Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Jesus had no problem with it, nor did His womb brothers, James and Jude, nor His apostles, nor did His disciple, Barnabas [who was also a called apostle to the Gentiles along with Saul/Paul]; but 2,000 years after Jesus walked the earth in His flesh, and preached His Gospel -using the framework revealed by Enoch, of Him and of the judgment- you do have difficulty with it. -now I wonder why that is -H-m-m?
Luk 16:22 And it came to pass, that the beggar died, and was carried by the angels into Abraham's bosom: the rich man also died, and was buried; And in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom. And he cried and said, Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, and cool my tongue; for I am tormented in this flame.
Luk 16:25 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?
b=Luk&c=16&v=1&t=KJV#comm/25 - broken link) But Abraham said, Son, remember that thou in thy lifetime receivedst thy good things, and likewise Lazarus evil things: but now he is comforted, and thou art tormented. And beside all this, between us and you there is a great gulf fixed: so that they which would pass from hence to you cannot; neither can they pass to us, that [would come] from thence.
Hi yeshuasaved me,
I don't know if you read a few pages back on this thread, but I tried to show what the parable of Lazarus and the Rich Man was about. Can you read it and get back to me?
Also, I believe that the Jews were bringing in a lot of strange ideas about the afterlife, having traveled through through Greece, Babylon, Egypt and so on. Maybe, just maybe, Jesus was using their own fouled-up ideas about who God was when He spoke to them. I mean, you can tell He was certainly angry with them. There are many layers of meaning behind that parable.
I understand that Jude references Enoch, but I think I have an explanation for that. Remember, if one book is throwing the rest of the Bible off kilter, something might be wrong. The ENTIRE book of Enoch may not be wrong, perhaps, but you should always check it against the whole.
There's something about you I like. What I don't understand is your love affair with the Syriac "Enoch." It not only isn't the only ancient writing claiming Enoch as source, it doesn't convince me it is what it claims. To believe it you have to contradict various things in the commonly accepted 66 books of the Bible.
Thank you.
The Book of Enoch, called Ethiopian Enoch -or 1 Enoch, has nothing in it that contradicts the OT or NT. What is it that you think that it does, and why do you think so? -Just make sure that you have read it before the comments though, please. The Book of Enoch
eternal life equates 500 years in the book of Enoch, I'm pretty sure that's not what you mean with "eternal life"
And no request that they (i.e. their fathers) make of thee shall be granted unto their fathers on their behalf; for they hope to live an eternal life, and that each one of them will live five hundred years.
The five hundred years was when they would be cut off/die. They thought they would live without ever dying, which Adam would have done if he had eaten of The tree of Life in the Garden. Even then, when the nephilliim were to be cut off/die at 500 years of living, in the stolen Adam flesh bodies [which they were in by illegal fornication of their angel watcher fathers -and the gene splicing done to get bodies for them, which is called cutting of roots, in Enoch], the Adam race was still living to nearly a thousand year "day", each, before dying; but the nephillim were given only 500 years [a "half millennial day, before dying].
Adam would have completed one, one thousand year day, if he had not fallen, and then been translated to His immortal body made for the glory. After that time [when the nephillim were given only 500 years] Methusaleh lived nearly a thousand years, as his son Lamech did, and as Noah did, also.
After the tower of Babel affair, YHWH shortened and diminished the lives of the Adam race -while men were still building the tower, even, according to the history of it, in Jasher.
...
Quote:
Originally Posted by svenM
the life of the saints in Enoch is not considered endless:
And then shall all the righteous escape, And shall live till they beget thousands of children, And all the days of their youth and their old age Shall they complete in peace.
Enoch 10:17
You are not reading Enoch for yourself, with the OT also read to correlate both together, which agree; because if you were reading it through, and were familiar with the OT also, and the NT, then you would know that Enoch speaks of the glorious age of the Millennial reign on earth, when those Jews [the people of the "elect" name -"Israel" of the New Man, invoked over Jacob as a sign of the adoption which was to come, in the name of the New Man] and Gentiles [the sheep Gentiles] who are alive on earth at the end of the tribulation and who are gathered by angels to come stand before the King of the earth [Jesus the Christ], are given the Covenant of Salvation in the Name [they are born again in Christ, for no one could be born again in Christ after the Church was removed form the earth and "Zion was hidden", during the tribulation], and at that time, they are given the entrance into the "kingdom prepared from the beginning", on earth; which kingdom Adam sold into sin and corruption and which Jesus the Christ ransomed back by His blood.
Those people who are "the Blessed of YHWH" never die for the entire thousand year reign, and they repopulate the earth with thousands of children. At the end of the thousand year reign of Peace on the restored and no longer cursed earth, then they are translated to the made for glory bodies, which Adam was made to morphose into, without ever dying, before the fall.
