"15Will you keep to the old way. Which wicked men have trod, (i.e. will you stay on the ancient path that wicked men have trod?) 16Who were cut down before their time, Whose foundations were swept away bya flood? 17They said to God, ‘Depart from us. What can the Almighty do to us?’" - Job 22:15-17
"7While the morning stars sang together and all the sons of God shouted for joy? 8Who enclosed the sea behind doors when it burst forth from the womb," - Job 38:8
How do you mean, no correlation yet muttley? No correlation yet to what CaveAdullam? In all the above, the high water mark verse, excuse the pun CaveAdullam, lol, is Job 22:17. I bet it was the patriarch Noah who had the last laugh
I knew that underneath, you're flesh and blood, with sweet human kindness flowing in your veins. You're a good 'un. I knew all that your bravado nah front and wash, lol. You see, you and I sabi and understand each other gobuchinny, because people like you and I give as good as we get. If na to do rough play, we dey there, if na to do ajebo and gelato, we dey there, lol. Nwanne, did you hear anyone say anything about apologies, please tell the person not to be daft. Me, I get strong chin, but maybe I am like that dog in the above clip, my bark is loud and stronger so I dont bite, lol.
Nwanne, we dont have to agree on everything, this is even by a God design, look at your fingers are they equal in lenght, hmm? Of course not, but they only become equal and tip to tip only when they bend
Enoch and the likes are more of strong meat? Face palm, smh, pull the other leg. The Book of Enoch and the likes are serious risks to the health of a son of God/daughter of God, lol wink wink.
. You cant judge what you haven't read brother. Even in science, you test theories to race hypothesis then laws of science. you must test all spirits first. You should read it first as that's the only way to truly know.
That book does not in any way speak against Christianity. In fact it speaks about Christ. Any book that confirms scriptures 100% cannot be accursed. And I mean 100%. It foretells the birthing of the nation of Israel and the coming of the Messiah till the end of the world and everlasting judgement . But anyways. As long as you beleive in Yeshua that fine with me. But I recommend that book to anyone who is curious to understand mysteries as it explains alot. Just like the book of Jasher and other apocrypha.
gobuchinny: . You cant judge what you haven't read brother. Even in science, you test theories to race hypothesis then laws of science. You must test all spirits first. You should read it first as that's the only way to truly know.
That book does not in any way speak against Christianity. In fact it speaks about Christ. Any book that confirms scriptures 100% cannot be accursed. And I mean 100%. It foretells the birthing of the nation of Israel and the coming of the Messiah till the end of the world and everlasting judgement . But anyways. As long as you beleive in Yeshua that fine with me. But I recommend that book to anyone who is curious to understand mysteries as it explains a lot. Just like the book of Jasher and other apocrypha.
Cheers
You really think I havent read the BoE, erhn?
Nwanne, trust me. I have the three flavours of that nauseating BoE, the same way I have the Quran and many other books like that I wouldnt want to mention their titles here. I am a voracious eater, but it doesnt mean because of eating, I'll call a monkey bros or a dog brother.
gobuchinny, please be honest at least if for this once with me on the BoE, erhn? Now gobuchinny are you trying to tell me, that there isnt anything written in the BoE that you've thought, hmm, thats odd, that doesnt add up, that is ludicrous, that is OTT, etcetera hmm?
gobuchinny, if the BoE, is truly that revered and a book that commands respect and honour, why isnt it, even if just once not directly mentioned anywhere in the Bible. Others are, even the your beloved Book of Jasher, the original is mentioned, mentioned even at least twice, if I am correct, but high and mighty BoE is missing. BoE, seems to be an outcast. Nobody dared directly mention it with the lips, talkess let it be in a way that is visible to the eye be seen written out in black ink on the Bible's white. This is an indictment that at the very least, its an accursed book
The demon that knew who Jesus was and even acknowledged Jesus, did the demon speak against Christianity, hmm? Did the demon not speak positively about Christ, hmm? Did the demon not confirm the scripture 100% about Jesus Christ, huh? Was the accursed demon, not in a manner that is suitable or proper in the circumstances, dealth with, erhn? If your replies are, yes, yes, yes and yes, then need I say more, then I rest my case.
Fyi, that the Book of Jasher now paraded about is not the original one mentioned in the Bible. The original BoJ is lost, missing AWOL, the paraded one is a hoax. The other apocrypha clearly werent God inspired, just as the BoE isnt.
1 Then Eliphaz the Temanite answered and said, 2 Can a man be profitable unto God, as he that is wise may be profitable unto himself? 3 Is it any pleasure to the Almighty, that thou art righteous? or is it gain to him, that thou makest thy ways perfect? 4 Will he reprove thee for fear of thee? will he enter with thee into judgment? 5 Is not thy wickedness great? and thine iniquities infinite? 6 For thou hast taken a pledge from thy brother for nought, and stripped the naked of their clothing. 7 Thou hast not given water to the weary to drink, and thou hast withholden bread from the hungry. 8 But as for the mighty man, he had the earth; and the honourable man dwelt in it. 9 Thou hast sent widows away empty, and the arms of the fatherless have been broken. 10 Therefore snares are round about thee, and sudden fear troubleth thee; 11 Or darkness, that thou canst not see; and abundance of waters cover thee. 12 Is not God in the height of heaven? and behold the height of the stars, how high they are! 13 And thou sayest, How doth God know? can he judge through the dark cloud? 14 Thick clouds are a covering to him, that he seeth not; and he walketh in the circuit of heaven. 15 Hast thou marked the old way which wicked men have trodden? 16 Which were cut down out of time, whose foundation was overflown with a flood: 17 Which said unto God, Depart from us: and what can the Almighty do for them? 18 Yet he filled their houses with good things: but the counsel of the wicked is far from me. 19 The righteous see it, and are glad: and the innocent laugh them to scorn. 20 Whereas our substance is not cut down, but the remnant of them the fire consumeth. 21 Acquaint now thyself with him, and be at peace: thereby good shall come unto thee. 22 Receive, I pray thee, the law from his mouth, and lay up his words in thine heart. 23 If thou return to the Almighty, thou shalt be built up, thou shalt put away iniquity far from thy tabernacles. 24 Then shalt thou lay up gold as dust, and the gold of Ophir as the stones of the brooks. 25 Yea, the Almighty shall be thy defence, and thou shalt have plenty of silver. 26 For then shalt thou have thy delight in the Almighty, and shalt lift up thy face unto God. 27 Thou shalt make thy prayer unto him, and he shall hear thee, and thou shalt pay thy vows. 28 Thou shalt also decree a thing, and it shall be established unto thee: and the light shall shine upon thy ways. 29 When men are cast down, then thou shalt say, There is lifting up; and he shall save the humble person. 30 He shall deliver the island of the innocent: and it is delivered by the pureness of thine hands.
