- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Proverbs 3:5-7(NIV) reads:
Quote Trust in the LORD with all your heart
and lean not on your own understanding;in all your ways acknowledge him,
and he will make your paths straight. [a]Do not be wise in your own eyes;
fear the LORD and shun evil.Do you know what this actually means? I assure you it doe not mean not to test the spirit of what you hear because you are to shun what is false and thus evil.
Hi KW,
Let scripture speak and teach you.
Find it written once and search for witnessing verses.[2Cor13]
To peer rather querulously looking for possible error is to know you have a stumbling block.Quote (Nick Hassan @ April 15 2009,11:32) Hi KW,
Let scripture speak and teach you.
Find it written once and search for witnessing verses.[2Cor13]
To peer rather querulously looking for possible error is to know you have a stumbling block.
Nick Hassan wrote:Quote
To peer rather querulously looking for possible error is to know you have a stumbling block.Who said anything about being faultfinding when testing the spirit of what you hear but you should test what you hear to see if they are from God or from man. Take the Koran which claims to be the word of God. Do you believe it is? Why or why not?
Hi KW,
Jesus read from the scroll the sacred words without any doubts as to their eternal truthfulness.Nick Hassan wrote:
Quote
Jesus read from the scroll the sacred words without any doubts as to their eternal truthfulness.Would he have still read from them if they were false scrolls? How do you know if they are false or true unless you test the spirits?
Nick………the subject is did scripture writers make errors, I believe the original (Hebrews) writers were truthful to the word given them, However those words have been altered from there original meanings through language changes as well as theology changes over the years, which is obvious or we would not have hundreds of different Bibles and interpretations existing today. So today it is almost impossible without GOD”S Spirit to properly understand them. Most Just quote what meets their theologies they have been taught over the years and tend to deal only with the scriptures that support them. Imo
love and peace………………………………………..gene
Quote (Nick Hassan @ April 15 2009,15:42) Hi KW,
How did he know?
How should you know?
Why did those who did not have scripture choose to believe when someone came preaching the word of God? I would say the answer is the same to your questions.Still as Gene pointed out my original point is about human errors and not doctrinal errors. It is almost certain that those living by the Holy Spirit still make human errors though not sins since God did create us with limits. The possible errors I mention are not really that important unless used to create a false doctrine and then the ones twisting them are really the ones at fault. Still my solution that I proposed was that perhaps they were not using straightforward reasoning. No one has addressed that hypothesis.
Hi KW,
Accept some things cannot now be known.
Prove what can be known by comparing scripture with scripture.Let the NT reveal the hidden secrets to be found in the OT.
By one verse the experts knew Jesus was to be born in Bethlehem.
Quote (t8 @ April 13 2009,13:14) Hi kerwin. I don't know about this instance, but sometimes the NT writers quoted from books that are not part of the bible. e.g., the Book of Enoch.
There are quite a number of books that were never canonised. Although I am not saying this to endorse every book out there, but to say that it is worth keeping this in mind. Some of the books could even be lost.
The book of Enoch is not quoted in the NT. It was likely not writen till centuries after the NT canonisation.Quote (Is 1:18 @ April 18 2009,13:31) Quote (t8 @ April 13 2009,13:14) Hi kerwin. I don't know about this instance, but sometimes the NT writers quoted from books that are not part of the bible. e.g., the Book of Enoch.
There are quite a number of books that were never canonised. Although I am not saying this to endorse every book out there, but to say that it is worth keeping this in mind. Some of the books could even be lost.
The book of Enoch is not quoted in the NT. It was likely not writen till centuries after the NT canonisation.
A version of the book of Enoch is found in the Dead Sea scrolls and is dated to about the 1st century BC according to what I have heard. It does appear that some ideas from the book of Enoch such as angels bound in darkness are also in the New Testament. Jude out and out tells us he is quoting from a version of the book of Enoch but I am not sure we have any copies of that version available today. The version I have seems to be a compilation of various other documents some which may be from God and some which are not. As such it is not reliable. I have heard there is more than one version and I have not seen all of them. Jubilees is another book that may have a legitimate version but I have not seen it either.Kerwin…….A good book about accuracy of the Bible is MISQUOTING JESUS, it is quite enlightening , bible texts have certainly been altered in places . I think if they could find and original Hebrew text of the new testament that would really clear up a lot. I have heard that the dead sea scrolls have some of the texts written in the Hebrew language. I really believe that the original texts were written in Hebrew, some think Aramaic. But we have to go with what we have and with God's Spirit guiding us i believe we can come to the right conclusions. IMO
peace and love…………………………..gene
Quote (kerwin @ April 18 2009,18:57) A version of the book of Enoch is found in the Dead Sea scrolls and is dated to about the 1st century BC according to what I have heard.
That's interesting, I'd like more information on this if you have it.Quote Jude out and out tells us he is quoting from a version of the book of Enoch but I am not sure we have any copies of that version available today.
That is incorrect, there in no mention of any “book” of Enoch in Jude.Quote (kerwin @ April 13 2009,04:47) So I propose the hypothesis that like when Israel represented Jesus earlier, Jesus represents God as Jesus is our Mediator and so is King over everything in heaven and on earth. Since he has that role both these statements are saying not that Jesus is God but rather that God given him authority over everything in heaven and on earth. Hebrews also makes the case that God has not given that much authority to any angel.
Kerwin,I stand in agreement with not only your hypothesis, but also your opening statement.
much love
reneQuote (kerwin @ April 13 2009,04:47) Some scriptures cause me to question the accuracy of certain books of scripture as they appear to misquote certain scriptures.
An excellent resource addressing a lot of the so-called contradictions in the Bible is “WHEN CRITICS ASK – A Popular Handbook on Bible Difficulties” by Norman Geisler and Thomas Howe. There is a free online copy of it here:http://www.biblecentre.net/
Click “Theology” and scroll down about the third of the way down the page.Hope it helps.
Is 1:18 wrote:
Quote That is incorrect, there in no mention of any “book” of Enoch in Jude.
They were not referred to as “books” at that time but rather writings from what I understand but I was not quibbling over words.
Here is Jude's testimony.
Jude 1:14-15(NIV) reads:
Quote Enoch, the seventh from Adam, prophesied about these men: “See, the Lord is coming with thousands upon thousands of his holy ones to judge everyone, and to convict all the ungodly of all the ungodly acts they have done in the ungodly way, and of all the harsh words ungodly sinners have spoken against him.”
Other scriptures that may have been referring to the writings of Enoch are.
Jude 1:6(NIV) reads:
Quote And the angels who did not keep their positions of authority but abandoned their own home—these he has kept in darkness, bound with everlasting chains for judgment on the great Day.
2 Peter 2:4(NIV) reads:
Quote For if God did not spare angels when they sinned, but sent them to hell, putting them into gloomy dungeons to be held for judgment;
Is 1:18 wrote:
Quote That's interesting, I'd like more information on this if you have it.
I am afraid that is about all I know. I have my suspicions that the true book of Enoch and also the book of Jubilees was bastardized by those in the movement to combine the Greek religion with the true religion. That movement occurred before the Roman Empire spread to Judea and Israel and resulted in the rebellion of Macabees so I am not surprised a corrupt version of Enoch was found in the Dead Sea Scrolls. My suspicion is based by the similarities with certain aspects to Greek religious myths.
After reading a bunch of stuff, this passage seems to best capture what is going on re Enoch, or rather, 1 Enoch…
“The surprising element to most readers is not the content of the prophecy but its source. First Enoch is not considered to be canonical Scripture by any religious group, whether we think of Judaism, Roman Catholicism, the Greek or Russian Orthodox, or Protestantism. It seems puzzling that Jude would cite 1 Enoch, for the quotation suggests to some that Jude believed 1 Enoch was part of inspired Scripture and an inspired book. Some church fathers concluded from this that 1 Enoch itself was inspired (Clement of Alexandria, Eccl. Proph. 3; Tertullian, De cultu fem. 1:3), though this judgment never became persuasive to the church at large. Others in the history of the church drew the same conclusion but then reasoned that Jude itself could not be part of the canon (cf. Jerome, De vir ill. 4). It was thought that any writing that considered 1 Enoch to be canonical Scripture could not itself be canonical. Some have defended Jude's citation by saying that Jude cited an oral tradition from the original Enoch and that this tradition found its way into the pseudepigraphical book.
The issue is not an easy one, but the following observations may be useful. Taking the last view first, it is difficult to see how Jude could have been citing an actual oral tradition from the historical Enoch since the book of Enoch was in circulation in Jude's day and was well known in Jewish circles. Jude almost certainly derived the citation from the book of 1 Enoch, and the latter is clearly pseudepigraphical. We would be faced with having to say that Jude knew that this specific quotation from 1 Enoch derived from the historical Enoch. It is better to conclude that Jude quoted the pseudepigraphical 1 Enoch and that he also believed that the portion he quoted represented God's truth. Jude's wording does not demand that he thought we have an authentic oracle from the historical Enoch.
