And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints. (Jude 1:14)
In this passage, Jude is quoting from the pseudepigraphic text 1 Enoch. The Greek reads:
Προεφήτευσεν δὲ καὶ τούτοις ἕβδομος ἀπὸ Ἀδὰμ Ἑνὼχ λέγων, ἰδοὺ ἦλθεν κύριος ἐν ἁγίαις μυριάσιν αὐτοῦ.
I wish to propose that Jude is not endorsing 1 Enoch and its concepts, but deconstructing them.
Firstly, the phrase Προεφήτευσεν δὲ καὶ τούτοις should be rendered "prophesied to these" as it is a dative of reference, not a genitive. As one leading Greek grammarian noted:
14. And to these also (de kai toutois). Dative case, for these false teachers as well as for his contemporaries. (A.T. Robertson, Word Pictures of the New Testament VI: 192)
Additionally, the verb προφητεύω ("to prophesy") can be used of an utterance of a false prophet, not just a true prophet. LXX Jeremiah, for instance, furnishes many examples, such as:
The priests said not, Where is the Lord? And they that handle the law knew me not the pastors also transgressed against me, and the prophets prophesied (προφητεύω) by Baal, and walked after things that do not profit. (Jer 2:8)
The prophets prophesy (προφητεύω) falsely, and the priests bear rule by their means; and my people love to have it so, but what will you do when the end comes? (Jer 5:31)
Then I said I, Ah, Lord God! Behold the prophets say (προφητεύω) unto them, Ye shall not see the sword neither shall ye have famine; but I will give you assured peace in this place. Then the Lord said unto me, The prophets prophesy (προφητεύω) lies in my name: I send them not, neither have I commanded them, neither spake unto them: they prophesy (προφητεύω) unto you a false vision and divination, and a thing of nought, and the deceit of their heart. Therefore thus saith the Lord concerning the prophets that prophesy (προφητεύω) in my name, and I sent them not, yet they say, Sword and famine shall not be in this land; By sword and famine shall those prophets be consumed. And the people to whom they prophesy (προφητεύω) shall be cast out in the streets of Jerusalem because of the famine and the sword; and they shall have none to bury them, them, their wives, nor their sons, nor their daughters: for I will pour wickedness upon them. (Jer 14:13-16)
What are the “things” Jude is talking about? They are the fallen angels concept (as well as those who accepted such false beliefs) that was in vogue during his time, based on Gen 6:1-4 and the “sons of God” that 1 Enoch and other texts reworked to tell the narrative of the sons of God being, not mortals, but angels who sinned, known as “the Watchers,” a concept mentioned previously in the epistle:
And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day. (Jude 1:6)
And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day. (Jude 1:6)
According to many scholars, Jude (and 2 Peter) were written to subvert and deconstruct popular theologies that were derived from 1 Enoch, such as the Watchers narrative:
The only earlier evidence that might betray some unease with 1 Enoch might be 2 Peter, which retains the content of Jude 6 (the Fall of the Watchers), but omits the explicit reference to Enoch. Schelke goes so far as to speak here of one book "demythologizing" the other. (Petrusbrief, Judasbrief, p. 221).' Hultin, "Jude's Citation of 1 Enoch" in Charlesworth and Mcdonald, eds. Jewish and Christian Scriptures: the Function of "Canonical" and "Non-Canonical" in Religious Texts, p. 125)
The importance to this to LDS theology is two-fold:
(1) The Book of Moses understands the “sons of God” in Gen 6 to be, not angels, but mortals (Moses 7:1; 8:13, 21). That Jude was deconstructing the embellishments of contemporary uninspired commentary on Gen 6 helps support the plausibility of the LDS reading of the Genesis text.
(2) Secondly, that such a deconstruction in Jude and 2 Peter allows for one to argue that 1 Pet 3:18-20, while cognizant of the Watchers myth, is not endorsing it, as some commentators argue, but instead, is deconstructing it. Some critics have used this as evidence against the LDS reading (based on D&C 138), but their approach to Peter’s use of 1 Enoch is rather simplistic. As one scholarly source stated on this pericope:
Having looked at the many sin and punishment traditions concerning angels, giants, spirits, and humans, the present study finds that, individually, none of them provide the background to 1 Pet 3:18-22. Rather, the stories of angelic sin and punishment, the birth of the giants, the presence of evil spirits, the examples of human evil, and the proclamations made to them exist in such multiple and conflated forms from the third century B.C.E. to the composition of 1 Peter that it is impossible to specify a single tradition-historical explanation behind this passage in 1 Peter. (Chad T. Pierce, Spirits and the Proclamation of Christ: 1 Peter 3:18-22 in Light of Sin and Punishment Traditions in early Jewish and Christian Literature, p. 236)
Having looked at the many sin and punishment traditions concerning angels, giants, spirits, and humans, the present study finds that, individually, none of them provide the background to 1 Pet 3:18-22. Rather, the stories of angelic sin and punishment, the birth of the giants, the presence of evil spirits, the examples of human evil, and the proclamations made to them exist in such multiple and conflated forms from the third century B.C.E. to the composition of 1 Peter that it is impossible to specify a single tradition-historical explanation behind this passage in 1 Peter. (Chad T. Pierce, Spirits and the Proclamation of Christ: 1 Peter 3:18-22 in Light of Sin and Punishment Traditions in early Jewish and Christian Literature, p. 236)
If the hypothesis that Jude and 1 and 2 Peter were deconstructing/demythologizing the Watchers myth from 1 Enoch, not embracing it, helps resolve some of the challenges to the Latter-day Saint exegesis of 1 Pet 3:18-20 (cf. 4:6) and also helps answer the question of why 1 Enoch is not seen as being worthy of considered to be part of the canon.
