Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire For Christians,non-Christians & Atheists

[/quote]Having Christ quote many scriptures from a book would or should be enough reason to research I would think.[quote]

What you are looks very much like a corporate institutional programming. Many of the early church fathers recognized that those books should be included with the 66 books. And Enoch was at the forefront. Is it not written in the book of ____ , would that not be the same as, it is written? Having Christ quote many scriptures from a book would or should be enough reason to research I would think.

So if Enoch is at the forefront of your position, let's consider it:
And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints,To execute judgment upon all, and to convince all that are ungodly among them of all their ungodly deeds which they have ungodly committed, and of all their hard speeches which ungodly sinners have spoken against him.

This is the one reference to Enoch's prophecies in the Bible. Now let's keep in mind that neither Enoch nor his contemporaries had alphabetic writing and so his prophecies would not have been recorded in a book that he wrote. This was an oral prophecy that was preserved by tradition among the Jews. The Jews never recognized a book of Enoch in their canon. Jude does not reference any "book of Enoch" but rather an oral tradition that recorded a prophecy of Enoch that was accurate. Moses wrote the first books of the Bible and included a narrative about Enoch but did not make any mention of a collection his prophecies or writings (hieroglyphics). Every early Bible character is recorded by Moses along with their sayings that became part of the Biblical record. What Jude is trying to establish is, not that Enoch's prophecies should be in the inspired canon, but rather just like Enoch foresaw the judgment of God coming upon the wicked--first in the flood and then at the end of the world, likewise Jude is also bearing witness to the same message. Jude is saying there is a consistent testimony from the advent of evil to the end of the age that wickedness will be ultimately judged by God. Jude is confirming the truth of Enoch's oral prophecy that was preserved.

Jesus confirmed the the extent of the OT canon of the Hebrew Tanakh, as I previously explained. Paul in Romans also indicates that to the Jews were committed the oracles of God. So the NT affirms the OT Jewish Tanakh as the OT canon as preserved by the Jews. The OT canon was settled before Jesus even came to earth. He said that every jot and tittle of it would be fulfilled--this is a clear reference to the Hebrew canon as the Greek alphabet does not have jots or tittles.

Next I want to note the Biblical principle that the truth of the Lord endures to all generations (Psa 100:5) The text of Enoch, though cited from throughout history has been lost to most of the Christian world for centuries at a time whereas the Biblical canon has always been preserved for every generation according to God's promise. The canonical books have never disappeared from human history.

Next I want to note that the Bible's quotation of Enoch's prophecy is not the same as the writings in the alleged book of Enoch.

Enoch 1:9
. . . Behold, he will arrive with ten million of the holy ones in order to execute judgment upon all. He will destroy the wicked ones and censure all flesh on account of everything that they have done, that which the sinners and the wicked ones committed against him.


The Bible says to "execute judgment and convince/convict" ... the book of Enoch says "destroy" ... while the meaning is similar the wording is clearly different, indicating that Jude was quoting from an original prophecy and not the book of Enoch per se. In the NT quotes of the OT there is some variation also, but if the NT citation is not following the Hebrew text it is following the Greek Septuagint text.
There are other significant differences such as where Jude says, “harsh things/hard speeches” but Enoch does not. Jude says, “spoken against” but Enoch says, “committed against him.” A comparison of the two passages from Greek texts reveal that the Greek text of Jude has 29 words but the text of the book of Enoch as translated by R. H. Charles has 36 words.

The Book of Enoch also fails the doctrinal truth test of Scripture:
A major theme in 1 Enoch is sinful angels taking human wives (e.g., 1 Enoch 6:2, 7:1, 12:4, 106:14, etc.). This is in direct contradiction to the words of the Word, Jesus Christ, who in Matthew 22:29-30, Jesus said, “You are mistaken, not knowing the Scriptures nor the power of God…they neither marry nor are given in marriage…like the angels…” (see also Mark 12:24-25, Luke 20:34-36). The "sons of God" in Genesis 6 are not fallen angles, because fallen angels are never referred to in Scripture as "sons of God" but rather demons.

Another consideration is that some of the observed narratives actually occur after the life of Enoch--meaning Enoch could not have been the author of those narratives. For example, Abraham did not write his own narratives in Genesis, but rather Moses did later as they were preserved by oral traditions. Therefore Enoch could not have been the author of this whole book which as a book was of much later origins than Enoch. Jude simply quotes a real saying of Enoch as originally prophesied and preserved by Jewish tradition and is not endorsing the book of Enoch.

