The question of the snake in Genesis.

[selfinflikted]

Don't go to the politics section then. If this makes you cry, that area of the site will make your eyes commit suicide

Ha! Helpful advice, I'm sure.

I'll just stick to the science boards, and E&M.

 

[PsychoSarah]

Ha! Helpful advice, I'm sure.

I'll just stick to the science boards, and E&M.

It makes the average poster on this part of the forum seem like Einstein by comparison. Not to insult any posters here, but I think it is fair to say most of us aren't geniuses.

 

[EternalDragon]

Does that mean that your belief is a choice and that you could choose to belive in something else?

Why wouldn't it be?

 

[mmksparbud]

I must disagree here. There were no demons until after the flood. The demons are the souls of the deceased Nephilim. The "sons of God" are, in fact, fallen angels that left their first estate and had children with human women. The nephilim were human/angel hybrids and their souls are now the evil spirits and demons talked about in scripture and other literature. This is why demons show up after the flood and not before. Angels are angels, they don't die and therefore are always in that state, however they are either fallen or committed to God.

The "Book of Enoch" is not canonized scripture however, neither is any of the writings of Socrates, Leonardo De Vince, Plato, and they are taken at face value and are very informative and useful.
The "Book of Enoch" can be compared, or paralleled with "the Book of Jasher" and the "Book of Jubilee" These three compilations are used extensively when researching Biblical events. They parallel the Bible in astonishing ways. The book of Enoch is also quoted in the Biblical book of Jude:
Jude 1:14International Standard Version (ISV)

14 Enoch, in the seventh generation from Adam, prophesied about these people when he said,
“Look! The Lord has come with countless thousands of his holy ones.



In my opinion, if the Bible quotes it, it must have some merit.

In this book, written by the only man that so touched God's heart that He took him away and he didn't die, is the account of the nephilim and the fact that these fallen angels set into motion a avalanche of corruption that affected "all flesh":
Genesis 6:12
And God looked upon the earth, and, behold, it was corrupt; for all flesh had corrupted his way upon the earth.

and resulted in God wiping out all living things accept for Noah, his wife, his three sons and their wives. Noah's family was the only pure bloodline left. This is why God choose him and his family.

I wouldn't be so quick to throw out these books. They are a fantastic lens into the ancient times and, in the case of the Book of Enoch, some very interesting prophecy and windows into creation and the heavenly world. Enoch had a revelation not unlike that of John with his book which is the Revelation of Jesus Christ to John

Wellllllll---you are free to believe whatever you want--but, what language were these books written in when found??--I mean, I sure would like to see what the written language looked like from before the flood. There was only one language until after the flood and the tower of Babylon is where the languages were confused, so this book of Enoch would have had to be written in that language. Of course, maybe somebody translated it--but how? The languages were confused after the flood and there was no one to translate. And I do hope the language it is written in is not Hebrew--'cause nobody is 100% sure of when that was developed--but there were no Jews as such before Abraham and the question would still be, how did they translate an unknown language? The Holy Spirit told someone what the words meant??----The Holy Spirit has not been in the business of translating whole books, He has shown what the interpretations of dreams are, has shown what certain phrases mean, but books, as in the biblical books, are translated by men who know the written language very well on their own and the Holy Spirit guides----so---what is that original language?

And you didn't answer my question---if there were crossbreeds of fallen angels and man why did they stop?--Why are they still not happily breeding with us all over the place??

demons are the offspring of humans and fallen angels?---Again--God said at creation--"after it's kind"--This so called Enoch is assuming that fallen angels had the needed "equipment" to have had sex with human females, and that they also possessed the needed DNA that could mix with the human DNA which goes against what God said any earthly creature would be able to do as the fallen angels were not made in the image of God as we are and we can only have children with other humans. God created His angels to not have sex--so why would He have even given them the sexual genitalia when there were no females for them to even mate with--in case you haven't noticed, anytime an angel is named, it is a male name, or the angel, if referred to, as a he. God doesn't make useless stuff--they don't need procreation "equipment" when there is no one to use them on--God made us male and female (and most other creatures)--not them.
I am assuming that you have researched what angels are said to look like in a few passages in the bible. Like--some with 6 wings, some with 4 faces, some with 2, not exactly the same "kind."---
Now--Lucifer, through ambition, pride and so on, became Satan, and him and his followers were thrown out of heaven---they may still look like angels, but they are now fallen ones and are now called the devil and his angels.

(Rev 12:7) And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels,

(Rev 12:8) And prevailed not; neither was their place found any more in heaven.

(Rev 12:9) And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.

This says that they were cast out into the earth-. Now it does not state if God had finished creation or not. At the start of creation it states that the earth was void and without form--they may have been cast into the earth long before creation actually started. Point being---they are called devil, dragon, serpent and his angels--all suffer the same fate.

(Eze 28:14) Thou art the anointed cherub that covereth; and I have set thee so: thou wast upon the holy mountain of God; thou hast walked up and down in the midst of the stones of fire.

(Eze 28:15) Thou wast perfect in thy ways from the day that thou wast created, till iniquity was found in thee.

(Eze 28:16) By the multitude of thy merchandise they have filled the midst of thee with violence, and thou hast sinned: therefore I will cast thee as profane out of the mountain of God: and I will destroy thee, O covering cherub, from the midst of the stones of fire.

Lucifer had been a covering cherub---6 wings--

 

[Kylie]

I was thinking about this, and realized that it must have been a literal snake, since all of snakekind was cursed to no longer have legs. If it was Satan in the form of a snake, why would God curse the entire species of snakes when it was not TRULY a snake?
I'm just not convinced that the ancient Jews would have understood the serpent in that story as anything other than one of God's animals. It refers to the snake as the "craftiest of all the Lord's creations" or something like this. I mean, especially since Satan in the OT is on God's Heavenly Council in the Book of Job.

Because it's just a story and never really happened. There's a story from the Australian Aboriginal people about how the lorrikeet got all his colours, or something like that. It's just as story, the same as the Bible.

 

[Nithavela]

Ha! Helpful advice, I'm sure.

I'll just stick to the science boards, and E&M.

The politics section can be emulated by opening random political news stories and then imagining how you can blame obama for them.

 

[VirOptimus]

Why wouldn't it be?

So you could choose not to belive in god?

I really doubt that.

I surely cant choose to belive in anything metaphysical.

 

[PsychoSarah]

Why wouldn't it be?

I have been seeking belief for the past 6 years and haven't been successful thus far. How could that happen if belief was a fully conscious choice?

 

[ChetSinger]

Wellllllll---you are free to believe whatever you want--but, what language were these books written in when found??...

Without giving blanket approval to everything JacksBratt said, the basic idea he described was a common belief in the early church. Afaik, it was probably the dominant viewpoint of the ECFs.

According to them, demons are not fallen angels but are instead the wandering spirits of dead nephilim, who were themselves the children of angels and women as described in Genesis 6.

Below are four ECFs on the subject.

CHURCH FATHERS: The Second Apology (St. Justin Martyr)

Chapter 5. How the angels transgressed

...God, when He had made the whole world, and subjected things earthly to man, and arranged the heavenly elements for the increase of fruits and rotation of the seasons, and appointed this divine law— for these things also He evidently made for man— committed the care of men and of all things under heaven to angels whom He appointed over them. But the angels transgressed this appointment, and were captivated by love of women, and begot children who are those that are called demons; and besides, they afterwards subdued the human race to themselves...

