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.
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.I'm surprised that this thread was even permitted in the first place, as the book of Enoch is not deemed Biblical by CF but yet they permit it. Are there double standards for the book of Enoch?
Revelation 22:18-19 people are not to add books or take away books from the Bible.
Please do not make lies like that. That derails the thread.Because it's just as beneficial to the average orthodox believer as the sealed portion of the Book of Mormon
Please do not make lies like that. That derails the thread.
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.YSM - how come you keep ducking my question asking why you're not Ethiopian Orthodox?
excellent!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.
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.
[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.
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.
Do you really, honestly believe that YSM understands the interpretive weight of the formal and material principle distinction? HAHA!
This^ Where the heck is Gsquared? He needs to defend himself.
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.
Do you really, honestly believe that YSM understands the interpretive weight of the formal and material principle distinction? HAHA!
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
[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.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?