- This topic is empty.
- Posts
First of all, forgive me because I started writing this without greeting any of you, so I will start with that: hello, my brothers and sisters. This forum makes me happy because there are other people than me interested in the truth of the Kingdom of God.
I will try to be as dry and clear as I possibly can:
Principle: Do not trust anything without putting it through the fire of WHAT WE KNOW is Scriptural: 1 Th. 5:21
Enoch 1:9 is quoted in the Bible in Jude v14, and in many places, it is in perfect keeping with the Bible, even on small points that only someone who is intimate with the Scriptures truly would notice, until the 4th Book of the Book of Enoch 107, where it is clearly in opposition to Scripture in WHY Noah was named Noah:
[Chapter 107]
1 And I saw written on them that generation upon generation shall transgress, till a generation of righteousness arises, and transgression is destroyed and sin passes away from the earth, and all 2 manner of good comes upon it. 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.
__
Clearly, the 4th book of Enoch of the compilation called “The Book of Enoch” cannot be divinely inspired, even though it has reference to the “blood coming up to the horse's bridle” and so many other good-sounding things. This shows that we really must examine everything we are involved with, in my opinion.
Does anyone know anything about where the 4th Book of Enoch came from? When did it show up?
The Book of Enoch sounds really spiritual, but just read “The Gospel of Peter” or any of the Catholic [who are not the established Kingdom of Heaven in and of themselves, but very well able to make mistakes, as all are] writings about the Sinless Mother of God – and even though it sounds spiritual – and it does – testing it with Scripture reveals that it is not.Maybe there is one of you who knows something about the 4th Book of Enoch?
#2 I agree that part of the Book of Enoch is God-breathed, but that other parts of it are not.
[/B]I don't know what happened to the rest of what I typed…
The Bible says Noah was named Noah because he would comfort his parents concerning the toil of their hands and the earth which God had cursed, but the Book of Enoch says that Noah was named Noah because he would comfort the earth after the flood.
comfort the earth after the flood vs. comfort his parents because of the cursed earth's toilsome labor.
Hello people — look down here!!!! lol Too busy striving over there over meaningless little tidbits, Jesus.
Names can have multiple meanings and attributes.
Why should they be limited to one thing?
When we say Yahweh, we don't think one thing like Spirit, but also love, light, judgement, eternal, etc.
We're not talking about his name; we're talking about two different accounts of WHY he was named – the REASON he was named; not his name.
If you have two people, and someone tells you,
“Go, listen to them, they have the same story – its uncanny!”
And you listen, and one says:“Yeah, he's our little boy, Noah; we named him that because the earth was cursed because of Adam's sin, and we had to do toilsome work – and he would console us concerning the cursed, toilsome working of the earth.”
and the other one says,
“Yeah, he's my little boy, Noah; I named him that because the great-grandfather of my husband, Lamech – Enoch – he said that he'd been shown all the mysteries of the heavens, and that the earth would be destroyed with a flood; so we decided that we should name our baby 'the son of consolation' because he would console the earth after it was flooded.”
…you would be like, “What? Their stories are not one in the same AT ALL…what are you talking about? These are two completely different stories.”
However, we know Genesis is Scripture; as for Enoch, it is still in question; not only this, but Enoch is split in 4 books; the quote from Enoch that is in Jude 14 (which, since it is quoted in what is “accepted” Scripture, is the only reason we are even considering that it might be true) comes from the 1st book of Enoch Chapter 1:9 — and the account of the naming of Noah comes from Enoch 107, the fourth book. It is possible, then, that the first – and possibly the second and third – are truly Scripture; whereas the fourth one is not. It is a compilation, just like the “Bible” – and should be under scrutiny, just like the “Bible”.
The Word Bible comes from an Egyptian word that means Papyrus. Papyrii are called “parchments”; which is why the Apostles Paul said, “…especially the parchments.” So, what is the “Bible”? It is a collection of papyrii documents that a group of MEN have said is Scripture; I'm sorry, but that's not enough to merit my full faith. I'm probably going to go to school concerning this.
Quote (Hanoch @ July 17 2008,08:24) I don't know what happened to the rest of what I typed… The Bible says Noah was named Noah because he would comfort his parents concerning the toil of their hands and the earth which God had cursed, but the Book of Enoch says that Noah was named Noah because he would comfort the earth after the flood.
comfort the earth after the flood vs. comfort his parents because of the cursed earth's toilsome labor.
