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

originally posted by: Gnosisisfaith
a reply to: cooperton

Lucifer is a myth based on a misunderstanding, and Isaiah 14:12 has nothing to do with Ha Satan. Damn that was cleared uphhundreds of years ago, where have you been?

no, I don't believe that you are right. Lucifer is described exactly as the king of Tyre was. it is no coincidence. there are many names or titles for Satan just as there are many names or titles for God in the bible.

As for satan being the adversary or the enemy. literally; maybe.

I know a woman in japan (a regionally famous singer and occasional voice actress) whose whose given name is made of kanji that literally mean "township worship" Meiko Haigou. Meiko township worship. Meiko itself means bud like a flower or tree bud. A Japanese word that they understand as stomach literally reads "bamboo basket" when transliterated.

Transliteration can be embarrassingly off the real meaning or intended use. Thats before you get into idioms, figures of speech, slang, extinct usages and euphemisms. then throw in that apparent names may be titles or epithets rather than a given name.

a reply to: stormbringer1701im not bebating history vs erroneous mythological interpretations. The king of tyre and Babylon were humans. You really need to brush up.

a reply to: LABTECH767cool. I love the book of Enoch. And the dead sea scrolls, and nag hammadi, anything deemed heretical or non canonical

originally posted by: Gnosisisfaith
a reply to: stormbringer1701im not bebating history vs erroneous mythological interpretations. The king of tyre and Babylon were humans. You really need to brush up.

it is quite commonly acknowledged that the king of Tyre in the bible was what is know as a biblical type for Satan. I am aware that there was a historical human king of tyre (as well) but in the bible that particular king of tyre is used to illustrate what is going to happen to Satan. This is acknowledged even by secular experts on the bible; not just religious theologians.

this is because the portion dealing with tyre begins with the king of tyre being a man/king as you say and procedes to identify him with satan:

Son of man, raise a lamentation over the king of Tyre, and say to him, Thus says the Lord God: "You were the signet of perfection, full of wisdom and perfect in beauty. You were in Eden, the garden of God; every precious stone was your covering, carnelian, topaz, and jasper, chrysolite, beryl, and onyx, sapphire, carbuncle, and emerald; and wrought in gold were your settings and your engravings. On the day that you were created they were prepared. With an anointed guardian cherub I placed you; you were on the holy mountain of God; in the midst of the stones of fire you walked. You were blameless in your ways from the day you were created, till iniquity was found in you." (Ezekiel 28:12-14 RSV)

at this point: this is satan not the human king of tyre but he is still called the king of Tyre.

and this is what happens to that king of Tyre in the end:

Thou hast defiled thy sanctuaries by the multitude of thine iniquities, by the iniquity of thy traffick; therefore will I bring forth a fire from the midst of thee, it shall devour thee, and I will bring thee to ashes upon the earth in the sight of all them that behold thee.
19 All they that know thee among the people shall be astonished at thee: thou shalt be a terror, and never shalt thou be any more.

He will be burned to ash from within his midst (belly) and be a terror no more.

He will not be hanging out in hell with his demon homies and the condemned mortals for eternity. It'll be over quick. and this is the actual fate of any that get thrown into the same place he is. Hell is not forever. It's consequences are eternal after it is gone though.

a reply to: stormbringer1701commonly knowledgeable by people who don't know what they are talking about. Lucifer comes from Hebrew: Halal ben Schachar. Schachar is from Canaanite mythology and is more or less Venus in the morning. Evening it is shahar, they are known as twins. Isaiah is referencing a myth to explain to the very human king of Babylon the futility of trying to be worshipped as God is. The sun always outshines Venus. There is no story in Judaism about the fall of the adversary, or ha satan. It isn't a part of Jewish tradition at all. What you have to realize is there is Jewish Satan, a servant of Yahweh with a job to do. And the Christian Satan who opposes God. Night and day my friend.

a reply to: stormbringer1701reference the scholars if you don't believe me.

originally posted by: Gnosisisfaith
a reply to: stormbringer1701commonly knowledgeable by people who don't know what they are talking about. Lucifer comes from Hebrew: Halal ben Schachar. Schachar is from Canaanite mythology and is more or less Venus in the morning. Evening it is shahar, they are known as twins. Isaiah is referencing a myth to explain to the very human king of Babylon the futility of trying to be worshipped as God is. The sun always outshines Venus. There is no story in Judaism about the fall of the adversary, or ha satan. It isn't a part of Jewish tradition at all. What you have to realize is there is Jewish Satan, a servant of Yahweh with a job to do. And the Christian Satan who opposes God. Night and day my friend.

