Diaste Posted August 16, 2015 Group: Royal Member Followers: 14 Topic Count: 67 Topics Per Day: 0.02 Content Count: 6,637 Content Per Day: 1.99 Reputation: 2,371 Days Won: 2 Joined: 03/17/2015 Status: Offline Share Posted August 16, 2015 Endorsement by the early church fathers actually makes the book of Enoch MORE questionable The early church fathers had some very unbiblical positions. They were wrong more often than they were right.There are plenty of ancient documents that we know were not written by the author bearing their names. Often names of famous people were used to give documents more credibility in the eyes of the readership. Just because the book of Enoch bears his name, doesn't mean it was authored by him.Besides, if one takes a modern copy of the book of Enoch and compares it to the biblical quotation, there is a number of significant differences for them to have come from the same document. Like contemporary christians do not hold to VERY unbiblical positions? Like, somehow, we are above reproach when it comes to our understanding of the bible and God's concepts for our conduct and beliefs? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OakWood Posted August 16, 2015 Group: Royal Member Followers: 7 Topic Count: 867 Topics Per Day: 0.24 Content Count: 7,331 Content Per Day: 1.99 Reputation: 2,860 Days Won: 31 Joined: 04/09/2014 Status: Offline Birthday: 04/28/1964 Share Posted August 16, 2015 (edited) Be very care how you interpret what you are reading, nowhere in scripture does it indicate, the Enoch of Genesis ever wrote a book. Jude 1:14 And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints,15 To execute judgment upon all, and to convince all that are ungodly among them of all their ungodly deeds which they have ungodly committed, and of all their hard speeches which ungodly sinners have spoken against him.It does not say Enoch wrote a book. It says Enoch prophesied, or spoke. If Jude would have been referring to a book written by Enoch, scripture would have followed the precedent set forth in the Old Testament. If Jude would have been quoting out of a book by Enoch. He would have said, as it is written in the book of Enoch. Not that Enoch prophesied. When we allude to someone prophesying today, we interpret that as speech, not as authorship. The precedent is established in the following verses, this is the only book outside the canon that I have found mentioned in the bible. The book of Jasher. I do not believe this is an inspired book, but it must have had at least some historical significant prevalence at that time, for God to have allowed it’s mention twice, in two different books.Joshua 10:12 Then spake Joshua to the Lord in the day when the Lord delivered up the Amorites before the children of Israel, and he said in the sight of Israel, Sun, stand thou still upon Gibeon; and thou, Moon, in the valley of Ajalon.13 And the sun stood still, and the moon stayed, until the people had avenged themselves upon their enemies. Is not this written in the book of Jasher? So the sun stood still in the midst of heaven, and hasted not to go down about a whole day.2 Samuel 1:17 And David lamented with this lamentation over Saul and over Jonathan his son:18 (Also he bade them teach the children of Judah the use of the bow: behold, it is written in the book of Jasher.) No, it doesn't indicate that Enoch ever wrote a book but seeing as Enoch lived in antediluvian times and only Noah and his family survived the Flood how did anybody know what Enoch ever said unless there was a book that had been preserved on the ark?Jude refers to what Enoch actually said. Without a book, how did he know unless the Noah preserved an oral tradition that passed down for generations? And what has happened to that oral tradition today? I believe its possible the story may have been handed down word of mouth, but, in my humbled opinion, it was direct inspired revelation from God to Jude, as was with all scripture when it was recorded by His servants. Jude did not have to have knowledge of a book or attain information from it. I also considered, when Jesus was on the earth, He never in N.T. scripture mentions a book of Enoch, nor does He correct the O.T. canon.Even if it was a direct revelation from God to Jude then why mention Enoch at all? It's a bit like me receiving a revelation from God and God telling me that he had already given this revelation to Paul, John and Peter. Prophets don't usually quote other prophets unless they are reaffirming a previously declared prophecy - they receive fresh and unique prophecies direct from God.Jude wrote as if the revelation was already common knowledge among some believers, as if he is reminding us what Enoch had said.As for Jesus never mentioning a book of Enoch, well I'm sure that he didn't mention every single one of the other OT books either.Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that the book of Enoch is authentic (my inner jury is still out on that one) but I'm just trying to give valid reasons as to why the book can be trusted or not. Edited August 16, 2015 by OakWood additions Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diaste Posted August 16, 2015 Group: Royal Member Followers: 14 Topic Count: 67 Topics Per Day: 0.02 Content Count: 6,637 Content Per Day: 1.99 Reputation: 2,371 Days Won: 2 Joined: 03/17/2015 Status: Offline Share Posted August 16, 2015 Did anybody read or seen the video of Enoch? I know it is not in the Bible ..if anybody read it before please let me know what you think of it as I,m debating to watch the video online... From what I heard and seen so far..it is interesting .. Years ago, I got the book of Enoch and started reading it. Holy Spirit told me to throw it away, so I did. I didn't get that deep into it to say whats in it, but I can say that the fruit from the ones who do get into the book of Enoch is not good. I've seen many people get on a prideful spiritual high, fall into some crazy false doctrines, separate themselves from the body of Christ through reading that book and taking it as scripture. . Thank you Joshua for your opinion about this Why would people get prideful after reading it, does it add to the Bible.. It does add to the bible and should not be taken as scripture. I know mormons hold it as one of their writings. Pride and deception go hand in hand. When people believe they have special knowledge or revelation, they get prideful and because they think they have a higher revelation than others, they are not open to correction and they separate from anyone who disagrees with them. I've seen this happen many times. Pride, separation, rejecting of admonition happen in the church all the time and it has little to do with the perception of whether a book is canon. In fact it seems a point of pride to counsel others to reject a particular set of writings just because they are not a part of the canon, which was approved by men. This also seems like a rejection of the word of God since Jude clearly references Enoch. The argument that Enoch "prophesied" and the phrase, "as it was written" does not appear in Jude, so therefore Enoch never wrote a book also seems ill conceived. I'm betting Enoch did write down all his prophecies since it's was likely the prophecies were for a future fulfillment and ensuing generations would need to read and be encouraged by such words. What if the words of Enoch were for this generation and Satan is trying to deceive the church into rejecting much needed information, encouragement, correction etc? Or are you under the impression that only the flocks needs correction and the shepherds are above such actions? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OakWood Posted August 16, 2015 Group: Royal Member Followers: 7 Topic Count: 867 Topics Per Day: 0.24 Content Count: 7,331 Content Per Day: 1.99 Reputation: 2,860 Days Won: 31 Joined: 04/09/2014 Status: Offline Birthday: 04/28/1964 Share Posted August 16, 2015 Did anybody read or seen the video of Enoch? I know it is not in the Bible ..if anybody read it before please let me know what you think of it as I,m debating to watch the video online... From what I heard and seen so far..it is interesting .. Years ago, I got the book of Enoch and started reading it. Holy Spirit told me to throw it away, so I did. I didn't get that deep into it to say whats in it, but I can say that the fruit from the ones who do get into the book of Enoch is not good. I've seen many people get on a prideful spiritual high, fall into some crazy false doctrines, separate themselves from the body of Christ through reading that book and taking it as scripture. . Thank you Joshua for your opinion about this Why would people get prideful after reading it, does it add to the Bible.. It does add to the bible and should not be taken as scripture. I know mormons hold it as one of their writings. Pride and deception go hand in hand. When people believe they have special knowledge or revelation, they get prideful and because they think they have a higher revelation than others, they are not open to correction and they separate from anyone who disagrees with them. I've seen this happen many times. Pride, separation, rejecting of admonition happen in the church all the time and it has little to do with the perception of whether a book is canon. In fact it seems a point of pride to counsel others to reject a particular set of writings just because they are not a part of the canon, which was approved by men. This also seems like a rejection of the word of God since Jude clearly references Enoch. The argument that Enoch "prophesied" and the phrase, "as it was written" does not appear in Jude, so therefore Enoch never wrote a book also seems ill conceived. I'm betting Enoch did write down all his prophecies since it's was likely the prophecies were for a future fulfillment and ensuing generations would need to read and be encouraged by such words. What if the words of Enoch were for this generation and Satan is trying to deceive the church into rejecting much needed information, encouragement, correction etc? Or are you under the impression that only the flocks needs correction and the shepherds are above such actions? Good point. It's possible that the book of Enoch was not included in the canon because we weren't ready for it at the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hmbld Posted August 16, 2015 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 4 Topic Count: 48 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 2,491 Content Per Day: 0.54 Reputation: 1,457 Days Won: 1 Joined: 10/23/2011 Status: Offline Birthday: 02/02/1971 Share Posted August 16, 2015 Or it's also possible the book contains untruths and should be recognized as such? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OakWood Posted August 16, 2015 Group: Royal Member Followers: 7 Topic Count: 867 Topics Per Day: 0.24 Content Count: 7,331 Content Per Day: 1.99 Reputation: 2,860 Days Won: 31 Joined: 04/09/2014 Status: Offline Birthday: 04/28/1964 Share Posted August 16, 2015 Or it's also possible the book contains untruths and should be recognized as such?Yes, that's possible which is why I declared in a previous post that I am undecided. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rev2015 Posted August 16, 2015 Group: Members Followers: 1 Topic Count: 4 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 60 Content Per Day: 0.02 Reputation: 71 Days Won: 0 Joined: 07/14/2015 Status: Offline Share Posted August 16, 2015 (edited) Did anybody read or seen the video of Enoch? I know it is not in the Bible ..if anybody read it before please let me know what you think of it as I,m debating to watch the video online... From what I heard and seen so far..it is interesting .. Years ago, I got the book of Enoch and started reading it. Holy Spirit told me to throw it away, so I did. I didn't get that deep into it to say whats in it, but I can say that the fruit from the ones who do get into the book of Enoch is not good. I've seen many people get on a prideful spiritual high, fall into some crazy false doctrines, separate themselves from the body of Christ through reading that book and taking it as scripture. . Thank you Joshua for your opinion about this Why would people get prideful after reading it, does it add to the Bible.. It does add to the bible and should not be taken as scripture. I know mormons hold it as one of their writings. Pride and deception go hand in hand. When people believe they have special knowledge or revelation, they get prideful and because they think they have a higher revelation than others, they are not open to correction and they separate from anyone who disagrees with them. I've seen this happen many times. Pride, separation, rejecting of admonition happen in the church all the time and it has little to do with the perception of whether a book is canon. In fact it seems a point of pride to counsel others to reject a particular set of writings just because they are not a part of the canon, which was approved by men. This also seems like a rejection of the word of God since Jude clearly references Enoch. The argument that Enoch "prophesied" and the phrase, "as it was written" does not appear in Jude, so therefore Enoch never wrote a book also seems ill conceived. I'm betting Enoch did write down all his prophecies since it's was likely the prophecies were for a future fulfillment and ensuing generations would need to read and be encouraged by such words. What if the words of Enoch were for this generation and Satan is trying to deceive the church into rejecting much needed information, encouragement, correction etc? Or are you under the impression that only the flocks needs correction and the shepherds are above such actions? On the other hand what if Satan, is the source of the book of Enoch, and his full intent was to twist its content with that of true scripture for the purpose of deceiving one to believe it is inspired or somehow missing from the word of God. You see it can go both ways, and that is the problem. If it was meant as canon, I believe Jesus would have placed it there when he was here. Every example I've read in the bible when Satan is communicating with someone he is deliberately twisting scripture to get someone to obey him (he did this with Eve, and Christ also). Satan does this because even he knows, any and all power only exist through the word of God, and he will use it in any twisted manner for his own gain. How do we know this isn't the case with what some believe, is a writing by the Enoch of Genesis? I can only conclude from what I read in scripture. Scripture says Enoch prophesied, it never says he wrote a book. As I posted earlier as my reasoning, I gave 2 examples of how scripture indicates when it is referencing information from a non canon book. I can only follow the precedent given, not presumptions, or bets. For whatever reason, some choose to believe the Bible is not complete, and is missing some other ancient text that was left out as if man has control over what has been established as scripture. God in His omnipotence has kept His word infallible and complete, and He kept it without a supposed book written by Enoch. Edited August 16, 2015 by Rev2015 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Willa Posted August 16, 2015 Group: Worthy Ministers Followers: 68 Topic Count: 186 Topics Per Day: 0.04 Content Count: 14,247 Content Per Day: 3.32 Reputation: 16,659 Days Won: 30 Joined: 08/14/2012 Status: Offline Share Posted August 16, 2015 I have heard the theory that the original book of Enoch was lost and a forgery took its place. But most believe that God preserved what is necessary for us to have as Cannon. The writer may even have thrown in something from a popular book of the time, like we often quote Ben Franklin's or Shakespeare's maxims. An example of this is when he quoted from The Assumption of Moses, which was written in the first century AD. He was using these as examples of what we should or should not do. That does not mean the books are Cannon. Jude was also one of the last books to be received as Cannon, along with Hebrews (because it was not signed) and 2 & 3 John. This means it had been received as Cannon and widely circulated in some areas but others were not familiar with them or their authors so parts of the church were