Read verse 16-20 in context. If we pick some verses (e.g. 15 & 16) in isolation to assume it refers to the Noahic flood, why did Eliphaz also claim he ignores the counsel of these same wicked people?
And who was Eliphaz referring to as the remnants the fire'll consume in verse 20?
Who are the innocent people laughing at in scorn in verse 19? Definitely not the wicked people that lived prior to the Noahic flood.
"5But they deliberately overlook the fact that long ago by God’s word the heavens existed and the earth was formed out of water and by water, 6through which the world of that time perished in the flood. 7And by that same word, the present heavens and earth are reserved for fire, kept for the day of judgment and destruction of ungodly men" - 2 Peter 3:5-7
For those of you fruitlessly arguing that the sons of God in Genesis & Job are the male descendants of Seth;
Please have a look at Josephus Flavius' Antiquity of the Jews; I don't think Josephus Flavius needs introduction here as famous first century Jewish historian he was.
Flavius Josephus of the Antiquities of the Jews — Book I Chapter 3 v 1;
1. 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 fore-fathers; and did neither pay those honours to God which were appointed them, nor had they any concern to do justice towards men. But for what degree of zeal they had formerly shewn for virtue, they now shewed 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 call Giants. But Noah was very uneasy at what they did: and being displeased at their conduct, persuaded them to change their dispositions, and their actions for the better. But seeing 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.
Amazing how this historical account is also ignored.
solite3: I get you, you have tried to clarify yourself but you are been intentionally misquoted and your evidence ignored, like you side there is a limit to which one can push. Just ignore unnecessary repetition but leave fact for the validity of your points. Stay blessed
That is certainly one way to put it, but I actually just intended to register a falsehood. I mean that the questions I asked when I entered the conversation with the false teacher in question were deliberately asked to demonstrate that he had not looked at the matter thoroughly. I really didn't plan to argue for anything after that. My going on to engage him was not what I intended. I knew that I could never persuade him to abandon his madness, since I have met him before in a similar setting. So, it was a waste of time, except in so far as engaging him could produce insights for those who are considering the question of the inspiration of any literature.
But thank you very much for your kind words.
I think I have offered you this advice before, but if I might, let me do so again: you should include appropriate attribution to any sources you quote, not only to give credit where it is due, but also to allow those who find what you post useful to go and look at the full work wherever it is available. Also, with proper attribution, you don't bear responsibility for the full thoughts and intents of the author of the work, and then you won't accidentally misrepresent anything that they may be saying.
MuttleyLaff: You really think I havent read the BoE, erhn?
Nwanne, trust me. I have the three flavours of that nauseating BoE, the same way I have the Quran and many other books like that I wouldnt want to mention their titles here. I am a voracious eater, but it doesnt mean because of eating, I'll call a monkey or dog brother.
gobuchinny, please be honest at least if for this once with me on the BoE, erhn? Now gobuchinny are you trying to tell me, that there isnt anything written in the BoE that you've thought, hmm, thats odd, that doesnt add up, that is ludicrous, that is OTT, etcetera hmm?
gobuchinny, if the BoE, is truly that revered and a book that commands respect and honour, why isnt it, even if just once not directly mentioned anywhere in the Bible. Others are, even the your beloved Book of Jasher, the original is mentioned, mentioned even at least twice, if I am correct, but high and mighty BoE is missing. BoE, seems to be an outcast. Nobody dared directly mention it with the lips, talkess let it be in a way that is visible to the eye be seen written out in black ink on the Bible's white. This is an indictment that at the very least, its an accursed book
The demon that knew who Jesus was and even acknowledged Jesus, did it speak against Christianity, hmm? Did it not speak positively about Christ, hmm? Did it not confirm the scripture 100% about Jesus Christ, huh? Was the accursed demon not appropiately dealth with, erhn? If your replies are, yes, yes, yes and yes, then need I say more, then I rest my case.
Fyi, that the Book of Jasher now paraded about is not the original one mentioned in the Bible. The original BoS is lost, missing AWOL, the paraded one is a hoax. The other apocrypha clearly werent God inspired, just as the BoE isnt.
Do you honestly think that God cannot preserve His words brother. Do humans preserve their own words? If they r duplicates it proves to me that there is an original. There r several books of jasher and Enoch (maybe you read the wrong one? but one true one which is still in circulation . When you read it. It fills in the blanks in the bible neatly.
