@@kingdombuildingmama Thanks for commenting. It sounds like you are suggesting people shouldn't actually study the history of the Book of Enoch. Is that true?
Thanks David, for adding more clarity to what you have already clarified for us. I fear that some will continue to cling to this book, no matter how much evidence is presented to them. But, your first video gave me all the evidence I needed to know (in addition to the research I had also done) that the book of Enoch is not a book written by the Enoch of the Bible. Thank you sooo much for sharing your studies with the Body of Messiah, together we become stronger as we share and search for Truth!! Shalom
Wow...didn't know about the RH Charles translation mistranslating that verse. That clears up a lot of confusion. Definitely makes sense why we don't consider Enoch Scripture.
"Wow...didn't know about the RH Charles translation mistranslating that verse. That clears up a lot of confusion." No it doesn't, you just aren't the sharpest knife in the drawer. the translation of those two words doesn't change anything either way. congrats on being in the small minority that was successfully gaslit by such a feeble argument.
I am wondering, could you give the exact references of Isaiah, Daniel and Ararat? I'm trying to debate with people about this to prove the book was written after Enoch's time.
@@maryharris2064 " I'm trying to debate with people about this to prove the book was written after Enoch's time" Why would you be doing that, given that you don't know yourself? Modern people are dumber than animals. We are taught to develop unshakable opinions the second we hear some new info and then we fight against anything that contradicts it without even considering that we really don't know much ourselves.
Even though Enoch 1 is not considered cannon, I thinknits important believers read it and ask for spiritual discernment whilst reading. Enoch educates us on angels and demons; two of which are very important that we as believers understand. From my studies on this I, personally, will be reading this book. Simply because it isn't inspired text doesn't mean we can't gain knowledge of other things Enoch felt we should know. Spiritual discernment is the key in this.
the book of enoch tells us who runs the world today and why. the wealthy banking elites that control our globe consider the stories in Enoch to be facts and they themselves to be the offspring of the fallen angels. This is why organized judaism and christianity got rid of it- because they know the ultimate political and economic power on earth are evil occultists that worship and receive the support of the fallen angels, and those people would oppress them if they told the truth. Those two religions could not be acceptable vehicles for state power unless they hid the true evils of the state, so that's what they did. They blinded Christians and destroyed Christianity to increase their own power, and evil apologists like wilber aid that deception because they know it will benefit their career as a profesional judeochristian.
Please do the book of Job, who it's the author is, is it pre-Noah in writing and if it is THEN how did it survive the floods, survived the era where God was not communicating with men (between Noah and Abraham) and how it got inserted into the Old Testament. I would highly appreciate it.
I am sure linguists of Hebrew would have a field day with Wilber's many leaps of logic. For no apparent reason, Wilber assumes that "son of man" is exclusively a title used for the Messiah alone even when it is used in reference to Ezekiel over 90 times and also used to address Daniel. Wilber even claims that Enoch is referred to as the Messiah based on such an inscrutable and fatal leap of logic. This whole line of argumentation amounts to a poisoning of the well, because it is not true that Enoch claimed to be the Messiah any more than "son of man" is a title exclusively reserved for the Messiah. While I have just started study of Ethiopic, I would be willing to bet that a Bible scholar who is fluent in Ge'ez would be able to explain why Enoch was being called "son of man". And did Wilber ever consider whether the phrase "who art born for righteousness" might actually be a limiting qualifier meant to describe Enoch as a certain type of son with a certain intended "mission"? Such a mission seems to be explained in detail in Jasher, where Enoch is described to have ruled over 130 kings for 243 years, and teaching them "the ways of righteousness". As we can see, within the next four generations, humankind gradually degenerated to the point that YHVH had to drown them in the Flood, except for Noah, who was perfect in his generations, which I understand to mean that Noah's genetic line was free of any Nephilim corruption; thus Noah was not only faithful and righteous, but he remembered his great grandfather's warning about a great flood. Even if the phrase "who art born for righteousness" is not a limiting qualifier that is meant to describe a certain "offspring of man" (that was actually the first rendering made by Archbishop and Oxford Professor of Hebrew Richard Laurence for this phrase in chapter 70, verse 17), there is still the possibility that the phrase "son of man" is symbolic reference to a type, which is exemplified by several people such as Daniel, Ezekiel, and Yeshua as well as its first exemplar, Enoch. After all, Jude found it important to mention that Enoch was the seventh generation from Adam; could this have anything to do with the fact that seven represents perfection or completion? Could Jude be implying that Enoch represents the completion or perfection of mankind? If not, it would be difficult to explain why Enoch is only one of two people in the Bible to never have died! The biggest problem with commentators such as Wilber is that they seem unable to be sufficiently self-critical and to entertain the possibility that there are other equally reasonable, or more reasonable, interpretations and deductions. Were Daniel and Ezekiel under any illusions that they were themselves the Messiah? Why didn't they reprove the one calling them "son of man"?
the problem with people like wilber is that they are paid to parrot the heresy of their church whether its right or wrong. they defend their religion from God, just like the scribes and pharisees. They are the walking dead, NPC's that are averse to truth.
I don't know much about this book. Unfortunately, my bias now lies in favor of Enoch because I read chapter 71 and found nothing there that indicated Enoch though he was the Savior. He was however introduced, so to speak, to Jesus Christ. For those of us who believe we were spirits before the world was and aren't looking at it through protestant eyes this is not a problem.
Has anyone considered the implications of the fact that a book that claims a 364-day calendar is written on the "tablets of heaven" is the most cited book of the entire 66-book Bible? Why would all those writers make so many obvious allusions to a book that makes such a massive declaration if the declaration is actually a massive lie if untrue? Are all those authors heretics then, or did they just overlook the fact that Enoch makes such a declaration? And if you think Yeshua and his followers had no problems with the moon-based 354-day calendar which is basically an adaptation of the Babylonian calendar having months named after Babylonian gods such as Tammuz - then what were all those "calendar wars" that some Essene communities were waging about? After all, scholars point out that John the Baptiser was most likely an Essene himself. The Zadokites and Essenes followed this calendar found in Enoch based on the available evidence. One of the interesting observations made by R.H. Charles is that Noah and family got off the ark exactly one Enochic calendar year after the flood started "on the seventeenth day of the second month-on that day all the springs of the great deep burst forth, and the floodgates of the heavens were opened" (Genesis 7:11), because they got off on the twenty-seventh day of the second month a year and ten days later, if we count based on the 354-day calendar, which was instituted after the taking into captivity in Babylon. My guess is that probably the group responsible for the P (priestly) parts of the Pentateuch were responsible for altering the original so that 17 and 27 appear instead of the original, since they are the ones that were coopted by the Babylonian authorities to impose their own religious rules. Why would anyone find it strange that there is evidence of "compilation" and some minimal "updating" of Enoch that occurred during the few centuries BCE? I would think such compilation and updating was taking place after gathering the most reliable manuscripts of Enoch found in the known world at the time so that this body of literature could serve an apologetic purpose at the time when Antiochus Epiphanes was imposing his calendrical reforms on the conquered Israelites. If some of the population had long resisted the 354-day calendar instituted by the priests, they would not have wished to defend what would have been, in their view, an idolatrous adaptation of a Babylonian calendar anyway, even in the face of a foreign power imposing their own calendar. Rather, they would wish to find the most persuasive documentary evidence of the calendar they were convicted was written in the "tables of heaven". Such documentary evidence of course is the words of the first prophet, Enoch. In any case, all those critical of the inspiration of Enoch have much to answer to, because they need to explain why it is the most cited book of the Bible while making a claim that the 364-day calendar is the one written on the "tablets of heaven", which of course was not a claim that one would risk their life to defend if they weren't absolutely convicted of! Yes, the penalty for not going along with Rome's instructions was death.
