God did not teach us these things

[teddyv]

From what I recall, Jude was almost excluded from canon because of the reference to Enoch. Also, if memory serves, among others I'm sure, Luther was against the inclusion of Revelation to canon. Just Revelation alone has probably caused more spilled ink and wasted pixels than any other part of the Bible.

[Marathoner]

11 minutes ago, teddyv said:

From what I recall, Jude was almost excluded from canon because of the reference to Enoch. Also, if memory serves, among others I'm sure, Luther was against the inclusion of Revelation to canon. Just Revelation alone has probably caused more spilled ink and wasted pixels than any other part of the Bible.

Luther was also opposed to the epistle of James, which he famously referred to as an epistle of straw because "it held no evangelical character." The early reformers held to some of the traditions of Rome such as infant baptism, and joined Catholic authorities in the persecution of Anabaptists who believed in adult baptism and the primacy of the scriptures. Nothing common to men is as "cut and dried" as some would like to believe.  

[Waggles]

Daniel 12:8  I heard, but I did not understand. Then I said, “O my lord, what shall be the outcome of these things?” 
9  He said, “Go your way, Daniel, for the words are shut up and sealed until the time of the end. 
10  Many shall purify themselves and make themselves white and be refined, but the wicked shall act wickedly. And none of the wicked shall understand, but those who are wise shall understand. 

[Guest]

I read Song of Solomon recently.  What am I supposed to take away from this book?  It doesn't seem to fit categorization.

[appy]

2 hours ago, Willa said:

Not you personally but you all generally.   I wasn't accusing anyone at all.  Like you personally I was stating principles and was agreeing exactly with your post.

I have not been well lately and will try to refrain from posting to avoid causing misunderstandings.

Sorry to hear you don't feel well.

Its not you Willa, you didn't create any misunderstanding. There is nothing wrong with your post or how you phrased it. People in general speaking, really, really want to believe that those Apocrypha books are on par with scripture. I'm sure your already in agreement with the following, but here goes

A lot of their belief or “proof” comes mostly from the Jude quote. The letter of Jude is one of rebuke and stern criticism aimed at arrogant church members who set themselves up against Jude. He begins with their misunderstanding, arrogance, and presumption in regard to a given passage in scripture.

The story of the exchange between the devil and the arch angel is not even in scripture. Scripture itself, says, God took care of the burial of Moses.

There is no dispute that Jude quoted an outside source, but its an assumption that the story and quote came from Enoch, for there were in bible times multiple outside sources just as there are endless books today in Christian books stores. Jude does not say, one way or the other where the story came from, so it is a guess and assumption that it came from Enoch. And Jude does NOT quote the book, verbatim.

The assumed “prophecy of Enoch” itself, is not recorded anywhere in the canonical Old Testament.

One thing we know for sure is that Jesus and the Apostles NEVER endorsed extra biblical sources as scripture.

People in today's world put high esteem on the Apocrypha books, and I'm sure there were some in the early church that put high esteem on extra biblical sources for which Jude used those sources on his adversaries to indict the very pride in them. We can compare Paul and Jude's conversations like that of Christian apologists of today citing an atheistic author in a debate against an atheist.

[appy]

12 minutes ago, Kelly2363 said:

 

Being silenced by abusive Christians is a norm. Of course of all people we have learned to dress it up into an art form. Unbelievable madness for so many grown men to parade like children just to force their heretical and ill informed views on others. 

No one is trying to silence anyone. Debate is allowed, as long as the discussion doesn't get personal. When it does, the forum moderator's will step in. So far, the discussion has remained civil. Just that there is a lot of disagreement in regard to the Apocryphal books. I myself, do NOT care for those books. To me, they read more like our modern day fiction books than the inspired word of God, and I put NO stock in them. There may be a wee bit of truth in them, but they are NOT infallible writings.

[appy]

kelly's point in his discussion with me alone isn't homing in on the topic of Enoch, but on members ganging up on one individual. Which he sees was unnecessary and uncalled for.

The rest of this post is a reply to @Kelly2363

forum moderators volunteer their time, and are not online 24/7 as they have jobs and families to tend to. It is helpful to all, that if there is a problem post to report it, instead of making it a personal mission to defend someone. Because in doing so, the defender ends up getting personal in their pursuit.  Believe me, as soon as a forum mod is online, they will get a notification of a complaint and deal with the offender, that is why they are here, volunteering their time.

