The Book Of Enoch

  • 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.
A

Ariel82

Guest
The books known as the Apocrypha which Enoch is one, was rejected after a while in the King James Bible as it did not contain time Holy Spirits anointing on it. The ones who were working for King James included them as they were there with the rest of the scriptures at the time. This Apocrypha we're believed to have been written during the 400 years in between the Old Testament and the times the New Testament was started.
Some of the Apocrypha were thought to be simply stories as they do not align up to the rest of the scriptures, neither do they carry the same anointing... They may well just be stories of their day. I've only read a brief bit and to be honest, they are tough going to read without having anointing... Rather like trying to read the book of Mormon in that it is tough going and meaningless! Very different from the sweetness that comes from reading Gods Word!
Be aware if God told me to read them I would!
The book of Enoch was NOT included as part of the Apocrypha...

https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Apocrypha-Books-List/
 
May 13, 2017
2,359
27
0
Well it becomes obvious that I know a little more about the bible than you do. And if you don't want to listen to the truth, then that is your God given right. Bye, bye buddy.
Just one question....If you're so all fired smart...How come you're not famous? Most of your truth is irrelevant. Jesus did not go around saying how ignorant people were and how smart He is. He had humility which you do not. You need to get over yourself!
 

miknik5

Senior Member
Jun 2, 2016
7,833
588
113
Salvation is a gift to us from God. It is not the entire scripture. When we are saved it is after we understand that God created us and we are His, we belong to Him. We give ourselves to him and follow Him. We don't decide how to follow, but we listen to His direction. You can't follow a leader and go your own way, we must listen to the instructions of how to follow. We can't go off on our own path for living regardless of what the person we are following says and still have salvation that includes following God.

So your reasoning against Enoch is not correct.
Enoch is not the LORD
He is just a man

I'm not following or reasoning for Enoch because Enoch can't save anyone
there's NO SALVATION in Enoch or in Elijah or in Peter or in Paul or in Apollos

one can't be baptized into any of these above because they are just men
 

miknik5

Senior Member
Jun 2, 2016
7,833
588
113
I do think the men who canonized the books included in the Bible were also inspired and led by the SPIRIT .
I think they had more their eyes on babes who, not fully understanding the divinity of JESUS CHRIST as THE SON of GOD who came forth from GOD...the WORD of GOD made flesh who came into the world to save those who would believe, might not fully enter in by and through and because of their faith properly and rightly directed in and on Christ Jesus alone

but rather, taking the words and sayings and teachings of apocryphal texts thinking that by interpreting and clinging to wise teachings and sayings on paper (rather than clinging to THE LORD ALONE) would treat CHRIST no different than just another wisdom teacher

i also think that this is what drove the council at Nicea

Church elders who knew the truth and divinity of CHRIST, wanted to ensure that babies new to the faith would enter the faith which should be directed in and on CHRIST JESUS. I think they understood that if one treated CHRIST as no different than plato...Aristotle...they ran the risk of becoming "truncated Christians" never having fully entered in
...or it could have been a group of guys gathered together under orders of the Roman emperor and were instructed to canonize scripture of the new "State Religion" because Constantine saw an opportunity to use Christianity for his own benefit and political machinations.

...but I'm a "glass is half empty and how dare you bring me only half a glass of water" type of guy.
So what you are saying is that they gave JESUS undeserved honor? And even went as far as to honor THE SON just as THE FATHER?
 

Enow

Banned
Dec 21, 2012
2,901
39
0
The first thing I will say is the lake of fire is not "chains of darkness".

That place is where everything bad will end up, after the great judgement of God at the very end. Hell will go there, and death, and then the accuser and all its cronies.

In bold, in your quote, I highlighted the past-tense, i.e. it has happened, not 'is happening' or 'will happen'.

In red, I highlighted the act of being put in to chains in darkness (hell is described as a dungeon by people who have been there to see it).

In blue, I highlighted the fact that it's a temporary measure and place BEFORE the judgement.

