Interesting video about The Book of Enoch

[tdidymas]

Originally Posted by 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

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]

Originally Posted by tdidymas

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:

[tdidymas]

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:

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]

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]

Originally Posted by tdidymas

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:

[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

[jude1:3]

Originally Posted by alanmolstad

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]

Originally Posted by 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

You're just making up stuff.

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

[alanmolstad]

Originally Posted by jude1:3

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]

Originally Posted by alanmolstad

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

^^^ This is what you are making up.

[alanmolstad]

Originally Posted by jude1:3

^^^ 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.