The Spirit Who Leads Us Into All Truth: Jesus, the Apostles, Enoch and the Continuing Revelation of Christ
Some things cannot be received all at once. Jesus knew this, and promised his disciples that the Holy Spirit would continue to teach them after his departure. Could this help us understand the relationship between the teaching of Jesus, the writings of the apostles, and the ancient traditions preserved in the Book of Enoch? And might the Spirit still be drawing our attention to truths that earlier generations were not ready, or able, to receive?
The road to Emmaus: Jesus opens the Scriptures
One of the most remarkable passages in the Gospels occurs after the resurrection, when two disciples are walking from Jerusalem to Emmaus. They are bewildered by the events of the preceding days. They had hoped that Jesus was the one who would redeem Israel, but their hopes appear to have been destroyed by his crucifixion.
Then Jesus himself joins them, although they do not recognise him.
When they explain their disappointment, Jesus responds:
“O fools, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken: Ought not Christ to have suffered these things, and to enter into his glory?”
— Luke 24:25–26
Luke then tells us something extraordinary:
“And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself.”
— Luke 24:27
Later, when Jesus appears to the wider group of disciples, Luke records that he says:
“These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me.”
— Luke 24:44
He then opens their understanding so that they can comprehend the Scriptures.
I have found myself wondering what Jesus actually said during that journey. Which passages did he bring together? What did he show them that they had not previously understood?
There are obvious places to begin.
Isaiah 52:13–53:12 describes the servant who is despised, rejected, wounded for the transgressions of others, and yet ultimately vindicated. Psalm 22 speaks of a righteous sufferer whose hands and feet are pierced, whose garments are divided, and whose suffering ends in a declaration of God's deliverance. Psalm 16 speaks of one whose soul will not be abandoned to the grave or allowed to see corruption. Psalm 110 describes the Lord's anointed figure seated at God's right hand.
Daniel 7 presents the mysterious figure “like a son of man” who receives dominion and an everlasting kingdom. Zechariah speaks of a humble king, of a pierced figure, and of a day when the Lord establishes his reign. The Passover, the sacrificial system, the bronze serpent in the wilderness, and the story of Joseph all offer further patterns through which the suffering and vindication of Jesus might be understood.
The astonishing thing is not simply that these passages can be connected with Jesus. It is that Jesus himself says that they were speaking about him.
He was giving the disciples the key to reading their own Scriptures.
But there is another question worth considering: did Jesus draw upon the wider body of Jewish religious tradition as well? Did he refer to writings and ideas familiar in the religious world of his time, even where those writings were not universally accepted as Scripture?
That question brings us to Peter, Jude, John and the Book of Enoch.
Peter's understanding of the suffering Messiah
Peter is particularly important because he was among those who heard Jesus teach, witnessed his ministry, and struggled to understand what kind of Messiah he was.
Before the crucifixion, Peter could not accept that Jesus must suffer and die. When Jesus began explaining that he would go to Jerusalem, suffer, be killed and rise again, Peter rebuked him.
Jesus' response was severe (Matthew 16:21–23).
This is worth remembering. Peter was not initially someone who had already worked out the Christian interpretation of Isaiah 53. He needed Jesus to teach him that the Messiah's suffering was not a failure of the divine plan but an essential part of it.
After the resurrection, however, Peter's preaching is full of this understanding.
In Acts 2, he interprets Psalm 16 in relation to the resurrection of Jesus. David, he argues, was speaking prophetically of the Messiah, whose body would not see corruption. Peter also invokes Psalm 110 to explain the exaltation of Jesus to God's right hand.
In Acts 3, Peter declares:
“But those things, which God before had shewed by the mouth of all his prophets, that Christ should suffer, he hath so fulfilled.”
— Acts 3:18
And in Acts 10:43 he says:
“To him give all the prophets witness, that through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins.”
The prophets, in Peter's understanding, were bearing witness to Jesus.
This becomes especially striking when we read 1 Peter.
In chapter 1, Peter writes that the prophets searched diligently concerning the salvation that had been promised. They were investigating the sufferings of Christ and the glory that would follow. He says that the Spirit of Christ was in them, testifying beforehand.