To make sense of this, imagine someone killing you and then putting handcuffs on you before they decide whether to kill you or not. That's essentially what you're saying, you believe that they go to the final place of punishment (burning), before God judges them and sends them to the place of punishment. It doesn't make sense. The lake of fire is a big pit in the centre of hell and all the contents of hell will be thrown in it, there won't be need for it after the great judgement.

Repeating the references that you had highlighted per your quote.

2 Peter 2:[SUP]4 [/SUP]For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell, and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment;

Jude 1:[SUP]6 [/SUP]And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day.

The underlined word "reserved" is how I was conveying that their judgment is coming; but they are still roaming loose. It is like, they are on parole, but not pending freedom, but pending judgment that is coming.

Every angel that has left their first estate which is Heaven has sinned, and yet the scripture testifies of them as well as Satan being on the loose.

The second thing I will add is I believe the unclean spirits / angels in their light form are the ones that appear, I believe they had flesh which is in hell. This would both explain why there are still enemies of God corrupting the world and also agree with the scripture that God has already put them in darkness.
That is you trying to fit this problem of demons still being on the loose so that the Book of Enoch is true in parts. The sons of God were never meant to be a reference to angels but to Israel's roots.

I think I've been visited by the adversary probably 3 times, and 2 of them it was masquerading as an angel of light, i.e. a ball of light, dim gold/orangishyellow in color. This leads me to conclude that these are essentially the energy form, not flesh. The same kind of deal if you astral project (leads to demonic attack--not recommended), your higher self leaves your body and is vulnerable. I believe they do this from in darkness of hell.

The evidence to back this up is that I had a vision, and I was in paradise (I think, it was pleasant and had grass and rocks if I recall correctly) and I vaguely remember being surrounded by other Christians, and Lord Jesus came and sat with us. I don't remember much after this but I found this in the scripture;

Ephesians 2:6
And hath raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus

I believe our higher selves are with God in paradise, where as the angels are in hell and their 'higher selves' are corrupting the world possessing people, etc.
Paul spoke of John the apostle in this way when having those visions for the Book of Revelation:

2 Corinthians 12:1 It is not expedient for me doubtless to glory. I will come to visions and revelations of the Lord.[SUP] 2 [/SUP]I knew a man in Christ above fourteen years ago, (whether in the body, I cannot tell; or whether out of the body, I cannot tell: God knoweth;) such an one caught up to the third heaven.[SUP] 3 [/SUP]And I knew such a man, (whether in the body, or out of the body, I cannot tell: God knoweth;)[SUP]4 [/SUP]How that he was caught up into paradise, and heard unspeakable words, which it is not lawful for a man to utter.

So I can see how it may apply to you, but not to fallen angels that never had a terrestrial body for them to die, let alone, develop the sudden genital parts for reproduction just because they had fallen when God never created angels in the first place to reproduce.

Let's face it. If fallen angels had genital parts then there would be female ones too. They would not need to take women as wives for them when such a union would produce a superior army to mankind and wipe them out. So to argue that God never bothered to create female angels is to assume that He gave male genital parts to all angels which is for what, pray tell? No reason at all. Angels were not originally created to have any sexual organs at all because they were not created to reproduce. And so to suddenly be able to when they fell is ludicrous.

That which is spirit is spirit, and that which is flesh is flesh. You can apply your theory to your experience, because you are in a terrestrial body with a spirit that might have gone somewhere else, but you cannot apply that to fallen angels. There is no separation of the celestial when their bodies can never die.

Luke 20:[SUP]35 [/SUP]But they which shall be accounted worthy to obtain that world, and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry, nor are given in marriage:[SUP]36[/SUP]Neither can they die any more: for they are equal unto the angels; and are the children of God, being the children of the resurrection.

Mark 12:[SUP]24 [/SUP]And Jesus answering said unto them, Do ye not therefore err, because ye know not the scriptures, neither the power of God?[SUP] 25 [/SUP]For when they shall rise from the dead, they neither marry, nor are given in marriage; but are as the angels which are in heaven.

Angels do not marry, and yet these beings called the sons of God "still" in His words, took wives unto themselves.

The angels cannot die. Neither can fallen angels still being in a celestial state. They never had a terrestrial state because angels are not in their "original" terrestrial state where they could die.