Jesus made reference to the book of Enoch in Mathew 22:29,30 and in Luke 20:34-36 and refers to it as the Scriptures. The book of 1st Enoch is the ONLY Scripture we have which mentions what Jesus was saying and referring to as Scripture. Please explain your view of that. Since Jude 1:14-15 also quotes from the book of Enoch there must have been a book of Enoch that was recognized as authoritative by Jesus and the early Christians. Please explain and share your thoughts on this. Thanks.
Great question! I don't think Matthew 22:29-32/Luke 20:34-36 quote 1 Enoch 15 as "Scripture." To explain, the Sadducees tried to ask a trick question: who will this woman be married to in the resurrection? Their goal was to ridicule the idea of the resurrection in light of the Levirate marriage law (Deut. 25:5-10), which they thought created an impossible dilemma if the resurrection is true. Jesus responded by accusing the Sadducees of knowing neither the Scriptures nor the power of God. First, Jesus explains the nature of the resurrection, which addresses their dilemma, and then He gives a Scriptural response to the fact of the resurrection. Notice that Jesus actually cites which Scriptures He's referring to in Matthew 22:32/Luke 20:37-38 when He quotes Exodus 3:6. Thus, there's no reason to assume He’s alluding to 1 Enoch when He references "Scripture" because He quotes the very Scriptures He's talking about in the passage! Also, the idea of our resurrected bodies being like the angels isn’t limited to 1 Enoch but part of a broader Jewish debate concerning the nature of the resurrection (e.g., 2 Baruch 51:10). Since Jesus' definition of Scripture was in accordance with the biblical canon of His day, as we see in Luke 24 and Matthew 23, it doesn't make sense to think He was alluding to 1 Enoch 15 when He referenced "Scripture" in Matthew 22/Luke 20. It makes more sense that He was referencing Exodus 3:6, which are the very scriptures He goes on to directly quote from.
@@jayb0g There are two parts to Messiah's answer. First, His main objective was to prove the Scriptural validity of the resurrection from the Torah, which were the primary "Scriptures" the Sadducees accepted. That's why He quotes Exodus. The Sadducees didn't view the rest of the Scriptures (prophets, writings), and certainly didn't see the pseudepigrapha, as "Scripture." So the quote from Exodus answers the Sadducees' objection from the Scriptural angle. Regarding the marriage part of the answer, Messiah is not appealing to Scripture but simply explaining "the power of God" to transform the person at the resurrection, which the Sadducees didn't recognize.
@@DavidWilberBlog So if Enoch was written prior to Christ making those statements about angels not marrying, how did the writer of Enoch know about it since we find it not mentioned anywhere else in OT scriptures?
The above scriptures talk about those counted worthy as Gods children who wouldn’t die again. In Jude it make reference to Enoch being 7th in line from the generational line from. Adam as a prophet who witnessed Gods judgment against that system. There’s no mention of a book 📖 or scripture in his name.
In 1 enoch the s in "son of man" was not capitalized in 1Enoch 71:13-14 but was in 1 Enoch 46:1-3 " 46:1 and there I saw one who had a Head of Days and his head was white like wool. And with him there was another whose face had an appearance of a man and his face was full of grace like one of the Holy Angels. 46:2 And I asked one of the Holy Angels, who went me and showed me all the secrets, about that Son of Man, who he was, and from where he was, and why he went with the Head of Days. 46:3 And he answered me and said to me: this is the Son of man who has righteousness and with whom righteousness dwells. He will reveal all the treasures of that which is Secret, for the Lord of spirits have chosen him, and threw up brightness his lot has surpassed all others, in front of the Lord of spirits, forever. 46.4 And this is the son of man, who you have seen, will Rouse the Kings and the powerful from their resting places, and the strong from their thrones and we'll lose the reign of the strong, and we'll break the teeth of the sinners. You can clearly see who he thinks the Son of Man is because Enoch 71:13-14 say he was "born for righteousness" and Enoch 46:3 say who has righteousness and with whom righteousness dwells. You should never get them mixed up. Of course is reference the same material from Isaiah and Daniel because they all had visions that speak of the End of Days. And im pretty sure the book of enoch had to move around because Jude was from Galilee and spoke the same language as Yeshua which is Aramaic. Jude also say in Jude 1:14 "Now Enoch, the seventh from Adam, prophesize about these men, also saying behold, the Lord comes with 10000 of his Saints. In order for him to know of Enoch prophesy he had to key word "read" of it or about it.
That was exceptional! Thank you for addressing the major arguments on the previous video and thank you for being gracious towards the narrow minded quick to judge comments.
Hello FIT/David Wilbur, thank you for your videos. I am a Christian and I have a few questions: 1) If the book of Enoch makes the claim that Enoch is the Messiah then why isn't Enoch aware of this when he sees the Son of Man sitting on his throne? Why would this Son of Man on the throne then talk to Enoch as if he were someone else? This error doesn't make sense when reading the whole text because it shows Enoch as not being the Son of Man the entire book, except this apparently one mistranslated verse. Could it be possible that this was an error in the original manuscript? 2) If Enoch is the Messiah why do the Watchers ask Enoch to pray to God on their behalf, since if he were the Messiah he and Gods will would be concordant? Are the Watchers not aware that Enoch is the Messiah? What does it mean in the Biblical cannon when it says that Enoch walked with God and was taken away? 3) What is your explanation of the Nephilim of Genesis? And furthermore, how could descendants of Nephilim survive the flood (like Goliath)? 4) Lastly, and this is somewhat farfetched, but since the pentagon confirmed that UFO's are apparently real and that they are in possession of space ships "not made on this planet", how should we as Christians be interpreting these findings? I ask because I have a friend who believes that "Watchers" and "Angels" are aliens, or perhaps vice versa. Thank you for your time and these videos, which are very informative.
1) Great question, and that's actually behind what led R.H. Charles to emend the verse in his translation. He couldn't fathom that Enoch could be seeing visions of himself and yet not recognize himself. But there simply is no textual basis for Charles' translation, so we cannot deny what the verse says when it identifies Enoch as the Son of Man. But modern scholars have argued that Enoch being revealed as this figure makes sense within the logical flow of the story. See the article linked in the video description for more information. 2) That section is from the Book of Watchers, which was likely written a couple centuries before the Book of Parables in which Enoch is taught to be the Messiah. So it's possible that earlier Enochic traditions, such as the Book of Watchers, did not see Enoch as a Messianic figure (although there are some divine characteristics applied to him). But he developed into a Messianic heavenly figure in the later traditions, as we see in the Book of Parables, which was written at the turn of the era. 3) I'm agnostic on this issue, personally. The angelic view is popular and has a lot of support, but I'm not completely persuaded. There are also good arguments that the "Sons of God" were kings. InspiringPhilosophy has a great video arguing this perspective if you want to search for it on RU-vid. 4) I honestly have no opinion on that. Sorry I can't be of more help.
