Shalom everyone,
During the 1990s, when I was doing research for The Exhortations, a few people wanted me to include the Book of Enoch. However, after having fully read its contents from cover to cover, digested its beliefs, and researched its origins, I ended up having to completely ignore the Book of Enoch. What I didn’t realise at the time though, was just how instrumental the Book of Enoch was in introducing so many pagan ideas into Second Temple Judaism (hell, Satan, fallen angels etc).
With regards to genuine, scholarly studies on the Book of Enoch, it is extraordinarily difficult to find anything academic and unbiased on the topic; I had to delve deep to find out which writers were widely acknowledged and respected in the field of Enochian research. The internet, on the other hand, seems to be full of all kinds of wild, speculative and conspiratorial theories, mostly by people who know little of the history and culture of the time period involved. The modern internet community loves good conspiracy theories!
The personal beliefs of the Methodist theologian Margaret Barker seem to be the sole point of origin for most of these theories (she believes that the Enoch literature comes from the pre-Exile Hebrew religion, whereas most scholars would say that the Enoch literature comes from post-Exile Jewish contact with Mesopotamian religions – see below). Her aim is to prove, through her singularly unique interpretation of the Hebrew Bible, that trinitarian beliefs were part of the original Hebrew faith.
But what would you say to an internet conspiracy theorist? What can anyone possibly say? This is the probable reason why the ancient rabbis said nothing about the Book of 1Enoch – they may have decided that it was better to say nothing, in order to contain the spread of its non-Jewish ideas. What we can say, is that it is a collection of sectarian, apocalyptic and messianic writings that greatly influenced Paul of Tarsus and the first Gentile Christians.
So what can I myself say? All I can realistically do is present the facts of history and Jewish culture, explain objectively why I am not enamoured of the Book of Enoch, and let my piece remain at that – I fully accept the fact that people will disagree with my view, and that’s OK.
The Scope of this article, and what it covers
Since supporters of the books of Enoch claim that the original Israelite religion had no Torah, in this lengthy article I will therefore need to examine the development of the books of the Torah first, and then I will examine what prompted the birth of apocalyptic literature; then I will examine what prompted the writing of 1Enoch itself, and delve into the peculiarities of Enochian Judaism; also, why the actions and words of Yeshua and James prove they were not Enochians or anti-Temple, but that Paul and early Gentile Christianity definitely seem to have been heavily influenced by the Enochians; and I conclude with the reasons why I am wary of the books of Enoch. It’s a long article, but all of it is relevant to know, in order to understand why I don’t put any faith in the books of Enoch or Enochianism.
List of topics covered in this article:
— When was 1Enoch written?
— Torah versus 1Enoch
— Regarding the pro-Enochian claim that there was no Torah whatsoever before Josiah: The Book of Deuteronomy
— The other parts of Torah before King Josiah
— Who wrote 1Enoch?
— The peculiarities of Enochian Judaism
— Why was ‘Enoch’ written?
— How Jewish Apocalyptic Literature came about
— Alien, non-Yahwist thought in ‘Enoch’
— The religious Situation at the beginning of the Second Temple Period
— The hallmarks of Apocalyptic Literature
— Reasons why I am wary of the Book of Enoch
— The Influence of the Book of Enoch on Jewish thought
— Were Yeshua and James Enochians?
— Was God’s Presence absent from the Second Temple?
— How were the ideas in the Book of Enoch able to influence Paul?
— Summary of my personal view on the Book of Enoch
— Links to resources
When was it written?
I’m going to concentrate on 1Enoch, since 2Enoch and 3Enoch were written after the Second Temple period, and are not relevant to any discussion on the early community of the Way (in spite of what Margaret Barker claims – that they come from the pre-Exile First Temple period).
The general consensus is that the book of 1Enoch was not written by a single author. The view is that it was written by various authors, and the works collected together in the mid- to late 2nd century BCE.
Parts of Enoch have been found in Aramaic among the writings of the Qumran sect, but most of the existing book (2Enoch & 3Enoch) is in Greek and Ge’ez (an Ethiopian liturgical language). Going on the linguistic evidence, and other cultural clues in the book, the earliest date for the Book of 1Enoch is the 4th century BCE (about 350-301 BCE, such as for the first part, ‘The Book of Watchers’), and the latest is the 2nd century BCE (150-101 BCE for all the other parts). This period is in itself very significant for understanding the book, and the contents of the Book of Enoch prove it is very much the child of this specific period of turmoil and upheaval.