Finally I will note, that although this book in some form was cited and and revered by some early Church writers, it was not included in any Jewish canon or any widely recognized Christian Bible. It is largely the Ethiopian church which have canonized this book on their own.

Having Christ quote many scriptures from a book would or should be enough reason to research I would think.

I'm not aware of numerous quotations from the Book of Enoch by Christ.

Didn't read what I posted nor have you read the Book.

As for the validity of the Jews and their book, which jews are you talking about? It was the Jews I did some research with that led me to Enoch in the first place. They were quite adamant in their belief of the Book of Enoch along with the others.

Knew nothing of the Book of Enoch so did a little research. Horny angels jumping human women sounds interesting. Particularly since angels not being native to our universe, having no physical presence, should be nonsexual. And them hungry giants!

Here's an interesting story..........................

Genesis 6 King James Version (KJV)
6 And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them,

2 That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose.

3 And the Lord said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years.

4 There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown.

and we certainly wouldn't want to forget about these..............................

Numbers 13:33
2 Samuel 21:20
Isaiah 26:14
Deuteronomy 3:11
Amos 2:9
Deuteronomy 2:10
2 Peter 2:4
Jude 1:6

There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown.

This is erroneous simply because you are making a bold generalization. For some it is definitely a fixed position due to their nearly unshakable beliefs. They believe in spite of available information.

Genesis 6 (KJV)

4 There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men,
and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown.

How did the translation end up as 'giants'..?...considering the orig. Hebrew word used was ~Nephilim~[literally meaning 'fallen ones']

but the Greek Septuagint rendered the said word as 'gigantes'

that greek choice of translation later adopted into the Latin Vulgate.

there are some 30 versions of English BIble that don't use the term giants, but rather the Hebrew; Nephilm ['fallen ones']

... see ( Genesis 5:20 ) the word "Nephilim" comes from a word which signifies to fall; and these might be so called,
either because they made their fear to fall upon men, or men, through fear, to fall before them, because of their height and strength;
or rather because they fell and rushed on men with great violence, and oppressed them in a cruel and tyrannical manner; ...

From Gills commentary

Genesis 6:4
There were giants in the earth in those days
That is, in the days before the sons of God took the daughters of men for wives, in such a general manner as before declared, or before the declension and apostasy became so universal; even in the times of Jared, as the Arabic writers F14 understand it, who say that these giants were begotten on the daughters of Cain by the children of Seth, who went down from the mountain to them in the days of Jared, see ( Genesis 5:20 ) the word "Nephilim" comes from a word which signifies to fall; and these might be so called, either because they made their fear to fall upon men, or men, through fear, to fall before them, because of their height and strength; or rather because they fell and rushed on men with great violence, and oppressed them in a cruel and tyrannical manner; or, as some think, because they fell off and were apostates from the true religion, which is much better than to understand them of apostate angels, whom the Targum of Jonathan mentions by name, and calls them Schanchazai and Uziel, who fell from heaven, and were in the earth in those days: and also after that,
which shows that the preceding clause respects giants in former times, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men,
came into their houses and chambers, and lay with them: and they bare [children] unto them,
or giants unto them, as may be supplied from the former clause; for the sense is, as there were giants before this general defection, so there were at this time, when there was a mixture of the Cainites and Sethites; which were the offspring of the sons of God, or posterity of Seth, mixing with the daughters of men, or the posterity of Cain; for this is not to be understood after the flood, as Aben Ezra, Ben Melech; and so they are described in the following words, the same [became] mighty men;
for tallness and strength, for power and dominion, for tyranny and oppression: which [were] of old:
like those that were of old before; or who in after times were spoken of, as in the days of old: men of renown,
or "of name" F15; whose names were often made mention of, both for their size and for their wickedness; they were much talked of, and extolled for their exploits, and even wicked ones: they were famous men, or rather infamous; for some men get a name in the world, not for their goodness, but for their greatness, and sometimes for their great wickedness; which sense is countenanced by what follows: that there were giants in these early times is confirmed by the testimony of many Heathen writers; such were the Titans that made war against Saturn, begotten by Ouranus, who were not only of bulky bodies, but of invincible strength, as Apollodorus F16 relates, and Berosus F17 speaks of a city about Lebanon, called Enos, which was a city of giants, who were men of vast bodies, and of great strength, inventors of arms and music, were cannibals, and exceedingly debauched

List your favorite three or four "contradictions in the bible," please.