We go from terrestrial to the celestial by way of Jesus Christ; the angels cannot go from celestial to the terrestrial just because they have sinned. It would be great if they did, then we can kill them all off, including Satan.. but alas, we cannot. But still, we have our victory in Christ Jesus. Yay! And amen.
 
Jun 28, 2017
147
1
0
Repeating the references that you had highlighted per your quote.

2 Peter 2:[SUP]4 [/SUP]For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell, and delivered them into chains of darkness, to bereserved unto judgment;

Jude 1:[SUP]6 [/SUP]And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day.

The underlined word "reserved" is how I was conveying that their judgment is coming; but they are still roaming loose. It is like, they are on parole, but not pending freedom, but pending judgment that is coming.

Every angel that has left their first estate which is Heaven has sinned, and yet the scripture testifies of them as well as Satan being on the loose.



That is you trying to fit this problem of demons still being on the loose so that the Book of Enoch is true in parts. The sons of God were never meant to be a reference to angels but to Israel's roots.



Paul spoke of John the apostle in this way when having those visions for the Book of Revelation:

2 Corinthians 12:1 It is not expedient for me doubtless to glory. I will come to visions and revelations of the Lord.[SUP] 2 [/SUP]I knew a man in Christ above fourteen years ago, (whether in the body, I cannot tell; or whether out of the body, I cannot tell: God knoweth;) such an one caught up to the third heaven.[SUP] 3 [/SUP]And I knew such a man, (whether in the body, or out of the body, I cannot tell: God knoweth;)[SUP]4 [/SUP]How that he was caught up into paradise, and heard unspeakable words, which it is not lawful for a man to utter.

So I can see how it may apply to you, but not to fallen angels that never had a terrestrial body for them to die, let alone, develop the sudden genital parts for reproduction just because they had fallen when God never created angels in the first place to reproduce.

Let's face it. If fallen angels had genital parts then there would be female ones too. They would not need to take women as wives for them when such a union would produce a superior army to mankind and wipe them out. So to argue that God never bothered to create female angels is to assume that He gave male genital parts to all angels which is for what, pray tell? No reason at all. Angels were not originally created to have any sexual organs at all because they were not created to reproduce. And so to suddenly be able to when they fell is ludicrous.

That which is spirit is spirit, and that which is flesh is flesh. You can apply your theory to your experience, because you are in a terrestrial body with a spirit that might have gone somewhere else, but you cannot apply that to fallen angels. There is no separation of the celestial when their bodies can never die.

Luke 20:[SUP]35 [/SUP]But they which shall be accounted worthy to obtain that world, and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry, nor are given in marriage:[SUP]36[/SUP]Neither can they die any more: for they are equal unto the angels; and are the children of God, being the children of the resurrection.

Mark 12:[SUP]24 [/SUP]And Jesus answering said unto them, Do ye not therefore err, because ye know not the scriptures, neither the power of God?[SUP] 25 [/SUP]For when they shall rise from the dead, they neither marry, nor are given in marriage; but are as the angels which are in heaven.

Angels do not marry, and yet these beings called the sons of God "still" in His words, took wives unto themselves.

The angels cannot die. Neither can fallen angels still being in a celestial state. They never had a terrestrial state because angels are not in their "original" terrestrial state where they could die.

We go from terrestrial to the celestial by way of Jesus Christ; the angels cannot go from celestial to the terrestrial just because they have sinned. It would be great if they did, then we can kill them all off, including Satan.. but alas, we cannot. But still, we have our victory in Christ Jesus. Yay! And amen.
In his last testament to his children Reuben has this to say concerning the sons of God who had abandoned their own original habitat: " because every woman who useth these wiles hath been reserved for eternal punishment. For thus they allured the Watchers [Heavenly Observers] who were before the flood; for as these continually beheld them, they lusted after them, and they conceived the act in their mind; for they changed themselves into the shape of men, and 7 appeared to them when they were with their husbands. And the women lusting in their minds after their forms, gave birth to giants, for the Watchers appeared to them as reaching even unto heaven. "

It would appear from the words of Reuben, who defiled his fathers bed by raping Bilhah, that they changed themselves into the shape of men by possessing the bodies of the men while they were with their wives.
 

