03-22-2011, 05:23 PM
Andrej Wrote:rungold315, i hope you did not think i implied that your approach was wrong? And, you are aware that most people here don't believe in a western 66 Book canon?
About the canon, i do currently use the 66-book canon, but if i see reason to change that, i easily would. The problem is, if you break open the canon you will have to deal with thousandfold more than just the book of enoch.
About the prophecies: Such similarities can be found in many places, and are not only an expression of the divine, but also of the underlying culture (people expressed themselves in similar ways in that time). A lot of end time prophecies are mirrored in many cultures on earth, some of which you may consider evil and satanic (even islam has a lot of NT prophecies, though with their own twist). i hope that we don't have to add the Quran to our canon though. The Tao te king has a lot of parallels and near-quotes from Song of Solomon, and yet no one ever thought about including it into our canon.
Establishing rules for a canon is very hard. The OT canon we use is more based on traditional / historical aspects than someone categorizing books as canon/non-canon. Most people like to back it up by saying that Jesus quoted from almost all of the 39 Books of the OT canon (but apparently not from the OT apocryphical writings) and by the fact that it was preserved widely and seperately by both jews and christians.
If you have any idea what the proper method of establishing a canon is, let me know. Jude quoting from enoch alone cannot make it canon. If enoch was a true account, it would be irrelevant if it was canon or not, there would be no reason why he could not quote from it.
i am not against enoch in any way, but i am not sure it really harmonizes with the Bible. The same story with the Shepherd of Hermas, which is a very interesting book.
Andre, I agree with you about the can of worms being opened and spilled by attempting to include Enoch back into the canon. Theres also the Revelation of St. Paul, the gospel of thomas, the gospel of barnabus, etc etc and it gets overwhelming. (The book I mentioned mentions these other writings too)
But we know the Quran just steals from the Bible. And as for the Chinese you mentioned, that just tells us that God does reach out to the heathen "without the law" as well as those with the law.
But Jude quoting Enoch isnt the only reason why I believe Enoch is special. Its found in the DSS, so we know its ancient and was found with our other accepted books. Theres also the fact that scripture tells women to cover their heads because of angels (which dupes a lot of people but is accepted worldwide in Corinthians), that Jude AND 2 Peter specifically mentioned the chained angels (keep in mind that Satan is obviously not one of them, as he roams the earth to and fro, so who else could they be and for what major sin?), and that the term "sons of God" in Hebrew literature is always angels, bottom line. So Genesis already tells you.
Theres nothing in Enoch, THAT I KNOW OF YET, that contradicts scripture, but lots of it further confirms and establishes scripture. Im only on chapter 16, but I'll try to keep updates. Keep in mind that Im not trying to start some cult or anything, you certainly dont need Enoch to know the truth as Genesis-Revelation is complete truth regardless, and having the book on hand or not, you need the blood of Yshua the Messiah of YHWH to be saved. I just thought Id share with THIS particular forum cause thats the type of stuff peshitta.org/forum was made for! <!-- s:bigups: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/bigups.gif" alt=":bigups:" title="Big Ups" /><!-- s:bigups: -->