CHURCH FATHERS: A Plea for the Christians (Athenagoras)

Chapter 24. Concerning the Angels and Giants

...Just as with men, who have freedom of choice as to both virtue and vice (for you would not either honour the good or punish the bad, unless vice and virtue were in their own power; and some are diligent in the matters entrusted to them by you, and others faithless), so is it among the angels. Some, free agents, you will observe, such as they were created by God, continued in those things for which God had made and over which He had ordained them; but some outraged both the constitution of their nature and the government entrusted to them: namely, this ruler of matter and its various forms, and others of those who were placed about this first firmament (you know that we say nothing without witnesses, but state the things which have been declared by the prophets); these fell into impure love of virgins, and were subjugated by the flesh, and he became negligent and wicked in the management of the things entrusted to him. Of these lovers of virgins, therefore, were begotten those who are called giants...

Chapter 25. The Poets and Philosophers Have Denied a Divine Providence

These angels, then, who have fallen from heaven, and haunt the air and the earth, and are no longer able to rise to heavenly things, and the souls of the giants, which are the demons who wander about the world, perform actions similar, the one (that is, the demons) to the natures they have received, the other (that is, the angels) to the appetites they have indulged...

CHURCH FATHERS: Divine Institutes, Book II (Lactantius)

Chapter 15. Of the Corruption of Angels, and the Two Kinds of Demons

When, therefore, the number of men had begun to increase, God in His forethought, lest the devil, to whom from the beginning He had given power over the earth, should by his subtlety either corrupt or destroy men, as he had done at first, sent angels for the protection and improvement of the human race; and inasmuch as He had given these a free will, He enjoined them above all things not to defile themselves with contamination from the earth, and thus lose the dignity of their heavenly nature. He plainly prohibited them from doing that which He knew that they would do, that they might entertain no hope of pardon. Therefore, while they abode among men, that most deceitful ruler of the earth, by his very association, gradually enticed them to vices, and polluted them by intercourse with women. Then, not being admitted into heaven on account of the sins into which they had plunged themselves, they fell to the earth. Thus from angels the devil makes them to become his satellites and attendants. But they who were born from these, because they were neither angels nor men, but bearing a kind of mixed nature, were not admitted into hell, as their fathers were not into heaven. Thus there came to be two kinds of demons; one of heaven, the other of the earth. The latter are the wicked spirits, the authors of all the evils which are done, and the same devil is their prince...

CHURCH FATHERS: On Christian Discipline (Commodianus)

III. The Worship of Demons

When Almighty God, to beautify the nature of the world, willed that that earth should be visited by angels, when they were sent down they despised His laws. Such was the beauty of women, that it turned them aside; so that, being contaminated, they could not return to heaven. Rebels from God, they uttered words against Him. Then the Highest uttered His judgment against them; and from their seed giants are said to have been born. By them arts were made known in the earth, and they taught the dyeing of wool, and everything which is done; and to them, when they died, men erected images. But the Almighty, because they were of an evil seed, did not approve that, when dead, they should be brought back from death. Whence wandering they now subvert many bodies, and it is such as these especially that you this day worship and pray to as gods.

This idea fell out of favor during the Reformation, but appears to have been the dominant viewpoint in the early church.

 

[EternalDragon]

I have been seeking belief for the past 6 years and haven't been successful thus far. How could that happen if belief was a fully conscious choice?

You either accept something as true or you do not. I would assume
you are seeking some sort of "God appearing before you" kind of proof
and it has nothing to do with making a choice.

If I told you I achieved 30 kills and 8 deaths on a recent Call of Duty
game, you would make a choice to believe me or not. Even if I presented
two friends who also saw it happen, you would still have to make a
choice to believe me or not. There would be no reason to keep seeking
for that belief or unbelief.

 

[mmksparbud]

Without giving blanket approval to everything JacksBratt said, the basic idea he described was a common belief in the early church. Afaik, it was probably the dominant viewpoint of the ECFs.

According to them, demons are not fallen angels but are instead the wandering spirits of dead nephilim, who were themselves the children of angels and women as described in Genesis 6.

Below are four ECFs on the subject.

CHURCH FATHERS: The Second Apology (St. Justin Martyr)



CHURCH FATHERS: A Plea for the Christians (Athenagoras)



CHURCH FATHERS: Divine Institutes, Book II (Lactantius)



CHURCH FATHERS: On Christian Discipline (Commodianus)



This idea fell out of favor during the Reformation, but appears to have been the dominant viewpoint in the early church.

Dominant viewpoint--maybe--and how far back are you going?--I really don't think Christ or his disciples held that view. And just because some early Christian views of some of those "founding fathers" included this believe, doesn't mean they were accurate. Some very wrong views entered the then dominate church that later had to be gotten rid off--in the reformation.

I am still waiting for my questions to be answered on this topic--like the language it was written in.

 

[ChetSinger]

Dominant viewpoint--maybe--and how far back are you going?--I really don't think Christ or his disciples held that view. And just because some early Christian views of some of those "founding fathers" included this believe, doesn't mean they were accurate. Some very wrong views entered the then dominate church that later had to be gotten rid off--in the reformation.

I am still waiting for my questions to be answered on this topic--like the language it was written in.

I don't consider this a matter of essential doctrine so I'm not going to beat it to death.

But is an interest of mine, and you did ask if Christ or the disciples held this view.

At least two of the disciples probably did. There are two NT passages, one in Jude and the other in 2 Peter, which appear to refer to this tradition.

First, Jude:

And the angels who did not stay within their own position of authority, but left their proper dwelling, he has kept in eternal chains under gloomy darkness until the judgment of the great day - just as Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding cities, which likewise indulged in sexual immorality and pursued unnatural desire,4 serve as an example by undergoing a punishment of eternal fire.

The phrase "kept in eternal chains under gloomy darkness until the judgment" echoes the language used in 1 Enoch of the sinning angels in Gen 6. The term "likewise in sexual immorality" reveals that the angel's sins were sexual, again echoing that tradition. So it's probably referring to that tradition.

I should mention that I don't consider 1 Enoch to be scripture. Not at all. But that doesn't mean that everything in it is automatically wrong, either.

Then, 2 Peter:

For if God did not spare angels when they sinned, but cast them into hell and committed them to chains of gloomy darkness to be kept until the judgment; if he did not spare the ancient world, but preserved Noah, a herald of righteousness, with seven others, when he brought a flood upon the world of the ungodly; if by turning the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah to ashes he condemned them to extinction, making them an example of what is going to happen to the ungodly; and if he rescued righteous Lot...

Again, the phrase "committed them to chains of gloomy darkness to be kept until the judgment" echoes the tradition. Also, notice how Peter's examples are in chronological order, implying that the angel's sins were prior to the Flood. Thus, the account of Gen 6 is pretty clearly in view.

If you have any doubt that the term "sons of God" (bene Elohim) in the Hebrew scriptures (Gen 6, Deut 32, Job 1, Job 38) refers to angels, I can go into more detail if you wish.

These traditions exist in the light of the Hebrew "Divine Council", which is the assembly of YHWH's heavenly host. The "bene Elohim" were the highest-ranking beings in it and reported directly to YHWH. The Divine Council is a big subject for scholars these days. If you're interested, here's a good (I think) starting point: The Divine Council. It's all orthodox; there's nothing heretical in it.

 

[mmksparbud]

I don't consider this a matter of essential doctrine so I'm not going to beat it to death.

But is an interest of mine, and you did ask if Christ or the disciples held this view.

At least two of the disciples probably did. There are two NT passages, one in Jude and the other in 2 Peter, which appear to refer to this tradition.

First, Jude:


The phrase "kept in eternal chains under gloomy darkness until the judgment" echoes the language used in 1 Enoch of the sinning angels in Gen 6. The term "likewise in sexual immorality" reveals that the angel's sins were sexual, again echoing that tradition. So it's probably referring to that tradition.

I should mention that I don't consider 1 Enoch to be scripture. Not at all. But that doesn't mean that everything in it is automatically wrong, either.

Then, 2 Peter:


Again, the phrase "committed them to chains of gloomy darkness to be kept until the judgment" echoes the tradition. Also, notice how Peter's examples are in chronological order, implying that the angel's sins were prior to the Flood. Thus, the account of Gen 6 is pretty clearly in view.

