Ihedinobi3:

Oh, I'm so excited for you. You finally actually looked at the posts that you were huffing and puffing about. Of course, I had "Edited" at the bottom of the second post all along. I deleted two or three sentences from the fifteenth paragraph and added one. That was why I wrote "Edited" at the bottom. And I did it a few days ago too. So, all this time you've been losing your mind over nothing.

As for whether or not I posted volumes after initially having nothing there, that would have been hilarious, if I felt like laughing. I wrote those two posts as one post on my Word app, then I copied and pasted it into one post that was too long, so it didn't get published on Nairaland. I broke the post in two and posted them one after the other with nothing else ever posted in the same text boxes before.

In other words, the only modification made there was the one I told you about in the second post. But you are a liar by nature. So, of course, all you wanted to see was that I was just as deceitful as you.

If I needed proof of your own deceitfulness, just look at all my responses to you. I would make a response quoting you, only to discover that you had already edited your post without warning. So, many of the posts I have quoted in my comments end up different from your old posts. This happened too on the other thread where you and other arrogant false teachers like yourself were trading pictures of your false visions of the Lord. How many times did you bother to warn me that you had changed your post? And you felt like I was like you too. I am not, OkCornel. Deal with it.

Dude you are liar, you just mentioned you never modified your post to Jamesid29 some moments ago;

Ihedinobi3:

"I modified my posts to JamesId29." This one's a travesty.

You modified these two posts to Jamesid29...
https://www.nairaland.com/5450889/why-book-enoch-removed-bible/3#83179902
https://www.nairaland.com/5450889/why-book-enoch-removed-bible/3#83179929

The end of the first post referred to the second one for a continuation, which you ended with the word "EDITED"

Those posts virtually had nothing in them initially, before you posted that large volume of information there.
It beats me how someone can tell brazen lies here.

OkCornel:



Gobuchinny, see more jokes from this clown

Job 38 v 7 happened after the flood, oh my goodness...wetin be this?

My man forget that boy. I wont even respond to him again. . The guy na confirm clown.

So much proofs yet no wisdom. So sons of God that God spoke about in Job 38 were who then? Sons of Seth also? A narrative God was giving to Job about happenings before the formation of man or any living thing on earth. GOD was discussing with Job the creation of the earth. How the foundations were laid and how the sons of God rejoiced at such magnificent creation but here we have muttey clown darkening counsel

OkCornel:


Dude you are liar, you just mentioned you never modified your post to Jamesid29 some moments ago;




You modified these two posts to Jamesid29...
https://www.nairaland.com/5450889/why-book-enoch-removed-bible/3#83179902
https://www.nairaland.com/5450889/why-book-enoch-removed-bible/3#83179929

The end of the first post referred to the second one for a continuation, which you ended with the word "EDITED"

No, OkCornel, I'm not a liar like you. I never claimed not to modify my posts to JamesId29. I said that your accusation in that regard is a travesty. You ignored the "Edited" at the bottom of the second post, and you claimed that I posted nothing earlier and then replaced it with large volumes of text. That is why I called your accusation a travesty.

As I said, I only edited the second post, and I put "Edited" there when I did. And I certainly never did what you claimed. I posted both parts of the post immediately I copied them to new posts on the thread. I never had any earlier response that I changed. That is all your own "vision."

I still have the Word document I copied from to post here.

Ihedinobi3:

No, OkCornel, I'm not a liar like you. I never claimed not to modify my posts to JamesId29. I said that your accusation in that regard is a travesty. You ignored the "Edited" at the bottom of the second post, and you claimed that I posted nothing earlier and then replaced it with large volumes of text. That is why I called your accusation a travesty.

As I said, I only edited the second post, and I put "Edited" there when I did. And I certainly never did what you claimed. I posted both parts of the post immediately I copied them to new posts on the thread. I never had any earlier response that I changed. That is all your own "vision."

I still have the Word document I copied from to post here.

Please tell me, where you blindfolded when you typed this earlier?

Ihedinobi3:

"I modified my posts to JamesId29." This one's a travesty.

Haba, reconcile these two things you just said now

Ihedinobi3:

"I modified my posts to JamesId29." This one's a travesty.

https://www.nairaland.com/5450889/why-book-enoch-removed-bible/8#83327413

Ihedinobi3:

I never claimed not to modify my posts to JamesId29.

https://www.nairaland.com/5450889/why-book-enoch-removed-bible/9#83328261

Guys, common now...if this is not a contradiction, what else is this?!

Anyhow, OkCornel, I've wasted enough of my night and morning talking to you. It's like shouting at the wind, for all the good it does to you.

You are free to believe whatever you want, and to accuse me of any fantasy that shows up in your head. It's not my problem. It won't make you less of a liar, nor will it free you from the Wrath of the Lord Jesus for the damage that you are doing to His sheep. For all your noise and bluster, it is not me that you really have to worry about. It's Him. Of course, I can barely stand talking to you because of the wickedness of your heart. You really annoy me. The absolute disregard you have for the Lord's Truth, and your brazen effort to destroy His sheep really upset me. But I'm nothing. What can I do to you? I can mock you, I can spite you, I can ignore you. But what good would any of that really do to you? If I ignore you, at least I will not give you occasion to blaspheme. Maybe. What stops you from blaspheming anyway using my name or my comments elsewhere as an excuse? You wouldn't be the first to do it. Another is doing the exact same here on this thread. So, ignoring you would not necessarily stop you from blaspheming and misleading the Lord's flock.

Nonetheless, to avoid falling any deeper into sin because of my distaste for your lies, I will do so and quit talking to you at this point. It is not my place to be angry with you or to even discipline you for the things you do. That is the Lord's Place.

solite3:
are visions not real anymore? .

solite3, but vision is different from reality, is it not. Seeing me in a vision approaching you, doesn't in reality mean I did approach you, solite3. You feel me now, hmm?

solite3:
Where did I suggest that?.

I owe you an apology, I had already made this comment before seeing and liking your post where you distanced yourself from those that believe in that nonsense

solite3:
I never said angels only applied to celestial beings

I was merely building on to what you said solite3 about who angels are

solite3:
This your trying to twist scripture is comical sir!
Read again.

Smh, so you are also like those not used to strong meat, erhn

solite3, have you considered and thought of far Job 38:7 is from Job 1:6 and Job 2:6. Fyi, it is 36-37 more verses away from Job 1:6 and Job 2:1, lol, yeah. Please what creation did you think the verse was talking about there?

solite3:
Job 38:4-7 Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? declare, if thou hast understanding.

Who hath laid the measures thereof, if thou knowest? or who hath stretched the line upon it?

Whereupon are the foundations thereof fastened? or who laid the corner stone thereof;
When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for Joy

Back up and down a verse more, then read contextually, you will see the give away sign that the narrative is talking about after the flood and not the Genesis creation, lol.

solite3:
how is it wrong?

It is wrong to think otherwise that the sons of God weren't ordinary fellow human beings, period.

solite3:
Never was Moses called a son of God neither Aaron. Moses had a calling to lead the Israelites and the only man in earth God speak with face to face (figure of speech)
Aaron was a priest who needed to present himself for cleasing this has tho do with the israelities only and specifically the levitical priesthood. It has no bearing with the Sons of God in Job.

Would you blame Moses, Aaron and the rest of the Israelites for not realising they can become sons of God. Jesus had to reorientate them by telling them to start the Lord's prayer with the words "Our Father who hath in Heaven"

Job was known and called a son of God, wasn't he solite3?, lol.

solite3:
the evidences are there, remaining in ignorance is a choice.

This seem to be, in relation to who the sons of God are, the story of your life.

Ihedinobi3:
Anyhow, OkCornel, I've wasted enough of my night and morning talking to you. It's like shouting at the wind, for all the good it does to you.

You are free to believe whatever you want, and to accuse me of any fantasy that shows up in your head. It's not my problem. It won't make you less of a liar, nor will it free you from the Wrath of the Lord Jesus for the damage that you are doing to His sheep. For all your noise and bluster, it is not me that you really have to worry about. It's Him. Of course, I can barely stand talking to you because of the wickedness of your heart. You really annoy me. The absolute disregard you have for the Lord's Truth, and your brazen effort to destroy His sheep really upset me. But I'm nothing. What can I do to you? I can mock you, I can spite you, I can ignore you. But what good would any of that really do to you? If I ignore you, at least I will not give you occasion to blaspheme. Maybe. What stops you from blaspheming anyway using my name or my comments elsewhere as an excuse? You wouldn't be the first to do it. Another is doing the exact same here on this thread. So, even if ignoring you would not stop you from blaspheming and misleading the Lord's flock.

Nonetheless, to avoid falling any deeper into sin because of my distaste for your lies, I will quit talking to you at this point. It is not my place to be angry with you or to even discipline you for the things you do. That is the Lord's Place.

1) After shooting yourself in the foot telling everyone here you didn't modify your posts to Jamesid29
2) After exalting your so called Professor Lunginbill's speculative view on the book of Enoch over and above numerous other views and evidences pointing to the fact the book of Enoch was written well before the book of Jude
3) After speaking from both sides of your mouth and dodging questions regarding;
(a) What the book of Enoch was doing alongside other canonized scriptures in the ancient dead sea scrolls
(b) Why the ancient Ethiopian Bible and the first version of the KJV bible has more than 66 books...


You are accusing me of what exactly? Dude...your very words here clearly shows you are ignorant, and you're a liar.

gobuchinny:
My man forget that boy. I wont even respond to him again. . The guy na confirm clown.

So much proofs yet no wisdom. So sons of God that God spoke about in Job 38 were who then? Sons of Seth also? A narrative God was giving to Job about happenings before the formation of man or any living thing on earth. GOD was discussing with Job the creation of the earth. How the foundations were laid and how the sons of God rejoiced at such magnificent creation but here we have muttey clown darkening counsel

Your father is the boy who should have given you the necessary home training you obviously lack.

MuttleyLaff:
Your father is the boy who should have given you the necessary home training you obviously lack.

Dont take it personal. You r a boy in spiritual matters. Like my son or daughter . How I explain God to them? Yes that how you r. Not in age bro so no need to be disturbing my father .

You might be 80 yrs for all I care but still a boy. Deal with it. Comment closed. Your foolishness is beginning to weary me.

gobuchinny:
Dont take it personal. You r a boy in spiritual matters. Like my son or daughter . How I explain God to them? Yes that how you r. Not in age bro so no need to be disturbing my father .

You might be 80 yrs for all I care but still a boy. Deal with it. Comment closed. Your foolishness is beginning to weary me.

Whether you are talking spiritually or physically, it still is your father, who is the boy I blame who didn't see to it that you got the necessary home training and decorum you so badly lack. Now scram and dont ever in your life again cross path with me. Mtcheww

Ihedinobi3:
Anyhow, OkCornel, I've wasted enough of my night and morning talking to you. It's like shouting at the wind, for all the good it does to you.

You are free to believe whatever you want, and to accuse me of any fantasy that shows up in your head. It's not my problem. It won't make you less of a liar, nor will it free you from the Wrath of the Lord Jesus for the damage that you are doing to His sheep. For all your noise and bluster, it is not me that you really have to worry about. It's Him. Of course, I can barely stand talking to you because of the wickedness of your heart. You really annoy me. The absolute disregard you have for the Lord's Truth, and your brazen effort to destroy His sheep really upset me. But I'm nothing. What can I do to you? I can mock you, I can spite you, I can ignore you. But what good would any of that really do to you? If I ignore you, at least I will not give you occasion to blaspheme. Maybe. What stops you from blaspheming anyway using my name or my comments elsewhere as an excuse? You wouldn't be the first to do it. Another is doing the exact same here on this thread. So, ignoring you would not necessarily stop you from blaspheming and misleading the Lord's flock.

Nonetheless, to avoid falling any deeper into sin because of my distaste for your lies, I will do so and quit talking to you at this point. It is not my place to be angry with you or to even discipline you for the things you do. That is the Lord's Place.

you are wasting your time on an apostate

solite3:
you are wasting your time on an apostate

Says the 21st century Pharisee who can’t still explain why the first version of KJV has over 66 books.

The Orthodox, Catholic and Coptic churches must be apostate churches going by your reasoning here...


How a fully grown man can insinuate the book of Jude was written before Enoch is really baffling in this 21st century. This information age

OkCornel:
I was told the bible has internal consistency with no contradictions; oh well...

Who told David to take a census of Israel? God or Satan;
2 Samuel 24 v 1
Again the anger of the Lord was aroused against Israel, and He moved David against them to say, “Go, number Israel and Judah.”

1 Chronicles 21 v 1
Now Satan stood up against Israel, and moved David to number Israel.


Or which of this advice should we adhere to?
Proverbs 24 v 5-6;

4 Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest thou also be like unto him.

5 Answer a fool according to his folly, lest he be wise in his own conceit.

The people claiming 66 books of the bible is the complete word of God with no contradictions & errors are still turning a blind eye to this post.


Very very interesting. I’m still awaiting either needless emotional outbursts in their response OR wild guesses to fill in the obvious gaps up there.

Why is the book of enoch not added to the bible?

The book of Enoch is one of the Pseudepigrapha books and was apparently written during the second or first century before Jesus Christ. It should be noted that this book is usually regarded to be the Ethiopic Apocalypse of Enoch.[1] There is also a Slavonic Apocalypse which is called the second book of Enoch that was written late in the first century A.D. There is a third book or Hebrew Apocalypse of Enoch which is believed to have been written in the fifth to sixth century A.D.[2] However, the book that is referred as the book of Enoch is the first book which contains one hundred and eight chapters which comprise five sections that are often also called books.[3]

Overview of First Enoch (2nd to 1st B.C.)
The first book of Enoch has five sections. James H. Charlesworth outlines the book as follows:[4]

1. Book of the Watchers (1-36)
2. Book of the Similitudes (37-71)
3. Book of the Astronomical Writings (72-82)
4. Book of the Dream Visions (83-90)
5. Book of the Epistle of Enoch (91-107)

Chapters 1-5 provide a short introduction of Enoch and speak to the major themes of rewards, punishment, the end of the world and final judgment. Book 1 includes chapters 6-36 and is primarily about angels, the Tree of Life, Jerusalem, and the universe. Book 2 includes chapters 37-71 and deals with the One, the Son of God, or the Messiah, resurrection, the flood, Noah, future judgment, and paradise. Book 3 includes chapters 72-82 which deal with the stars, moon, astronomy, the universe, and Enoch’s mission. Book IV includes chapters 83-90 which concern predictions about the flood, a historical sketch, the future of Israel, and the messianic kingdom. Book V includes chapters 91-105 that deal with various challenges for the wicked and righteous. The concluding chapters of 106-108 discuss the sin after the flood until the coming of the Messiah.

Comparison of books of Jude and Enoch
While the book is fascinating to read, it is important to note that the first book of Enoch is not Scripture. That is, the book is not inspired by God. The book was quoted in the Apocryphal book of Baruch, and in several early church manuscripts: Barnabas 16:5, Idolatry 15:6 (Tertullian), and Eccl. Proph 3 (Clement of Alexandria). Some have speculated that Jude 14-15 is a quote from the book of Enoch and concluded that Jude regarded Enoch as Scripture. The following two quotes compare Jude 14-15 to the suspected passage in the book of Enoch.

Jude 14-15
. . . Behold, the Lord came with many thousands of His holy ones, to execute judgment upon all, and to convict all the ungodly of all their ungodly deeds which they have done in an ungodly way, and of all the harsh things which ungodly sinners have spoken against Him. (NASB) Jude 14-15

Enoch 1:9
. . . Behold, he will arrive with ten million of the holy ones in order to execute judgment upon all. He will destroy the wicked ones and censure all flesh on account of everything that they have done, that which the sinners and the wicked ones committed against him. – Enoch 1:9[5]

Upon examination of these two texts, the reader will note that Jude refers to “thousands” of angels, but Enoch refers to “millions.” This could appear to be significant, but the Greek word in Jude that is translated as “thousands” is myrias. It literally means “ten thousand” when used in the singular. When the Greek word is plural, it means “innumerable.” Balz and Schneider state,

myrias “appears 8 times in the NT: in the literal sense, Acts 19:19 . . .; in the sense of myriads/thousands/tens if thousands (without further specification of the exact number).”[6]

Note that the Greek word, myrias, is plural in Jude. In R. H. Charles’ Greek text of 1 Enoch myrias appears.[7] It should be noted that R. H. Charles has written many books about the book of Enoch. He has supplied a Greek text of Enoch. The Greek text supplied by him has myrias in the plural. This means the Greek texts of Jude 14-15 and Enoch 1:9 both contain myrias and the apparent diference is not real since the Greek word is identical.

Careful examination of the two passages reveals some significant differences, however. First, Jude says that God will “convict” all of the ungodly, but Enoch says that they will be “destroyed.” In the Greek language the words for convict and destroy are different. Therefore, this is a significant difference. There are other significant differences such as Jude says, “harsh things” but Enoch does not. Jude says, “spoken against” but Enoch says, “committed against him.” A comparison of the two passages reveal that the Greek text of Jude has 29 words but the text supplied by R. H. Charles has 36 words.

Therefore, it is inaccurate to conclude that Jude just copied Enoch. It is important to notice that Jude does not quote the first book of Enoch but simply reports that Enoch “prophesied, saying.” That is, Jude is not citing the book of Enoch but the prophet Enoch.

It was also about these men that Enoch, in the seventh generation from Adam, prophesied, saying . . . Jude 14 (NASB)

Book of Jude Is Scripture
Since the book of Jude was written by Jude under the influence of God the Holy Spirit (2 Peter 1:21), we conclude that the book of Jude is truth. It does not matter if Jude knew about the non-canonical (non-biblical) source. What is important is that God the Holy Spirit guided Jude to write truth because God is truthful (2 Peter 1:20-21; 2 Timothy 3:16-17; Hebrews 6:18). Therefore the first book of Enoch is wrong with regard to some facts and Jude can be trusted. Because Jude quoted the prophet Enoch we can know what happened historically.

Book of Enoch Is Not Scripture
The book of Enoch was never referred to by Jesus or any of the New Testament writers as Scripture, and the book was not included in the New Testament by the apostles. It is commonly misunderstood that the content of the Bible evolved over time. But the New Testament clearly tells us that the apostles were identifying Scripture as it was being written (2 Peter 3:14-16; cf. 1 Timothy 5:18 and Luke 10:7 ). The New Testament books were being distributed by the apostles to the various churches to be read (Galatians 6:11; Colossians 4:16; 1 Thessalonians 5:27; 2 Thessalonians 2:2; 3:14). By the time the apostles died, the New Testament had been written and its books were known. The Muratorian Fragment and several of the early fathers have left us a list of books that were identified as belonging to the New Testament. The book of Enoch was never included. Some books were challenged later but never with success.

Conclusion:
You asked the question, “Why isn’t this wonderful book included in the Bible?” The answer is that Jesus and the apostles never called it Scripture. It is important to note that a few early church fathers highly valued the book of Enoch, but they never referred to it as Scripture. Therefore, we cannot view it as authorative since it is not the Word of God.

References:
1. James H Charlesworth. The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha. Doubleday & Company. 1983. vol. 1, pp. 5-89.

2. Ibid. p. 93, 223.

3. Ibid. p. 7.

4. Ibid.

5. Ibid., p. 13.

6. Balz and Schneider. Exegetical Dictionary of the New Testament. Eerdmans Publishing. 1981. p. 446.

7. Text can be found at barnascha.narod.ru/books/1hanokhg.htm. However, note that the text has many typographical errors, maybe due to word processing.

solite3:
you are wasting your time on an apostate

I agree up to a point. I often get into these conversations in order to leave a witness, a shining beacon for any young believer who is still looking to grow in the Truth. It should tell them where there is danger and what sort of danger it is, and hopefully show them the way to the Truth. I already left signals all over this thread for them.

But, of course, when I allow myself to be drawn in up to the point of getting emotionally involved, it starts to defeat the purpose. That is why I often end these discussions and exit them, as I did here. It is never for the sake of these rebels, except in so far as they may be saved by being shown their error, but that is almost never likely.

OkCornel:
I was told the bible has internal consistency with no contradictions; oh well...

Who told David to take a census of Israel? God or Satan;
2 Samuel 24 v 1
Again the anger of the Lord was aroused against Israel, and He moved David against them to say, “Go, number Israel and Judah.”

1 Chronicles 21 v 1
Now Satan stood up against Israel and moved David to number Israel.


Or which of this advice should we adhere to?
Proverbs 24 v 5-6;

4 Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest thou also be like unto him.

5 Answer a fool according to his folly, lest he be wise in his own conceit.

The 66 books crew are still playing the ostrich to the above contradictions in the “perfect 66 books of the bible”

CAN SOMEONE KINDLY EXPLAIN WHAT THE BOOK OF ENOCH WAS DOING ALONGSIDE OTHER CANONIZED SCRIPTURES IN THE DEAD SEA SCROLLS?

Ihedinobi3:

I agree up to a point. I often get into these conversations in order to leave a witness, a shining beacon for any young believer who is still looking to grow in the Truth. It should tell them where there is danger and what sort of danger it is, and hopefully show them the way to the Truth. I already left signals all over this thread for them.

But, of course, when I allow myself to be drawn in up to the point of getting emotionally involved, it starts to defeat the purpose. That is why I often end these discussions and exit them, as I did here. It is never for the sake of these rebels, except in so far as they may be saved by being shown their error, but that is almost never likely.

I get you, you have tried to clarify yourself but you are been intentionally misquoted and your evidence ignored, like you side there is a limit to which one can push. Just ignore unnecessary repetition but leave fact for the validity of your points. Stay blessed

[b]the BoE was almost certainly not written by Enoch himself. Nearly every scholar agrees that it was written MUCH later than when Enoch lived (pre-flood). Most estimates are that it was written at a time when many other apocryphal books were also written, this time being what is called the intertestamental period; the period between the book of Malachi and the events of the New Testament (app. 400 years). These being the case, the BoE is often called a pseudepigrapha. The term pseudepigrapha basically means that it is a work attributed to an author who is not really the author. (This was usually done to lend credibility to the written work.) In addition, these writings were considered Jewish works, written around the time period just mentioned. Why do these things apply to the BoE? Let's look at that next.

The primary reason pointing to the impossibility of Enoch writing the book lies within the book itself. In several places, the BoE seems to put Enoch as being alive when Noah was born. In (Enoch 106:8 - 107:3), Enoch has a conversation with his son Methuselah regarding the birth of Noah. For example, in (Enoch 107:2-3) it says:

"And now, my son, go and make known to thy son Lamech that this (3) son, which has been born, is in truth his son, and that (this) is no lie.' And when Methuselah had heard the words of his father Enoch-for he had shown to him everything in secret-he returned and showed (them) to him and called the name of that son Noah; for he will comfort the earth after all the destruction."
**(106:18) says that Enoch told Methuselah to name the child Noah.

***Note: Some say that this conversation between Methuselah and Enoch is after Enoch was no longer on the Earth, however, if this is the case, then that is obviously another unbiblical issue (see: Q: #135.).

Based upon dating in the Bible, Enoch could not have been on Earth when Noah was born (Noah would have been his great-grandson). Enoch had his son Methuselah when he was 65 years (Gen 5:21). Enoch lived to be 365 years old when God took him to Heaven (Gen 5:21-22)(Heb 11:5). Methuselah was 187 years old when he had his son Lamech (Gen 5:25). Lamech was 182 years old when he had his son Noah (Gen 5:28-29). Putting these together, Enoch was 65 when Methuselah was born, 252 when Lamech was born, and would have been 434 when Noah was born. Enoch was on Earth for 365 years. He had been gone for 69 years when Noah was born!

The BoE also contradicts our Bible in many places. Let me share a few examples.

(Enoch 2:3) speaks of "rain," when it had not "rained" before the flood (when Enoch lived), and no one even knew what "rain" was (see: Q: #44.).


(Enoch ch. 6-7) are a parallel to (Gen 6:1-4) in our Bible. However, it says many things that are not in our Bible. It says that "200" angels came to Earth to marry and impregnate human women, which resulted in giant offspring. It gives the names of many of these angels. These angels also "taught them charms and enchantments, and the cutting of roots, and made them acquainted with plants" (7:1-2). The Bible never says that "angels" mated with human women in (Gen 6:1-4), but rather than that it was the "sons of God." There are those who believe that the "sons of God" were angels, but I do not. I believe that the "sons of God" are referring to the Godly line of Seth intermarrying with the ungodly line of Cain. I explain this here.

(Enoch 40:7) speaks of "Satans" (plural), and how they were forbidden "to come before the Lord of Spirits to accuse them who dwell on the earth." This contradicts the Book of Job (Job 1:6-12)(Job 2:1-7).

(Enoch 40:9) says an angel named Phanuel "is set over the repentance unto hope of those who inherit eternal life." In other words, Phanuel is taking the place of Jesus Christ.

(Enoch 41:1-2) speaks of "actual" mansions in Heaven for the elect (and that sinners were driven from them). While this may be debatable, I do not believe there are "actual" mansions in Heaven (see: Q: #289.).

(Enoch 67:1-3) says that God appointed angels to build Noah's Ark. Our Bible says that God told Noah to build the Ark (Gen 6:14-16).

(Enoch 69:6) says that an angel named "Gadreel... led astray Eve." Our Bible says it was Satan (Gen 3)(2 Cor 11:3)(1 Tim 2:14).
(This verse also says that Gadreel showed mankind: "the blows of death" and "the weapons of death... the shield and the coat of mail, and the sword." In a contradiction, (Enoch 8:1) it says Azazel did this.)

The BoE has also has some BIZARRE teachings. Here are just a few:

(Enoch 7:3) is perhaps the MOST bizarre. It speaks of "great giants, whose height was three thousand ells," roaming the Earth. Webster's Dictionary says an "ell" is "a former English unit of length (as for cloth) equal to 45 inches." Doing some math, we come up with giants that were 11,250 feet tall!! Some believe that this was a copyist error, and instead the giants were "300 cubits" tall. Even if this were true, a cubit was approximately 18 inches, therefore we have 450' tall giants! (Enoch 7:4-5) goes on to say that eventually, they began to eat men and each other.

(Enoch 32:2-6) seems to indicate that the Garden of Eden survived the flood.

(Enoch 33:3) indicates that Enoch counted every star.

(Enoch 69:8-9) says an angel named Penemue taught men wisdom, and how to write with ink and paper.

(Enoch 106:1-3, 11;12) says that the moment Noah was born, he "opened his mouth, and conversed with the Lord."[/b]

THE BOOK OF ENOCH

The Book of Enoch (also 1 Enoch;[1] Ge'ez: መጽሐፈ ሄኖክ maṣḥafa hēnok) is an ancient Hebrew apocalyptic religious text, ascribed by tradition to Enoch, the great-grandfather of Noah.[2][3] Enoch contains unique material on the origins of demons and giants, why some angels fell from heaven, an explanation of why the Great Flood was morally necessary, and prophetic exposition of the thousand-year reign of the Messiah.

The older sections (mainly in the Book of the Watchers) of the text are estimated to date from about 300–200 BCE, and the latest part (Book of Parables) probably to the 100 BCE.[4]

Various Aramaic fragments found in the Dead Sea Scrolls, as well as Koine Greek and Latin fragments were proof that The Book of Enoch was known by early Jews and Christians. This book was also quoted by some 1st and 2nd century authors as in the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs. Authors of the New Testament were also familiar with some content of the story.[5] A short section of 1 Enoch (1:9) is cited in the New Testament, Epistle of Jude, Jude 1:14–15, and is attributed there to "Enoch the Seventh from Adam" (1 En 60:8 ), although this section of 1 Enoch is a midrash on Deuteronomy 33:2. Several copies of the earlier sections of 1 Enoch were preserved among the Dead Sea Scrolls.[3]

It is not part of the biblical canon used by Jews, apart from Beta Israel (Ethiopian Jews). Most Christian denominations and traditions may accept the Books of Enoch as having some historical or theological interest and while the Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church and Eritrean Orthodox Tewahedo Church consider the Books of Enoch as canonical, other Christian groups regard them as non-canonical or non-inspired.



