dr3032 Posted January 22, 2019 Group: Advanced Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 13 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 332 Content Per Day: 0.16 Reputation: 273 Days Won: 0 Joined: 06/23/2018 Status: Offline Share Posted January 22, 2019 Do you consider it canon or non-canon? Why or why not? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ENOCH2010 Posted January 22, 2019 Group: Senior Member Followers: 8 Topic Count: 6 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 907 Content Per Day: 0.20 Reputation: 382 Days Won: 0 Joined: 11/03/2011 Status: Offline Birthday: 07/07/1866 Share Posted January 22, 2019 It's not in the canon, should it be, maybe. Was it read and studied during Lords first advent, I think so. Should it be read and studied today, I think so, I have read it many times. Some things in it, I think are not correct but a lot can be learned from it. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R. Hartono Posted January 23, 2019 Group: Royal Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 763 Topics Per Day: 0.34 Content Count: 6,897 Content Per Day: 3.09 Reputation: 1,976 Days Won: 1 Joined: 02/15/2018 Status: Offline Share Posted January 23, 2019 (edited) Thats the only book that records world history be4 the flood, a very precious one more worthy than diamond. Edited January 23, 2019 by R. Hartono 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Willa Posted January 23, 2019 Group: Worthy Ministers Followers: 68 Topic Count: 185 Topics Per Day: 0.04 Content Count: 14,204 Content Per Day: 3.35 Reputation: 16,629 Days Won: 30 Joined: 08/14/2012 Status: Offline Share Posted January 23, 2019 Unfortunately most of the book was probably added after the time of Christ, and it is not the Enoch that was recorded in the Bible. It is definitely not cannon. Got Questions says: 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. (edited) 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. Recommended Resource: The Canon of Scripture by F.F. Bruce Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
other one Posted January 23, 2019 Group: Worthy Ministers Followers: 29 Topic Count: 593 Topics Per Day: 0.08 Content Count: 55,875 Content Per Day: 7.55 Reputation: 27,624 Days Won: 271 Joined: 12/29/2003 Status: Offline Share Posted January 23, 2019 9 hours ago, dr3032 said: Do you consider it canon or non-canon? Why or why not? There is vert strict rules as to what was decided to add to the canon.... I don't think we can answer all those questions that it has to muster to add it to the canon.... However that does not make it untrue as some people are want to do..... it was within the general knowledge of the people during Jesus time and during the first century when the New Testament was written. It has always been part of the Ethiopian bible and there are fragments of many copies within the dead sea scrolls.... It's also referenced by the writers of the New Testament and many of the first century church fathers.... Should it be canon.... no I don't think so, but I do believe 1Enoch is mostly true and should be understood so as to grasp some of the context of the Bible itself. 2 Enoch is a very bad translation and 3 Enoch is basically Jewish Kabbalistic mysticism and should be totally rejected... Just my two cents. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Patriot21 Posted January 23, 2019 Group: Worthy Ministers Followers: 28 Topic Count: 338 Topics Per Day: 0.05 Content Count: 15,676 Content Per Day: 2.46 Reputation: 8,497 Days Won: 39 Joined: 10/25/2006 Status: Offline Birthday: 02/27/1985 Share Posted January 23, 2019 Should probably be burned for the heresy that it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
other one Posted January 23, 2019 Group: Worthy Ministers Followers: 29 Topic Count: 593 Topics Per Day: 0.08 Content Count: 55,875 Content Per Day: 7.55 Reputation: 27,624 Days Won: 271 Joined: 12/29/2003 Status: Offline Share Posted January 23, 2019 as a citizen of this great constitutional republic, you have the right to think and express whatever you want. I would never attempt to take that away from you even though you have to know that I do greatly disagree. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Called Out One Posted January 23, 2019 Group: Members Followers: 4 Topic Count: 1 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 35 Content Per Day: 0.02 Reputation: 26 Days Won: 0 Joined: 01/19/2019 Status: Offline Share Posted January 23, 2019 Personally, It does not make sense to me that Jude would have quoted from the Book of Enoch if, in fact, it were heresy as some claim. Particularly in light of the fact the whole point behind his letter was to warn us against those who infiltrate the church and undermine it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
enoob57 Posted January 23, 2019 Group: Worthy Ministers Followers: 35 Topic Count: 99 Topics Per Day: 0.02 Content Count: 40,796 Content Per Day: 7.95 Reputation: 21,264 Days Won: 76 Joined: 03/13/2010 Status: Offline Birthday: 07/27/1957 Share Posted January 23, 2019 https://carm.org/bible-difficulties/hebrews-revelation/jude-14-quotes-book-enoch-it-scripture Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justin Adams Posted January 23, 2019 Group: Worthy Ministers Followers: 26 Topic Count: 61 Topics Per Day: 0.03 Content Count: 9,602 Content Per Day: 4.02 Reputation: 7,795 Days Won: 21 Joined: 09/11/2017 Status: Offline Share Posted January 23, 2019 (edited) To a student of Hebraic writings, ancient and modern, there are many quotes that can be traced back by the apostles' use of them (sometimes almost word for word). Some scrolls we have and some we do not have. They are sometimes mentioned in the Tanach. The most interesting point to be observed about all this is that the 'bible' that the apostles had was mostly ancient Hebraic texts and other books we can dimly discern. They did NOT have a 'new testament' yet so they compiled that by first hand knowledge and by revelation. What is very clear is that there is not a lot that IS clear. As Saul said; 'if the had known they would not have killed the King of Glory...' Not everything the 'church fathers' said is correct either. Though much of that has been edited. As stated, linguistic scholars CAN tell the difference between true text and doctored text. It can be shown that even the complete text we have (AKA the KJV 1611) has some translation errors that were just part and parcel of the 'kingly' doctrines of the day. The Papist influence did away with the seventh day Sabbath along with other things because they really believed they had the right to do so. Even the Reformist ideas mostly adhered to the RCC although they did change somethings for the better. Rome actually sneered at the Reformist for following their dictates in one of their Vatican Briefs. Edited January 23, 2019 by Justin Adams Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts