Book of Enoch

[Guest shiloh357]

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.

 

It is a logical fallacy to assume that early fathers knew more, or had a more pure faith simply because they were in closer proximity to the apostles.  That's not how we determine truth. 

 The early church until the 4th century until Augustine, believed in the premillennial view and a literal millennium.   It was Augustine who began the amillennial view of biblical prophecy.    So, if the argument is the earliest fathers are correct simply because they were I closer proximity  to John and the other Apostles, then it follows that you should believe in a literal millennial reign.

[Guest shiloh357]

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?

I didn't claim that modern Christians don't have some very unbiblical positions.   That's not the point.   I was responding to post that seems to indicate that since Tertullian accepted the book of Enoch that such an endorsement means that the book of Enoch is a reliable and trustworthy source.   Many use the book of Enoch because they are caught up in extra-terrestrial conspiracy theories and any way they can find to legitimize it as a source they will use to justify the use of Enoch to support belief in extra-terrestrials.   My point is that the early church fathers are not an accurate source for gauging truth.   The Bible alone is our plumline for truth, not the early church fathers.

[missmuffet]

Question: "What is the book of Enoch and should it be in the Bible?"

Answer: The Book of Enoch is any of several pseudepigraphal (falsely attributed works, texts whose claimed authorship is unfounded) works that attribute themselves to Enoch, the great-grandfather of Noah; that is, Enoch son of Jared (Genesis 5:18). Enoch is also one of the two people in the Bible taken up to heaven without dying (the other being Elijah), as the Bible says "And Enoch walked with God, and he was not; for God took him." (Genesis 5:24; see also Hebrews 11:5). Most commonly, the phrase "Book of Enoch" refers to 1 Enoch, which is wholly extant only in the Ethiopic language.

The biblical book of Jude quotes from the Book of Enoch in verses 14-15, “Enoch, the seventh from Adam, prophesied about these men: ‘See, the Lord is coming with thousands upon thousands of his holy ones to judge everyone, and to convict all the ungodly of all the ungodly acts they have done in the ungodly way, and of all the harsh words ungodly sinners have spoken against him.’” But this does not mean the Book of Enoch is inspired by God and should be in the Bible.

Jude’s quote is not the only quote in the Bible from a non-biblical source. The Apostle Paul quotes Epimenides inTitus 1:12 but that does not mean we should give any additional authority to Epimenides’ writings. The same is true with Jude, verses 14-15. Jude quoting from the book of Enoch does not indicate the entire Book of Enoch is inspired, or even true. All it means is that particular verse is true. It is interesting to note that no scholars believe the Book of Enoch to have truly been written by the Enoch in the Bible. Enoch was seven generations from Adam, prior to the Flood (Genesis 5:1-24). Evidently, though, this was genuinely something that Enoch prophesied – or the Bible would not attribute it to him, “Enoch, the seventh from Adam, prophesied about these men…” (Jude 14). This saying of Enoch was evidently handed down by tradition, and eventually recorded in the Book of Enoch.

We should treat the Book of Enoch (and the other books like it) in the same manner we do the other Apocryphal writings. Some of what the Apocrypha says is true and correct, but at the same time, much of it is false and historically inaccurate. If you read these books, you have to treat them as interesting but fallible historical documents, not as the inspired, authoritative Word of God.

http://www.gotquestions.org/book-of-Enoch.html

Edited August 16, 2015 by bopeep1909

[Diaste]

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.

I think we would easily be able to discern if the writings of a particular author lined up with accepted scriptures. 

[OakWood]

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.

I think we would easily be able to discern if the writings of a particular author lined up with accepted scriptures. 

But I haven't read it yet, so I can't until I do.

[Diaste]

 

 

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.

This is what I'm talking about. You aren't even sure of your own beliefs. How was Jesus to place any book in the canon when he was here? None of the books of the NT were written until after he ascended to heaven. As far as your earlier 'reasoning' about scripture referencing written scripture you are mistaken. In the Sermon on the Mount Jesus repeatedly says, "It has been said." or, " You have heard that is was said," And then goes on to quote OT passages either from the 10 commandments or Jewish law. Are we then to believe that most of the Torah in non-canonical because Jesus neglected to say. "It is written." ?  I think the phrase, "It is written," is used for particular emphasis to fully engage the hearers attention. It also solidifies the weight of the issue, and it establishes the immutability of the precept, the God breathed inspiration of the words. Dismissing the possibility of the existence of a  book because three words were missing from a direct quote by an inspired NT writer is prejudice in my mind. 

 

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.

[other one]

 

 

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.