Analysis of the dialect and style of writing has been carried out by Josef T. Milik (with Matthew Black: ‘The Books of Enoch: Aramaic Fragments of Qumran Cave 4’, Oxford: Clarendon, 1976). The conclusion was that the Aramaic fragments of Enoch were written about 200-150 BCE.
If the fringe ideas in 1Enoch had been from the pre-Temple Israelite religion (as Margaret Barker claims), then there would be residual linguistic and cultural clues within the document itself, but there aren’t any. The clues that are present in the book, suggest influence from the Babylonian Jewish community who resided in Judea, between the 4th to the 2nd centuries BCE.
Torah versus 1Enoch
Before I examine 1Enoch itself, I’m going to address the claim that the original Israelite religion had no Torah (since Enochian Judaism did not seem to practice any form of Torah). If you are already familiar with the history of the Torah’s development, you can skip ahead to the section on, ‘Who wrote 1Enoch?’)
There are some people who claim that the book was written in strong opposition to the final redaction of the written Torah by Ezra in the 6th century BCE. However, if the Book of 1Enoch truly was written as a reaction to Ezra and the Written Torah, then we would have linguistic and cultural evidence within 1Enoch itself, dating it to the mid-Sixth century BCE, but there is none. We therefore have to look at the more likely period it was written in (mid-4th to mid-2nd century BCE).
There are others who claim that even the post-Sinai Israelites had no Torah – that Torah was a fictional invention of Josiah and Ezra. However, in David and Solomon’s time, there was a nascent, proto-Torah. The ‘Book of the Covenant’ in the Book of Exodus (chs 21-23) is the oldest part of Torah – its form of language dates it to at least the 13th century BCE; and in order for the Temple services during the First Temple to function, logically there needed to be some form of ritual guidance in place even in the 10th century BCE – this would have been an early form of proto-Leviticus. Any non-Torah form of Judaism (such as Enochian Judaism) therefore has to be of a very late, pagan-influenced origin.
The present Torah is a melding of sources from two geographic locations – the northern Kingdom of Israel, and the southern Kingdom of Judah. When Solomon’s Israel split into two after his death, Israel’s origin-narratives, its ritual laws and its ethical codes also split into two (the Deuteronomist [Dt] and Elohist [E] sources are from the north, and the Yahwist [J] and Priestly [P] sources are from the south).
When the northern kingdom fell to the Assyrians in 722 BCE, not all Ephrathites (northerners) were taken into captivity; some fled to the south, and settled in Jerusalem, eventually to completely assimilate with the Judeans. The existence of these diverse versions of Israel’s ritual laws and national oral history, and the pressing need to culturally integrate this influx of Ephrathite refugees, prompted the initial process of knitting the northern and southern traditions back together (see Who Wrote the Bible? by Richard E. Friedman).
Regarding the pro-Enochian claim that there was no Torah before Josiah: The Book of Deuteronomy
Some people who promote the Enochian absence of Torah, and view Torah as an unnecessary burden imposed on the Jewish people, say that it was King Josiah (reigned 640–609 BCE) who invented the Book of Deuteronomy, and that the other four books of Torah didn’t exist in any shape or form whatsoever before the time of Ezra (flourished: 480–440 BCE). However, scholars and experts in both ‘form criticism’ and ‘redaction criticism’ would have to disagree with these claims.
Proto-Deuteronomy (the earliest parts of Deuteronomy, in chs 6-32) is written in what academics call, ‘Israelian Hebrew’. This dialect of ancient Hebrew has been identified with the northern kingdom of Israel. The cultural references and concerns within this section share many commonalities with those expressed by the prophet Hosea during his ministry (he was active from about 780-722 BCE). The earliest redaction of proto-Deuteronomy has therefore been attributed by some scholars to Hosea. Just before the Assyrian sieges of Samaria in the late 8th century BCE, it was then probably brought by northern refugees to Jerusalem, and deposited for safekeeping in one of the storerooms of the Temple – and then forgotten.