The truth is, there r several things that we read in the conventional bible that strikes as odd. How can 300 men defeat men as much as the sand in the seashore. How can a virgin give birth to a man. How can a sea divide for a people? Or how can the earth be flooded and only 8 survive? The book of Enoch speaks about the gospel. Infact you read it and r amazed at the similarities of doctrines. I ask again, do you think God cannot preserve His words? That man is stronger than God? The same word He honours more than His name?
Let me tell you, the catholic is an evil institution. See, the devil didnt know the plan of God for if he knew he wouldn't have killed Jesus 1 cor 2 vs 8. Enoch speaks about the death of Yeshua. The Catholics r a institution of the devil to hijack christianity. It's all prophesied. The abomination of desolation spoken of by Yeshua in Matt 25. Its similar to what happened in the maccabees where Antichous erected the statue of Zeus in the temple.
What the Catholics brought is pagan worship which the protestants continued. They would have hide all scriptures if they could but there was a tradition on written/verified scripture which could not be denied hence the bible as you c it. The Euthopians have always been in the mix with the jews. Check out ancient civilizations. Some euthopians jews (betajews) have naturally settled in Israel and Israel's gov acknowledges them as jews . Everyone knows Israel is the bearer of the true God. When it was customary to have multiple gods the jews came with One true God..There was a tradition of fallen angels. It was well known in ancient times. Please verify with ancient Jewish beliefs. The euthopian bible kept this truth.
The devil has been working hard. Please nwannem, let's discuss the book of enoch. Tell me one thing in that book that you have an issue with. I'm not here to promote the book as I beleive you dont need the book to find salvation in Christ. As all has been provided in the conventional bible. But that book is an inspired word of God.
Sometimes you will be reading it and fill your r reading from revelations, other times you will fill like it's from galatians, or ephesians or genesis.
Let's discuss your issues with the book. Pls quote it let's discuss. Because if you cant find any thing that contradicts the bible, y do you have an issue? Bear in mind the devil is no fool. He won't bring this 'accursed' book without blaspheming . It's his nature. To curse God cause he will eventually die. Like the quran is, for tho they acknowledge Yeshua, they still curse him. The devil wont inspire the book of Enoch without reaping his benefits. No. Do you invest in a business you want benefit from?
OkCornel: For those of you fruitlessly arguing that the sons of God in Genesis & Job are the male descendants of Seth;
Please have a look at Josephus Flavius' Antiquity of the Jews; I don't think Josephus Flavius needs introduction here as famous first century Jewish historian he was.
Flavius Josephus of the Antiquities of the Jews — Book I Chapter 3 v 1;
1. 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 fore-fathers; and did neither pay those honours to God which were appointed them, nor had they any concern to do justice towards men. But for what degree of zeal they had formerly shewn for virtue, they now shewed 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 call Giants. But Noah was very uneasy at what they did: and being displeased at their conduct, persuaded them to change their dispositions, and their actions for the better. But seeing 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.
Amazing how this historical account is also ignored.
This antiquities of the jews seem interesting from what I read. I will soon get to it.
This antiquities of the jews seem interesting from what I read. I will soon get to it.
It's an insightful read, every minute spent on this book is worth it. Explains quite a lot in the Bible (From the timeline between Genesis to the Maccabees)
Was painstakingly documented by Josephus Flavius, a first century Jewish historian.
Antiquities of the Jews (Latin: Antiquitates Judaicae; Greek: Ἰουδαϊκὴ ἀρχαιολογία, Ioudaikē archaiologia) is a 20-volume historiographical work, written in Greek, by the Jewish historian Flavius Josephus in the 13th year of the reign of Roman emperor Flavius Domitian which was around AD 93 or 94.
Antiquities of the Jews contains an account of history of the Jewish people for Josephus' gentile patrons. In the first ten volumes, Josephus follows the events of the historical books of the Hebrew Bible beginning with the creation of Adam and Eve. The second ten volumes continues the history of the Jewish people beyond the biblical text and up to the Jewish War, or the First Jewish–Roman War, 66 to 73 CE.
This work, along with Josephus's other major work, The Jewish War (De Bello Iudaico), provides valuable background material to historians wishing to understand 1st-century AD Judaism and the early Christian period.
Sources;
1) Freedman, David Noel, ed., The Anchor Bible Dictionary, (New York: Doubleday, 1997, 1992). 2) Stephen L. Harris, Understanding the Bible, (Palo Alto: Mayfield, 1985).
Do you honestly think that God cannot preserve His words brother. Do humans preserve their own words? If they r duplicates it proves to me that there is an original. There r several books of jasher and Enoch (maybe you read the wrong one? but one true one which is still in circulation . When you read it. It fills in the blanks in the bible neatly.
The truth is, there r several things that we read in the conventional bible that strikes as odd. How can 300 men defeat men as much as the sand in the seashore. How can a virgin give birth to a man. How can a sea divide for a people? Or how can the earth be flooded and only 8 survive? The book of Enoch speaks about the gospel. Infact you read it and r amazed at the similarities of doctrines. I ask again, do you think God cannot preserve His words? That man is stronger than God? The same word He honours more than His name?
Let me tell you, the catholic is an evil institution. See, the devil didnt know the plan of God for if he knew he wouldn't have killed Jesus 1 cor 2 vs 8. Enoch speaks about the death of Yeshua. The Catholics r a institution of the devil to hijack christianity. It's all prophesied. The abomination of desolation spoken of by Yeshua in Matt 25. Its similar to what happened in the maccabees where Antichous erected the statue of Zeus in the temple.
What the Catholics brought is pagan worship which the protestants continued. They would have hide all scriptures if they could but there was a tradition on written/verified scripture which could not be denied hence the bible as you c it. The Euthopians have always been in the mix with the jews. Check out ancient civilizations. Some euthopians jews (betajews) have naturally settled in Israel and Israel's gov acknowledges them as jews . Everyone knows Israel is the bearer of the true God. When it was customary to have multiple gods the jews came with One true God..There was a tradition of fallen angels. It was well known in ancient times. Please verify with ancient Jewish beliefs. The euthopian bible kept this truth.