If Angels copulated with human women, leaving their abode, why then God blames only MEN for the deluge? He repeats over and again that MEN grieved Him with their behavior and MEN He created were exceedingly wicked. Why no mention of angels or mixture of angels and humans or hybrids? But MEN only. Also, interesting that God said He’ll destroy MEN and ANIMALS He created. Again, no mention of angels in Genesis 6 passage. Very strange, especially taking in consideration Angels left God and allegedly went to earth and started procreating with human women. God even more so would have been enraged and mention His Angels as they culprit for the flood. Yet, not a single word about angels. Only MEN.
@@DavidWilberBlog About the sons of God. According to the bible, the sons of God were present with God when the foundations of the earth were laid, and even shouted for Joy. Job 38:4-7 Where were you when I laid the foundations of the earth? Tell Me, if you have understanding. 5Who fixed its measurements? Surely you know! Or who stretched a measuring line across it? 6On what were its foundations set, or who laid its cornerstone, 7while the morning stars sang together and all the SONS OF GOD shouted for joy? The sons of God existed long before these "kings", assumed to be human. I mean, where were humans when God was laying down the foundations of the earth? Humans didn't exist, so it makes the angelic view more plausible
Thank you - my experience with the book of Enoch has been...in evangelistic endeavors I occasionally come across someone who uses the "lost books" as a reason to invalidate the bible, most do no have a copy of any of the books but have simply latched on to what they have heard as an attempt to invalidate the scriptures and of course, God Himself. But occasionally some do have an actual copy of the book of Enoch and it is very helpful to me to have information that I can actually show them in their own book. Would like to have more information that could help me...it is strange to me that someone would question your salvation based on your rejection of the book of Enoch...I have yet to come across anyone who has a relationship with Christ, has any biblical knowledge and who also believes in the validity of the book of Enoch. Thanks again for your help!
Hi Barbara. I tend to steer people away from this book. Jesus is the Truth the Way and the Life- this book does not lead to Jesus so we can take it that its a lie. Furthermore "the anointed one" in the book of enoch is not Jesus but enoch himself which (sorry to say) sounds blasphemous to me. Its my understanding that this book states angels built the ark? I have to say I was most uncomfortable with the verse referencing Eve and the serpent- that would mean she committed beastiality ?!! I often wonder how this book survived the flood of Noah- the language was different from the time of Enoch who walked with God to Noah,s day- who translated the book and why was this book not mentioned as an item on the Ark? I hope these thoughts help.
@@mimi45945 Jesus is the way, the truth, and the light. The funny thing is that the book of Enoch, which predates the new testament and christ on earth, has the clearest depiction of the pre-incarnate. It also answers certain questions I've always had such as where does the concept of abortion-killing of a child in the womb-come from? The fallen watchers. The art of making weapons-the watchers taught men. Remember the first sword in the bible can be seen in Genesis 3:22. Those are all secrets from heaven.
Enoch 71:14, you think it's that simple? Please read the whole passage in context, context is not directing us to Enoch being the Messiah. Many scholars totally disagree with David. Please research. BTW, it's easy to attack Charles, but many more scholars have different explanations, so again, read and research. At best this verse is neutralized by differing opinions, so to be an absolutist here is telling of the messenger.
I tried to read the book of Enoch out of curiosity, but it didn't sit right in my spirit and felt I had to stop. Came here for your info which was helpful. Thank you very much.
Further thoughts, not my stuff, it's called research and quit trusting others to tell you what to believe. Tertullian pointed out two reasons why 1 Enoch was rejected. First, it failed to be accepted because it wasn’t included in the Jewish canon. The Jewish scholars, beginning with the school at Jamnia late in the first century A.D., contended that what we call intertestamental literature was not sacred because it was apocalyptic (which was an aspersion in their mode of thinking); and because they felt that prophecy had ceased with Malachi circa 440 B.C. Tertullian is not too fond of the idea that the Jews should be setting the rules for Christians. Citing the fine article by Hultin once again, we read about Tertullian’s viewpoint regarding whether Christian’s should only include those books that the Jews approved of: “As for the fact that Enoch was not a part of the Jewish canon, Tertullian claims that the Jews probably rejected Enoch-just as they had other scriptures-because Enoch spoke of Christ. Tertullian finds it plainly absurd that Christians should follow the Jewish decision about what prophetic books to read, for if Enoch spoke of Christ, then his writing pertain ‘to us,’ and all writings suitable for edification are divinely inspired (Cult. fem. 3.3; cf. 2 Tim 3:16). Last of all Tertullian notes that ‘Enoch possesses a testimony in the Apostle Jude.’”
"First, it failed to be accepted because it wasn’t included in the Jewish canon." Which never should have even been a consideration. the talmudic jew leaders were considered to be the most vile, satanic scumbags on the planet by Jesus and it makes no sense to defer to their religious views.
Premature thumb...anyhow i meant to say a fluid explanation. Thanks for the lesson. Im thinking there is much you could probably clear up. Ill be looking for more of your videos.
Why so many people didn't want to watch till the end, but then commented their opinion, doubt and/or questions, however many are answered already in the video... 🙏
@Founded In Truth Fascinating that you say you saw the debate and still promoted David's theories and interpretations. Did you catch the moment when our brother David admitted that he hadn't read 1 Enoch when he debated me? *To claim 1 Enoch steals from Isaiah and Daniel because there are similar prophecies is like saying Isaiah is false and stole from Matthew because Jesus quotes from Isaiah. It's backward hermeneutics. Many of the prophets foretold similar events as the information is coming from the same God and the events being foretold do not change. *To claim 1 Enoch promotes Enoch as the Messiah ignores the entire context of the book of Enoch. You don't need R. H. Charles' translation to see that. *To claim 1 Enoch has "Aramaic structure" ignores the Paleo Hebrew fragments of 1 Enoch found among the DDS and the well known history of the 6th century high priest of Israel, Ezra, who restored ALL the scriptures when exiles returned from Babylon. He's the reason we have a Bible today, and his lifespan was after Aramaic was introduced to the Israelites. Subsequent centuries thereafter copied scrolls in both Aramaic and later Greek. The reason David has to rely on all the quotes of scholars is because he hasn't actually studied the text of 1 Enoch or its manuscript history. He's just read books about it. If you're interested in a different opinion and peaceful conversation on 1 Enoch that's based on Scripture and not the opinions of men, we can schedule something at your convenience. Bless you, brother.
