• Welcome to Christian Forums
  1. Welcome to Christian Forums, a forum to discuss Christianity in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

The Book of Enoch

Discussion in 'General Theology' started by Stryder06, Nov 4, 2013.

  1. NannaNae

    NannaNae Guest

    +0
    first of all the giants were before and after the flood.
    second ..... all dna of that kind was killed in the flood.

    and every form created by God in it's original form or purpose could legitimately be called
    " sons of God" and not be
    " demonic" genetically . In the same way that all creation mourns for the revealing of the sons of God to be again. for nature and humanity to go back to it's original form and purpose.

    The bible clearly states " hero's of old" ( think greek mythological creatures and hero's)were pre flood, those were the half breeds, the cyclopes , trolls , Hercules and such and all of that stuff was pre flood. There was giants before and after the flood and no one can prove that the ones after the flood has anything to do with demons/ or Alien resurrections or half breeds or other things born of wild imaginations and fear.
    so isn't Enoch really recording pre flood concepts in from pre flood constructs !!
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 31, 2014
  2. Oh my goodness. It's a Second Temple era text in the genre of apocalypsis addressing Second Temple era concerns through the literary conceit of revelation to a primordial seer. There are literally dozens of similar documents.
     
  3. Lujack Skylark

    Lujack Skylark Newbie

    54
    +1
    Baptist
    Married
  4. childofdust

    childofdust Newbie

    +64
    Anabaptist
    Private
    That's a good way of putting it. The genre of apocalypse and psuedepigraphy is used as a literary device to communicate ancient Jewish traditions and beliefs - many of which were also held by the early church. And it was done a lot. It was an accepted form of teaching and communicating spiritual truths. Hence, the existence of Revelation... or The Shepherd of Hermes... or whatever. Nothing wrong with this kind of thing at all. Quite common. Quite respected. And quite truthful in the things it wishes to communicate. I would recommend everyone read it once in their life and try to absorb its wisdom.
     
  5. Lujack Skylark

    Lujack Skylark Newbie

    54
    +1
    Baptist
    Married
    My computer is only letting me post comments. I am not seeing the answers to respond to.
     
  6. NannaNae

    NannaNae Guest

    +0
    then there is the whole point that "a giant" is relative, if your 12 ft tall then a giant is 20 ft tall.. if you are 3 ft tall then ": a giant" is 5 ft tall. SO IF ENOCH WAS SAY 10 OR 12 FT.........

    in the mean time scientism wants us to believe " what they call 'Heidelbergensis 'a giant' at 5 ' 6 inches to 5'9".
    Homo heidelbergensis - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    PS seems they just recently add the 7' statement in that wiki (MAYBE BECAUSE THEY FOUND PAKAL after Smithsonian's destroyed all the others ages ago that were sent to them ? and created those history into myths and objects of mocking )....... 7+++ ft which they have got to explain! how that and 6 fingers and two rows of teeth came from a monkey.. so be aware... I know here comes the alien resurrection theory or the demon hybrid spawn theory! now those will sell !!
     
  7. yeshuasavedme

    yeshuasavedme Senior Veteran

    +575
    Christian
    Married
    It is in the Ethiopian Orthoodox canon, and therefore, admitted just as well as all Orthodox canon of all Orthodox Denominations -though varying, and varying with the RC, are.
    There is no concensus of agreement between RC, Orthodox, and Protestant groups -and even amopng the different PRotestant groups there has been much division- on "canon lists".
    Bible: Whose Canon? Which Bible?

    I use Enoch as the first book of Eschatology written that we have access to and which is the foundation book for all doctrine of eschatology referred to in the OT/Tenach, and in the NT.
    The foundation is laid in Enoch that all those "feed off of", in that no new doctrine is introduced about the Son of Man in Torah that is not laid down foundationally first, in Enoch in regards to the Son of Man and His coming and His work and His person -and all things connected to that.
    Then there is no other place where these doctrines are laid foundationally but in Enoch:

    The Book of Life;
    Book of Deeds;
    the origin of demons;
    Sheol below earth and who goes there and how it has separated chasms and for whom and for why and for how long;
    the ages of this present creation;
    The Lake of Fire and who goes and why and how long;
    the different orders of the angels and their duties;
    the names of the seven archangels;
    the throne of God in heaven;
    the doctrine of the Son of Man in heaven who was hidden in God, is God, who made all things by the Word of His power, who was to come and is the Judge of men and angels and of all principalities and powers, and is the Person in YHWH to whom every knee will bow and every tongue confess [that is why Paul knew, cause He read it in Enoch, that Jesus now come in flesh is YHWH to whom every knee will bow and every tongue confess, for it was not said in the OT, in Isaiah, that YHWH who had sworn that every knee would bow and tongue confess is God the Son who is the Son of Man in heaven, but it was said in Enoch and referred to in ISaiah.

    It just goes on and on and on, hand in hand with the Gospel of Christ which was told of in Enoch and was the mystery now revealed to the elect and shall be revealed to the world at His second coming.
     