The devil has been working hard. Please nwannem, let's discuss the book of enoch. Tell me one thing in that book that you have an issue with. I'm not here to promote the book as I beleive you dont need the book to find salvation in Christ. As all has been provided in the conventional bible. But that book is an inspired word of God.
Sometimes you will be reading it and fill your r reading from revelations, other times you will fill like it's from galatians, or ephesians or genesis.
Let's discuss your issues with the book. Pls quote it let's discuss. Because if you cant find any thing that contradicts the bible, y do you have an issue? Bear in mind the devil is no fool. He won't bring this 'accursed' book without blaspheming . It's his nature. To curse God cause he will eventually die. Like the quran is, for tho they acknowledge Yeshua, they still curse him. The devil wont inspire the book of Enoch without reaping his benefits. No. Do you invest in a business you want benefit from?
That is certainly one way to put it, but I actually just intended to register a falsehood. I mean that the questions I asked when I entered the conversation with the false teacher in question were deliberately asked to demonstrate that he had not looked at the matter thoroughly. I really didn't plan to argue for anything after that. My going on to engage him was not what I intended. I knew that I could never persuade him to abandon his madness, since I have met him before in a similar setting. So, it was a waste of time, except in so far as engaging him could produce insights for those who are considering the question of the inspiration of any literature.
But thank you very much for your kind words.
I think I have offered you this advice before, but if I might, let me do so again: you should include appropriate attribution to any sources you quote, not only to give credit where it is due, but also to allow those who find what you post useful to go and look at the full work wherever it is available. Also, with proper attribution, you don't bear responsibility for the full thoughts and intents of the author of the work, and then you won't accidentally misrepresent anything that they may be saying.
solite3: Why is the book of enoch not added to the bible?
The book of Enoch is one of the Pseudepigrapha books and was apparently written during the second or first century before Jesus Christ. It should be noted that this book is usually regarded to be the Ethiopic Apocalypse of Enoch.[1] There is also a Slavonic Apocalypse which is called the second book of Enoch that was written late in the first century A.D. There is a third book or Hebrew Apocalypse of Enoch which is believed to have been written in the fifth to sixth century A.D.[2] However, the book that is referred as the book of Enoch is the first book which contains one hundred and eight chapters which comprise five sections that are often also called books.[3]
Overview of First Enoch (2nd to 1st B.C.) The first book of Enoch has five sections. James H. Charlesworth outlines the book as follows:[4]
1. Book of the Watchers (1-36) 2. Book of the Similitudes (37-71) 3. Book of the Astronomical Writings (72-82) 4. Book of the Dream Visions (83-90) 5. Book of the Epistle of Enoch (91-107)
Chapters 1-5 provide a short introduction of Enoch and speak to the major themes of rewards, punishment, the end of the world and final judgment. Book 1 includes chapters 6-36 and is primarily about angels, the Tree of Life, Jerusalem, and the universe. Book 2 includes chapters 37-71 and deals with the One, the Son of God, or the Messiah, resurrection, the flood, Noah, future judgment, and paradise. Book 3 includes chapters 72-82 which deal with the stars, moon, astronomy, the universe, and Enoch’s mission. Book IV includes chapters 83-90 which concern predictions about the flood, a historical sketch, the future of Israel, and the messianic kingdom. Book V includes chapters 91-105 that deal with various challenges for the wicked and righteous. The concluding chapters of 106-108 discuss the sin after the flood until the coming of the Messiah.
Comparison of books of Jude and Enoch While the book is fascinating to read, it is important to note that the first book of Enoch is not Scripture. That is, the book is not inspired by God. The book was quoted in the Apocryphal book of Baruch, and in several early church manuscripts: Barnabas 16:5, Idolatry 15:6 (Tertullian), and Eccl. Proph 3 (Clement of Alexandria). Some have speculated that Jude 14-15 is a quote from the book of Enoch and concluded that Jude regarded Enoch as Scripture. The following two quotes compare Jude 14-15 to the suspected passage in the book of Enoch.
Jude 14-15 . . . Behold, the Lord came with many thousands of His holy ones, to execute judgment upon all, and to convict all the ungodly of all their ungodly deeds which they have done in an ungodly way, and of all the harsh things which ungodly sinners have spoken against Him. (NASB) Jude 14-15
Enoch 1:9 . . . Behold, he will arrive with ten million of the holy ones in order to execute judgment upon all. He will destroy the wicked ones and censure all flesh on account of everything that they have done, that which the sinners and the wicked ones committed against him. – Enoch 1:9[5]
Upon examination of these two texts, the reader will note that Jude refers to “thousands” of angels, but Enoch refers to “millions.” This could appear to be significant, but the Greek word in Jude that is translated as “thousands” is myrias. It literally means “ten thousand” when used in the singular. When the Greek word is plural, it means “innumerable.” Balz and Schneider state,
myrias “appears 8 times in the NT: in the literal sense, Acts 19:19 . . .; in the sense of myriads/thousands/tens if thousands (without further specification of the exact number).”[6]
Note that the Greek word, myrias, is plural in Jude. In R. H. Charles’ Greek text of 1 Enoch myrias appears.[7] It should be noted that R. H. Charles has written many books about the book of Enoch. He has supplied a Greek text of Enoch. The Greek text supplied by him has myrias in the plural. This means the Greek texts of Jude 14-15 and Enoch 1:9 both contain myrias and the apparent diference is not real since the Greek word is identical.
