I reading from some sources that Enoch 1:9 isn't in any of the Aramaic or Greek fragments and I'm reading from some that it is. Do you have any information that would clear this up?
The text in question is found in both the Greek (Akhmim, aka the Codex Panopolitanus) and the original Aramaic (4QEn c 1); the passage is also extant in Latin. The Aramaic manuscript from Qumran is dated to the late first century BC. The other six copies of the book have lacunae (i.e. holes in the parchment resulting from processes of decay) where the passage would occur.
There is more reason for supposing that the book of Jude is older than this so-called “Book of Enoch” and that the author quoted from Jude rather than Jude from him.
No contemporary scholar worth his/her salt would make such a claim. This assertion sounds dated because similar claims were made prior to the publication of the Enochic manuscripts from Qumran (which some diehards like Solomon Zeitlin in the 1950s and 1960s refused to see as dating to the Second Temple period). Nowhere are the Dead Sea Scrolls dependent on Christian works and they have a terminus ad quem of AD 70-71 from the end of the Jewish Revolt (indeed, some revolters took Qumran scrolls with them to Masada where they made their last stand). The scroll of 1 Enoch attesting the passage in question does not belong to the latest manuscripts but from the first century BC. Other manuscripts of 1 Enoch are older; several belong to the early-to-mid second century BC. One scroll with a fuller version of the Book of Luminaries (which originally circulated independently) belongs to the late third century BC. The date of composition, moreover, must be earlier than the oldest manuscript. If you look carefully at the assortment of works at Qumran, you can see that the Enochic works date to an early foundational phase and not the later sectarian community (which distanced itself from its Enochic roots). 1 Enoch is a composite containing different works composed across several centuries, e.g. from the fourth-third century BC to the first century AD (e.g. the Book of Parables, which is the only portion of 1 Enoch absent from Qumran). This is plainly indicated by both internal evidence (e.g. the Maccabean date of the Animal Apocalypse in the Book of Dreams) and external evidence (e.g. the dependence of Jubilees, which dates to the middle of the second century BC, on the Book of Parables). Most scholars agree that ch. 1-5 of 1 Enoch (inclusive of the passage in question) were added to the Book of Watchers when it was joined with other works to form a single Enochic corpus (which also included the Book of Luminaries, the Book of Dreams, the Proto-Epistle of Enoch, and possibly the Book of Giants at one stage), and that had occurred by the early second century BC as manuscript evidence shows (ch. 1-5 are attested in two other copies of the book at Qumran, including one of the oldest manuscripts).
Jude never said that he quotes it from The Book of Enoch.
Does Matthew 2:17-18 quote specifically from The Book of Jeremiah? This contains a quote from Jeremiah 31:18 but alas, the author only says that this is what was said by "the prophet Jeremiah". So maybe this passage has nothing to do with the book of Jeremiah after all, since the author of Matthew failed to say he was quoting a "book"? The next chapter quotes Isaiah 40:3 but only says that the "prophet Isaiah" is being quoted. Nothing about quoting from a book of Isaiah. Maybe that passage has nothing to do with the book of Isaiah and the evangelist was just quoting from some unknown lost oracle of the "prophet Isaiah". Scores of other examples could be cited from the NT. There is nothing unusual about how 1 Enoch 1:9 is quoted in Jude 14-15; it is perfectly in keeping with citational practices in early Christianity. Only through the imposition of a double standard would somehow this be dismissed as a genuine quotation and Matthew 2:17-18, 3:18, etc. etc. be regarded as bonafide quotes from the OT.
As mentioned above, the author of Jude not only quotes 1 Enoch but also utilizes its wording and ideas throughout the epistle. Nor is this the only pseudepigraphal book used by the author; v. 9 alludes to the Assumption of Moses. Early church fathers were well aware that the author used sources not recognized as canonical by rabbinical Jews (whose ideas of canon derived from first-century AD Pharisees, who never recognized the Enochic works, which sprang instead from the (proto)-Essene stream of Judaism), which was the very reason why Jude had problems being accepted itself as canonical scripture. Others, such as Tertullian, cited Jude as proof that 1 Enoch should be accepted as scripture regardless of what the Jews of his day said.
