the Epistle of Jude says:
14 Enoch … prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints, 15To 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.
So, the Epistle of Jude quotes a book (called 1 Enoch) and says the words of the quote had been “prophesied” by Enoch, the purported author of the Book.[2] Stewart of course rejects 1 Enoch, and goes through several attempts to argue that Jude rejected it too:
[1 Enoch and others] …are not called “Scripture.” Neither are they introduced with such phrases as “God said,” “the Holy Spirit said,” or “it is written.” Therefore, we learn two important truths: First, the writers of the New Testament were aware of other written works apart from the Old Testament Scripture. However, though they knew of them, alluded to them, and perhaps quoted from them, they never cited them as divinely authoritative Scripture. This again demonstrates the distinction between the Scriptures and all other writings.[3]
But notice how Stewart speaks of 1 Enoch as one of the “other written works apart from the Old Testament Scripture” when the question is whether 1 Enoch was one of those Scriptures, at least to Jude. This is circular reasoning of course, and begs the question of whether quoting 1 Enoch as “Prophecy” was a fourth way that a Divinely inspired Evangelist identified Scripture.
After all, Stewart told us that the Book of Jeremiah is Scripture because:
Matthew cites a passage from Jeremiah the prophet (Jeremiah 31:15). This is in the context of the slaughter of the innocents in Bethlehem. He wrote:
Then was fulfilled what was spoken by Jeremiah the prophet, saying: “…” (Matthew 2:17-18 NKJV)
Jeremiah’s authority is assumed in the New Testament.
Jude also cites a passage from Enoch the Prophet—so Enoch’s authority is likewise “assumed” in the New Testament, by any fair standard.[4]
Next among Stewart’s attempted explanations for 1 Enoch:
… it is possible that Jude is not citing from the Book of Enoch, but rather from a common source that he, as well as the writer of the Book of Enoch, had access. Indeed, some have argued that the quotation is similar but not the same as found in the Book of Enoch. There are some minor differences between the two statements.[5]
Most New Testament citations do not perfectly match the exact words of the Old Testament. In fact, the proof he offered above where Stewart says that Matthew “cites” Jeremiah does not actually involve Matthew quoting Jeremiah. The Apologetics Study Bible says “Matthew loosely translated the Hebrew of Jeremiah 31:15;” he did not quote it.
…Even if Jude is citing from the Book of Enoch, he is not treating the entire writing as divinely inspired, or for that matter, even true. All he is doing is citing one statement from this work. Thus, what we have is Jude citing a truthful statement in a written work which contains truth mixed with error. There is nothing in his citation that indicates Jude believed the Book of Enoch to be divinely inspired.
Of course, Stewart himself wrote an entire essay claiming that New Testament citations of a single verse assure us that every single word of each Old Testament book is inerrant Divinely-inspired truth. I noted a few situations earlier, so just to pick one more example, “These Four Books May Be Alluded To: In fact, there is some evidence that these four books were considered divinely inspired.”—i.e., mere allusions to one statement in a work could prove that the entire work is Divinely inspired, he says, let alone actual quotations as Prophecy.
Jude says Enoch prophesied about the coming of the Lord. This verb, to prophesy, is used some twenty-eight times in the New Testament. However, on only two occasions, Mark 7:6 and First Peter 1:10, does it refer to predictions found in the Old Testament canon. All of the other references are to prophetic utterances which did not find their way into the canon of Scripture. To the New Testament writers, prophesying was not limited to canonical Scripture. There were valid prophetic utterances made which were not recorded in the Scripture. Therefore, it is consistent with the rest of the Bible that Enoch could make a valid prophetic utterance, which was not part of canonical Scripture, but could still be true.
Stewart appears to be distinguishing between the verb “to prophesy” and the noun “prophecy,” given that, in the above analysis, he himself seems to accept translations of the noun “prophecy” to mean Scripture. Otherwise, I do not want to be accused of showing off my fluency in Koine Greek, so I will just assume his linguistic details are correct.
However, how many of his 28 examples were quotes taken from pre-existing books?[6] Of course, the answer is exactly three: this quote from 1 Enoch plus the two examples he mentions where the New Testament quotes to Divinely-inspired Scripture. Lumping those three similar examples in with the other 25 dissimilar examples is not false, but it does not lead one to truth either. You can trust me on this, as much as you should trust my Greek translations—after all, I did my Ivy League Doctoral Thesis in Statistics.[7]
The other utterances “did not find their way into the canon of Scripture” because they were not written down prior to the New Testament, and thus there is no writing that could have found its way into the canon. But every single Prophecy quoted in the New Testament that had been previously written down came from canonical Scripture, except with this quote to 1 Enoch.
