Thread 18082248

Why didn't the Church canonize the Book of Enoch?

>>18082248 (OP)
Strictly speaking, it isnt required in order to perceive the Truth.

>>18082248 (OP)
What's with all the Ethiopian AI slop on YouTube and Amazon?

Because it's not the word of God.

>>18082248 (OP)
It's complicated. While some of the church fathers spoke out against it, it doesn't ever seem to have been seriously in contention for canonical status. It's not included in any canon list, but it's also not condemned in any papal lists, so it's not like it was hugely polemic like the Apocalypse of Peter. It's more likely that it was already an obscure text by the 1st century and the death of the Qumran community killed the only Jewish group that actively used it

>>18082310
Debatable. But what it does is illuminate aspects of the theology which dont necessesarily need explaining.

>>18082310
Says whomst?

>>18082323
I'd say that it is pretty major with our modern perspective, given that Jesus's concept of the Son of Man far more resembles the Enochian view of a partner of God that was sent to spread God's word to the world than the more traditional view.

>>18082248 (OP)
Because it was written in the 20th century.

Because it isn't canon

Durrr how come this book not in bible

This is why the Internet is a mistake. Imagine a medieval peasant asking about the biblical canon.

These people haven't even read the book and they demand it should be added its so disgusting

>>18082248 (OP)
Simply because it wasn't accepted canon by the Jews who compiled the Greek Septuigent for the Ptolemys. Yes it's in the Dead Sea Cave scrolls but that doesn't tell us anything other than the person who put them there thought the texts important.

Unlike the NT fanfiction Gospels floating around in the first few centuries that could be identified as false, there's no way of knowing if the Book of Enoch was actually written by Enoch, or written by some Jew much later and falsely attributed to him.

>>18082327
>Debatable
Sorry, it is not debatable. Picrel, it doesn't even rise to the level of Apocrypha. You're done.

>>18082796
The reason it is debatable is that at some point there was a literal debate about it, when they decided what books to canonize. The fact that those men decided at that time not to include it doesn't mean anything other than exactly that.

>>18082298
Oh and the book of Chronicles is?

>>18082310
Neither is the JudeoChristian Bible...

>>18083003
?

All Christian demonology and understanding of the devil is built on the book of Enoch, there is even a bit of gnosticism in Christianity, but it is schizophrenic, like people are to blame for the fall, Satan is the prince of this world, but at the same time it is not, but at the same time it is

>>18083011
God only speaks through Creation, not Jewish, Christian, Muslim, Hindu, etc, books.

>>18083003
The Book of Mormon is though.

>>18082248 (OP)
Especially since it's cited in scripture (Jude 1:14–15)

I came inside a black woman (again)

>>18083171
Yeah and as far as know it was one of the more popular books or stories during the events of the New Testament. And as this anon >>18083000 pointed out it seems more relevant than the Book of Chronicles for example.

>>18082248 (OP)
Because it's fucking fanfiction.

The jews who actually preserved their own scriptures didn't include it in the hebrew bible for a reason. It's a 2nd temple era forgery full of weird angel shit that directly contradicts established canon. Christfags and biblethumpers follow the list the jews settled on, and enoch didn't make the cut. It's that simple.

>>18082453
Emperor Constantine I
Now let's wrap this council up. I have work to do back in Nova Roma.

>>18083217
Why didn't you take precautions anon?
And what race are you?

>>18082978
The King James Bible is the complete and perfect word of God. The so-called Book of Enoch is not in the King James Bible. Therefore, it is not the word of God. There is no debate, you are just obstinate in your sin. Ready to admit you are wrong or are you going to crank those flames hotter?