The very first Christian and very first christians were jews. Jesus was a jew. yet this is also His and thier interpretation of it.

originally posted by: Gnosisisfaith
a reply to: stormbringer1701commonly knowledgeable by people who don't know what they are talking about. Lucifer comes from Hebrew: Halal ben Schachar. Schachar is from Canaanite mythology and is more or less Venus in the morning. Evening it is shahar, they are known as twins. Isaiah is referencing a myth to explain to the very human king of Babylon the futility of trying to be worshipped as God is. The sun always outshines Venus. There is no story in Judaism about the fall of the adversary, or ha satan. It isn't a part of Jewish tradition at all. What you have to realize is there is Jewish Satan, a servant of Yahweh with a job to do. And the Christian Satan who opposes God. Night and day my friend.

Really? so it is not God telling Isaiah verbatim what to say to the king of then? in your opinion i mean. and in your opinion he chose to use a heathen myth, really?

a reply to: stormbringer1701Its not my opinion. Actual scholars concluded this a long time ago.

originally posted by: Gnosisisfaith
a reply to: stormbringer1701Its not my opinion. Actual scholars concluded this a long time ago.

you mean actual scholars who happen to be full of crap concluded what they pulled out of their alimentary canal exit a long time ago.

a reply to: stormbringer1701You sound pre programmed. You have most likely been taught a lot of lies. Everything I said was true and sufficient. Work it out on your own time, I have nothing to add. How about that Enoch?

originally posted by: Gnosisisfaith
a reply to: stormbringer1701You sound pre programmed. You have most likely been taught a lot of lies. Everything I said was true and sufficient. Work it out on your own time, I have nothing to add. How about that Enoch?

I believe that the one that is judged most credible should at least be considered to be like the book of judith and esdras if not divine then perhaps partly divine or at least instructive. sort of like the extra books in the Catholic bible. i would not consider it apocryphal or pseudo-epistles or what ever because even if it is a fabrication it does take all of the known canonical references to enochian events but elaborates on them.

its sort of like that non canon book that spells out what Christ was writing on the sand that sent the woman's accusers rolling under the bottom rope and running for the locker room in the canonical gospels.

a reply to: stormbringer1701I don't know, I don't have a canon, I read it all. If it's just a myth I had fun reading it. If it's true great too. It's wisdom hidden in mythology, my opinion.

originally posted by: Gnosisisfaith
a reply to: stormbringer1701You sound pre programmed. You have most likely been taught a lot of lies. Everything I said was true and sufficient. Work it out on your own time, I have nothing to add. How about that Enoch?

hardly. if you think my views are mainstream Christian you do not understand Mainstream Christianity very well. Much of what i said would be considered heresy or blasphemy. Hell isn't eternal torment? The rapture is a false doctrine. Speaking in tongues is not the cloven tongue of the pentacost. Satan come before Christ in the end times. He won't be a monster in appearance or even in demeanor but will impersonate Christ.

Most of that would get me "burned at the stake" you know.

for that matter so would the notion that adam was not the first human or that eve had sex with satan in the garden and Cain was his seed. Crispy critter level heresy.

a reply to: stormbringer1701
I love how scholars are full of crap because you don't agree. Ya your not ignorant no. Your to smart to be foiled by the pesky truth. Forget that millions of people know it, you don't believe it ,so it's not true. Impressive logic, what university did you attend?

a reply to: stormbringer1701
I love how scholars are full of crap because you don't agree. Ya your not ignorant no. Your to smart to be foiled by the pesky truth. Forget that millions of people know it, you don't believe it ,so it's not true. Impressive logic, what university did you attend?

a reply to: stormbringer1701
I love how scholars are full of crap because you don't agree. Ya your not ignorant no. Your to smart to be foiled by the pesky truth. Forget that millions of people know it, you don't believe it ,so it's not true. Impressive logic, what university did you attend?

a reply to: stormbringer1701
I love how scholars are full of crap because you don't agree. Ya your not ignorant no. Your to smart to be foiled by the pesky truth. Forget that millions of people know it, you don't believe it ,so it's not true. Impressive logic, what university did you attend?