1 Enoch

The writing of Enoch, the seventh from Adam, as received by the Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church, where it remains canonical. It is preserved in full in Ge'ez and in Aramaic fragments at Qumran, and Jude 14–15 quotes it.

1 Enoch is received by the Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church as the writing of Enoch, the seventh from Adam. It is preserved complete in Ge'ez, and Aramaic fragments such as 4Q201 from Qumran show it was copied from the third to first centuries BCE. The Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church includes it in the broader canon. No source in this dataset describes a single council or person removing it from a Bible that everyone had shared. Western and most Byzantine lists never adopted it as a closed-canon book. Jude 14–15 quotes a line also found in 1 Enoch 1:9, which is reception, not a Western canon decree. Tertullian argues for the book in the early third century and notes that others refused it. Manuscripts, quotation, and Ethiopian canonical status stay three different claims.

No single council or person “removed Enoch from the Bible.” Western and most Byzantine lists never adopted it as a closed-canon book, while Ethiopian Christianity continued to receive it. Jude 14–15 quotes a line also found in 1 Enoch 1:9. Manuscript survival and quotation are reception evidence, not automatic Western canonical status.

Date

Ethiopian Orthodox tradition: Enoch before the Flood; copies known from the 3rd–1st centuries BCE (Qumran)

Confidence

low

Languages

Aramaic, Ge'ez, Greek

Traditional authorship

Enoch

Authorship note

Enoch, the seventh from Adam, as received by the Ethiopian Orthodox Church (quoted in Jude 14–15)

• 4Q201 · 4QEnocha ar

  2nd century BCE (medium confidence) · Aramaic · Aramaic Enoch fragments

  4Q201, also called 4QEnocha ar, is an Aramaic parchment manuscript of 1 Enoch from Qumran Cave 4. The catalog date used here is the second century BCE, at medium confidence, because the dating is paleographic rather than a dated colophon. The standard designation places the fragments with the Israel Antiquities Authority collections. What survives is a portion of Enoch, not the complete book later preserved in Ge'ez. The link on this card is to those Aramaic fragments. Copying at Qumran is existence evidence for Enochic literature in Second Temple Judaism. It does not assign 1 Enoch to the Western or Byzantine closed canon, and it does not cancel the Ethiopian Orthodox reception of the book. The Dead Sea Scrolls coming to light in 1947–1956 is the discovery event on the timeline. This card is the object itself.

• Ge'ez biblical copies · Ethiopic Enoch and Jubilees

  Medieval and early modern Ge'ez copies of older books · Ge'ez · Complete Ge'ez 1 Enoch

  The complete books of 1 Enoch and Jubilees survive in Ge'ez. The manuscripts used by modern editors are medieval and early modern copies, centuries later than the Qumran fragments, but they preserve books the Hebrew fragments only sample. Ethiopian Orthodox churches copied them as part of the broader biblical collection. A Ge'ez codex is existence evidence for the full text. It is not a Western canon decree, and it does not erase the fact that most other Christian lists never adopted these two books.

• preserves

  Second Temple Jewish copyists

  1 Enoch is not a book of the Tanakh. Josephus, near the end of the first century, describes twenty-two Jewish books his people trust and sets later writings in a lower rank. The later rabbinic Bible, counted as twenty-four books, likewise leaves 1 Enoch outside Torah, Nevi'im, and Ketuvim. Aramaic fragments from Qumran show that Enochic books were copied in Judea in the second century BCE. The book is not in the Tanakh. Ethiopian preservation is a later Christian canonical reception, not the original Jewish canon decision. Jewish copying or quotation, where it exists, is reception. It is not the same fact as a place in the Hebrew canon, and it is not a Christian council’s decision.

• quotes

  Jude

  Jude, in verses 14–15, attributes a judgment prophecy to Enoch, the seventh from Adam. The wording matches 1 Enoch 1:9 in the later Ethiopic book and in the related Aramaic witnesses. The reception kind is quotes. Quotation shows that an Enochic line was available to the author of Jude in the first century and was worth citing by name. It is reception inside the New Testament. It is not a decree that every later Western or Byzantine church listed the whole Book of Enoch as canonical, and it is not evidence that a council deleted the book afterward. Ethiopian Orthodox reception of 1 Enoch is a different witness, the community’s own list.

• calls scripture

  Tertullian

  Tertullian, writing in Latin in the early third century, discusses the Book of Enoch and the reasons some Christians refused it. The reception kind is calls scripture: his own judgment that the book should be heard as scriptural authority, set next to his report that others disagreed. That is one North African writer’s reception between about 200 and 220. It is not a council minute, and it does not bind the later Catholic list at Trent or the Protestant sixty-six. Read it beside Jude’s quotation, which is earlier and is only a quotation, and beside the Ethiopian list, which is a community canon rather than one author’s argument.

• quotes

  Jude and Tertullian

  Jude quotes an Enochic judgment saying, and Tertullian argues for the book while admitting that some Christians refused it. Those are early Christian acts of reception. They are not a Western canon decree, and they do not cancel the later choice of most churches to leave 1 Enoch outside the closed canon. The Ethiopian list is a separate, continuing reception.