Consider also how apologists explain Matthew 2:23 (that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophets, He shall be called a Nazarene). From Geisler and Howe, When Critics Ask:
“[Problem:] Didn’t Matthew make a mistake by claiming a prophecy that is not found in the OT?…[Solution:] Matthew did not say that any particular OT “prophet” (singular) stated this. He simply affirmed that the OT “prophets” (plural) predicted that Jesus would be called a Nazarene. So we should not expect to find any given verse, but simply a general truth found in many prophets to correspond to His Nazarene-like character. There are several suggestions…”
Notice how Matthew’s reference to the Prophets is understood by even apologists to be a clear reference to the Old Testament Scriptures. Notice further that even though it says the Prophesy was “spoken” by such Prophets then it is understood by all that it will therefore be found in writing in the Old Testament Scriptures. Notice the conspicuous absence of the idea that Prophecy and the Old Testament Scriptures are completely unrelated. Etc.
As it is, Jude quoted the words of a Book purporting to be written by a Patriarch, and Jude declares it Prophecy—which is also what 1 Enoch declares itself to be: “The words of the blessing of Enoch … whose eyes were opened by God, saw the vision of the Holy One in the heavens, which the angels showed me, and from them I heard everything, and from them I understood as I saw, but not for this generation, but for a remote one which is for to come. Concerning the elect I said, and took up my parable concerning them: …” Jude skipped over eight verses and selected verse 9 of Chapter 1, after which the Book goes on for 108 chapters, all of which are “Enoch” Prophesying.
… Jude quoted Enoch, not the Book of Enoch. How well the Book of Enoch reproduced Enoch’s actual words is not relevant. Both the Book of Enoch, as well as Jude, basically say the same thing.
Jude and Enoch say the same thing because Jude quoted 1 Enoch. Stewart had no problem concluding that “The writer to the Hebrews quotes the Book of Joshua (Joshua 1:5) as Scripture. He cited it in the following manner: “… for he has said, “I will never leave you …”” If we took Stewart’s 1 Enoch standard seriously, then the author of Hebrews quoted nothing, he merely notes that someone (not even Joshua) said it, and the fact that it can be found in the Book of Joshua is a random coincidence that proves nothing.
Moving on, consider what When Critics Ask by Geisler and Howe has to say about Jude:
… the external evidence for Jude is extensive from the time of Irenaeus (ca. A.D. 170) onward. It is in the Bodmer papyri (P72) of A.D. 250, and traces of it are found even earlier in the Didache (2:7) which probably dates from the second century. So there is evidence for the authenticity of the Book of Jude …
Neither Kruger, nor F.F. Bruce (quoted in the above discussion re: Irenaeus), nor I, nor even Wikipedia consider the possible reference by Irenaeus to Jude as worth mentioning. For the record, however, it is:
And it was He who rained fire and brimstone from heaven, in the days of Lot, upon Sodom and Gomorrah, “an example of the righteous judgment of God,” that all may know, “that every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit shall be cut down…”
The part that tracks Jude is just Sodom and Gomorrah as “an example of the righteous judgment of God;” the other, longer quotation is from Matthew 3:10. So that is matching eight words, and it is in the same context, so that may, indeed, qualify as an allusion; however, Jude is not the only place to find Sodom and Gomorrah mentioned, and the wording that matches is the sort of thing that might be an accidental match. So, it is not a clear allusion.
For comparison, Jude’s citation to 1 Enoch is a quote of 47 words. Geisler and Howe tell us that “First, it is not certain that Jude is actually citing the Book of Enoch…”—and that is with a 47-word quote specifically mentioning Enoch. And yet they determine that Irenaeus is certainly citing Jude from just eight words with no mention of this “Jude” person, let alone a Book, or even an indication that the author is actually quoting something.