Then we have the story of the later discovery of this version of proto-Deuteronomy a hundred years later, by the High Priest Hilkiah, in about the year 622 BCE. Because of the form of Hebrew language in the earliest parts of Deuteronomy, I personally believe that the account of the scroll’s discovery given in 2Kgs 22 is genuine. The young Josiah (who was only 26 years old when the scroll was discovered) was not the author of Deuteronomy, but rather the prophet Hosea (who himself probably reworked a yet earlier, existing version).
Incidentally, there are parts of Deuteronomy that date to even earlier than Hosea, such as the Song of Moses (ch 32). My overall conclusion is that before the revelation at Sinai, yes, Hebrews had no Torah, and I have openly said as much in previous articles. However, when Israel became a nation, Torah was given for us as a nation (you cannot have a lawful and orderly society – and have it survive against all odds – without some form of law). Some form of Torah has therefore been part of the Israelite faith since Sinai.
The other parts of Torah before King Josiah
Out of all the chapters in Leviticus, scholars generally agree that the oldest section is the ‘Holiness Code’ (chapters 17-26). Also, in order for the sacrificial system in the Temple to function properly, logically we would have to presume that there was already some kind of ritual, sacrificial code of law in place before Josiah, beginning at least from the time of the start of services in the First Temple in 957 BCE. In other words, there had to be some kind of proto-Leviticus at least by that time. Even before this, there must have been some kind of sacrificial code in place, used at the shrines at Bethel and Shiloh – again, there would logically have to have been some kind of primitive ritual code in place, to enable the system of offerings at these shrines to function properly.
With regard to the descriptions of the Tabernacle in Exodus (chapters 25-31, 35-39), most of the parts of the Tabernacle were still being used in these two aforementioned shrines, and once the Temple was built, the last shrine at Shiloh was dismantled – the beams, coverings, outer curtains and fenceposts would not have been needed in the Temple.
There is a lot about the institution and structure of the Tabernacle in the Torah which are not relevant to the structure of the Temple. Richard Friedman, in his book, ‘Who Wrote the Bible?’, posits that the reason why the descriptions of the constituent parts of the Tabernacle complex were so incredibly detailed, is because these parts were still being stored beneath Solomon’s Temple. Why embark upon the process of writing such long, detailed descriptions of all the parts of the structure of the Tabernacle, if these pre-Temple structures never existed, and if they were never used in building the Temple?
Furthermore, the likely reason why there are no instructions on how to put the parts of the Tabernacle together, is probably because the descriptions were written some while after the last shrine was dismantled (which would have contained these parts). This would mean that the descriptions of the Tabernacle parts and its furnishings were written after the construction of the First Temple, but before the composition of the amalgamated proto-Exodus after 740 BCE. A priest likely went down to the chambers beneath the Temple, where the parts were being stored, and wrote down careful, detailed descriptions of what he saw.
In his book, ‘The Bible with Sources Revealed’, Richard Friedman describes how each Israelite kingdom – the northern and the southern kingdoms – had their own version of history, narratives, ritual and ethical laws. These two versions were then knitted together after the fall of the northern kingdom, to form the proto-versions of Exodus and Numbers.
I would have to conclude that, any claim saying that Torah did not exist in any shape or form whatsoever before the time of Ezra, is not realistic. Yes, Ezra finalised the 5 books of Torah that we have today, but there were earlier forms of each book of Torah. Otherwise, a scholarly examination, using the form and redaction criticism techniques, should be able to conclude that Torah was written for the very first time by just one person in the 6th century BCE – but that is not what any reliable scholar of these disciplines conclude.
Who wrote 1Enoch?
1Enoch is a typical work of the apocalyptic genre. However, the Book of Daniel is the only work of the post-exile apocalyptic genre that has been accepted into the Hebrew Bible. I think the reason this happened was because, alone of all apocalyptic writings, it generally has a positive view on the end of the world, in line with other prophetic books (that the Jewish people and other righteous people will be purified by God and become heavenly beings, so that God’s Glory can dwell on earth, without harming humanity). The Book of Daniel was not written during the Babylonian Exile (in which it claims to have been written), but during the Hasmonean period, in the 2nd century BCE. The claim for an earlier time within the book itself, was probably done to get round the Pharisaic ban on all prophets after the Exile.
