The two witnesses...

[visionary]

There is more than a few reference or collaborations within scripture regarding Enoch. Not only that there is quite a few references like Guardian indicated that the early believers even went so far as to call the Book of Enoch the "Scripture of Enoch" [Tertullian]. Origen considered it on the same level as Psalms. The book of Enoch was in the Abyssinian Canon for centuries, but no where to be found in Europe, hence not even considered existing. It was one of the most ancient of Cabbala contained in the Zohar, and considered one of the hidden wisdom of the Jewish nation.

Enoch has in it things like the assignment jobs of the angels, the leading angels, the judicial throne, the details on the scapegoat of Yom Kippur, the Ancient of Days coming to judgment [which can be indicating Daniel also read it], the 360 day/year cycle, fiery torment for the angels, the elect and on and on goes the list.

 

[daq]

There is more than a few reference or collaborations within scripture regarding Enoch. Not only that there is quite a few references like Guardian indicated that the early believers even went so far as to call the Book of Enoch the "Scripture of Enoch" [Tertullian]. Origen considered it on the same level as Psalms. The book of Enoch was in the Abyssinian Canon for centuries, but no where to be found in Europe, hence not even considered existing. It was one of the most ancient of Cabbala contained in the Zohar, and considered one of the hidden wisdom of the Jewish nation.

Enoch has in it things like the assignment jobs of the angels, the leading angels, the judicial throne, the details on the scapegoat of Yom Kippur, the Ancient of Days coming to judgment [which can be indicating Daniel also read it], the 360 day/year cycle, fiery torment for the angels, the elect and on and on goes the list.

Also in 1-Enoch all of the sins are charged to `Aza'zel just as in Leviticus 16 the Priest places all of the sins of the people upon the, (mortally wounded) head of the ''scapegoat'' for `Aza'zel just before he is sent away into the wilderness or dry-arid places.

Matthew 9:2-6
2. And, behold, they brought to him a man sick of the palsy, lying on a bed: and Yeshua seeing their faith said unto the sick of the palsy; Be of good cheer, teknon-child; the sins of thee be aphiemi-sent away.
3. And, behold, certain of the scribes said within themselves, This man blasphemeth.
4. And Yeshua knowing their thoughts said, Wherefore think ye evil in your hearts?
5. For whether is easier, to say, The sins of thee be aphiemi-sent away; or to say, Arise, and walk?
6. But that ye may know that the Son of man hath power over the earth to aphiemi-send away sins, (then saith he to the sick of the palsy) Arise, take up thy bed, and go unto thine house.

And in another place Yeshua says: ''Sin no more lest a worse thing come unto thee!''
What then might be that ''worse thing'' possibly mean?

Luke 11:24-26
24. When the unclean spirit is gone out of a man, he walketh through dry places, seeking rest; and finding none, he saith, I will return unto my house whence I came out.
25. And when he cometh, he findeth it swept and garnished.
26. Then goeth he, and taketh to him seven other spirits more wicked than himself; and they enter in, and dwell there: and the last state of that man is worse than the first.

My forty two sense: www.sheshbazzardaq.com/enoch.html

 

[ContraMundum]

Bumping to the top​

Must you?

 

[Avodat]

Did you know that the book of Enoch was accepted as scriptural until about 700 AD. It was highly regarded by the first Christians. However, it is true that Gnostic corruptions have been added to it. That is why I recommend the one edited by R.H. Charles, it has special marks in it to let you know of troubled places.

We need those for The Book - trouble is, by the time all the posters on here have contributed their 'special mark for troubled places', we would have very, very, few texts that we could take with any certainty as being the true Word of G_d!

 

[visionary]

Also in 1-Enoch all of the sins are charged to `Aza'zel just as in Leviticus 16 the Priest places all of the sins of the people upon the, (mortally wounded) head of the ''scapegoat'' for `Aza'zel just before he is sent away into the wilderness or dry-arid places.

Matthew 9:2-6
2. And, behold, they brought to him a man sick of the palsy, lying on a bed: and Yeshua seeing their faith said unto the sick of the palsy; Be of good cheer, teknon-child; the sins of thee be aphiemi-sent away.
3. And, behold, certain of the scribes said within themselves, This man blasphemeth.
4. And Yeshua knowing their thoughts said, Wherefore think ye evil in your hearts?
5. For whether is easier, to say, The sins of thee be aphiemi-sent away; or to say, Arise, and walk?
6. But that ye may know that the Son of man hath power over the earth to aphiemi-send away sins, (then saith he to the sick of the palsy) Arise, take up thy bed, and go unto thine house.

And in another place Yeshua says: ''Sin no more lest a worse thing come unto thee!''
What then might be that ''worse thing'' possibly mean?

