Enoch as an existential phenomenon of “walking with God”

автор:

Dmytro Rybуdailo (https://orcid.org/0009-0008-7820-9628)

Relevance of the research. The figure of Enoch is one of the most enigmatic in the biblical tradition. The brevity of the biblical references to him, combined with the extensive reception in apocalyptic and early Christian literature, makes the phenomenon of “walking with God” an important subject of theological and philosophical reflection.

Relevance of the research. The minimal biblical description of Enoch together with the apocryphal Enochic tradition raises the question of righteousness as a mode of human existence before God and the possibility of overcoming the limits of human mortality.

Analysis of recent research and publications. The figure of Enoch has been studied by scholars of apocalyptic literature and early Judaism such as G. Nickelsburg, J. VanderKam, L. Stuckenbruck, and A. Orlov. However, the interpretation of Enoch in the perspective of existential philosophy remains insufficiently explored.

Research task. The aim of the article is to clarify the theological and existential meaning of the concept of “walking with God” through the example of Enoch in the context of biblical, apocalyptic, and philosophical traditions.

Main material presentation. The article provides a comprehensive analysis of biblical texts (Gen. 5:22–24; Heb. 11:5; Jude 14–15) together with the apocalyptic tradition of the Book of Enoch. It is shown that “walking with God” represents a holistic mode of spiritual existence in the constant presence before God (coram Deo). The interpretation in the light of existential philosophy (S. Kierkegaard, K. Jaspers, M. Heidegger, A. Camus) allows Enoch to be understood as a model of existential selfhood.

Conclusions. The figure of Enoch appears as an existential phenomenon that unites biblical anthropology, apocalyptic eschatology, and philosophical reflection on human existence. His image reveals faith as a mode of being in the presence of God and as a symbol of hope for overcoming the limits of human life.

Keywords. Enoch, Book of Enoch, Genesis 5, apocalypticism, existentialism, walking with God, coram Deo, biblical anthropology, eschatology.

References:

  1. Alexander, PS 1998. ‘From Son of Adam to Second God: Transformations of the Biblical Enoch’, in Stone, M. E. and Bergren, T. A. (eds.) Biblical Figures Outside the Bible. Trinity Press, pp. 87–122.
  2. Baumeister, A 2012. ‘Origins and Hidden Motives of Fundamental Ontology’, Sententiae, 27(2), pp. 46–59.
  3. Blackburn, V 2011. ‘Albert Camus: The Challenge of the Unbeliever’, Scottish Journal of Theology, 64(3), pp. 313–326.
  4. Brock, SP 1968. ‘A Fragment of Enoch in Syriac’, Journal of Theological Studies, 19, pp. 626–631.
  5. Charles, RH 1906. The Ethiopic Version of the Book of Enoch. Oxford : Clarendon Press.
  6. Dakhniy, A 2012. ‘Authenticity in Face of Death: Thanatological Problematics in the Thinking of M. Heidegger and L. Tolstoy’, Sententiae, 27(2), pp. 67–76.
  7. De Martin De Viviés, P 2016. ‘La figure d’Hénoch’, Études Théologiques et Religieuses, 91(4), pp. 639–646.
  8. Dimant, D 1983. ‘The Biography of Enoch and the Books of Enoch’, Vetus Testamentum, 33, pp. 14–29.
  9. DiTommaso, L 2007. ‘Apocalypses and Apocalypticism in Antiquity’, Currents in Biblical Research, 5, pp. 235–286.
  10. Dix, GH 1925. ‘The Enochic Pentateuch’, Journal of Theological Studies, 27, pp. 29–42.
  11. Frey, J & Levison, JR (eds.) 2014. ‘The Origins of Early Christian Pneumatology’, in The Holy Spirit, Inspiration, and the Cultures of Antiquity. De Gruyter, pp. 1–38.
  12. Iwański, D 2013. ‘Księga Henocha – starożytny apokryf w świetle współczesnej wiedzy’, Teologia i Człowiek, 21(1), pp. 123–140.
  13. Khmil, VV & Korkh, OM 2017. ‘Umovy istorychnosti liudskoho isnuvannia ta istorii liudstva za Yaspersom (Conditions of the Historicity of Human Existence and the History of Humanity according to Jaspers)’, Antropolohichni vymiry filosofskykh doslidzhen, 12, pp. 121–127.
  14. Laurence, R 1883. The Book of Enoch the Prophet. London: Kegan Paul, Trench & Co.
  15. Lawlor, HL 1904. ‘The Book of Enoch in the Egyptian Church’, Hermathena, 30, pp. 178–183.
  16. Malivskyi, AM 2018. ‘Motyvy osobystoho filosofuvannia: Dekart i Kierkehard (Motives of Personal Philosophizing: Descartes and Kierkegaard)’, Antropolohichni vymiry filosofskykh doslidzhen, 13, s. 124–133.
  17. Muchowski, P 2024. ‘Genesis 5:24 in Karaite Exegesis: Printed Commentaries’, The Biblical Annals, 14(3), pp. 531–552.
  18. Nesterenko, P 2021. ‘Problema smerti ta bezsmertia osobystosti v istorii filosofii (The Problem of Death and Immortality of Personality in the History of Philosophy)’, Visnyk Lvivskoho universytetu, 37, s. 93–106.
  19. Nickelsburg, GWE & VanderKam, JC 2012. 1 Enoch: The Hermeneia Translation. Minneapolis: Augsburg Fortress.
  20. Orlov, AA 2007. ‘On the Polemical Nature of 2 (Slavonic) Enoch’, Scrinium, 3(1), pp. 337–363.
  21. Orlov, A & Boccaccini, G 2012. New Perspectives on 2 Enoch: No Longer Slavonic Only. Leiden: Brill.
  22. Powęska, M 2018. ‘Księga Przypowieści Henocha’, Resovia Sacra, 25, pp. 339–371.
  23. Prince, PE 2025. ‘A Critique of Suicide from Camussian Perspective’, Advance Journal of Arts, Humanities and Social Sciences, 8(3), pp. 107–117.
  24. Rowland, C 2003. ‘Review: 1 Enoch 1. A Commentary on the Book of 1 Enoch’, Journal of Theological Studies, 54(2), pp. 635–641.
  25. Stuckenbruck, LT 2007. 1 Enoch 91–109. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
  26. Stuckenbruck, LT 2016. ‘The Use and Function of Jeremianic Tradition in 1 Enoch’, in Schmidt, K. & Najman, H. (eds.) Jeremiah’s Scriptures. Brill, pp. 268–279.

 P1