Although I found it extremely interesting, my opinion is that the Book of Enoch is, at best, tainted, and at worst, almost completely fabricated. However, it seems like it might derive from something with some legitimacy.
First, we have to consider the passage of time from Enoch's exploits to modern times as compared to the amount of time between the Exodus (presumably Moses wrote Genesis, meaning that our oldest surviving scripture is probably from that time) and now.
First, we know that Adam was created on the "Eighth Day" of the replenishment of the Earth after Satan's overthrow and the resulting destruction. We also know that the Millennium that will begin after the actual return of Christ is the "Day of the Lord," corresponding with God's original Sabbath of 1000 years. Putting this all together, it seems the Millennium will begin exactly 6000 years after the end of God's original sabbath which corresponds to the beginning of the eighth day.
2068 is the last projected year of the Generation of the Fig Tree, if we follow the 120-year generation model after the re-situation of Judah and some secretive Kenites in Israel. We are in the year 2011, and if we subtract 2011 from 2068, we get a 57-year margin. 6000-57 equals 5943. From this, we can say that "Adam's body was created anywhere from almost 5943 to almost 6000 years ago." Now, to determine the time of Enoch, we look at the genealogies of Genesis chapter 5.
3And Adam lived an hundred and thirty years, and begat a son in his own likeness, and after his image; and called his name Seth:
6And Seth lived an hundred and five years, and begat Enos:
9And Enos lived ninety years, and begat Cainan:
12And Cainan lived seventy years and begat Mahalaleel:
15And Mahalaleel lived sixty and five years, and begat Jared:
18And Jared lived an hundred sixty and two years, and he begat Enoch:
130+105+90+70+65+162 equals 622. Enoch was born 622 years after the creation of Adam's body. Let's work that into our previous theory. Adam was born 5943 to nearly 6000 years ago, meaning Enoch was born within the range of 5321 to 5378 years ago, or to put it in our modern dating system, 3294 to 3367 BC.
The time of Enoch's birth was from 3294 to 3367 BC.
Assuming that Moses wrote the book of Genesis, say, when he was spending time with God on Sinai, then we have a pretty good indicator of when our earliest reliable scripture was originally written. Perhaps the book of Job itself, inasmuch as it is separate and chronologically very early, is actually older; I'm not sure, but let's just consider the time of the Exodus.
Most people think that the Pharoah of the Exodus is Ramessess II. This is obviously a lot sketchier for numerous reasons, but scholars think that Ramesses was born in 1303 BC.
Now, Ramessess was obviously an adult during the Book of Exodus, and Enoch would have been an adult when he was used by God and ultimately would have written his supposed book, so just keep in mind those figures are births. However, there are numerous things that can corrupt written history or scripture, one of which starts with a "K," but most of which include passage of time, poor fact-checking, trying to record an unreliable oral history, relying on other people for the full details of events, and things of that nature.
I personally don't think we can honestly expect to find a manuscript of a writing that was ultimately written in the 3000's BC. We know that the book of Enoch is not a part of our Old Testament as determined by the Masoretic text. We have no reason to believe it's divinely-protected scripture. However, what can we find by examining the book itself?
I can't cover the whole thing, but I'll just make some points by providing examples of what I mean.
First, we notice that certain aspects do indeed coincide with the Word of God's message.
4 But ye -ye have not been steadfast, nor done the commandments of the Lord,
But ye have turned away and spoken proud and hard words
With your impure mouths against His greatness.
Oh, ye hard-hearted, ye shall find no peace.
Likewise, Genesis reports that several generations before Enoch, men began to profane the name of God:
26And to Seth, to him also there was born a son; and he called his name Enos: then began men to call upon the name of the LORD.Although calling upon the name of the Lord doesn't sound so bad, the word "call" here is "qara," which is both Strong's 7121 and 7122. 7121 is essentially to properly address. 7122 can be to befall in a hostile manner. Eve called God "Elohiym"; you could argue that this refers to the Sacred Name, but the Sacred Name was something that was very exclusively known among people such as Abimelech and Jacob before Moses learned of it and spread it abroad. Combined with what happens next and the nature of humans, I think it's safe to say that this instance is in fact 7122. We're talking about men profaning God. Back to analyzing the book of Enoch.
1 And it came to pass when the children of men had multiplied that in those days were born unto 2 them beautiful and comely daughters. And the angels, the children of the heaven, saw and lusted after them, and said to one another: 'Come, let us choose us wives from among the children of menCompare this with Genesis:
This selection, again, seems to be well-validated in the Word. What's extremely curious is that the chapters and verses correspond exactly with the same subject. God did not divide Genesis into chapters, mind you, but the books of his Word were later divided for more easy reference.