If you have any doubt that the term "sons of God" (bene Elohim) in the Hebrew scriptures (Gen 6, Deut 32, Job 1, Job 38) refers to angels, I can go into more detail if you wish.

These traditions exist in the light of the Hebrew "Divine Council", which is the assembly of YHWH's heavenly host. The "bene Elohim" were the highest-ranking beings in it and reported directly to YHWH. The Divine Council is a big subject for scholars these days. If you're interested, here's a good (I think) starting point: The Divine Council. It's all orthodox; there's nothing heretical in it.

Glad to know you don't consider it scripture--and thus not to be considered as a basis for forming ones doctrinal believes.

Perhaps the reading of those verses should be more like this??

(Jud 1:6) And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day.

(Jud 1:7) Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.

(2Pe 2:6) And turning the cities of Sodom and Gomorrha into ashes condemned them with an overthrow, making them an ensample unto those that after should live ungodly;


The "in like manner" is referring to the other cities besides Sodom and Gomorrha. And the example is suffering eternal fire for sinning---and by the way---Sodom and Gomorrha are not still burning. But--just my way of thinking, I guess. And the angels sins were prior to creation itself (or pretty close to that time) as Satan is the one who tempted Eve so he was already out of heaven ( and, consequently, his followers).

 

[ChetSinger]

Glad to know you don't consider it scripture--and thus not to be considered as a basis for forming ones doctrinal believes.

Sure. In fact I've had some rousing debates with a few believers here who do consider it scripture. Yikes.

Perhaps the reading of those verses should be more like this??

(Jud 1:6) And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day.

(Jud 1:7) Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.

(2Pe 2:6) And turning the cities of Sodom and Gomorrha into ashes condemned them with an overthrow, making them an ensample unto those that after should live ungodly;

The "in like manner" is referring to the other cities besides Sodom and Gomorrha. And the example is suffering eternal fire for sinning---and by the way---Sodom and Gomorrha are not still burning. But--just my way of thinking, I guess.

I looked them up and found they match the KJV. While I believe that the KJV has been a blessing from God to the English-speaking world, I don't use it myself. The reasons are two-fold. First, our language has changed in 400 years and some verses just no longer come across as they should. Second, we have more Greek resources than the KJV's creators did, and we also know more about the subtleties of Koine Greek itself. In sum, if a reading implies one thing in the KJV and something else in modern translations such as the ESV or NET, I'll probably go with the modern ones.

And the angels sins were prior to creation itself (or pretty close to that time) as Satan is the one who tempted Eve so he was already out of heaven ( and, consequently, his followers).

Perhaps, but that's debatable. Regardless, Gen 6 is widely taken as an account of angelic sins.

This is an interesting discussion. Thanks. Btw, have you checked out that Divine Council link? It's a gateway to a lot of this stuff. And it's scholarly, not internet hokum.

 

[JacksBratt]

Wellllllll---you are free to believe whatever you want--but, what language were these books written in when found??--I mean, I sure would like to see what the written language looked like from before the flood. There was only one language until after the flood and the tower of Babylon is where the languages were confused, so this book of Enoch would have had to be written in that language. Of course, maybe somebody translated it--but how? The languages were confused after the flood and there was no one to translate. And I do hope the language it is written in is not Hebrew--'cause nobody is 100% sure of when that was developed--but there were no Jews as such before Abraham and the question would still be, how did they translate an unknown language? The Holy Spirit told someone what the words meant??----The Holy Spirit has not been in the business of translating whole books, He has shown what the interpretations of dreams are, has shown what certain phrases mean, but books, as in the biblical books, are translated by men who know the written language very well on their own and the Holy Spirit guides----so---what is that original language?

