Book of Enoch and Book of Jubilees

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
PoxEclipse

PoxEclipse

Banned
#21
Jul 12, 2013
1,011
10
0
#21
Miss said:
Somewhere in the book of Enoch ( I don't remember if at beginning or end< I'll have to go in the attic and find it) it said that this book would be hidden for a remote generation that would go through the tribulation. I really did not understand the book thouroghly, and I was just wondering if someone else did.
Click to expand...
[Chapter 1]
1 The words of the blessing of Enoch, wherewith he blessed the elect and righteous, who will be 2 living in the day of tribulation, when all the wicked and godless are to be removed. And he took up his parable and said -Enoch a righteous man, whose eyes were opened by God, saw the vision of the Holy One in the heavens, which the angels showed me, and from them I heard everything, and from them I understood as I saw, but not for this generation, but for a remote one which is 3 for to come. Concerning the elect I said, and took up my parable concerning them:

The Wesley Center Online: Book Of Enoch
 
L

LuvGod7

Guest
#22
#22
Look, I know that the book of enoch isn't from the Bible, so people say that it can't be trusted, but I have proof that it can indeed be trusted. Ok, so in the bible, Jude takes a prophecy about Jesus out of the book of Enoch and preached it. "Enoch, the seventh from Adam, prophesied about them: "See, the Lord is coming with thousands upon thousands of his holy ones." And one could argue, that Jude was only quoting the book of enoch as Paul quoted Greek Philosophy when he preached, and that could be correct, except for one thing. Notice how Jude didn't say that the prophesy was Fromm the book of Enoch, no, he said that it was quoted from Enoch, the seventh from Adam, the person, not he book. That prophesy, was not only said by Enoch, who was also mentioned in Genesis, but it is also in the book of Enoch. So Enoch said it, and it was in the book "Book of ENOCH". So It is very clear that he wrote the book of enoch. And yes, even if he did write it, it doesn't make it true, but this does. In the book of enoch it has prophesies about Jesus, the Apocalypse, and other things. But these things were not aware to humans in the generation of enoch. The prophesy of Jesus was not told to humans until after the flood, and enoch was alive before that, and he wasn't on the ark, so he want there after, when humans were told about Jesus. This means that Enoch actually was raised up by God, and god did show him prophesies about Jesus, revelations, and other things, and he did right them down, in the book of enoch. That means that the things inside the book, are shown by god, and they are true. I know it is a lot to process at once, but it is amazing. I put a lot of facts together to prove it is true. I don't know about Jubilees, because I have not read it, but Enoch is true.
 
L

LuvGod7

Guest
#23
#23
I know that the book of enoch isn't from the Bible, so people say that it can't be trusted, but I have proof that it can indeed be trusted. Ok, so in the bible, Jude takes a prophecy about Jesus out of the book of Enoch and preached it. "Enoch, the seventh from Adam, prophesied about them: "See, the Lord is coming with thousands upon thousands of his holy ones." And one could argue, that Jude was only quoting the book of enoch as Paul quoted Greek Philosophy when he preached, and that could be correct, except for one thing. Notice how Jude didn't say that the prophesy was from the book of Enoch, no, he said that it was quoted from Enoch, the seventh from Adam, the person, not he book. That prophesy, was not only said by Enoch, who was also mentioned in Genesis, but it is also in the book of Enoch. So Enoch said it, and it was in the book "Book of ENOCH". So It is very clear that he wrote the book of enoch. And yes, even if he did write it, it doesn't make it true, but this does. In the book of enoch it has prophesies about Jesus, the Apocalypse, and other things. But these things were not aware to humans in the generation of enoch. The prophesy of Jesus was not told to humans until after the flood, and enoch was alive before that, and he wasn't on the ark, so he wasn't there after, when humans were told about Jesus. This means that Enoch actually was raised up by God, and god did show him prophesies about Jesus, revelations, and other things, and he did right them down, in the book of enoch. That means that the things inside the book, are shown by god, and they are true. I know it is a lot to process at once, but all those facts together, I think proved that the book of Enoch is trustworthy.
I don't know about Jubilee, I have not read it, so sorry about that, but I hope I cleared up the book of Enoch thing.
 
Gjolll

Gjolll

Banned
#24
Nov 18, 2013
511
7
0
#24
LuvGod7 said:
Look, I know that the book of enoch isn't from the Bible, so people say that it can't be trusted, but I have proof that it can indeed be trusted. Ok, so in the bible, Jude takes a prophecy about Jesus out of the book of Enoch and preached it. "Enoch, the seventh from Adam, prophesied about them: "See, the Lord is coming with thousands upon thousands of his holy ones."
Click to expand...
Yes but you're overlooking the fact that Enoch was probably a common name, so to distinguish Enoch the prophet from other Enoch's, he would have been called "Enoch the 7th from Adam" as a title. The Book of Enoch is almost certainly 2nd century BC and was unknown to Sirach who knew all the other books of the OT except for Daniel, writing circa 200BC.