In chapter 2, Peter draws extensively on the language of Isaiah 53:
- Jesus committed no sin.
- No deceit was found in his mouth.
- He was led like a lamb.
- He bore our sins.
- His wounds bring healing.
- We were like sheep going astray, but have returned to the Shepherd.
The relationship between Isaiah 53 and 1 Peter 2:21–25 is unmistakable.
I find it entirely reasonable to think that Peter's understanding of these passages was profoundly shaped by what Jesus had taught him. We cannot prove that Peter's letter preserves the actual words of the Emmaus exposition, but we can see the same interpretative understanding at work.
Jesus had shown his disciples how to read the Scriptures in the light of his suffering, death, resurrection and glory. Peter subsequently preached and wrote from within that understanding.
The teacher had opened the Scriptures. The apostle was now bearing witness to what he had learned.
Was Isaiah's suffering servant understood as an individual?
There is another important question here.
Isaiah 53 has often been read by Christians as a prophecy of an individual Messiah who suffers on behalf of others. In many Jewish interpretations, however, the servant is understood corporately as Israel.
There are passages in Isaiah that support the national interpretation. Israel is explicitly called God's servant in Isaiah 41:8–9 and 44:1–2.
Yet the picture is not quite so simple.
In Isaiah 49, the servant is described as one who will bring Jacob back to God and restore Israel. The servant appears to have a mission to Israel itself:
“And now, saith the LORD that formed me from the womb to be his servant, to bring Jacob again to him, Though Israel be not gathered, yet shall I be glorious in the eyes of the LORD.”
— Isaiah 49:5
The servant can therefore be understood as an individual who represents Israel and fulfils Israel's calling. This is an important distinction. The servant may embody the people without being identical to the people in every passage.
Second Temple Judaism was not a single, uniform system of interpretation. Jewish communities held different expectations about the Messiah, the resurrection, angels, judgement, the end of the age and the restoration of Israel.
Some Jewish traditions anticipated an individual eschatological figure. Daniel 7, for example, presents one “like a son of man” receiving dominion, while also associating the kingdom with the saints of the Most High. Individual and collective meanings can exist together.
There are also intriguing texts from the period around the Dead Sea Scrolls that have been discussed in connection with suffering, exalted or priestly figures. Their precise interpretation is disputed, and they do not establish that all Jews expected a suffering, atoning Messiah. But they remind us that the religious imagination of the period was varied and sometimes more complex than later divisions between Jewish and Christian interpretation might suggest.
The Samaritan woman at the well offers another interesting window into this world.
The Samaritan woman and the expected Restorer
In John 4, Jesus meets a Samaritan woman beside a well. Their conversation begins with water but quickly becomes a discussion about worship, the Messiah and the coming restoration.
The woman says:
“I know that Messias cometh, which is called Christ: when he is come, he will tell us all things.”
— John 4:25
Jesus replies:
“I that speak unto thee am he.”
— John 4:26
Her expectation is significant.
The Samaritan understanding of the coming Restorer was not identical to the Jewish expectation of a Davidic Messiah. The figure is often described by the term Taheb, meaning the Restorer or one who returns. The expectation was strongly associated with Moses and Deuteronomy 18:15–18, where God promises to raise up a prophet like Moses.
This coming figure would reveal truth, restore proper worship and settle questions that divided the people.
The woman's words, “he will tell us all things,” fit this expectation remarkably well.
It is worth noticing that Jesus does not correct her expectation of an individual figure who will come and reveal the truth. Instead, he identifies himself as that figure.
This does not prove that she knew the Book of Enoch, or that she expected the suffering servant of Isaiah 53. Nor should we assume that every Samaritan belief was identical to that of Jewish communities. The Samaritan religious world had its own centre of authority, especially the Pentateuch and the worship associated with Mount Gerizim.
Nevertheless, the encounter shows that the expectation of an individual, divinely appointed revealer and restorer was not confined to one narrow religious circle.
Jesus was speaking into a world in which people were waiting for God to act through a particular person.