And you didn't answer my question---if there were crossbreeds of fallen angels and man why did they stop?--Why are they still not happily breeding with us all over the place??

demons are the offspring of humans and fallen angels?---Again--God said at creation--"after it's kind"--This so called Enoch is assuming that fallen angels had the needed "equipment" to have had sex with human females, and that they also possessed the needed DNA that could mix with the human DNA which goes against what God said any earthly creature would be able to do as the fallen angels were not made in the image of God as we are and we can only have children with other humans. God created His angels to not have sex--so why would He have even given them the sexual genitalia when there were no females for them to even mate with--in case you haven't noticed, anytime an angel is named, it is a male name, or the angel, if referred to, as a he. God doesn't make useless stuff--they don't need procreation "equipment" when there is no one to use them on--God made us male and female (and most other creatures)--not them.
I am assuming that you have researched what angels are said to look like in a few passages in the bible. Like--some with 6 wings, some with 4 faces, some with 2, not exactly the same "kind."---
Now--Lucifer, through ambition, pride and so on, became Satan, and him and his followers were thrown out of heaven---they may still look like angels, but they are now fallen ones and are now called the devil and his angels.

(Rev 12:7) And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels,

(Rev 12:8) And prevailed not; neither was their place found any more in heaven.

(Rev 12:9) And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.

This says that they were cast out into the earth-. Now it does not state if God had finished creation or not. At the start of creation it states that the earth was void and without form--they may have been cast into the earth long before creation actually started. Point being---they are called devil, dragon, serpent and his angels--all suffer the same fate.

(Eze 28:14) Thou art the anointed cherub that covereth; and I have set thee so: thou wast upon the holy mountain of God; thou hast walked up and down in the midst of the stones of fire.

(Eze 28:15) Thou wast perfect in thy ways from the day that thou wast created, till iniquity was found in thee.

(Eze 28:16) By the multitude of thy merchandise they have filled the midst of thee with violence, and thou hast sinned: therefore I will cast thee as profane out of the mountain of God: and I will destroy thee, O covering cherub, from the midst of the stones of fire.

Lucifer had been a covering cherub---6 wings--

OK, first let me deal with each paragraph separately.

The language issue.
Did Noah speak a language? Yes. Did they have text to record things in his language? I would be certain that they did. Were the documents that were written in Noah's language totally useless after the Tower of Babel? No. Is it possible the the book of Enoch was written in a language that was understood by Noah, his grandson? I would believe so.

Therefore, the language that the book of Enoch was written in was most certainly understood up to and after the tower of Babel.

Also, the book of Enoch was kept in Ethiopia for all this time in very old, original manuscripts.

Secondly, "why did this sinful copulation stop. The angels that took part in this were punished. Firstly by seeing their offspring fight against each other and all original Nephilim were killed by each other while their parents watched. Secondly, their punishment was to me chained in the bottom part of hell until final judgement as stated in this scripture:

2 Peter 2:4

4 For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell, and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment;


It is written in the book of Enoch that this punishment was so severe that Michel an arch angel and still a righteous servant of God, shook when he delivered the verdict and punishment to the convicted. How severe would a punishment have to be for even the person in the court, reading the sentence, who will not participate or endure the sentence, to shake in the fear of it's severity?

Third, angels that have been mentioned in the Bible as interacting with men are always seen as male. In the example of the angels that saved Lot and his family, the people of the Sodom wanted to have sex with them. There is no reason to believe that when angels take the form of men that they are anatomically and physically the same. I cannot prove it, however, there is overwhelming scripture and text to back the fact that they did mate with human women. If this was to mean righteous men, only, then why would it state that they looked upon human women and liked what they saw. This would be a mute point. All human men look upon human women and like what they see. And, take them for their wives. This scripture was a well written text that made a clear point that it was not a normal event.

If you look, you will see evidence of skeletal remains of large human like bodies that were very large and amazing.

Third, when Satan was cast out. You are right, it doesn't say at what point in time in relation to the time line of the creation week. It does state that he was cast out of heaven. He was able to be on earth and command his minions to do this horrendous deed. Satan was not one of the 200 that committed the fornication.

The scripture you present do not conflict with the context of the book of Enoch, the book of Jasher or the book of Jubilee.

