Interesting video about The Book of Enoch

[jude1:3]

• The Ethiopian Orthodox Church has The Book of Enoch as apart of their scriptures:
http://www.ethiopianorthodox.org/english/canonical/books.html


• Another side note is that The Ethiopian Orthodox Church was not apart of the Council of Chalcedon (451 A.D.)
and is apart of the Oriental Orthodox Church:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oriental_Orthodoxy



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ukXIdxJbxDk

[jude1:3]

• The Essenes were a Jewish sect that existed before Christ.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Essenes
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Enoch


• Fragments of The Book of Enoch were found with The Dead Sea Scrolls:
https://www.loc.gov/exhibits/scrolls/scr3.html


https://www.loc.gov/exhibits/scrolls/images/enoch-b.jpg



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ah4osVGLOuY&t=180s



• Church Father Quotes about The Book of Enoch:

• Tertullian, an early church father and founder of Latin Christianity, wrote a few positive things concerning the Book of Enoch. Tertulian writes as follows in his 2nd century work, On the Apparel of Women I 3:1-3.

“I am aware that the Scripture of Enoch, which has ***igned this order of action to angels, is not received by some, because it is not admitted into the Jewish canon either. I suppose they did not think that, having been published before the deluge, it could have safely survived that world-wide calamity, the abolisher of all things. If that is the reason for rejecting it, let them recall to their memory that Noah, the survivor of the deluge, was the great-grandson of Enoch himself; and he, of course, had heard and remembered, from domestic renown and hereditary tradition, concerning his own great-grandfather’s ‘grace in the sight of God,’ (Genesis 6:8) and concerning all his preachings; since Enoch had given no other charge to Methuselah than that he should hand on the knowledge of them to his posterity. Noah therefore, no doubt, might have succeeded in the trusteeship of his preaching; or, had the case been otherwise, he would not have been silent alike concerning the disposition of things made by God, his Preserver, and concerning the particular glory of his own house.

“If Noah had not had this conservative power by so short a route, there would still be this consideration to warrant our ***ertion of the genuineness of this Scripture: he could equally have renewed it, under the Spirit’s inspiration, after it had been destroyed by the violence of the deluge, as, after the destruction of Jerusalem by the Babylonian storming of it, every document of the Jewish literature is generally agreed to have been restored through Ezra.

“But since Enoch in the same Scripture has preached likewise concerning the Lord, nothing at all must be rejected by us which pertains to us; and we read that ‘every Scripture suitable for edification is divinely inspired.’ (2 Timothy 3:16) By the Jews it may now seem to have been rejected for that very reason, just like all the other portions nearly which tell of Christ. Nor, of course, is this fact wonderful, that they did not receive some Scriptures which spake of Him whom even in person, speaking in their presence, they were not to receive. To these considerations is added the fact that Enoch possesses a testimony in the Apostle Jude.” (Jude 1:14-15)


http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0402.htm
http://torahdrivenlife.com/articles/enoch/the-church-fathers-and-the-book-of-enoch/

[tdidymas]

• The Essenes were a Jewish sect that existed before Christ.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Essenes
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Enoch


• Fragments of The Book of Enoch were found with The Dead Sea Scrolls:
https://www.loc.gov/exhibits/scrolls/scr3.html


https://www.loc.gov/exhibits/scrolls/images/enoch-b.jpg



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R6WM5Hkc26k



• Church Father Quotes about The Book of Enoch:

• Tertullian, an early church father and founder of Latin Christianity, wrote a few positive things concerning the Book of Enoch. Tertulian writes as follows in his 2nd century work, On the Apparel of Women I 3:1-3.

“I am aware that the Scripture of Enoch, which has ***igned this order of action to angels, is not received by some, because it is not admitted into the Jewish canon either. I suppose they did not think that, having been published before the deluge, it could have safely survived that world-wide calamity, the abolisher of all things. If that is the reason for rejecting it, let them recall to their memory that Noah, the survivor of the deluge, was the great-grandson of Enoch himself; and he, of course, had heard and remembered, from domestic renown and hereditary tradition, concerning his own great-grandfather’s ‘grace in the sight of God,’ (Genesis 6:8) and concerning all his preachings; since Enoch had given no other charge to Methuselah than that he should hand on the knowledge of them to his posterity. Noah therefore, no doubt, might have succeeded in the trusteeship of his preaching; or, had the case been otherwise, he would not have been silent alike concerning the disposition of things made by God, his Preserver, and concerning the particular glory of his own house.

“If Noah had not had this conservative power by so short a route, there would still be this consideration to warrant our ***ertion of the genuineness of this Scripture: he could equally have renewed it, under the Spirit’s inspiration, after it had been destroyed by the violence of the deluge, as, after the destruction of Jerusalem by the Babylonian storming of it, every document of the Jewish literature is generally agreed to have been restored through Ezra.

“But since Enoch in the same Scripture has preached likewise concerning the Lord, nothing at all must be rejected by us which pertains to us; and we read that ‘every Scripture suitable for edification is divinely inspired.’ (2 Timothy 3:16) By the Jews it may now seem to have been rejected for that very reason, just like all the other portions nearly which tell of Christ. Nor, of course, is this fact wonderful, that they did not receive some Scriptures which spake of Him whom even in person, speaking in their presence, they were not to receive. To these considerations is added the fact that Enoch possesses a testimony in the Apostle Jude.” (Jude 1:14-15)


http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0402.htm
http://torahdrivenlife.com/articles/enoch/the-church-fathers-and-the-book-of-enoch/

Does this mean you support canonization of Enoch?

Why I do not support canonization:

1. Enoch is clearly post-exilic in text style; my sources put the writing at about 150 BC. Wikipedia states "although modern scholars estimate the older sections (mainly in the Book of the Watchers) to date from about 300 BC, and the latest part (Book of Parables) probably to the first century BC."

2. Enoch is called pseudoepigrapha because the writer is not Enoch, but claims to be.

3. Gen. 6:4 says "There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown." which clearly indicates that since the giants (nephilim) were there before the event, they could not have been the offspring of that union. Therefore, the basis of the nephilim origin in Enoch is not Biblical.

4. There are indications within Enoch that imply its fictional nature, such as: (1) Giants 3000 els in height, which would put them 4500 ft. tall. (2) he saw a vision in the land of Dan, which didn't exist until about 1500 years after Enoch.

5. The idea of a union between angels and women is problematic in scriptures such as Mat. 22:30 and Heb. 1:5.

Some people claim that Jude quoted Enoch, and therefore validates Enoch as canon. I differ with this, as Jude may have quoted an oral tradition as an original source, which could have been the same oral tradition that the writer of Enoch quoted. Some false writings do the same in an attempt to validate themselves. Even if Jude paid attention to the Enoch quote in the book of Enoch (as it stands today), it does not necessarily validate Enoch as canon, because truth can be quoted from fiction material and still be truth. I'll bet I can get some good truth quotes from Moby Dich.
TD:)

[jude1:3]

Does this mean you support canonization of Enoch?



I used to not think it was legit, but now I do. Especially after reading quotes from Church Fathers.

• More Quotes from Church Fathers from : http://torahdrivenlife.com/articles/enoch/the-church-fathers-and-the-book-of-enoch/

• Origen appeals to the Book of Enoch as having the same canonical authority as he does the Book of Psalms. He writes as follows in De Principiis IV.

“But some one will perhaps inquire whether we can obtain out of Scripture any grounds for such an understanding of the subject. Now I think some such view is indicated in the Psalms, when the prophet says, ‘My eyes have seen your imperfection;’ (Psalm 139:16) by which the mind of the prophet, examining with keener glance the first principles of things, and separating in thought and imagination only between matter and its qualities, perceived the imperfection of God, which certainly is understood to be perfected by the addition of qualities. Enoch also, in his book, speaks as follows: ‘I have walked on even to imperfection;’ which expression I consider may be understood in a similar manner, viz., that the mind of the prophet proceeded in its scrutiny and investigation of all visible things, until it arrived at that first beginning in which it beheld imperfect matter existing without ‘qualities.’ For it is written in the same book of Enoch, ‘I beheld the whole of matter;’ which is so understood as if he had said: ‘I have clearly seen all the divisions of matter which are broken up from one into each individual species either of men, or animals, or of the sky, or of the sun, or of all other things in this world.’”