Willa has been here a really long time and is a well respected member of this community. Sometimes people get a little too passionate to defend a side, an opinion, or another community member; and often post in haste without giving just that little extra thought into what was currently said before hitting the submit button. It happens. We are human. We've all have had days when we are not showing love. And I agree, that giving a tongue lashing in the heat of the discussion isn't showing the best side of ourselves.

 

[appy]

1 hour ago, Hopefully said:

The point of my post was not to glorify Enoch but to discuss sin. To get people to see how some of its tools got here, and how we can look at what we are doing with the things being taught today so we could imagine life without it and how it would be better.

I agree with a Jewish scholar when he said that the book of Enoch simply allowed the Jews in the time between the Old and New Testaments to blame and attribute evil on spirits that are themselves the result of an angelic transgression against God’s will. Rather than on mankind's propensity to sin, which we inherited from Adam. (mankind's true condition)

No where in scripture does it even hint that the fallen angels taught men different sins. Instead scripture teaches that men began to worship creation, etc.... because man walked away from God. Nothing about because evil beings taught them things against God's will.

Scripture lays the blame of the presence of sin, squarely at the feet of mankind

For though they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God or show gratitude. Instead, their thinking became nonsense, and their senseless minds were darkened. Claiming to be wise, they became fools and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man, birds, four-footed animals, and reptiles. Therefore God delivered them over in the cravings of their hearts to sexual impurity, so that their bodies were degraded among themselves.

They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served something created instead of the Creator, who is praised forever. Amen.

Move down to verse 28

 

28And because they did not think it worthwhile to acknowledge God, God delivered them over to a worthless mind to do what is morally wrong.

 

So which book should we heed? The bible or Enoch? That which teaches us what sin is and what to do about it. As I said earlier, the Apostles and Jesus, NEVER regarded the Apocryphal books as scriptures. The bottom line, if God had wanted those rejected books to be in the canon, they would be in the canon. But they are not.

I think the biggest objection people in general speaking have to the op, is the fact of teaching from an Apocrypha book instead of from scripture itself.  And we can learn more from actual scripture and the Holy Spirits leading. 

[appy]

15 hours ago, The_Patriot21 said:

 Its because it contradicts scripture. 

If one wants to read it like say they would a good commentary, understanding that it is one mans opinions on certain events, and not necessarily gospel fact, then its excellent material.

But if they hold it up at the same level as the bible, then that is heretical in nature as its clearly not inspired, and claiming something is inspired when it is not, is, in at least my book, heresy.

You hit the nail on the head.

[Kelly2363]

4 hours ago, Hopefully said:

It’s not my place to say wether you should go or stay but I believe I can speak to a brand new member on a good way to communicate while here.

I do the same that I’m saying you should do. Love others as you love yourself.

 

If you can show me in actual real words where I have been either abusive or else unloving then please do. But before you jump at that premise you quoted you should know that I don't even allow myself the luxury of being deceitful when it comes to speaking about spiritual matters. It's pure fiction to say that anyone should say nothing at all or that utilising plain words is somehow unchristian. And you can speak to me just howsoever you are pleased to do. It won't alter my mind or make me sulk like a baby and then resort to fictional nonsense to uphold a foolish and mistaken claim. 

I was asked by a moderator in this OP in plain view of every member to demonstrate how the book of Enoch was a lead into the occult. So I posted just one pdf of hundreds of examples I could have posted that expressly shows that the occult is not only fascinated by the book of Enoch but expressly takes enormous comfort from it. I was once an occultist and I was setting up an occult order when I was saved. So I posted an pdf article written over 150 years ago in England that expressly cites the book of Enoch as the origin of Christianity. That was written by an esoteric occult theosopher - not a keeper of a sweet shop. What I said was completely ignored. So spare me the theatre of words. And you are right - you cannot advise me on anything. 

Your OP was a claim that certain things as claimed in 1 Enoch were not taught by God. So I raised a reality that the occult is in fact entirely natural to men and finds its interest in the flesh as defined in Galatians 5:20 as a fruit of the flesh. Only when that was ignored did I warn about the other effect. And why was all of that? It was because the book of Enoch is more valued than it is cautiously held. In this OP it is openly promoted and expressed as a very benefit and comfort. That is the measure of it and the OP is self evidently readable to anyone who wants to read it. 

Edited September 8, 2021 by Kelly2363