Enow

Banned
Dec 21, 2012
2,901
39
0
In his last testament to his children Reuben has this to say concerning the sons of God who had abandoned their own original habitat: " because every woman who useth these wiles hath been reserved for eternal punishment. For thus they allured the Watchers [Heavenly Observers] who were before the flood; for as these continually beheld them, they lusted after them, and they conceived the act in their mind; for they changed themselves into the shape of men, and 7 appeared to them when they were with their husbands. And the women lusting in their minds after their forms, gave birth to giants, for the Watchers appeared to them as reaching even unto heaven. "

It would appear from the words of Reuben, who defiled his fathers bed by raping Bilhah, that they changed themselves into the shape of men by possessing the bodies of the men while they were with their wives.
The problem here is your refusal to believe that the Book of Enoch is a fraud and in it are lies mixed with one truthful verse plagiarized from Jude.

The other problem is your denying the deity of Christ.

You have studied much, but in error.

1 John 2:
[SUP]18 [/SUP]Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time.[SUP] 19 [/SUP]They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us.[SUP] 20 [/SUP]But ye have an unction from the Holy One, and ye know all things.[SUP] 21 [/SUP]I have not written unto you because ye know not the truth, but because ye know it, and that no lie is of the truth.[SUP]22 [/SUP]Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son.[SUP] 23 [/SUP]Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father: he that acknowledgeth the Son hath the Father also.[SUP]24 [/SUP]Let that therefore abide in you, which ye have heard from the beginning. If that which ye have heard from the beginning shall remain in you, ye also shall continue in the Son, and in the Father.[SUP] 25 [/SUP]And this is the promise that he hath promised us, even eternal life.[SUP] 26 [/SUP]These things have I written unto you concerning them that seduce you.[SUP]27 [/SUP]But the anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you, and ye need not that any man teach you: but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie, and even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in him.[SUP]28 [/SUP]And now, little children, abide in him; that, when he shall appear, we may have confidence, and not be ashamed before him at his coming.

To deny Jesus is the Christ is to deny His deity, because to deny His deity is the same as denying the Father.

1 Corinthians 10:4And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ.

Rock is always a reference to deity in the Old Testament.

There is no way for you to deny the deity of Christ when He is at the right hand of God the Father as being of the One God.

Isaiah 43:[SUP]10 [/SUP]Ye are my witnesses, saith the Lord, and my servant whom I have chosen: that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me.[SUP] 11 [/SUP]I, even I, am the Lord; and beside me there is no saviour.[SUP]12 [/SUP]I have declared, and have saved, and I have shewed, when there was no strange god among you: therefore ye are my witnesses, saith the Lord, that I am God.

Isaiah 45:[SUP]20 [/SUP]Assemble yourselves and come; draw near together, ye that are escaped of the nations: they have no knowledge that set up the wood of their graven image, and pray unto a god that cannot save.[SUP]21 [/SUP]Tell ye, and bring them near; yea, let them take counsel together: who hath declared this from ancient time? who hath told it from that time? have not I the Lord? and there is no God else beside me; a just God and a Saviour; there is none beside me.[SUP] 22 [/SUP]Look unto me, and be ye saved, all the ends of the earth: for I am God, and there is none else.

Isaiah 42:[SUP]6 [/SUP]I the Lord have called thee in righteousness, and will hold thine hand, and will keep thee, and give thee for a covenant of the people, for a light of the Gentiles;[SUP] 7 [/SUP]To open the blind eyes, to bring out the prisoners from the prison, and them that sit in darkness out of the prison house.[SUP] 8 [/SUP]I am the Lord: that is my name: and my glory will I not give to another, neither my praise to graven images.[SUP] 9 [/SUP]Behold, the former things are come to pass, and new things do I declare: before they spring forth I tell you of them.

The only way to rectify these verses is that Jesus is God of the Triune God as God is speaking in this reference below and yet the Lord God and His Spirit sent Him.

