There was a discussion about Enoch in Genesis and whether the book attributed to him (1 Enoch) and referred to in Jude has to be literal history because of the referent there. I can't remember if it was on the old TWeb or not; a search for the word "Enoch" brings up a bunch of stuff about the Noah movie. I maintained that it should not be understood as by him because the scholarly consensus is there is no way it could have been that old.
I came across this in Craig Blomberg's new Can We Still Believe the Bible? (And as we know, Blomberg is no liberal.)
I came across this in Craig Blomberg's new Can We Still Believe the Bible? (And as we know, Blomberg is no liberal.)
(Jude) could well have imagined that this text unwittingly reflected a divine truth, much as Caiaphas was said to have prophesied unknowingly in John 11:51. Nor need Jude have believed that the historical Enoch actually wrote these words. The phrase "seventh from Adam" actually comes from 1 Enoch itself (60.8) and thus helps to identify Jude's source; it need not be an affirmation of authorship. What Jude does believe is that the quoted verse of 1 Enoch reflects a true statement. In fact, its teaching fundamentally agrees with Zechariah 14:5.
Comment