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 Jєωelry
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.

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 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, I think he's completely wrong about #1.  It's talking about the "Nephilim" (which they call the Watchers).  THEY were the ones who are being said to have fallen here, not the original angels.

Nor, with #2, does it say that the Nephilim FIRST taught man to sin.  It did say that they taught man all kinds of sinful things and that it was these types of things that spread and eventually led to God wiping out the world.  He's saying that it led to the debauchery in the "days of Noah".

I'm starting a new thread on Enoch/Nephalim.

People here are still trying to push this whole angels mated with humans Gnostic garbage?  Nowhere does The Church teach this and it goes against any Catholic sense and this type of belief, and others like it, were condemned at Fifth Ecuмenical Council Constantinople II and part of the 15 condemned errors of Origen.  (A search should get you to see and read them)

The gnostics were around in the Early Church period and were spreading false Gospels and this is why The Church had to step in and go through a plethora of books to see which ones were ok to include and which were not.  People shouldn't try to reconcile forbidden and rejected books, this goes into the realm of vain curiosity, and I fell victim to this Gnostic trash for a while and I would hope that others will listen and not go down this rabbit hole out of "vain curiosity" or for "more light/"gnosis""  If The Church did not include it then that should be good enough for us not to get into this trash.   The Duoay-Rheims commnetary and Catholic sense tells us what the daughters of men are as Tradman alluded to earlier, we don't need these fantastical Gnostic ideas.  

A lot of the New Agers, and certain New Age leaning "Protestants" have "revived" a lot of the Gnostic "gospels" for a reason...to sow confusion and bring Gnosticism back and get people thinking into those ideas.  

Some of The Church Fathers had this opinion that it was demonically possessed humans that they're referring to and not actual demons themselves and I think a lot of their opinions on the matter are distorted or taken out of context, and even if they DID mean it that way, it might have been a loose opinion floating about due to the Gnostic trash out there and The Church condemned many of those types of ideas later anyway.  

Starting at around -45:00 In Robert Sungenis' most recent live video, he talks about a huge light that preceded the sun during the week of creation. It is about a billion times, um, no,...wait, he says, probably only ten thousand times, no wait, maybe a million times bigger than the sun. Yea, that's it. Then it dissipates. And it goes away.  It's still there, but we don't need it.  Earth is enveloped by water, which was ice at the time because the temp was zero.  Now it's water thanks to the big sun before the sun.  He says the universe is precessing; both vertically and horizontally, at about -34:50 and the universe is spiraling around the earth and it draws an oval over the earth except at the pole. He says the one reason geocentrism is superior to heliocentrism is because of stellar aberration and the speed of light only works within the geocentric system.  At about -28:30 Sungenis says he studied (all) the hundreds of books on the Fathers of the Church to tie their understanding together to explain creation. 



Get ready people.  Sungenis' new movie is coming in a couple of months! He says you'll get to watch a graphic creation of the universe as though you were there!






I wondered what might happen if Sungenis showed up to the forum to chat about geocentrism, but all hope of any reasonable discussion went out the window after watching this video. In fact, I went straight away and looked up the term "intellectual dishonesty" and found this:

Intellectual Dishonesty

What is meant when one uses this term?

When one avoids an honest, deliberate and comprehensive approach to a matter because it may introduce an adverse effect on personally and professionally held views and beliefs.



 

Intellectual Dishonesty

What is meant when one uses this term?

When one avoids an honest, deliberate and comprehensive approach to a matter because it may introduce an adverse effect on personally and professionally held views and beliefs.

Like M79 respecting Cooties-19, modern so-called virology, Germ Theory vs. Terrain Theory, FE vs. GE, Geocentrism vs. Heliocentrism, or any number of topics unrelated to exposing the SS.

I have met MANY people throughout Traddieland during the past 25 years.  There is an almost-universal desire to know the truth about everything, particularly because once one realizes that the modern anti-Church is a fraud, it is natural, especially for the intellectually active and curious, to question everything.  It turns out that just about everything HAS been rendered fake, in one way or another: fake food, fake money, fake sex/marriage, fake medicine, fake cosmology, fake wars/enemies, and on and on and on.  How can anyone hang out at CI for any length of time without questioning just about everything, knowing that the very Pillar and Foundation of Truth has, in some still-mysterious manner, been, at least to all appearances, rendered fake?  FWIW, the SS has had a hand in a great deal of the aforementioned falsification.