This is what I'm talking about. You aren't even sure of your own beliefs. How was Jesus to place any book in the canon when he was here? None of the books of the NT were written until after he ascended to heaven. As far as your earlier 'reasoning' about scripture referencing written scripture you are mistaken. In the Sermon on the Mount Jesus repeatedly says, "It has been said." or, " You have heard that is was said," And then goes on to quote OT passages either from the 10 commandments or Jewish law. Are we then to believe that most of the Torah in non-canonical because Jesus neglected to say. "It is written." ?  I think the phrase, "It is written," is used for particular emphasis to fully engage the hearers attention. It also solidifies the weight of the issue, and it establishes the immutability of the precept, the God breathed inspiration of the words. Dismissing the possibility of the existence of a  book because three words were missing from a direct quote by an inspired NT writer is prejudice in my mind. 

 

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.

 

which Bible are you referring to.  I have about a dozen different translations and they don't all say the same thing.  All the different manuscripts that we have don't say the same thing.  I'm not putting the Bible down, but just wanting for us all to be realistic about things.

I am told that the places where Jesus quotes the old testament his quotes follow the septuagint more than anything else.

 

[Diaste]

 

 

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.

This is what I'm talking about. You aren't even sure of your own beliefs. How was Jesus to place any book in the canon when he was here? None of the books of the NT were written until after he ascended to heaven. As far as your earlier 'reasoning' about scripture referencing written scripture you are mistaken. In the Sermon on the Mount Jesus repeatedly says, "It has been said." or, " You have heard that is was said," And then goes on to quote OT passages either from the 10 commandments or Jewish law. Are we then to believe that most of the Torah in non-canonical because Jesus neglected to say. "It is written." ?  I think the phrase, "It is written," is used for particular emphasis to fully engage the hearers attention. It also solidifies the weight of the issue, and it establishes the immutability of the precept, the God breathed inspiration of the words. Dismissing the possibility of the existence of a  book because three words were missing from a direct quote by an inspired NT writer is prejudice in my mind. 

 

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.

 

which Bible are you referring to.  I have about a dozen different translations and they don't all say the same thing.  All the different manuscripts that we have don't say the same thing.  I'm not putting the Bible down, but just wanting for us all to be realistic about things.

I am told that the places where Jesus quotes the old testament his quotes follow the septuagint more than anything else.

 

no idea what you are talking about. But as point I would get rid of any 'bible' that isn't "saying" the same thing as the other bible.I would stick with the KJV as the standard since the earliest manuscripts extant confirm the OT and the volume of examples of NT writings confirm the veracity of the NT. And the reality of all this is that more is not always better and neither is newer. You do realize the Septuagint is the Greek version of the OT? So yeah, I guess Jesus' OT quotes would come from the Septuagint more than anything else.

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.

[thereselittleflower]

 

 

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.

This is what I'm talking about. You aren't even sure of your own beliefs. How was Jesus to place any book in the canon when he was here? None of the books of the NT were written until after he ascended to heaven. As far as your earlier 'reasoning' about scripture referencing written scripture you are mistaken. In the Sermon on the Mount Jesus repeatedly says, "It has been said." or, " You have heard that is was said," And then goes on to quote OT passages either from the 10 commandments or Jewish law. Are we then to believe that most of the Torah in non-canonical because Jesus neglected to say. "It is written." ?  I think the phrase, "It is written," is used for particular emphasis to fully engage the hearers attention. It also solidifies the weight of the issue, and it establishes the immutability of the precept, the God breathed inspiration of the words. Dismissing the possibility of the existence of a  book because three words were missing from a direct quote by an inspired NT writer is prejudice in my mind. 

 

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.

 

which Bible are you referring to.  I have about a dozen different translations and they don't all say the same thing.  All the different manuscripts that we have don't say the same thing.  I'm not putting the Bible down, but just wanting for us all to be realistic about things.

I am told that the places where Jesus quotes the old testament his quotes follow the septuagint more than anything else.

 

That is correct.

[Diaste]

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?

I didn't claim that modern Christians don't have some very unbiblical positions.   That's not the point.   I was responding to post that seems to indicate that since Tertullian accepted the book of Enoch that such an endorsement means that the book of Enoch is a reliable and trustworthy source.   Many use the book of Enoch because they are caught up in extra-terrestrial conspiracy theories and any way they can find to legitimize it as a source they will use to justify the use of Enoch to support belief in extra-terrestrials.   My point is that the early church fathers are not an accurate source for gauging truth.   The Bible alone is our plumline for truth, not the early church fathers.

but that is the point. How did you first know the bible was the word of God? Someone told you. Later, you had an experience with the Holy ghost. Well, perhaps that happened. I don't know, I'm just assuming. Unless you had a vision from God concerning the god inspired truth of the bible, you relied on  people to tell you the bible is the truth. it really is acceptable to rely on authority when that authority has accomplished scholarly works in the area being investigated.  To say the early church father's were wrong or unreliable is to say contemporary church leaders are just as unreliable. Honestly, who are you going to rely on? Scholars whose works have been confirmed or modern dime a dozen pastors and their ilk? I'm not saying that any of  them are right or wrong. But it's clear the closer to the point of origin we can get the closer we are to the real truth, and further we move away from the originator the less truth we see. I say read it for yourself, decide for yourself and keep less than well conceived opinions to yourself as well.