Has anyone here read the Book of Enoch? What's it like? Can you describe it? Should Christians read it...

Attached: alternetive gospels.webm (540x360, 11.68M)

Great video; checkmate, atheists.

Jews extract the belief from it that Enoch was transformed into the Angel Metatron. They believe Metatron is a lesser YHWH and that he will come back at the end of time to be the Messiah.

firmament of the heaven. 3. ⌈⌈And I saw how the winds stretch out the vaults of heaven⌉⌉, and have their station between heaven and earth: ⌈⌈these are the

??????????????????????????

That makes it all the more puzzling as to why it wouldn't be included in the Bible.

But it is in the Bible.

t. Ethiopian Orthodox

Attached: 858e5c4391693c8e68fb9b178ce9d4f2.jpg (450x600, 48.62K)

I apologise. I should have said Bibles used in all denominations.

Not Scripture, but definitely worth a read.
1 Enoch is split into five sections: The Book of Watchers, The Book of Parables of Enoch, The Astronomical Book / The Book of (Heavenly) Luminaries, The Book of Dream Visions, and the Epistle of Enoch. While it isn't Scripture, it was likely viewed as Scripture by some early Christians (and the Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church now), as Jude's quote of it suggests. In spite of it's being non-canonical, it definitely has a very Christian ring to it and fills in a lot of things that are not talked about in the Bible.

It isn't included in the Biblical Canon (save the EOTC's) because it was never included in the Septuagint, which is the basis for the Christian OT (which the text would have had to have been a part of, as it was written before Christ, prior to A.M. 987 when Enoch was taken bodily into Heaven).

You also have 2 Enoch (The Book of the Secrets of Enoch / Slavonic Enoch) and 3 Enoch (The Hebrew Book of Enoch / The Book of Palaces / The Book of Rabbi Ishmael the High Priest / The Revelation of Metatron), but these appear to be pseudepigraphic works made a long time after their purported writing (I personally didn't enjoy them as much as 1 Enoch either).

Only thing I know about it it
based on all the memes around here (including that of Jay Dyer).

What language is that? It looks like Amharic.

Its Ge'ez

It’s terrifying and made me fear God even more than I did.

If the visions were truly inspired, then purgatory is definitely real

Jews don't get the Metatron nonsense from 1 Enoch, 3 Enoch was written independent and way after 1 Enoch. However there are things that basically say that Jews burned deuterocanon after Christ and ripped off many elements, with some midrashim including elements of Enoch.

Of elements carried over from deuterocanon (including Enoch) -

probably a lot more than this but this is at the very least what I have seen and what I know.

Attached: cfb85ed5d960ece199e4b545552a5ba02574d505d51553e941cb16218051442e.jpg (640x640, 40.29K)

It's an interesting book, but any Christian knows it absolutely heretic not to mention it is an obvious fraud of course.

Enoch (1 Enoch), the book of Jasher (book of the Righteous) and the book of Jubilees are all supported by scripture in the Bible and also agree with one another.

As it was in the days of Noah, so it will be at the coming of the Son of Man, Enoch was written for our generation.

The Essenes thought it was important, Jude quoted it directly, Genesis chapter 6 talks about the flood, 2 Samuel 1:18, Joshua 10:13 call the book of Jasher by name, I don't know enough about Jubilees to say anything on it beyond that it tells a similar story.

The tl;dr of all of them is as such:

200 angels(called watchers because their job was to watch and subtly guide humanity) rebelled against God and made a pact with one another to come down to earth and have children with human women. (their reason for doing this was to corrupt the seed of man to prevent the redeemer from being able to be born, it obviously didn't work)

Their offspring were the giants, incredibly unbelievably large in the first generation, getting smaller after that.

The watchers taught various technologies to humanity, among them being how to make implements of war, how to make cosmetics, how to perform abortions, astrology, etc.

The offspring of the fallen angels, called giants, nephilim and mighty men trampled the whole earth, killed, ate and raped humans and committed every kind of degeneracy.

From the actions of the watchers, their offspring and the sins of the sons of Cain all flesh on the earth was corrupted, man, beast, fowl and every creeping thing. There are other texts found among the dead sea scrolls that indicate that the fallen angels were mixing different animals dna and human dna and that the offspring of those experiments were literal monsters.