And then he told her that the person she was waiting for was standing in front of her.
Living water and the language of Enoch
The conversation at the well also contains another intriguing connection.
Jesus tells the woman:
“Whosoever drinketh of the water that I shall give him shall never thirst; but the water that I shall give him shall be in him a well of water springing up into everlasting life.”
— John 4:14
Later, at the Feast of Tabernacles, Jesus cries out:
“If any man thirst, let him come unto me, and drink.”
— John 7:37
John explains that Jesus was speaking about the Spirit (John 7:39).
The imagery of water as divine life, wisdom and spiritual nourishment is deeply rooted in the Hebrew Scriptures. Jeremiah 2:13 describes God as “the fountain of living waters”. Isaiah 55 invites the thirsty to come to the waters. Ezekiel 47 describes a life-giving river flowing from the temple, bringing renewal wherever it goes.
But there is also a striking passage in 1 Enoch.
In 1 Enoch 48, the text describes a fountain of righteousness and fountains of wisdom. Those who thirst are invited to drink and be filled. The passage then turns to the mysterious figure known as the Son of Man, whose name was known before the creation of the world and who is associated with light and hope.
The combination is fascinating:
- Water as a source of divine wisdom and life.
- The thirsty being invited to drink.
- A heavenly figure associated with the fulfilment of God's purposes.
- The hope of the righteous in the face of judgement.
The similarities with the language of John's Gospel are worth exploring.
This does not establish that Jesus was directly quoting 1 Enoch. Living water is a much wider biblical and Jewish image, and the dating and history of the Enochic Parables (the section containing these passages) remain debated. No copies of the Parables have been identified among the Dead Sea Scrolls, unlike other parts of the Enochic collection.
But the parallels invite us to take seriously the religious vocabulary that existed in the world in which Jesus taught.
It is possible to recognise a connection without claiming that we can prove direct literary dependence.
Enoch and the world of the apostles
The Book of Enoch is not one simple, uniform book. It is a collection of ancient Jewish writings, commonly called 1 Enoch, preserved in its complete form in Ethiopic.
It contains several distinct sections, including traditions about the Watchers, heavenly journeys, astronomical order, visions of judgement and the mysterious figure called the Son of Man or Chosen One.
The book was known in the ancient Jewish world. Fragments of several Enochic writings were found among the Dead Sea Scrolls. It was part of the religious environment in which Jesus and the apostles lived.
However, we need to distinguish between three things:
- A writing being known and read.
- A writing being regarded as spiritually valuable or authoritative by some people.
- A writing being accepted as Scripture by a particular community.
These are not necessarily the same.
The fact that a writing was found at Qumran does not prove that every member of the community regarded it as canonical Scripture. Nor does the fact that a New Testament writer uses a tradition from Enoch prove that the writer accepted every part of the collection as Scripture.
Nevertheless, the New Testament's engagement with Enochic material is difficult to ignore.
The clearest example is Jude.
Jude explicitly invokes Enoch
Jude writes:
“And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints, To execute judgment upon all...”
— Jude 14–15
This is closely related to 1 Enoch 1:9.
Jude does not merely refer to an ancient story about Enoch. He explicitly describes Enoch as prophesying.
That is important.
The passage shows that Jude regarded this Enochic prophecy as a legitimate witness in support of his warning about judgement. It is not necessary to conclude that Jude therefore regarded the entire collection of 1 Enoch as canonical in exactly the same way as the Torah or the Prophets. But it certainly means that we cannot dismiss the text as having no place in early Christian thought.
The relationship between Jude and 2 Peter is also striking.
Second Peter 2 describes angels who sinned and were cast into confinement, drawing on traditions that are closely related to the Watchers narrative in 1 Enoch 6–16. Jude 6 contains a very similar reference to angels who did not keep their proper position but abandoned their dwelling.
The literary relationship between Jude and 2 Peter is debated. Many scholars think that 2 Peter used Jude, though other explanations have been proposed. In either case, the shared language shows that these early Christian writings were engaging with a body of Jewish tradition that included the Watchers story.