 

[JacksBratt]

Because it's just a story and never really happened. There's a story from the Australian Aboriginal people about how the lorrikeet got all his colours, or something like that. It's just as story, the same as the Bible.

The Bible is real

• Manuscript Evidence. There are way more copies of the biblical manuscripts, with remarkable consistency between them, than there are for any of the classics like Plato, Aristotle and Socrates. "There is no body of ancient literature in the world which enjoys such a wealth of good textual attestation as the New Testament." F.F. Bruce, The New Testament Documents: Are They Reliable?
• Archaeological Evidence. Again and again archaeological discoveries have verified the accuracy of the historical and cultural references in the Bible. The more they dig, the more it confirms the Bible. “It is important to note that Near Eastern archaeology has demonstrated the historical and geographical reliability of the Bible in many important areas.” E.M. Blaiklock, The New International Dictionary of Biblical Archaeology.
• Eyewitness Accounts. The Bible was written by people who witnessed the events it describes; many were persecuted or martyred but never changed their story. Would you die for something you knew was untrue? “It is no moderate approbation of Scripture that it has been sealed by the blood of so many witnesses, especially when we reflect that they died to render testimony to the faith …with a firm and constant, yet sober, zeal toward God.” John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion.
• Corroborating Accounts. There are plenty of references in non-biblical sources to the events described in the Bible. The Jewish historian Josephus, born in 37 AD, “provide(s) indispensable background material for the student of…New Testament history. In them, we meet many figures well known to us from the New Testament. Some of his writings provide direct commentary on New Testament references.” J.D. Douglas, ed., The New Bible Dictionary.
• Literary Consistency. The Bible contains 66 books written over 1,500 years by 40 different writers but it tells one "big story" of God's plan of salvation that culminated in Jesus Christ. You can't even pass a secret around a circle of 12 people and get the same message at the end. “There is indeed a wide variety of human authors and themes (in the Bible). Yet behind these…there lies a single divine author with a single unifying theme.” John R.W. Stott, Understanding the Bible.
• Prophetic Consistency. There are over 300 specific prophecies in the Old Testament that are fulfilled in the life, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ in the New Testament. “The very dimension of the sheer fulfillment of prophecy of the Old Testament Scriptures should be enough to convince anyone that we are dealing with a supernatural piece of literature….God has himself planted within the scriptures an internal consistency that bears witness that this is his Word.” R.C. Sproul, Now That’s a Good Question.
• Expert Scrutiny. The early church had extremely high standards for what books were judged to be authentic and therefore included in the Bible. A book had to have been written by an Apostle or someone in their immediate circle, had to conform to basic Christian faith and had to be in widespread use among many churches. This was a careful process of “the people of God in many different places, coming to recognize what other believers elsewhere found to be true”; these writings were truly God’s word. G.J. Wenham, J.A. Motyer, D.A. Carson and R.T. France, The New Bible Commentary.
• Leader Acceptance. A majority of the greatest leaders and thinkers in history have affirmed the truth and impact of the Bible. "I believe the Bible is the best gift God has ever given man. All the good from the Savior of the world is communicated to us through this book. But for it we could not know right from wrong.” Abraham Lincoln.
• Global Influence. The Bible has had a greater influence on the laws, art, ethics, music and literature of world civilization than any other book in history. Can you think of one that even comes close? “Christianity”, as set forth in the Bible “is responsible for a disproportionately large number of the humanitarian advances in the history of civilization—in education, medicine, law, the fine arts, working for human rights and even in the natural sciences….” Craig L. Blomberg, in Christian Apologetics: A Comprehensive Case for Biblical Faith.
• Changed Lives. From St. Augustine to Martin Luther to Joni Eareckson Tada to countless everyday men, women and children, the words of the Bible have transformed lives unmistakably and forever. “As unnamed masses of Christians down through the ages have shown us, the Bible is the most reliable place to turn for finding the key to a life of love and good works.” T.M. Moore, The Case for the Bible.