These quotations which he attributes to Enoch are not found in the Ethiopic text of the Book of Enoch, upon which our modern translations are based. There are, however, two sufficient reasons to believe that Origen is still quoting from the Book of Enoch. First, notice how Origen mishandled Psalm 139:16, “My eyes have seen your imperfection,” as if to indicate that God had imperfections which could be seen. Psalm 139:16 is more accurately translated, “Mine unformed substance Thine eyes saw.” (YLT) So it is very possible that Origen was simply incorrectly quoting p***ages that do exist in the Ethiopic text. Second, it is known from the discovery of Hebrew and Aramaic m****cripts of Enoch found in the Dead Sea Scrolls at Qumran that there are large portions of text that are not present in the Ethiopic m****cripts. (See 4Q209 and 4Q211) So it is also possible that he was quoting from portions of Enoch that may have not been translated into the Ethiopic text, and hence have not survived to today.




• Irenaeus, in his work The Proof of the Apostolic Preaching 18, records a condensed retelling of Enoch 6-8. He does this without directly citing the Book of Enoch, yet the citation here is unmistakable.

“And for a very long while wickedness extended and spread, and reached and laid hold upon the whole race of mankind, until a very small seed of righteousness remained among them: and illicit unions took place upon the earth, since angels were united with the daughters of the race of mankind; and they bore to them sons who for their exceeding greatness were called giants. And the angels brought as presents to their wives teachings of wickedness, in that they brought them the virtues of roots and herbs, dyeing in colours and cosmetics, the discovery of rare substances, love-potions, aversions, amours, concupiscence, constraints of love, spells of bewitchment, and all sorcery and idolatry hateful to God; by the entry of which things into the world evil extended and spread, while righteousness was diminished and enfeebled.”

[jude1:3]

• Justin Marty wrote in his Second Apology
http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0127.htm

“But the angels transgressed this appointment, and were captivated by love of women, and begat children who are those that are called demons; and besides, they afterwards subdued the human race to themselves, partly by magical writings, and partly by fears and the punishments they occasioned, and partly by teaching them to offer sacrifices, and incense, and libations, of which things they stood in need after they were enslaved by lustful p***ions; and among men they sowed murders, wars, adulteries, intemperate deeds, and all wickedness. Whence also the poets and mythologists, not knowing that it was the angels and those demons who had been begotten by them that did these things to men, and women, and cities, and nations, which they related, ascribed them to god himself, and to those who were accounted to be his very offspring, and to the offspring of those who were called his brothers, Neptune and Pluto, and to the children again of these their offspring. For whatever name each of the angels had given to himself and his children, by that name they called them“.

Justin Marty Second Apology

[alanmolstad]

just made up junk...

No concern to us

[jude1:3]

just made up junk...

No concern to us



You're wrong.

Heliocentrism and Macroevolution are "made up junk"

[alanmolstad]

You're wrong.

Heliocentrism and Macroevolution are "made up junk"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heliocentrism




from time to time I notice that some people will attempt to engage with you on a topic....Its then that someone will pull them aside and inform them that you are of the "flat Earth" persuasion.



Literally you believe the earth is flat.


(It is felt that once informed it should help people come to understand better where all your ideas come forth from.)

[jude1:3]

It ****s my mind that the writings of The Church Fathers hold no weight with you. The Book of Enoch refers to "The Son of Man" and it was written before The Lord Jesus Christ was born on earth (Enoch 69:29 and Enoch 71:14, Matthew 19:28, Matthew 25:31-32, John 5:27 and John 3:14)

Especially in • John 3:14:
And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of Man be lifted up,


Please research this. I'm truly asking.

[alanmolstad]

research eh?

Let me tell you about that....










One of the topics I had to study back in Bible School, was the fact that there are many, many pagan sources quoted within the text of the Bible.

It does not mean for one moment that the Bible writer is saying that the entire pagan source he is quoting a small part of should be ***umed to be equal to the bible, but rather what we see is that the Bible writers felt free enough that they took a sentence here or there from many many different places known to their time period in order to prove a point they were making.

So it's not a big deal that we read within the Bible or within the writings of the early church Fathers about different stories that are actually taken from non-Bible books, (like Enoch) it's to be expected because we do the same thing today!
When I write about a topic like "The Right To Life" I may pull quotes from many different sources, this does not mean Im endorsing every work of the creator of that source as being on par with Scripture......Im just quoting them because what I quote helps me make a point Im making.
If I am quoting CNN Im not saying that everything seen on CNN is to always be believed..
If Im quoting President Clinton or President Trump Im not saying that every word the guys said is to be believed.

In the same way just because some writer in church history may have quoted the Book Of Enoch it does not mean that we today should jump to the conclusion that the whole book of Enoch stands on equal footing with the Bible.


We also have to always keep in mind that no single church leader living now or in the past should be allowed to have the authority over us to decide for us what is or is not in our Bible.
That's what CULTS do,
The CULTS use the supposed authority of their current or past leaders over members of the CULT to decide for them what they are to believe.




Now if a person wants to know why the books of the Bible we have now got into the Bible?...then there are many good books and websites that will help you learn why we have ended up with the Bible in it's form, why some books were always accepted, and why some other books were always suspected and finally rejected.

[jude1:3]

, many pagan sources quoted within the text of the Bible.

So it's not a big deal that we read within the Bible or within the writings of the early church Fathers about different stories that are actually taken from non-Bible books, (like Enoch)


That's the thing though, It's Not Pagan. It's Pre Antediluvian and Jewish Scripture. The Text existed Before The Lord Jesus Christ was born on earth.

[alanmolstad]

what I had to study in Bible School was the future issue we see here, that I would one day run into people that would hold up the fact that many types of non-canonical sources are quoted in the Bible.

We were made aware of just how many different places in the Holy Text we will find quotes from all kinds of historical works that are not held by the church as being`inspired.

Thats the thing.....many people that grasp onto the Book of Enoch just because it gets quoted a bunch of times in church history and suggest it should be included in the Bible have mixed up the concepts of a work being "useful" with being "Inspired"...

There is no doubt to me that many sources were used by the different writers of the Bible and in church history when they made their points.
There is no problem to me with the use of quotes from books like Enoch as well as many other books that the church has rejected.
Thats not an issue because just because a book might not be inspired by the Holy Spirit does not mean it cant be yet useful to the church in some manner.

So if this or that Christian wants to study the many books that the church has in it's long history that have been always rejected as not inspired?...thats fine.

But as my Bible School teachers predicted, I do have to point out a few times though the years to people that have jumped to a wrong conclusion based only on the fact that a church father quoted something from a non-Bible source, and so they decided that anything so quoted must mean it's also as equally inspired at any other book in the Bible....


I tell them that "That dont mean that at all, friend"

[tdidymas]

That's the thing though, It's Not Pagan. It's Pre Antediluvian and Jewish Scripture. The Text existed Before The Lord Jesus Christ was born on earth.

There were many books written in the BC, it doesn't make them the word of God. Besides, the Book of Enoch is not antediluvian, it is post-exilic, and it's not Jewish scripture. The statement quoted by Jude is probably the only antediluvian part of it. Anyone could write a novel in which the setting of the story is antediluvian.
TD:)

[jude1:3]

The statement quoted by Jude is probably the only antediluvian part of it. TD:)


This is Not True.


• John 3:14
And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of Man be lifted up,

• Enoch 69:29
And from henceforth there shall be nothing corruptible;
For that Son of Man has appeared,
And has seated himself on the throne of his glory,
And all evil shall p*** away before his face,
And the word of that Son of Man shall go forth
And be strong before the Lord of Spirits.

[jude1:3]

Keep in mind this was written Before Christianity even existed.


And there I saw the One to Whom belongs the time before time, and His head was white like wool. With Him was another being, whose countenance had the appearance of a man, and his face was full of graciousness, like one of the holy angels. I asked the angel who went with me concerning that son of and who he was, and whence he was, and why he went with the One to Whom belongs the time before time.

He answered and said to me: 'This is the son of man who has righteousness, with whom dwells righteousness, and who reveals all the treasures of that which is hidden, because the Lord of the spirits has chosen him, and whose lot has the pre-eminence before the Lord of the spirits in uprightness for ever. This son of man whom you have seen shall raise up the kings and the mighty from their seats and the strong from their thrones, and shall loosen the reins of the strong and break the teeth of the sinners.'