Then, because the seed are all born which were created in the loins of Adam and who were to come forth in the Adam being as sons of God, so as to be living stones in the temple of YHWH "made without hands" for His glory to indwell; then the earth and heavens will be regenerated, and the Adam spirit will never multiply on earth again. Then Adam will be cut off in that 8th day of creation, measured as thousand year days.
This is Enoch's teaching, and more is in Isaiah, and Jesus Gospel teaching, and in Jesus' Revelation which He gave to John.
There is a thousand year day of Sabbath Peace coming, after the tribulation, and Enoch wrote of it first, before the flood. Those who enter into that kingdom of God on earth will be just like Adam was, before the fall, and they will multiply the seed of Adam on earth and have thousands of children, and their children will have children, and so on, for one thousand years of Sabbath Peace, when there will be no more curse on earth.
Enoch also wrote of the rapture of the saints [who are redeemed before the tribulation] and the glory they get at the translation/change of them, before the tribulation begins, and of the repentance of those who see that, and repent, but do not get the glory, though they are "saved in His name". Those who miss the translation to glory because they are not born again, in Spirit, and those who are not watching and praying to escape all the things to come, in the tribulation [which Enoch wrote of, first], and who repent, must endure the tribulation, and if they are alive in body when Jesus returns, then they are gathered by the angels to come stand before Him, on His throne of Glory, and they are judged before Him and enter into the "kingdom come, on earth", for the millennial reign, when the will of the LORD will be done and there is no more death but for the unrepentant sinner -and the sinner does not die until he is a hundred, even at that.
This is all in Enoch, Isaiah, and Revelation, besides other prophets of the OT; and in Jesus' teaching.
Here's a passage from Enoch you quoted that contradicts Scripture:
5I saw the spirit of the children of men who were dead, and their voice went forth to heaven and made suit.6Then I asked Raphael the angel who was with me, and I said unto him: "This spirit- whose is it, whose voice goeth forth and maketh suit?" 7And he answered me saying: "This is the spirit which went forth from Abel, whom his brother Cain slew, and he makes his suit against him till his seed is destroyed from the face of the earth, and his seed is annihilated from amongst the seed of men."
The flesh profits nothing. God will never be, is not and never was a racist (even though it is foundational to dipSinsationalism.) All any human needs is the gift of the Holy Spirit to be made righteous. The flesh "seed" of any "tribe and tongue and people and nation" does not determine their destiny. Out of all of them God has constituted Priests, Royal Priests unto Himself.
And they are singing a new song, saying, "Worthy art Thou to be taking the scroll and to open its seals, For Thou wast slain and dost buy us for God by Thy blood. Out of every tribe and language and people and nation. "Thou dost also make them a kingdom and a priesthood for our God, And they shall be reigning on the earth." (Rv 5:9-10, Concordant Literal Translation)
If you say that it is only what the spirit of Abel is doing apart from approval from God several problems arise. Abel is called, "Righteous Abel." Why would he be doing something un-righteous? More, why would he be doing something so contrary to the truth of the nature of reality for so long a time, not being corrected by The Father Who is not stopped by death, but continues to perfect that concerning us?
The seed of Cain are the generation of the wicked, in spirit, who do evil deeds. They are the children of wrath, and they will be removed form the earth and the meek will inherit it.
In Jasher, the prophecy of Abel [which is what made Abel the first prophet slain] states that the LORD will avenge his blood, if Cain killed him -which Cain had threatened to do. The LORD Jesus is the avenger of blood, and that cry for the avenging of his blood is what Abel's soul was calling out to the LORD for, in Genesis 4.
After the resurrection of the dead and the rapture of the living saints -who are all taken to dwell in heaven- then those who repent and believe in Jesus Christ who are martyrs are seen by John, under the altar in heaven, crying out for the avenging of their blood, just as Abel was when Enoch saw him in Sheol. Rev 6:9 ¶ And when he had opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar the souls of them that were slain for the word of God, and for the testimony which they held: Rev 6:10And they cried with a loud voice, saying, How long, O Lord, holy and true, dost thou not judge and avenge our blood on them that dwell on the earth?
Jesus is the Avenger of blood, of all the slain of the earth. He will settle all scores with the unrepentant and remove all things that offend from the earth, at His return.
You are not reading Enoch for yourself, with the OT also read to correlate both together
I think it's not worth the effort, Enoch is a heretical writing, it is not good to dwell to deep in such kind of writings; secondly I don't trust the available translations, I examined a little the Greek version available and I think the book of Enoch is in many aspects equally mistranslated as many bibles.
Thank you.