Isaiah 48:[SUP]16 [/SUP]Come ye near unto me, hear ye this; I have not spoken in secret from the beginning; from the time that it was, there am I: and now the Lord God, and his Spirit, hath sent me.[SUP]17 [/SUP]Thus saith the Lord, thy Redeemer, the Holy One of Israel; I am the Lord thy God which teacheth thee to profit, which leadeth thee by the way that thou shouldest go.
 
May 13, 2017
2,359
27
0
The problem here is your refusal to believe that the Book of Enoch is a fraud and in it are lies mixed with one truthful verse plagiarized from Jude.

The other problem is your denying the deity of Christ.

You have studied much, but in error.

1 John 2:
[SUP]18 [/SUP]Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time.[SUP] 19 [/SUP]They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us.[SUP] 20 [/SUP]But ye have an unction from the Holy One, and ye know all things.[SUP] 21 [/SUP]I have not written unto you because ye know not the truth, but because ye know it, and that no lie is of the truth.[SUP]22 [/SUP]Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son.[SUP] 23 [/SUP]Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father: he that acknowledgeth the Son hath the Father also.[SUP]24 [/SUP]Let that therefore abide in you, which ye have heard from the beginning. If that which ye have heard from the beginning shall remain in you, ye also shall continue in the Son, and in the Father.[SUP] 25 [/SUP]And this is the promise that he hath promised us, even eternal life.[SUP] 26 [/SUP]These things have I written unto you concerning them that seduce you.[SUP]27 [/SUP]But the anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you, and ye need not that any man teach you: but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie, and even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in him.[SUP]28 [/SUP]And now, little children, abide in him; that, when he shall appear, we may have confidence, and not be ashamed before him at his coming.

To deny Jesus is the Christ is to deny His deity, because to deny His deity is the same as denying the Father.

1 Corinthians 10:4And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ.

Rock is always a reference to deity in the Old Testament.

There is no way for you to deny the deity of Christ when He is at the right hand of God the Father as being of the One God.

Isaiah 43:[SUP]10 [/SUP]Ye are my witnesses, saith the Lord, and my servant whom I have chosen: that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me.[SUP] 11 [/SUP]I, even I, am the Lord; and beside me there is no saviour.[SUP]12 [/SUP]I have declared, and have saved, and I have shewed, when there was no strange god among you: therefore ye are my witnesses, saith the Lord, that I am God.

Isaiah 45:[SUP]20 [/SUP]Assemble yourselves and come; draw near together, ye that are escaped of the nations: they have no knowledge that set up the wood of their graven image, and pray unto a god that cannot save.[SUP]21 [/SUP]Tell ye, and bring them near; yea, let them take counsel together: who hath declared this from ancient time? who hath told it from that time? have not I the Lord? and there is no God else beside me; a just God and a Saviour; there is none beside me.[SUP] 22 [/SUP]Look unto me, and be ye saved, all the ends of the earth: for I am God, and there is none else.

Isaiah 42:[SUP]6 [/SUP]I the Lord have called thee in righteousness, and will hold thine hand, and will keep thee, and give thee for a covenant of the people, for a light of the Gentiles;[SUP] 7 [/SUP]To open the blind eyes, to bring out the prisoners from the prison, and them that sit in darkness out of the prison house.[SUP] 8 [/SUP]I am the Lord: that is my name: and my glory will I not give to another, neither my praise to graven images.[SUP] 9 [/SUP]Behold, the former things are come to pass, and new things do I declare: before they spring forth I tell you of them.

The only way to rectify these verses is that Jesus is God of the Triune God as God is speaking in this reference below and yet the Lord God and His Spirit sent Him.

Isaiah 48:[SUP]16 [/SUP]Come ye near unto me, hear ye this; I have not spoken in secret from the beginning; from the time that it was, there am I: and now the Lord God, and his Spirit, hath sent me.[SUP]17 [/SUP]Thus saith the Lord, thy Redeemer, the Holy One of Israel; I am the Lord thy God which teacheth thee to profit, which leadeth thee by the way that thou shouldest go.
Its interesting how you would say the book of Enoch is a plagarism...Especially considering it was written at least a thousand years before Jude was born. All the rest of your rant here is based on that assumption. Not worth answering beyond what I already said.
 

