Book Of Enoch?
- Thread starter Katy-follower
- Start date
-
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.
Problem passage: Enoch 7:2 It says the giants height was “3,000 ells”; Verse 2 should be corrected in favor of the Greek fragment for this passage which says nothing about the stature of the giants, “And they conceived from them and bore to them great giants. And the giants begot Nephilim, and to the Nephilim were born Elioud- and they were growing in accordance with their greatness,” Nickelsburg/Vanderkam.
Because Western scholars say so?
http://read.thebookofenoch.info/#7:2 It says the giants height was “3,000 ells”; Verse 2 should be corrected in favor of the Greek fragment for this passage which says nothing about the stature of the giants, “And they conceived from them and bore to them great giants. And the giants begot Nephilim, and to the Nephilim were born Elioud- and they were growing in accordance with their greatness,” Nickelsburg/Vanderkam.
Please cite examples
You mean like they also push the books of the Bible to discredit the Bible?
http://read.thebookofenoch.info/#7:2 It says the giants height was “3,000 ells”; Verse 2 should be corrected in favor of the Greek fragment for this passage which says nothing about the stature of the giants, “And they conceived from them and bore to them great giants. And the giants begot Nephilim, and to the Nephilim were born Elioud- and they were growing in accordance with their greatness,” Nickelsburg/Vanderkam.
Please cite examples
You mean like they also push the books of the Bible to discredit the Bible?
Last edited:
As a mier mortal if I was selling a book for you to know me, I would only sell you the whole truth and nothing but the truth, not just something with truthful parts. If I am a human and would protect my book, how much more G-d? G-d did not allow it to be canonized. I either believe the Word of G-d that His Bible all 66 Books is the infallible, inerrant Word or not. Josephus was a historian of Biblical times but and I believe their accuracy, but I do not question why they are not in the Bible. Because the Cholithic church didn't claim his writings... To believe in the apocrypha is just stupid!!!
I have not raised the issue of canon. But since you do, the Book of Enoch and the Apocrypha are canonical just not universally so. Now since you are so sure you have the right canon of Scripture, please tell me where in the Bible I can go to see the doctrine of the canon of Scripture so I can choose which of the five or six canons of Scripture which exist in the world today.
P
"Recognition" is key here, do not concern yourself with with "acceptance
" whatsoever, because you will always have your fringe cults, groups, and remember those actual devil worshipers who are going to accept, alter, misuse, add, subtract, and manipulate what is Perfection to achieve their worldly desires and ignorance.
Your confusion comes from maybe me ironically using recognition to mean what God "considers" (put more plainly) scripture, rather than what man considers as God's scripture. What does God consider scripture, not what does man consider scripture. What do I think is scripture, or what should I think is scripture or the divinely inspired words we can believe to be True and elevate to she status of the Glorified "canonical" Bible. We know what "canon" I am talking about without even naming it, so I'll just tell you how it is derived and why you should "accept" this one and not question or cast doubt on it.
I can't put it any better than Nathan Busenitz has in this article I'm going to include:
"We believe in the 39 books of the Old Testament, because the Lord Jesus Christ affirmed the Old Testament. And we believe in the 27 books of the New Testament, because the Lord Jesus Christ authorized His apostles to write the New Testament."
Why These 66 Books? | The Cripplegate
Read this article first if you have any more doubts about canon, put this simple and easily testable line of thinking up against your own, and decide what you believe is canon.
Now, if you have reasons for doubts and want to immediately post them without consulting the article, such as, "what about Jude's referencing Enoch", well I guess I'll just bring the article to you quickly:
"(Now, I’m sure some of you are immediately wondering about Jude’s reference to the Book of Enoch … but the Book of Enoch is not part of the Apocrypha. It was simply a well-known piece of Jewish literature at that time period, which Jude cited for the purpose of giving an illustration, just like Paul cited pagan poets on Mars Hill in Acts 17.)"
Put any tests you have up against the article before arguing with me because I can't satisfy all your demands without really consulting the article and this circles line of thinking and copy pasting their arguments anyway, because I haven't wasted my time and energy going into this topic. If you have flat earth questions I won't have to copy paste as much.
I'm being confrontational on purpose about this and want to dismiss everything you are saying and leave you no room to argue because I get this way when people are arguing different canons or for the validity of "gnostic" material. I do not want to give what you are saying any merit or "discuss" it for fun because to me it's a "fact" and discussing the alternative is pointless and damaging. But please understand, I am a flat earther and understand your mentality and capability to go against the mob on something that is "fact".
So if you have a reason to believe the canon is something that contradicts what I quoted or the article, then present the facts and sources for this belief or at least explain it in detail. If you can't do that then really question why you can't and see if it's a good reason.
" whatsoever, because you will always have your fringe cults, groups, and remember those actual devil worshipers who are going to accept, alter, misuse, add, subtract, and manipulate what is Perfection to achieve their worldly desires and ignorance. Your confusion comes from maybe me ironically using recognition to mean what God "considers" (put more plainly) scripture, rather than what man considers as God's scripture. What does God consider scripture, not what does man consider scripture. What do I think is scripture, or what should I think is scripture or the divinely inspired words we can believe to be True and elevate to she status of the Glorified "canonical" Bible. We know what "canon" I am talking about without even naming it, so I'll just tell you how it is derived and why you should "accept" this one and not question or cast doubt on it.
I can't put it any better than Nathan Busenitz has in this article I'm going to include:
"We believe in the 39 books of the Old Testament, because the Lord Jesus Christ affirmed the Old Testament. And we believe in the 27 books of the New Testament, because the Lord Jesus Christ authorized His apostles to write the New Testament."
Why These 66 Books? | The Cripplegate
Read this article first if you have any more doubts about canon, put this simple and easily testable line of thinking up against your own, and decide what you believe is canon.
Now, if you have reasons for doubts and want to immediately post them without consulting the article, such as, "what about Jude's referencing Enoch", well I guess I'll just bring the article to you quickly:
"(Now, I’m sure some of you are immediately wondering about Jude’s reference to the Book of Enoch … but the Book of Enoch is not part of the Apocrypha. It was simply a well-known piece of Jewish literature at that time period, which Jude cited for the purpose of giving an illustration, just like Paul cited pagan poets on Mars Hill in Acts 17.)"
Put any tests you have up against the article before arguing with me because I can't satisfy all your demands without really consulting the article and this circles line of thinking and copy pasting their arguments anyway, because I haven't wasted my time and energy going into this topic. If you have flat earth questions I won't have to copy paste as much.
I'm being confrontational on purpose about this and want to dismiss everything you are saying and leave you no room to argue because I get this way when people are arguing different canons or for the validity of "gnostic" material. I do not want to give what you are saying any merit or "discuss" it for fun because to me it's a "fact" and discussing the alternative is pointless and damaging. But please understand, I am a flat earther and understand your mentality and capability to go against the mob on something that is "fact".
So if you have a reason to believe the canon is something that contradicts what I quoted or the article, then present the facts and sources for this belief or at least explain it in detail. If you can't do that then really question why you can't and see if it's a good reason.
Last edited:
Without even raising the question what language Enoch spoke during his lifetime, since after the flood the world was of one language. Since Noah spoke the language of Pharaoh then how could Enoch have written a book before man learned how to write the spoken word when there is no evidence that the Egyptians had developed any form of written language which used the spoken word.
As you can see in the following example,
which as one can read clearly tells about the nights that Pharaoh and his wife enjoyed playing chest with great child of God that was, and is not, yet is since Enoch walked with God; and he was not; for God took him.
By the way did you know that the name Enoch translates from the ancient language spoken by Noah into the English word 'Stewie" who we see written in the Egyptian artifact above who at the time was a mere cubit tall.
As you can see in the following example,
By the way did you know that the name Enoch translates from the ancient language spoken by Noah into the English word 'Stewie" who we see written in the Egyptian artifact above who at the time was a mere cubit tall.
Last edited:
An example of where a false gospel was written as proved by the self proving details of documents. Enoch was written in 300 BC contrary to the claims in the text. Enoch fails miserably on content as well. 300 ft people is Impossible. People of today that are very large have major problems. Andre the Giant wrestler is an example. His body started failing at 35 years. Doctors stated that the larger the person the more medical problems they will have. A person who would grow to 300 ft wouldn't survive early childhood.
Last edited:
"Recognition" is key here, do not concern yourself with with "acceptance" whatsoever, because you will always have your fringe cults, groups, and remember those actual devil worshipers who are going to accept, alter, misuse, add, subtract, and manipulate what is Perfection to achieve their worldly desires and ignorance.
Your confusion comes from maybe me ironically using recognition to mean what God "considers" (put more plainly) scripture, rather than what man considers as God's scripture. What does God consider scripture, not what does man consider scripture. What do I think is scripture, or what should I think is scripture or the divinely inspired words we can believe to be True and elevate to she status of the Glorified "canonical" Bible. We know what "canon" I am talking about without even naming it, so I'll just tell you how it is derived and why you should "accept" this one and not question or cast doubt on it.
I can't put it any better than Nathan Busenitz has in this article I'm going to include:
"We believe in the 39 books of the Old Testament, because the Lord Jesus Christ affirmed the Old Testament. And we believe in the 27 books of the New Testament, because the Lord Jesus Christ authorized His apostles to write the New Testament."
Why These 66 Books? | The Cripplegate
Read this article first if you have any more doubts about canon, put this simple and easily testable line of thinking up against your own, and decide what you believe is canon.
Now, if you have reasons for doubts and want to immediately post them without consulting the article, such as, "what about Jude's referencing Enoch", well I guess I'll just bring the article to you quickly:
"(Now, I’m sure some of you are immediately wondering about Jude’s reference to the Book of Enoch … but the Book of Enoch is not part of the Apocrypha. It was simply a well-known piece of Jewish literature at that time period, which Jude cited for the purpose of giving an illustration, just like Paul cited pagan poets on Mars Hill in Acts 17.)"
Put any tests you have up against the article before arguing with me because I can't satisfy all your demands without really consulting the article and this circles line of thinking and copy pasting their arguments anyway, because I haven't wasted my time and energy going into this topic. If you have flat earth questions I won't have to copy paste as much.
I'm being confrontational on purpose about this and want to dismiss everything you are saying and leave you no room to argue because I get this way when people are arguing different canons or for the validity of "gnostic" material. I do not want to give what you are saying any merit or "discuss" it for fun because to me it's a "fact" and discussing the alternative is pointless and damaging. But please understand, I am a flat earther and understand your mentality and capability to go against the mob on something that is "fact".
So if you have a reason to believe the canon is something that contradicts what I quoted or the article, then present the facts and sources for this belief or at least explain it in detail. If you can't do that then really question why you can't and see if it's a good reason.
" whatsoever, because you will always have your fringe cults, groups, and remember those actual devil worshipers who are going to accept, alter, misuse, add, subtract, and manipulate what is Perfection to achieve their worldly desires and ignorance. Your confusion comes from maybe me ironically using recognition to mean what God "considers" (put more plainly) scripture, rather than what man considers as God's scripture. What does God consider scripture, not what does man consider scripture. What do I think is scripture, or what should I think is scripture or the divinely inspired words we can believe to be True and elevate to she status of the Glorified "canonical" Bible. We know what "canon" I am talking about without even naming it, so I'll just tell you how it is derived and why you should "accept" this one and not question or cast doubt on it.
I can't put it any better than Nathan Busenitz has in this article I'm going to include:
"We believe in the 39 books of the Old Testament, because the Lord Jesus Christ affirmed the Old Testament. And we believe in the 27 books of the New Testament, because the Lord Jesus Christ authorized His apostles to write the New Testament."
Why These 66 Books? | The Cripplegate
Read this article first if you have any more doubts about canon, put this simple and easily testable line of thinking up against your own, and decide what you believe is canon.
Now, if you have reasons for doubts and want to immediately post them without consulting the article, such as, "what about Jude's referencing Enoch", well I guess I'll just bring the article to you quickly:
"(Now, I’m sure some of you are immediately wondering about Jude’s reference to the Book of Enoch … but the Book of Enoch is not part of the Apocrypha. It was simply a well-known piece of Jewish literature at that time period, which Jude cited for the purpose of giving an illustration, just like Paul cited pagan poets on Mars Hill in Acts 17.)"
Put any tests you have up against the article before arguing with me because I can't satisfy all your demands without really consulting the article and this circles line of thinking and copy pasting their arguments anyway, because I haven't wasted my time and energy going into this topic. If you have flat earth questions I won't have to copy paste as much.
I'm being confrontational on purpose about this and want to dismiss everything you are saying and leave you no room to argue because I get this way when people are arguing different canons or for the validity of "gnostic" material. I do not want to give what you are saying any merit or "discuss" it for fun because to me it's a "fact" and discussing the alternative is pointless and damaging. But please understand, I am a flat earther and understand your mentality and capability to go against the mob on something that is "fact".
So if you have a reason to believe the canon is something that contradicts what I quoted or the article, then present the facts and sources for this belief or at least explain it in detail. If you can't do that then really question why you can't and see if it's a good reason.
P
Your argument cannot stand against it, therefore you must create a reason to ignore it that doesn't acknowledge the content. Act above it and try to sell your book, I'll leave you alone. I'll attempt to post my message to you and your response on the amazon review page. We will see if it's incomprehensible to your potential buyers.
Last edited:
P
You know I'll just dumb it down for you too.
The OT Christ affirmed and came to fulfill did not contain Enoch. The NT the apostles wrote did not contain Enoch. To be canon you have to be in the OT Christ fulfilled, or in the canon of scripture the apostles authorized and wrote. Enoch is in neither. Enoch is not canon.
What is your argument it is canon? Historic accuracy and prophecy? Any one of his here can write a book with accurate history of our present and "prophecy" of the future. Your book falls outside of "canon".
The OT Christ affirmed and came to fulfill did not contain Enoch. The NT the apostles wrote did not contain Enoch. To be canon you have to be in the OT Christ fulfilled, or in the canon of scripture the apostles authorized and wrote. Enoch is in neither. Enoch is not canon.
What is your argument it is canon? Historic accuracy and prophecy? Any one of his here can write a book with accurate history of our present and "prophecy" of the future. Your book falls outside of "canon".