• 1 Enoch.46.1-4




And at that hour that Son of Man was named
In the presence of the Lord of Spirits,
And his name before the Head of Days.

Yea, before the sun and the signs were created,
Before the stars of the heaven were made,
His name was named before the Lord of Spirits.

He shall be a staff to the righteous whereon to stay themselves and not fall,
And he shall be the light of the Gentiles,
And the hope of those who are troubled of heart.

All who dwell on earth shall fall down and worship before him,
And will praise and bless and celebrate with song the Lord of Spirits.

And for this reason hath he been chosen and hidden before Him,
Before the creation of the world and for evermore.

And the wisdom of the Lord of Spirits hath revealed him to the holy and righteous;
For he hath preserved the lot of the righteous,
Because they have hated and despised this world of unrighteousness,
And have hated all its works and ways in the name of the Lord of Spirits:
For in his name they are saved,
And according to his good pleasure hath it been in regard to their life.

• 1 Enoch.48.2-6

[jude1:3]

And there was great joy among them, and they blessed and honored and exalted, because the name of the Son of Man had been revealed unto them.
• 1 Enoch 69:26


And from that time on there will be nothing that will be destroyed, for he, the Son of Man, has appeared, and sits on the throne of his glory, and all wickedness will disappear before his face and depart; but the word of that Son of Man will be strong before the Lord of the spirits. This is the third Parable of Enoch.
•1 Enoch 69:29



And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up:
• John 3:14

The people answered him, We have heard out of the law that Christ abideth for ever: and how sayest thou,The Son of man must be lifted up? who is this Son of man?
• John 12:34

[alanmolstad]

I refer you to my answer above

[alanmolstad]

what I had to study in Bible School was the future issue we see here, that I would one day run into people that would hold up the fact that many types of non-canonical sources are quoted in the Bible.

We were made aware of just how many different places in the Holy Text we will find quotes from all kinds of historical works that are not held by the church as being`inspired.

Thats the thing.....many people that grasp onto the Book of Enoch just because it gets quoted a bunch of times in church history and suggest it should be included in the Bible have mixed up the concepts of a work being "useful" with being "Inspired"...

There is no doubt to me that many sources were used by the different writers of the Bible and in church history when they made their points.
There is no problem to me with the use of quotes from books like Enoch as well as many other books that the church has rejected.
Thats not an issue because just because a book might not be inspired by the Holy Spirit does not mean it cant be yet useful to the church in some manner.

So if this or that Christian wants to study the many books that the church has in it's long history that have been always rejected as not inspired?...thats fine.

But as my Bible School teachers predicted, I do have to point out a few times though the years to people that have jumped to a wrong conclusion based only on the fact that a church father quoted something from a non-Bible source, and so they decided that anything so quoted must mean it's also as equally inspired at any other book in the Bible....


I tell them that "That dont mean that at all, friend"
.................

[alanmolstad]

for a help to anyone interested, I have found a very short recording of the current Bible Answer Man dealing with the question of how we are to view the Book Of Enoch?


http://www.equip.org/audio/whats-your-opinion-on-the-book-of-enoch-since-jude-quotes-from-it-in-his-epistle/

[tdidymas]

And there was great joy among them, and they blessed and honored and exalted, because the name of the Son of Man had been revealed unto them.
• 1 Enoch 69:26


And from that time on there will be nothing that will be destroyed, for he, the Son of Man, has appeared, and sits on the throne of his glory, and all wickedness will disappear before his face and depart; but the word of that Son of Man will be strong before the Lord of the spirits. This is the third Parable of Enoch.
•1 Enoch 69:29



And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up:
• John 3:14

The people answered him, We have heard out of the law that Christ abideth for ever: and how sayest thou,The Son of man must be lifted up? who is this Son of man?
• John 12:34

You should really listen to Hank's answer in the link that Alan provided (I'll copy it here for your convenience - http://www.equip.org/audio/whats-you...n-his-epistle/)

Like I showed before, Enoch was written AFTER the Exile, and it is apocalyptic literature, therefore it stands to reason that it would contain phrases already written in existing scripture in eschatological p***ages of Daniel and Isaiah. But it is fiction, even though it contains truth. Anyone today can write a fiction that contains universal truth, and it happens all the time. That doesn't make it inspired scripture. People were writing fiction since centuries BC that we know of, and we acknowledge it is fiction even though many supers***ious people took them as gospel truth, like the writings of Homer, the Vedic texts, and so on. We know that the writings of philosophers like Aristotle and Socrates contain universal truth, but we do not believe those writings to be inspired of God. The Gnostics wrote many things that they thought were inspired of God, (example, the Gospel According to Thomas), and we deny that it is inspired scripture, even though Gnostics accept it as scripture even today. Some people in the R.C.C. are also supers***ious enough to accept many unbiblical things because they think apocryphal and pseudoepigraphal writings are equal with scripture, enough to formulate dogmas about it. Many of such people and those in cults will be lost because of dogmas they believe that are unbiblical based on writings and sermons of false ideas, because they are a distraction from the true gospel of Christ. Just because the book of Enoch contains quotes from earlier scripture and from oral tradition, acts like prophecy, and is translated in bonified King James English, doesn't make it inspired of God. Paul quoted from secular philosophy in 1 Corinthians 15:33 and Acts 17:28, and there are other quotes even by Jesus (e.g. Mat. 16:2-3) in which they acknowledge the truthfulness of the statement, but do not acknowledge any inspiration of the source of the statement. It is not any particular statement or phrase that is usable/truthful in the writing that makes a writing inspired, but it is the whole of the writing that makes it a consideration for scripture or not. The Book of Enoch does not meet scrutiny because of the things I mentioned before:

1. Enoch is clearly post-exilic in text style; my sources put the writing at about 150 BC. Wikipedia states "although modern scholars estimate the older sections (mainly in the Book of the Watchers) to date from about 300 BC, and the latest part (Book of Parables) probably to the first century BC."

2. Enoch is called pseudoepigrapha because the writer is not Enoch, but claims to be.

3. Gen. 6:4 says "There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown." which clearly indicates that since the giants (nephilim) were there before the event, they could not have been the offspring of that union. Therefore, the basis of the nephilim origin in Enoch is not Biblical.

4. There are indications within Enoch that imply its fictional nature, such as: (1) Giants 3000 els in height, which would put them 4500 ft. tall. (2) he saw a vision in the land of Dan, which didn't exist until about 1500 years after Enoch.

5. The idea of a union between angels and women is problematic in scriptures such as Mat. 22:30 and Heb. 1:5.

Another pseudoepigraphal writing is the Epistle of Barnabas, in which it actually appears like it could be on the same level of scripture. But because it was not accepted in the early Church, not widely used, etc. it was not accepted in the canon. One can also discern its lack of inspiration compared with the canon of scripture. I recommend reading the 66 books of scripture canon many times to get familiar with real inspiration, and be skeptical of anything that has claims, but lacks the overall inspiration of the whole text.
TD:)

[jude1:3]

4. There are indications within Enoch that imply its fictional nature, such as: (1) Giants 3000 els in height, which would put them 4500 ft. tall. (2) he saw a vision in the land of Dan, which didn't exist until about 1500 years after Enoch.
TD:)



I think you guys are wrong.

Really ask your self how such huge structures and huge stones could have been moved before the use of hydraulic machines. Seriously Though:


https://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/s--Pyk-LwE2--/c_scale,fl_progressive,q_80,w_800/whkyfvlg6otmceadtnr4.jpg

http://www.galacticfacets.com/uploads/9/4/8/8/9488982/7203015_orig.jpg

[jude1:3]

it would contain phrases already written in existing scripture in eschatological p***ages of Daniel and Isaiah.
TD:)


It's actually the other way around. Daniel and Isaiah got it from The Book of Enoch.


For whoever is ashamed of Me and My words in this adulterous and sinful generation, of him the Son of Man also will be ashamed when He comes in the glory of His Father with the holy angels.
• Mark 8:38

[alanmolstad]

http://www.equip.org/audio/whats-you...n-his-epistle/

[tdidymas]

It's actually the other way around. Daniel and Isaiah got it from The Book of Enoch.