Enow

Banned
Dec 21, 2012
2,901
39
0
Its interesting how you would say the book of Enoch is a plagarism...Especially considering it was written at least a thousand years before Jude was born. All the rest of your rant here is based on that assumption. Not worth answering beyond what I already said.
I say the Book of Enoch is a fraud and thus a plagiarism of that one verse from the Book of Jude.

It was not written thousands of years before Jude was born when Enoch did not write that book at all since he was before the flood, and there is no reason for such a book to be on the ark at all to survive the flood.

There was no need for scripture at all until Israel became a nation to keep the scriptures, and thus the first 5 books of the Bible was penned by Moses as inspired by the Holy Spirit.

The Book of Enoch was not one of them when the author claims he is Enoch.

How much inconsistencies do you need to see that the Book of Enoch is a fraud?
 
May 13, 2017
2,359
27
0
I say the Book of Enoch is a fraud and thus a plagiarism of that one verse from the Book of Jude.

It was not written thousands of years before Jude was born when Enoch did not write that book at all since he was before the flood, and there is no reason for such a book to be on the ark at all to survive the flood.

There was no need for scripture at all until Israel became a nation to keep the scriptures, and thus the first 5 books of the Bible was penned by Moses as inspired by the Holy Spirit.

The Book of Enoch was not one of them when the author claims he is Enoch.

How much inconsistencies do you need to see that the Book of Enoch is a fraud?
Well, you certainly have the right to think that. I would love to know, though, how you came to that conclusion. Did Noah tell you? Or any of Enoch's relatives? Who told you? I realize that very few people today keep journals or diaries. For that matter very few people today can even spell much less write coherently. Many people today find reading and writing too old fashioned for them, so I understand you believing its a fake. I also wonder who told you the Book of Enoch was a part of the bible. It's not and it never was.
 

Enow

Banned
Dec 21, 2012
2,901
39
0
Well, you certainly have the right to think that. I would love to know, though, how you came to that conclusion. Did Noah tell you? Or any of Enoch's relatives? Who told you? I realize that very few people today keep journals or diaries. For that matter very few people today can even spell much less write coherently. Many people today find reading and writing too old fashioned for them, so I understand you believing its a fake. I also wonder who told you the Book of Enoch was a part of the bible. It's not and it never was.
Then stop treating it as a guide or a vocabulary source to read the accepted scripture of the Bible. The sons of God are not angels and they never were. They certainly would not be called that if they were "fallen" angels and as angels, God would never marry them to be one flesh..
 
May 13, 2017
2,359
27
0
Then stop treating it as a guide or a vocabulary source to read the accepted scripture of the Bible. The sons of God are not angels and they never were. They certainly would not be called that if they were "fallen" angels and as angels, God would never marry them to be one flesh..
So I'm supposed to accept backward and ignorant advice just because I like you? Uh uh..Ain't going to happen. As I said earlier...The book of Enoch was written at least a thousand years before Jude...Therefore it cannot be plagiarized from Jude. The Book of Enoch is a history book, and it has many good uses, even though it is not bible quality. What it contains is true, but it was not written along the same formula that was used in the writing of the bible. That's the only reason why it is not cannon. The formula is wrong. If you can understand that, then you can step up to the next square. If not...

Its sad to see someone argue out of ignorance.
 

Magenta

Senior Member
Jul 3, 2015
56,209
26,265
113
So I'm supposed to accept backward and ignorant advice just because I like you? Uh uh..Ain't going to happen. As I said earlier...The book of Enoch was written at least a thousand years before Jude...Therefore it cannot be plagiarized from Jude. The Book of Enoch is a history book, and it has many good uses, even though it is not bible quality. What it contains is true, but it was not written along the same formula that was used in the writing of the bible. That's the only reason why it is not cannon. The formula is wrong. If you can understand that, then you can step up to the next square. If not...

Its sad to see someone argue out of ignorance.
How are you dating the book of Enoch?
 
