What do you think about Jude quoting Enoch?

[NathanH83]

Did Jude accept the book of Enoch as scripture?

 

[Josiah]

No such indication.

No more than Paul's reference to Greek poets in Acts 17 indicates he thus regarded their words as inerrant, fully/equally canonical, divinely-inscripturated words of God.

Perhaps you've been to a Christian church (especially an American "Evangelical" one) where the pastor quotes from some book or movie or TV show or newspaper article or lyrics of a song that he does NOT consider to be among THE few inerrant, fully/equally canonical, divinely-inscripturated words of God. Words up there on the big screens American "Evangelical" churches often have. Or maybe you've read books written by some American "Evangelical" where there are quotes from philosophers, scientists, politicians ... or illustrations.... or whatever that the author does NOT view as among the few inerrant, equally/fully canonical, divinely-inscripturated words of God.

I think it's LIKELY (but cannot be substantiated) that he is quoting from a book that has never been considered Scripture by Jews or Christians. LIKELY. Just as it is clear Paul did in Acts 17 and nearly every Christian pastor, theologian and writer does even now. But this is not proof that ERGO the source is THUS viewed as among the few inerrant, equally/fully canonical, divinely-inscripturated words of God. That is an absurd and incredible leap.




.

 

[NathanH83]

No such indication.

No more than Paul's reference to Greek poets in Acts 17 indicates he thus regarded their words as inerrant, fully/equally canonical, divinely-inscripturated words of God.

Perhaps you've been to a Christian church (especially an American "Evangelical" one) where the pastor quotes from some book or movie or TV show or newspaper article or lyrics of a song that he does NOT consider to be among THE few inerrant, fully/equally canonical, divinely-inscripturated words of God. Words up there on the big screens American "Evangelical" churches often have. Or maybe you've read books written by some American "Evangelical" where there are quotes from philosophers, scientists, politicians ... or illustrations.... or whatever that the author does NOT view as among the few inerrant, equally/fully canonical, divinely-inscripturated words of God.

I think it's LIKELY (but cannot be substantiated) that he is quoting from a book that has never been considered Scripture by Jews or Christians. LIKELY. Just as it is clear Paul did in Acts 17 and nearly every Christian pastor, theologian and writer does even now. But this is not proof that ERGO the source is THUS viewed as among the few inerrant, equally/fully canonical, divinely-inscripturated words of God. That is an absurd and incredible leap.




.

What is a ERGO?
And what is a TOME?

 

[pinacled]

What is a ERGO?
And what is a TOME?

Yair(jude) only spoke of the 7th generational enoch aside from the lineneage of qyain.

2 trees

 

[pinacled]

What is a ERGO?
And what is a TOME?

I ve never heard of "tome".

Is it a cuneiform of speech?

 

[NathanH83]

Yair(jude) only spoke of the 7th generational enoch aside from the lineneage of qyain.

2 trees

Ankle bone.
Ocean tide.
Wrong frequency.
Beady eyes.

See, I can say random words too.

 

[pinacled]

Ankle bone.
Ocean tide.
Wrong frequency.
Beady eyes.

See, I can say random words too.

The 2 linageages have enoch without armor upon the ankle.
When tide Pearl's are revealed to be a trojan horse capable of walking on sand.

Horses without a bridle will sink into a frequency of fire..

And only pearled eyes will witness a fire mare's flight.

Blessing Always

 

[NathanH83]

Yair(jude) only spoke of the 7th generational enoch aside from the lineneage of qyain.

2 trees

Yair.
Qyain.
Trionial.
Hardensic.
Frempt.
Par-glonsen.

See, I can make up words too.

 

[tango]

Did Jude accept the book of Enoch as scripture?

Call me Ishmael.

Does this prove I regard Moby Dick as being divinely inspired?

 

[Andrew]

Yair.
Qyain.
Trionial.
Hardensic.
Frempt.
Par-glonsen.

See, I can make up words too.

Yair is a Hebrew name. Pronounced ya-EAR, it is a Hebrew verb meaning "he will light" or "he will enlighten". It appears both in ancient Jewish sources and as a familiar name in contemporary Israel. In Scriptural and archaic form, it may appear as Jair or Ya'ir.

Par-glonsen is the technical term for "side-fumbling" which was once a common issue with modulation devices

 

[pinacled]

Yair.
Qyain.
Trionial.
Hardensic.
Frempt.
Par-glonsen.

See, I can make up words too.

Frempt has a definition.

 

[pinacled]

Call me Ishmael.

Does this prove I regard Moby Dick as being divinely inspired?

Only if mobious was a sand worm on the planet of arakis

 

[pinacled]

Yair.
Qyain.
Trionial.
Hardensic.
Frempt.
Par-glonsen.

See, I can make up words too.

My point is that you will find a number of digits relating to generations.

One tree has 5
The other has 6

Keep up youngin

 

[NathanH83]

Call me Ishmael.

Does this prove I regard Moby Dick as being divinely inspired?

Depends on how you quote it.
It also makes a big difference when you’re Jesus’ brother.