For whoever is ashamed of Me and My words in this adulterous and sinful generation, of him the Son of Man also will be ashamed when He comes in the glory of His Father with the holy angels.
• Mark 8:38

It is already established by authoritative scholars who can translate from ancient languages that Enoch was written 200-300 years AFTER Isaiah and Daniel. Your argument does not stand up to that.

Incidentally, your feeble attempt at striking fear falls to the ground.
TD:)

[tdidymas]

I think you guys are wrong.

Really ask your self how such huge structures and huge stones could have been moved before the use of hydraulic machines. Seriously Though:


https://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/s--Pyk-LwE2--/c_scale,fl_progressive,q_80,w_800/whkyfvlg6otmceadtnr4.jpg

http://www.galacticfacets.com/uploads/9/4/8/8/9488982/7203015_orig.jpg

It's your prerogative to disagree. But what does this brick have to do with the price of tea in China? Either come up with a valid explanation against my internal evidence, or just keep silent.
TD:)

[alanmolstad]

I think you guys are wrong.

Really ask your self how such huge structures and huge stones could have been moved before the use of hydraulic machines. Seriously Though:




http://www.galacticfacets.com/uploads/9/4/8/8/9488982/7203015_orig.jpg


The movement of large stones was not confined to Egypt in ancient times. The Romans moved the so-called Trilithon, weighing 800 tons, from the quarry to the Temple of Jupiter at Baalbek (in eastern Lebanon) in the first century AD. Another stone weighing 1,200 tons, the Hajar el Hibla ("Stone of the Pregnant Woman"), was never separated from its base and lays abandoned.

(see http://www.catchpenny.org/movebig.html for more info)

[alanmolstad]

the answer to "How did they do it?" is that they worked at it.

They had the man power, they had the desire, and that gave them the means.

Sometimes the effort failed as in the photo posted above where the Romans were unable to get the block free.

Now take a look at the Roman block seen in the photo above, its not sitting flat.
The fact that its not sitting flat is not an accident.
The blocks were carved this way so that they were all set to help slide down hill to the site where they would be used.
This is why the place where the stone is carved out of the earth is always up hill from where it is later taken and placed.


So its just a case of men with the desire and lots and lots of manpower doing things that were hard but do-able.

No need for UFOs to help lift the stones.

No need for giants to help move the stones.

No need to invent all kinds of answers .

[jude1:3]

Incidentally, your feeble attempt at striking fear falls to the ground.
TD:)


I wasn't trying to strike fear. I was trying to show you that the term "Son of Man" came from the Book of Enoch.

[jude1:3]

It's your prerogative to disagree. But what does this brick have to do with the price of tea in China? Either come up with a valid explanation against my internal evidence, or just keep silent.
TD:)


I've already given you evidence.

You have begun to have a pompous tone. Why is that ?

[jude1:3]

Another verse to consider:

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 for to come.

• 1 Enoch 1:2



• Maybe this is why The Book of Enoch was lost for so long.

[jude1:3]

Video about The Essenes:



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=roQ7QT-CMuU

[jude1:3]

Another video about The Essenes:



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B3maUXJollI

[tdidymas]

I wasn't trying to strike fear. I was trying to show you that the term "Son of Man" came from the Book of Enoch.

The term came from Daniel which was before the Book of Enoch.
TD:)

[tdidymas]

I've already given you evidence.

You have begun to have a pompous tone. Why is that ?

If this is all you've got, then I'm done here.
TD:)

[jude1:3]

If this is all you've got, then I'm done here.
TD:)

More At***ude.

I didn't respond negatively to you. I just said I thought you guys were wrong.

[alanmolstad]

Like I said.....

Being older does not make a written work inspired.

Being quoted does not mean something is inspired.



What we find true is the early church writers felt free to use whatever source they wanted as long as it supported whatever point they wanted to make.
So this is why we find many pagan sources as well as non-Bible sources quoted in the Bible as well as by early church leaders.






What I learned in Bible School is that we Christians have to be always ready to one day deal with people that latch-on to something weird and it will cause them to think that "The sky is falling! The sky is falling!"......
An example of this is when we deal with people that claim that some book was taken out of the Bible, or that it is really the "source" for many Christian teachings, etc.


Over my time on this website I have seen them come and go...

Like the people that are stuck on the Book of Enoch,
or the King James Only guys,
or the people that push the Essenes
or the "hidden books of the Bible"
Or the UFO guys,
or the "Giants did it" guys...etc,etc,etc,


I have seen first hand that there just are some type of people that latch on to these sideline issues and cant free themselves from being totally consumed with them.

They tend to ignore reason, facts and logic, but yet seem ever so ready to believe any crazy idea as long as it offered to them the chance to feel like "They know a secret"
People love to believe that they know a secret.

CULTS are started by the idea that there is some type of secret out there that only a few people are able to see.

That is why the use of well-reasoned, logical arguments dont work with such people.

For they are not driven by logic and reason, but by the feelings they get when they think they know something that no one else does....

[jude1:3]

Like I said.....
CULTS are started by the idea that there is some type of secret out there that only a few people are able to see.



• The Essenes were Not a cult

• The Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church is Not a cult.

[alanmolstad]

• The Essenes were Not a cult

.I kinda think they were....

[jude1:3]

I kinda think they were....

Well, you're wrong then.

[jude1:3]

I kinda think they were....

They were faithful to God and faithful to making copies of the scriptures. Thanks to them and God for faithfully hiding the scriptures for us to find in the Dead Sea Scrolls.

[alanmolstad]

They were faithful to God and faithful to making copies of the scriptures. Thanks to them and God for faithfully hiding the scriptures for us to find in the Dead Sea Scrolls.

They were an off shoot jewish cult that had weird rules and died out...case closed

[jude1:3]

They were an off shoot jewish cult that had weird rules and died out...case closed


No, you're wrong. They were the precursor to Christian Monks and Monastics. Their legacy lives on through the findings of The Dead Sea Scrolls.

Those rules helped with the transmitting of Holy Scriptures.

[alanmolstad]

They were a bad idea that died out and the suggestion they had anything to do with the Dead Sea Scrolls is not proved..

I have read that the place where the Scrolls were found might have just been a summer vacation spot for rich Romans too....so it's not clear

[alanmolstad]

Cults that go off into the wilderness because they believe that the world is about to end...history is filled with such...

All of them have one key thing in common. ..

They all were equally wrong

[jude1:3]

They were a bad idea that died out and the suggestion they had anything to do with the Dead Sea Scrolls is not proved..

I have read that the place where the Scrolls were found might have just been a summer vacation spot for rich Romans too....so it's not clear


You're just making up stuff.

http://www.crystalinks.com/deadseascrolls.html

[alanmolstad]

You're just making up stuff.

http://www.crystalinks.com/deadseascrolls.html

No I never make anything up.
All I have posted on this or any topic is what I was taught by Walter martin from listening to him or from teachers well respected in the church

[jude1:3]

the suggestion they had anything to do with the Dead Sea Scrolls is not proved..


^^^ This is what you are making up.

[alanmolstad]

^^^ This is what you are making up.

You need to do a bit of research before you post such things.

All I have written is in FACT how it is...

[alanmolstad]

The newest findings of science are casting doubt on all the past teachings about everything connecting these people to the Dead Sea Scrolls.

It is now doubted they even lived where it had been taught.

[alanmolstad]

Also the whole idea that these guys spent so much time writing the Scrolls is also now in doubt.

[alanmolstad]

And....the buildings that once we're believed to be where they worked on scrolls turns out to have nothing to do with such stuff....

The thinking now is that it was built as a center to make pottery. Or was a vacation home of a rich family

[alanmolstad]

And the idea it was at the time of Christ out in the wilderness alone is now shown to also be in error.
It now is found to have been a rich suburb with many comings and goings...many people lived in and around the area as it was a easy walk to many centers of trade.

The idea it was off alone is only due to how it looks now....but 2000 years ago it was an important trading area....thus a good place to make pottery

[alanmolstad]

As for the Scrolls themselves. ...
They now are believed to have not all been worked on by a single bunch of scribes....

The thinking now is they are simply a collection that were gathered when Rome started to attack the large city.
They seem to have signs of being created by many different hands in different places...but gathered in the cave to hide

[alanmolstad]

What is also believed now is that there is really nothing that really connects the Essenes to the found scrolls.

[alanmolstad]

If you do the research you will also see that what I'm posting is the newest findings by science.

Not a word I have posted is stuff I have made up !

[alanmolstad]

So let's review...

The large stones in history were moved by normal guys who had to work hard to move them.

The large stone you posted a photo of is tilted because they cut it out that way so it would help start down the hill when dragged.
The book of Enoch is quoted by many church leaders in the past ,yet none of them teach it was inspired and should be on part with the bible.
Other none bible books are also in the same way quoted by the same men

So the idea that the book of Enoch is part of the inspired bible is in error.

And....

The earth is round and goes around the sun....case closed.

[alanmolstad]

And.......ALL that I have written are things I have learned ...

NOTHING that I have written is my own ideas!

[alanmolstad]

The newest teaching that near where the Dead Sea Scrolls were found in caves they made clay pottery fits with the fact that almost all the pottery found with scrolls inside all came from the same source of pottery.
It now looks like the Essenes were not living in the buildings near the caves but rather the buildings were just a pottery factory.

If they just made pottery there then that explains why they went there to hide the Scrolls because they needed lots and lots of pottery jars quickly.

It looks like they simply ended up there simply because at the time it was handy

[alanmolstad]

Now this means that the newest teaching on the Dead Sea Scrolls totally destroys the past view that a bunch of Essenes lived there and we're busy working on scrolls in the buildings near there.

At this time there is little support for the idea that the Essenes lived around where the Dead Sea Scrolls were found.

Now it is likely true that many books and websites are now out of date too.
My guess is that many people are still stuck with using out of date research and do not yet know what the best views of science teach us today.

[jude1:3]

Hopefully The Holy Spirit will reveal to you that you are wrong about:

• Evolution
• Heliocentrism
• The Book of Enoch
• The Essenes

[alanmolstad]

Hopefully The Holy Spirit will reveal to you that you are wrong about:

• Evolution
• Heliocentrism
• The Book of Enoch
• The Essenes
Name it and claim it.
King James only.
The Prosperity doctrine.
That all men have one less rib than women.
And the Tooth fairy...


Yes the list of the things I don't believe in must be very troubling for you...

[alanmolstad]

Just let me know if anything I have presented here is something that you would like to see supported?

[TrueBlue?]

5. The idea of a union between angels and women is problematic in scriptures such as Mat. 22:30 and Heb. 1:5.

TD:)

I don't understand how you see this relating to what happened in Enoch. Angels on earth married women, not in Heaven.

[alanmolstad]

I totally reject the idea that Angels has sex with easy earth girls...

There is no reason to support the idea that angels had kids.

The only thing you have to do to prove that Im correct is read the whole story in context.
When you read the whole story in context then you see that the story is all part of a whole...

Consider:
Genesis 1 is about the creation of the universe
Genesis 2 is about the creation of humans
Genesis 3 is about the fall of man into sin.
Genesis 4 is about the sinful family tree of Cain who was the first killer.
Genesis 5 is about the Godly family tree of Seth.

Genesis 6 is about the results of the Godly line of men intermarrying with the sinful line of men and the results leading to the flood.

The "Sons of God" are simply the same people we have been talking about in Genesis 5.

There is no need to introduce anyone else to the story. the Sons of God = Seth's sons.


The "Daughters of men" are simply the same people we learned about in Genesis 4.
The daughters of men are the girls who are part of the family tree of Cain.




Thats all this story is talking about.
No need to invent a wild story about Big Foot, or UFOs,. or Monsters, or Angels

[TrueBlue?]

I totally reject the idea that Angels has sex with easy earth girls...

There is no reason to support the idea that angels had kids.

The only thing you have to do to prove that Im correct is read the whole story in context.
When you read the whole story in context then you see that the story is all part of a whole...

Consider:
Genesis 1 is about the creation of the universe
Genesis 2 is about the creation of humans
Genesis 3 is about the fall of man into sin.
Genesis 4 is about the sinful family tree of Cain who was the first killer.
Genesis 5 is about the Godly family tree of Seth.

Genesis 6 is about the results of the Godly line of men intermarrying with the sinful line of men and the results leading to the flood.

The "Sons of God" are simply the same people we have been talking about in Genesis 5.

There is no need to introduce anyone else to the story. the Sons of God = Seth's sons.


The "Daughters of men" are simply the same people we learned about in Genesis 4.
The daughters of men are the girls who are part of the family tree of Cain.




Thats all this story is talking about.
No need to invent a wild story about Big Foot, or UFOs,. or Monsters, or Angels

It is interesting how this story of Heavenly beings are having children with mortal women, then the greatest event in history happens, a child is born of a woman who is the child of a heavenly being.

[alanmolstad]

It is interesting how this story of Heavenly beings are having children with mortal women, then the greatest event in history happens, a child is born of a woman who is the child of a heavenly being.

again...I reject the idea that angels had sex with easy earth girls.

I believe its the wrong way to read the whole story.
I believe that when you go slow and read the whole Genesis story in context you don't find anything all that different in this part of the story at all.

In Genesis 4 you read about one side of the family tree of human

In Genesis 5 you read about the other side of the family tree of humans

and then in Genesis 6 you read about what happened when one side mixed with the other....




It's that simple of a story to read and understand.

[TrueBlue?]

again...I reject the idea that angels had sex with easy earth girls.

I believe its the wrong way to read the whole story.
I believe that when you go slow and read the whole Genesis story in context you don't find anything all that different in this part of the story at all.

In Genesis 4 you read about one side of the family tree of human

In Genesis 5 you read about the other side of the family tree of humans

and then in Genesis 6 you read about what happened when one side mixed with the other....




It's that simple of a story to read and understand.

Reject what you will. Your rejection does not put the final authority on whether the Book of Enoch is true or not.

Plus just because archeology can only place the earliest form of Enoch to 300 bc does not mean it did not exist before that. The m****cripts for Enoch are much older than most the m****cripts we have for the Bible, yet you except those writings existed before. Yet in Genesis we have a snippet of Enoch.

[alanmolstad]

Reject what you will. Your rejection does not put the final authority on whether the Book of Enoch is true or not.

.

The church rejected Enoch long ago...

Im just pointing that out...



and that is why Im not one of them guys that have lots and lots of invented ideas that I need to hang on non-Bible books like Enoch.

There is more that enough in the text of the Bible to worry about...

[alanmolstad]

as for the argument that the Book of Enoch is very old?....moot point, because being old does not make something inspired.


as for the argument that the book of Enoch is quoted in the Bible?....moot point because lots of non-Bible books are quoted.


as for the argument that many writers in the early church quoted Enoch?....again, its a moot point because they can use whatever source they want, it does not mean that wanted us to believe what they were quoting was inspired or to be seen as on par with scripture.



The simple fact is this, that early church writers felt free to use whatever source material that wanted as they made the points...

So we should understand this in that light, and not have a cow every time just because some guy quotes a bit of Enoch

[jude1:3]

• A Few Thoughts about some information I got from this site talking about the fallen angels and how they are in prison.
https://philologos.org/bpr/files/a018.htm


For if God did not spare the angels who sinned, but cast them down to hell and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved for judgment;
• 2 Peter 2:4


And the angels who did not keep their proper domain, but left their own abode, He has reserved in everlasting chains under darkness for the judgment of the great day;
• Jude1:6



••••••• Super Long Read Ahead ••••••••••


• Revelation 9


Then the fifth angel sounded: And I saw a star fallen from heaven to the earth. To him was given the key to the bottomless pit. And he opened the bottomless pit, and smoke arose out of the pit like the smoke of a great furnace. So the sun and the air were darkened because of the smoke of the pit. Then out of the smoke locusts came upon the earth. And to them was given power, as the scorpions of the earth have power. They were commanded not to harm the gr*** of the earth, or any green thing, or any tree, but only those men who do not have the seal of God on their foreheads. And they were not given authority to kill them, but to torment them for five months. Their torment was like the torment of a scorpion when it strikes a man. In those days men will seek death and will not find it; they will desire to die, and death will flee from them.

The shape of the locusts was like horses prepared for battle. On their heads were crowns of something like gold, and their faces were like the faces of men. 8 They had hair like women’s hair, and their teeth were like lions’ teeth. And they had breastplates like breastplates of iron, and the sound of their wings was like the sound of chariots with many horses running into battle. They had tails like scorpions, and there were stings in their tails. Their power was to hurt men five months. And they had as king over them the angel of the bottomless pit, whose name in Hebrew is Abaddon, but in Greek he has the name Apollyon.

