to about the middle of the first century.ĭo you know why scholars say this. You say that scholars say that the book is between 200 B.C. At least that is the pattern for the New Testament.
I do not know of any other scripture that is quoted from an ancient oral record, but the New Testament quotes many times from old written records, Old Testament books. But that oral record would have to have remained intact for thousands of years, hard to believe that Jude the brother of James would quote an oral record thousands of years old.
When the biblical writers are quoting Enoch, I find it difficult to believe that they were quoting an oral record, although I admit it is possible. Oral records are very unreliable and are usually exagerated over time to become legends. The only 2 options as I see it is that Jude is quoting either an oral or written record. Your quote "First, it should be noted that Jude is quoting Enoch himself, not from a book of Enoch". Thanx for your post and your reasons for the Book of Enoch not being authentic. Right or wrong about the judgement, it gives the possibility that 1 Enoch is actually quoting Jude. Since this does seem to allow for at least the possibility that 1 Enoch is actually quoting Jude, it was considered banished from the scriptures. to about the middle of the first century. Jude is by a single author, and is estimated by scholars to have been written from the mid to later half of the 1st century, while 1 Enoch was apparently written by several authors over a time period from about 200 B.C. Second, there is apparently some question as to the exact dating of both Jude and 1 Enoch. Jude 15 To execute judgment upon all, and to convince all that are ungodly among them of all their ungodly deeds which they have ungodly committed, and of all their hard speeches which ungodly sinners have spoken against him.įirst, it should be noted that Jude is quoting Enoch himself, not from a book of Enoch. Jude 14 And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints, (Jude 14-15 appears to be a quote from 1 Enoch, which is also known as the Apocalypse of Enoch-ġ Enoch 1:9 And behold! He cometh with ten thousands of His holy ones to execute judgment upon all, and to destroy all the ungodly and to convict all flesh of all the works of their ungodliness which they have ungodly committed, and of all the hard things which ungodly sinners have spoken against Him. Let me say that the early church father’s who determined what is “scripture” and what is not determined that The Book of Enoch’s discrepancy was: T8, very cool that you are interested and want to know the detail of the facts. trains bank personnel to recognize counterfeit money, they never actually see or handle counterfeit money - just the real thing. That will give you the "taste of the true" to allow you to separate that with is congruent with God’s word with that which isn’t.
I would say that Enoch is worth a read but only after you have steeped yourself in God’s word. They are worth reading and studying, but they are not considered by the Christian community as a whole to be "the infallible word of God". There are many parallels and similarities between canon and the pseudepigraphical books, but these books were generally rejected because of obvious flaws of one kind or another in doctrine or content that are apparent to virtually all Christian readers who have studied them. And they may even have some accurate historical accounts of Jesus or the disciples that did not make it into the canon. Virtually all the books considered over time to be apocryphal (by both Catholics and Protestants) can be expected to contain at least some truth in them. The Aramaic language used would indicate an authorship sometime in the 2nd or 3rd century B.C. I belive that Enoch was excluded from both the Jewish and Christian canons because is pseudepigrapha - ascribed to a writer who did not write it.
0 kommentar(er)
