One of the most enlightening scholars regarding the Book of Enoch is James C. Vanderkam of the University of Notre Dame.  Although VanderKam's study of the Ethiopic Book of Enoch puts forth more questions than answers, the honesty of the questions themselves lets the reader know that the perspective of  the (creation-centered) Book of Enoch was far different than the (human-centered) laws purportedly given to Moses on Mt. Sinai.  VanderKam remarks quite accurately that the Decalogue and the laws given to Moses on Sinai have almost nothing to do with the morality of the Book of Enoch.  It is indisputable that this is true.  While the Decalogue focuses on humanity's relationship with the Divine and with other humans, the Book of Enoch, like the vegetarian covenant of Genesis 1: 28-29, is creation-centered, and refers to the ideal morality of all creatures, when it indisputably infers that all creatures are to be vegetarian.

    Orthodox Jews cannot adequately interpret Genesis 1: 30, a scripture in which Deity commands all creatures to eat vegetation, because it was not a scripture born of what we call orthodox Judaism, but instead is a scripture that has a clear Hindu/Jain source, one which acknowledges, as Judaism does not, that other creatures have sentience and free will.

    It is unthinkable for the orthodox Jew, for the orthodox Christian, and for the orthodox Sunni Muslim, to think that other creatures are sentient beings with free will.

And to every beast of the earth and to every bird of the air and to everything that creeps on the earth, everything that has the breath of life, I have given every green plant for food. Genesis l: 30.

"the earth was corrupt, for all flesh had corrupted its ways upon the earth" Genesis 6:12

9 And behold! He cometh with ten thousands of His holy ones
To execute judgement upon all,
And to destroy all the ungodly:
And to convict all flesh
Of all the works of their ungodliness which they have ungodly committed,
And of all the hard things which ungodly sinners have spoken against Him.

    Furthermore, both 'Genesis' and the Book of Enoch relate the evil, the violence and corruption of all flesh, with the giants who were on earth, who married the daughters of men, giants who have become corrupt.  The giants in Enoch are described as the Fallen Angels who married the daughters of men, and likewise were corrupt, teaching their evil ways to humans as well.
 

    The rewriter of "Genesis" however, for obvious reasons, refuses to specify the violence and corruption that have caused God to desire to destroy the world.  The Book of Enoch, however is quite specific: all bloodshed, whether of other creatures or humans, mining, making weaponry, cosmetics, writing, are all evil.  In other words, creation is to be let alone, not exploited.  Humans are to live and be satisfied with the plants of creation.  Numerous passages in Enoch describe trees, vegetation in general, and their uses, as food, spice, shade.  In other words, industrial civilization is not acceptable.  Humans are simply an equal part of the landscape of creation, not favored creatures who may subdue, have dominion over, or eat other creatures, or have other creatures be in the state of dread and terror.  Those are the marks of Fallen Humanity, the result of humans accepting the evil teachings of demons, or as put in the Book of Enoch, the "sorceries of fallen angels."
 

    In Isaias' classic denunciation of animal sacrifices, Isaias links the animal sacrifices with Sodom and Gomorrah.  Deity destroys those cultures which destroy the creatures of the Creator.  And according to Origen, who was obviously well read in the Book of Enoch, those who kill the creatures of the Creator are apostates, traitors against the will of the Creator, and their actions, in particular their animal sacrifices, move Deity to cause natural disasters in order to destroy those who have become violent.

    VanderKam also asks the very poignant question: "Was Enoch chosen to make a wider appeal than Moses who lived after the nation of Israel had begun?"  In asking such a question he is taking it for granted that the scriptures regarding Moses are true scriptures, but narrow perhaps in their focus, whereas the scriptures of Enoch quite obviously embrace the behavior of all creatures.  In fact it is the ethic of the Book of Enoch that is in harmony with the vegetarian covenant of Genesis 1: 29-30, and not the Decalogue, which is obviously a fabrication by one of the writers revising the Torah.

   Just as Edgar Allan Poe wrote an aesthetic that focussed on rhythm, one of Poe's strongest aspects in his poetry, so too VanderKam, like most carnivorous scholars, embraces a philosophy or religious view which justifies the animal sacrifices  and carnivorism.  VanderKam, however, asks honest questions which can lead the true scholar to new discoveries.  Most orthodox scholars don't bother doing so.  This view is seen to its extreme, for example, in works by scholars which actually insist that Isaias was not against animal sacrifices, whether in the Temple or not, in spite of the overwhelming evidence in his scriptures that he regarded cultures practicing animal sacrifices as worthy of destruction, like Sodom and Gomorrah, and in spite of Isaias' eschatological view that in the Final Times all creatures would live peacefully together.
 

     It is because of such absurdities that it has been posited that the term "orthodox scholar" is an oxymoron, because orthodoxy by definition does not go beyond the acceptable boundaries of the status quo, whereas the true scholar accepts no boundaries, and accepts no a priori theories, when investigating the truth.  The absurdity of the orthodox position was evidenced by the attitude of virtually all orthodox scholars who said that the Dead Sea Scrolls did not at all challenge orthodox Christianity or orthodox Judaism. To the contrary, the Essenes' denunciations of animal sacrifices and their acceptance of the family of creation showed they were creation-centered, and not human centered, adherents of the original and only real dietary covenant between God and creation that is seen in Gen. 1: 29-30.  As Sirach said: "The love of a man is for his neighbor, but the love of God is for all living beings."  The Book of Enoch and the Essenes, as well as the late Jewish prophets, and the only true Jesus, the Ebionite Jesus, and his associates, were likewise adherents to that covenant.

      Finally, however, even the orthodox scholar must admit that the Book of Enoch and "Genesis" agree on:

1. The Vegetarian Covenant,
2. That All Flesh has Consciousness and Free Will
(for you do not give a command to those who have no freedom to execute or disobey it.)
3.  That the Giants or Fallen Angels were involved with the corruption and violence.
4.  And that Deity came "to convict all flesh," not just humans.
 

    One of the evasive ploys of the orthodox scholar, however, as seen in Catholic Editions of the "Book of Zechariah," is to call all attacks on orthodoxy's beliefs, such as Zechariah's denunciation of those who kill animals and sell their flesh for profit, as allegorical, that is, as not having literal value.  In other words, the Catholic Editors of the Bible are saying "Whatever agrees with the Roman Catholic Church's views are true, and whatever disagrees must be seen as allegorical or symbolical, not literally true."  This is the attribute of the escapist, the elitist, and the egotist, who does not want to consider even the possibility that his or her views need correcting.  The orthodoxies of the world not only have God complexes, saying their evils are sanctioned by God, which is bad enough, but because they regard their own orthodox beliefs as given by God, they are beyond correction. They are Perfect. They mirror the Divine Mind.  In so many words, that is what the rabbinical orthodoxy of Judaism, the fundamentalists of Christianity, and the Sunni Muslim tradition is saying: We already have the perfect tradition that needs no correcting.

     Egotism and elitism are the attributes of all those who claim to have the perfect scriptures.  And such egotism and elitism are part and parcel of the power struggle of those wishing, through revising the scriptures, to sanction their profit-making through the meat and animal foods industries, and to also sanction oligarchies or plutocracies, the rule of the rich, that is, governments of the rich enslaving those beneath them, as do all the industrial governments of the world.  Justify the slaughtering and eating of animals, justify economic slavery through the scriptures, and we have an accurate scenario of our times.