reply to post by Wongbeedman
The existence of all these people is debatable no matter what you have to say about it. Also is the age and validity of the book of Enoch. Which is
why I wonder why some Christians regard it as highly as the bible itself.
The reason I wrote the years of Enoch was simply that if Enoch wrote the original material does not mean that the material used today is that same
material that Enoch wrote. We do not know how many copies have been used and worn out and re copied. No way of telling. The only thing we know
today is that the complete work which we use today was found in the Ethiopian language. There have been fragments found in the Dead Sea scrolls (cave
number 4) but not the complete work.
If Enoch wrote the original work then he must have written it over 3139 years before Christ. If this is true then it was not Jewish but believed to
be of Aramaic stock. Judaism did not exist at that time.
Now, the reason that the early churches used the material as a reference was simply that the Genesis account of Moses also tells the same story of
giants that Enoch tells us except that Enoch material gives much more information than Moses did. Also the giants are referenced in Jude. If Jude is
truly the brother of Jesus then some Christians assume that Jesus also taught of the same material. We simply do not know. Also the Hebrew bible
tells us that Enoch was the grandson of Adam and that he was translated by god because of his piety.
Besides the giant issue Enoch also tells us that there is an afterlife and describes this after life. That is one main reason that the early
Christian church used the book as edifying God and Christ Jesus. Remember that when I say the early church I am referencing the first Christian Jewish
Jerusalem church which existed for well over forty years before it was decimated by the Roman Gentiles. I am not talking about the Roman Catholic
organization which came into play well after the first century and who slaughtered the Jerusalem Christians in 70 AD.
At this time in the early Christian Jerusalem Church, the book of Enoch was used in conjunction with Torah but was not codified as Jewish literature.
In other words it was adopted work because it agreed with Torah. It would be the same as the Apostles letters were read in the evangelizing of the
Gentile churches. Even though the letters of the Apostles were of Jewish origin did not make them Gentile. It is true that Greek was the language of
that day but it did not change the Jewish aspect of the Apostles works. The Apostles were Jewish and will always be counted to be Jewish. The very
same can be said of Enoch. Enoch material was more than likely of Aramaic language and adopted by the Jewish foundation but in all fairness it was
The reason I wrote of the Jerusalem Christian church as being the original church is simply that in that era of history we did not have all of the
hundreds of so called Christian churches that you have today. Most so called Christian churches of today have nothing in common with the early
Jerusalem church. We did not have all of this confusion of hundreds of word change bibles and beliefs within the Christian structure. At that time
we had a Torah and outside books which agreed with Torah along with the tradition of Christ Jesus. Nothing was canonized except Torah. Edification
of the church came with tradition and the book of Enoch was part of that edification.
You are correct in saying that religion is nothing but belief. That’s all it ever has been from day one. It is nothing but tradition recorded.
All tradition is by mouth till it becomes written or recorded. That is why we call it theory or theological. All religions are theological and were
tradition at one time. You are also correct when you doubt the dates or validity of even the bible. Almost all people find it hard to swallow every
thing written in the bible. Even scholars argue among themselves as to different writings in both the Hebrew and Greek bibles. I wish I had a true
answer to your doubt but I probably don't know any more that you know to be truthful.