The Book of Enoch is just a collection of anonymous prophecies written by anonymous authors, some more intelligible than others, some more inspired than others. It's a book where the individual reader has to decide for himself what is inspired and what is not inspired. Some bits of it do appear to be inspired, especially those relating to the coming of the son of God.
 
oldhermit

oldhermit

Senior Member
#25
Jul 28, 2012
9,142
612
113
69
Alabama
#25
It is inconceivable that Enoch could have written anything since he lived more than a 1000 years before any written language was ever developed.
 
B

BananaPie

Guest
#26
#26
OldHermit,

1. Are you a linguist, or simply a keen thinker?
2. What does the word "triad" mean to you?
3. Did you complete the essay on 1 John for your friends in India?
 
thecreationtutor

thecreationtutor

Senior Member
#27
Jun 30, 2011
2,521
35
0
#27
more books again - can't keep the Bible - said it before - why do we keep up with these arguments - could it be that we don't' want to do what the Bible says ? so we study other "books"
 
Gjolll

Gjolll

Banned
#28
Nov 18, 2013
511
7
0
#28
thecreationtutor said:
more books again - can't keep the Bible - said it before - why do we keep up with these arguments - could it be that we don't' want to do what the Bible says ? so we study other "books"
Click to expand...
There's a good reason to study Enoch. It was very much part of the early church scene, and is acutely interesting in terms of the information that it conveys, but the Catholics dropped it, probably for the same reason that its authors are anonymous: persecution of the prophetical element. Catholics wanted to develop religion according to the legal, hierarchical structure. Enoch does not fit that structure. It displays a freedom of writing, of prophesy, that is antithetical to it and symptomatic of the lay-church favoured by the apostles.
 
oldhermit

oldhermit

Senior Member
#29
Jul 28, 2012
9,142
612
113
69
Alabama
#29
BananaPie said:
OldHermit,

1. Are you a linguist, or simply a keen thinker?
2. What does the word "triad" mean to you?
3. Did you complete the essay on 1 John for your friends in India?
Click to expand...
No, I am not a linguist. I did do some research a number of years ago into the development of written language. The earliest form of writing is known as cuneiform and may have been created by the Akkadians. This was centuries after the life of Enoch.

The word triad is a term that shows up in mathematics but can be linked to anything that has three points of valence or connection. This is in contrast to a monad which is something with only one point of valence and a dyad which has two points of valence.

Yes, I did complete the study outline for the India missions website but the site has just recently come on line and none of the study materials are able to be viewed as yet. This will be available soon.
 
B

BananaPie

Guest
#30
#30
oldhermit said:
No, I am not a linguist... Ah, so you are a modest, keen thinker. :)

The word triad is a term that shows up in mathematics but can be linked to anything that has three points of valence or connection. Indeed, gotta have 'em heavenly vectors in order.

Yes, I did complete the study outline for the India missions website but the site has just recently come on line and none of the study materials are able to be viewed as yet. This will be available soon. Like sweet.
Click to expand...
Well, OldHermit, if you would enjoy sharing a bit of what you studied regarding 1 John 5, specifically verse 7, I would enjoy reading your thoughts.

Dyad? ...I mean, deal? :)
 
Last edited:
oldhermit

oldhermit

Senior Member
#31
Jul 28, 2012
9,142
612
113
69
Alabama
#31
B

BananaPie

Guest
#32
#32
Roger. Copy. Interesting thoughts there. I'm heading to my friend's party now, and there's a Thanksgiving party tomorrow, yet I'll trust the Lord regarding the matter.

BTW, when BananaPie was in the 3rd grade, she was taught how to make this triad.
 MathEd7.JPG
The concept of the Trinity clicked, and I've had a couple of issues with 1 John 5:7 since my teens years. Okay, gotta run. Later. :)
 
L

LuvGod7

Guest
#33
#33
Gjolll said:
Yes but you're overlooking the fact that Enoch was probably a common name, so to distinguish Enoch the prophet from other Enoch's, he would have been called "Enoch the 7th from Adam" as a title. The Book of Enoch is almost certainly 2nd century BC and was unknown to Sirach who knew all the other books of the OT except for Daniel, writing circa 200BC.