 

[pinacled]

Depends on how you quote it.
It also makes a big difference when you’re Jesus’ brother.

2 trees represent the heart.
One is circumcised.

 

[tango]

Depends on how you quote it.
It also makes a big difference when you’re Jesus’ brother.

OK, "For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son that whosoever believeth in him may not perish but have everlasting life". "Call me Ishmael". Does this mean I consider Moby Dick to be as significant as Scripture?

 

[Josiah]

Depends on how you quote it.
It also makes a big difference when you’re Jesus’ brother.

No.


1. It makes no difference whatsoever as to who is quoting.

2. Nowhere does the Book of Jude state that the author is the son of Mary or the brother of Jesus.... And brother, remember, "brother" was a very, very broad and loose term.\

3. You'll have a hard time finding any scholar who holds that the "JUDE" here is the same "Jude" mentioned as a "brother" of Jesus.... . The ECF's did not believe that.... Luther and Calvin did not believe that.... pretty much no one believes that.


And it would make no difference. Even IF the unknown author is quoting a book, that has NOTHING to do with stating, "And this book is ergo among the collect of inerrant, fully/equally canonical, divinely-inscripturated words of God. When your preach tells a story.... quotes a book or movie or song... reports something from newspaper or magazine or TV show... that does NOT prove that ERGO that TV show or book or song or magazine is among the collection of inerrant, fully/equally canonical, divinely-inscripturated words of God. Come on, how silly can you get? That's just absurd.




.

 

[NathanH83]

No.


1. It makes no difference whatsoever as to who is quoting.

2. Nowhere does the Book of Jude state that the author is the son of Mary or the brother of Jesus.... And brother, remember, "brother" was a very, very broad and loose term.\

3. You'll have a hard time finding any scholar who holds that the "JUDE" here is the same "Jude" mentioned as a "brother" of Jesus.... . The ECF's did not believe that.... Luther and Calvin did not believe that.... pretty much no one believes that.


And it would make no difference. Even IF the unknown author is quoting a book, that has NOTHING to do with stating, "And this book is ergo among the collect of inerrant, fully/equally canonical, divinely-inscripturated words of God. When your preach tells a story.... quotes a book or movie or song... reports something from newspaper or magazine or TV show... that does NOT prove that ERGO that TV show or book or song or magazine is among the collection of inerrant, fully/equally canonical, divinely-inscripturated words of God. Come on, how silly can you get? That's just absurd.




.

You still haven’t explained what an ERGO is or what a TOME is.

 

[NathanH83]

OK, "For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son that whosoever believeth in him may not perish but have everlasting life". "Call me Ishmael". Does this mean I consider Moby Dick to be as significant as Scripture?

You’re not the brother of Jesus.
You’re not an apostle.

But Jude is. He mentions events from Exodus, then events from Enoch, then events from Genesis.

He’s got Enoch sandwiched right in between Genesis and Exodus. It’s like an Enoch sandwich. And he expected his audience to have read it.

I. -Verse 5, he mentions the Red Sea crossing (from Exodus)

II. -Verse 6 he mentions the angels sinning and being chained in darkness (from Enoch)

III. -Then verse 7 he mentions Sodom and Gomorrah (from Genesis).

An Enoch sandwich.

Then in verses 14 and 15, he quotes Enoch, word-for-word verbatim, as if he’s quoting holy scripture, fully expecting his audience to have read it too.


Yes, this is significantly different than some random dude on the Internet in the 21st century quoting Moby Dick. Big difference.

 

[tango]

You’re not the brother of Jesus.
You’re not an apostle.

But Jude is. He mentions events from Exodus, then events from Enoch, then events from Genesis.

He’s got Enoch sandwiched right in between Genesis and Exodus. It’s like an Enoch sandwich. And he expected his audience to have read it.

I. -Verse 5, he mentions the Red Sea crossing (from Exodus)

II. -Verse 6 he mentions the angels sinning and being chained in darkness (from Enoch)

III. -Then verse 7 he mentions Sodom and Gomorrah (from Genesis).

An Enoch sandwich.

Then in verses 14 and 15, he quotes Enoch, word-for-word verbatim, as if he’s quoting holy scripture, fully expecting his audience to have read it too.


Yes, this is significantly different than some random dude on the Internet in the 21st century quoting Moby Dick. Big difference.

Really no different at all. Some words of Scripture record historical events. That doesn't mean we are called to copy the historical events, merely that they happened. Other words of Scripture are clear mandates and prohibitions. You're trying to imply that the presence of something in a book makes it equivalent to everything else in the same book. It doesn't work that way.

If Jude expected his audience to have read Enoch (which is a bit of an assumption in itself) that doesn't mean he regarded it as being divinely inspired. I've been known to quote lyrics from secular music when I preach but that doesn't mean I consider secular music to be equivalent to Scripture, I just use them to make a point. Depending on the context when I'm talking to people I might expect them to be familiar with aspects of modern culture that are nothing to do with Scripture.

You're still assuming that a mention of something makes it divinely inspired. You can't get there from here.