/christian/ - Christian Discussion and Fellowship

Jewish mythology and pure gnosticism.

So I give it a no.

>>747967

>Jewish mythology and pure gnosticism.

Mythology may be true, but there's nothing Gnostic about it. It's Jewish in nature. Not Gentile. It's intertestamental literature that predates the New Testament. Gnosticism is a specific sect that tried to merge Platonism with Christianity and was well after the New Testament times.

It's even quoted in the book of Jude:

"And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints, 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." -Jude 1:14,15

This is clearly from the first chapter of Enoch (verse 9).

>>747960

The original is long gone, and all we have is a fanfiction. It’s also loved by conspiritards.

>>747984

There is no other version. It was discovered in the Dead Sea Scrolls, and is similar to the Ethiopic version we already know of. That's about as original as it's going to get (pre 1st century, written in Aramaic. The previous versions were only in Greek and Ethiopic).

It was never originally written by Enoch, and in a sense, yes, it's "fan fiction", but it had a sincere purpose: Jews had just come back from Exile, with their experience of Babylon and it's gods. The writer of Enoch basically looked back to Genesis 6 and elaborated where all of the world's false gods came from and interpreted in light of the scriptures. This is part of an older Jewish tradition on idols, but writer made Enoch the mouthpiece.

>>747989

Have you read the Book of Enoch, what were your thoughts?

I'm really interested in the Book of Jasher, but apparently it has been lost and never found. The Book of Jasher is quoted directly in Scripture.

>>747993

Well, like I said above, it's kind of a polemic on false gods, most of all.. and ties that into Genesis' origins (specifically Genesis 6, of the story of the fallen angels who mated with women). You don't necessarily need to read it, but it's good to get into the mind of post-Exile Jewish thought.

The book of Jasher is mentioned in the Bible, but the actual text being presented as the book of Jasher has no ancient evidence like Enoch. A lot of scholars suspect it to be a hoax. Only Enoch and Jubilees have a wide array of copies.

It's a Jewish fable therefore non Canon.

Op here.

Book of jasher?

https://www.sacred-texts.com/chr/apo/jasher/index.htm

Only “copy” I know of.

Also

I only got into it because of genesis 6:4. Lots of conspiracies about nephelim and antediluvian civilizations being highly advanced because of their influence. It was interesting to say the least but I don’t put my faith in it as much as I do in kjv 1611.

>>748594

That's all Enoch really is. It shares your fascination with Genesis 6.. So much packed in that small passage. But I think the Lord wanted the writer of Genesis to leave it at that.. that the post-Flood world is what we should focus on. And good riddance to those monsters.

But we want to poke and figure it out. And that was the writer of Enoch.. a post Exile Jew simply trying to figure it out and drawing correlations with the false gods around the world.

That said, it's better to listen to a 3/4th century BC Jew on what Genesis 6 means than some kook on the History Channel says. Or even many pastors. I think these Jews were simply closer to whatever tradition Genesis 6 came from, while everyone else is separated by more degrees and outside contexts as to make their input worthless.

>>747969

>Gnosticism is a specific sect that tried to merge Platonism with Christianity and was well after the New Testament times

That's one way to look at it, I guess.

But I can agree with the rest you said.

>>748596

>That said, it's better to listen to a 3/4th century BC Jew on what Genesis 6 means than some kook on the History Channel says

I disagree

>>748623

>I disagree

Care to explain? If I wanted to know about, say, medieval English history, I'd more than likely get clearer views from the guy living in the year 1000 and who still lives in England.. than some outsider, 2000 years removed and lives in the Virgin Islands.

If I wanted to know about Puritan America, I'd more likely get a clearer view from the generations after them.. than some faggot at Yale in 1994.

I'm actually giving the History channel too much credit. Because they don't even have faggots from Yale. They have people like David Wilcock, who says that the angels themselves explained it all to him… and denies that Jesus even saves people from their sins (but teaches that Jesus is more like another Buddha and everyone misunderstood. yada yada).

>>748624

The outsider had more time on his hands to study the text more thoroughly and with more and better resources at his hand tho.

>>747989

The Book of Enoch has the clearest prophecy of Jesus of any early Hebrew work. It was definitely inspired.

In those days shall the earth deliver up from her womb, and hell deliver up from hers, that which it has received; and destruction shall restore that which it owes.

He shall select the righteous and holy from among them; for the day of their salvation has approached.

And in those days shall the Elect One sit upon his throne, while every secret of intellectual wisdom shall proceed from his mouth, for the Lord of spirits has gifted and glorified him.

In those days the mountains shall skip like rams, and the hills shall leap like young sheep (46) satiated with milk; and all the righteous shall become like angels in heaven.

Their countenance shall be bright with joy; for in those days shall the Elect One be exalted. The earth shall rejoice; the righteous shall inhabit it, and the elect possess it.

>>748684

>In those days the mountains shall skip like rams, and the hills shall leap like young sheep (46) satiated with milk; and all the righteous shall become like angels in heaven.

That really is a beautiful passage, inspired or not.

>>748596

If only in could read the original texts.

I feel like you can get a feel for the writers mindset and who they were as a person. But unfortunately I can neither read that language nor would I have access to the texts.

>>748592

I don't think that's the original Book of Jasher, thanks for trying though.

>>748596

>That said, it's better to listen to a 3/4th century BC Jew on what Genesis 6 means than some kook on the History Channel says.

Or better yet listening to the wise words of Church Fathers like Augustine who say the angel human hybrids are a stupid fable just like the whole book of Enoch.