Luke 11:24-26
24. When the unclean spirit is gone out of a man, he walketh through dry places, seeking rest; and finding none, he saith, I will return unto my house whence I came out.
25. And when he cometh, he findeth it swept and garnished.
26. Then goeth he, and taketh to him seven other spirits more wicked than himself; and they enter in, and dwell there: and the last state of that man is worse than the first.

My forty two sense: www.sheshbazzardaq.com/enoch.html

Nice find.. I can see where Enoch/Lev's Azazel's sent away bearing the sins and Yeshua stating "sins sent away" here in Matt are definitely connected.

 

[ContraMundum]

Did you know that the book of Enoch was accepted as scriptural until about 700 AD. It was highly regarded by the first Christians. However, it is true that Gnostic corruptions have been added to it. That is why I recommend the one edited by R.H. Charles, it has special marks in it to let you know of troubled places.

It is not on any Christian canonical list after 351AD, so no, it was not considered "scriptural".

 

[visionary]

It is not on any Christian canonical list after 351AD, so no, it was not considered "scriptural".

So you consider the Coptic non christian?

 

[ContraMundum]

So you consider the Coptic non christian?

Christian yes, orthodox no, not until they affirmed they were not monophysites. Their canon now conforms to the rest of the OOC, and their notion of canonicity is not the same as yours anyway, so this could end up lengthy is we went down that road. God is at work in bringing His church into unity.

I know the Book of Enoch is interesting. But just because it's interesting, and even if its filled with truth, doesn't mean you can cram it into scripture without the consensus of the wholy Body of Christ.

 

[visionary]

Christian yes, orthodox no, not until they affirmed they were not monophysites. Their canon now conforms to the rest of the OOC, and their notion of canonicity is not the same as yours anyway, so this could end up lengthy is we went down that road. God is at work in bringing His church into unity.

I know the Book of Enoch is interesting. But just because it's interesting, and even if its filled with truth, doesn't mean you can cram it into scripture without the consensus of the wholy Body of Christ.

I am not concerned whether their theology agrees with mine or not. The issue you brought up was that NO christian group considers Enoch canon. And the answer is not NO as you suggested but Yes and Coptic is just one of them.

 

[daq]

Nice find.. I can see where Enoch/Lev's Azazel's sent away bearing the sins and Yeshua stating "sins sent away" here in Matt are definitely connected.

If indeed that were a ''find'' then I would not have written: ''My forty two sense'' …

 

[Gxg (G²)]

Coptic is just one of them.

There are also those who are with Ethiopian Orthodoxy (from Oriential Orthodoxy) - very similar to what early Judaism was like in the temple worship era...and the Ethiopians retained many aspects of the old covenant (seeing their own connection with Solomon )

• Canonical Books - The Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church

Most commonly, the phrase "Book of Enoch" refers to 1 Enoch, which is wholly extant only in the Ethiopic language. There are two other books named "Enoch": 2 Enoch (surviving only in Old Slavonic, c. first century AD; English translation by R. H. Charles (1896); and 3 Enoch (surviving in Hebrew, c. fifth - sixth century). The numbering of these texts has been applied by scholars to distinguish the texts from one another. But again, the book of Enoch was preserved within the Ethiopian Church.

Personally, I'm also VERY Glad that the Book of Enoch was preserved within the Ethopian Church. Its always odd seeing people trip on it, despite the fact that its already referenced within the Book of Jude---and the early Jewish church had no problem with many of the thoughts held within it when it came to the concept of a Divine Council, the Watchers and many other things..

I'm always amazed at how many seem to not be amazed at the beauty of the Ethiopian Orthodox Old Testament...as there's truly so much depth to it that many don't seem able to realize.

The Ethiopian canon is basically the same as the LXX canon plus Jubilees and Enoch and different Maccabees tales (which many scholars see as a later attempt to replace lost scrolls), much like what has been found at the Dead Sea Caves. Commenting on the influence of certain councils regarding the sacredness of the Book of Enoch and the canon, it seems that the the Book of Enoch was extant centuries before the birth of Christ and yet is considered by many to be more Christian in its theology than Jewish. Jude 1:6, Gen 6, 1st Peter 3:19-20, and 2nd Peter 2:4 immediately come to mind, though there are more passages that either directly quote or refer to the Book of Enoch. And its not surprising, seeing that it was considered scripture by many early Christians...as the earliest literature of "Church Fathers" is filled with references to this mysterious book. The early second century "Epistle of Barnabus" makes much use of the Book of Enoch. Second and Third Century "Church Fathers" like Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Origin and Clement of Alexandria all make use of the Book of Enoch. Tertullian (160-230 C.E) even called the Book of Enoch "Holy Scripture".....so its very odd, IMHO, that the Ethiopic Church even added the Book of Enoch to its official canon whereas other branches of Orthodoxy reject it (to my knowledge). For it was widely known and read the first three centuries after Christ.

One can go here to read it

 

[Gxg (G²)]

Christian yes, orthodox no, not until they affirmed they were not monophysites

Oriential Orthodox, out of which Coptic Orthodoxy arose, has actually always been orthodox on multiple levels and many have come to realize that when seeing what was addressed in the context disagreements developed.