slower to accept them. The disciples of the apostles had to validate them for them to be accepted. Any person who is filled with the Holy Spirit can discern truth from error. There is consistency which runs through all Scripture. It reveals the character of God. So when we find a book which shows our God to be immoral or in some way contradicting that character, it stands out like a sore thumb. It is not unusual for a spurious apocryrphal writing to have moments of great insight interspersed with heresy. Consistency is everything when it comes to accepting cannon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thereselittleflower Posted August 16, 2015 Group: Royal Member Followers: 6 Topic Count: 58 Topics Per Day: 0.02 Content Count: 5,457 Content Per Day: 1.69 Reputation: 4,220 Days Won: 37 Joined: 07/01/2015 Status: Offline Share Posted August 16, 2015 Endorsement by the early church fathers actually makes the book of Enoch MORE questionable The early church fathers had some very unbiblical positions. They were wrong more often than they were right. There are plenty of ancient documents that we know were not written by the author bearing their names. Often names of famous people were used to give documents more credibility in the eyes of the readership. Just because the book of Enoch bears his name, doesn't mean it was authored by him. Besides, if one takes a modern copy of the book of Enoch and compares it to the biblical quotation, there is a number of significant differences for them to have come from the same document. Endorsement by the early church fathers actually makes the book of Enoch MORE questionable The early church fathers had some very unbiblical positions. They were wrong more often than they were right. It is amazing to me any time someone claims they understand christian truth better than the early christians did who still had the words of the Apostle ringing in their ears. The closer one to something, the more true one is to it. We are 2000 years removed, not 100. That you think you understand christianity better than they did betrays the source of such belief. The ego. Excellent point. The further we are from the point of origin the less attached we are to our beginnings. Understanding of the scriptural concepts of old, that came as easily as breathing to the apostles and the early church, choke contemporary christianity. Modern scriptural truth is diluted, muddled, fractured and suppressed. Thank you for pointing that out! Thank you for understanding what can happen when one is so far removed in time, place, language and culture from when the scrptures were written and the teachings of the Apostles given. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thereselittleflower Posted August 16, 2015 Group: Royal Member Followers: 6 Topic Count: 58 Topics Per Day: 0.02 Content Count: 5,457 Content Per Day: 1.69 Reputation: 4,220 Days Won: 37 Joined: 07/01/2015 Status: Offline Share Posted August 16, 2015 (edited) Regarding the book of Enoch, I have found following the path of the ancient christians to be the safest and truest path to follow. If they used the book of Enoch and held it in high regard, even if it didn't make it into the canon of scripture even back then, then this is sufficient reason to hold it in high regard now.While I struggled with the issues that many of you struggle with in trying to come to terms with how you believe today, and how different it is from how the earliest christians believed, I was praying as I was driving along a highway. I passed a protestant church with this on the sign in front right after I asked God to show me what to do about this:Jeremiah 6:16This is what the LORD says: "Stand at the crossroads and look; ask for the ancient paths, ask where the good way is, and walk in it, and you will find rest for your souls.I had to come to the point of realizing that if I truly wanted to be a christian, if I truly wanted chrsitianity, then I wanted nothing less than the full chrsitianity of the earliest christians, the christianity they lived, breathed, which guided their worship, their interactions, their testimony, for which they shed their blood and died for. I wanted the full chrsitianity of the Apostles. Why would I want anything less than this? Why would I want some abridged form of it such, as one of the many abridgments floating around today, the majority of which I have participated in at one point or other? There had always been something missing, something that didn't quite add up, logical holes in theology and doctrine, contradictions. Yet, I found that the ancient chrsitian faith of these earliest of chrsitians of the Apostles and those they sent to continue to lead the Church once they were gone to be theologically and logically complete, sound, lacking nothing. One seemless, coherent whole truth without contradiction.This included viewing the book of Enoch, while less than divinely inspired as canonical scripture is, nevertheless, very important in personal devotion and study in the things of God.I obeyed the words of the scripture in that verse above, and I have indeed found rest for my soul.i did not quote the full verse. The rest of it says: But you said, 'We will not walk in it.' This is a choice all must make. I chose to walk in it. I pray that none here passes from this life saying "We will not walk in it." Edited August 16, 2015 by thereselittleflower Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts