-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Which Canon of the Bible do you believe in?
- Thread starter 37818
- Start date
37818
Well-Known Member
That being understood, from the time were written and became available to them.
Holy Scriptures were Holy Scripture when written, not when some council decided what was Holy Scripture.
Last edited:
If you teach false doctrine, you NEED Bible references to justify the teaching. To add "religious books and writings" that were NOT perfect or in keeping with the other books of the canon was the smokescreen to add credibility. This is Romanism.
If you DON'T add books, then you need to make your own translation of the 66 books to twist to your own false teaching. This is Jehovah's Witness.
If you want to really confuse readers, take the 66 books and translate/interpret nebulous meaning today and then make them appear to uphold false doctrine. This is Latter Day Saints using KJVonly (+ their own "inspired" books)
If you DON'T add books, then you need to make your own translation of the 66 books to twist to your own false teaching. This is Jehovah's Witness.
If you want to really confuse readers, take the 66 books and translate/interpret nebulous meaning today and then make them appear to uphold false doctrine. This is Latter Day Saints using KJVonly (+ their own "inspired" books)
alexander284
Well-Known Member
Are there still doubts among Bible scholars (or even layman) regarding whether the Book of Jude ought to have been included in the Canon?
37818
Well-Known Member
Jude was Holy Scripture when it was written. And this was known to it's original recipients.
The issue of church councils is promoted by the Roman Catholic church, since councils/traditions of fallible men are equal (or MORE) than the inspired Word of God
alexander284
Well-Known Member
The reason I brought up the Book of Jude is because that reference to 1 Enoch (?) kind of throws me off.
ChristB4Us
Member
I believe that "whole" book of Enoch that was found in the area of Alexandria where poetic licensing and Gnosticism was known to exist is a fraud.
So plagiarizing a few verses from the Book of Jude to make it appear legit can be throwing some believers off.
Also, tattered fragments of the supposed book of Enoch has been found among the Dead Sea scrolls but what little was translated, I have yet to match any to the 3 versions of the whole book of Enoch that is supposedly out there.
But seeing how the Book of Enoch was supposedly written by Enoch, and not Moses, I fail to see why Moses would have not mentioned it as something to be kept as scripture as a warning for future generations as surviving the Biblical global flood.
I am sure it qualifies as a Jewish fable that believers were warned about to avoid.
Titus 1:13 This witness is true. Wherefore rebuke them sharply, that they may be sound in the faith;
14 Not giving heed to Jewish fables, and commandments of men, that turn from the truth.
15 Unto the pure all things are pure: but unto them that are defiled and unbelieving is nothing pure; but even their mind and conscience is defiled.
16 They profess that they know God; but in works they deny him, being abominable, and disobedient, and unto every good work reprobate.
Wrong. The Book was found in Ethiopia, where Christians kept coping it there.
Jude quoted from a Book of Enoch.
Proving the Book existed in Israel at the time of Jude.
There is a shorter version "a", a medium length version "b" and a longer version of the same book "c". Obviously the C version is expanded over time. They are all the same book of Enoch.
Perhaps you are right.
ChristB4Us
Member
That is still considered to be in the region of Alexandria. Plagiarized books can wind up in Ethiopia.
[QUOTE}Jude quoted from a Book of Enoch.[/QUOTE]
It looks that way but it is the other way around. When you compare the writing style of those verses from Jude, you may discern with Him how it does not match up with the writing style of that whole book of Enoch.
The supposed translated few lines of the fragmented tattered parts of that Dead Sea scroll, I have yet to align with any of those 3 versions of the whole Book of Enoch. It certainly did not refer to any verses from Jude.
Unless you want to do that, but I am settled since nobody else bothered to prove it as if validating that whole Book of Enoch.
Would that not add to the conclusion that it is derived from poetic licensing as Alexandria was known for?
Well, there is that.
ChristB4Us
Member
I thank you for providing the link.
Demons, let alone angels, are not marrying nor given in marriage.
Luke 20:34 And Jesus answering said unto them, The children of this world marry, and are given in marriage:
35 But they which shall be accounted worthy to obtain that world, and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry, nor are given in marriage:
36 Neither can they die any more: for they are equal unto the angels; and are the children of God, being the children of the resurrection.
Mark 12:24 And Jesus answering said unto them, Do ye not therefore err, because ye know not the scriptures, neither the power of God?
25 For when they shall rise from the dead, they neither marry, nor are given in marriage; but are as the angels which are in heaven.
God performs the marriage covenant as what He joins together, let no man separate, therefore God would not join an angel let alone a fallen angel with a woman in unholy matrimony for these women to be called wives in His words to them.
Plus God testified exactly why He flooded the world and it was not because of demi-godlike creatures, but one should rely on the KJV to see that truth.
Genesis 6:4 There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown.
( Still men, in spite of giants, men of renown, but still men and no mention of the Nephelium )
5 And God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.
6 And it repented the Lord that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart.
7 And the Lord said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth; both man, and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air; for it repenteth me that I have made them.
8 But Noah found grace in the eyes of the Lord.
Genesis 6:5 is the reason why God flooded the world. It is confirmed again after the flood.
Genesis 8:20 And Noah builded an altar unto the Lord; and took of every clean beast, and of every clean fowl, and offered burnt offerings on the altar.
21 And the Lord smelled a sweet savour; and the Lord said in his heart, I will not again curse the ground any more for man's sake; for the imagination of man's heart is evil from his youth; neither will I again smite any more every thing living, as I have done.
22 While the earth remaineth, seedtime and harvest, and cold and heat, and summer and winter, and day and night shall not cease.
The sons of God were of the godly lineage of Seth that Israel came from as where their family tree originated from.
Luke 3:38 Which was the son of Enos, which was the son of Seth, which was the son of Adam, which was the son of God.
Look who the sons of God are now as it is not by bloodline, nor Judaism but by faith in Jesus Christ.
John 1:12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:
13 Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.
The term son is from the Hebrew word "ben" which is "builder of the family name". That is why you will not find angels, let alone fallen angels as the sons of God as formerly listed in John 1:12-13 when now Christians are the sons of God.
My view is that the quote of Enoch in Jude is not necessarily original with any so-called book of Enoch. Jude says nothing about a Book of Enoch, but only gives us the prophecy. It could have been oral, passed down in Israel for centuries. It could have then been added to the "Book of Enoch" from that oral version. At a minimum the prophecy was extant at the time of Jude.
The Bible, including the book of Jude, is inspired and inerrant Scripture. To suggest that Jude somehow quoted something that was not the literal prophecy of Enoch is to try to negate verbal plenary inspiration of Scripture. Having said that, note that Paul also quoted from non-canonical sources.
The Bible, including the book of Jude, is inspired and inerrant Scripture. To suggest that Jude somehow quoted something that was not the literal prophecy of Enoch is to try to negate verbal plenary inspiration of Scripture. Having said that, note that Paul also quoted from non-canonical sources.
The whole issue came to a head with the cult of Marcion (died c. 160), who put out his own list of the canon, excluding any book or passage favorable to the Jews. With that, an orthodox canon was developed. Books were accepted (James) or rejected (the Didache) by the work of the Holy Spirit in the hearts of believers. When you read Jude, you are spiritually blessed, but if you read the Didache, there is historical interest, but no spiritual blessing.
Matthew Barrett observed: “When it comes to the books of the Bible, it was God, not his people, who invested Scripture with authority” (God’s Word Alone, p. 355). Matthew Barrett noted: “For the canon is comprised of only those books that God has inspired and given to his bride, the church” (Ibid.). Matthew Barrett affirmed: “Rather than creating the canon, as if the church itself imputes authority into the biblical books, the church simply recognizes the Bible for what it is, the Word of God. No more has the church given us the canon than Sir Isaac Newton gave us the power of gravity” (Ibid.).
I'll try to make my answer short.
The book of Enoch was written in the 400 year span between the Old and New Testament, ergo a few hundred years before Christ and his half-brother, Jude.
So, Enoch [not written by THE Enoch but a group of false teachers] came first. Does that mean that Jude "lifted" a part of it in his book?
Nope. Nope. Nope. But how could he NOT have if his book came second?
Here's another passage from Enoch and Matthew that foolish people use to "prove" Enoch is true and scripture.
Matthew 5:5. = Jesus said, "Blessed are the meek for they shall inherit the earth."
1 Enoch 6:7 = "But for the chosen....they shall inherit the earth.".
"They shall inherit the earth." Who said it first? The author(s) of Enoch between the Old and New Testament? Jesus, the Word, in the New Testament?
Neither.
It was the Holy Spirit inspiring King David in the Old Testament.
Psalm 37:11 = "But the meek shall inherit the earth; and shall delight themselves in the abundance of peace.
Both Jesus, creating holy scripture, and the author(s) of Enoch, creating heresy cited the Old Testament. Ergo there IS no truth to Jesus citing the author(s) Enoch.
Same with Jude. Both Jude and the author(s) of Enoch obviously cited from the same oral passage passed down, written passage not included in scripture, or some source we do not have anymore.
There is zero proof that Jude is quoting Enoch as scripture or quoting those author(s) at all.