1And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them,
2That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose.
However, let's continue on with that particular chapter of Enoch.
...and beget us children.' And Semjaza, who was their leader, said unto them: 'I fear ye will not 4 indeed agree to do this deed, and I alone shall have to pay the penalty of a great sin.' And they all answered him and said: 'Let us all swear an oath, and all bind ourselves by mutual imprecations 5 not to abandon this plan but to do this thing.' Then sware they all together and bound themselves 6 by mutual imprecations upon it. And they were in all two hundred; who descended in the days of Jared on the summit of Mount Hermon, and they called it Mount Hermon, because they had sworn 7 and bound themselves by mutual imprecations upon it. And these are the names of their leaders: Samlazaz, their leader, Araklba, Rameel, Kokablel, Tamlel, Ramlel, Danel, Ezeqeel, Baraqijal, 8 Asael, Armaros, Batarel, Ananel, Zaqiel, Samsapeel, Satarel, Turel, Jomjael, Sariel. These are their chiefs of tens.Here, we begin to be introduced to new specific information. To someone who is interested in this sort of thing (like I am), reading it at first is like being a kid in a candy store. They seem to have everything right so far, and then they seem to provide specific details of events that we only know vaguely about--even possibly describing the history of the evil angels which we will encounter.
However, let's not succumb to confirmation bias. The whole book needs to be entirely validated in the Word, and even if it is, there's a big possibility it might not be true. Even if it is to be true, as it is not included in the Masoretic Text, it is to be taken as a historical account, rather than the deep, ever-pregnant and divinely-authored Word of God.
3 I and from afar off trees more numerous than I these trees and great-two trees there, very great, beautiful, and glorious, and magnificent, and the tree of knowledge, whose holy fruit they eat and know great wisdom.
Uh, oh. We know that The Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil is Satan, and he had free reign, walking to and fro on Earth or even approaching God in Paradise before Christ's sacrifice. However, whoever wrote this is obviously of the commonly false interpretation that Eve literally ate from a fruit tree and was provided with forbidden knowledge.
A false interpretation of actual scripture in a text whose earliest surviving manuscript might be dated around 300 BC. That's a strong indication of Kenite perversion of written text, but either way, it's obvious from this one passage that everything in this book has to be taken with a grain of salt.
There are multiple other inconsistencies with scripture in the book of Enoch, including God sending "Uriel to the son of Lamech" to give Noah his flood-related instructions, rather than telling Noah himself. Since Uriel is elsewhere mentioned as an archangel in the book, and should be in a spiritual body (therefore not the "son" of anyone but God), that makes even less sense. The Book of Enoch seems to take the stance that the Sons of God are not humans in non-flesh bodies, but rather are an entirely different species of human-like but superior being who can produce offspring among themselves.
The book of Enoch seemingly is deliberately designed to appeal to us in numerous ways. It starts out by talking about the Elect. It begins in line with teachings that we know about and treasure because most of the rest of the Christian/Jewish world hardly ever mentions or understands them. It even seems to understand the deep but very true idea that all the humans in spiritual bodies must be born at their ordained time (but then again, aren't they contradicting the idea of Uriel the angel being the "son" of another angel there?) It strongly appeals to us in several ways as we empathetically place ourselves in Enoch's shoes. However, this one false teaching indicates that perhaps the text is derived from something legitimate, but was corrupted with falsity or modified or perhaps mistranslated. Or perhaps it is deception directed primarily toward us by Satan?
This would be a fairly closed case, but there is one more interesting twist. The Book of Enoch contains elements of the Word of God which were not yet revealed before the birth of Christ.
The first clue I found was the idea that the fallen angels are literally imprisoned, which (as far as I know) was not revealed until the books of the New Testament.
1 2 Peter 2:4 For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell, and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment; 2 Jude 1:6 And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day.
...And the Lord said unto Michael: 'Go, bind Semjaza and his associates who have united themselves with women so as to have defiled themselves 12 with them in all their uncleanness. And when their sons have slain one another, and they have seen the destruction of their beloved ones, bind them fast for seventy generations in the valleys of the earth, till the day of their judgement and of their consummation, till the judgement that is 13 for ever and ever is consummated. In those days they shall be led off to the abyss of fire: and 14 to the torment and the prison in which they shall be confined for ever. And whosoever shall be condemned and destroyed will from thenceforth be bound together with them to the end of all 15 generations.Well, 70 generations in the 120-year model is 8400 years, and surprisingly, that is actually too long a time for them to be imprisoned, especially since it happened after the time of Enoch and they need to be released as short season when they and Satan are cast out of Heaven. And, in any case, we know that the references to eternal torment are false.