We do not need to conclude, however, that the entire book is part of the canon of Scripture (rightly Augustine, City of God 15.23). Jude probably cited a part of 1 Enoch that he considered to be a genuine prophecy. Perhaps he referred to Enoch because the adversaries treasured the work, and thereby he used their own ammunition against them. Vögtle suggests that the opponents rejected Christian tradition about Christ's coming and hence Jude cited the prophecy from Enoch. Indeed, the content of the prophecy is not remarkable, assuring the readers that the Lord will truly judge the ungodly. Citing a quotation from another source does not indicate that the entire work is inspired, even if the saying drawn upon is true. For instance, Paul quoted Aratus (Phaenomena 5) in Acts 17:28, and he surely did not intend to teach that the entire work was inspired Scripture. Similarly, he quoted Epimenides in Titus 1:12, without any notion that he accepted the truth of the whole work. Some might think the citation here is different because Jude said Enoch “prophesied” (proepheteusen). The verb “prophesy” (propheteuo) sometimes is used to designate canonical Scripture (Matt 15:7; 1 Pet 1:10). But the verb also is used to say that a certain utterance or saying is from God. For example, Caiaphas prophesied regarding the fate of Jesus even though he was an unbeliever (John 11:51). Zechariah prophesied when the Spirit filled him at the Baptist's birth (Luke 1:67). Women prophesied when the believing church gathered as well (1 Cor 11:4-5; cf. Acts 19:6; Rev 11:3). A prophecy may derive from God and still not be a part of canonical Scripture. We cannot necessarily draw the conclusion from the words “Enoch prophesied” that the work was considered to be Scripture. It would have been more telling if Jude had used the phrase “it is written” with reference to 1 Enoch. Jude simply drew from a part of the work that he considered true. Bauckham rightly says, “It need not imply that he regarded the book as canonical Scripture. At Qumran, for example, the Enoch literature and other apocryphal works were evidently valued without being included in the canon of Scripture.”
The word kai, “also” (omitted by the NIV), could connect to either “prophesied” or “these men.” If the latter, Jude said that Enoch prophesied to his own generation and also to those of Jude's day. More likely, however, the conjunction attaches to the verb, and in that case the NIV's omission is insignificant exegetically. The term toutois could be rendered “to these,” but the dative probably is a dative of reference, so that it means “with reference to these,” or as the NIV renders it “about these men.”
When Jude said that Enoch was “the seventh from Adam,” he counted inclusively and began with Adam: Adam, Seth, Enosh, Kenan, Mahalalel, Jared, Enoch. Perhaps the number “seven” also is symbolic, designating completion and perfection. Does this indicate that Jude believed the quotation came from the historical Enoch? Such a conclusion is possible but seems unlikely. That Enoch was the seventh from Adam is stated explicitly only in the book of 1 Enoch (60:8; 93:3; cf. Jub. 7:39). It had to be widely known that the book itself was not written by the historical Enoch. Perhaps Jude designated the book he cited by calling Enoch the seventh from Adam. The historical Enoch was very interesting to Jews during the second temple period, since he did not die but was translated into God's presence (Gen 5:23-24). Hebrews confirms that this text was interpreted as saying that Enoch did not die (Heb 11:5; cf. Sir 44:16; 49:14). Jewish writers concluded from this that heavenly secrets were conveyed to Enoch, and it is not surprising that he is an agent of revelation in Jewish literature.
Scholars have attempted to discern the text Jude used in his citation of 1 Enoch, and it is clear that he quoted from 1 Enoch 1:9. For this verse we have the original Aramaic and a Greek, Ethiopic, and Latin version. Bauckham carefully compares Jude's citation with the texts we have. Some believe that Jude cited the Greek version from memory. Dehandschutter suggests that Jude used “a third form of the Greek text of Enoch.” Others think Jude was aware of the Greek version but supplied his own translation from the Aramaic. Certainty on this matter eludes us. English readers can compare and contrast the differences by noting Isaac's translation of 1 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 wicked ones committed against him.” The most interesting divergence in Jude's quotation is the insertion of kyrios (“Lord”). The term “Lord” is not in any of the other versions, representing Jude's Christological interpretation of the judgment. In applying a text that referred to God's judgment to Christ, Jude followed the precedent of other New Testament writers (cf. 1 Thess 3:13; 2 Thess 1:7; Rev 19:13,15; 22:12). The verb elthen is aorist but is rightly translated by the NIV as a future (“is coming”) and is equivalent to a “prophetic perfect.” Jude spoke here of the second coming of Christ. The “holy ones” with whom he will come are his angels. The coming of Christ is patterned after God's theophany on Sinai, where he “came with myriads of holy ones” (Deut 33:2). Zechariah looked forward to the day when “the LORD my God will come, and all the holy ones with him” (Zech 14:5). That angels will accompany Jesus at his coming is clearly taught in the New Testament as well (Matt 16:27; 25:31; Mark 8:38; Luke 9:26; 1 Thess 3:13; 2 Thess 1:7). The attendance of the angels at his coming indicates the event will be stunning and majestic.
—New American Commentaryblessings,
ken
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