As for the Didache, it could only be making an allusion. 2:7 says “You shall not hate any man; but some you shall reprove, and concerning some you shall pray, and some you shall love more than your own life,” which might be alluding to Jude 1:23: “And others save with fear, pulling them out of the fire; hating even the garment spotted by the flesh.” There are far stronger allusions to Apocrypha in the Bible, let alone in the Didache.[8]
The key takeaway, as usual, is that Geisler and Howe think that allusions are solid evidentiary support for the acceptance of the entire Epistle of Jude as Scripture, without even a reference to the name Jude or a declaration that it is Prophecy; etc. Yet like Stewart and others, they simultaneously try to claim that the extensive and explicit quote from 1 Enoch as “Prophecy” made in that Divinely inspired Epistle of Jude is not clear evidence of anything.
Whether 1 Enoch actually is or should be Scripture is not my present concern.[9] But this reference is one more piece of Biblical evidence, and it should be considered when judging the claim that “the extent of the Hebrew canon was clear to everyone at the time of Christ.”
Finds at Qumran evidence that some Jews considered 1 Enoch Scripture. Which Jews, and whether they were in power, or in the majority, are interesting but irrelevant questions. The relevant question is whether the evidence including the Epistle indicates that Jude the Divinely inspired Evangelist was such a Jew, and whether his audience and peers were as well. The words of Scripture written by Jude himself certainly seem to indicate that they were, and even if you could prove that other Jews held to a limited canon, what evidence overrules Jude’s own words with respect to himself?
A generation after Jude’s death (martyred in Beirut by axe in 65 AD, per traditional accounts), Josephus will claim that the Jewish canon is limited to a number of Books (22). This is the main piece of evidence used to claim that the 22 Book canon is not just what the Jews accepted, but what the Evangelists accepted—even Jude. The Divinely-inspired words of Jude are not considered evidence that Josephus did not speak for Jude; instead the much later words of Josephus (who himself claimed to be Divinely-inspired) are the text used to overrule the plain meaning of the inerrant Scripture of Jude the Evangelist.
The Scriptural evidence is not ambiguous or hard to interpret; it is perfectly straightforward. This situation has parallels, and all were interpreted the exact same way, over and over: it is a reference to Scripture and authenticates the work as Scripture. Paul quoting a poem does not mean Paul saw the poem as Scripture—but Paul did not say the words quoted were “Prophecy,” and the words are not from a Book purportedly written by a legendary Patriarch from Sacred history, one who Paul says “by faith was translated that he should not see death; because he pleased God.” (Hebrews 11:5).
In addition, Jude referenced 1 Enoch as prophecy in an Epistle that “condemns in fierce terms certain people the author sees as a threat to the early Christian community … these opponents are within the Christian community, but are not true Christians: they are scoffers, false teachers…”[10] So, in the midst of writing a letter condemning false teaching among Christians, Jude pulled out 1 Enoch and quoted it as Prophecy. That seems inexplicable if “the extent of the Hebrew canon was clear to everyone at the time of Christ.”
Also, why would Jude even own these works if he did not consider them Scripture? We know how expensive these things were, and here he quotes an expensive Book that clearly speaks “as if” it were Scripture—a Book found at Qumran (evidencing that some Jews considered it Scripture), a Book accepted and used as Scripture by both Jews and Christians long after Christ.[11]
1 Enoch played an important role in Jewish mysticism both before and after Christ, still being cited by Rabbis in the eighth century. Josephus and Philo both used 1 Enoch to explain Genesis 6:1-5 (…There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God 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…). Some of the earliest Christian works explicitly call it Scripture, including the Epistle of Barnabas (latest date 135 AD, but the dating range goes back to 40 AD).[12] Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Athenagoras, Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian, and Origen all use it as Scripture, sometimes designating it Prophecy, Divinely inspired, etc.
Moreover, Jude’s audience apparently could be expected to recognize the quotation and agree that he was quoting authentic Prophecy. And Jude also makes an extensive allusion to another work called the Assumption of Moses: corroborating evidence showing Jude’s and his audience’s way of thinking. Again, the illiterate could be expected to recognize all this, meaning 1 Enoch was being read aloud to them. And it is not the kind of work that would be read except as Scripture, as anyone can see for themselves by trying to read it.
The idea that Jude actually held to a strict 22-Book canon and somehow quoted from 1 Enoch without accepting 1 Enoch, is simply not the plain meaning of the words of Jude, as proven in numerous other instances where no one forces fanciful readings onto similar passages.