If the early date for 1Enoch is accepted (350-301 BCE), then we would have to examine the history of the period that led to the rise of Jewish apocalyptic literature (see below). If we accept the later date (150-101 BCE), then it could have been written by any fringe group opposed to the Temple hierarchy, including the Essenes. James VanderKam and others refer to non-Essene followers of the Book of Enoch as ‘Enochians’ or ‘Enochic Jews’. The sectarian belief system of the Book of Enoch is therefore ‘Enochianism’.
The peculiarities of Enochian Judaism
The main peculiar aspects of Enochic Judaism are the following (i.e. the things that are different from Common Judaism and all other ancient sects of Judaism):
— the idea of the origin of all evil caused by the fallen angels (i.e. not through Adam and Eve becoming aware of good and evil; the Enochian idea is similar to beliefs surrounding Babylonian demons),
— angels are all male, have sexual lusts and desires, and can procreate
— angels, not God, bring wisdom to humanity (like the Babylonian Apkallu: Bringers of Wisdom)
— hell, as a place of fire and eternal torment (Bk 1, ch 21, lines 7-9; ch 27, lines 2-3)
— Satan, as the lord of all evil (Bk 2, ch 54, line 6 – similar to the anti-god Ahriman in Persian Zoroastrianism)
— this present world is ruled by evil (similar to Gnosticism)
— God is merely a distant king who sits on a throne in heaven, demands praise from humanity, but has little interaction with human beings (like Ahura Mazda in Zoroastrianism)
— the absence of anything like the laws and commandments found in Torah; there is no Shabbat, no Covenant, no festivals and no circumcision (the word ‘commandments’ is only mentioned once in 1Enoch)
— no explicit reference to God’s social values, ethical principles, or how a society should be organised (there are references to ‘sin’, ‘unrighteousness’ and ‘ungodliness’, but not what those sins actually are – although idol-worship is alluded to three times, violence is mentioned in Bk 5, ch 91, lying is mentioned a couple of times)
— reference to ‘God’s righteous elect’, but doesn’t explain why they are considered righteous or elect (only that they praise God, and ‘walk the paths of peace’); and that the ungodly will perish, but doesn’t explain what they have done that causes them to be considered ungodly
— The ‘End of Days’ as the only time of final judgment and reward; there are no earthly rewards (as in Gnosticism)
— all non-Jews will burn in hell, along with the wicked among the Jews (Bk 5, ch 91, line 9)
— very little concern with the nature or manner of life on earth (because this world is ruled by evil – a belief borrowed from Gnosticism)
— the rejection of the Temple sacrifices and the Temple itself (similar to Essene belief)
— a solar calendar in opposition to the biblical lunar calendar; the result is that the calendar gets out of sync with the actual year by one day every year
Why was ‘Enoch’ written?
During the Second Temple Period, there were various groups opposed to Temple worship – who opposed it for various reasons. The ancestors of the Essenes opposed Temple worship, because they believed the line of official High Priesthood to have been corrupted. The Enochians opposed it, because they were likely reacting to the growing influence of Hellenism.
In the writings of the Qumran sect, they opposed someone they called, ‘the Wicked Priest’. This priest is never named, which has led some scholars to think that he wasn’t just one priest, but a whole successive line of priests – likely to have been the Hasmoneans. In Torah, a priest cannot be a king, and a king cannot be a priest, but the Hasmoneans (who were born priests) made themselves the kings of Judea, beginning with Jonathan Apphus (153-143 BCE).
When the dynasty of Hasmonean High Priests came to an end in 37 BCE, the line that took over – the Sadducees – were not viewed in any better light by the Essenes, so the title of ‘Wicked Priest’ was probably extended to them as well.
The circumstances that produced both the Essenes and the Enochians, all began with the introduction of Greek ways of thinking and living, which entered Jewish life after the conquest of Judea by Alexander the Great. It initiated an era of upheaval and unpleasant change for the Jewish people. Seeing all the tumultuous events going on around them, the original author of Enoch mixed together Jewish ‘end-times’ beliefs with Zoroastrian and Babylonian beliefs, to produce the biggest single work responsible for introducing pagan beliefs into Judaism. Both the Essenes and the Enochians responded to these tribulations with the idea of a soon-to-arrive apocalypse – that is, belief in a fast-approaching end to the world through violence and destruction, with salvation only for the chosen few, and hellfire for everyone else.