Hanoch Get out your Strongs and go into it a bit further. Their is plenty of room for more fine slants on the translation of the passage זה ינﬔחffמנוּ ׯממּﬔעffשׂנוּ וּffמׯעצּבוֹן יffדינוּ ׯמן־fiהﬔאfiדfiמה ﬔאstשׁר than it appears and that is in the translation efforts at one end without even seeing the quality of the translation to english of Enoch.
So before on account of one apparent irregularity we throw out potentially the Baby with the Bath water so resolutely and with such bold confidence perhaps we should do more homework.Anyone out there a Hebrew Scholar? can you look at this a bit?
But my main point the Hebrew doesn't suggest parents scarcely as I see it. Perhaps a particular english transltion assumed that Lamech was thinking of himself alone
But it could be just as easily mankind in General no term indicates who is comforted it is General so far as I see.
It just points out he will be a comfort concerning the pian the toil of the Ground cursed by God
Perhaps mankinds purpose coming to nothing and destruction was relieved and comforted by God preserving his purpose. That applies to me after the flood as it may to Lamech Noahs Daddy. Lamech for his hopes sake for his son and his life effort not being in vain But for me for my very existence sake. Now that is very real for me after the flood.Gen 5:29 And he called his name Noah, saying, This same shall comfort us concerning our work and toil of our hands, because of the ground which the LORD hath cursed.
You have to remember that the Book of Enoch is untested, and it is itself a compilation of 4 separate books.
There may well be a flaw in the fourth, but none in the first.I will study a little bit more the Hebrew. Thx for the suggestion.
Look at the difference, though, it is plain:
“And he [Lamech] called his name Noah, saying, the same shall comfort us concerning the work and the toil of our hands, because of the ground which the Lord has cursed.”Is apparently different than:
“…for he will comfort the earth after all the destruction.”
Right?
I'll still review it in Hebrew…Incompletely tested yes without the full range of earlier manuscripts, But I would not say untested.
A lot of scholarly examination on it has been done and I think we have most of the picture.
It is a book that was widely read and often accepted as “scripture” in the early church.
But Jewish and Roman leaders hesitated to accept it though were not (at least initially) resolute in rejecting it.
Both these administrations had motives, though different, for rejecting it. The RC Church was along the lines of keeping down Gnostic passions though in fact Enoch doesn't prove that philosophy anyway.Not accepted and not agreed upon- I agree…. but quite widely tested and reviewed.
I think when the Bible warns not to add or take away the words of the book perhaps only of the book of revelation but perhaps of all scripture.. That it shows God saw the chance that God inspired books would be actually restricted from the people.
The Bible was kept from even Believers during the Dark ages I don't think it stretches the imagination to think whole books would be suppressed. This is a book in a whole seperate class to the Gospel of Thomas and Judas which are clearly much less trustworthy and with less means of verifying their dreamy drifty content.
Enoch stands out somewhat. I am still looking into it and am not convinced of it yet or quoting it at church as true but I am very intrigued at the way it resolves so much confusion in the Bible.Let me know what you reckon of the Hebrew.
I would also like to know more to about the translation of Enoch from Ethiopian or whatever language it was in their and english 200 + years ago. Was it clear and straight forward or was there a lot of difficult passages.
It is, to me, untested, because I personally have not tested it, and I am the only one I trust, seeing as how the testing done by others has not yielded results in the past, to wit:
1) no one could sufficiently disprove Assumption of Mary in Rev. 12
2) no one could suffiiciently argue against the false doctrine of the “rapture” in order to correct those who believe in it in its current mainstream incarnation… and there are many more problems which no one has a sufficient answer for; all of these they think to escape, but all I want to do is make sure things are sturdy, so when the shaking of not only the earth but of the heavens comes, what I'm standing on will be trustworthy.
Anything that is NOT true is not from God and anything that is not from God is from the DEVIL, regardless of whether it was the intent of the one responsible for the false doctrine or not, it is from the devil and the man who teaches it is responsible for not testing the teaching before teaching it to others.
Therefore, to me, it is yet untested; there are many other more important things that we must learn about. Even if I did know where the spirits came from and everything, Jesus says, “Rejoice that your names are written in the Book of Life in Heaven!!” and not that we have power over demons and evil spirits.
I don't know anything about the Hebrew. All I know is that for centuries the only articles of the Book of Enoch that were in mens' hands were the Ethiopian and Slavonic (Slavic?) copies until the “Dead Sea Scrolls” at Qumran were found; there they found portions of the Book of Enoch. I saw a program or read an article (I don't remember which) and in it they spoke about which books were more prominent in that community. Daniel was first, followed by Isaiah I think and then Ezekiel: all end-times, prophetic Scriptures – of course they had the Book of Enoch; whether it was in Hebrew or Aramaic I haven't read. I garauntee you the Book of Enoch dates back further than 200, though. Maybe the copy known to man today is 200 years old, but it had to have been copied from someone else.