Careful examination of the two passages reveals some significant differences, however. First, Jude says that God will “convict” all of the ungodly, but Enoch says that they will be “destroyed.” In the Greek language the words for convict and destroy are different. Therefore, this is a significant difference. There are other significant differences such as Jude says, “harsh things” but Enoch does not. Jude says, “spoken against” but Enoch says, “committed against him.” A comparison of the two passages reveal that the Greek text of Jude has 29 words but the text supplied by R. H. Charles has 36 words.
Therefore, it is inaccurate to conclude that Jude just copied Enoch. It is important to notice that Jude does not quote the first book of Enoch but simply reports that Enoch “prophesied, saying.” That is, Jude is not citing the book of Enoch but the prophet Enoch.
It was also about these men that Enoch, in the seventh generation from Adam, prophesied, saying . . . Jude 14 (NASB)
Book of Jude Is Scripture Since the book of Jude was written by Jude under the influence of God the Holy Spirit (2 Peter 1:21), we conclude that the book of Jude is truth. It does not matter if Jude knew about the non-canonical (non-biblical) source. What is important is that God the Holy Spirit guided Jude to write truth because God is truthful (2 Peter 1:20-21; 2 Timothy 3:16-17; Hebrews 6:18). Therefore the first book of Enoch is wrong with regard to some facts and Jude can be trusted. Because Jude quoted the prophet Enoch we can know what happened historically.
Book of Enoch Is Not Scripture The book of Enoch was never referred to by Jesus or any of the New Testament writers as Scripture, and the book was not included in the New Testament by the apostles. It is commonly misunderstood that the content of the Bible evolved over time. But the New Testament clearly tells us that the apostles were identifying Scripture as it was being written (2 Peter 3:14-16; cf. 1 Timothy 5:18 and Luke 10:7 ). The New Testament books were being distributed by the apostles to the various churches to be read (Galatians 6:11; Colossians 4:16; 1 Thessalonians 5:27; 2 Thessalonians 2:2; 3:14). By the time the apostles died, the New Testament had been written and its books were known. The Muratorian Fragment and several of the early fathers have left us a list of books that were identified as belonging to the New Testament. The book of Enoch was never included. Some books were challenged later but never with success.
Conclusion: You asked the question, “Why isn’t this wonderful book included in the Bible?” The answer is that Jesus and the apostles never called it Scripture. It is important to note that a few early church fathers highly valued the book of Enoch, but they never referred to it as Scripture. Therefore, we cannot view it as authorative since it is not the Word of God.
References: 1. James H Charlesworth. The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha. Doubleday & Company. 1983. vol. 1, pp. 5-89.
2. Ibid. p. 93, 223.
3. Ibid. p. 7.
4. Ibid.
5. Ibid., p. 13.
6. Balz and Schneider. Exegetical Dictionary of the New Testament. Eerdmans Publishing. 1981. p. 446.
7. Text can be found at barnascha.narod.ru/books/1hanokhg.htm. However, note that the text has many typographical errors, maybe due to word processing.
Conclusion: You asked the question, “Why isn’t this wonderful book included in the Bible?” The answer is that Jesus and the apostles never called it Scripture. It is important to note that a few early church fathers highly valued the book of Enoch, but they never referred to it as Scripture. Therefore, we cannot view it as authorative since it is not the Word of God.
A FEW OF THE EARLY CHURCH FATHERS HIGHLY VALUED THE BOOK OF ENOCH. I really wonder if these early church fathers were apostates too...
By the way, someone played the ostrich to this question;
CaveAdullam: So Jesus Christ read the books of the new testament. Hmmmm! Wonderful!
Can you please enlighten me sir, where and when did the Lord Jesus Christ and the Apostles made a list of scriptures Christians should read?
That is certainly one way to put it, but I actually just intended to register a falsehood. I mean that the questions I asked when I entered the conversation with the false teacher in question were deliberately asked to demonstrate that he had not looked at the matter thoroughly. I really didn't plan to argue for anything after that. My going on to engage him was not what I intended. I knew that I could never persuade him to abandon his madness, since I have met him before in a similar setting. So, it was a waste of time, except in so far as engaging him could produce insights for those who are considering the question of the inspiration of any literature.
Ahn ahn, I didn't know holding onto a single professor's view (Dr. Luginbill) is now the standard for looking into the matter of the book of Enoch thoroughly?
I mean, you discounted and turned a blind eye to the view of other numerous scholars and encyclopedias to hinge onto a funny speculative view that the book of Jude was written before the book of Enoch? As in...who in his or her right senses would conclude the book of Jude was written before the book of Enoch?
Amazing how someone can tell lies comfortably and defend it vigorously.
By the way, there's a certain false teacher that claimed the Holy Spirit withheld some of His gifts from the church since after the Bible era. I'm still trying to recall this false teacher vividly....
gobuchinny: Do you honestly think that God cannot preserve His words brother. Do humans preserve their own words? If they r duplicates it proves to me that there is an original. There r several books of jasher and Enoch (maybe you read the wrong one? but one true one which is still in circulation . When you read it. It fills in the blanks in the bible neatly
Refer to 2 Timothy 4:3 and Jude 1:18 coming next below
gobuchinny: Let's discuss your issues with the book. Pls quote it let's discuss. Because if you cant find any thing that contradicts the bible, y do you have an issue? Bear in mind the devil is no fool. He won't bring this 'accursed' book without blaspheming . It's his nature. To curse God cause he will eventually die. Like the quran is, for tho they acknowledge Yeshua, they still curse him. The devil wont inspire the book of Enoch without reaping his benefits. No. Do you invest in a business you want benefit from?
