What are your thoughts on the book of Enoch ?

HolySpiritWOF2 said:

<snip>transliteration usually means you run one line of original text in original language script and under it a line of transliteration in english script of original words and then under that the english translation - there is nothing in his book to explain how he did his translation

Click to expand...

Because he did none. No original languages were consulted. He took Charles' English original and changed it where he wanted to.

SummaScriptura said:

Because he did none. No original languages were consulted. He took Charles' English original and changed it where he wanted to.

Click to expand...

were are you getting that information from?

all i can find on him is this - they all say he is a renowned translator and well-published author - can't find anything bad about him - where are you getting your info from?

Joseph Lumpkin &#8211; author and founder/CEO of Fifth Estate Publishing
Joseph B. Lumpkin


i found this at this url - The Apocrypha. Including Books From the Ethiopic Bible - pg 8

At the end of the forth century, Pope Damasus commissioned Jerome to to prepare a standard Latin version of the Scriptures called the Latin Vulgate. Jerome wrote a note or preface, designating a separate category for the apocryphal books. However, copyists failed to include Jerome's prefaces. Thus, during the medieval period the Western Church generally regarded the books as part of the Holy Scriptures.

this is what google brought up when i asked what is the best translation of the book of enoch -

http://infaustus.uw.hu/book_of_enoch.pdf
Amazon.com: Lost Book of Enoch : A Comprehensive Transliteration of the Forgotten Book of the Bible (9780974633664): Joseph B. Lumpkin: Books
Amazon.com: The Book of Enoch, the Prophet (9780934666060): Richard Laurence: Books
http://www.forbiddengate.com/BookOfEnoch.pdf

what copy of the book of enoch are you using? who is the translator of your version?

also just now stumbled on this site - where 2 researchers that previously argued FOR the book of enoch being HOLY SCRIPTURE are now saying it is not - but it does contain ancient jewish scriptural wisdom

http://paradoxbrown.com/the-case-against-book-first-enoch/

HolySpiritWOF2 said:

were are you getting that information from?

Click to expand...

His preface.

HolySpiritWOF2 said:

At the end of the forth century, Pope Damasus commissioned Jerome to to prepare a standard Latin version of the Scriptures called the Latin Vulgate. Jerome wrote a note or preface, designating a separate category for the apocryphal books. However, copyists failed to include Jerome's prefaces. Thus, during the medieval period the Western Church generally regarded the books as part of the Holy Scriptures.<snip>

Click to expand...

So one man coming 400 years after the Apostles should determine what books the Church should consider Scripture? Are you saying the Eastern Church should have abandoned what they'd already been doing for centuries?

SummaScriptura said:

His preface.So one man coming 400 years after the Apostles should determine what books the Church should consider Scripture? Are you saying the Eastern Church should have abandoned what they'd already been doing for centuries?

Click to expand...

no - that was the information from page 8 - check page 7 of the link i gave - it says it is because - "none of these books are included in the Hebrew canon of Holy Scripture."

The Apocrypha. Including Books From the Ethiopic Bible

as to the eastern church abandoning their canon - all i can say is that for something to be called HOLY SCRIPTURE it should truly be HOLY SCRIPTURE - otherwise it should be called supplemental material - historical material or something like that -

this link i gave says the etymology of the word apocrypha means "things that are hidden" - i can't seem to copy and paste this pdf document- only give the link - or type out portions - but i can't take the time to manually type out all of page 7

as far as lumpkin - i can't find anything in his preface that says what you say about him

HolySpiritWOF2 said:

no - that was the information from page 8 - check page 7 of the link i gave - it says it is because - "none of these books are included in the Hebrew canon of Holy Scripture."

The Apocrypha. Including Books From the Ethiopic Bible

as to the eastern church abandoning their canon - all i can say is that for something to be called HOLY SCRIPTURE it should truly be HOLY SCRIPTURE - otherwise it should be called supplemental material - historical material or something like that -

this link i gave says the etymology of the word apocrypha means "things that are hidden" - i can't seem to copy and paste this pdf document- only give the link - or type out portions - but i can't take the time to manually type out all of page 7

as far as lumpkin - i can't find anything in his preface that says what you say about him

Click to expand...

I'm confused. Are we discussing whether Lumpkin translated Enoch or whether anyone should be concerned about what Jerome wished?

SummaScriptura said:

I'm confused. Are we discussing whether Lumpkin translated Enoch or whether anyone should be concerned about what Jerome wished?

