Paul calls Enoch Scripture!

[yeshuasavedme]

Other than citing an opinion from a secondary source, are you able to state your reasons for dating 1 Enoch to the 2nd Cent BC? Is there anything internal to the book that leads you to do so?

Excellent answer! Those who deny Enoch is written by Enoch are themselves just echoing opinions of men outside the internal evidence of ENoch itself.

 

[yeshuasavedme]

My post here deals with the prophesy question:
http://christianforums.com/showpost.php?p=47929048&postcount=19

I'm not arguing it is scripture, I am stating the fact the Book of Enoch has been considered a part of scripture for more than 2 millenia. The question really is, who's list of the books of the Bible are in your Bible? If you say The Book of Enoch is not in your Bible, okay. But that is not the case with everyone. Truth is, the Book of Enoch was deemed scripture and preserved in Ethiopia by the Falasha Jews from as far back as anyone can determine; then when the Falasha converted to Orthodox Christianity, The Book of Enoch remained a sacred book of scripture to them and is currently in the Bible of Orthodox Ethiopians, and even for other Ethiopians. The Book of Enoch has always been in someone's list of scripture books since before N.T. times.

Just as a reminder, the Ethiopians have figured prominently in the story of salvation from at least the time of King Solomon. An Ethiopian Jew helped Jeremiah in the time of his distress. The Ethiopian eunuch brought Christianity to Ethiopia in the 1st century. A huge number of Hebrew words are part of the various languages of Ethiopia. No one knows for sure the time the Falasha migrated to Ethiopia, some surmise it occured at the time of the fall of the Kingdom of Israel in 722 BC. Whenever they came, they brought The Book of Enoch with them.

The Jews in Israel also held the Book of Enoch in high regard. Of the 5 most represented books in the libraries recovered from the Dead Sea Scrolls, they rank in this order, Psalms, Isaiah, Deuteronomy, Book of Jubilees (also in the Ethiopian Bible) and the Book of Enoch. Jubilees and Enoch were more represeted than 4 of Moses other books!

Again, The Book of Enoch has always been in someone's list of scripture books since before N.T. times. Its very lately become a part of mine.

It has become a part of mine also.

On Canon: The Jews did not have a list of "Canon" until 1 AD, after Jesus came, died, rose, and ascended; and as 1 Enoch is obviously a book filled with the Son of Man who is seen in 1 Enoch as "God", and the very Oath of God who created and upholds all things, and who, since the incarnation, is now come in flesh, and therefore was no longer a secret/a mystery, no longer "hidden" as Enoch saw Him, then it follows that they rejected the Book dealing with the Son of Man who was in heaven with God and who was God, kept secret, and who is come, and in whose image (Greek "Tupos") Adam was made, as Romans 5:14 states and as Genesis 1 also informs us.

Then, hundreds of years after the NT Church was long established and the foundation "Stone" and "stones" of it were long ascended to heaven (Jesus, in His body and the twelve Apostles, in their soul/spirit, to await the resurrection body made in His image), some men in one part of the world decided tomake a list of what they thought the Holy Spirit was responsible for delivering to mankind. They argued and fought over what they would come to by concensus, and Augustine strobng armed the decisions they came to -even he and Jerome did not agree and Jerome was greatly offended that Augustine included the books called the Apochrypha. That's what I recall without looking it up at the moment, anyway. At any rate, there was not a decision at that time to make their list an official "canon", contrary to popular teachings, for that did not come for nigh on to a thousand years, and by that time, Enoch was long lost to the western "Church", being tucked away in monestaries and hidden in the Qumram caves, and still, all that time, listed as "Canon" in the Ethiopian Coptic Church....from whence we got our copies in the late 1700's, which were translated to English in the early 1800's.

If anyone wants to argue "Canon" then they need to review what they have accepted and why they have or have not accepted the Apochrypha, for beginners, as the first English translation by Protestants (The Geneva Calvinists) of the accepted "sacred writings" of the Western Church included the Apochrypha, as the first King James TRranslation of 1611 di8d. -so what happened to those books in your Bible, if you are not RC?

