The Book of Enoch (Hardcover)

Written, refined and compiled over a period spanning at least 800 years (approx. 250 BCE-650 CE, from Qumran through the Hellenistic and Roman periods), the Book of Enoch, or Henok, is one of the finest non-canonical writings produced in the apocalyptic tradition, and is referenced numerous times in canonical books. It certainly influenced the OT and NT. Ironically, Enoch was once (and in some places, still is) part of the canon. The reader will at once see that Rev. Brown has compiled and edited a version of the Book of Enoch from purely Ethiopic sources, though he does not cite which manuscripts he referenced and studied for this compilation of a truly "African" edition of Enoch. Whatever the reasons Rev. Brown speaks only broadly of his studies of Ethipoic texts (and the questionable, dated, 1906 translation by R.H. Charles), this book is compiled from the only known complete works of Enoch dating from antiquity.

The most complete texts of Enoch have been preserved through the Ethiopic Christian Church in a language known as Ge'ez. Ethiopic (Ge'ez) is an African writing system designed as a meaningful and graphic representation of a wide array of knowledge, including, languages. It is a knowledge system that is organized to represent philosophical features like ideography, numerology, syllography, astronomy, and grammatology. Furthermore, Ethiopic is not only a cultural agency: It is a foundation to a great literary tradition in Ethiopia. This rich literary tradition, too often overlooked in the past by many Western scholars, is evident in this book, though it is still arguable whether Ethiopic was the original language of Enoch. In fact, no one is certain what the original language of Enoch was; some feel it was both Aramaic and Hebrew. Others think it was Ethiopic because it is akin to the ancient Egyptian (Mirzraim) Hamitic language family. In this case it hardly matters because Rev. Brown has chosen some of the finest renditions of the Ethiopic for readers, and this IS a Book of Enoch based on that literary tradition. In fact, the finest translations of the Book of Enoch I have read have all been structured on the Ethiopic sources (e.g., Kebran 9/II, Princeton Ethiopic 3, Abbadianus 55, EMML 2080, 4437, 4750, the Chester Beatty papyrus, et al). Admittedly, Rev. Brown's compilation has a somewhat compressed Astronomical book (the Book of Heavenly Luminaries, probably the oldest preserved Enochian book), and though taken from Ethiopic texts, the Book of the Similitudes appear here though they were decidedly a later, Christian addition from the common era. 1 Enoch is, after all, a composite that represents numerous periods and writers. One may wonder how the Book of Enoch was shaped, polished and edited over time, how later Christian insertions became a part of the story. There is no Book of Similitudes (Book of Parables) in the Qumran corpus, but rather fragments of the Book of Giants, or men of renown and power.

I do beg to differ with Rev. Brown's assertion that the Book of Enoch is an "inspired" work that only further bolsters claims of biblical prophecy, as well as Dr. Yefru's contention that the Book of Enoch dates from 4000 BCE. The foundations of Enoch may very well have existed in several places around the Mediterranean and Northeast Africa before 300 BCE; in fact, it is quite likely. The genesis material that became the Book of Enoch almost certainly predated the written word, circulating as oral tradition, traveling from East to West. At some point, the elements of Enoch coalesced, but no one knows when. The current body of evidence cannot support the contention for a 4000 BCE inception.

To his credit, Rev. Brown has included, for those married to the KJV of the Bible, an exhaustive concordance. His remarks in the preface aside, Rev. Brown has compiled/edited a very neutral, unbiased Book of Enoch accessible to any reader, and it is, in my opinion, a fine contribution to the investigation and reconstruction of ancient African historiography. This little gem of a book should not be ignored.

The first kind would be texts of the relevant material (Ethiopian 1Enoch, Slavonic 2Enoch, Hebrew 3Enoch, and Jubilees) including out-of-copyright reprints of editions and translations of R.H. Charles and other late 19th Century scholars, as well as newer versions such as the standard Old Testament Pseudepigrapha edited by Charlesworth.

The second kind would be commentaries and analysis from modern scholars, such as George Nickelsburg and James Vanderkam.

The third kind, which in terms of both number and sales probably make up the majority, are written by enthusiasts for the Enoch story per se.

The Rev. Brown falls into the third category, about which there is nothing wrong in itself. After all, everyone is entitled to accept or not accept the authority of ancient texts and traditions, and the sections of 1Enoch found among the Dead Sea Scrolls prove that this tradition is older than the Christian New Testament. The Coptic Orthodox Church in Ethiopia has long accepted 1Enoch as part of their canon, and during the 19th Century as translations of Ethiopic 1Enoch appeared in English many American denominations have made some use of Enoch traditions.

However if one is going to present "Enoch: A Cross-Reference Exegesis of the Holy Bible" there should be critical analysis of the texts so "cross-referenced".

For example it is not enough to point out that Jude 9 is related to 1Enoch 9, one should also ask how and why. In 1Enoch 9 Michael accuses the leader of the rebel angels, but in Jude 9 the writer, using material drawn from Zechariah 3, contradicts this and says Michael would not even rebuke. The same goes for the other quotes of 1Enoch in Jude.

Another example : anyone can see that there is a correspondence between "angels" and "sons of God" in Luke 20:36 and the angels marrying in 1Enoch 1, but we need to ask this: Is Jesus agreeing with 1Enoch or disagreeing?

I'm sorry but anyone wanting a book about Enoch would be much better served by 'Enoch : A Man for All Generations' (Studies on Personalities of the Old Testament) written the head of Hebrew at University of Notre Dame, James C. Vanderkam.