As far as quoting the Book of Enoch in church, it's a little too late: the Bible has already quoted it – that establishment of men!! What is more strange is that men prefer to use Scriptures that do not agree with one another and choose not to use the Book of Enoch, which is quoted by their “infallible” Bible.
But even then, the Book of Enoch is made up of 4 smaller books. The first one is quoted – that we know – but I'm not convinced that all of it is Scriptural: Enoch wrote it himself: afterwards, sinners will pervert my words. We spoke about this before: the so-called 4th book of Enoch contains a verse that is contradictory to what is KNOWN Scripture, despite everything else it says that seems to be good.
That is all I know.As far as the other books, starting at Chapter 39, I did Biblical cross-references, just to prove to those who do no believe it is Scripture that it agrees perfectly with Scripture — and after I got to 3 pages front-and-back, I thought I would rest a bit; I never began again LOL. For every verse of Enoch, there had to be at least like 1 – 3 or more verses from the Bible that popped into my head; it's amazing.
GBU,
DanielI am going through it myself now. It seems you have done some good work there too.
I am impressed how much it clarifies the Bible to me, as I have mentioned many times.
I am still to see it tearing down any strong point of generally accepted doctrine too.
I think if it is repressed scripture the motivation for it being repressed can often suggest its effect or value if un repressed was very high. To me it resolves some of the common Why Why questions to those who complain of Gods injustice in very clear terms.
I would like to show passages of it to my father if I could show him it with a credibility = to scripture.
It would help reslove some of some of his problems i think. I see it as a practicaly useful book and not just a book that will satisfy intellectual ego, satisfaction, or stimulation.
I would love a copy of any analysis you have done if you have it.
I am doing a bit of a commentary/cross reference table on it now in a parrallel columns format.
I have gone through the book for familiarisation purposes a dozen times or so but am still to do enough hard analysis.
I would like info on the more than 200 BC topic. To me it is intuitively obvious but I have no proof.
I am dead sick of hideously DUMB academics that declare facts of negative conclusions due to lack of evidence.
“There is no evidence so it is wrong” people need to be banned from ever being scholars or their stubborn heads bashed together long enough to get their brains started.The assumption that it was written in the first century I guess made a lot of sense as it would have needed to be so, to explain the horses up to their breasts in blood as coming from Revelation..
But yes the dead sea scrolls nailed that.
I like your attitude re testing for your self.
I agree with you on testing 100%; inherited trust from others is not excusable or genuine as faith or understanding in any area when accountability to God is the issue.
But I just wanted to point out a lot of establishing of the Enochs credibilty has been done and it isn't in the Gospel of Thomas class at all. It is far superior as a contender for canon worthy ness.
I also think that though it is 4 books or 4 sections that It seems that they are likely to be very old friends. I think they belong pretty close together though. Noahs writings and Enochs certainly would have been carried together on the Ark as a record of the world in Noahs library.
I would like a copy of your research. I like you can find many linkages to the bible.
I reckon a serious study on this should be done and published and IF after such a study it still seems appropriate. It should be published as
– A claim of Canonicity
– A declaration of a wrongful attempt to cover it up.
– A demand that it be reintroduced into future Bible publications.If it shows it to be otherwise that too should be established as a clear public conclusion. What it is and how it should be viewed,
Perhaps another study won't get it past the status quo but I think it is worth a try.I say, find out the truth for my self; share it with others, and let them make decisions for themselves.
As for the compilation called “the Bible”, I say, “Let it be.” Also, to not speak except by love, even if it is “right”.
If I introduce to the community of believers that brings up more questions than answers or could shake the faith of some, I am then liable for those peoples' souls for that, soooo…. I would prefer to contain all of the answers, and once this has come to “full term” within me, then deliver it, God-willing. If not, then I won't want anything to do with it.
I've known it before but didnt' pay attention to the fact) that I've searched too much for mysteries — and not enough for the more practical aspects of the Bible: is it worth knowing many mysteries if I can't pay my bills because I can't keep a job because I have not been able to keep my mind straight or my emotions in check which makes me quit because I don't have a strong prayer life? No. I should pay more attention to those practical things, I think; and I have the freedom not to, but I should learn soon enough it is not profitable to chase mysteries only, but establish my foundation…As for my papers, it's a long story, but, being in depression and not caring about what I knew would happen, I allowed a certain person to take a look at them and – I think he may have thrown them away – never got them back. However, it doesn't mean I can't do it again.