There is another possible connection in 1 Peter 3:19–20, where Peter speaks of Christ proclaiming to “the spirits in prison” who were disobedient in the days of Noah. This passage has been interpreted in several ways, but one influential interpretation connects it with the rebellious heavenly beings of Enochic tradition.
Again, caution is necessary. The interpretation is disputed, and the authorship of 2 Peter in particular has been debated. But the presence of these themes in the New Testament is significant.
The apostles were not operating in a religious vacuum. They were interpreting the coming of Christ within a world filled with scriptural, prophetic and apocalyptic traditions.
Jesus, the angels and the Sadducees
Another passage deserves consideration.
When the Sadducees challenge Jesus about the resurrection, they present a hypothetical case involving a woman who has been married successively to seven brothers.
Jesus answers:
“For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven.”
— Matthew 22:30
The parallel accounts are found in Mark 12 and Luke 20.
This answer has an interesting resonance with the Watchers tradition in 1 Enoch. In 1 Enoch 15, the rebellious heavenly beings are described as having abandoned their proper heavenly order and taken human wives.
The Enochic account is concerned with the boundary between heavenly and earthly existence. The Watchers transgressed their appointed place by entering into human sexual relationships.
Jesus' statement that the resurrected will be like angels in heaven, neither marrying nor being given in marriage, has a conceptual similarity.
Does this mean Jesus was quoting Enoch?
We cannot establish that. The idea of angels not marrying was not necessarily exclusive to Enochic literature, and Jesus' immediate argument is directed at the Sadducees using the authority of the Torah.
He turns to the words spoken to Moses at the burning bush:
“I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob.”
— Exodus 3:6
His point is that God is not the God of the dead, but of the living.
This is especially interesting because the Sadducees were associated with rejecting the resurrection and, according to Acts 23:8, denying the existence of angels and spirits, whereas the Pharisees accepted them. The precise scope of Sadducean belief is a matter of historical discussion, but the contrast helps explain the setting of the exchange.
Jesus answers the challenge by appealing to the Torah, the common ground on which he can expose their misunderstanding.
Yet the wider angelic world familiar from Enoch provides an illuminating background to the discussion.
It is possible that Peter heard Jesus speak in a way that resonated with traditions he already knew, even when Jesus chose to ground his argument explicitly in Moses.
Did Jesus leave some things for the Holy Spirit to teach later?
This brings me to a thought that has become increasingly important in considering these passages.
At the Last Supper, Jesus tells his disciples:
“I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now.”
— John 16:12
He then promises:
“Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth.”
— John 16:13
And:
“He shall glorify me: for he shall receive of mine, and shall shew it unto you.”
— John 16:14
Jesus does not tell his disciples that they have already understood everything. Quite the opposite. He acknowledges that there are things they are not yet able to receive.
He promises that the Spirit will continue the work of teaching.
This is an extraordinary principle.
The disciples had spent years with Jesus. They had heard his parables, witnessed his miracles, listened to his explanations and seen the fulfilment of prophecy in his life. Yet even then, there were things they could not bear.
After the resurrection, Jesus opened their understanding of the Scriptures. After the ascension, the Holy Spirit came upon them. Their understanding continued to develop as they preached, encountered new situations and reflected on what God had done in Christ.
It is reasonable to ask whether the Spirit also helped them recognise the significance of traditions and prophetic writings that had not been central to Jesus' initial exposition.
Luke 24 tells us that Jesus began with Moses and the Prophets and referred to the Psalms. It does not tell us that he gave an exhaustive list of every Jewish religious writing he considered valuable, nor does it say that every subject was covered in one conversation.
Perhaps the apostles' understanding of the wider prophetic world continued to develop after Jesus' departure.
We should be careful not to claim that Jesus deliberately withheld a particular teaching about Enoch. The text does not say that. Nor can we demonstrate that the Spirit later instructed the apostles to accept the whole Enochic collection.
But the principle of progressive understanding is explicitly present in Jesus' own words.
The Spirit would guide them into truth, glorifying Christ and bringing to remembrance what Jesus had taught.
