Tertullian (see article) makes the case for why the Enochian manuscript should not be dismissed as post-Flood.
Though the argument is coherent, other church leaders opposed it for various other reasons. This is reflected in the nearly 4 centuries it took for Jude to finally be accepted as scripture. Even Orogen, though initially endorsing it, after further review rejected it as scripture.
To that the article adds astronomy in Enoch which would not seem to find roots in an anti-Hellenistic society such as the Essenes
Being rather close to science type stuff, this understates the Jewish appreciation for astronomy. Job cites how God ‘suspends the earth over nothing’ (Job 26:7), during a period when the earth was described by many cultures as being held up by elephants, turtle, or Atlas. The other astronomic references are very sketchy at best.
Before the Dead Sea Scroll discovery, those references were taken to mean that Enoch was written by Christians. Scholars start with the presumption that if the document refers to an actual historical event, it must have been written after the event occurred, i.e. that prophesy is impossible on principle of "methodological naturalism."
While preference to the document is correct, that is only good if nothing else about it runs counter to it. In the case of Enoch, the portions most commonly considered ‘Christian’ are the Simlitudes. These are absent from the DSS cave four materials of Enoch. This has caused many to conclude that Similtudes were written post 70AD. These are the sources for the referred ‘direct quotes’ of enoch proponents.
The material is compatible with Scripture - providing one is not reading Scripture with theological presuppositions and understands allegory and metaphorical language (like the book of Revelation and Daniel.)
Enoch has some sever short comings in its compatability with scripture, even Similitudes. Nowhere in Similitudes is the atonement mentioned, Christ’s sacrifice or resurrection even addressed. The famous ‘son of man’ correlations come to a conclusion with the angels telling Enoch he was the ‘son of man’ mentioned over and over again. Other incompatabilities include:
An angel (demon) teaching men to write with ink and paper, thus causing them to sin. Chapter 40:9-10
Another angel who acts as a door keep to salvation and eternal life Chapter 69:8-12
The ‘son of man’ being named by the ancient of days Chapt 48:2
The terminology for Christ in Enoch is "the Elect One" which is the same terminology used in the original Greek in Luke 9:35 to describe Christ, i.e. God tells us that He is the Elect One, hear Him.
This challenges the story that God used those words and forces an Enochian interpretation on the basis of this word – from Similtudes – that argumentatively may not have existed at the time of the writing of Luke or Matt who uses the same.
Essentially, the Jews rejected Enoch out-of-hand after Christ being enfleshed, because it was obvious that it was speaking of Him.
That is an assumption that FF Bruce took Tertullian to task for. This doesn’ t mesh with what IS known – portions of Enoch are as old as 3d century bc and known to the Jews prior to Christ. The LXX excluded it (160 BCish) from not only scripture but apocrypha as well. Respected it, yes, but didn’t believe it to be inspired – recognizing it was pseudographic – not written by Enoch to begin with.
The Church rejected Enoch along with other apocalyptic ancient manuscripts (e.g. the Epistle of Barnabas) - to discourage Christians from expecting Christ to return any moment (2 Peter 3:9) - and because some leaders were loathe to speak of angels.
Not a reason I am aware of, interesting.
As a final remark, I do not consider Enoch to be Scripture - but rather insight to Scripture. The manuscript itself is not preserved as a single text at Qumran and thus segments of it remain suspect of later dating.
Agree, provides great insight to the thinking of the intertestamental Jewish nation, but to go farther as some would is reckless.
The oldest reference we could find for modern astronomy suggested by Enoch, outside Enoch, was from Greece, ca 450 B.C. Anaxagores of Clazomenae – on the point of the moon’s light being a reflection of the sun’s light.
Charlesworth sums up the Messianic parts of Enoch as follows:
This description is placed in the Similitudes in the context of reflections upon the last judgment, the coming destruction of the wicked, and the triumph of the righteous ones. This eschatological concept is the most prominent and recurring theme throughout the whole book. The very introduction (1-5) opens with an announcement of the final, coming punishment, the destruction of the wicked ones, and the resurrection of the righteous ones to an endless and sinless eternal life. Likewise, in the Dream Visions (83-90) the same theme is recalled. In this case, the righteous dead, including converted gentiles, will be resurrected, the Messiah will appear, his kingdom will be founded, and the new Jerusalem established; on the other hand, the sinners, the fallen angels, including the apostate Jews, will be judged. The last major section of 1 Enoch (91-105) is an admonition to righteousness, for he predicts that the wicked shall be condemned to eternal punishment in Sheol, whereas the righteous shall have a blessed resurrection to enjoy the bliss of heaven.
That being the case, I see it more akin to the dispute between the Catholic Church and the Reformers – which is to say, the Reformers wanted to remove the influence of the Church itself from the beliefs, go back to the roots so to speak. Thus they rejected the LXX and went with the Masoretic, rejected extra-Biblical traditions, etc.
Of course, by then, 1 Enoch had been purged by both the Jews and the Catholic Church. The Essenes had preserved it unknown to the outside world until the Dead Sea Scrolls. Only the Ethiopians kept it "alive" until it was discovered by the Western world in the late 1700's.
In other words, the history of the manuscript cuts both ways.
“To that the article adds astronomy in Enoch which would not seem to find roots in an anti-Hellenistic society such as the Essenes
Being rather close to science type stuff, this understates the Jewish appreciation for astronomy. Job cites how God ‘suspends the earth over nothing’ (Job 26:7), during a period when the earth was described by many cultures as being held up by elephants, turtle, or Atlas. The other astronomic references are very sketchy at best.”
Job was not a Jew.
Job has in it many things which are comments on what Enoch has written, and reading Enoch will explain the comments in Job. Just as Revelation has many things in it which are the end of the things Enoch first prophesied were to come, in the end of days. Enoch sees the same scene in heaven that John does, but Enoch saw the scene pre-incarnation and John saw it post incarnation and post ascension.
Job had read about His Redeemer who lived in heaven and who was to come and who would stand on the earth in the last day, and who would resurrect his dead body after it was destroyed, and that he -Job- would see Him -His Redeemer- with his own resurrected eyes.
Job did not read that in Moses, as Moses was not around then.
Job did read that in Enoch.
The ancient Jews claimed that Job was the descendent of Esau and the second chief of Edom -I think it was, the Jobab listed as Esau’s descendent.
Job 19:25 For I know [that] my redeemer liveth, and [that] he shall stand at the latter/last [day] upon the earth:
Job 19:26 And [though] after my skin [worms] destroy this [body], yet in my flesh shall I see God:
Whom I shall see for myself, and mine eyes shall behold, and not another; [though] my reins be consumed within me.