May 13, 2017
2,359
27
0
How are you dating the book of Enoch?
I don't date it....Bible scholars can't stop fighting about it long enough to come up with decent information. I do know however that it's contents parallel what the bible says. It does not contradict the bible but rather helps to explain what he bible is talking about in many areas.
 

Billyd

Senior Member
May 8, 2014
5,063
1,498
113
I don't date it....Bible scholars can't stop fighting about it long enough to come up with decent information. I do know however that it's contents parallel what the bible says. It does not contradict the bible but rather helps to explain what he bible is talking about in many areas.
Have you actually taken the time to study the text of the book, the actual history of the book, and the reasons that it is not in any accepted cannon of scripture?
 
Jun 28, 2017
147
1
0
How are you dating the book of Enoch?
The book of Enoch from which Jesus, his half brother Thomas Didymus Jude and the apostles, all quoted, was cherished by the early Christians right up until the fourth century, when under the ban of dogmatic authorities of the Roman church of Emperor Constantine, such as Jerome, Hilary, and Augustine, they eventually passed out of circulation and were thought to have been lost for millennia.

But the Book of Enoch was held in great reverence by many of the fathers of the early Roman church that was established some 300 years after the Apostolic Church of Jesus Christ was formed in Jerusalem, among those leaders were Irenaeus, Origen, and Tertullian, even Jerome, who generally disapproved of the work, erroneously believed that Enoch was one of the two witnesses in Revelation who ascend to heaven in a cloud. However, by the end of the 4th century, the book was banned because the authorities believed that the Sons of God having sex with the daughters of man, was an inappropriate subject.

Even Moses, the adopted grand son of the Egyptian Pharaoh received the regulations of his new church from the books of Enoch.

I hope that answers your question Magenta.
 
May 13, 2017
2,359
27
0
Have you actually taken the time to study the text of the book, the actual history of the book, and the reasons that it is not in any accepted cannon of scripture?
I've read the book three times so far...I've also stated above why the book is not cannon
 

Magenta

Senior Member
Jul 3, 2015
56,209
26,265
113
I don't date it....Bible scholars can't stop fighting about it long enough to come up with decent information. I do know however that it's contents parallel what the bible says. It does not contradict the bible but rather helps to explain what he bible is talking about in many areas.
But you HAVE dated it and now claim you don't. Gosh, get your facts straight. You said it was written at least a thousand years before Jude. So, where does that number come from?
 
Jun 28, 2017
147
1
0
I've read the book three times so far...I've also stated above why the book is not cannon
Then you would have also read that Azazel was one of the sons of God, who was punished separate from the other sons of God, and he was taken out into the wilderness, to a place called Dudael where he was cast into a deep pit and covered with rough and Jagged stones, and all sin was to be ascribed to him.

You would have also read in your bible, in Leviticus 16: 21; where Moses gave to his brother Aaron, the religious regulation, where he would place his hands on the head of a scape goat, thereby symbolically transferring the sins of Israel onto the goat, which was then sent out into the wilderness to Azazel, the son of God to whom all sin is ascribed.
 

Magenta

Senior Member
Jul 3, 2015
56,209
26,265
113
The book of Enoch from which Jesus, his half brother Thomas Didymus Jude and the apostles, all quoted, was cherished by the early Christians right up until the fourth century, when under the ban of dogmatic authorities of the Roman church of Emperor Constantine, such as Jerome, Hilary, and Augustine, they eventually passed out of circulation and were thought to have been lost for millennia.

But the Book of Enoch was held in great reverence by many of the fathers of the early Roman church that was established some 300 years after the Apostolic Church of Jesus Christ was formed in Jerusalem, among those leaders were Irenaeus, Origen, and Tertullian, even Jerome, who generally disapproved of the work, erroneously believed that Enoch was one of the two witnesses in Revelation who ascend to heaven in a cloud. However, by the end of the 4th century, the book was banned because the authorities believed that the Sons of God having sex with the daughters of man, was an inappropriate subject.

Even Moses, the adopted grand son of the Egyptian Pharaoh received the regulations of his new church from the books of Enoch.

I hope that answers your question Magenta.
Not even close. Maybe f I had asked who used it, but that was not the question. The question was related to the age of the book of Enoch, not who used it or for how long.