why do christians quote the book of enoch?

That brings me onto the book of enoch The book of enoch is an ancient jewish scripture. Obviously this doesn't disprove YOUR god, but it doesn't actually talk about your god either. To be honest you may as well be quoting verses from the Qur'an.

reply to post by Wongbeedman


I don't quite understand what your driving at but the first thing you should correct is that Enoch was not Jewish. Enoch was of the Adamic stock and grandson (six times removed) from Adam. Enoch (Chanoch) was born 622 years after Adam and 3139 years before Christ. It was well over 1750 years later that the word JEW was even uttered. Actually Enoch was considered as just a grand son of Adam. Even though Enoch is recorded in the history of Jews does not make him Jewish.

The seven laws of Adam were the moral code of mankind in that era and yes it all centered around the God of grandfather Adam. In that era Shem was the high priest of the Creator Father God. I don't understand where you get your biblical history but it certainly is not similar to the Qur'an. The Qur'an was not even thought of till some 3750 years later and has nothing in common with modern day Judaism.

In fact after the great flood of Noah, Shem and Noah had an academy dedicated to the teaching of Father God and the seven Noahide laws were the foundation of their teachings. It was in this academy that Enoch's life of teaching the seven laws of God was also regarded as being Father God's teachings. Enoch was translated and is said to not have seen death. In other words his substance was changed instantly and he enjoyed the Bosom of the Father. We don't really know where that was at that time. Some say in the heavenly abode while others say in Sheol.

reply to post by Seede


You're all focusing on the life of Enoch.
I'm focusing on the BOOK of Enoch, I don't care when he was born or who to or how he's related to Noah.
The existence of all these people is debatable no matter what you have to say about it.
Also is the age and validity of the book of Enoch.
Which is why I wonder why some Christians regard it as highly as the bible itself.
You can't use stories from these books to support their validity. That's just ridiculous.
It seems you guys will believe anything you read as long as it claims to be connected to the bible in some way.

en.m.wikipedia.org...
There you can see, the book itself is quite Jewish.
I never said Enoch was Jewish. although he probably was.
Your idea of Christianity didn't exist back then. God was a Jewish god. Jesus was a Jew.

reply to post by Wongbeedman


Isn't there a religion for that? Like Bahigh? Naaaa bad idea. Jesus is the true God. The way to test that is by prayer to him, and feeling your gutt. Your gutt is always right. So when your praying to Jesus sense in your gutt if you're right or not?

If you want to test the opposite pray to Buddha or Mohammad and do the same thing. Focus on what your gutt is telling you.

Originally posted by Wongbeedman
reply to post by jjkenobi

 

But its the fact it Somehow came into the limelight when the whole ancient astronauts theory came about. In fact a lot of people think the book is a hoax.
Now if you believe in the AA theory then you think something along the lines of "humans saw aliens, humans mistook them for gods, humans praise them, humans start religions"
And this is believed to have happened all around the world on seperate occasions quite a long time ago.
So if you subscribe to the AA theory, it has everything to do with the Qur'an.

edit on 5-10-2012 by Wongbeedman because: (no reason given)

Only in a very general way. The books and religions cant be lumped together on that one point. The quran is very very weak in so many regards compared to hebrew scripture. The quran is like finding a copy of mad magizine in a stack of books on complicated math, advanced.

Originally posted by Logarock

Originally posted by Wongbeedman
reply to post by jjkenobi

 

But its the fact it Somehow came into the limelight when the whole ancient astronauts theory came about. In fact a lot of people think the book is a hoax.
Now if you believe in the AA theory then you think something along the lines of "humans saw aliens, humans mistook them for gods, humans praise them, humans start religions"
And this is believed to have happened all around the world on seperate occasions quite a long time ago.
So if you subscribe to the AA theory, it has everything to do with the Qur'an.

edit on 5-10-2012 by Wongbeedman because: (no reason given)

Only in a very general way. The books and religions cant be lumped together on that one point. The quran is very very weak in so many regards compared to hebrew scripture. The quran is like finding a copy of mad magizine in a stack of books on complicated math, advanced.

Yes I should point that out, normally I will be speaking very generally.
I'm a firm believer in working things out from looking at the bigger picture, often its simpler that way.
I tend to think of the religious as one group. And people who aren't really bothered as the other.

