-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Book of Enoch?
- Thread starter Francine
- Start date
kai
ragamuffin
the ethiopian orthodox church regards it to be inspired Scripture.
Azakel
Liebe ist für alle da
I really don't know. Maybe they forgot to put it in?
It would make sense, in the book Enoch is shown thing be the Angels(namely Uriel). It's been awhile since I've read it, but to me it comes of as a type of End of days type book, and most Bible have the Book of Revelation for that. I don't know if the Ethiopian Orthodox do or not, if they didn't it would make sense that they had the Book of Enoch.
Sola'lor
LDSUJC
The Lost Books of the Bible - The Hidden Truths
I think the Book of Enoch is in there somewhere. Feel free to read it for yourself.
I think the Book of Enoch is in there somewhere. Feel free to read it for yourself.
TrueBlue2
Member
I would LOVE to read the teachings and writings of Enoch! Or Adam! Or Abraham! We don't even have the writings of the FATHER of the Israelite nation in the Biblical canon. It just goes to show that the Bible is a compilation of some books, but that it is not a complete canon of ALL the workings of God. There are many precious things that are not currently at our disposal.
Dirty Penguin
Master Of Ceremony
I mentioned something like this in another thread where Clement of Alexandria regarded the Apocalypse of Peter as Holy Scripture (cf. Euseb. HE VI 14.1).
I often wondered if the bible told the "whole" story. There might be something worth reading in the gnostic manuscripts. I understand that some have said a lot of the books were fakes or just untrustworthy.
The bible itself in various books and chapters tell of other books that we may not have in our possesion today.
Think of this. Ignore all the gnostic manuscripts and ask yourself is the bible complete given the fact that others within the bible make mention of other books. These books could possibly tell the story a whole lot differently.
Book of the Covenant
Exodus 24:7
And he took the book of the covenant, and read in the hearing of the people; and they said: 'All that the LORD hath spoken will we do, and obey.'
Book of Wars of the Lord
Numbers 21:14
wherefore it is said in the book of the Wars of the LORD: Vaheb in Suphah, and the valleys of Arnon
Book of JasherJoshua 10:13
And the sun stood still, and the moon stayed, until the people had avenged themselves upon their enemies. Is not this written in the book of Jasher? So the sun stood still in the midst of heaven, and hasted not to go down about a whole day.
2 Samuel 1:18
(Also he bade them teach the children of Judah the use of the bow: behold, it is written in the book of Jasher.)The Manner of the Kingdom / Book of Statutes
1 Samuel 10:25
Then Samuel told the people the manner of the kingdom, and wrote it in a book, and laid it up before the Lord. And Samuel sent all the people away, every man to his house.Nathan the Prophet
1 Chronicles 29:29Now the acts of David the king, first and last, behold, they are written in the book of Samuel the seer, and in the book of Nathan the prophet, and in the book of Gad the seer,
2 Chronicles 9:29 Now the rest of the acts of Solomon, first and last, are they not written in the book of Nathan the prophet, and in the prophecy of Ahijah the Shilonite, and in the visions of Iddo the seer against Jeroboam the son of Nebat?
Acts of Solomon
1 Kings 11:41 And the rest of the acts of Solomon, and all that he did, and his wisdom, are they not written in the book of the acts of Solomon?
Shemaiah the Prophet
2 Chronicles 12:15
Now the acts of Rehoboam, first and last, are they not written in the book of Shemaiah the prophet, and of Iddo the seer concerning genealogies? And there were wars between Rehoboam and Jeroboam continually.
Book of Jehu
2 Chronicles 20:34
Now the rest of the acts of Jehoshaphat, first and last, behold, they are written in the book of Jehu the son of Hanani, who is mentioned in the book of the kings of Israel.
Sayings of the Seers2 Chronicles 33:19 His prayer also, and how God was intreated of him, and all his sin, and his trespass, and the places wherein he built high places, and set up groves and graven images, before he was humbled: behold, they are written among the sayings of the seers.
Book of Enoch
Jude 1:14 And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints,
kai
ragamuffin
well if someone was inspired by the almighty i am sure microsoft word , would be the media of the day
gnostic
The Lost One
Clearly the NT figures (Jesus, Paul, etc) knew well of the both books of Enoch. Many of concepts of heaven, hell, angels, fallen angels, judgements, etc, had actually originated with the Enochic literature, are later found in the NT literature. Before these non-canonical literature, there were no hell. Not once was hell ever use as a place of torment. Also the reference to the Son of Man, a title frequently associated with Jesus, was actually coined in one of the books of Enoch. 1 Enoch and 2 Enoch are by far the most interesting of non-canonical texts.
blackout
Violet.
Perhaps this is why Roman Catholicism left it out?
They would lose their "leverage" with the masses:fork:.
You raise interesting & provocative questions Francine.
I find it so frustrating that some speak with such authority on that about which they are so ignorant. See Son of Man.
gnostic
The Lost One
So I am wrong about this Jay.
It still doesn't change the fact the title is not unique as Christians would claim it to be. They (Christians) refer it to Jesus, because they believe he is the Messiah, so to them Son of Man= Christ. I don't believe this title, or whatever you would like to call it, have anything to do with the messiah.
It still doesn't change the fact the title is not unique as Christians would claim it to be. They (Christians) refer it to Jesus, because they believe he is the Messiah, so to them Son of Man= Christ. I don't believe this title, or whatever you would like to call it, have anything to do with the messiah.
It is not the "wrong" that concerns me, but the pretense. Pedantry should be based on firmer ground, and intellectual honesty demands that each of us make at least some minimal effort to know what we don't know.
gnostic
The Lost One
ultraviolet said:
Sorry, Ultraviolet, but I didn't complete my sentence. It should read as:
edited said:
The following is new:
I should also add that Christians have identify sheol with their hell. This is not so in Judaism at that time (before the books of Enoch). Sheol referred to the netherworld, or world of the dead, where everyone went, regardless of being good or bad, or the social classes, eg. kings or slaves. There were no reward or punishment in sheol. There were no judgement. It was not place of joy or pain. At the end of life, everyone went there. Only god lived in heaven, possibly with his angels.
It was in Enoch that we see new change in belief in regarding to angels, fallen angels, final judgement and hell - a concept that would later flourish in Christian teaching and belief.
Sola'lor
LDSUJC
Hmm. That Sheol concept has some similarities with LDS beliefs.
kai
ragamuffin
its just one of the books they left out when they decided to make a compilation , not all Christians have the same bible some have more books than others. its just another chink in the Armour that Christians dont have one source like Islam. i seek some kind of answer and Christianity with these kinds of anomalies tends to make me steer clear,
A
angellous_evangellous
Guest
Accident.
Dirty Penguin
Master Of Ceremony
I like your answers.
That's why I listed the books that the bible itself speaks of. To me, (just IMO), the story is incomplete because some books aren't there. I'm quite sure it doesn't change faith and no I am not suggesting people should rethhink their way of life. I'm puzzeled why Clemet of Alexandria regarded the Apocalypse of Peter as scripture but the church doesn't. Why is it they took Paul's word (who never met Yeshua) over one of Yeshua's own deciples?
It may have something to do with that conversation Yeshua had with Peter about not being the one on the cross which actually fits the story in Islam.....
JUST MY OPINIOIN...........