How Jewish Apocalyptic Literature came about
To understand the original seed or catalyst for apocalyptic literature during the Second Temple Period, you have to go back a bit, to the prophets of the First Temple Period. Leading up to the fall of the Northern Kingdom of Israel, there were various prophets who warned of a coming tribulation, such as Amos and Hosea. They warned of exile, if the Yahwist faith of Israel was not restored. Up until then, the Israelites had been firmly entrenched in their land, and they couldn’t believe that such a thing as exile could ever happen. Pagan Israelites were in the majority, and Yahwist Israelites were the minority (cf. the case of Elijah and the priests of Baal). Pagan Israelites had even given the God of Israel a wife, in feint imitation of how Baal had a wife (Asherah – apparently the same wife)!
In ancient times, the pagan gods of most peoples were geographically linked to their homeland. So when the Israelites were wrenched from their land – first the northern kingdom, and then the southern kingdom – the faithful Yahwists among the survivors had to find a way to explain their tragedy, and understand why they had been taken from their land (the constant harping in Torah about faithfulness and unfaithfulness might seem a boring and unnecessary refrain to us today, and we might have some difficulty in understanding why the Torah & the Prophets keep going on about them, but they were really important issues for the people back then).
The explanation they came up with to explain the Assyrian and Babylonian Exiles, was to examine the warnings of the pre-exile prophets, who had been warning – long before they ever happened – that if the Hebrew people continued to worship pagan gods, and continued to reject the social values and ethical principles of Yahveh, then Israel would be exiled – and this is what the survivors focussed on. This focus ensured that the post-exile population of Judea was entirely Yahwist, and not pagan.
The traumatising experience of the two Exiles profoundly coloured how the final version of Torah was edited, filled as it is with intermittent episodes of faithfulness and disobedience. The Israelians and Judeans who worshipped other gods all lost their identity, because there was nothing holding them together. However, those who maintained their loyalty to Yahveh survived, just as God promised. Before the Assyrian and Babylonian exiles, pagan Israelites were in the majority, but after the exile, Yahwist Judeans were in the majority.
Alien, non-Yahwist thought in ‘Enoch’
In her graduate thesis paper, ‘The Origins of Jewish Apocalyptic Literature: Prophecy, Babylon, and 1 Enoch’, Sarah Robinson, a graduate of the University of South Florida, wrote, “My thesis is that the earliest Jewish apocalyptic writing, the Book of Watchers, 1Enoch 1-36, was written as a result of the Babylonian Exile, and its authors syncretized the Hebrew prophetic books with Babylonian elements.” Chapter Four (from page 45) of her paper is an interesting read, examining the in-text evidence for a Babylonian footprint. She shows how the map of the world described in 1Enoch 77 is the same as the Babylonian map of the world.
I myself have long held the view that alien, non-Yahwist ideas (such as messianism, fallen angels, Satan, apocalypticism etc), entered into Judaism as a result of contact with Babylonian and Persian religion. You can read my article on the subject here. The Enochian calendar itself might be based on Babylonian ideas and beliefs on the calendar (1Enoch Book 3 seems to be based on Babylonian astronomical ideas).
The religious Situation at the beginning of the Second Temple Period
All the surviving Torah and Prophetic literature at the beginning of the Second Temple Period contains concerns about backsliding, away from YHVH to the service of pagan gods and pagan values. So at the beginning of the Second Temple Period, you have a Jewish people, ever fearful of yet another exile, who are majorly aware of the dangers of turning aside from the laws of Yahveh. If the early date for 1Enoch is to be accepted, then the historical conditions that prompted it would have been the beginnings of Hellenisation, after Alexander the Great conquered Judea in 332 BCE.
During this time, the Jewish faith was seen as something backward and primitive, and Hellenist ways were seen as something progressive and modern. Consequently, many Jews began abandoning Jewish beliefs and culture, and started taking on Greek ways and culture.
Some faithful Jews saw immediate dangers in this, and so began the fruitful genre of apocalyptic literature. Enochians melded earlier prophetic warnings with Persian and Babylonian beliefs.