SOURCES:

1) There are two other books named "Enoch": 2 Enoch, surviving only in Old Slavonic (Eng. trans. by R. H. Charles 1896) and 3 Enoch (surviving in Hebrew, c. 5th to 6th century CE).
2) Barker, Margaret. (2005) [1987]. "Chapter 1: The Book of Enoch," in The Older Testament: The Survival of Themes from the Ancient Royal Cult in Sectarian Judaism and Early Christianity. London: SPCK; Sheffield Phoenix Press. ISBN 978-1905048199
3) Barker, Margaret. (2005) [1998]. The Lost Prophet: The Book of Enoch and Its Influence on Christianity. London: SPCK; Sheffield Phoenix Press. ISBN 978-1905048182
4) Fahlbusch, E.; Bromiley, G.W. The Encyclopedia of Christianity: P–Sh page 411, ISBN 0-8028-2416-1 (2004)
5) Cheyne and Black, Encyclopaedia Biblica (1899), "Apocalyptic Literature" (column 220). "The Book of Enoch as translated into Ethiopic belongs to the last two centuries BCE. All of the writers of the NT were familiar with it and were more or less influenced by it in thought

solite3:
Why is the book of enoch not added to the bible?


Conclusion:
You asked the question, “Why isn’t this wonderful book included in the Bible?” The answer is that Jesus and the apostles never called it Scripture. It is important to note that a few early church fathers highly valued the book of Enoch, but they never referred to it as Scripture. Therefore, we cannot view it as authorative since it is not the Word of God.

So Jesus Christ read the books of the new testament. Hmmmm! Wonderful!

Can you please enlighten me sir, where and when did the Lord Jesus Christ and the Apostles made a list of scriptures Christians should read?

CaveAdullam:
So Jesus Christ read the books of the new testament. Hmmmm! Wonderful!

Can you please enlighten me sir, where and when did the Lord Jesus Christ and the Apostles made a list of scriptures Christians should read?

My brother, this matter tire me mehn...
Just see someone calling me an apostate making such an incredible gaffe.

They admit on one hand that some of the early church fathers highly valued the book of Enoch, but on the other hand...it is not the word of God.

I can only shake my head in pity for this 21st century ignorance.

OkCornel:


My brother, this matter tire me mehn...
Just see someone calling me an apostate making such an incredible gaffe.

They admit on one hand that some of the early church fathers highly valued the book of Enoch, but on the other hand...it is not the word of God.

I can only shake my head in pity for this 21st century ignorance.

My brother please wait, because my mind is open towards the truth and nothing but the truth, I always yearn to get proper understanding on any topic.

If Job is the oldest book of the Bible don't you think muttleylaff "might" be correct to say Job lived before the flood?

Just reasoning.

CaveAdullam:
My brother please wait, because my mind is open towards the truth and nothing but the truth, I always yearn to get proper understanding on any topic.

If Job is the oldest book of the Bible don't you think muttleylaff "might" be correct to say Job lived before the flood?

Just reasoning.

CaveAdullam, I love it when you are exercising those gray matter muscles. It's good nice one. Keep it up

CaveAdullam I never made any comment about Job existing before the flood ooo. Please don't dump marijuana inside my pocket abeg, lol.

Taking the mention of flood further, correctly and fyi, Job existed postdiluvian CaveAdullam, in simple and easy language, that means, he lived after the flood, lol.

I know you are itching to have proof or evidence of this, so here is one out of others I can give you. Check out Job 22:16, and let me know what you think of it, lol.

CaveAdullam:
My brother please wait, because my mind is open towards the truth and nothing but the truth, I always yearn to get proper understanding on any topic.

If Job is the oldest book of the Bible don't you think muttleylaff "might" be correct to say Job lived before the flood?

Just reasoning.

Good question,

1) I would also ask if the Sabeans and Chaldeans that killed Job's shepherds and stole his livestock also lived before the flood?

2) Now, if the sons of God were the descendants of Seth as proposed in the book of Genesis/Job...where exactly do we put the timeline of Job's existence?

See how points 1 & 2 are a direct contradiction for those proposing the sons of God in Job were the descendants of Seth? I guess going by biblical geneaology...since all men on earth descended from Noah's sons who in turn descended from Seth...we should all be "sons of God" isn't it?