One woe is past. Behold, still two more woes are coming after these things.

Then the sixth angel sounded: And I heard a voice from the four horns of the golden altar which is before God, saying to the sixth angel who had the trumpet, “Release the four angels who are bound at the great river Euphrates.” So the four angels, who had been prepared for the hour and day and month and year, were released to kill a third of mankind. Now the number of the army of the horsemen was two hundred million; I heard the number of them. And thus I saw the horses in the vision: those who sat on them had breastplates of fiery red, hyacinth blue, and sulfur yellow; and the heads of the horses were like the heads of lions; and out of their mouths came fire, smoke, and brimstone. By these three plagues a third of mankind was killed—by the fire and the smoke and the brimstone which came out of their mouths. For their power is in their mouth and in their tails; for their tails are like serpents, having heads; and with them they do harm.

But the rest of mankind, who were not killed by these plagues, did not repent of the works of their hands, that they should not worship demons, and idols of gold, silver, br***, stone, and wood, which can neither see nor hear nor walk. And they did not repent of their murders or their sorceries or their sexual immorality or their thefts.


• Revelation 9

https://philologos.org/bpr/files/a018.htm

[jude1:3]

'Bind Azazel hand and foot, and cast him into the darkness: and make an opening in the desert, which is in Dudael, and cast him therein. And place upon him rough and jagged rocks, and cover him with darkness, and let him abide there for ever, and cover his face that he may not see light. And on the day of the great judgement he shall be cast into the fire.

• 1 Enoch 10:4-7


https://philologos.org/bpr/files/a018.htm

[jude1:3]

I'm convinced that The Nephilim/Fallen Angels built the great Pyramid before Noah's Flood and also bunch of other huge Stone Structures:


https://media-cdn.tripadvisor.com/media/photo-s/01/2a/c5/b9/the-great-pyramid-is.jpg

https://news.artnet.com/app/news-upload/2015/05/more-easter-island.jpg

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/68/3e/91/683e9136af7559338e491c0211c60e51--mesoamerican-antigua.jpg

[jude1:3]

Carving in India depicting a Giant Nephilim:



https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/78/b1/81/78b181b34210edad9451ec729196ae11--nephilim-giants-madhya-pradesh.jpg

[jude1:3]

Another:

Stela Naram-Suen from Suz. The victory of the tsar over the llublubs.
Around 2300 BC. E.
Louvre, Paris

http://allforchildren.ru/artenc/img/d003-4b.jpg

[alanmolstad]

let me quote what I posted here on page 2 of this topic...



the answer to "How did they do it?" is that they worked at it.

They had the man power, they had the desire, and that gave them the means.

Sometimes the effort failed as in the photo posted above where the Romans were unable to get the block free.

Now take a look at the Roman block seen in the photo above, its not sitting flat.
The fact that its not sitting flat is not an accident.
The blocks were carved this way so that they were all set to help slide down hill to the site where they would be used.
This is why the place where the stone is carved out of the earth is always up hill from where it is later taken and placed.


So its just a case of men with the desire and lots and lots of manpower doing things that were hard but do-able.

No need for UFOs to help lift the stones.

No need for giants to help move the stones.

No need to invent all kinds of answers .

[jude1:3]

And the Lord said unto Michael: 'Go, bind Semjâzâ and his ***ociates who have united themselves with women so as to have defiled themselves with them in all their uncleanness. And when their sons have slain one another, and they have seen the destruction of their beloved ones, bind them fast for seventy generations in the valleys of the earth, till the day of their judgement and of their consummation, till the judgement that is for ever and ever is consummated.

• 1 Enoch 10:11-12




Then the sixth angel sounded: And I heard a voice from the four horns of the golden altar which is before God, saying to the sixth angel who had the trumpet, “Release the four angels who are bound at the great river Euphrates.” So the four angels, who had been prepared for the hour and day and month and year, were released to kill a third of mankind.

• Revelation 9:13-15

[alanmolstad]

Again.



Moot point

[jude1:3]

Again.



Moot point



So, We have:

• The Essenes using The book of Enoch Before the time of Christ.

• The Dead sea Scrolls containing The Book of Enoch

• 4 Different Church Fathers making Reference To The Book of Enoch as scripture in their writings.

• Archeological Stone Structures built before The Aid of Hydraulic Machines in ancient times that can't even be made or moved in today's time with today's technology.

• The Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church From Anceint Times having The Book of Enoch in their Official Canon.



And All these Things mean nothing to you.

Yet you still believe and promote: Macroevolution and Heliocentrism. I just can't take your posts seriously.

[alanmolstad]

Lots and lots of books were written before the bible.
..so that's a moot point.

The writers of the bible quote all kinds of non-inspired works....so again moot point.

[alanmolstad]

Lots on writers quoted all kinds of works in church history. ..but they felt free to do that...

Did the same guys ever claim that this meant we are to understand the whole work is inspired and equal with scriptures? .





I will pause while you GOOGLE that. ..

[jude1:3]

....so again moot point.


No, they are not moot points.

[alanmolstad]

Did the same guys ever claim that this meant we are to understand the whole book of Enoch is inspired and equal with scriptures? .......the answer is no.


My point is that writers throughout church history have used different sources to make different arguments.
While some people today try to make a big deal over the fact that a writer quoted from Enoch, they seem to skip-over the fact that many non-inspired books are quoted within the text of the Bible.

The earrly church writers felt free to do this.
They felt free to use whatever source they wanted as long as it worked to help their arguments..

So when we read such quotations taken out of non-inspired works we must do so with the knowledge that this use of a book of Enoch quotations does not mean for one moment that the writer is supporting the entire work as being equal to the Bible.

[alanmolstad]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bj0RnvIl9cQ

[jude1:3]

John, to the seven churches which are in Asia:

Grace to you and peace from Him who is and who was and who is to come, and from the Seven Spirits who are before His throne, and from Jesus Christ, the faithful witness, the firstborn from the dead, and the ruler over the kings of the earth.

• Revelation 1:4-5



When He opened the seventh seal, there was silence in heaven for about half an hour. And I saw The Seven Angels who stand before God, and to them were given seven trumpets.
• Revelation 8:1-2



The mystery of the seven stars which you saw in My right hand, and the seven golden lampstands: The Seven Stars Are The Angels of the seven churches, and the seven lampstands which you saw are the seven churches.
• Revelation 1:20



And these are the Names of The Holy Angels who watch. Uriel, one of the holy angels, who is over the world and over Tartarus. Raphael, one of the holy angels, who is over the spirits of men. Raguel, one of the holy angels who †takes vengeance on† the world of the luminaries. Michael, one of the holy angels, to wit, he that is set over the best part of mankind ⌈⌈and⌉⌉ over chaos. . Saraqâêl, one of the holy angels, who is set over the spirits, who sin in the spirit. Gabriel, one of the holy angels, who is over Paradise and the serpents and the Cherubim. Remiel, one of the holy angels, whom God set over those who rise.

• 1 Enoch 20





But to which of the angels has He ever said:

“Sit at My right hand,
Till I make Your enemies Your footstool”?
Are they not all ministering spirits sent forth to minister for those who will inherit salvation?

• Hebrews 1:13-14

[jude1:3]

A Collective Post of Church Fathers and Others Quoting The Book of Enoch, Mentioning The Book of Enoch or making reference to Fallen Angels mating with human women :





Church Father Tertullian Literally Calls The Book of Enoch Scripture:



1. • Tertullian - On the Apparel of Women - Book 1 - Chapter 3:1-3 (160-220 A.D.)