Most apocalyptic literature, however, was written during the 2nd century BCE, during the beginning of the Hasmonean dynasty.
The hallmarks of Apocalyptic Literature
While the books of the biblical prophets saw a positive end to human history (universal peace, the purification of Israel, the Glory of God dwelling in Israel’s midst), apocalyptic literature began to see the end of the world in terms of violent death and utter destruction, and the survival only of the faithful few – the Elect, while everyone else went to hell.
Reasons why I am wary of the Book of Enoch
In the earliest parts of the Torah, there is an absence of any belief in demons. In the pagan worldview, demons caused illness and misfortune, and these demons had to be appeased with sacrifices. In the Yahwist worldview, Yahveh was sovereign over everything, so illness and misfortune – as equally as good health and good fortune – were seen as coming from God. Yahwist ritual was therefore designed to ween people off belief in demons, by restricting to whom (Yahveh) and where (in the Temple) sacrifices could be offered. There was a belief in angels, but not demons. In contrast, the Book of Enoch holds to the pagan belief in the existence of demons and fallen angels.
In the Book of Enoch, Azazel is a demon. However, the scapegoat in Torah is ‘for the Azazel’, and because we are forbidden to make offerings to demons (see Lev 17:7), Azazel cannot therefore be a demon – simple logic. Azza Zeil (‘Fortress of Shadow’) may in fact be a proto-Semitic term, describing a place where souls are purified of their sins after death, but before entering heaven – hence the symbolism of the second goat sent into the wilderness.
In the earliest parts of the Torah, the Nephilim are understood to be giants – whenever Nephilim, Anakites or Rephaim are mentioned, they are always understood to be humans of enormous stature. However, in the Book of Enoch, Nephilim are instead understood to be fallen angels, and it is their children who are giants. In Yahwist theology, angels cannot disobey God, are genderless, and cannot have children.
In the Torah, awareness of both good and evil came into the world because of the disobedience of Adam and Eve, and so each human being is responsible for their own actions, good or bad. In Enoch, it is the Nephilim who brought evil into the world (so we humans are not responsible for our evil actions). In Yahwist belief, angels cannot disobey God, and there is peace and harmony in heaven. In Enoch, angels can disobey God, and there is only conflict and disharmony in heaven as a result. In Yahwist belief, angels have no names, because they are too wondrous for humans to comprehend, but in Enoch they are given names, sometimes even Greek names (like Metatron and Armaros), or Persian names (like Samjaza, Artaqifa, Damjal and Jeqon). The Torah and the early prophets make Yahveh our Saviour; Enoch makes the messianic ‘Son of Man’ our saviour.
As a side note: Before 1Enoch, the term ‘son of man’ was not a messianic title; it was the normal way in both Aramaic and Hebrew of saying ‘human being’; the phrase, ‘one like a son of man’ in Dan 7:13 simply means, ‘one like a human being’. It is 1Enoch which is responsible for turning it into a messianic title (just as it turned Nephilim [giants] into ‘fallen angels’, and turned Azza Zeil [Fortress of Shadow] into ‘Azazel’, the name of a demon which doesn’t exist).
The Influence of the Book of Enoch on Jewish thought
The book ended up having an enormous influence on Jewish thought – most Jewish people of the time took on board its messianism, its end of the world beliefs, its belief in demons, and so on. One thing most people did not take on board, however, was a total rejection of the Temple.
The Temple was meant to be a place where ALL Jewish people could worship, regardless of which sect had charge of it, or which denominations that worshippers belonged to. Today, the non-Muslim areas are controlled by the Orthodox Jewish community, but even Liberal Jews worship there – I have worshipped there myself, as a Talmidi, and there, each time I always experience the living Presence of Yahveh more deeply and more vividly than anywhere else on earth.
Were Yeshua and James Enochians?
If Yeshua had personally accepted the Book of Enoch wholesale, then he would have to have stayed away from anything to do with the Temple. And yet he didn’t – he still considered it the house of God, despite his opposition to the Sadducean Temple authorities; he observed the Sabbath, and attended the Temple during festivals. James, according to tradition, was even brought up in the Temple as a child, and prayed there daily, right up until his execution in 62 CE. He did not reject the Temple either. If neither Yeshua nor James rejected the sanctity of the Temple, despite the corrupt chief priests, then neither do we – not all the ordinary priests, who served daily in the Temple, were Sadduceans; it was mostly the chief Priests and High Priest who were Sadduceans.