 

[JayFern]

I really don't think Christ or his disciples held that view.

You have no idea what Jesus or his disciples views were or what they thought and neither does anyone else, all we have in the bible are memories of what people were told by other people who may or may not have heard Jesus speak.

Everything Jesus was supposed to have said or done is nothing but hearsay because nothing was written down until at least 60 years after Jesus [if he even existed] was supposed to have died.

I am not trying to say anything other than no one knows the facts about what Jesus is supposed to have said because no one who ever heard him speak ever wrote anything down.. that is simply a fact.

 

[EternalDragon]

You have no idea what Jesus or his disciples views were or what they thought and neither does anyone else, all we have in the bible are memories of what people were told by other people who may or may not have heard Jesus speak.

Everything Jesus was supposed to have said or done is nothing but hearsay because nothing was written down until at least 60 years after Jesus [if he even existed] was supposed to have died.

I am not trying to say anything other than no one knows the facts about what Jesus is supposed to have said because no one who ever heard him speak ever wrote anything down.. that is simply a fact.

You seem to know an awful lot about what people did back then. Do
you have a time machine?

Jesus existed before his earthly body and was the one who spoke to
Adam and Eve, Noah, Moses, Job, etc. So yes, people do know facts
about Jesus before, during and after he died physically.

 

[CryOfALion]

OK, first let me deal with each paragraph separately.

The language issue.
Did Noah speak a language? Yes. Did they have text to record things in his language? I would be certain that they did. Were the documents that were written in Noah's language totally useless after the Tower of Babel? No. Is it possible the the book of Enoch was written in a language that was understood by Noah, his grandson? I would believe so.

Therefore, the language that the book of Enoch was written in was most certainly understood up to and after the tower of Babel.

Also, the book of Enoch was kept in Ethiopia for all this time in very old, original manuscripts.

Secondly, "why did this sinful copulation stop. The angels that took part in this were punished. Firstly by seeing their offspring fight against each other and all original Nephilim were killed by each other while their parents watched. Secondly, their punishment was to me chained in the bottom part of hell until final judgement as stated in this scripture:

2 Peter 2:4

4 For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell, and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment;


It is written in the book of Enoch that this punishment was so severe that Michel an arch angel and still a righteous servant of God, shook when he delivered the verdict and punishment to the convicted. How severe would a punishment have to be for even the person in the court, reading the sentence, who will not participate or endure the sentence, to shake in the fear of it's severity?

Third, angels that have been mentioned in the Bible as interacting with men are always seen as male. In the example of the angels that saved Lot and his family, the people of the Sodom wanted to have sex with them. There is no reason to believe that when angels take the form of men that they are anatomically and physically the same. I cannot prove it, however, there is overwhelming scripture and text to back the fact that they did mate with human women. If this was to mean righteous men, only, then why would it state that they looked upon human women and liked what they saw. This would be a mute point. All human men look upon human women and like what they see. And, take them for their wives. This scripture was a well written text that made a clear point that it was not a normal event.

If you look, you will see evidence of skeletal remains of large human like bodies that were very large and amazing.

Third, when Satan was cast out. You are right, it doesn't say at what point in time in relation to the time line of the creation week. It does state that he was cast out of heaven. He was able to be on earth and command his minions to do this horrendous deed. Satan was not one of the 200 that committed the fornication.

The scripture you present do not conflict with the context of the book of Enoch, the book of Jasher or the book of Jubilee.

Very well stated. I think if the book of Enoch was canon, at least 50% of questions asked by Christians and non-Christian alike would be answered satisfactorily.

 

[JacksBratt]

Very well stated. I think if the book of Enoch was canon, at least 50% of questions asked by Christians and non-Christian alike would be answered satisfactorily.

I agree, however, it is not and should not be presented as such (Canon). It is just as reputable as any resource book used today. It parallels the Bible and other documents and has reliable manuscripts. As with any presented "fact" it is always good to back it up by one two other historical resource texts.