Pray about this and be led of the Spirit.!!!!!!!!!!!!! Question: What is the book of Enoch and should it be in the Bible? Answer: The Book of Enoch is any of several pseudepigraphal (falsely attributed works, texts whose claimed authorship is unfounded) works that attribute themselves to Enoch, the great-grandfather of Noah; that is, Enoch son of Jared (Genesis 5:18).(Genesis 5:24; see also Hebrews 11:5). Most commonly, the phrase Book of Enoch refers to 1 Enoch, which is wholly extant only in the Ethiopic language. The biblical book of Jude quotes from the Book of Enoch in verses 14-15, “Enoch, the seventh from Adam, prophesied about these men: ‘See, the Lord is coming with thousands upon thousands of his holy ones to judge everyone, and to convict all the ungodly of all the ungodly acts they have done in the ungodly way, and of all the harsh words ungodly sinners have spoken against him.’” But this does not mean the Book of Enoch is inspired by God and should be in the Bible. Jude’s quote is not the only quote in the Bible from a non-biblical source. The Apostle Paul quotes Epimenides in Titus 1:12 but that does not mean we should give any additional authority to Epimenides’ writings. The same is true with Jude, verses 14-15. Jude quoting from the book of Enoch does not indicate the entire Book of Enoch is inspired, or even true. All it means is that particular verse is true. It is interesting to note that no scholars believe the Book of Enoch to have truly been written by the Enoch in the Bible. Enoch was seven generations from Adam, prior to the Flood (Genesis 5:1-24). Evidently, though, this was genuinely something that Enoch prophesied – or the Bible would not attribute it to him, “Enoch, the seventh from Adam, prophesied about these men…” (Jude 14). This saying of Enoch was evidently handed down by tradition, and eventually recorded in the Book of Enoch. We should treat the Book of Enoch (and the other books like it) in the same manner we do the other Apocryphal writings. Some of what the Apocrypha says is true and correct, but at the same time, much of it is false and historically inaccurate. Didnt the King James Bible when first printed contain the Apocrypha? The following is from Sam Gipps The Answer Book. QUESTION: Didnt the King James Bible when first printed contain the Apocrypha? ANSWER: Yes. EXPLANATION: Many critics of the perfect Bible like to point out that the original King James had the Apocrypha in it as though that fact compromises its integrity. But several things must be examined to get the factual picture. First, in the days in which our Bible was translated, the Apocrypha was accepted reading based on its historical value, though not accepted as Scripture by anyone outside of the Catholic church. The King James translators therefore placed it between the Old and New Testaments for its historical benefit to its readers. They did not integrate it into the Old Testament text as do the corrupt Alexandrian manuscnpts. That they rejected the Apocrypha as divine is very obvious by the seven reasons which they gave for not incorporating it into the text. They are as follows: 1. Not one of them is in the Hebrew language, which was alone used by the inspired historians and poets of the Old Testament. 2. Not one of the writers lays any claim to inspiration. 3. These books were never acknowledged as sacred Scriptures by the Jewish Church, and therefore were never sanctioned by our Lord. 4. They were not allowed a place among the sacred books, during the first four centuries of the Christian Church. 5. They contain fabulous statements, and statements which contradict not only the canonical Scriptures, but themselves; as when, in the two Books of Maccabees, Antiochus Epiphanes is made to die three different deaths in as many different places. 6. The Apocrypha inculcates doctrines at variance with the Bible, such as prayers for the dead and sinless perfection. 7. It teaches immoral practices, such as lying, suicide, assassination and magical incantation. If having the Apocrypha between the Testaments disqualifies it as authoritative, then the corrupt Vaticanus and Sinaiticus manuscripts from Alexandria, Egypt, must be totally worthless since their authors obviously didnt have the conviction of the King James translators and incorporated its books into the text of the Old Testament thus giving it authority with Scripture. If you read these books, you have to treat them as interesting but fallible historical documents, not as the inspired, authoritative Word of God. In what languages were the Dead Sea Scrolls written and what is wrong with changing the Bible to match all of these scrolls? The Dead Sea Scrolls were written in Hebrew. The books of Leviticus, and Job were written in Aramaic. They have found a few manuscripts that were written in Greek. All of the books of the Old Testament, except Esther, Nehemiah, and some of the minor prophets, have been discovered in the Dead Sea Scrolls. The Dead Sea Scrolls include non- biblical writings also. The group who created the Dead Sea Scrolls were Essenes. This was a community of esoterics who were in rebellion against both the Old Testament sacrifice system and the New Testament Messiah. So they are not a good source for correcting the historic Rabbinic Bible. However, all new versions, including the New King James Version, consult the Dead Sea Scrolls. I think this is a grievous mistake. Jesus said, “the words that I speak unto you, they are...life” (John 6:63), not death, like the Dead Sea. Although most of the Bible scrolls match the KJV precisely, a few corrupt scroll fragments do not. These few corrupt readings were used in the Dead Sea Scroll Bible (Martin Abegg, Peter Flint, Eugene Ulrich, Harper San Francisco, 1999, p. xviii, item 5). This bible’s cover has the coiled serpent logo, modeled after a ‘board game’ discovered with the scrolls. Book of Enoch From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia For other writings attributed to Enoch, see Book of Enoch (disambiguation). The Book of Enoch (also 1 Enoch;[1] Geez: መጽሐፈ ሄኖክ mätshafä henok) is an ancient Jewish religious work, ascribed by tradition to Enoch, the great-grandfather of Noah, although modern scholars estimate the older sections (mainly in the Book of the Watchers) to date from about 300 BC, and the latest part (Book of Parables) probably to the end of the first century BC.[2] It is not part of the biblical canon as used by Jews, apart from Beta Israel. Most Christian denominations and traditions may accept the Books of Enoch as having some historical or theological interest or significance, but they generally regard the Books of Enoch as non-canonical or non-inspired.[3] It is regarded as canonical by the Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church and Eritrean Orthodox Tewahedo Church, but not by any other Christian group. It is wholly extant only in the Geez language, with Aramaic fragments from the Dead Sea Scrolls and a few Greek and Latin fragments. For this and other reasons, the traditional Ethiopian belief is that the original language of the work was Geez, whereas non-Ethiopian scholars tend to assert that it was first written in either Aramaic or Hebrew; E. Isaac suggests that the Book of Enoch, like the Book of Daniel, was composed partially in Aramaic and partially in Hebrew.[4]:6 No Hebrew version is known to have survived. The book itself claims to be written by Enoch himself before the Biblical Flood. The authors of the New Testament were familiar with the content of the story and influenced by it:[5] a short section of 1 Enoch (1 En 1:9 or 1 En 2:1 depending on the translation) is quoted in the New Testament (Letter of Jude 1:14–15), and is attributed there to Enoch the Seventh from Adam (1 En 60:8). The text was also utilised by the community that originally collected the Dead Sea Scrolls....... who knows if the Book of Enoch is true just pray about it.!!!!!!!!!!!!
Posted on: Thu, 15 Jan 2015 00:28:09 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015