Ethiopian Orthodox?

Quoting a book isn't enough grounds to make it scripture, we don't know if Jude quoted the Enoch as we know it today, neither do we consider Scripture the Assumption of Moses.

This is stupidity. The Essenes became Christians, and as Jews were even holier than the other two or three major sects. St. Jude quoted Enoch, and nothing heretical is in it. You clearly don't study the Scriptures.

Scripture is just the canon which is just the words profitable to be read in the liturgy, many other things are inspired even if not read in the liturgy.

That's both silly and heretical, if you say there are other things that "inspired, but not known", you can pull anything out of your butt and proclaim it inspired. The way of frauds and wolves masquerading as sheep.

Pics related are just some of the lies the book of Enoch has in it. Listen to St. Paul and stop believing in jewish fables. They do not measure up to Christ's teachings.
Remember, even the devil speaks some wisdom to entice you and lead you astray.
Lmao. Even if I was from the south it wouldn't change the fact that the Book of Enoch is a jewish fable.

refuteit.com/the-book-of-enoch-debunked.html

Attached: 2019_03_09_122046.png (1080x1044 1.07 MB, 266.45K)

The Orthodox called them Monophysite, the term Oriental Orthodox is revisionism.

Ancient Jews=/=Modern Jews. Obviously there was a bit of overlap when Jesus appeared and a while after the Resurrection but it annoys me when people pretend that modern Jews have much in common with Biblical Jews. I'm not a "the holocaust didn't happen but it should have" guy but ignoring the fact that modern Jews are responsible for lits of problems in the world is to put blinders on.

Absolutely right my man.
Just like the Hymn to Zeus poem St. Paul quoted is canon and inspired and redpilled.
Only heretics deny these truths.

No

The greatness of the misunderstandings and ignorance here is astounding.

I never said inspired but not known, and it's not silly or heretical but the historical understanding when you read the Fathers. Take a look: newadvent.org/fathers/

Name some, many of the Fathers knew of the famous Christian works, but only a few (none?) would dare to claim what was or what was not scripture.

St. Augustine in particular spoke of the issue definitively, mentioning that both the Assumption of Moses and the Book of Enoch could not be Scripture, not only because the Church would not canonize it, but because the authenticity of such could not be verified or trusted.

Book of Enoch, the Shepard of Hermas, the gnostic pseudo-gospels, and the Assumption of Moses were outright rejected for good reason.

Judaizing heretics that ortholarps will admire because man look how trad and cool they are

mayoclinic.org/healthy-lifestyle/adult-health/in-depth/anger-management/art-20045434

We don't call them that anymore. After theological dialogues between eastern and oriental Orthodox some 30-40 years ago we come to the conclussion that our Christology is practically the same. That's when they took the name oriental Orthodox, it was a step to restore communion. Unfortunatelly we left it to that until now.

Dude, calm down; you could have expressed the same thoughts in a more relaxed way, driving your point further and without having to sound like you are angrily typing with veins about to pop on your neck.
I’m a (awful yet not completely gone) Catholic and we can talk about those who are not in communion with the true Church in a better way; we don’t need to act like leftists or far right extremists, because our extremism is of another kind.

This. You might as well tell us that the Infancy Narrative Gospel of Thomas is Scripture because it's referenced in the story of the Finding of Jesus in the Temple. Just because a book is referenced in divinely-inspired Scripture doesn't make it divinely-inspired Scripture in and of itself. At best it means that you might be able to glean a few truths from it. But at the end of the day, if the Church didn't see fit to include it in the canon, that means that it has some serious problems.

You know what he was saying.
Stop being pedantic.

No, the Orthodox do not call the Oriental Orthodox "Monophysites." No one calls them Monophysites anymore except hardline schismatics like True Orthodox or Old Calendarists. We came to an agreement on our Christology in the 90s.

I think you should actually try reading the Book of Enoch instead of these Chick Tract memes. It is a holy book that has many prophecies of Christ and is referenced in far more than just Jude. Jude also references Enoch twice, not once. Jude 1:6 and Jude 1:14. But there are many more parallels besides these:
bookofenochreferences.wordpress.com/category/the-book-of-enoch-with-biblical-references-chapters-1-to-9/chapter-1/ (Currently incomplete, missing chapters 85-110, but still most of the Book)
I love the Ethiopian Tewahedo Church. All the Eastern Orthodox Churches around here contain several Ethiopian Tewahedo members, including mine, we treat them as brothers and equals. I don't know why you lot can't do the same.

Attached: bd7faa404539951d21b36962f13d9cf72cc8f5b07e0caae020383149dd2e5c00.jpg (720x720, 42.55K)

Now I am 100% certain that moving away from the Eastern "Orthodoxy" was a good idea. The Book of Enoch has just as much legitimacy as the book of Judas.

Just because the devil writes some wisdom in the books that he authors does not mean that the books are Holy.

Attached: 42a.jpg (650x429, 57.9K)

Are you going to strike out everything Solomon said too? There goes all the psalms.

What are you on about? The book of Enoch is not Holy in the slightest. The Essences that wrote it were literal heretics of their time. They rejected the 2nd Temple and are akin to Gnostics. No one should take them seriously. Least of all a Christian.

You realize the book of Enoch isn't actually part of the Eastern Orthodox canon, right?

The Oriental Orthodox absolutely are Monophysites and I've only heard a few people say that this isn't "polite".

The agreements in the 90s have no authority.

And 1 Enoch is condemned as heretical by several saints and if anything it is more proof that the Oriental Orthodox are not Christians.
My parish has several Eritreans but they are not permitted to take communion.

Book autism is how i know you're all protestants or at least ex-protestants

I am aware, yes. My disgust stems from calling the Book of Enoch holy when it is not.

What's "devilish" about it? Have you even read it? Seriously.

I don't say it's holy or canon though. Why is this is an either/or? You people are silly and too dramatic for your own good. Look at it as the mundane document it is.

It was written in post Exile Israel, where they became reacquainted with the belief systems of Mesopotamia. It's sort of a reimagining of Genesis 6, retold in the light of what they found out in Babylon. The last time Jews were in that land was Abraham, who cast off their false beliefs for the true God. Babylonians adopted much of Sumerian myths, and the Jews who encountered them realized where they came from, and their origins. Enoch was written in this light.

Oriental “orthodox” are Monophysite heretics