“I am aware that The Scripture of Enoch which has ***igned this order of action to angels, is not received by some, because it is not admitted into the Jewish canon either. I suppose they did not think that, having been published before the deluge, it could have safely survived that world-wide calamity, the abolisher of all things. If that is the reason for rejecting it, let them recall to their memory that Noah, the survivor of the deluge, was the great-grandson of Enoch himself; and he, of course, had heard and remembered, from domestic renown and hereditary tradition, concerning his own great-grandfather’s ‘grace in the sight of God,’ (Genesis 6:8) and concerning all his preachings; since Enoch had given no other charge to Methuselah than that he should hand on the knowledge of them to his posterity. Noah therefore, no doubt, might have succeeded in the trusteeship of his preaching; or, had the case been otherwise, he would not have been silent alike concerning the disposition of things made by God, his Preserver, and concerning the particular glory of his own house.
“If Noah had not had this conservative power by so short a route, there would still be this consideration to warrant our ***ertion of the genuineness of this Scripture: he could equally have renewed it, under the Spirit’s inspiration, after it had been destroyed by the violence of the deluge, as, after the destruction of Jerusalem by the Babylonian storming of it, every document of the Jewish literature is generally agreed to have been restored through Ezra.
“But since Enoch in the same Scripture has preached likewise concerning the Lord, nothing at all must be rejected by us which pertains to us; and we read that ‘every Scripture suitable for edification is divinely inspired.’ (2 Timothy 3:16) By the Jews it may now seem to have been rejected for that very reason, just like all the other portions nearly which tell of Christ. Nor, of course, is this fact wonderful, that they did not receive some Scriptures which spake of Him whom even in person, speaking in their presence, they were not to receive. To these considerations is added the fact that Enoch possesses a testimony in the Apostle Jude.” (Jude 1:14-15)

http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0402.htm





2. • Tertullian - On the Apparel of Women - Book 2 - Chapter 10 - (160-220 A.D.)

But, if the self-same angels who disclosed both the material substances of this kind and their charms— of gold, I mean, and lustrous stones— and taught men how to work them, and by and by instructed them, among their other (instructions), in (the virtues of) eyelid-powder and the dyeings of fleeces, have been condemned by God, As Enoch Tells Us, how shall we please God while we joy in the things of those (angles) who, on these accounts, have provoked the anger and the vengeance of God?

http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0402.htm





Tertullian Quoting 1 Enoch 99:6-7



3. • Tertullian - On Idolatry - Chapter 4 (160-220 A.D.)

Enoch had preceded, predicting that the demons, and the spirits of the angelic apostates, would turn into idolatry all the elements, all the garniture of the universe, all things contained in the heaven, in the sea, in the earth, that they might be consecrated as God, in opposition to God. All things, therefore, does human error worship, except the Founder of all Himself. The images of those things are idols; the consecration of the images is idolatry. Whatever guilt idolatry incurs, must necessarily be imputed to every artificer of every idol. In short, the same Enoch fore-condemns in general menace both idol-worshippers and idol-makers together. And again: "I swear to you, sinners, that against the day of perdition of blood repentance is being prepared. You who serve stones, and you who make images of gold, and silver, and wood, and stones and clay, and serve phantoms, and demons, and spiritsin fanes, and all errors not according to knowledge, shall find no help from them "

• Tertullian - On Idolatry - Chapter 4 (160-220 A.D.)

http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0302.htm



And again I swear to you, ye sinners, that sin is prepared for a day of unceasing bloodshed. And they who worship stones, and grave images of gold and silver and wood (and stone) and clay, and those who worship impure spirits and demons, and all kinds of idols not according to knowledge, shall get no manner of help from them.

• 1 Enoch 99:6-7

http://reluctant-messenger.com/book_of_enoch.htm





4. • Origen - de Principiis - Book 1 - Chapter 3 - Section 3 (185-254 A.D.)

That all things were created by God, and that there is no creature which exists but has derived from Him its being, is established from many declarations of Scripture; those ***ertions being refuted and rejected which are falsely alleged by some respecting the existence either of a matter co-eternal with God, or of unbegotten souls, in which they would have it that God implanted not so much the power of existence, as equality and order. For even in that little treatise called The Pastor or Angel of Repentance, composed by Hennas, we have the following: "First of all, believe that there is one God who created and arranged all things; who, when nothing formerly existed, caused all things to be; who Himself contains all things, but Himself is contained by none." And In The Book Of Enoch Also We Have Similar Descriptions.

http://ecmarsh.com/fathers/anf/ANF-04/anf04-45.htm#P6244_1101010







5. • Anatolius (3rd Century)- Ante Nicene Fathers - Book 6 - Section 5

But I shall p*** on without demanding such copious demonstrations (on subjects ) from which the veil of the Mosaic law has been removed; for now it remains for us with unveiled face to behold ever as in a gl*** Christ Himself and the doctrines and sufferings of Christ. But that the first month among the Hebrews is about the equinox, Is Clearly Shown Also By What Is Taught In The Book Of Enoch.

http://ecmarsh.com/fathers/anf/ANF-06/anf06-57.htm#P2468_688069





6. • Justin Martyr wrote in his Second Apology - Chapter 5 (100-165 A.D.)

“But the angels transgressed this appointment, and were captivated by love of women, and begat children who are those that are called demons; and besides, they afterwards subdued the human race to themselves, partly by magical writings, and partly by fears and the punishments they occasioned, and partly by teaching them to offer sacrifices, and incense, and libations, of which things they stood in need after they were enslaved by lustful p***ions; and among men they sowed murders, wars, adulteries, intemperate deeds, and all wickedness. Whence also the poets and mythologists, not knowing that it was the angels and those demons who had been begotten by them that did these things to men, and women, and cities, and nations, which they related, ascribed them to god himself, and to those who were accounted to be his very offspring, and to the offspring of those who were called his brothers, Neptune and Pluto, and to the children again of these their offspring. For whatever name each of the angels had given to himself and his children, by that name they called them“.

http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0127.htm

[jude1:3]

7. • Athenagoras of Alexandria - A Plea For The Christians - Chapters 24 and 25 : (133-190 A.D.)

Just as with men, who have freedom of choice as to both virtue and vice (for you would not either honour the good or punish the bad, unless vice and virtue were in their own power; and some are diligent in the matters entrusted to them by you, and others faithless), so is it among the angels. Some, free agents, you will observe, such as they were created by God, continued in those things for which God had made and over which He had ordained them; but some outraged both the cons***ution of their nature and the government entrusted to them: namely, this ruler of matter and its various forms, and others of those who were placed about this first firmament (you know that we say nothing without witnesses, but state the things which have been declared by the prophets); these fell into impure love of virgins, and were subjugated by the flesh, and he became negligent and wicked in the management of the things entrusted to him. Of these lovers of virgins, therefore, were begotten those who are called giants. And if something has been said by the poets, too, about the giants, be not surprised at this: worldly Wisdom and divine differ as much from each other as truth and plausibility: the one is of heaven and the other of earth; and indeed, according to the prince of matter,- Chapter 24



These angels, then, who have fallen from heaven, and haunt the air and the earth, and are no longer able to rise to heavenly things, and the souls of the giants, which are the demons who wander about the world, perform actions similar, the one (that is, the demons) to the natures they have received, the other (that is, the angels) to the appe***es they have indulged. But the prince of matter, as may be seen merely from what transpires, exercises a control and management contrary to the good that is in God:- Chapter 25

http://ecmarsh.com/fathers/anf/ANF-02/anf02-46.htm#P2397_653146





8. • Irenaeus - The Proof of the Apostolic Preaching 18 (130-202 A.D)

“And for a very long while wickedness extended and spread, and reached and laid hold upon the whole race of mankind, until a very small seed of righteousness remained among them: and illicit unions took place upon the earth, since angels were united with the daughters of the race of mankind; and they bore to them sons who for their exceeding greatness were called giants. And the angels brought as presents to their wives teachings of wickedness, in that they brought them the virtues of roots and herbs, dyeing in colours and cosmetics, the discovery of rare substances, love-potions, aversions, amours, concupiscence, constraints of love, spells of bewitchment, and all sorcery and idolatry hateful to God; by the entry of which things into the world evil extended and spread, while righteousness was diminished and enfeebled.”

http://www.tertullian.org/fathers/irenaeus_02_proof.htm

http://torahdrivenlife.com/articles/enoch/the-church-fathers-and-the-book-of-enoch/







9. • ***us Flavius Josephus - The Antiquities of the Jews - Book 1 - Chapter 3

(37-100 A.D.)

