Previous scholarship pointed out passages in the Qur’an that betray an Enochian subtext indicating that the qur’anic author was familiar with the myth of fallen angels found in the Book of the Watchers; one of five documents comprising what scholars today call 1 Enoch. This paper reaches beyond the scattered observations of previous authors to make a stronger claim. The qur’anic messenger knows about the myth of the fallen angels and he is at pains to deny that this heavenly rebellion ever took place. The messenger’s adamant rejection of the myth seems programmatic to such an extent that it systematically revises strands of biblical salvation history where Enochian lore plays an important role. I substantiate this hypothesis by providing an intertextual analysis of Q18:50-51 and Q2:28-39. Before that I will provide background information that informs my readings of these passages. Throughout the Hebrew Bible one notices a motif of a divine council of bənê ĕlōhîm that assisted YHWH in the creation of the world. Through an exegetical expansion of Genesis 6:1-4, these divine beings are presented in the Book of the Watchers as fallen angels. Building on others, I argue that Q18:50-51 serves as a rejection of the idea that God had sons which could be fallen angels. The Qur’an rejects the idea of a divine council of bənê ĕlōhîm in Q18:51 which evokes the scene at Job 38:7 by claiming that the devil and his progeny never witnessed “the creation of the heavens and the earth.” The claim that God would never take demons as helpers (18:50), if not to be read as self-evidently redundant, would make little sense unless the qur’anic author presupposes his audience’s foreknowledge of the tradition of fallen angels found in the Book of the Watchers. The Devil and his progeny are not fallen angels who went on to become demons, because God would never place Himself to take them on as His sons as helpers in the first place. In effect the Qur’an rejects an Enochian etiology of evil. Q2:28-39 helps to corroborate this reading. Others have noticed that the angelic protest in Q2:30 has a close parallel to 1Enoch 9:4. I will argue that this placement is not haphazard but was purposely done to revise the soteriological implications of the Enochian narrative. I will wrap up the paper by examining how this reading is consistent with other teachings of the Qur’an such as the fact that the angels do not teach magic, and the need for the Jinn to be ontologically separate from angels among others. Verses that could be read as presenting potential counter-examples to my thesis will also be presented and briefly discussed.