I have a better idea.
I'll take book 2 (Chs 37-71)
You take Book 1 (1-36)For every verse, I'm sure there are something like 5 or 6 or more verse from “the Bible” that coincide with them; however, two or three of which I am aware.
TTYL
Good Idea!
After we have worked through once we can exchange results. Do put in a column where you can put in any thoughts of interpretations that stand out or connections you see.
I am still very interested in the last part of Enoch too. Well best to start at the beginning anyway.
Feel free to e-mail me if you'd like.
Perhaps we could chat on the side somewhere. Its cheap enough by net phone from my end to the US. 2 cents a minute.
VaC
Yeah. I haven't used that before. I use skype.
I'll have a look at setting up or whatever ya have to do.
Anyway I'd better do my work now. And I will try to chat direct soon.I will try and do a good bit of work on this over my summer Holidays which begin next week.
Lap top under a tree by the river or under the stars. It should be good!Respects
VaC
Quote Noahs writings and Enochs certainly would have been carried together on the Ark as a record of the world in Noahs library.
I can well imagine Noah, of a fine deluge morning, having scoffed a delcious breakfast of poached dinosaur eggs (d'oh! no wonder they went extinct!) collecting his copy of Enoch from the ark library, moving out through the french doors in the conservatory to the chairs on the executive deck, settling down to a quiet morning read. I say quiet but I suppose the sounds of either one or seven pairs of hyenas, howler monkeys, cows, mosquitos and ravens, and the inceasant sneezing, scratching and projectile vomiting that would have been necessary for the humans to preserve all human parasites might have taken some of the gloss off that relaxing experience.Stuart
Quote (Stu @ July 29 2008,22:41) Quote Noahs writings and Enochs certainly would have been carried together on the Ark as a record of the world in Noahs library.
I can well imagine Noah, of a fine deluge morning, having scoffed a delcious breakfast of poached dinosaur eggs (d'oh! no wonder they went extinct!) collecting his copy of Enoch from the ark library, moving out through the french doors in the conservatory to the chairs on the executive deck, settling down to a quiet morning read. I say quiet but I suppose the sounds of either one or seven pairs of hyenas, howler monkeys, cows, mosquitos and ravens, and the inceasant sneezing, scratching and projectile vomiting that would have been necessary for the humans to preserve all human parasites might have taken some of the gloss off that relaxing experience.Stuart
Greeting Stu….I must say that was an accurate accounting of possibly all the various encounters one might have while being in the company of such a large assortment of wild animals,however,you left out the pungent odor of excrement…Which brings me to my next point…I would think that Noah was so scared he didn't have time to relax with a morning read…Quote (theodorej @ July 30 2008,00:37) Quote (Stu @ July 29 2008,22:41) Quote Noahs writings and Enochs certainly would have been carried together on the Ark as a record of the world in Noahs library.
I can well imagine Noah, of a fine deluge morning, having scoffed a delcious breakfast of poached dinosaur eggs (d'oh! no wonder they went extinct!) collecting his copy of Enoch from the ark library, moving out through the french doors in the conservatory to the chairs on the executive deck, settling down to a quiet morning read. I say quiet but I suppose the sounds of either one or seven pairs of hyenas, howler monkeys, cows, mosquitos and ravens, and the inceasant sneezing, scratching and projectile vomiting that would have been necessary for the humans to preserve all human parasites might have taken some of the gloss off that relaxing experience.Stuart
Greeting Stu….I must say that was an accurate accounting of possibly all the various encounters one might have while being in the company of such a large assortment of wild animals,however,you left out the pungent odor of excrement…Which brings me to my next point…I would think that Noah was so scared he didn't have time to relax with a morning read…
Too late for scared! Never mind the stench, scratching and screeching. The ark as dictated by god would have sunk under the weight of the first two million animals. The architect of the ark (the arkitect??) designed an impossible boat for a fictional flood!Stuart
my name is rljohn1
I do not know if this the proper method for asking a question about the book of Enoch or not.
If it is not proper for me to ask questions here, please direct me.
Thank you. I have a question about the 7th chapter of Enoch. It describes the children of angel human
mating as being “and they bare great giants, whose height was three thousand ells”.
I cannot accept the measurement of the english ell because it would make these giants 11,250 feet tall.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