  8. yeshuasavedme

    yeshuasavedme Senior Veteran

    +575
    Christian
    Married
    That is not what it says: they are not to take away from Torah or from Revelation nor add to Torah nor to Revelation. Not to take away from "Thus saith YHWH"
    Bible means "collection of manuscripts", and in religion, it means as considered sacred. Canon is a man made list, and some manuscripts indeed were removed from what men read and considered sacred, by some men in power, and at different times, and no consensus of agreement among all the Churches of Jesus Christ in all the age of the Church in all the world exists now nor did it ever.
    Bible: Whose Canon? Which Bible?
     
  9. yeshuasavedme

    yeshuasavedme Senior Veteran

    +575
    Christian
    Married
    Please do not make lies like that. That derails the thread.
     
  10. Fenwick

    Fenwick WEST coast BEST coast

    +5,238
    United States
    Catholic
    Single
    US-Others
    YSM - how come you keep ducking my question asking why you're not Ethiopian Orthodox?
     
  11. Keachian

    Keachian On Sabbatical

    +238
    Baptist
    Single
    I've said before and I'll say again you are not a part of the Tewahedo Orthodox Church or any community affiliated with it, as such your use of Enoch to draw out your distinctive doctrines is not the same as their use of it in their liturgy and community, stop trying to act as if their acceptance of Enoch somehow gives credibility to your misuse of it.
     
  12. MoreCoffee

    MoreCoffee Repentance works.

    +2,413
    Catholic
    Private
    Perhaps it is because the Ethiopian Orthodox Christians know how to read Enoch without becoming heretical? They would read it with the discipline of the gospels and the saints to guide and correct them. When one dissociates one's self from discipline unhealthy imaginations flood in and make wisdom blush and hide. An undisciplined mind is not productive in good things. An undisciplined religion is not productive spiritual good. Some of what is written in this thread is testimony to that truth.
     
  13. NannaNae

    NannaNae Guest

    +0
    excellent!

    sure then if man can choose alien resurrections or demon spawn as their CREATORS ...., Instead of deal with the truth, but instead choose to distract himself/themselves and to excuse himself/themselves with their own lies created in their own imaginations .Then mankind doesn't have to admit that He loved every generation and spoke to every generation with the exact gospel . even The israelites could have gone up the mountain and become a nation of priests but didn't want to even fast three days !!! and He always gave all the exact same opportunities , over and over again ,, The truth that tells us He created men in a perfect state and in perfect world and he built them both to live forever. to fall was man choice,. to die instead of serve / love / protect was mankinds choice. it Still IS mankinds choice .

    but Our loving and polite lawful God who really believes in free will...has always provided another choice to find him no matter what the cost to himself.
     
  14. yeshuasavedme

    yeshuasavedme Senior Veteran

    +575
    Christian
    Married
    [edit, general to eschatology forums and covering what is the first book of eschatology] Enoch is the first book of eschatology, and I post on eschatology mainly in this forum. It is not possible to truly understand eschatology without the first book of eschatology corroborating and shedding light on the many references from Torah to Revelation.
    Without Enoch's book, one is walking in darkness trying to invent meanings for obscure passages in Torah and through to the end of Rev, which meanings invented have no connection to what is written already, in the Book of Enoch.

    Sorry that upsets those who don't really come here in this forum to discuss eschatology, anyway [or even general theology as is written in the sacred Scriptures], but to deny what is written even in the books they do accept.
    Scholars are few and far between, here.
     
    Last edited: Apr 1, 2014
  15. This^

    Where the heck is Gsquared? He needs to defend himself.
     
  16. Keachian

    Keachian On Sabbatical

    +238
    Baptist
    Single
    Ergo you have a functional canon, it is the Book of Enoch and all other "canonical" books are viewed through it. This is very different from the Ethiopian Orthodox as I understand it who like all other Orthodox churches interpret Scripture through the lens of Christ.
     
  17. Do you really, honestly believe that YSM understands the interpretive weight of the formal and material principle distinction? HAHA!
     
  18. Keachian

    Keachian On Sabbatical

    +238
    Baptist
    Single
    Well even if we were to use her hermeneutical principle Enoch is placed in the Historic Literature after Chronicles and Jubilees by the Tewahedo Church so it should be interpreted by Gen-Jubilees
     
  19. Fenwick

    Fenwick WEST coast BEST coast

    +5,238
    United States
    Catholic
    Single
    US-Others
    That's a good question, I haven't seen him in a while. He must be tied up with school?

    That would be my wager.

    BAHAHAHA, I needed that laugh bro, thanks. ^_^

    Wait... you mean to say there is a hermeneutical principle in her interpretation?!
     
  20. Keachian

    Keachian On Sabbatical

    +238
    Baptist
    Single
    Yes, she gave it in this post

    Ultimately it comes down to Enoch being the first book, a first-come-first-served hermeneutic, very popular in Fundamentalist circles, she has reorganised her canon to be by historical composition (or at least her view of when things were composed) and then started from there from what I can gather.
     
Loading...