Why isn't the book of Enoch in the Bible?

originally posted by: Raggedyman

originally posted by: TheChrome


I agree and disagree. I agree the book of Enoch is baseless. However, the Hebrew/Aramaic Scriptures and the Greek Scriptures are in harmony and provide the complete guide for God's followers. If the Jews follow the "Old Testament" and Christendom follows the "New Testament" then both of them are not understanding the full context of the scripture.

I am sorry
I dont believe the law can be in harmony with grace, not in any context

Old testament under the law, death and severe justice metered out by humanity and God
New Testament, Grace poured out onto humanity and christians to be a living walking Gospel of Gods grace through Christs to humanity
The OT points to Jesus. The Jews are following the old laws and that is the problem, they deny Jesus, they do not understand the full context of scripture

The Law foreshadowed Christ:

(Colossians 2:17) "These are a shadow of the things that were to come; the reality, however, is found in Christ.

(Romans 10:4) "Christ is the end of the law so that there may be righteousness for everyone who believes."

These scriptures do not in any way negate the contents of the Old Testament, rather it points to the fulfillment of it in Christ.

the primary reason given for the exclusion of the book of Enoch even though it is quoted by many figures in the bible and alluded to be Jesus himself was that it was allegedly not divinely inspired. However many scholars believe it was excluded due to a schism of philosophy among the early church fathers. One faction believed that the spirit and the flesh were mutually exclusive and could not mix. Another faction felt that spirit could mingle with flesh. the latter lost out and because the book of Enoch contradicted the prevailing belief it was banished from canon.

However they could not excise it where it was cited in other books of the bible especially when it appears Jesus was familiar with it.

Mind you- there are several extant manuscripts purporting to be the authentic book of Enoch and they are phony. only one is thought to be possibly the real book of Enoch. but you have to understand that a lot of the books mentioned in the bible but found nowhere are actually sections of existing books in the canonical books. This happens because ...scrolls.

There may be legitimate reasons to exclude the book of Enoch manuscripts from canon but the argument that prevailed is not one of them. If flesh and spirits cannot mingle why was mana able to feed both man and angel?

a reply to: stormbringer1701

If flesh and spirits cannot mingle why was mana able to feed both man and angel?

If flesh and spirits cannot mingle how did the Holy Spirit commit the Immaculate Conception?

a reply to: Wide-Eyes

AND as Baron Munchhausen said "This is precisely the sort of thing people refuse to believe"
I can see why the Pope wouldn't like to see a being uplifted intact ..it crowds Jesus.
BUT considering how the world was ,I want MORE from any faith than jealousy,I'll be my own church until more data present's itself.

originally posted by: stormbringer1701
the primary reason given for the exclusion of the book of Enoch even though it is quoted by many figures in the bible and alluded to be Jesus himself was that it was allegedly not divinely inspired. However many scholars believe it was excluded due to a schism of philosophy among the early church fathers. One faction believed that the spirit and the flesh were mutually exclusive and could not mix. Another faction felt that spirit could mingle with flesh. the latter lost out and because the book of Enoch contradicted the prevailing belief it was banished from canon.

However they could not excise it where it was cited in other books of the bible especially when it appears Jesus was familiar with it.

Mind you- there are several extant manuscripts purporting to be the authentic book of Enoch and they are phony. only one is thought to be possibly the real book of Enoch. but you have to understand that a lot of the books mentioned in the bible but found nowhere are actually sections of existing books in the canonical books. This happens because ...scrolls.

There may be legitimate reasons to exclude the book of Enoch manuscripts from canon but the argument that prevailed is not one of them. If flesh and spirits cannot mingle why was mana able to feed both man and angel?

This goes back to my original comment. While people may disagree on religious matters, God only has one thought. If this is the case, the current bible cannon is complete according to his will, and not influenced by human action. Attributing certain texts being excluded from the current cannon because of human schisms, would exclude God from having guided it to it's current form. Thus the argument, you either are atheist, or are religious.

a reply to: windword
I personally believe angels can manifest Physically, however to answer your question about the immaculate conception, it would not BE the immaculate conception if it were not immaculate.

All joking aside, if we are going to presuppose that the Holy Spirit impregnated Mary, we have already assumed the supernatural.
If we have already presupposed the supernatural why would anyone look for a natural explanation for the supernatural act?

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: stormbringer1701

If flesh and spirits cannot mingle why was mana able to feed both man and angel?

If flesh and spirits cannot mingle how did the Holy Spirit commit the Immaculate Conception?

true. and there are very definitely other examples in the bible.

originally posted by: TheChrome

originally posted by: stormbringer1701
the primary reason given for the exclusion of the book of Enoch even though it is quoted by many figures in the bible and alluded to be Jesus himself was that it was allegedly not divinely inspired. However many scholars believe it was excluded due to a schism of philosophy among the early church fathers. One faction believed that the spirit and the flesh were mutually exclusive and could not mix. Another faction felt that spirit could mingle with flesh. the latter lost out and because the book of Enoch contradicted the prevailing belief it was banished from canon.