Please quote my friend let put this to bed
solite3: the BoE was almost certainly not written by Enoch himself. Nearly every scholar agrees that it was written MUCH later than when Enoch lived (pre-flood). Most estimates are that it was written at a time when many other apocryphal books were also written, this time being what is called the intertestamental period; the period between the book of Malachi and the events of the New Testament (app. 400 years). These being the case, the BoE is often called a pseudepigrapha. The term pseudepigrapha basically means that it is a work attributed to an author who is not really the author. (This was usually done to lend credibility to the written work.) In addition, these writings were considered Jewish works, written around the time period just mentioned. Why do these things apply to the BoE? Let's look at that next.
The primary reason pointing to the impossibility of Enoch writing the book lies within the book itself. In several places, the BoE seems to put Enoch as being alive when Noah was born. In (Enoch 106:8 - 107:3), Enoch has a conversation with his son Methuselah regarding the birth of Noah. For example, in (Enoch 107:2-3) it says:
"And now, my son, go and make known to thy son Lamech that this (3) son, which has been born, is in truth his son, and that (this) is no lie.' And when Methuselah had heard the words of his father Enoch-for he had shown to him everything in secret-he returned and showed (them) to him and called the name of that son Noah; for he will comfort the earth after all the destruction." **(106:18) says that Enoch told Methuselah to name the child Noah.
***Note: Some say that this conversation between Methuselah and Enoch is after Enoch was no longer on the Earth, however, if this is the case, then that is obviously another unbiblical issue (see: Q: #135.).
Based upon dating in the Bible, Enoch could not have been on Earth when Noah was born (Noah would have been his great-grandson). Enoch had his son Methuselah when he was 65 years (Gen 5:21). Enoch lived to be 365 years old when God took him to Heaven (Gen 5:21-22)(Heb 11:5). Methuselah was 187 years old when he had his son Lamech (Gen 5:25). Lamech was 182 years old when he had his son Noah (Gen 5:28-29). Putting these together, Enoch was 65 when Methuselah was born, 252 when Lamech was born, and would have been 434 when Noah was born. Enoch was on Earth for 365 years. He had been gone for 69 years when Noah was born!
The BoE also contradicts our Bible in many places. Let me share a few examples.
(Enoch 2:3) speaks of "rain," when it had not "rained" before the flood (when Enoch lived), and no one even knew what "rain" was (see: Q: #44.).
(Enoch ch. 6-7) are a parallel to (Gen 6:1-4) in our Bible. However, it says many things that are not in our Bible. It says that "200" angels came to Earth to marry and impregnate human women, which resulted in giant offspring. It gives the names of many of these angels. These angels also "taught them charms and enchantments, and the cutting of roots, and made them acquainted with plants" (7:1-2). The Bible never says that "angels" mated with human women in (Gen 6:1-4), but rather than that it was the "sons of God." There are those who believe that the "sons of God" were angels, but I do not. I believe that the "sons of God" are referring to the Godly line of Seth intermarrying with the ungodly line of Cain. I explain this here.
(Enoch 40:7) speaks of "Satans" (plural), and how they were forbidden "to come before the Lord of Spirits to accuse them who dwell on the earth." This contradicts the Book of Job (Job 1:6-12)(Job 2:1-7).
(Enoch 40:9) says an angel named Phanuel "is set over the repentance unto hope of those who inherit eternal life." In other words, Phanuel is taking the place of Jesus Christ.
(Enoch 41:1-2) speaks of "actual" mansions in Heaven for the elect (and that sinners were driven from them). While this may be debatable, I do not believe there are "actual" mansions in Heaven (see: Q: #289.).
(Enoch 67:1-3) says that God appointed angels to build Noah's Ark. Our Bible says that God told Noah to build the Ark (Gen 6:14-16).
(Enoch 69:6) says that an angel named "Gadreel... led astray Eve." Our Bible says it was Satan (Gen 3)(2 Cor 11:3)(1 Tim 2:14). (This verse also says that Gadreel showed mankind: "the blows of death" and "the weapons of death... the shield and the coat of mail, and the sword." In a contradiction, (Enoch 8:1) it says Azazel did this.)
The BoE has also has some BIZARRE teachings. Here are just a few:
(Enoch 7:3) is perhaps the MOST bizarre. It speaks of "great giants, whose height was three thousand ells," roaming the Earth. Webster's Dictionary says an "ell" is "a former English unit of length (as for cloth) equal to 45 inches." Doing some math, we come up with giants that were 11,250 feet tall!! Some believe that this was a copyist error, and instead the giants were "300 cubits" tall. Even if this were true, a cubit was approximately 18 inches, therefore we have 450' tall giants! (Enoch 7:4-5) goes on to say that eventually, they began to eat men and each other.
(Enoch 32:2-6) seems to indicate that the Garden of Eden survived the flood.
(Enoch 33:3) indicates that Enoch counted every star.
(Enoch 69:8-9) says an angel named Penemue taught men wisdom, and how to write with ink and paper.
(Enoch 106:1-3, 11;12) says that the moment Noah was born, he "opened his mouth, and conversed with the Lord." https://jesusalive.cc/ques393.htm
"For the time will come when people will not tolerate sound doctrine, but according to their own desires, will multiply teachers for themselves because they have an itch to hear what they want to hear." - 2 Timothy 4:3
"How they told you that there would be mockers in the last time who would walk according to their own ungodly lusts. (i.e. whose purpose in life is to satisfy their ungodly desires)" - Jude 1:18
Bodydialect57 and gobuchinny, I have this sneaky feeling youse havent at all back to back read the BoE. I say this because first, gobuchinny never gave a response to my questions about him to please give me honest replies to each and every one of my questions I asked him in my previous post.
