Ok, I see lots of posts on here about religion, faith, beliefs, etc. I reply to some of them, but I’ve always wanted to start one for people that just have questions.
First off, I am a Christian but feel free to ask about anything. This is just about questions so please don’t post trying to push some atheism agenda and don’t be negative.
That being said, let’s here what you got, and I’ll do my best to answer.
Tell me youre feelings on the Book of Enoch.
there is some pretty wild stuff in there.
It’s completely unknown when the Book of Enoch was written but the earliest known texts appear around 300BC. This is odd from a book supposedly written by Enoch, the great-grandson of Adam, which puts him living before about 2500BC since he was also the great-grandfather of Noah. The book has always been considered false and was kept out of both the Torah in Jewish times and the Bible when it was assembled around 300AD. It was completely unknown outside of Ethiopia until around 1700AD.
Typically, books left out of the Canon known today as the Bible were done so because it was doubtful they were written by: A) The author ascribed to them B) the time period the author would have lived or C) completely contradicted other books of the Bible. The Book of Enoch pretty much meets all three standards. It was definitely known to early Church fathers who referenced it and to whom the idea that fallen angels intermarried with women to create a race of giants. However, the term referred to in Genesis as “fallen ones” could not have been angels as fallen angels could not have become men or bred with mortal women. If they could have then it would make sense that Lucifer, chief of the fallen angels, could have and most likely would have done both.
Hope that helped.
Not another one! Uncle!
So let me explain how this is going to go…First you express you self in an honest and vulnerable way. Then some atheist is going to insult you and tell you that Christianity is the root of all evil, because of the crusades and that the world would be better off with out religion, period. Then it will be pointed out that atheists in fact have done the most evil the world has ever know by a wide margin. Then, they’ll come back with atheists are al independent so you can’t do evil in the name of nothing and then they try to say that evil atheists were Catholic because they were so as a kid. Then it will break down in to whether or not God exists. Of course, science and philosophy will be brought in because they at the root of it. All the while people will chime in with "fuck you"s and “dumbass”, etc. Then the thread will sort of fade away only to start over again with another post. Having been apart of many, I am well versed. Next time let the other thread die before starting a new one, these discussions are very labor intensive.
Good luck.
P.S. - I hope your not a creationist.
[quote]pat wrote:
Not another one! Uncle!
So let me explain how this is going to go…First you express you self in an honest and vulnerable way. Then some atheist is going to insult you and tell you that Christianity is the root of all evil, because of the crusades and that the world would be better off with out religion, period. Then it will be pointed out that atheists in fact have done the most evil the world has ever know by a wide margin. Then, they’ll come back with atheists are al independent so you can’t do evil in the name of nothing and then they try to say that evil atheists were Catholic because they were so as a kid. Then it will break down in to whether or not God exists. Of course, science and philosophy will be brought in because they at the root of it. All the while people will chime in with "fuck you"s and “dumbass”, etc. Then the thread will sort of fade away only to start over again with another post. Having been apart of many, I am well versed. Next time let the other thread die before starting a new one, these discussions are very labor intensive.
Good luck.
P.S. - I hope your not a creationist.[/quote]
Nah, I can just ignore anyone that wants to rant and rave, and of course I’m a creationist. If you say you believe in God then you have to believe he created mankind.
[quote]pat wrote:
Not another one! Uncle!
So let me explain how this is going to go…First you express you self in an honest and vulnerable way. Then some atheist is going to insult you and tell you that Christianity is the root of all evil, because of the crusades and that the world would be better off with out religion, period. Then it will be pointed out that atheists in fact have done the most evil the world has ever know by a wide margin. Then, they’ll come back with atheists are al independent so you can’t do evil in the name of nothing and then they try to say that evil atheists were Catholic because they were so as a kid. Then it will break down in to whether or not God exists. Of course, science and philosophy will be brought in because they at the root of it. All the while people will chime in with "fuck you"s and “dumbass”, etc. Then the thread will sort of fade away only to start over again with another post. Having been apart of many, I am well versed. Next time let the other thread die before starting a new one, these discussions are very labor intensive.
Good luck.
P.S. - I hope your not a creationist.[/quote]
Yeah…
Good times.
[quote]BBriere wrote:
[quote]pat wrote:
Not another one! Uncle!