Concerning the monophysite disagreements at Chalcedon, its rather fascinating to consider the many sides of history that may get lost when it comes to discussion on the various debates others had on the nature of Christ--especially in regards to how many Oriental Orthodox have long noted that the term "monophysite" is something that doesn't really reflect what they've always believed. Ethopian Orthodox would prefer to be called tewahido (made one)......and in their mindset, misunderstandings occurred more so over not understanding what another meant and then carrying that misunderstanding further over the years. Yet even in the disagreements, there was still much fruit.

On the split issue, it has always been rather fascinating to me in studying the history of Oriental Orthodoxy..and it has actually been interesting to see instances where it seems that there was an understanding on how united both camps were and that some of the ecumenical councils were not meant to be a matter of division as much as they were a matter of misunderstanding in interpretations on what the Lord was about. There are many good resources on that issue--and there have been other scholars that've done some excellent work on the issue of sharing more in-depth treatment of the many ways that Oriental Orthodoxy have not been understood proprely.

One of the best places around is known as "Orthodox Unity: Supporting the Joint Commission"

 

[Gxg (G²)]

Although there is speculation on the identity of the witnesses, I tend to think there's more in support for the Elijah/Moses view than the Elijah/Enoch view...but no one will ever know fully until it happens.

 

[visionary]

I tend to lean with the Elijah/Moses as both were leaders bringing the people back in line. Enoch is not known to anything more than a prophet. The two witnesses of Revelation have a singular task, preparing a people for His return. It isn't your typical prophetic job, but more of a spiritual leader work and for that reason will have to agree with you.

Revelation 11:8
and their dead bodies will lie in the main street of the great city whose name, to reflect its spiritual condition, is “S’dom” and “Egypt” — the city where their Lord was executed on a stake.

These two will have to confront the evil spirits of the prevailing Egyptian type of slavery which the people of the world are getting caught up in through debt and the financial world. The people are also getting caught up in a spiritual perversions of all kinds leading to physical perversions eroding the good life. Together they both have to be addressed.

Moses challenged Pharaoh and demanded that he let his people go. We are entering into the days when no man may buy or sell unless....

Elijah challenged the prevailing idol worship perversions of His day, demanding proof their version stands up to the test of true connection with God. In Revelation we see that the "fire coming down from heaven" is used again to bring the point home by both sides.

2 Kings 1:10
Eliyahu answered the commander of fifty, “If I am in fact a man of God, let fire come down from heaven and burn you up, along with your fifty men.” Fire came down from heaven, and it burned up him and his fifty men.

Luke 17:29
but the day Lot left S’dom, fire and sulfur rained down from heaven and destroyed them all.
The two witnesses....

Rev 11:3 “Also I will give power to my two witnesses; and they will prophesy for 1,260 days, dressed in sackcloth.” 4 These are the two olive trees and the two menorahs standing before the Lord of the earth. 5 If anyone tries to do them harm, fire comes out of their mouth and consumes their enemies — yes, if anyone tries to harm them, that is how he must die.

Satan's image working counter evidence...

Revelation 13:13
It performs great miracles, even causing fire to come down from heaven onto the earth as people watch.

 

[Gxg (G²)]

I tend to lean with the Elijah/Moses as both were leaders bringing the people back in line. Enoch is not known to anything more than a prophet. The two witnesses of Revelation have a singular task, preparing a people for His return. It isn't your typical prophetic job, but more of a spiritual leader work and for that reason will have to agree with you.



These two will have to confront the evil spirits of the prevailing Egyptian type of slavery which the people of the world are getting caught up in through debt and the financial world. The people are also getting caught up in a spiritual perversions of all kinds leading to physical perversions eroding the good life. Together they both have to be addressed.

Moses challenged Pharaoh and demanded that he let his people go. We are entering into the days when no man may buy or sell unless....

Elijah challenged the prevailing idol worship perversions of His day, demanding proof their version stands up to the test of true connection with God. In Revelation we see that the "fire coming down from heaven" is used again to bring the point home by both sides.



Satan's image working counter evidence...

I agree, as the examples of Elijah/Moses in what they symbolized seems to fit more...

 

[yedida]

But what do you do with Heb. 9:27? Moses has already died once, but according to the way scripture reads neither Enoch nor Elijah tasted death, they weer just 'taken,' so they have still to meet that appointment with death.

 

[visionary]

But what do you do with Heb. 9:27? Moses has already died once, but according to the way scripture reads neither Enoch nor Elijah tasted death, they weer just 'taken,' so they have still to meet that appointment with death.

John the Baptist came and Yeshua pointed to him as the fulfillment of Elijah "preparing the way"... I think it will be again... someone of our generation, is called, chosen, and walks in the prophetic shoes necessary to get the job done.