But being imprisoned literally... it seems like that is one true concept tucked away there. And other parts of the book seems to have concepts that could very well be true; indeed, there are a few cases of correct theology that is rare to be seen at all today. But then there are confusing, often contradictory visions and a mound of unreliable information surrounds it.
And I went into the tongues of fire and drew nigh to a large house which was built of crystals: and the walls of the house were like a tesselated floor (made) of crystals, and its groundwork was 11 of crystal. Its ceiling was like the path of the stars and the lightnings, and between them were 12 fiery cherubim, and their heaven was (clear as) water. A flaming fire surrounded the walls, and its 13 portals blazed with fire. And I entered into that house, and it was hot as fire and cold as ice: there 14 were no delights of life therein: fear covered me, and trembling got hold upon me. And as I quaked 15 and trembled, I fell upon my face. And I beheld a vision, And lo! there was a second house, greater 16 than the former, and the entire portal stood open before me, and it was built of flames of fire. And in every respect it so excelled in splendour and magnificence and extent that I cannot describe to 17 you its splendour and its extent. And its floor was of fire, and above it were lightnings and the path 18 of the stars, and its ceiling also was flaming fire. And I looked and saw therein a lofty throne: its appearance was as crystal, and the wheels thereof as the shining sun, and there was the vision of 19 cherubim. And from underneath the throne came streams of flaming fire so that I could not look 20 thereon.
Once again, if this book were written before Christ, then we know that the full vision of God's architecture of crystal (or something which is like crystal) was not yet revealed. We see that vision (as far as I know) only in Revelation:
And he shewed me a pure river of water of life, clear as crystal, proceeding out of the throne of God and of the Lamb.Now that all these points have been raised, let's wrap it up with some ideas and explanations.
1. Originally, Enoch recorded his account, possibly (though not necessarily) in an earlier writing system than that of ancient Hebrew. This text was passed down over many centuries, and was gradually corrupted to the point that it only has brief snippets of true supernatural accounts today.
2. Enoch did not record his account, but an oral tradition survived. This is a likely option in my estimation, because Enoch's great grandson, Noah, both knew that he needed to preserve his pedigree and was so dedicated that he took a very long time to find an uncorrupted Adamic wife. This makes it extremely likely that avoiding intermixing with the Nephilem-offspring was a strong notion passed down through the family at that time. The entire world records an ancient deluge, but very few records, perhaps none besides the Word of God, record exactly why it happened. Nevertheless, Noah almost certainly knew, and the unwritten oral tradition could have been passed down through many, many years. Unfortunately, spoken word is bound to be corrupted over time, to the point that the Book of Enoch, if based on that tradition, only contains brief glimmers of truth and a lot of myth, confusion and fictionalized accounts.
3. Inasmuch as Satan knew that the Elect would pretty much be the only people who knew the truth about the abominable interbreeding between spiritual and flesh humans several thousand years ago, it's possible that the Book of Enoch was something edited heavily or even contrived by Kenites or people possessed/influenced by Satan's spirit or an evil spirit. This would also explain the few details of God's plan which weren't expressed in the Word yet before the birth of Christ, if indeed those parts were written before Christ was born. It also makes sense from a manipulative standpoint. Satan can attempt to make a person go astray from all sorts of angle using the book of Enoch, including simply making one think that the references to chains of darkness and God's crystal-like architecture which were written later were not divinely inspired, but based on this prior work. Or, it could appear to be truth to the point it makes one shift their theology and think the Tree of Knowledge was a literal tree, etc. Certain aspects of the book may even be designed to take advantage of the Elect if such an individual believes them when Satan is on Earth.
4. The final possibility is that the references to crystal architecture and the imprisonment of angels were made by a man who read the books of Revelation and Jude/Peter after they were written. According to Wikipedia, parts of the book may have been written a century or more after the death of Christ. In this case, it's possible some good theology about the angels is still retained by the early Christian church, but it is heavily polluted with fantasy and written into this book by people in the first century AD in a similar way that other non-canonical books were, like the Gnostic works.
And there you have it. The bottom line is, while the book of Enoch is interesting, take it with an extreme grain of salt because parts of it are outright and verifiably wrong, and it might just be deliberate deception.