How is 1enoch relevant to Israel? Sincerely? Perhaps since I don't understand, you can please explain... According to the Holy Bible... Our King was sent unto the lost sheep of the house of ISRAEL...(Matthew 10:6; 15:24), Correct? We're supposed to be grafting back into ISRAEL...(Romans11:17-27), Correct? The Adamic, 'Enoch walked with God, AND HE WAS NOT(h369 'ayin, to be nothing, cease to exist), for God took him.' ...60+ years BEFORE Noah's birth, and hundreds of years before the deluge, Correct? Jacob was born (Genesis 25:26) and didn't become ISRAEL (Genesis 32:28) until after the deluge, Correct? The very Ten Commandment Covenant given unto Moses by the Father, for ISRAEL didn't occur until the Exodus(Exodus20), Correct? How does 1enoch lead the lost sheep of Israel back into Covenant? Also... How many contradictions to the Holy Bible must a text have, before it can be deemed spurious? Or non-Canonical? One example... 1enoch40:9 , sets an angel named 'phanuel', "over the repentance and those who hope to inherit eternal life..." Yet our King said... "I CAME not to call the righteous, but the sinners, to REPENTANCE." -Words of Messiah, Luke 5:32 "They that are whole, have no need of the physician, but they that sick; I CAME not to call the righteous, but sinners to REPENTANCE." -Words of Messiah, Mark2:17 "Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have ETERNAL LIFE: and they are they which testify of ME." -Words of Messiah, John 5:39 "And I give unto them ETERNAL LIFE; and they shall never perish, neither shall any pluck them out of my hand." -Words of Messiah, John 10:28 Why does 1enoch curse the righteous eternally with the names of hard hearted sinners...1enoch5:4-7 ? 'In those days you shall make your names an eternal curse to all the righteous..." VS. And the LORD said to Moses, 'Whosoever hath sinned against me, him will I BLOT OUT of my book.' Exodus 32:33 "Let them be BLOTTED OUT of the book of the living, AND NOT BE WRITTEN IN WITH THE RIGHTEOUS." Psalm69:28 ???
@@KingdomInContext again... how is 1enoch relevant to anybody grafting back into Israel? If Yehoshua was only sent to the lost sheep of the house of Israel, and we're supposed to be grafting back into Israel... what possible value could 1enoch add? The Adamic Enoch was taken and was no more, BEFORE Jacob was ever born... BEFORE Noah was ever born... NOTHING in 1enoch pertains to the lost sheep grafting back into Israel... FACT! it's spurious, therefore not part of the Bible... a stumbling block... ...do you honestly think pushing non-Biblical books puts the Kingdom into context? Remembering, 1enoch has your prayers of repentance and hopes of eternal life being answered by phanuel, not Yehoshua... (1enoch40:9)... that isn't found a single place in the Bible, is it? 1enoch8:1 has Scapegoat [Azazel- Leviticus 16:8,10] teaching men metallurgy... not TubalCain of Genesis 4:22... and then 1enoch contradicts itself with 1enoch69:6, "gadreel" instead of "azazel" and not TubalCain (Genesis4:22) taught men metallurgy, along with deceiving Eve??? ... 'gadreel' deceived Eve and taught men metallurgy??? Balderdash!!! It's fable and clearly contradicts the Bible.
This was really good! Definitely answered some of the questions I had regarding the book of Enoch. Thank you for making this video, you guys are really dope. And im sorry if my comment on the first video seemed like I was just trying to be disagreeable or argumentative- I genuinely have just been trying to find answers, and for some reason was not satisfied with some of the answers in the previous video, as some of the answers just left me with more questions- but this one did a great job of answering those! Thank you again. Much love. God bless
@@DavidWilberBlog Definitely! I ALWAYS love hearing different perspectives, different people's answers - I just love information; and when the conversation is about God, I can't help but want to learn as much information as I can. And then once I've processed the information, I take it to scripture and prayer to determine my view/what I believe to be true.
@@XIsleTheWanderer I do the exact same. Like you the book of enoch left me with questions. I felt very uncomfortable with the lord of spirits reference.
@@svenshanah I see that Jesus says "your problem is that you don't know the Scriptures", but I don't see any mention of Enoch there. Could you elaborate for me?
So Canon is subjective and not objective? That means some people sat down and came up with a list of rules, why would we then tie ourselves to one Canon and assign to that Holy inspiration?
Well, it depends on what you believe about Jesus. I believe Jesus is the eternal Son of God. His stance on the canon is therefore the objective standard. The fact is that Jesus affirmed the OT canon of His day, which excluded 1 Enoch. See the first video for the argument on this.
@@DavidWilberBlog "I believe Jesus is the eternal Son of God. His stance on the canon is therefore the objective standard." And he says this while denying the authenticity of scripture that was verified by Jesus Himself. He's doing the exact opposite of what he claims to stand for. That's how delusional these judeochristians can be. totally averse to the Holy Spirit. "The fact is that Jesus affirmed the OT canon of His day, which excluded 1 Enoch" No matter how many times you tell that lie, it will never become truth.
Hey guys, great videos on this topic! I enjoy the themes of the Book of Enoch for their potential historical value but yeah, definitely not inspired canon even if the accounts in 1 Enoch are truthful. That being said... Is there any way you guys could do similar videos on other apocryphal texts like Jubilees and Maccabees? I follow a ministry that actively uses those and 1 Enoch for historical context as part of their belief that the land of Havilah (and by extension, the Garden of Eden) was under what is now the Sulu Sea off of the coast of Palawan, Philippines. I think they have enough support for this theory using just the 66 canonical books but I'd be interested in getting more info on the apocryphal books they use as my research has really just led me to more confusion in regards to what they are and what they teach. Clearly, they're not part of the inspired canon for a reason but I'm curious if they, too, can be viewed for their historical value.
Hi David so I'm a new Christian saved about 3 years ago and struggle with the books that are taken out of the bible( about 14?) My question is, what do you believe is the correct bible and version to learn and read from and is there an explanation on why the other books where taken out? Loved the way you explained the book of enoch and reasons it's not inspired by God. Could to help with the other books?
the idea that the bible is the complete and infallible word of God is heresy and it makes the bible into an idol and locks away all meaning from the people that view it that way.
@@svenshanah You keep saying that (in multiple comments) and people have asked you to show where. Nobody seems to be able to locate this reference that you keep stating is there over and over.
@@TheLionAndTheLamb777 The fact that you didn't even attempt to locate a canonical source for His quote in that passage really tells us all we need to know about your research skills, or your desire to know the truth, doesn't it? Find that quote in the canon - you won't, because you can't, it's not in there, it's only in Enoch. "Source", really? 🙄Matthew and Enoch ARE the sources..are you "that" lazy? Apparently.
Watching this now and I'm already not following you at the first argument. Why did Enoch necessarily have to be referencing Daniel/Isaiah/etc rather than vice versa? Jesus, Paul, the apostles explicitly referred to it numerous times... at least, to the first of the five sections of Enoch. (As far as I know the other four sections are never affirmed in the New Testament.) I'm fine with not treating those other four sections as scripture, though your arguments are quite weak (claiming Enoch borrowed from Greek arithmetic rather than the other way around). It's exactly the same mistake scholars make about the Bible, claiming that El was a Canaanite deity etc. Watching more: scholars "universally" reject Enoch's antiquity? Come on, that's not true. About "the Son of Man", Ezekiel was referred to this way, and anyway, it doesn't seem wise to throw out a whole book based on one word ("you" vs. "this") which may have been corrupted. Though again, the later sections have no witnesses as far as I'm aware - even the Dead Sea Scrolls only witness to the first of the five sections of Enoch. I respect you and I get that it's a divisive book, but I wanted to share my thoughts. Will check out your other video for clarifying information.
I have to be honest, I don't trust scholars and don't care about what they "think" they know about the book of Enoch. Any attempts to discredit it just make me more interested in it.
Thanks for the clarification. I’ll consider the quote in Jude like Paul quoting Greek poets. I was thinking that before but the clarification helps. Could you do a video on that strange passage in Jude about Michael and Satan fighting over Moses body? That would be really interesting 🧐 Thanks for the video God Bless
@@FoundedInTruth I disagree with his process and his opinion on the book of Enoch. I also disagree with how he feels canon is determined by what the theologians of Christianity say is canon. I disagree with his interpretation of that verse as well even without using the translation he disagrees with I believe the context lends to a different interpretation than what he has come to.