As the men making a list of "accepted" sacred writings, over three hundred years after the NT Church was firmly established in the world chose to use the "canon" of the Jews which they only decided in 1 AD, then it follows that they erred, following those men who rejected the witness of the prophet Enoch.

To those who claim that Enoch is not called Scripture in the NT, I take issue, as Jesus did so in at least two places, quoting or referring to things specifically from there and in one calling them Scripture, and in the other calling it "the Wisdom of God".

 

[MrPolo]

Again, The Book of Enoch has always been in someone's list of scripture books since before N.T. times. Its very lately become a part of mine.

What you have stumbled upon here is the vital issue of authority. To what Body on earth has Christ entrusted to pass on such things. Select Ethiopian Jews? SummaScriptura? The Muratorian Fragment? Luther?

 

[SummaScriptura]

What you have stumbled upon here is the vital issue of authority. To what Body on earth has Christ entrusted to pass on such things. Select Ethiopian Jews? SummaScriptura? The Muratorian Fragment? Luther?

Actually, I've not stumbled onto it, I embrace it.

The body that was entrusted with authority on such things was not a Western one, so you can toss out the RCC and all the Protestant ones. All the wranglings by RCCers and Protestants over scripture are irrelevant on this issue; both groups of Western Christians delete books without authority.

The eastern churches predated both including the RCC. I accept as original all the books of the Bible that have been accepted by the ancient communions of Orthodoxy, Syrian, Ehtiopian, Greek and Armenian. In fact, all the Bibles in the world today contain a subset of books which were put into use for the Church Universal by the ancient communions of Orthodoxy from the earliest times.

 

[MrPolo]

Actually, I've not stumbled onto it, I embrace it.

The body that was entrusted with authority on such things was not a Western one, so you can toss out the RCC

Good!

FYI, the RCC is not a "western" Church. It is universal, with rites in the east and west, born on Good Friday, fortified at Pentecost, and built upon Peter.

I'm curious then, so you embrace all the so-called books that Protestants call "Apocrypha"? Since there have always been communities that considered them Scripture (i.e. Sirach, Wisdom, 1 & 2 Maccabees). What about, say, the Assumption of Moses that Jude also uses? Or 3 & 4 Maccabees?

 

[SummaScriptura]

Good!

FYI, the RCC is not a "western" Church. It is universal, with rites in the east and west, born on Good Friday, fortified at Pentecost, and built upon Peter.

The RCC may be fairly ubiquitous, but not universal.

I'm curious then, so you embrace all the so-called books that Protestants call "Apocrypha"? Since there have always been communities that considered them Scripture (i.e. Sirach, Wisdom, 1 & 2 Maccabees). What about, say, the Assumption of Moses that Jude also uses? Or 3 & 4 Maccabees?

Yes I do. I also embrace the ones discarded by Rome in the 16th century, Manasseh, 3 Esdras and 4 Esdras. The Assumption of Moses presents a unique problem due to its text now having been lost. The version we now have probably should be included in an appendix to the Bible for reference purposes. All the Maccabees are in!

 

[yeshuasavedme]

Good!



I'm curious then, so you embrace all the so-called books that Protestants call "Apocrypha"? Since there have always been communities that considered them Scripture (i.e. Sirach, Wisdom, 1 & 2 Maccabees). What about, say, the Assumption of Moses that Jude also uses? Or 3 & 4 Maccabees?

For myself,
The protestants included the apocrypha in the first Geneva Bible and the first King James AV included the apodrypha in it.
When were they dropped? -certainly not by a "canonizing" of "66" books.