This does not mean that every later religious idea is true, or that every claimed revelation should be accepted without discernment. It means that the apostles themselves were promised continuing guidance, and that their understanding was not complete at the beginning.
John and the apocalyptic world of Enoch
The Book of Revelation also contains themes that are strikingly close to the world of Enochic apocalyptic literature.
Both writings describe heavenly thrones, cosmic judgement, the vindication of the righteous, the defeat of evil powers, and the renewal of creation.
The Enochic Parables describe the Son of Man as an exalted figure associated with judgement and the vindication of the righteous. Revelation presents Christ as the one who judges, reigns and brings the purposes of God to completion.
The imagery of a renewed heaven and earth appears in both traditions. Revelation 21–22 describes the new heaven and new earth, the New Jerusalem, the river of life and the tree of life. Enochic passages also look forward to a transformed creation and the vindication of the righteous.
There are parallels in the imagery of divine judgement as well. Revelation pictures the word proceeding from the mouth of the victorious Christ as a weapon of judgement (Revelation 1:16; 19:15). Enochic texts also describe judgement in language associated with the authority of the heavenly Son of Man.
But we should not assume that every parallel means John directly copied Enoch. Daniel, Isaiah, Ezekiel and other biblical writings provide much of the shared imagery. Jewish apocalyptic literature had a common vocabulary, and Revelation is deeply rooted in the Old Testament.
The important point is that John writes within a world of apocalyptic expectation that is also represented in Enoch.
Jude explicitly invokes Enoch. Second Peter engages with traditions closely associated with it. Revelation shares a remarkable number of themes with the wider apocalyptic world in which Enochic literature belongs.
This suggests that the early Christian understanding of Christ was expressed through a much wider network of Jewish prophetic and apocalyptic ideas than some later readers may realise.
The great oath, the name of the Son of Man and the order of creation
One of the most personally significant connections for me is found in 1 Enoch 69.
This chapter describes the great oath, a mysterious heavenly power associated with the order and stability of creation. It speaks of angelic beings and the consequences of their rebellion, and it includes a remarkable reference to the name of the Son of Man.
The passage is dense and difficult, and translations differ in how they render some of its details. It would be unwise to pretend that every aspect of the chapter is straightforward.
Nevertheless, what stands out to me is the association between the great oath, the revealed name of the Son of Man, and the order of the created world.
The passage invites reflection on the relationship between the authority of God, the heavenly order, the name of the Son of Man and the forces that govern creation.
It is particularly interesting when read alongside the New Testament's teaching about the name and authority of Jesus.
Paul writes:
“For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible...”
— Colossians 1:16
And:
“And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.”
— Colossians 1:17
The writer of Hebrews describes the Son as the one who upholds all things by the word of his power (Hebrews 1:3).
John opens his Gospel by declaring that all things were made through the Word, and that without him nothing was made that was made (John 1:3).
These are profound claims. Christ is not simply a teacher who enters creation to bring a message. He is intimately involved in creation's very existence and continuance.
When I read 1 Enoch 69 in this light, I see a possible point of contact between the Enochic language of heavenly order and the New Testament's declaration that all things are created and sustained through Christ.
I would not claim that the Enochic passage is simply another version of Colossians or Hebrews. Nor would I claim that all its details can be mapped neatly onto Christian doctrine. But the theological resonance is powerful.
It raises a question: might some ancient prophetic traditions have preserved glimpses of the relationship between the Son of Man and the order of creation that become clearer when read in the light of Christ?
That is a question worth exploring.
A personal experience of the name of Jesus and the trees
There is a personal reason why these passages have become especially meaningful to me.
Decades ago, during a church service, a message was delivered in tongues and then interpreted. The interpretation was:
“Consider the trees. They put forth buds and leaves. They do so by the power of the name of the Lord Jesus Christ.”
What made the experience particularly striking was that two people received the same interpretation.
At the time, I did not know the connection I would later discover in Enoch. It was only much later, when reading the book, that I encountered passages that seemed to resonate with that message.
The connection that especially caught my attention was 1 Enoch 69, with its account of the great oath, the name of the Son of Man and the ordering of the natural world.