@@FoundedInTruth isn't it older than the other translations? And I'm not saying that we have to use that translation. I think even the other translations can have different contextual meaning and they could have used capitalization and punctuation in the wrong way as we see done in the KJV.
@Jannie Lee I may end up checking out Sean Griffin. I hadn't heard of him before now. I, personally, felt this video had some good answers to some of my questions about why it wouldn't be considered scripture - but, if I am understanding your comments correctly, you seem to believe that we, as a Christian society, put too much weight on what other people who might have read more or studied more have to say - rather than allowing the Spirit to lead us to wisdom and truth, and give us the discernment to determine what is of God and what is not. If that is, indeed, what youre saying, I agree wholeheartedly; which is why I had such a hard time just accepting the last video on this channel about the Book of Enoch, because it seemed to rely too heavily on what scholars say, not what God says, or taking into consideration the possibility that, maybe there are so many similarities with books that came later because we serve a God who is outside of time yet who, Himself, never changes - so if both Enoch and the book it is similar to express things the same way or similar ways, it could very well be simply because God ordained it that way - God could have easily had two authors write very similar things, so that to the human eye it would appear one of them was copying the other. Then again, it could be that the book of Enoch was not inspired, not written by Enoch, and truly was copying other books. But either way, relying on he said/she said, even if its scholarly he said/she said, its still not going to the Source. I would love to have a dialogue or something at some point on this topic, some sort of open conversation. I would say "debate" but its not something I would consider a debate, but like I said- an open conversation, even if/especially if not everyone agreed with each other, but everyone involved has a heart for knowing God and following Christ
Its a case of a rabbit caught in the headlights as far as I'm concerned. Yes, chapter 71 in one version I have of the book of Enoch does say "you are the son of man", in v14 (as he claims)... BUT, just a few verses later in v17, it says this "there will be length of days with that son of man". So we have "the son of man" & also we have "that son of man". Which of these is the Messiah?... mmm he missed all this out!! I wonder why? I guess, he hoped we wouldn't bother to read the text. He is so self-assured, I don't like the way he talks down to his audience, this is a bad sign.
he missed it because he's a liar. if you read the book of enoch you would never come away thinking Enoch was claiming to be the messiah, however, you twist one verse and exclude all others and then it's easy to convince others of that lie.
You could say that about the whole bible. Since it was written and translated over generations. :/ I wonder how much of it was made to fit someone's own idea.
Does anyone have any solid evidence that the generations between Adam and Moses observed a 354-day calendar that suspiciously resembles the one that was observed in Babylon, while even keeping the names of some Babylonian deities intact? Why would YHVH expect so many generations to pass before telling them which calendar is sacred? To the contrary, Jubilees gives strong evidence that such an unlikely scenario did not in fact take place. In fact, even Adam and Eve were aware of the system formally revealed to Enoch in full, because they waited until the first Jubilee to consummate their union. They also mourned the death of Abel for 28 years before YHVH ended their mourning by having them conceive Seth - is it any coincidence that the 28th year is the year another week is added (it seems that this added week has some festive and religious significance, doesn't it)? Actually, the fact that Jubilees doesn't mention the significance of this 28th year would seem to suggest that it was taken as a given that readers already understood the significance of the 28th year. And this would also suggest that there was indeed an intercalation system that made sense from every perspective. It is not only for "symmetry" that such a calendar was devised arbitrarily by man, as Wilber supposes so dismissively. Rather it is for SANCTITY that it was written on the tablets of heaven before being shown to the first prophet!
Rachel Elior (Professor at Hebrew Unviversity) addressed “books left outside” what we currently have in the Old Testament- which was very revealing - her study of the Dead Sea Scrolls was enlightening 😊
Well, we can prove that the New Word Translation (Jehovah's Witness Bible version) mistranslated some passages, just like we can prove that R.H. Charles mistranslated 1 Enoch 71:14-15. You just go back to the original languages.
Enoch 70:3-24 [3]Then I fell on my face before the Lord of spirits [4]And Michael, one of the archangels, took me by my right hand, raised me up, and brought me out to where was every secret of mercy and secret of righteousness [5]He showed me all the hidden things of the extremities of heaven, all the receptacles of the stars, and the splendours of all, from whence they went forth before the face of the holy [6]And he concealed the spirit of Enoch in the heaven of heavens [7]There I beheld, in the midst of that light, a building raised with stones of ice; [8]And in the midst of these stones vibrations of living fire My spirit saw around the circle of this flaming habitation, on one of its extremities, that there were rivers full of living fire, which encompassed it [9]Then the Seraphim, the Cherubim, and Ophanin surrounded it these are those who never sleep, but watch the throne of his glory [10]And I beheld angels innumerable, thousands of thousands, and myriads of myriads, who surrounded that habitation [11]Michael, Raphael, Gabriel, Phanuel, and the holy angels who were in the heavens above, went in and out of it Michael, Raphael, and Gabriel went out of that habitation, and holy angels innumerable [12]With them was the Ancient of days, whose head was white as wool, and pure, and his robe was indescribable [13]Then I fell upon my face, while all my flesh was dissolved, and my spirit became changed [14]I cried out with a loud voice, with a powerful spirit, blessing, glorifying, and exalting [15]And those blessings, which proceeded from my mouth, became acceptable in the presence of the Ancient of days [16]The Ancient of days came with Michael and Gabriel, Raphael and Phanuel, with thousands of thousands, and myriads of myriads, which could not be numbered [17]Then that angel came to me, and with his voice saluted me, saying, Thou art the offspring of man, who art born for righteousness, and righteousness has rested on thee [18]The righteousness of the Ancient of days shall not forsake thee [19]He said, On thee shall he confer peace 1 in the name of the existing world; for from thence has peace gone forth since the world was created [20]And thus shall it happen to thee for ever and ever [21]All who shall exist, and who shall walk in thy path of righteousness, shall not forsake thee for ever [22]With thee shall be their habitations, with thee their lot; nor from thee shall they be separated for ever and ever [23]And thus shall length of days be with the offspring of man [24]Peace shall be to the righteous; and the path of integrity shall the righteous pursue, in the name of the Lord of spirits, for ever and ever
@@iraidushka Numbers 27:15-16 [15]And Moses spake unto the LORD, saying, [16]Let the LORD, the God of the spirits of all flesh, set a man over the congregation, Was Moses into sorcery when he said it?
@@samuelalvinkiggundu5836 Right! He is God OF >THE< SIRITS OF >ALL THE FLESH< just like Moses called Elohim, not “lord of spirits” of alleged authentic Enoch. Enoochian 1 expression sounds like sorcery “lord of spirits”. Are those are like unclean spirits? He doesn’t even use article THE before spirits. And you see Moses using the expression only ONCE in the whole entire Scriptures, where alleged authentic Enoch uses it over and again. And he uses it in the conviction of “The Lord, The God of the spirits of all the flesh” not just “lord of spirits”.
You're pastor know only scientific not holy or in its geez word so why is book of henok mentioned in Bible in judah 1:14 b/c we know that vulget had cutted many holy biblical books and the articles i mean if you know about vulget i want answers!!!