• ProtestantRelated literature

  Not among the Protestant 66. Western exclusion is not a single-person “removal” event.

• CatholicRelated literature

  Not among the Catholic deuterocanonical books listed at Trent.

• OrthodoxRelated literature

  Not part of the typical Constantinopolitan closed canon.

• EthiopianCanonical

  1 Enoch remains canonical in the Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo collection.

• TanakhNot applicable

  Not part of the Jewish Tanakh.

• LXXRelated literature

  Not a standard Septuagint book, though Greek excerpts exist.

• Early ChristianDisputed

  Some early Christians used or quoted Enochic material (Jude; Tertullian). That is reception, not a later Western closed-canon vote.

• Second TempleRelated literature

  Composite Jewish apocalyptic literature; Aramaic fragments survive at Qumran.

• Mid-to-late first century CE · Historical witness · Eastern Mediterranean

  Jude quotes an Enochic prophecy

  Jude 14–15 attributes to Enoch a judgment saying that matches 1 Enoch 1:9 in later witnesses.

  In the mid-to-late first century, the letter of Jude quotes a prophecy it attributes to Enoch. The saying matches 1 Enoch 1:9 as that verse stands in later Ethiopic and related witnesses. The event is a quotation inside a New Testament book. It shows Enochic tradition was known and was cited by name. It does not install the whole composite Book of Enoch in the Western canon, and it does not record a later deletion. Ethiopian Orthodox reception of 1 Enoch rests on that church’s own list. Jude’s verses remain a New Testament witness to one Enochic passage.

  Why it matters. This is reception of Enochic tradition inside the New Testament. It does not by itself make 1 Enoch canonical for later Western churches.

  Source: Jude 14–15 quotes a prophecy attributed to Enoch, matching 1 Enoch 1:9 in later Ethiopic/Aramaic witnesses.

• 1947–1956 CE · Manuscript · Qumran, Judean Desert

  Dead Sea Scrolls come to light

  Caves near Qumran yielded Jewish manuscripts, including Aramaic fragments of 1 Enoch such as 4Q201.

  From 1947 to 1956, caves near Qumran yielded Jewish manuscripts of the Second Temple period, including Aramaic fragments of 1 Enoch such as 4Q201. The find shows that Enochic books were being copied in Judea in the second century BCE, long before the Ge'ez manuscripts that preserve the book in full. Discovery is manuscript evidence. The scrolls are not a Christian canon list, and they are not a table of contents for the Ethiopian, Catholic, or Protestant Bibles. They belong with the Second Temple column and with the existence of 1 Enoch. Canonical status for each later tradition stays on that tradition’s own witnesses.

  Why it matters. Shows that Enochic books were copied in Second Temple Judaism. Discovery is not a statement that the scrolls were a Christian canon list.

  Source: 4Q201 is an Aramaic 1 Enoch manuscript from Qumran Cave 4, commonly dated to the second century BCE.

• Direct quotation · Jude 14–15 ↔ 1 Enoch 1:9

  High confidence — strong primary or manuscript support.

  Jude attributes to Enoch a judgment saying that matches 1 Enoch 1:9 in Ethiopic and related witnesses. High confidence for the parallel; medium confidence for the exact first-century wording of Enoch.

1. Mid-to-late first century CE — Jude quotes an Enochic prophecy
2. 1947–1956 CE — Dead Sea Scrolls come to light

• Westminster Confession I.2–3 names the 66-book Protestant canon and says the books commonly called Apocrypha are not of divine inspiration and are not part of the canon of Scripture.
• Council of Trent, Session IV (8 April 1546), lists the Catholic canonical books including the deuterocanonical writings received in the Vulgate.
• Athanasius, Festal Letter 39 (367), lists 22 Old Testament and 27 New Testament books and names some other writings as useful but not canonical.
• The Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church publishes an 81-book list that includes 1 Enoch, Jubilees, and the Meqabyan books.
• Josephus, Against Apion 1.8, speaks of 22 Jewish books and distinguishes later writings as not equally trusted.
• Brenton’s public-domain Septuagint translation includes Tobit, Judith, Wisdom, Sirach, Baruch, the Additions, and Maccabees as part of the Greek Old Testament corpus.
• Tertullian discusses the Book of Enoch and why some did not receive it, while he himself used it. This is reception evidence, not a later Western canon decision.
• R. H. Charles, The Book of Enoch (Oxford: Clarendon, 1912), introduction on Ethiopic preservation and composite dating.
• 4Q201 is an Aramaic 1 Enoch manuscript from Qumran Cave 4, commonly dated to the second century BCE.
• Ge'ez manuscripts preserve the complete Ethiopian biblical books, including 1 Enoch, Jubilees, and the Meqabyan books.
• Jude 14–15 quotes a prophecy attributed to Enoch, matching 1 Enoch 1:9 in later Ethiopic/Aramaic witnesses.