The Book of Enoch is just a collection of anonymous prophecies written by anonymous authors, some more intelligible than others, some more inspired than others. It's a book where the individual reader has to decide for himself what is inspired and what is not inspired. Some bits of it do appear to be inspired, especially those relating to the coming of the son of God.
Click to expand...
You have the information wrong, it does say enoch, seventh from Adam. It doesn't just say enoch, which I agree would probably have been a common name. He was referring to this particular Enoch, Enoch seventh from Adam.
 
posthuman

posthuman

Senior Member
#34
Jul 31, 2013
36,661
13,127
113
#34
BananaPie said:


BTW, when BananaPie was in the 3rd grade, she was taught how to make this triad.
 View attachment 64469
Click to expand...
(mathematician here) -- that's a tetrahedron (4 nodes, 4 faces), not a triad. 3 points define a plane, 4 or more points can define a polyhedron.

i don't mean to say it's not cool - my education just makes me habitually precisely define things.
 
R

reject-tech

Guest
#35
#35
I doubt any "canonizers" or scripturally spawned "church fathers" were entitled to any more discernment than the common modern man who follows Christ. Therefore, if you follow Christ, you can decide for yourself if non-canon works are inspired or not, without needing to ask any experts.
Enoch is certainly more digestible to me personally than the left behind books and other Christian book store stuff.
"Left behind" is effectually considered canon by some churches. I know it is sometimes offered as suggested reading to new church members, proposed as pre-reading to the Revelation of Jesus, as if it "helps one understand the revelation."
And I know some new Christians read the entire left behind series, but never go through a single book of the bible.

Read it and decide for yourself, it is unlikely to do any more damage than a random paperback or trip to the movie theatre.
I would suggest having the majority of the entire canonized bible, read full book at a time, under your belt first though.
 
Apostol2013

Apostol2013

Senior Member
#36
Jan 27, 2013
2,105
39
48
#36
Although at one time some books were available there are some that were corrupted or distorted or just made up one of these groups doing so were the Gnostic they believed in intlect of men and had some pretty heretical beliefs and the apostles fought against these devil seed of like and fought to maintain proper doctrine true religion and maintain proper family structure as we see throughout scripture now the only word you can rely on is the canon you have today this is my experience
 
B

BananaPie

Guest
#37
#37
posthuman said:
(mathematician here) Howdy!

-- that's a tetrahedron (4 nodes, 4 faces), Correct.
not a triad. 3 points define a plane, ...hmm... each vertex of a tetrahedron is a triad, and each face of a tetrahedron is also a triad. :)

i don't mean to say it's not cool - my education just makes me habitually precisely define things. ​Ah, it's cool.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I'm OCD when it comes to precise definitions. :)
 
oldhermit

oldhermit

Senior Member
#38
Jul 28, 2012
9,142
612
113
69
Alabama
#38
Originally Posted by posthuman
(mathematician here) Howdy!

-- that's a tetrahedron (4 nodes, 4 faces), Correct.
not a triad. 3 points define a plane, ...hmm... each vertex of a tetrahedron is a triad, and each face of a tetrahedron is also a triad. :)
Click to expand...

i don't mean to say it's not cool - my education just makes me habitually precisely define things. ​Ah, it's cool.
Yeah, I'm OCD when it comes to precise definitions. :)
Click to expand...
I am not a mathematician so I could not argue the definition of the configuration. I would have defined it as a three dimensional triad. Would this be incorrect?
 
B

BananaPie

Guest
#39
#39
oldhermit said:
...I would have defined it as a three dimensional triad. Would this be incorrect?
Click to expand...
Yes, a triad in 2D is a triplet, i.e. Pythagorean triad (1, 1, 2); (3, 4, 5); etc, while a triad in 3D is usually defined by a vector (x, y, z).

The tetrahedral posted has lingered in my mind since elementary school because I associated it with the concept of the Trinity. That particular tetrahedral was constructed in several steps, all which began by a single "line," represented by the straw.

It's okay if you're not a Mathematician; I like how you think, so it's cool. :)
 
oldhermit

oldhermit

Senior Member
#40
Jul 28, 2012
9,142
612
113
69
Alabama
#40
BananaPie said:
Yes, a triad in 2D is a triplet, i.e. Pythagorean triad (1, 1, 2); (3, 4, 5); etc, while a triad in 3D is usually defined by a vector (x, y, z).

The tetrahedral posted has lingered in my mind since elementary school because I associated it with the concept of the Trinity. That particular tetrahedral was constructed in several steps, all which began by a single "line," represented by the straw.

It's okay if you're not a Mathematician; I like how you think, so it's cool. :)
Click to expand...
Ok, that makes sense.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.