I do not offer this personal experience as proof that every interpretation of Enoch is correct, or as something that others must accept as a demonstration. It is part of my own spiritual journey, and I recognise the difference between a personal experience and a claim that can be established historically or textually.
But the experience gave me a new way of looking at the relationship between Christ and creation.
The trees put forth buds and leaves. The seasons turn. Life emerges from what appears dormant. The created order continues to function according to laws and patterns that are beyond human control.
Scripture repeatedly presents creation as dependent upon God.
In Colossians, all things hold together in Christ. In Hebrews, the Son upholds all things by the word of his power. In Romans 8, creation itself is described as groaning and waiting for liberation. In Revelation 22, the tree of life bears fruit and its leaves are for the healing of the nations.
The tree is not merely a decorative biblical image. It can represent life, renewal, healing and the restoration of creation.
The message I heard connected the ordinary, recurring miracle of trees putting forth buds and leaves with the name of Jesus.
When I later encountered the Enochic material, I found myself considering whether the same underlying theological theme was present there: the authority of the Son of Man in relation to the order of creation.
I cannot prove that this was the intended meaning of the message I received. But I can say that the connection has been deeply significant to me.
The Spirit of Christ in the prophets
There is a verse in 1 Peter that I keep returning to:
“Searching what, or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow.”
— 1 Peter 1:11
Peter is describing the prophets as people through whom the Spirit of Christ was already at work.
This is an extraordinary statement.
The Spirit was not absent from the centuries before the incarnation. The Spirit was working in the prophets, bearing witness in advance to the sufferings and glory of Christ.
Peter's language suggests continuity between the prophetic witness of the past and the revelation of Christ in the present.
The writer of 2 Peter similarly says:
“For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.”
— 2 Peter 1:21
The exact authorship and date of 2 Peter are debated, and that should be acknowledged. Nevertheless, the theological claim is clear: prophecy is not merely the product of human imagination. It is associated with the action of the Holy Spirit.
If the Spirit was at work in the prophets, then the question of which ancient writings preserve genuine prophetic insight becomes important.
Jude's explicit use of Enoch is relevant here. It demonstrates that at least one New Testament writer could appeal to an Enochic prophecy in support of a Christian warning.
That does not settle the canonical status of the entire book. But it does mean that Enoch deserves more serious attention than it has sometimes received in Western Christian settings.
The possibility that the Spirit was at work in traditions outside the later boundaries of some Christian canons is a question that deserves thoughtful consideration.
Why the Ethiopian Church matters
One reason I find this subject particularly interesting is the position of the Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church.
Unlike most Western Christian traditions, the Ethiopian Orthodox Church retains 1 Enoch within its biblical canon. The complete text has been preserved in Ge'ez, the classical language of Ethiopia.
This means that Enoch has not been treated simply as an interesting historical document or a source of ancient Jewish mythology. It has continued to occupy a place within the scriptural life of a major Christian tradition.
The history of the book in other parts of Christianity is different.
Early Christian writers knew Enoch. Some regarded it with considerable respect, and Tertullian defended its use. Other Christian writers were more cautious. Over time, it did not retain the same canonical status in most Greek and Latin Christian traditions.
The reasons for this history are complex. They involve questions of language, transmission, reception, ecclesiastical authority and differing judgements about which books should be read as Scripture.
It would be too simplistic to say that the Western churches rejected Enoch because they were unable to receive the truth it contained. Nor can we assume that the Ethiopian Church's acceptance settles every historical or theological question.
But its continued preservation of Enoch is important.
It reminds us that Christianity has not always had one identical list of biblical books in every tradition. It also provides a living Christian context in which Enoch can be read as Scripture rather than merely as an ancient curiosity.
I think Western Christians would benefit from knowing more about this tradition, even if they do not share its canon.
At the very least, Jude's use of Enoch should make us cautious about dismissing the book out of hand.
Some things need to wait until they can be received
I keep returning to Jesus' words at the Last Supper:
“I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now.”
— John 16:12
There is something deeply human in this statement.