So let me explain how this is going to go…First you express you self in an honest and vulnerable way. Then some atheist is going to insult you and tell you that Christianity is the root of all evil, because of the crusades and that the world would be better off with out religion, period. Then it will be pointed out that atheists in fact have done the most evil the world has ever know by a wide margin. Then, they’ll come back with atheists are al independent so you can’t do evil in the name of nothing and then they try to say that evil atheists were Catholic because they were so as a kid. Then it will break down in to whether or not God exists. Of course, science and philosophy will be brought in because they at the root of it. All the while people will chime in with "fuck you"s and “dumbass”, etc. Then the thread will sort of fade away only to start over again with another post. Having been apart of many, I am well versed. Next time let the other thread die before starting a new one, these discussions are very labor intensive.
Good luck.
P.S. - I hope your not a creationist.[/quote]
Nah, I can just ignore anyone that wants to rant and rave, and of course I’m a creationist. If you say you believe in God then you have to believe he created mankind.[/quote]
And why do you have to be so narrow minded as to assert that to believe in God mandates that one has to subscribe to the belief that Genesis is a literal version of events instead of allegory fit for the readers of that time?
[quote]BBriere wrote:
It’s completely unknown when the Book of Enoch was written but the earliest known texts appear around 300BC. This is odd from a book supposedly written by Enoch, the great-grandson of Adam, which puts him living before about 2500BC since he was also the great-grandfather of Noah. The book has always been considered false and was kept out of both the Torah in Jewish times and the Bible when it was assembled around 300AD. It was completely unknown outside of Ethiopia until around 1700AD.
Typically, books left out of the Canon known today as the Bible were done so because it was doubtful they were written by: A) The author ascribed to them B) the time period the author would have lived or C) completely contradicted other books of the Bible. The Book of Enoch pretty much meets all three standards. It was definitely known to early Church fathers who referenced it and to whom the idea that fallen angels intermarried with women to create a race of giants. However, the term referred to in Genesis as “fallen ones” could not have been angels as fallen angels could not have become men or bred with mortal women. If they could have then it would make sense that Lucifer, chief of the fallen angels, could have and most likely would have done both.
Hope that helped.[/quote]
If Enoch being the great grandson of adam puts him living around 2500bc when was adam alive.Also wasnt it believed that Enoch lived like some 600 years.
[quote]pat wrote:
Not another one! Uncle!
So let me explain how this is going to go…First you express you self in an honest and vulnerable way. Then some atheist is going to insult you and tell you that Christianity is the root of all evil, because of the crusades and that the world would be better off with out religion, period. Then it will be pointed out that atheists in fact have done the most evil the world has ever know by a wide margin. Then, they’ll come back with atheists are al independent so you can’t do evil in the name of nothing and then they try to say that evil atheists were Catholic because they were so as a kid. Then it will break down in to whether or not God exists. Of course, science and philosophy will be brought in because they at the root of it. All the while people will chime in with "fuck you"s and “dumbass”, etc. Then the thread will sort of fade away only to start over again with another post. Having been apart of many, I am well versed. Next time let the other thread die before starting a new one, these discussions are very labor intensive.
Good luck.
P.S. - I hope your not a creationist.[/quote]
I honestly don’t get how you guys can keep it up for so long… But sooo very true.
Religion is totaly the root to ALL evil.
I mean ALL!
I skipped some steps, but there, I said it.
Science gives us truth.
Religion gives us meaning.
Everyone has a “religion”. Some more defined than others. Sometimes it is labeled a philosophy. In the end it serves the same purpose.
[quote]JEATON wrote:
Science gives us truth.
Religion gives us meaning.
Everyone has a “religion”. Some more defined than others. Sometimes it is labeled a philosophy. In the end it serves the same purpose.[/quote]
I think science gives us a pretty good idea, while religion gives us unquestionable truth.
The masses see religion as valid.
The philosopher sees religion as false.
The politician recognizes that it is useful.
[quote]horsepuss wrote:
[quote]BBriere wrote:
It’s completely unknown when the Book of Enoch was written but the earliest known texts appear around 300BC. This is odd from a book supposedly written by Enoch, the great-grandson of Adam, which puts him living before about 2500BC since he was also the great-grandfather of Noah. The book has always been considered false and was kept out of both the Torah in Jewish times and the Bible when it was assembled around 300AD. It was completely unknown outside of Ethiopia until around 1700AD.