Is it wrong for me to be more skeptic? I mean his explanation has a "point" but I don't think I'm satisfied with the answer. And about this "Enoch was a Messiah", is that really what he understood?
The guy is awesome, however the cappy should be avoided (1 Corinthians 11, David Bercot has disproved all the modern "cultural" excuses). I gave you a like for the content, because it was very informative.
@@svenshanah Jewish fables with one mile high giants. It is as credible as eating dinosaurs like rice. Ignorance and idolatry of verbal diarrhea. Enoch is no sort of inspired scripture but a 2-3 century BC forgery, the entrance to the occult.
Definitely doesn't seem to be inspired and to the level of the scriptures (that is the Bible), but I do wonder if perhaps it sheds a bit of light on stories passed down from the ancient times, before Noah. The book of Genesis certainly corroborates some parts. I remember back in the day not having any idea what Genesis was talking about in earlier chapters, but it seems to make much more sense if the early parts of this book are based in truth. Perhaps Enoch was a great prophet, which was why Jude quoted him, but this book of Enoch is not completely accurate to what he actually prophesied (namely, things being inserted like him being the Son of Man). Surely, there were certain things God instructed Noah and his sons to pass down generations of the account of times before the flood to be able to write Genesis, and maybe there were other things that he passed down but weren't necessary to be recorded in the inspired texts, but got passed down anyways through the generations. For whatever reason, God doesn't desire to make clearly known all that has and is happening in spiritual realms, but just by the fact that it happened and some people experienced it back then, there are accounts and echos of accounts that hint at those events.
Brilliant video Mr Wilber !! Thank you. You made me think of Noah,s flood- on the Ark was Noah, his family and the animals- there is no mention of any books or Scripture so how did this book survive the flood? According to the Bible everything was wiped out. I get the feeling this book mocks God- especially with the angels procreating with humans factor. If spirits could mate with flesh then the devil would not need a man as the Anti Christ. It makes no sense to me. I have a copy of the Apocryapha and Enoch is not there. Googled kjv 1611 that include the Apocrypha and this book is not there. I noted that Angels were involved in the building of the Ark? Surly this is a warning as God told Noah what to do with its construction. There is the whole serpent seed teaching also. I feel this is not good- points to Eve committing beastiality no? Your teachings are fantastic as you back them with verses no other teacher of enoch uses (for obvious reasons). Well done !!!
I would like to say this is in Genesis 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. Sooooo yea they did mate with humans
@@emilyjordan585 If you read the fact that God states they were "men" of old "men" of renown- you can see He does not state they were angel men mix He is clear they were men. Men come from men= humans. We are sons of God - we are His children- the Lords Prayer (not given to any angel) starts " Our Father Who Art in Heaven".. Jesus identified the children of the devil " you are of your father the devil" they also were humans. Yes angels can manifest in human form but this does not mean they have human bodily functions. Demons possess a body - Jesus cast out demons- these spirits dont procreate with humans. Even the devil uses a man as the anti christ. Sorry but I do not see how it is possible. I feel the only time spirit and flesh became one was Jesus Christ Himself, the only begotton Son of God.
@@mimi45945 Exactly! Also, nowhere in Scriptures do we see a fallen angel possessing human body. Nowhere! Righteous angels? Yes, but not bad fallen angels.
@@iraidushka Happy new year Irisha. Exactly- we choose to do good or evil. I was looking at the four horsemen of the apocolypse - KJV call them" beasts " ..I saw a few verses that show these 4 bowing to Jesus and God so clearly the misery these 4 cause on the earth is controlled by God = HIS judgements, its Jesus Christ symbolised as the slain lamb that lets these 4 go (opening of the 7 seals). When comparing the book of enoch and its version of end times to The Holy Bible its clear to see why its not deemed Scripture. Sadly people will believe what they want to believe - its their choice. First warning Jesus gave as a sign of His second coming "do not be deceived". Irisha, when you look at the story of judas iscarriot, do you see how he repented ? he went to those he conspired with - he did not turn to God (last supper verse " satan entered him and he went his way" ) So belief is very important- get it wrong and "the door is closed" so to speak.
@@iraidushka @rhia c The watchers(Daniel 4:13 &17) were not fallen angels. They were in heaven and came down onto the daughters of men, took wives for themselves, and bore children with them, and these off springs were the giants-great men of old. As much as you may be inclined to think the "sons of god" were human, the bible indicates otherwise. These are non human, heavenly beings because the bible indicates in Job 38:4-7, that these beings, the sons of God, were present at the time God laid the foundations of the earth and were shouting for joy. Where were humans when God was creating the earth? Humans were not created until the 6th day of creation. So there goes that theory that the "sons of God" being referred to in Genesis were human. These beings can only be heavenly beings. So these beings, the Watchers/sons of god, fell out of favor with God when they left their first home (as Jude 1:6 alludes to) and came onto the women, had children with them and taught them some of the secrets of heaven. Some of this knowledge, according to enoch, includes the art of forging weapons to kill, which is not surprising because swords and weapons existed in heaven long before humans were created. The first time a sword is mentioned in the bible is after the sin of adam and eve- we see the flaming sword put by God along a cherubim to guard the tree of life in Genesis 3:24. We also see the angel who confronts Balaam in Numbers 22:23 holding a sword. David sees the angel of the lord with a sword in 1 Chronicles 21:16 and other places. You hate abortion? Guess what, apparently, fallen angels taught this evil deed to humans! Since the watchers abused this privilege and helped corrupt the human race with this knowledge, God had them chained in darkness as Jude 1:6 and 2 Peter 2:4 allude to. It seems the bible suggests that heavenly beings are able to assume a human form; hence, the reason why the writer in Hebrews 13:2 encourages the reader not to forget to be hospitable to people because some have unknowingly entertained angels. God appeared with some angels to Abraham, obviously in a human body and ate food that sarah prepared-Genesis 18:7-8. Jacob physically wrestled with an angel who'd appeared in the form of a man till day break- Genesis 32:22-25 The bible offers no explanation for the origin of demons. The book of enoch does. It does say that the demons are the disembodied spirits of the nephilim when they died since they are an abomination/hybrid. The demons and the watchers are different beings and not the same. The watchers
5:47 By "The Head of Days" it's referring to Jesus, by son of man (small caps) it was clearly referring to Enoch, the passage is very clear and the two terms are not to be confused, nommatter translation you're using, failure to understand such simple text proves you are (might be) incompetent and not worthy of giving your insight on these texts. However the Books of Enoch remain authentic nonetheless... 71.13 And that Head of Days came with Michael, Gabriel, Raphael and Phanuel, and thousands and tens of thousands of Angels without number. 71.14 And that Angel, came to me, and greeted me with his voice, and said to me: “You are the son of man who was born to righteousness and righteousness remains over you and the righteousness of the Head of Days, will not leave you.”
