22 July 2023
Just a couple more comments about the Books of Enoch.
First, fans of the Books of Enoch openly admit that the narrative completely disregards the Fall in Genesis 3. According to Enoch, the sole source of sin in the world is the alleged fallen angels. Furthermore, Enoch presumes that humans were created in a mortal form in the first place. Thus, they were not inherently immortal, and that an extended lifespan was almost magical, something applied to their mortal form artificially.
The second item is that I am very uncomfortable with Michael Heiser's glib dismissal of the words of Jesus regarding what angels can and cannot do regarding procreation (Matthew 22:29-30; Mark 12:25 and Luke 20:30). He relies on mere semantics like the Pharisees.
There is no doubt the men questioning Jesus about the seven brothers believed at least some of the silly stuff in the Books of Enoch. Their question assumes that humans have always been mortal and that, once in the afterlife, will still be somehow mortal. Jesus' comment flatly denies that. Once we leave this world, we leave our mortal existence and become eternal beings, as we were created, as we were before the Fall.
I've run into this denial of the Fall everywhere. It's amazing how many people and different groups agree that mankind does evil, but the common assumption is that we don't really need redemption, just reform. Without the Fall, the Cross means nothing. Even in evangelical colleges I've run into professors -- ordained to the ministry -- who insist that we are not fallen.
I'm not arguing necessarily for what is called the Sethite theory. What I'm saying is that, whatever happened in the first few verses of Genesis 6, it wasn't sex between angels and humans, at least as we know sex. The brief mention does not include the mechanics, but points more to the results. I have no doubt that whatever such activity was, the product was not a regular human. The Bible uniformly condemns the creatures produced. They were not human and should not be allowed to live among humans.
I suppose the only other question is whether Jesus spoke authoritatively on such things. The worldview of whoever wrote Enoch was not the same as the worldview of Jesus.
This document is public domain; spread the message.