Typically, books left out of the Canon known today as the Bible were done so because it was doubtful they were written by: A) The author ascribed to them B) the time period the author would have lived or C) completely contradicted other books of the Bible. The Book of Enoch pretty much meets all three standards. It was definitely known to early Church fathers who referenced it and to whom the idea that fallen angels intermarried with women to create a race of giants. However, the term referred to in Genesis as “fallen ones” could not have been angels as fallen angels could not have become men or bred with mortal women. If they could have then it would make sense that Lucifer, chief of the fallen angels, could have and most likely would have done both.
Hope that helped.[/quote]
If Enoch being the great grandson of adam puts him living around 2500bc when was adam alive.Also wasnt it believed that Enoch lived like some 600 years.[/quote]
The time table is of course debatable since the Bible doesn’t use specific dates. 2500BC isn’t a given, but what can be traced back from the times after Enoch put him living more or less around that time period.
So back to the original question, Since he was born when Adam himself was around 600 then back up 600 years and that would put the time of Adam as ca. 3100BC. Again you have to give or take some time. Enoch’s recorded age was 365 when it ended on earth.
[quote]BBriere wrote:
[quote]pat wrote:
Not another one! Uncle!
So let me explain how this is going to go…First you express you self in an honest and vulnerable way. Then some atheist is going to insult you and tell you that Christianity is the root of all evil, because of the crusades and that the world would be better off with out religion, period. Then it will be pointed out that atheists in fact have done the most evil the world has ever know by a wide margin. Then, they’ll come back with atheists are al independent so you can’t do evil in the name of nothing and then they try to say that evil atheists were Catholic because they were so as a kid. Then it will break down in to whether or not God exists. Of course, science and philosophy will be brought in because they at the root of it. All the while people will chime in with "fuck you"s and “dumbass”, etc. Then the thread will sort of fade away only to start over again with another post. Having been apart of many, I am well versed. Next time let the other thread die before starting a new one, these discussions are very labor intensive.
Good luck.
P.S. - I hope your not a creationist.[/quote]
Nah, I can just ignore anyone that wants to rant and rave, and of course I’m a creationist. If you say you believe in God then you have to believe he created mankind.[/quote]
Of course, God is creator of everything…but I am not a biblical literalist. I believe the bible is a book of truth, not a book of facts.
I subscribe to the Aristotle view of the uncaused-cause. That works in any realm and though it has been tried, it has not, and cannot be proven wrong, unless you can prove deductively beyond the shadow of any doubt that God does not exist…Unfortunately, that requires you know everything; though task.
[quote]Makavali wrote:
The masses see religion as valid.
The philosopher sees religion as false.
The politician recognizes that it is useful.[/quote]
You’re wrong about the philosopher part. It’s about 50/ 50. However, that means you must be a politician.
[quote]JEATON wrote:
Science gives us truth.
Religion gives us meaning.
Everyone has a “religion”. Some more defined than others. Sometimes it is labeled a philosophy. In the end it serves the same purpose.[/quote]
Yup, simple and to the point.
[quote]BBriere wrote:
[quote]horsepuss wrote:
[quote]BBriere wrote:
It’s completely unknown when the Book of Enoch was written but the earliest known texts appear around 300BC. This is odd from a book supposedly written by Enoch, the great-grandson of Adam, which puts him living before about 2500BC since he was also the great-grandfather of Noah. The book has always been considered false and was kept out of both the Torah in Jewish times and the Bible when it was assembled around 300AD. It was completely unknown outside of Ethiopia until around 1700AD.
Typically, books left out of the Canon known today as the Bible were done so because it was doubtful they were written by: A) The author ascribed to them B) the time period the author would have lived or C) completely contradicted other books of the Bible. The Book of Enoch pretty much meets all three standards. It was definitely known to early Church fathers who referenced it and to whom the idea that fallen angels intermarried with women to create a race of giants. However, the term referred to in Genesis as “fallen ones” could not have been angels as fallen angels could not have become men or bred with mortal women. If they could have then it would make sense that Lucifer, chief of the fallen angels, could have and most likely would have done both.