However they could not excise it where it was cited in other books of the bible especially when it appears Jesus was familiar with it.

Mind you- there are several extant manuscripts purporting to be the authentic book of Enoch and they are phony. only one is thought to be possibly the real book of Enoch. but you have to understand that a lot of the books mentioned in the bible but found nowhere are actually sections of existing books in the canonical books. This happens because ...scrolls.

There may be legitimate reasons to exclude the book of Enoch manuscripts from canon but the argument that prevailed is not one of them. If flesh and spirits cannot mingle why was mana able to feed both man and angel?

This goes back to my original comment. While people may disagree on religious matters, God only has one thought. If this is the case, the current bible cannon is complete according to his will, and not influenced by human action. Attributing certain texts being excluded from the current cannon because of human schisms, would exclude God from having guided it to it's current form. Thus the argument, you either are atheist, or are religious.

not so. Remember that (paraphrasing) "in the end times there will be a famine not for bread but for the very Word of God."

a reply to: vethumanbeing

Not being familiar with the Pinocchio apocrypha I'll take your word for it if that is what you want I feel differently and it helps.

originally posted by: Punisher75
a reply to: windword
I personally believe angels can manifest Physically, however to answer your question about the immaculate conception, it would not BE the immaculate conception if it were not immaculate.

All joking aside, if we are going to presuppose that the Holy Spirit impregnated Mary, we have already assumed the supernatural.
If we have already presupposed the supernatural why would anyone look for a natural explanation for the supernatural act?

to put this crudely and profanely: a spirit flesh interaction does not have to be the spirit bonking Mary. it can be and was subtler than that.

to put this crudely and profanely: a spirit flesh interaction does not have to be the spirit bonking Mary. it can be and was subtler than that.

LOL I don't think you realize I am in agreement with you, on the immaculate conception issue.
All I said is that I think spirits (of a certain type) can manifest in the physical.
I do not however think that was the case with Mary.

a reply to: stormbringer1701

SIGH...I love "The Combat NCOs pocket scripture" The unabridged Murphy version...

When Christ speaks of the days of Noe (Greek name for Noah) he is speaking of Enoch's time and of what Enoch said was happening at that time. To wit- Angels were breeding with humans. people take it that he was talking about the rapture but he wasn't. why would women have to veil themselves if it was about the rapture? he said it was because of the angels. what?

originally posted by: Punisher75

to put this crudely and profanely: a spirit flesh interaction does not have to be the spirit bonking Mary. it can be and was subtler than that.

LOL I don't think you realize I am in agreement with you, on the immaculate conception issue.
All I said is that I think spirits (of a certain type) can manifest in the physical.
I do not however think that was the case with Mary.

oops. sorry. i misunderstood.

There are many who believe the OT manuscripts support that this happened with Eve in the garden as well. IOW Cain was not Adam's son.

originally posted by: stormbringer1701
When Christ speaks of the days of Noe (Greek name for Noah) he is speaking of Enoch's time and of what Enoch said was happening at that time. To wit- Angels were breeding with humans. people take it that he was talking about the rapture but he wasn't. why would women have to veil themselves if it was about the rapture? he said it was because of the angels. what?

Yes, apparently Angels were quite frisky back in the day, and early Christians were warned.

For this cause ought the woman to have power on her head because of the angels.
1 Corinthians 11:10

And, then there's this.......

Canon 35

Christians must not forsake the Church of God, and go away and invoke angels and gather assemblies, which things are forbidden. If, therefore, any one shall be found engaged in this covert idolatry, let him be anathema; for he has forsaken our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, and has gone over to idolatry.

Synod of Laodicea (4th Century)

yup. that was one i was going for as well.

a reply to: Punisher75

All joking aside, if we are going to presuppose that the Holy Spirit impregnated Mary, we have already assumed the supernatural.
If we have already presupposed the supernatural why would anyone look for a natural explanation for the supernatural act?

Is spirit mingling with flesh supernatural?

Imho you are all wrong. The book isnt
there cause it didnt fit the agenda of
the leaders at the time.. And never will...

originally posted by: Miccey
Imho you are all wrong. The book isnt
there cause it didnt fit the agenda of
the leaders at the time.. And never will...

except... i think i said that.

However many scholars believe it was excluded due to a schism of philosophy among the early church fathers. One faction believed that the spirit and the flesh were mutually exclusive and could not mix. Another faction felt that spirit could mingle with flesh. the latter lost out and because the book of Enoch contradicted the prevailing belief it was banished from canon.