As judgment for all this evil God passed the judgement of the flood, made the watchers witness their offspring kill each other, he also had the watchers bound for 70 generations of mankind at which point some of them would be let out to lead mankind astray again, the souls of all their offspring are bound to the earth becoming disembodied spirits when they die, what we know of as demons.

In the last of days when the watchers are let loose and knowledge is increased in the earth the rebellion will be brought to its climax and the world will be cleansed by fire the second time, 2 Peter agrees with this.

I think it is inspired, when reading them there is a strong spirit of truth to them, I think they were removed because being forearmed with knowledge against these things would have prepared a great many more people for the schemes of the sons of darkness, but that the elect in these days will recognize the truth anyway.

Jesus is Lord

Your "Book of Jasher" is a modern fake named after a long-lost book mentioned once in the Old Testament. The Old Testament refers to a few books of which nothing beyond those mentions is known. I could write something and call it, say, "The Book of the Wars of the Lord" but that doesn't mean that the original would have been restored.

Show me where the Book of Enoch is heretical and an absolute fraud, please.

The Vulgate and Septuagint verses where the Book of Jasher is referred to doesn't even refer to a Book of Jasher iirc, but the modern Jasher is a medieval midrash. The smoking guns on this is the massive literary dependency on the actual OT books and locations only in Europe being referred to within the work.

Attached: d52f093b08750b05b20ea792d6af533af82d4761b560d9cce35d62d789037e88.jpg (800x541, 429.21K)

Not technically heretical but of concern for it being the Word of God because it teaches really wrong scientific things about the earth and universe. Unless we all want to be flat earther creationists then it certainly shouldn't be in the Bible.

Literally nothing wrong with being a young earth creationist, and Enoch supports round earth theory in a similar manner to Isaiah if I remember right.

No it doesn't, it says Enoch traveled to the end of the earth and could see where the firmament ended and it proceeds to say he went farther east "outside of the firmament". It also advocates geocentrism. It says that the sun and moon orbit around the earth and travel through portals every month. It's cosmology is outdated.

*west

The way it was historically read was to disprove gnostics. The idea was that since angels were corrupt beings in the text it showed that gnostic view of the immaterial as inherently good was wrong.

The Church has never rescinded the condemnation of non geo centrism, so geo centrism probably is still the theory. From what we know now of space and that there is no "central point" of the universe, suddenly geo centrism makes more sense. Astronomers say geo centrism is a fine model to use but just requires more complicated maths which is why they use a heliocentric model instead (why is wrong seeing as we know the sun is not immobile)

While the Book of Enoch is an interesting read, it doesn’t mesh well with Genesis or the rest of the Bible and here’s why

Reproduction And Death:

Vs.

Reputation of The Nephilim:

Vs.

The Nephilim were on the earth in those days, and afterward as well, when the sons of God had relations with the daughters of men. And they bore them children who became the mighty men of old, men of renown. - Genesis 6:5

Continue

Building of the Ark:

Vs.

Salvation:

Vs.

Jesus

No, I don't see any contradiction. On the contrary, the texts in the excerpts mesh perfectly together.

#1: The first comparison pair doesn't even talk about the same thing! There is no contradiction. Adam's sin is separate from the angels' later sin.

#2: Being mighty and being evil is in no way contradictory. You may remember that after that Genesis passage the Earth soon becomes filled with evil for some reason.

#3: So Enoch is suggesting that the Ark was not entirely mundane and had some supernatural qualities imbued to it. Given the technical limitations of wood, such enhancements could have been useful for safety and other considerations.

For comparison:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_longest_wooden_ships

#4: Again not talking about the same thing. Enoch is talking about the archangels, who have their place in Christian theology. I notice you skipped Michael from the beginning of the list.

Paul quotes Aristotle multiple times. Are the writings of Aristotle scripture?

Are you being intellectually dishonest here?

#1: yes there is contradiction because the Book of Enoch is flat out saying that humans were only allowed to reproduce because they are mortal while in Genesis they were given the ability to reproduce before eating the Fruit of Knowledge (as in before they became mortal)

#2: pic related so that is a contradiction since they weren’t considered “evil spirits” in the Bible but were considered famous men that were looked up to and some would argue this with King Og or Goliath who was considered the Philistine’s champion (1 Samuel 17:4)

#3: not so if you were to consider Knibb’s commentary

#4: You honestly have no problem with Phanuel’s position as being the authority of repentance and “hope of those who will inherit eternal life” as in the whole reason Jesus came to Earth and died for us?