Now this posterity of Seth continued to esteem God as the Lord of the universe, and to have an entire regard to virtue, for seven generations; but in process of time they were perverted, and forsook the practices of their forefathers, and did neither pay those honors to God which were appointed to them, nor had they any concern to do justice towards men. But for what degree of zeal they had formerly shown for virtue, they now showed by their actions a double degree of wickedness; whereby they made God to be their enemy, for Many Angels Of God Accompanied With Women And Begat Sons that proved unjust, and despisers of all that was good, on account of the confidence they had in their own strength; for the tradition is, that these men did what resembled the acts of those whom the Grecians Called Giants. But Noah was very uneasy at what they did; and, being displeased at their conduct, persuaded them to change their dispositions and their acts for the better; but, seeing that they did not yield to him, but were slaves to their wicked pleasures, he was afraid they would kill him, together with his wife and children, and those they had married; so he departed out of that land.

https://www.gutenberg.org/files/2848/2848-h/2848-h.htm#link2HCH0003







10. • Philo of Alexandria - On The Giants - (25 B.C.-50 A.D.)

And when The Angels of God saw the daughters of men that they were beautiful, They Took Unto Themselves Wives of all of them whom they Chose." Those beings, whom other philosophers call demons, Moses usually calls angels; and they are souls hovering in the air. And let no one suppose, that what is here stated is a fable, for it is necessarily true that the universe must be filled with living things in all its parts, since every one of its primary and elementary portions contains its appropriate animals and such as are consistent with its nature; --the earth containing terrestrial animals, the sea and the rivers containing aquatic animals, and the fire such as are born in the fire (but it is said, that such as these last are found chiefly in Macedonia), and the heaven containing the stars: for these also are entire souls pervading the universe, being unadulterated and divine, inasmuch as they move in a circle, which is the kind of motion most akin to the mind, for every one of them is the parent mind.

http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/yonge/book9.html

[jude1:3]

11. • Archelaus - The Acts of The Disputation with The Heresiarch Manes - Chapter 32 (3rd Century)

Hence also certain of The Angels, refusing to submit themselves to the commandment of God, resisted His will; and one of them indeed fell like a flash of lightning upon the earth, While Others, har***ed by the dragon, sought their felicity In Intercourse With The Daughters Of Men, and thus brought on themselves the merited award of the punishment of eternal fire.

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf06.vii.iii.xxxi.html





12. • Commodi**** - The Instructions of Commodi**** - Chapter 3 - (3rd Century)

When Almighty God, to beautify the nature of the world, willed that that earth should be visited By Angels, when they were sent down they despised His laws. Such was the beauty of women, that it turned them aside; so that, being contaminated, they could not return to heaven. Rebels from God, they uttered words against Him. Then the Highest uttered His judgment against them; and from their Seed Giants are said to have been born. By them arts were made known in the earth, and they taught the dyeing of wool, and everything which is done; and to them, when they died, men erected images. But the Almighty, because they were of an evil seed, did not approve that, when dead, they should be brought back from death. Whence wandering they now subvert many bodies, and it is such as these especially that ye this day worship and pray to as gods.

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf04.v.ii.iv.html





13. • Eusebius of Caesarea - Preparations - Book 5 - Chapter 4 - (263-339 A.D.)

And this argument is still further confirmed by Plutarch, in the p***age where he says that the mythical narratives told as concerning gods are certain tales about daemons, and the deeds of Giants and ***ans celebrated in song among the Greeks are also stories about daemons, intended to suggest a new phase of thought.

Of this kind then perhaps were the statements in the Sacred Scripture concerning the giants before the Mood, and those concerning their progenitors, of whom it is said, 'And when The Angels of God saw The Daughters Of Men that they were fair, They Took Unto Them Wives Of All That They Chose,' and of these were born 'The Giants the men of renown which were of old.'

For one might say That These Demons Are Those Giants, And That Their Spirits Have Been Deified By The Subsequent Generations Of Men, and that their battles, and their quarrels among themselves, and their wars are the subjects of these legends that are told as of gods. Plutarch indeed, in the discourse which he composed On Isis and the gods of the Egyptians, speaks as follows word for word:

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/pe****/morefathers/files/eusebius_pe_05_book5.htm






14. • Tertullian- The Five Books Against Marcion - Book 5 - Chapter 18 - (160-220 A.D.)
But “the spiritual wickedness” did not signify the Creator, because of the apostle’s additional description, “in heavenly places;” for the apostle was quite aware that “spiritual wickedness” had been at work in heavenly places, when angels were entrapped into sin by the daughters of men


http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/03125.htm




15. • Tertullian - On Idolatry - Chapter 9 - (160-220 A.D.)
One proposition I lay down: that those angels, the deserters from God, the lovers of women, were likewise the discoverers of this curious art, on that account also condemned by God.

http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0302.htm



16. • Tertullian - On Prayer - Chapter 22 - (160-220 A.D.)
For indeed it is “on account of the angels” that he saith women must be veiled, because on account of “the daughters of men” angels revolted from God.

http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0322.htm

[jude1:3]

17. • Irenaeus - Against Heresies - Book 4 - Chapter 36 -
(130-202 A.D.)
Since the Son of God is always one and the same, He gives to those who believe on Him a well of water [springing up] to eternal life, but He causes the unfruitful fig-tree immediately to dry up; and in the days of Noah He justly brought on the deluge for the purpose of extinguishing that most infamous race of men then existent, who could not bring forth fruit to God, since the angels that sinned had commingled with them, and [acted as He did] in order that He might put a check upon the sins of these men, but [that at the same time] He might preserve the archetype, the formation of Adam

http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0103436.htm





18. • Irenaeus - Against Heresies - Book 4 - Chapter 16 - (130-202 A.D.)
Enoch, too, pleasing God, without circumcision, discharged the office of God’s legate to the angels although he was a man, and was translated, and is preserved until now as a witness of the just judgment of God, because the angels when they had transgressed fell to the earth for judgment, but the man who pleased [God] was translated for salvation.

http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0103416.htm





19. • Clement - The Stromata - Book 5 - Chapter 1 - (150-215 A.D.)

And we showed in the first Miscellany that the philosophers of the Greeks are called thieves, inasmuch as they have taken without acknowledgment their principal dogmas from Moses and the prophets. To which also we shall add, that the angels who had obtained the superior rank, having sunk into pleasures, told to the women the secrets which had come to their knowledge; while the rest of the angels concealed them, or rather, kept them against the coming of the Lord. Thence emanated the doctrine of providence, and the revelation of high things; and prophecy having already been imparted to the philosophers of the Greeks, the treatment of dogma arose among the philosophers,
http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/clement-stromata-book5.html






20. • Lactantius (3rd to 4th Century) The Divine Ins***utes - The Epitome, - Chapter 27
But when God saw this, He sent His angels to instruct the race of men, and to protect them from all evil. He gave these a command to abstain from earthly things, lest, being polluted by any taint, they should be deprived of the honour of angels. But that wily accuser, while they tarried among men, allured these also to pleasures, so that they might defile themselves with women. Then, being condemned by the sentence of God, and cast forth on account of their sins, they lost both the name and substance of angels. Thus, having become ministers of the devil, that they might have a solace of their ruin, they betook themselves to the ruining of men, for whose protection they had come.






More References and Quotes Here :

http://torahdrivenlife.com/articles/enoch/the-church-fathers-and-the-book-of-enoch/

https://tg-sojourning.blogspot.com/2011/12/problem-of-enoch-challenge-to-current.html

https://tasbeha.org/community/discussion/9472/the-book-of-enoch/p3

http://www.sherryshriner.com/church-coverup.htm

https://www.christianforums.com/threads/the-book-of-enoch.8022611/page-10

[alan]

"Jude’s quote is not the only quote in the Bible from a non-biblical source. The Apostle Paul quotes Epimenides in ***us 1:12 but that does not mean we should give any additional authority to Epimenides’ writings. The same is true with Jude, verses 14-15. Jude quoting from the book of Enoch does not indicate the entire Book of Enoch is inspired, or even true. All it means is that particular verse is true. It is interesting to note that no scholars believe the Book of Enoch to have truly been written by the Enoch in the Bible. Enoch was seven generations from Adam, prior to the Flood (Genesis 5:1-24). Evidently, though, this was genuinely something that Enoch prophesied – or the Bible would not attribute it to him, “Enoch, the seventh from Adam, prophesied about these men…” (Jude 14). This saying of Enoch was evidently handed down by tradition, and eventually recorded in the Book of Enoch.

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."

( https://www.gotquestions.org/book-of-Enoch.html )