Number 2, if truly youse two have read the BoE, then youse would have noticed the gaping holes in the BoE, as opposed of thinking it is filling blanks and/or gaps.
gobuchinny, you seem not to want to acknowledge the God Factor in 300 men defeating men as much as the sand in the seashore. The God Factor in the virgin give birth to a man. The God Factor in how a sea divides for people. The God Factor in how the earth got flooded and only 8 survived
The book of Enoch speaks about the gospel? So? Even demons, workers of evil and workers of iniquity speak about the Gospel too gobuchinny. So whats the big deal, saying the BoE, speaks about the Gospel, hmm?
gobuchinny, you said, you're asking me again that, do I think God cannot preserve His words, but you refused to reply to my question that, if the BoE, is truly that revered and a book that commands respect and honour, why isnt it, even if its just once, not directly mentioned anywhere in the Bible. Others books, even the your beloved Book of Jasher, the original is mentioned, mentioned even at least twice, if I am correct, but high and mighty BoE is missing. BoE, seems to be an outcast. Nobody dared directly mention it with their lips, talkess let it be in a way that is visible to the eye, be seen written out in black ink on the Bible's white. This is an indictment, that at the very least, BoE is an accursed book
I am glad for you that you know the truth about RCC. My grouse at the moment isnt with the RCC, so that congrats to you, is all I'll here be saying about the RCC aside again saying here that, if only more christians properly read their bibles there'd be less christians.
gobuchinny, I would rather we stick to this BoE matter at hand, instead to wandering off talking about Israel, the fakery going on with Ashkenazi Jews and whatnot
gobuchinny, you said: "Please nwannem, let's discuss the Book of Enoch. Tell me one thing in that book that you have an issue with... Let's discuss your issues with the book. Pls quote it let's discuss. Because if you cant find any thing that contradicts the bible, y do you have an issue?"
Well gobuchinny, guess what? I have countless times made comments about the ridiculousness of the BoE on this thread and elsewhere, but do you know what gobuchinny? You see up there, is a quote from solite3. solite3 has twice painstakingly provided an itemised listing of contradictions present in the Book of Enoch.
gobuchinny, be our guest, munch on away on those contradictions. You're spoiled for choice gobuchinny, which ones you want to first start sink your teeth into, lol. Happy days. lol.
Please jor, biko, my nwanne friend gobuchinny dont let the crew down, let's put this Book of Enoch to bed. At least make solite3 a happy person tonight before solite3 goes to bed too.
PS: I like that "see: Q: #289". Another strong meat that's too tough for some to gnaw their teeth on, lol.
OkCornel: For those of you fruitlessly arguing that the sons of God in Genesis & Job are the male descendants of Seth;
Please have a look at Josephus Flavius' Antiquity of the Jews; I don't think Josephus Flavius needs introduction here as famous first century Jewish historian he was.
Flavius Josephus of the Antiquities of the Jews — Book I Chapter 3 v 1;
1. 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 fore-fathers; and did neither pay those honours to God which were appointed them, nor had they any concern to do justice towards men. But for what degree of zeal they had formerly shewn for virtue, they now shewed 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 call Giants. But Noah was very uneasy at what they did: and being displeased at their conduct, persuaded them to change their dispositions, and their actions for the better. But seeing 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.
Still no dispute to the historical accounts/records of first century Jewish historian - Josephus Flavius
nijabazaar: I have being going via all the debates here. And it seems a few think they reserve the moral authority to deem what is inspired and what isnt.?
One commenter, went as far as to make it seem other denominations' view of the Bible is in consequential to His own view of the books the bible. I dont know. But i think is isolating....intellectual arrogance perhaps.
This is the problem with we Christians. Those who claimed to have been saved, suddenly start thinking like the Pharisees, they now cant afford to look beyond their noses. T
With the debate this Book has ensued here, one wonders, if this is the reason why the early Christian fathers refused or where reluctant, to include it with the final compilation of the Bible.
I am almost getting way pst the last chapters of the book of Enouch. I will add my findings as soon.
I am a catholic, i must say.... I am fairly annoyed by a comment above that seem to put up a nose. But that is irrelevant to the issue here.
The book was surely part of the Dead Sea scrolls. Other sets of Books, discovered alongside, were allegedly stacked away under heavy several concrete-deep vaults in the Vatican. Why??
The BoE also contradicts our Bible in many places. Let me share a few examples. The BoE has also has some BIZARRE teachings. Here are just a few: https://www.nairaland.com/5450889/why-book-enoch-removed-bible/10#83348088 nijabazaar form a tag team with gobuchinny so together you both can discuss the contradictions in the BoE that solite3 has kindly helped to list out on the above link
This is the problem with we Christians. Those who claimed to have been saved, suddenly start thinking like the Pharisees, they now cant afford to look beyond their noses.
They say, "no one puts new wine into old wineskins. For the wine would burst the wineskins, and the wine and the skins would both be lost. New wine calls for new wineskins.” Yet, that is precisely what most 'Christians' do, they put new wines in old skins which burst!
Abeg when will the 66 books crew form a tag team to deal with these contradictions in the "perfect and complete 66 books of the bible"
A) Who moved David to take a census of Israel? God or Satan; 2 Samuel 24 v 1 Again the anger of the Lord was aroused against Israel, and He moved David against them to say, “Go, number Israel and Judah.” 1 Chronicles 21 v 1 Now Satan stood up against Israel, and moved David to number Israel.
B) Or which of this advice should we adhere to? Proverbs 24 v 5-6; 4 Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest thou also be like unto him. 5 Answer a fool according to his folly, lest he be wise in his own conceit.