It's all good bro, no worries.

MuttleyLaff:
CaveAdullam, I love it when you are exercising those gray matter muscles. It's good nice one. Keep it up

CaveAdullam I never made any comment about Job existing before the flood ooo. Please don't dump marijuana inside my pocket abeg, lol.

Taking the mention of flood further, correctly and fyi, Job existed postdiluvian CaveAdullam, in simple and easy language, that means, he lived after the flood, lol.

I know you are itching to have proof or evidence of this, so here is one out of others I can give you. Check out Job 22:16, and let me know what you think of it, lol.

Alright, maybe I didn't get the proper understanding of your points so forgive me if I didn't presents your statement rightly.

I don't think the flood in Job 22:16 is anyway close to the one that occurred in Genesis.

CaveAdullam:
Alright, maybe I didn't get the proper understanding of your points so forgive me if I didn't presents your statement rightly.

It's alright, things like that happen when one gets excited, lol

CaveAdullam:
I don't think the flood in Job 22:16 is anyway close to the one that occurred in Genesis.

Dont you now? Na which mouth you use tok and make such a sacrilegious comment as this with, erhn, lol.

OK then, what about this other verse then, its the next verse after the popular well known world famous, star verse Job 38:7 that everyone ignores. I dont know why people refuse to take notice of or acknowledge it, so dont ask me, but maybe, if I want to guess, I'll say its because people are so used to reading bible verses in isolation to other verses up and below the verse they are focused on.

Anyway, CaveAdullam, hey, here is the verse, it is Job 38:8. Is Job 38:8 now that convincing enough for you, huh CaveAdullam? Is it anyway close to the flood that occurred in Genesis, hmm CaveAdullam? lol. Talk now, lol.

CaveAdullam, tbh with you, you need to revist Job 22:15-18, carefully and thoughtfully read it and then keep me updated on what you think of it

Pusyiter:
Well, keep searching until you find what you have been looking for.

hahahaha and he'll defo find it.

MuttleyLaff:
Whether you are talking spiritually or physically, it still is your father, who is the boy I blame who didn't see to it that you got the necessary home training and decorum you so badly lack. Now scram and dont ever in your life again cross path with me. Mtcheww

Hey muttey man. Sorry for calling you a boy. No need for all the bad blood. I have no issues with you bruv. We just dont agree on the glorious book of Enoch. Atleast you beleive in the conventional bible and that's fine with me. Enoch n d likes r more of strong meat. Reading it or not has nothing to do with a better relationship with Elohim. After all He is the reason for this discuss. My apologies once again.

MuttleyLaff:
It's alright, things like that happen when one gets excited, lol

Dont you now? Na which mouth you use tok and make such a sacrilegious comment as this with, erhn, lol.

OK then, what about this other verse then, its the next verse after the popular well known world famous, star verse Job 38:7 that everyone ignores. I dont know why people refuse to take notice of or acknowledge it, so dont ask me, but maybe, if I want to guess, I'll say its because people are so used to reading bible verses in isolation to other verses up and below the verse they are focused on.

Anyway, CaveAdullam, hey, here is the verse, it is Job 38:8. Is Job 38:8 now that convincing enough for you, huh CaveAdullam? Is it anyway close to the flood that occurred in Genesis, hmm CaveAdullam? lol. Talk now, lol.

CaveAdullam, tbh with you, you need to revist Job 22:15-18, carefully and thoughtfully read it and then keep me updated on what you think of it

no correlation yet muttley.

gobuchinny:
Hey muttey man. Sorry for calling you a boy. No need for all the bad blood. I have no issues with you bruv. We just dont agree on the glorious book of Enoch. At least you beleive in the conventional bible and that's fine with me. Enoch n d likes r more of strong meat. Reading it or not has nothing to do with a better relationship with Elohim. After all He is the reason for this discuss. My apologies once again.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CsYEiYUP_OI

I knew that underneath, you're flesh and blood, with sweet human kindness flowing in your veins. You're a good 'un. I knew all that your bravado nah front and wash, lol. You see, you and I sabi and understand each other gobuchinny, because people like you and I give as good as we get. If na to do rough play, we dey there, if na to do ajebo and gelato, we dey there, lol. Nwanne, did you hear anyone say anything about apologies, please tell the person not to be daft. Me, I get strong chin, but maybe I am like that dog in the above clip, my bark is loud and stronger so I dont bite, lol.

Nwanne, we dont have to agree on everything, this is even by a God design, look at your fingers are they equal in lenght, hmm? Of course not, but they only become equal and tip to tip only when they come together bending.

Enoch and the likes are more of strong meat? Face palm, smh, pull the other leg. The Book of Enoch and the likes are serious risks to the health of a son of God/daughter of God, lol wink wink.