The existence of all these people is debatable no matter what you have to say about it. Also is the age and validity of the book of Enoch. Which is why I wonder why some Christians regard it as highly as the bible itself.

reply to post by Wongbeedman


The reason I wrote the years of Enoch was simply that if Enoch wrote the original material does not mean that the material used today is that same material that Enoch wrote. We do not know how many copies have been used and worn out and re copied. No way of telling. The only thing we know today is that the complete work which we use today was found in the Ethiopian language. There have been fragments found in the Dead Sea scrolls (cave number 4) but not the complete work.

If Enoch wrote the original work then he must have written it over 3139 years before Christ. If this is true then it was not Jewish but believed to be of Aramaic stock. Judaism did not exist at that time.

Now, the reason that the early churches used the material as a reference was simply that the Genesis account of Moses also tells the same story of giants that Enoch tells us except that Enoch material gives much more information than Moses did. Also the giants are referenced in Jude. If Jude is truly the brother of Jesus then some Christians assume that Jesus also taught of the same material. We simply do not know. Also the Hebrew bible tells us that Enoch was the grandson of Adam and that he was translated by god because of his piety.

Besides the giant issue Enoch also tells us that there is an afterlife and describes this after life. That is one main reason that the early Christian church used the book as edifying God and Christ Jesus. Remember that when I say the early church I am referencing the first Christian Jewish Jerusalem church which existed for well over forty years before it was decimated by the Roman Gentiles. I am not talking about the Roman Catholic organization which came into play well after the first century and who slaughtered the Jerusalem Christians in 70 AD.

At this time in the early Christian Jerusalem Church, the book of Enoch was used in conjunction with Torah but was not codified as Jewish literature. In other words it was adopted work because it agreed with Torah. It would be the same as the Apostles letters were read in the evangelizing of the Gentile churches. Even though the letters of the Apostles were of Jewish origin did not make them Gentile. It is true that Greek was the language of that day but it did not change the Jewish aspect of the Apostles works. The Apostles were Jewish and will always be counted to be Jewish. The very same can be said of Enoch. Enoch material was more than likely of Aramaic language and adopted by the Jewish foundation but in all fairness it was not Jewish.

The reason I wrote of the Jerusalem Christian church as being the original church is simply that in that era of history we did not have all of the hundreds of so called Christian churches that you have today. Most so called Christian churches of today have nothing in common with the early Jerusalem church. We did not have all of this confusion of hundreds of word change bibles and beliefs within the Christian structure. At that time we had a Torah and outside books which agreed with Torah along with the tradition of Christ Jesus. Nothing was canonized except Torah. Edification of the church came with tradition and the book of Enoch was part of that edification.

You are correct in saying that religion is nothing but belief. That’s all it ever has been from day one. It is nothing but tradition recorded. All tradition is by mouth till it becomes written or recorded. That is why we call it theory or theological. All religions are theological and were tradition at one time. You are also correct when you doubt the dates or validity of even the bible. Almost all people find it hard to swallow every thing written in the bible. Even scholars argue among themselves as to different writings in both the Hebrew and Greek bibles. I wish I had a true answer to your doubt but I probably don't know any more that you know to be truthful.

Okay, I'm jewish, so here's some jewish input. Here's what happened to Enoch

en.wikipedia.org...

On the book of enoch, one of the good reasons to keep it, is that the book of the watchers tells you who the antichrist is.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

and if you want to know what the original Hebrew of Genesis really says, try this

www.thechronicleproject.org...

Originally posted by GeneralMishka
The Book of Enoch is a gnostic book very doubtfully written by Enoch. Such a claim would require it surviving the flood at the hands of Noah. Its more like a late Templar book of wisdom given credibility because they said they found it under the Temple Mount

To answer your question, few Christians have even heard about it, let alone read it

Whatever Enoch is, its not a gnostic book. Not like what we have as coming from the early church gnostics.

Originally posted by Seede

The existence of all these people is debatable no matter what you have to say about it. Also is the age and validity of the book of Enoch. Which is why I wonder why some Christians regard it as highly as the bible itself.

reply to post by Wongbeedman

 

The reason I wrote the years of Enoch was simply that if Enoch wrote the original material does not mean that the material used today is that same material that Enoch wrote. We do not know how many copies have been used and worn out and re copied. No way of telling. The only thing we know today is that the complete work which we use today was found in the Ethiopian language. There have been fragments found in the Dead Sea scrolls (cave number 4) but not the complete work.

We do know that several writers, some BC, whos work was bound up with the other books we call the bible made direct quotes from Enoch......and that fact wasnt known untill after the bible was put together and then later after the Ethiopian text was translated.