C) How much did David purchase threshing floor of Ornan or Araunah the Jebusite? 50 shekels of silver? OR 600 shekels of gold 2 Samuel 24 v 1-24 21 And Araunah said, Wherefore is my lord the king come to his servant? And David said, To buy the threshingfloor of thee, to build an altar unto the Lord, that the plague may be stayed from the people. 22 And Araunah said unto David, Let my lord the king take and offer up what seemeth good unto him: behold, here be oxen for burnt sacrifice, and threshing instruments and other instruments of the oxen for wood. 23 All these things did Araunah, as a king, give unto the king. And Araunah said unto the king, The Lord thy God accept thee. 24 And the king said unto Araunah, Nay; but I will surely buy it of thee at a price: neither will I offer burnt offerings unto the Lord my God of that which doth cost me nothing. So David bought the threshingfloor and the oxen for fifty shekels of silver.
1 Chronicles 21 v 23-25; 23 And Ornan said unto David, Take it to thee, and let my lord the king do that which is good in his eyes: lo, I give thee the oxen also for burnt offerings, and the threshing instruments for wood, and the wheat for the meat offering; I give it all. 24 And king David said to Ornan, Nay; but I will verily buy it for the full price: for I will not take that which is thine for the Lord, nor offer burnt offerings without cost. 25 So David gave to Ornan for the place six hundred shekels of gold by weight.
"Why Was The Book Of Enoch Removed From The Bible? " - by nijabazaar: 2:36pm On Oct 03
If I remember correctly, its the BoE and its inconsistencies/contradictions thats on trial, and not the Bible.
Who is going to waste their time showing how 2 Samuel 24:1 & 1 Chronicles 21:1 are a pseudo contradiction and/or false positive contradiction?
There is a time and place when and when not to answer a fool according to his folly. Ihedinobi3, has perfectly and well demonstrated how to adhere to Proverbs 24:5-6. If you know, you know. Who no know, no go know.
MuttleyLaf: "Why Was The Book Of Enoch Removed From The Bible? "by nijabazaar: 2:36pm On Oct 03
If I remember correctly, its the BoE and its inconsistencies/contradictions thats on trial, and not the Bible.
Who is going to waste their time showing how 2 Samuel 24 :1 and 1 Chronicles 21:1 are a pseudo contradiction and/or false positive contradiction
There is a time and place when and when not to answer a fool according to his folly. Ihedinobi.3, has perfectly and well demonstrated how to adhere to Proverbs 24:5-6. If you know, you know. Who no know, no go know.
Now that the inconsistencies of the "perfect and inspired 66 books" of the Bible are gradually shown in full glare... all sorts of evasive tactics can now be employed by members of the 66 books crew
1) They disregard the same book of Enoch some of the early church fathers held in high regard. 2) They are suddenly deaf and dumb as to how the book of Enoch was found alongside other canonized scriptures in the ancient dead sea scrolls 3) Even the accounts of Josephus Flavius which corroborates the sons of God to be fallen angels is still not countered...
Funny how quite a lot of the New Testament suffers from what they accuse Jude and Enoch of but the jokers and the hypocrites shall not judge the inspired 66 books by the same measure by which they judge Jude or the so called Book of Enoch as doing so would be blasphemy, so they shall just blind their eyes to the contradictions in the inspired Word of God or weave a web of deceit to avoid engaging with them.
Pity is in reality they worship the Word and not the Spirit of the Word and mistake the finger for the moon it points to.
budaatum: Funny how quite a lot of the New Testament suffers from what they accuse Jude and Enoch of
budaatum, please I think I've missed something, what is Jude accused of and what is Enoch too accused of? Who are Jude's accusers and who equally are Enoch's accusers?
budaatum: but the jokers and the hypocrites shall not judge the inspired 66 books by the same measure by which they judge Jude or the so called Book of Enoch as doing so would be blasphemy, so they shall just blind their eyes to the contradictions in the inspired Word of God or weave a web of deceit to avoid engaging with them.
Not me. I dont avoid.
MuttleyLaff: ... I have given you an opportunity to shine, by asking you to give me your best shot, out of all your, the seemingly inconsistencies and alleged contradictions in the Bible, if it wont be explained to you. C'mon, bring it on, why the sudden cold feet, hmm?
Oftentimes what seemingly are thought to be contradictions, arent at all contradictions. Whenever you think you're facing a contradiction, do the Berean angle like you've mentioned to check your premise.
I'll be very intrigued if you can list what you've realised dont add up. I must admit and warn you though, that sometimes 1+1 doesnt equal 2
Who are these ambassadors and what myths are you referring to here? Where are these ambassadors sent from, who are they representing?
MuttleyLaff: ...Nah, no, not another Bible contradiction, that's just your ''m.o.'' This is another of your phantom Bible contradictions and you pursuing a mistaken belief and misguided line of thought, that, it is another Bible contradiction Nitpicking, just for mere nitpicking sake, is not healthy
budaatum: Pity is in reality they worship the Word and not the Spirit of the Word and mistake the finger for the moon it points to.
"But the time is coming—indeed it’s here now—when true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and in truth. The Father is looking for those who will worship him that way." - John 4:23
MuttleyLaff: budaatum, please I think i've missed something, what is Jude accused of and what is Enoch too accused of?
Can't say I'm surprised muttley, that you missed everything. Yadayada word diarrhea is usually indicative of blindness and hearing only yourself, though, I doubt you can possibly have been hearing yourself.
. You cant judge what you haven't read brother. Even in science, you test theories to race hypothesis then laws of science. you must test all spirits first. You should read it first as that's the only way to truly know. 
. But anyways. As long as you beleive in Yeshua that fine with me. But I recommend that book to anyone who is curious to understand mysteries as it explains alot. Just like the book of Jasher and other apocrypha.