David quotes 1 Enoch 71:14 from The Hermeneia Translation. A scholar Leslie W. Walck writes about this translation, “If this reading is authentic, then it is the only instance of apocalyptic auto-vision that survives, in which the seer does not recognize himself.” The popular 1912 translation from R. H. Charles has the verse in the third person rather than the second person... "And the angel came to me and greeted me with his voice, and said to me, "THIS IS THE Son of Man who is born to righteousness, and righteousness abides over him, and the righteousness of the Head of Days forsakes him not." There's a huge difference between the two... which one is right? We can't be 100% certain but... Jude quoted from the book of Enoch and so did Yeshua... Jude 14-15 quotes from 1 ENOCH 1:9 ---- It was also about these that Enoch, in the seventh generation from Adam, prophesied, saying, “See, the Lord is coming with ten thousands of his holy ones, to execute judgment on all, and to convict everyone of all the deeds of ungodliness that they have committed in such an ungodly way, and of all the harsh things that ungodly sinners have spoken against him.” Yeshua often quotes scripture even in parables... In Matthew 22:13 Yeshua says, ""Then the king told the attendants, 'Tie him hand and foot, and throw him outside, into the darkness, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.'" 1 Enoch 10 :4-7 says "Bind Azazel hand and foot, and cast him into the darkness: and make an opening in the desert, which is in Dudael, and cast him therein. And place upon him rough and jagged rocks, and cover him with darkness, and let him abide there for ever, and cover his face that he may not see light. And on the day of the great judgement, he shall be cast into the fire." Coincidence?
Thanks for the comment! First, you said, "we can't be 100% certain" regarding how 1 Enoch 71:14 should be translated. That's simply untrue. We CAN be certain, because we know what the Ethiopic text says. R.H. Charles didn't translate the verse according to what it says but emended the text to say what he thought it ought to say. Charles' version of that verse is not a translation but an emendation driven by a bias a baseless hypothesis of a missing passage. Second, Jude (and POSSIBLY Yeshua, though that's a stretch) quoting Enoch does not entail that they considered it inspired or that we should. I go into more detail on this in the first video we did on this topic (link in description). Hope that helps!
@@gbricochetj Shalom. Did you know that doing Ayahuasca belongs to shamanistic rituals and it opens the door for the occult? I'm someone who regularly casts out demons and playing with the occult is truly dangerous. Depression aslo can be demonic, so by opening a door to the occult is truly not helpful, inviting more delusional demons. Therefore thank you for your testimony, it just strenghtened me in opposing the book of Enoch, since you were led after an occult event to read it. Also you might know your SDA background is not a "faith" background, since SDA is in the heretical line of denying the finished work on the cross (according to them Jesus went into the Holy of Holies in 1844) and that SDA was influenced by a Jezebel called Ellen G. White who had astral travels to another planets (occultism) and created the veggie stuff in order to emasculate men. As an exorcist sorry to say but your testimony really concerns me about which Jesus you've come to since there are many fake ones out there. The true one will demand self denial and acknowledging your sinfulness accompanied with godly sorrow. I'm not being critical but factual and I hope you will examine what I've just said. I have a basic deliverance prayer you can pray: "Dear Heavenly Father, please set me free from all the lies I've ever believed in Jesus' name." May the Lord bless you, clearing up everything so that you can find the narrow gate and walk on the pressed way. Shalom.
@@DavidWilberBlog "We CAN be certain, because we know what the Ethiopic text says." so what? it changes nothing whichever translation you prefer. Enoch 71 clearly talks about 2 different "son of man" and that is very clear. You're just lying because that's what liars do. You're probably hoping for your lodge to raise you up another level by deceiving Christians and proving your worth to satanism.
Matthew 22:29 [29]Jesus answered and said unto them, Ye do err, not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of God. Some versions of the Book of Enoch miss some data, you shouldn't side with man since all scripture is given by the inspiration of God. Check out more versions of the text of Enoch. My version says this, Enoch 70:16-18 [16]The Ancient of days came with Michael and Gabriel, Raphael and Phanuel, with thousands of thousands, and myriads of myriads, which could not be numbered [17]Then that angel came to me, and with his voice saluted me, saying, Thou art the offspring of man, who art born for righteousness, and righteousness has rested on thee [18]The righteousness of the Ancient of days shall not forsake thee. Am not a scholar but i can understand that the angel who was revealing the mysteries of the heavens in Enoch's visions was telling Enoch that through his seed because of his righteousness the Son of man Yeshua was to come just like Isaiah prophecied in Isaiah 11:10 [10]And in that day there shall be a root of Jesse, which shall stand for an ensign of the people; to it shall the Gentiles seek: and his rest shall be glorious. Jude courted from the Book of Enoch Jude 1:14-15 [14]And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints, [15]To execute judgment upon all, and to convince all that are ungodly among them of all their ungodly deeds which they have ungodly committed, and of all their hard speeches which ungodly sinners have spoken against him. Apart from the book of Enoch where can we find this prophecy, Sir. And where can we find the testimony of Enoch the righteous who was translated because of his testimony which pleased God. Hebrews 11:5 [5]By faith Enoch was translated that he should not see death; and was not found, because God had translated him: for before his translation he had this testimony, that he pleased God. Jeremiah 30:9 [9]But they shall serve the LORD their God, and David their king, whom I will raise up unto them. The Messiah Yeshua came and taught righteousness and about the Kingdom. Enoch taught about righteousness and David was a king of God's chosen people. Enoch 70:3-24 [3]Then I fell on my face before the Lord of spirits [4]And Michael, one of the archangels, took me by my right hand, raised me up, and brought me out to where was every secret of mercy and secret of righteousness [5]He showed me all the hidden things of the extremities of heaven, all the receptacles of the stars, and the splendours of all, from whence they went forth before the face of the holy [6]And he concealed the spirit of Enoch in the heaven of heavens [7]There I beheld, in the midst of that light, a building raised with stones of ice; [8]And in the midst of these stones vibrations of living fire My spirit saw around the circle of this flaming habitation, on one of its extremities, that there were rivers full of living fire, which encompassed it [9]Then the Seraphim, the Cherubim, and Ophanin surrounded it these are those who never sleep, but watch the throne of his glory [10]And I beheld angels innumerable, thousands of thousands, and myriads of myriads, who surrounded that habitation [11]Michael, Raphael, Gabriel, Phanuel, and the holy angels who were in the heavens above, went in and out of it Michael, Raphael, and Gabriel went out of that habitation, and holy angels innumerable [12]With them was the Ancient of days, whose head was white as wool, and pure, and his robe was indescribable [13]Then I fell upon my face, while all my flesh was dissolved, and my spirit became changed [14]I cried out with a loud voice, with a powerful spirit, blessing, glorifying, and exalting [15]And those blessings, which proceeded from my mouth, became acceptable in the presence of the Ancient of days [16]The Ancient of days came with Michael and Gabriel, Raphael and Phanuel, with thousands of thousands, and myriads of myriads, which could not be numbered [17]Then that angel came to me, and with his voice saluted me, saying, Thou art the offspring of man, who art born for righteousness, and righteousness has rested on thee [18]The righteousness of the Ancient of days shall not forsake thee [19]He said, On thee shall he confer peace 1 in the name of the existing world; for from thence has peace gone forth since the world was created [20]And thus shall it happen to thee for ever and ever [21]All who shall exist, and who shall walk in thy path of righteousness, shall not forsake thee for ever [22]With thee shall be their habitations, with thee their lot; nor from thee shall they be separated for ever and ever [23]And thus shall length of days be with the offspring of man [24]Peace shall be to the righteous; and the path of integrity shall the righteous pursue, in the name of the Lord of spirits, for ever and ever.
