CathInfo.com

Don't be misled by the title.  But they point out how St. Jude in his epistle cited prophecy from Enoch as if it were legitimate and real.

I was only able to get through about half on my break, so I'll listen to the rest later. But I think he has a very good point about the usage of Enoch as a cultural text rather than as Scripture. As it was very common among the Fathers to utilize ideas from philosophers in part to unpack Scripture, while not advocating for the entire philosophy. I believe that Enoch would serve well in that regard, as the author of that article proves in practice.

There's things that Enoch appears to cover in detail that are only mentioned in passing by Sacred Scripture, such as the Nephalim, the nature of the world, etc. to such a degree that it's difficult to completely dismiss it as anything less than possibly an early parallel of what we now know as private revelation in Church history. As clearly Enoch was a saint of the Old Covenant. And, if not that, at least one of the highest forms of natural wisdom and/or philosophy extant, given the claims of Josephus of how Enoch was a "primeval sage ... entrusted by God to record and disseminate this information". This aligns with what I've read in Pythagoras or Christ? on how one of the earliest, and most essential, forms of wisdom was that of astronomy and cosmology after the Fall. So, of course, Enoch being an ante-diluvian compiler and disseminator of the true cosmology makes perfect sense.

I haven't read the book myself, so I can't comment on how accurate their interpretation is, but if it actually says these things, then it discredits the whole book in my view.

No it doesn't. The other point they made was that there's still a lot of good things in it that makes it worth reading, it's just that the contradictions that they point out prevent it from being considered inspired. It could still be viewed on the level of a "private revelation" or even Hebrew philosophy.

Just because Aristotle believed in the eternity of the universe doesn't discredit his conclusions about causality. And the same could be said about those conclusions that these books of Enoch come to that coincide with Sacred Scripture.

They seem to point out 2 major errors in Enoch that discredits it though. 
1. Enoch appears to claim that the fallen angels fell after Man was already created.
2. It appears to claim that an angel other than Lucifer taught Man to sin and, not only that but, also that Man only learned to sin after there were already a number of humans, i.e the Fall happened post-Adam and Eve.

I've read the whole book; it's not that long.  The version that I have did not say any of the above.  Methinks these guys didn't understand what Enoch was describing.


1.  Enoch describes, during the period before the Flood, how the world became more and more corrupt, which led to God deciding to send the Great Flood.
a.  Enoch describes how God allowed angels to be tempted by women (and a lust for power) and choose to leave heaven to become fallen angels.  Enoch does not say WHEN the angels fell by this temptation (i.e. before the world was created or after).  Enoch also does not mention lucifer as part of this group, so those angels who were cast into hell by St Michael before the world was created were a separate group that "fell" from heaven.
b.  Those angels who fell by lust for women/power were given very specific names by Enoch, as well as descriptions of their powers and interests.
c.  The angels who fell during Noah's time had children by way of witchcraft, which produced the Giants/Nephalim.

2.  The descriptions of the fallen angels who "taught men to sin" is not accurate.  What Enoch describes is that these angels gave to those men/women who worshipped them the knowledge of all sciences, technology, metallurgy, chemistry, astronomy, etc.  Before the angels came into the world, the world revolved around farming.  The angels taught evil men how to do the following:
a.  Find, develop and use metals for weapons, technology and jewelry
b.  Find, develop and use herbs for medicine, potions and poisons
c.  Find, develop and use chemistry, biology, etc (all modern sciences) for power, money and war.
d.  All of these things led to luxuries, sinfulness and war

Scripture also tells us that all of mankind was "corrupted" but that Noah was "pure in his generations".  This leads one to suspect that animal/Nephalim/demonic corruption (i.e. genetic manipulation) was also happening.  As one guy argued, Satan wanted to corrupt all of mankind's gene pool so that Our Lord couldn't be born.  This is a strong argument and fits into what Scripture implies here.

Also, many Church Fathers are very explicit when they say they believed that the Giants/Nephalim were, in fact, demonic/human hybrids.