And not to be forgotten, many believe that Jude was another Brother of the Lord, since he begins his Epistle by calling himself the brother of James (and Jude the Brother of the Lord is mentioned with James the Brother of the Lord in Matthew 13:55 and Mark 6:3).[13] There are two Epistles possibly from Brothers of the Lord, and only two such Epistles. One is from James and seems to reference Sirach an astonishing number of times, and one is from Jude and quotes 1 Enoch as Prophecy. If the writer of James was his brother, regardless of whether they were brothers of Jesus, then that too would support the conclusion that Jude saw 1 Enoch as Scripture.
Earlier, we discussed the standard of proof:
“Many proofs of Christianity can be shown, and proofs have been given over and over again. Evidences can be given, but is that the real issue? Do those who reject the Bible refuse to believe because the evidence is not convincing? … lack of information is not the problem. Nor is lack of evidence the problem. The reason for unbelief is simple. Unbelievers start from the presupposition that the claims of the Bible are not true.”[14]
The eye witness testimony of the Gospels is clear and convincing evidence. As long as that is the standard of proof, Christianity wins the case. But the Epistle of Jude is also clear and convincing evidence that the canon of the Evangelists was not limited to the 22-Book canon. The Apologetics Study Bible admits why they do not accept the evidence as proof:
… the book of 1 Enoch was in circulation in Jude’s day and was well known in Jewish circles. Jude almost certainly derived the citation from the book of 1 Enoch, and the latter is clearly pseudepigraphical. We would be faced with having to say that Jude knew that this specific quotation from 1 Enoch derived from the historical Enoch. It is better to conclude that Jude quoted the pseudepigraphical 1 Enoch and that he also believed that the portion he quoted represents God’s truth. Jude’s wording does not demand that he thought he had an authentic oracle from the historical Enoch.
“Does not demand” is not a standard of proof based on the evidence. It is a demand that one’s opponent disprove one’s presupposition.
[1] www.blueletterbible.org/Comm/stewart_don/faq/right-books-in-old-testament/question17-new-testament-quote-old-testament.cfm
[2] 1 Enoch says: “And behold! He cometh with ten thousands of His holy ones to execute judgement 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.” www.ccel.org/c/charles/otpseudepig/enoch/ENOCH_1.HTM
[3] www.blueletterbible.org/Comm/stewart_don/faq/right-books-in-old-testament/question18-new-testament-old-testament.cfm
[4] Especially since Stewart also told us that “Malachi is believed to be God’s prophet,” showing the entire Book of Malachi to be Scripture, even though Matthew does not even quote from it (he just alludes to it). And the Book of Zechariah is Scripture, Stewart says, because Matthew 21:4-5 quotes a single verse of it as Prophecy (without naming the Prophet): “This important prophecy was cited on Palm Sunday. Zechariah was, indeed, God’s prophet.” Etc.
[5] www.blueletterbible.org/Comm/stewart_don/faq/books-missing-from-old-testament/question11-new-testament-quote-writings.cfm?a=1167014
[6] It had been claimed that 1 Enoch must have copied from Jude, but that was disproven. They have found copies of 1 Enoch from before Christ, so that fanciful explanation did not survive.
[7] My doctorate is a law degree; our theses are a joke compared to a PhD’s; and my focus was on uncovering lies told with statistics, not actually conducting PhD-level statistical analyses. So I am indeed an expert on the topic of misleadingly lumping disparate things together.
[8] E.g., Didache 4.5 “Be not a stretcher forth of the hands to receive and a drawer of them back to give.” www.newadvent.org/fathers/0714.htm. Sirach 4:31 “Let not thine hand be stretched out to receive, and shut when thou shouldest repay.”
[9] The canon lists do not support 1 Enoch; but the later Church’s views are not our present concern, which is just whether the Epistle shows that Jude accepted 1 Enoch.
[10] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epistle_of_Jude
[11] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reception_of_the_Book_of_Enoch_in_premodernity
[12] Barnabas 4:3: The last offence is at hand, concerning which the scripture speaketh, as Enoch saith… www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/barnabas-lightfoot.html. What Enoch saith can be found at 1 Enoch 80:2: www.ccel.org/c/charles/otpseudepig/enoch/ENOCH_3.HTM.
[13] Kruger sees the case for Jude being the brother of James and Jesus as compelling, p. 270. Among other things, the very fact that the Epistle of Jude was preserved would seem to be based more on the importance of the author than the contents.
[14] www.everlastingtruths.com/2016/02/26/do-people-not-believe-the-bible-because-of-a-lack-of-evidence/
