why the book of enoch and other apocrypha books are crap

I've always hated the book of enoch. It is so contrary to the Word of God that i had to re-read it again, disgusting as it is and copy some obvious flaws from it. You can do a google search and find this horrid book online and read it for yourself.

the book of enoch says:
1) we shall not have pride in heaven
And then there shall be bestowed upon the elect wisdom,
And they shall all live and never again sin,
Either through ungodliness or through pride:
But they who are wise shall be humble.
(but yet satan had pride, apparently)

2)There are just two angels mentioned in the bible and 200 in enoch.
3)jesus never quoted anything from enoch.

4a)the angels are supposed to take supplications from earth to god.
'The earth made without inhabitant cries the voice of their cryingst up to the gates of heaven. And now to you, the holy ones of heaven, the souls of men make their suit, saying, "Bring our cause before the Most High". (These are the dead speaking) (we know We ourselves make supplication to god and our mediator is christ jesus)

4b)the dead cry to heaven (This heresy is repeated)
And now, behold, the souls of those who have died are crying and making their suit to the gates of heaven, and their lamentations have ascended: and cannot cease because of the lawless deeds which are wrought on the earth.

5)Length of days is incorrect
for length of days shall they not have. And no request that they (i.e. their fathers) make of thee shall be granted unto their fathers on their behalf; for they hope to live an eternal life, and that each one of them will live five hundred years. (This is after the flood)

6)An angel is covered with rocks so that he not see light
Bind Azâzêl hand and foot, and cast him into the darkness: and make an opening in the desert, which is in Dûdâêl, and cast him therein. And place upon him rough and jagged rocks, and cover him with darkness, and let him abide there for ever, and cover his face that he may not see light. (This is an angel, a spirit, intangible spirit and rocks are gonna cover him?)

i don't even want to read anymore of this crappy book. It is obvious that it contradicts scripture and i havent even gotten to the third chapter yet. Anybody who uses this book to argue on the bibles behalf is a IS A SATAN AND DOES SATANS WORK. (Satan works as a metaphor for me quite well, lol)


The book of Enoch is one of the Pseudopigrapha books and was apparently written during the first century before Jesus Christ. It was NOT written by enoch. It was in fact a number one seller in jesus' time.

. . . Behold, the Lord came with many thousands of His holy ones, to execute judgment upon all, and to convict all the ungodly of all their ungodly deeds which they have done in an ungodly way, and of all the harsh things which ungodly sinners have spoken against Him. Jude 1:14-15

. . . Behold, he will arrive with ten million of the holy ones in order to execute judgment upon all. He will destroy the wicked ones and censure all flesh on account of everything that they have done, that which the sinners and the wicked ones committed against him. - Enoch 1:9

Careful examination of the two passages reveals some significant differences. First, Jude refers to "thousands" of angels, but Enoch refers to "millions." Jude says that God will "convict" all of the ungodly, but Enoch says that they will be "destroyed." The rest of the two passages disagree in wording in minor ways. Therefore, it is inaccurate to conclude that Jude quoted Enoch. Since the book of Jude was written by Jude under the influence of God the Holy Spirit, we conclude that the book of Jude is truth. Therefore Enoch is wrong with regard to some facts.
The book of Enoch was never referred to by Jesus or any of the New Testament writers as scripture, and the book was not included in the New Testament by the apostles. It is commonly misunderstood that the content of the Bible evolved over time. But the New Testament clearly tells us that the apostles were identifying scripture as it was being written (1 Tim. 5:17-18; 2 Pet. 3:14-16). The New Testament books were being distributed by the apostles to the various churches to be read (Gal. 6:11; Col. 4:16; 1 Thess. 5:27; 2 Thess. 2:2; 3:14). By the time the apostles died, the New Testament had been written and its books were known. The Muratorian Fragment and several of the early fathers have left us a list of books that were identified as belonging to the New Testament. The book of Enoch was never included. Some books were challenged later but never with success.

Also and here's is another good point. We need to be able to backup the book of enoch with the bible and since there are no confirming scriptures to marry enoch with either the OT or the NT then we are breaking scripture. That is to say just because jude seems to quote a very very small portion of enoch that does not make all of enoch scripture. I can quote some interesting things that Plato says but to take all of his writings as scripture would be wrong. We simple need more bible to back up the angelology and we do not have it verbatum, therefore we assume to know more than the canonists and that is another wrong also.

Here's where you can find a good dissing of the apocrypha. http://www.biblequery.org/Bible/BibleCanon/WhatAboutTheApocrypha.htm

The following are from my "family Bible, king james, between the testaments" section
Why protestants reject them:

(1) These books were never a part of the old testament, jesus never referred to them or the early church. While the apocrypha was known to jesus and his disciples, they never quote from it as authoritative scripture. The couple of references in jude and peters epistles are not quotes they are incompletely quoted, roughly used as examples of false doctrines, if you read them in context. (2) Ancient jewish writers, philo and josephus, although acquainted with the Abooks never quote them as scripture. (3) The writings of Melito of Sardis, Cyril of Jerusalem, and St. Jerome show a recognition of the difference between inspired Scripture and Apocrypha. (4) The Abooks were never declared to be canonical until the council of trent (a.d. 1546) by the Catholic Church, which should tell you right there NOT to resource these books for doctrine. The following Abooks were declared: Tobit, Judith, The Wisdom of Solomon, Ecclesiasticus, Baruch, 1 and 2nd maccabees, the additions to Esther and Daniel. (5) Most readers feel that the Abooks represent a lower level of writng than that of the Canonical scriptures. They contain numerous historical and geographical inaccuracies and anachronisms, and do not breathe the prophetic spirit so evident in the Canonical writings. The Westminister Confession (1643) states that "the books commonly called Apocrypha, not being of divine inspiration, are no part of the Canon of Scripture, and therefore are of no authority in the Church of God, or to be any otherwise approved or made use of than other human writing". The Reformed Churches have not encourage the use of the Abooks and as a consequence it is seldom used in contemporary Protestantism. The Anglican Church in its 39 articles takes a mediating position, holdng that, "the church does read the Abooks for example of life and instruction of manners; and does not apply them to confess any doctrine".

Enoch was never an apocrypha book. Enoch remains to this day a pseudopigrapha book, which means written by someone under a different name for commercial reason.

It is therefore a holy and wholesome thought to pray for the dead, that they may be loosed from sins. (2 Maccabees 12:39-46)