Hope that helped.[/quote]
If Enoch being the great grandson of adam puts him living around 2500bc when was adam alive.Also wasnt it believed that Enoch lived like some 600 years.[/quote]
The time table is of course debatable since the Bible doesn’t use specific dates. 2500BC isn’t a given, but what can be traced back from the times after Enoch put him living more or less around that time period.
So back to the original question, Since he was born when Adam himself was around 600 then back up 600 years and that would put the time of Adam as ca. 3100BC. Again you have to give or take some time. Enoch’s recorded age was 365 when it ended on earth.
[/quote]
Is that 365 earth years or does that count the time he spent up in the heavens with the ones who came down from Heaven, or the Annunaki as the Sumerians called them.
Also I recently skipped through an article on yahoo about the origins of the bible and it was dated back to the 9th century BC because of some Hebrew language dating.
[quote]horsepuss wrote:
[quote]BBriere wrote:
[quote]horsepuss wrote:
[quote]BBriere wrote:
It’s completely unknown when the Book of Enoch was written but the earliest known texts appear around 300BC. This is odd from a book supposedly written by Enoch, the great-grandson of Adam, which puts him living before about 2500BC since he was also the great-grandfather of Noah. The book has always been considered false and was kept out of both the Torah in Jewish times and the Bible when it was assembled around 300AD. It was completely unknown outside of Ethiopia until around 1700AD.
Typically, books left out of the Canon known today as the Bible were done so because it was doubtful they were written by: A) The author ascribed to them B) the time period the author would have lived or C) completely contradicted other books of the Bible. The Book of Enoch pretty much meets all three standards. It was definitely known to early Church fathers who referenced it and to whom the idea that fallen angels intermarried with women to create a race of giants. However, the term referred to in Genesis as “fallen ones” could not have been angels as fallen angels could not have become men or bred with mortal women. If they could have then it would make sense that Lucifer, chief of the fallen angels, could have and most likely would have done both.
Hope that helped.[/quote]
If Enoch being the great grandson of adam puts him living around 2500bc when was adam alive.Also wasnt it believed that Enoch lived like some 600 years.[/quote]
The time table is of course debatable since the Bible doesn’t use specific dates. 2500BC isn’t a given, but what can be traced back from the times after Enoch put him living more or less around that time period.
So back to the original question, Since he was born when Adam himself was around 600 then back up 600 years and that would put the time of Adam as ca. 3100BC. Again you have to give or take some time. Enoch’s recorded age was 365 when it ended on earth.
[/quote]
Is that 365 earth years or does that count the time he spent up in the heavens with the ones who came down from Heaven, or the Annunaki as the Sumerians called them.
Also I recently skipped through an article on yahoo about the origins of the bible and it was dated back to the 9th century BC because of some Hebrew language dating.
[/quote]
I think you’re confusing Christianity, Sumerian mythology, and new age beliefs. The Annunaki are mentioned in Sumerian mythology, but they are simply part of the pantheon of the gods. The Annunaki in other beliefs are known as fallen angels or possibly space aliens. Anyway, the Bible only acknowledges one God and Enoch was a mortal man just as everyone else except Jesus.
The original five books of the Bible, known as the Pentateuch, were written mostly by Moses. These books were already in use by the time of King David who lived and reigned around the 11th and 10th century BC since David is known to have broken nearly all 10 Commandments. In other words, the 9th century is much too late for it to have be written. It’s possible one of the oldest compiled list of all the scrolls of the books of the Bible came from the 9th century BC.
^^^^, I know the difference between Annunaki and Enoch’s acounts of traveling to heaven I just brought up the Annunaki because the sumerians acounts of the Annunaki sound very similar to the tales of Enoch ascending into the heavens.
“Once, when Enoch was teaching people, the Godâ??s angel appealed to him, and gave him a message that it had been decided to summon him to the heaven, so he would teach the sons of the God, as he had been teaching the sons of men before that. <…> And so the storm fell uponâ?¦ A fiery chariot with fiery horses appeared in a whirlwind, and Enoch ascended into heaven”
[quote]pat wrote:
Of course, God is creator of everything…but I am not a biblical literalist. I believe the bible is a book of truth, not a book of facts. [/quote]
Interesting point you bring up. We all know that the Bible contains a mixture of facts and metaphors/parables, so it must be interpreted literally and figuratively. My question is, when do you know for certain if something is literal vs metaphorical?