Canon is a man made list, first "canonizing" was done by unbelieving Jews in the first century, who discarded Enoch because it was so obviously identifying Jesus the Christ as "the Son of Man who was in heaven from the beginning and who was with God and who was God" and who "was to come and who is come" -and so on and so forth.
since each Believer is given the Holy Spirit who wrote through men of old then it is the Holy Spirit who speaks to we who are born into the Living Spirit, to teach us Truth, to lead us into all truth, as Jesus said, We don't need "middle men" telling us what the Spirit wrote when we are truly His.
If you do listen to men, then you will stumble. Men made "Canon" lists which cause much confusion in the Church because many men want to believe that God has middle men, after all.

The Ethiopian coptic Church is a NT Church and has 1 Enoch in it. "Rome" banned it after over three hundred years of use in the NT Church because of those Jews in the first century banning it, mainly, and because of the unbelieving men who dominated the decision, whose voices were the loudest.

Following their errors only keeps one in the dark.
It is also curious why the true "Jasher" -the Upright Record" was lost to the western world, though it is now available again, which explains much in Moses' writings and without which many errors are made by translators of the OT.


Though the Ethiopian Coptic Church also kept Jubilees in their "Canon" that book is not written by the Holy Spirit through men. It is contradictory to 1 Enoch, Genesis, Jasher, which all three agree; but Jubilees is valuable in learning the mindset of the Essenes who separated themselves from the corrupted priesthood and who kept a marvelous library of Jewish writings intact, hidden away over the centuries for discovery in the last century, and which writings confirm 1 Enoch, and teach us about many other things lost to Judaism when YHWH "hid their seers and wisdom"
Isa 29:13, 14

Wherefore the Lord said, Forasmuch as this people draw near [me] with their mouth, and with their lips do honour me, but have removed their heart far from me, and their fear toward me is taught by the precept of men:Therefore, behold, I will proceed to do a marvellous work among this people, [even] a marvellous work and a wonder: for the wisdom of their wise [men] shall perish, and the understanding of their prudent [men] shall be hid..
Jubilees seems to be where Peter read and believed that Jews were not to "go in to or to keep company with Gentiles", and which the Holy Spirit taught Peter differently and correctly by the vision of the unclean foods in the sheet. Jubilees is the only place where that commandment is given, and it is in error, but it is what the strict Jews believed who wrote Jubilees and who "enlarged the law". Maybe it is written somewhere else and I have not just found it yet, but Jubilees does not at all agree with the record of Jasher and 1 Enoch and Genesis. I see no reason in banning it, though, as I see no reason in banning the 2 Esdras record which is contradictory to 1 Enoch and Genesis and -I think- Jasher, also. We learn history and mindsets by reading these books and the Holy Spirit who teaches us shows us they do not agree with what He wrote through men by "inspiration", anyway.

That said, Song of Solomon is not written by the Holy Spirit through Solomon, and is the ramblings of a dirty old sex crazed man who is a reprobate [1 Kings 11] and who is disobedient to the Law [a king must not multiply wives unto himself; nor horses; nor take foreign wives, and do not commit adultery] and who has so many wives and concubines that he cannot "service one a night in a year" yet is committing adultery with the Shulamite Egyptian princess. Those who called Song of Solomon "Canon" were not themselves in agreement with the Holy Spirit.

In short, Canon is man made lists. Sometimes men get it and sometimes they do not. But the Holy spirit always "gets it" and teaches individuals who seek Him and who do not seek middle men on the important matters pertaining to their salvation and enlightenmment.
For the record, Barnabas' Epistle is included in my "list", along with 1 Enoch and Jasher, and Jesus explicitly called 1 Enoch "Scripture" [in rebuke to the Sadducees on not knowing the Scripture about no marraige in the resurrection, in the kingdom of God] and in one place Jesus also called 1 Enoch "The Wisdom of God", in another place, when He referenced the sending of Apostles to the Jews whom they would persecute and kill, which Jesus spoke of from Enoch's dream visions [the Wisdom given him], of the future concerning the nation of Israel [though Enoch did not name them, he was given all the details of their history before it came to be].
.