@@iraidushka I see that you luck alot of information..there are quite many books which were later removed from the Bible which they labelled apocryphal because they doubt their authenticity...Can you show me where the prophecy of Enoch is written in the Bible and show me his testimony according to Paul when he wrote to the Hebrews. Hebrews 11:5 [5]By faith Enoch was translated that he should not see death; and was not found, because God had translated him: for before his translation he had this testimony, that he pleased God.
@@iraidushka Of the authenticity of all books, who has the right to add and remove, is it man or God? For example, book of philemon tell me were in the Bible it shows that we should read it but we do read it because its contained in the 66 books of Bible. 2 Timothy 3:16-17 [16]All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: [17]That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.
@@iraidushka I hope you realize that there are many spirits that exist? And Yahweh, happens to be Lord over all of them-greater and supreme in every aspect because they were all created by him. Although the term "Lord of Spirits" is not used in the bible, there's one term that comes close to it, and this can be found in Hebrews 12:19 Moreover, we have all had human fathers who disciplined us and we respected them for it. How much more should we submit to the Father of spirits and live! And a translation means to be taken from one place to another. Enoch and Elisha were both translated to heaven-both of them did not taste physical death. "How could the alleged book of Enoch survive the flood? No mention of Noah taking anything on the ark except for 7 people and 7 pairs of clean and unclean animals." So, according to your logic, Noah didn't take any food for himself or the animals because the bible didn't mention that, which makes little sense.
@@explodingrubberducky797 Elisha and Enoch were not translated to Heaven. No such thing has been said in Scriptures. Only that Yahowah took them. But you need to read The Bible little more thorough to know exactly were they went. Bible does mention Noah taking 7 pair clean and 1 pair unclean animals. The clean animals were for food.
Apologetics by definition is defending the Bible not necessarily a search for truth. There is a lot of speculation in his argument. How is the book of Enoch ancient and yet written after books younger than itself.. Scholars are just that, scholars they do not necessarily hold the truth. Lest we forget those who claimed to be scholars during Jesus's time rejected him as not fitting the profile of the messiah. I hear echoes here..
Can you elaborate on what is speculative in my argument? I've presented pretty definitive evidence that places 1 Enoch later in history: marks of Greek influence, Aramaic, use of later material. All I'm arguing is that we should follow the evidence.
Using BCE and CE 'because other people use it' is a perfect example of how society pushes Jesus out of our everyday lives. I'm not castings stones or trying to be jerk. I'm just saying the secular world changed it because it was centered on Christ and you are unintentionally following suit. "Jesus is at the center of how we measure time itself. " What impact will this statement have when BC and AD are lost? I hope you understand where I'm coming from, I think its important we understand whats happening so we can oppose it when we see it. Peace and may God bless what you guys are doing!
Bro you didn't answer my question. Why was Enoch taken. Or did I miss it somewhere can you timestamp it for me? You sent me a link to this and no answer. It's ok if you don't know why he was "taken". He didn't die like so many in the bible.
@@daniellaclinton8813 And Enoch walked with God: and he was not; for God took him. I don't have a PhD in theology, wait neither does this guy, to find it in Genesis 5:24. I was just pointing out from a previous comment thread to not dismiss him so easily.
@@samwihapi6286 sorry, the context of your question was lost on me 😅 I thought I was being helpful, turns out your question was rhetorical and also for the maker of the video
Whose Charles except being a translator ‘ Iyou think one of the disciples of Jesus how can you sure about Enoc and I will tell you that the Roman or Greece’s didn’t influence and creating about Ethiopian Enoch’s books written in Geez and I will tell you as Ethiopian we have our own calendars idk why y’all argue About Bc or whatever check our calendar and dig into it and am Protestant but Ik your enlightenment but more research!!
Why David is interpreting that there is no BC? See, you said there is no BC because Christ is eternal, Well,that is biblical aspect about Christ before He appeared on Earth. But He was really born 2000 years ago and divided the time (AD and BC) from that we still counting as year.if Christ was not here , then you tell me what is the exact year now rather than 2020?
Heard the statements about why the Book of ENOCH was written later ,ok I can understand the greek influence in most scripture. What of the Book of Enoch in the Dead Sea Scrolls ? The arguments don't hold water with that . Then your other arguments about ENOCK relate to the same flawed Greek translations. Sorry but I see too much deception . GO BACK and study the Dead sea scrolls .
sojourn Traveler well, the Greek empire had already come and gone (being consumed by the Roman) by the time the Essene community had formed. In other words, the Greeks ruled that area prior to the DSS. This is why much of Judaism was Hellenized in the first century. In Caesarea, for example, the Shema was said every Sabbath in Greek, not Hebrew.
As explained in the previous video, Yeshua implicitly rejected 1 Enoch as Scripture by affirming the OT canon of His day, which every historian and scholar acknowledges excluded 1 Enoch. This is confirmed in primary historical sources. Sorry the facts upset you.
You are very desperate to be basing your rejection of 1 Enoch mainly on one doubtful word, whether "Son of Man" might be referring to Enoch or to another person. You are writing a long paper, but are ignoring the immediate context in 1 Enoch 71:15. "And he [the Angel] said to me [Enoch]: ' He [the Son of Man from 71:14] proclaims peace to you [Enoch] in the name of the age that is to be [i.e. "The Kingdom of God" which LORD Yeshua proclaims in the Gospels!]; for from there peace has proceeded since the creation of the world ["the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world"], and thus you will have it forever and forever and ever [i.e. all saints in LORD Yeshua will inherit the Kingdom of God]." (Hermeia translation) It goes against simple logic and the immediate context to think that the angel would enlighten Enoch about how Enoch would declare something to himself [Enoch]. Look at what happens in 71:14-15: Verse 14: The angel proclaims to Enoch who the Son of Man would be and it is NOT Enoch Verse 15: The angel declares to Enoch that he would inherit the age to come (just as all believers in Messiah Yeshua) FROM the Son of Man This is the simple context and the simple meaning which you are ignoring entirely - sadly! You have to understand and acknowledge: Scribal errors have always been a common phenomenon in the course of the transmission of the Word of YHWH. We as Christians have been defending the accuracy, inspiration and reliability of the Word of YHWH, and resolving discrepancies through "context" for millenia. I am sure this is how you would defend the accuracy of the Bible on other issues when e.g. an unbeliever would criticize passages in the Bible that seem to be contradicting each other or seemingly making no sense - but here you are ignoring the immediate context and are desperately holding to something that is entirely illogical, just to defend your doctrine and reject 1 Enoch in its entirety although it is quoted basically verbatim in Jude as Scripture, which would render you a heretic in this matter. Insisting on a wrong reading and a wrong conclusion, although the immediate context enlightens us about the correct reading just to justify a view that you would like to be true ist just wrong and not upright.
The "He" in verse 15 is the Head of Days, not the Son of Man. Why? Because Enoch is declared to be the Son of Man in verse 14. You literally have to import an additional figure who isn't mentioned into the text to make the passage say what you want it to say. The immediate context confirms what every modern scholar of 1 Enoch says: Enoch is identified as the Son of Man. All you have to do is read it. If you're interested, I go into more detail on this in my response video to Zach Bauer, which is on my channel.
@@DavidWilberBlog "Because Enoch is declared to be the Son of Man in verse 14." But nowhere is he called "THAT Son of Man", which is how Jesus is referred to in 71. And, of course, you added the capitalization to son of man yourself. I guess since you began that deception you have to keep it up, eh?