Attached: IMG_1734.PNG (1536x2048, 727.75K)

Is there any evidence of this? Abel, Cain and Seth are only mentioned after the fall, there is no indication that Adam and Eve could reproduce before the fall. If they could then wouldn't an endlessly exponentially reproducing immortal species cause quite a few issues?

I looked up the Book of Jubilees
Another book the Jews memoryholed because it conclusively showed the Christian idea of the messiah was correct.

I mean, Adam and Eve fell on day 1, so it's not like they had much of a chance to reproduce lol

Well either trace back the reply posts to the see the chapter and verse that was notifying the disparities or actually go to Genesis chapter 1 and 2 and understand how to read in sequence (it even implies it again in Genesis 2:24 and that’s before Genesis 3:1 where Eve gets tempted). Also basing on your posts, it looks similar to that user that sperged out because he was told that his favorite fictional role model was going to the Lake of Fire for not believing in Christ

The "disparities" are very weak, they're weaker than disparities between books in the actual Bible and I assume you have no problem reconciling those. The Book of Enoch is a legitimate addendum to Genesis, there are some things in Genesis which simply don't make any sense without it.

Why did Enoch alone get the privilege of being whisked away to Heaven without experiencing death? The Book of Enoch explains this.

Who the winnie the pooh are the "Nephalim" mentioned once and never again? The Book of Enoch explains this.

Despite what secular scholars might say the Book of Enoch was written before the book of Genesis. Genesis takes stuff from Enoch but not the other way around. It's also 100% in agreement with Christian theology while it conflicts greatly with Jewish theology. Even Jesus himself references concepts taking directly from the Book of Enoch.

What fire? There is no explanation for this anywhere in the Old Testament. There is the the Book of Enoch however.

#1: As the other user said, Adam and Eve only had children after the fall.

#2: I gather the Nephilim were supposed to have become spirit beings only after their deaths. But anyway, once again, having greatness as the world defines is not at all contradictory with being evil. Goliath for example may have been a great warrior, but we have no idea whether he was a nice person. The historical kings that are considered the greatest and have the most renown were the ones who went forth and conquered other nations to build empires of their own. You may also want to consider examples like the Greek mythology.

#3: I don't know who Knibb is and why I should trust his commentary.

#4: You know how a CEO can have underlings with specific missions while still being in charge of all that stuff? Archangels are attested in the Bible, and we know that angels do tasks.

That Genesis 5:24 verse translation that you quoted already has a self-containing answer for that, “he walked faithfully with God”. Paul even made this more dead clear in Hebrews 11:5 “By faith Enoch was taken from this life, so that he did not experience death: ‘He could not be found, because God had taken him away.’ For before he was taken, he was commended as one who pleased God.”

Also Enoch wasn’t the only one that got to go to Heaven alive, Elijah did too (2 Kings 2:11)

You should probably read that Genesis 6:4 verse you quoted again very carefully it is right in front of you. Also Numbers 13:33 mentioned them again “We saw the Nephilim there (the descendants of Anak come from the Nephilim).”

Isaiah 33:14 “The sinners in Zion are terrified; trembling grips the godless: ‘Who of us can dwell with the consuming fire? Who of us can dwell with everlasting burning?’”

Isaiah 66:24 “And they shall go out and look on the dead bodies of the men who have rebelled against me. For their worm shall not die, their fire shall not be quenched, and they shall be an abhorrence to all flesh.”

4/10 I suggest you sperge less and study the Bible more

#1: That still doesn’t nullify that they were given the ability to reproduce in Genesis 1:27-28 and really heavily implied so in Genesis 2:24 both of which occurred before Genesis 3:1 where Eve starts to get tempted to eat the Fruit of Knowledge of Good and Evil as already been iterated before in this thread which goes against the Enoch 15:2-5 statement that people were only allowed to reproduce because of mortality

#2: Not being nice does not equate to being evil unless you believe or still believe that getting shots from doctors, being force to eat fruits and vegetables, not being allowed to stay up late etc. is evil. Also with your implication of kings conquering nations as evil, that would be a subjective matter of perspective in a worldly sense as kings will always have their loyalists and sometimes nationalists who sees otherwise. Also I am sure most the inhabitants of Jericho from their perspective probably saw the invading Israelites as evil.

#3: Knibb is one of the translators of the Ethiopian texts of the Book of Enoch into English. If you don’t believe or trust him you could read R.H. Charles translations which made it a little more clear that the angels were building a “wooden (building)” aka “Ark” (Enoch 67:2 in that translation)
sacred-texts.com/bib/boe/boe070.htm

If nephilim are demons then wouldn't there be a lot of their corpses around? Because there are a lot of demons? I don't think we've ever found that many bones, and in anycase that amount would have to be in additon to all the human corpses

Except that neither of those verses have anything to do with punishment for the devil and his angels. Only the Book of Enoch describes the fallen angels and their eventual punishment.

The verse in question if you're wondering

Not my fault if user didn’t specify and only left it at “what fire?”

Attached: IMG_1741.JPG (810x780, 84.29K)

#1: The Bible does not always tell things in strict linear order where a later verse absolutely must take place later in time than an earlier verse. You sound like the people who talk about two different and incompatible creation accounts.

#2: I was saying that greatness as the world sees it and evil are not at all contradictory and are separate dimensiions. The word "hero" in the original Greek had no moral connotations. Being evil can in fact even aid greatness as the world sees it, because a successful conqueror is going to be remembered and trying to bring "subjective matters of perspective" to it only shows that you don't really believe in objective morality, which is Christian morality. Going forth and enslaving the neighboring tribes to make an empire is not at all comparable to taking care of children's bedtimes.

Do you even know what renown is? It is not being held in positive esteem by one's friends and family during one's lifetime and a short while afterwards.

#3: At best you're reading a translation of a translation of the original Enoch. You may need to add a few "of a translation" to it.

Maybe human-angel hybrids have more aetherial body?

#1: Riddle me this, why does Genesis 2 bother having “That is why a man leaves his father and mother and is united to his wife, and they become one flesh.” after God created Eve from Adam but not after Eve and or Adam ate the Fruit of Knowledge of Good and Evil as to correlate with Enoch 15:2-5 idea of human reproduction? Genesis certainly had no problem telling linearly how we got permission to eat meat so why would it have a problem telling linearly why we were allowed to reproduce? Objectively Genesis 2 and onwards to the final chapter of the book is meant to be read and interpreted linearly but incase you want to contest this be my guess if you wish.

#2: Nice composition fallacy, I brought up those examples because it seems you are equating of not being nice to being evil. And I see you also miss “in a worldly sense”, not sure if you did that in order insert an ad hominem onto me but nonetheless I will let that part go since my character doesn’t matter in this discussion/debate/argument. Also since it seems you are still implying that conquering others to build an empire is an objective evil then let me ask you this question, even though they are technically a kingdom do you think the Israelites were evil in enslaving the Canaanites to force labor while controlling their villages and towns as described in Joshua 16:10 and 17:13 (assuming you are ok or don’t see wiping out entire villages, cities, towns, countries etc. as bad)?

#3: Should I then assume you can read ancient Ge’ez, Aramaic, Greek, Latin, and Hebrew?

He quoted the fire he was referring to
It's not my fault if you can't read and can't understand that "what fire" obviously means "the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels" in the immediately preceding quote

#1: That sentence is referring to the present. The Bible occasionally inserts comments about the contemporary present in historical narratives. In more than one case these asides begin with "This is why…"

#2: I already used "worldly sense" in my original reply. I didn't mean to say that every single conqueror in world history was objectively evil, but rather that being evil could predispose someone to go on wars of aggression. Then the ones who are competent and lucky enough to make lasting conquests and found dynasties achieve greatness as the world sees it.

After all, my point was that the Nephilim having renown and being considered great while also being evil is not inherently contradictory.

#3: Reading Enoch you're not only relying on your favorite translator's opinion. You're also relying on whoever translated Enoch to Ge'ez. And if Enoch really is genuine, it would most likely have been originally written in a pre-Hebrew language.

Also the passage you quoted sounds like the translators' opinion is not necessarily correct. One version sounds more like what I said, and the other inserts a word in parentheses because the word wasn't there originally but the translator thought he knew what the text implied.

1) If Adam and Eve had sons before the fall man would reproduce unfallen beings according to the spirit. Since they did it after the fall they reproduce fallen mortal beings. It's simply a matter of perspective.