Was God’s Presence absent from the Second Temple
The continued Presence of God in the Temple is dependent on the faithfulness of the attending priests and worshippers, not just on the stature of the High Priest. Personally, I believe that the Presence of God left the Temple only when the Zealots took over the Temple Mount, and began fighting amongst themselves in the late 60s of the 1st century CE, and so shed human blood within the Temple precincts, thus desecrating it – and that is why the Temple was destroyed in 70 CE. I also believe God’s Presence has returned, because of the faithfulness of ordinary Jewish worshippers – I feel God’s overwhelming Presence whenever I go to pray at the Western Wall. And there, more than anywhere else, I also feel a connectedness with the entire Jewish people, whoever they might be – the secondary point of the Temple services.
How did the ideas in the Book of Enoch influence Paul?
I am certain that the earliest Jewish followers of Yeshua did not accept the theology of Enoch, but I’m equally certain that the Gentile followers of Paul did, because the New Testament seems to be heavily laced with Enochian ideas.
Hyam Maccoby (see ‘Paul and the Invention of Christianity’) concludes, based on ideas expressed in the Jewish-Christian Clementine Literature, that Paul was not a Pharisee, but a captain of the Temple police. As such, he would have been exposed directly and indirectly to the teachings of fringe sects, whose teachers would throng the Temple during festival times. I find it very telling and notable, that Paul’s theology is not that of mainstream, Common Judaism, but that of fringe, sectarian Judaism.
Various books in the NT quote Enoch. The only genuinely Jewish letter in the NT is that of James, and he doesn’t quote Enoch. Regarding the other non-Paulline letters in the NT which quote Enoch, I don’t believe that any of them were actually written by the people they claimed to have been written by.
Summary of my personal views on the Book of Enoch
In order to accept the Book of Enoch, you have to hold to certain beliefs, which I, as a Massorite Talmidi, do not accept. These are the main reasons why I do not accept the validity of the Book of Enoch:
— It appears to be a melding of Jewish and pagan Babylonian beliefs
— It is messianic (‘Son of Man’ / the ‘Elect One’ is a judge and saviour, alongside and equal to God)
— It is apocalyptic (that the world will end in death and destruction at the end of time)
— The end of the world is soon (near to the time of the authors of 1Enoch – late 4th to mid 2nd century BCE; the world self-evidently has NOT ended)
— It supports belief in fallen angels (interpreting Nephilim as fallen angels)
— It is fallen angels who tempt human beings to sin (Bk 2, ch 64), rather than sin being the personal responsibility of each individual human being
— It supports belief in demons and Satan (from Zoroastrianism)
— It supports belief that fallen angels brought demons into the world
— Logically therefore, the God of Israel is not supreme, and does not have dominion over heaven and earth (similar to Zoroastrianism, with the limited power of their supreme deity, Ahura Mazda)
— There is no Covenant, no Shabbat, no festivals and no Torah
— It is not universalist; it believes that only the chosen elect will be saved, and everyone else will burn in eternal fire (which includes all non-Jews)
— It introduced the idea of hell into Judaism (Enoch 21:7, from Zoroastrianism)
— it introduced belief in resurrection of the dead at the end of time, and final judgment (from Zoroastrianism, instead of judgment right after death)
— It is the biggest, single agent of bringing pagan ideas into the Jewish religion (mostly from Zoroastrianism and Babylonian religion)
Several writers say that the Book of Enoch was written by ‘conservative Jews’, but given the lack of any references to commandments, values, ethics, laws, Jewish customs or culture, I have to be honest, and say that I cannot see what the Enochians were ‘conservative’ about.
Links to resources:
The Book of Watchers (1Enoch) (19th century translation online)
A Treatise on the Book of Watchers (Graduate Thesis)
The Beginnings of Jewish Apocalyptic Literature (Academic treatise in PDF format)
The Hermeneia Translation of 1Enoch (Expert translation and commentary on Amazon)
A Commentary on the Book of 1Enoch (Expert commentary, available from Amazon)
The Book of Enoch examined (video by ReligionForBreakfast on YouTube)