Interesting video about The Book of Enoch

[jude1:3]

Video about The Essenes:

[jude1:3]

Another video about The Essenes:

[tdidymas]

Originally Posted by jude1:3

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]

Originally Posted by tdidymas

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]

Originally Posted by alanmolstad

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]

Originally Posted by jude1:3

• The Essenes were Not a cult

.

I kinda think they were....

[jude1:3]

Originally Posted by alanmolstad

I kinda think they were....

Well, you're wrong then.

[jude1:3]

Originally Posted by alanmolstad

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]

Originally Posted by jude1:3

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

[alanmolstad]

Originally Posted by jude1:3

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:

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)

[jude1:3]

Originally Posted by tdidymas

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]

Originally Posted by jude1:3

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

[jude1:3]

Originally Posted by tdidymas

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.

[tdidymas]

Originally Posted by jude1:3

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

[TrueBlue?]

Originally Posted by tdidymas

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?]

Originally Posted by 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

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]

Originally Posted by TrueBlue?

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?]

Originally Posted by alanmolstad

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]

Originally Posted by TrueBlue?

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