>>18085420
Twang!
*sound of 14 leather balloons inflating and stretching*

>>18082323
It's not that simple, the book of Jude quotes from it, attributing it to Enoch which implies the author thought it was legit. Multiple church fathers reference its teaching that angels descended from heaven and mated with mortal women to birth the giants (e.g. Irenaeus, Justin Martyr, Athenagoras, Clement of Alexandria). Tertullian outright said it's scripture in 'Apparel of Women' 1.3
>But since Enoch in the same Scripture has preached likewise concerning the Lord, nothing at all must be rejected by us which pertains to us; and we read that “every Scripture suitable for edification is divinely inspired.” [2 Timothy 3:16] By the Jews it may now seem to have been rejected for that (very) reason, just like all the other (portions) nearly which tell of Christ. Nor, of course, is this fact wonderful, that they did not receive some Scriptures which spake of Him whom even in person, speaking in their presence, they were not to receive. To these considerations is added the fact that Enoch possesses a testimony in the Apostle Jude. [Jude 14-15]

>>18085741
I am so glad I wasn't cursed with such a low IQ.

>>18082248 (OP)
The bigger question is why did they canonize revelation.

>>18085772
>I don't believe in Jesus
Great! No problem. You will just have to pay for all of your sins, forever, in the lake of fire. Have fun with that.

>>18085776
You get off on telling people this, pretty gross. I'm sure if Christianity were true, the JudeoChristian god would not approve of you saying you knew the eternal fate of anyone.

Unless you are an atheist doing your best impression of a smarmy judgemental Christian prig to make Christians look bad, in which case you have succeeded with your trolling.

>>18085772
>why did they canonize revelation.


Because looking into the future, they saw that a time would come when the body of Christ would have to be resurrected again, that the kingdom would fall to ruin because the lies of the enemy would cause His people to no longer see God.

>>18082248 (OP)
there's always been a split in early Christianity and ancient Judaism as to whether it's inspired writing or not. However, Catholics and Orthodox maintain that it's of historical and theological interest, but to read it devotionally because they're not sure about it. The Protestants act like it's heretical because they don't know basic church history and use the corrupted modern jew masoretic text, which excludes tons of books and passages quoted by Jesus and the apostles.

>>18085971
*but to NOT read it devotionally

>>18082248 (OP)
Despite the fact that they did not recognize this book, nevertheless, the legend of fallen angels + the book of Enoch + the schizophrenia of Essenism + shizo Revelation + the peculiarity of Abrahamism in the form of demonization of everything = the murder of supposed heretics, sorcerers, pagans at the stake (a veiled sacrifice, by the way)

>>18082248 (OP)
For me its the Book of Enoch (Powell)

>>18085963
The books are all cooked. The games are all rigged. And every side plays with loaded dice, and shows their hand in the process of doing so. And undoubtedly they all show their true faces, in action and inaction alike.

>>18082310
this simple fact confuses all heretics

the church doesn’t want everyone to know they use a book of puppets who passed down accounts of ancient aliens, to pass down their fake morals onto sheeps to control them

>>18085913
We're not supposed to gloat about who's going where, but we are supposed to warn people of the danger of their sin. No one deserves heaven and the ONLY way you can get there is through faith in Jesus for His sacrifice.

>>18086638
do you think that the watchers were ayys?

>>18085913
Tick tock.

>>18086830
describe why you think you're not going to hell too

>>18086812
Well tell that to the guy gloating and telling everyone they're destined for hell. >>18086830

Also Adam is in hell? Moses? Abraham? Isaac? Jacob? None of these had faith in Jesus, they were monotheists not tritheists. The sacrifice of Jesus had not happened, therefore no one for at least a few thousand years (assuming young earth creationism) was saved according to your logic because none had faith in something that had yet to occur.

Oops you were born in a place where the "good news" never made it to you in your lifetime, like in the New World before 1492. Guess it's hell for you, since you couldn't possibly have known and had faith in an event that happened in the 1st Century in the Middle East.

>What a waste!
>So many decent people at the gates!

>>18086849
>Also Adam is in hell? Moses? Abraham? Isaac? Jacob?
That is an ancient theological problem. Because if they are in Heaven that would mean that Jews or even the descendants of Abraham can go there without Jesus. So they come up with the Limbo of the Patriarchs and they argued that Jesus saved them from there. The question is why did God need all that hassle when he could just send them straight to Heaven upon their deaths.

>>18086834
Because I believe on Jesus.

>>18085776
>>18086830
>>18086892
2 more weeks and you will get your rapture, that means to be taken btw. You're a little cumslut of jesus aren't you, good girl. You want to be taken, bride of christ.

>>18086892
Wow, you believe. Even the demons believe according to Jesus. Are they saved too?

>>18086896
Enjoy Hell.

>>18086918
Not even in the Bible. Not the original one at least. Before fanatic subhumans like you twisted it into their schizophrenic delusions.

But thank you. I'd rather be in hell than be in "heaven" forced to bend over like a slut, sing, dance and entertain your faggot Yahweh deity for eternity. Because that's what Heaven really is. You won't meet your loved ones, your stinky cat or dog there. You will be a clown for god. That's all there is to it. Stupid fucking christian apes. You truly have to have low IQ to buy into this nonsense.

>>18086927
Those demons just perked up

>>18086927
> I hate God
> I can’t read

>>18086892
Jesus said:
“If you love me, keep my commands.

"Whoever has my commands and keeps them is the one who loves me.”

“Anyone who loves me will obey my teaching."

"Anyone who does not love me will not obey my teaching."

>>18087526
>non-sequitur
Are you Catholic?

>>18082248 (OP)
The Ethiopians did.
>>18082323
It's canon in the Ethiopian Bible

>>18085741
Additionally, the Synoptic Gospels reference Enoch a lot, like the way the demonic spirits speak to Christ.

>>18082248 (OP)
Giants is the more correct book ("more than" does not mean "is")

>>18087334
>>18087375
Dance, clown.

>>18082248 (OP)
because the Church is a religious institution, with particular interests and agendas, like ruling the masses instead of providing divine knowledge

>>18088821
>The Ethiopians did.
Can you post this alleged Ethiopian version? No one seems to be able to verify that there was such a thing but it gets repeated often enough.

>>18088821
>>18091238
And btw,I'm not talking about a modern version. I'm talking a full textual transmission. If you could show it existing before the 20th century that would be impressive, but before the 19th century would be even better.

Ethiopians claim they have the Ark of the covenant and literally no one with half a brain believes that.

>>18090072
>No, like, I *REALLY* hate God.
You're fucked. :)

>>18092287
>:)
Case in point. You're more of a woman than a man. No wonder you want to be a bride or christ so much. Estrogenic twat..

>>18093022
>Christianity is the only religion
LMAO. Retvrn to Deism.

>God intended for his full word to be available to all
>BUT DOOD, THESE TOTALLY NOT FABRICATED (((WRITINGS))) WERE DISCOVERED OVER A THOUSAND YEARS LATER, BECAUSE THEY JUST WERE! AND BY ISRAELIS, NO LESS!
Come on now.

>>18082323
>some of the church fathers spoke out against it

Not to my knowledge.
In fact, several do treat it as scripture.
Justin Martyr for example, while not naming the book outright in his apology to the Roman Senate, does invoke it's content precisely without deviation in his explanation of the origin of demonic spirits.

>The Greek text was known to, and quoted favorably by many Church Fathers: references can be found in Justin Martyr, Minucius Felix, Irenaeus, Origen, Cyprian, Hippolytus, Commodianus, Lactantius and Cassian.[16]:430

>>18084322
>Christfags and biblethumpers follow the list the jews settled on
protestants do
apostolic Christians have the likes of Sirach

>>18093022
I have more testosterone than you could ever hope to have. You should see some of the women I fucked before I forsook fornication.
>twat
Case in point.

>>18095230
You can say forsake in the past tense validly.
For example, "I forsake eating meat 40 days ago now".

Don't listen to dictionaries, they conflate envy and jealousy when they are obviously two different things.
Sometimes I think they are principally headed by ESLs merely pretending to understand English through sheer rules autism alone.
Also, they are apparently under the impression that "fulment" isn't a real word. Which was crazy to me the first time I learned "fulmenting rebellion" officially isn't a phrase anymore.
Newspeak ass shit tbqh, words are delet.

>>18095596
>my definition of a word is that it identifies as that word

>>18095230
Sad. Go pray or something.

>>18095230
someone's gotta do some confessing this sunday