Click to expand...

the link i provided says:
1. the early church used the canon set by ancient hebrew scriptures
2. the greek septuagint bible added a supplemental appendix of the apocrypha at the end with a note from jerome that these were not to be considered HOLY SCRIPTURE
3. the copyists in the medieval days started to drop jerome's note explaining the material as supplementary not scripture when they made new copies
4. the church after that started to think the apocrypha was HOLY SCRIPTURE
5. until the post medieval church discovered the error and went back to the original 66 books as the HOLY SCRIPTURE
6. but the catholic church - orthodox church - ethiopic church kept 6-15 of the apocrypha embedded in their versions

The Apocrypha. Including Books From the Ethiopic Bible

HolySpiritWOF2 said:

the link i provided says:
1. the early church used the canon set by ancient hebrew scriptures

Click to expand...

The evidence is not there to make this statement. In the New Testament, the Apostles quote the versions of Bible passages found in the Septuagint more often than not.

HolySpiritWOF2 said:

2. the greek septuagint bible added a supplemental appendix of the apocrypha at the end with a note from jerome that these were not to be considered HOLY SCRIPTURE

Click to expand...

Jerome had nothing to do with issuing the Greek Septuagint. The Greek Septuagint (LXX) predated Jerome by centuries. There was no "Apocrypha" division in bound Bibles of the Septuagint (LXX). The LXX was and is the Bible in the East. It contains books called "Apocrypha" by Westerners intermixed with the rest of the books of the Bible. In the East, Christians do not call those books "Apocrypha", nor are those books in an appendix. The use of an "Apocrypha" appendix was an innovation of Luther's alone.

HolySpiritWOF2 said:

3. the copyists in the medieval days started to drop jerome's note explaining the material as supplementary not scripture when they made new copies

Click to expand...

What happened in Medieval times is irrelevant. The Church already had its Bible before that.

HolySpiritWOF2 said:

4. the church after that started to think the apocrypha was HOLY SCRIPTURE

Click to expand...

The facts don't match this idea, here's the evidence in quotes from pre-Medieval sources:
The Banana Republican: The "Deuterocanon" Is Scripture!

HolySpiritWOF2 said:

5. until the post medieval church discovered the error and went back to the original 66 books as the HOLY SCRIPTURE

Click to expand...

We are now living in the post-Medieval Church. World Christianity uses no less than five different line-ups of Biblical books.

HolySpiritWOF2 said:

6. but the catholic church - orthodox church - ethiopic church kept 6-15 of the apocrypha embedded in their versions

Click to expand...

I don't know what you mean here.

The history of the Bible in the West, beginning with Jerome and the Catholic Church and continuing on into the Protestant churches, is one of dropping books form the Bible. Yes, the Catholic Church did it too. Beginning with the innovations of Jerome and continuning with those of Luther and others, the Bible seems fluid in the hands of its "friends".

The communions of Orthodoxy preserve the most oringinal traditions on this question.

all i can say is check out the link - it is all in context - it is very clear - very easy to understand - and hard to argue with

The Apocrypha. Including Books From the Ethiopic Bible

and thanks for the link you posted - good link too

This thread was not oppresive before you started reading it? You posted in #18, so that ain't saying much, so that's a bit disengenious. You were took an opposing position from the start.

Click to expand...

On this page was a large quote from the book and I'm just telling you of the oppression that was present when that page came up on the screen. It has the same fruits I get when I am around false scripture like the Book of Mormon. Spirits often tag on to things like this because they seek to deceive.

I experience this a lot and I can only assume many Spirit filled Christians do. I cannot speak for them. Sometimes people cannot experience this because they have layers of filth on them from these very things. It dulls your spiritual senses. Sometimes when people file into church, I can tell they're toting spirits in with them because they act up and I can sense them. Bookstores are famous for hosting a myriad of demonic spirits because certain books "give place" to the devil and those who read them pick up oppressions.

You can feel this stuff when the TV is on too as demonic ads and TV shows open up spirits into your house like an open door. I was falling asleep with the TV on and the Holy Spirit tugged me big time and I felt like the enemy had been loosed. The oppression was forming and some vampire movie had just come on with the sound down. These types of things offer entry from the spirit realm.

Take it for what you can, but when this screen with its text was viewed, an oppression was working and it was one similar to ones I experience when I'm around false scripture like Mormonism.