Jesus did not treat the disciples as though they were already capable of understanding everything. He knew their limitations. He knew that some truths would only become clear after his death and resurrection, and that the Spirit would continue to guide them.
The disciples' understanding was progressive.
Peter did not understand the suffering Messiah before the resurrection as he understood him afterwards. The disciples did not fully comprehend the meaning of Jesus' words until events had unfolded. The Spirit continued to teach them, not by replacing Jesus' message, but by bringing them more deeply into its meaning.
This principle should make us humble.
We should not assume that our present understanding exhausts everything the Spirit may teach. Neither should we accept every new idea simply because it is presented as revelation. The promise of the Spirit is not permission for uncritical speculation. Jesus says that the Spirit will glorify him.
That is the essential test.
Does an interpretation lead us towards Christ? Does it accord with the character and teaching of Jesus? Does it illuminate rather than contradict the central witness of the Gospel? Can we distinguish what the text actually says from what we infer?
These questions matter.
The fact that something is ancient does not make it true. The fact that something is outside a particular canon does not automatically make it false. And the fact that a New Testament writer uses an ancient tradition does not mean that every detail of that tradition must be accepted without examination.
But neither should we close our minds to the possibility that the Spirit's work in the ancient world was wider than the boundaries we have sometimes drawn around it.
One Spirit, many witnesses, one Christ
When I put these things together, I see a remarkable pattern.
Jesus opens the Scriptures to his disciples and shows them that the Messiah must suffer and enter into glory.
Peter carries that understanding into his preaching and letters. He sees the prophets as having been moved by the Spirit of Christ, bearing witness beforehand to the suffering and glory of the Messiah.
Jude explicitly invokes Enoch's prophecy. Second Peter engages with traditions associated with the Watchers. First Peter contains language that some interpreters connect with the same ancient traditions.
John's Gospel speaks of living water, divine life and the Spirit. Revelation presents Christ as the heavenly judge and victorious Son who brings creation to its fulfilment. The wider apocalyptic world represented by Enoch provides illuminating parallels, even where direct literary dependence cannot be established.
And in the Ethiopian Church, Enoch remains part of the living biblical inheritance of Christianity.
I find myself asking whether we have sometimes made the story of revelation narrower than it needs to be.
The Holy Spirit was not inactive before the New Testament. Peter explicitly says that the Spirit of Christ was at work in the prophets. The New Testament itself draws upon a rich world of Jewish prophetic and apocalyptic tradition.
The central question is not whether every ancient writing should be treated as Scripture. It is whether we are willing to examine the evidence carefully and recognise the possibility that the Spirit's witness may be found in places that some Christian traditions have neglected.
For me, the most important thing is that this must never displace Christ.
The Spirit does not lead us away from Jesus. As Jesus says in John 16:14, the Spirit glorifies him.
That is the thread running through everything.
The suffering servant, the Son of Man, the promised Restorer, the living water, the victorious judge, the one through whom all things were made and in whom all things hold together: these are not unrelated ideas when read in the light of the Gospel. They invite us to contemplate the extraordinary scope of Christ's identity and work.
Perhaps we should be more willing to explore the ancient witnesses that surround the New Testament, while remaining careful about what we can and cannot prove.
Perhaps we should also remember that the disciples themselves did not receive everything at once.
Jesus knew that.
He promised them the Spirit of truth.
And perhaps one of the lessons for us is the same one the disciples had to learn: some things need to wait until they can be received.
The Spirit who was at work in the prophets, who bore witness to Christ before his coming, who opened the Scriptures to the apostles after the resurrection, is the same Spirit whom Jesus promised would continue to guide his followers.
The question is not whether we have already understood everything.
The question is whether we are willing to keep listening, testing, learning and allowing all things to be brought into the light of Christ.
“He shall glorify me: for he shall receive of mine, and shall shew it unto you.” — John 16:14
(— From the output of a ChatGPT chat. Prompted by Stephen D Green in a chat with ChatGPT, November 2026. https://chatgpt.com/share/6af2d60f-aeec-83eb-9c51-e54250dafe6e )