The Book of Enoch, called Ethiopian Enoch -or 1 Enoch, has nothing in it that contradicts the OT or NT. What is it that you think that it does, and why do you think so? -Just make sure that you have read it before the comments though, please. The Book of Enoch
I will look forward to hearing from you.
(This was my post #230 on page 23
Here's a passage from Enoch you quoted that contradicts Scripture:
5I saw the spirit of the children of men who were dead, and their voice went forth to heaven and made suit.6Then I asked Raphael the angel who was with me, and I said unto him: "This spirit- whose is it, whose voice goeth forth and maketh suit?" 7And he answered me saying: "This is the spirit which went forth from Abel, whom his brother Cain slew, and he makes his suit against him till his seed is destroyed from the face of the earth, and his seed is annihilated from amongst the seed of men."
The flesh profits nothing. God will never be, is not and never was a racist (even though it is foundational to dipSinsationalism.) All any human needs is the gift of the Holy Spirit to be made righteous. The flesh "seed" of any "tribe and tongue and people and nation" does not determine their destiny. Out of all of them God has constituted Priests, Royal Priests unto Himself.
And they are singing a new song, saying, "Worthy art Thou to be taking the scroll and to open its seals, For Thou wast slain and dost buy us for God by Thy blood. Out of every tribe and language and people and nation. "Thou dost also make them a kingdom and a priesthood for our God, And they shall be reigning on the earth." (Rv 5:9-10, Concordant Literal Translation)
If you say that it is only what the spirit of Abel is doing apart from approval from God several problems arise. Abel is called, "Righteous Abel." Why would he be doing something un-righteous? More, why would he be doing something so contrary to the truth of the nature of reality for so long a time, not being corrected by The Father Who is not stopped by death, but continues to perfect that concerning us?
But it says in the next verse to do the exact same thing with their flocks and cattle as they were to do with their firstborn. You're rationalizing the text away from a conclusion you've a priori rejected. The text is very clear. There's no reason to try to change what it says.
But how God works doesn't match up with itself in the Bible. One text says God is not a man that he should repent. Another text says God repented. One text says he is the source of all good and evil. Another says only good. One text says he is above human emotion, another says he is wildly jealous. The simple fact is that the Bible represents a series of vastly disparate ideologies spread across a great deal of time and space.
If you want to determine what is and is not pagan then you have to know what pagan is. I don't think you really want to dedicate the time necessary to studying not only Jewish history, religion, and literature, but also Syro-Palestinian, Egyptian, Assyro-Babylonian, Greek, and Roman history, religion and literature. What you're doing is trying to filter out sections of the Bible that don't agree with your presuppositions and label them as pagan. That's not a particularly helpful exercise, since all it does is confirm what you already assume to be true.
I don't know if you are still looking out for new posts on this thread, but I will try and answer the best I can.
I have never done an IN-DEPTH study of ancient civilizations. I have studied them superficially, though. I do understand that there are passages in the Old Testament that feel pagan, and some of them are conflicting with other passages.
The website that I linked before (All about Sheol and hell) gave some pretty good explanations. I think it was very logical, commons sense kind of stuff. You don't need to know EVERYTHING about old civilizations to use your head.
There are enough verses in the Old Testament scriptures that speak AGAINST all things pagan, especially in relation to the afterlife, and I would rather believe those prophets and such over the Babylonian, Greek kind of thinking.
I'm sure the Old Testament folks were having a VERY hard time determining HOW the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob differed from the gods around them. It comes out in their writings.
I find it interesting that so many verses talk of NO THOUGHT, NO ACTION, NO NOTHING, after you die. That was not typical thought in those days, was it?
I really don't think the Old Testament Hebrews believed in the Egyptian immortal soul. It looks to me like they thought when you die, you die.
Kaput, End, Fin.
The New Testament speaks of putting on IMMORTALITY. It did not exist before. Yeshua gave us IMMORTALITY when He got the keys to the grave and ROSE FROM THE DEAD!
Not too shabby, I think.
In regards to the SACRIFICES that God wanted, hmmm....
I have a bit more to study, but I THINK that the people were confused a lot. If you notice later in the Old Testament the prophets start writing about how God isn't even happy with their GRAIN and such. He just wanted their HEARTS!
So, I think that even if some of those old passages talk about sacrificing in the typical "kill your kids" kind of way, maybe that was just the primitive thought (as Mystic would say) that was coming from confused minds.
Some of the Old Testament stuff just doesn't fit with the Spirit of Yeshua, and He said He was equal with the Father. The Jews seemed pretty confused when Jesus showed up. So.......
I'm still pondering these things and studying.
Last edited by herefornow; 05-25-2010 at 03:57 PM..
I don't know if you are still looking out for new posts on this thread, but I will try and answer the best I can.
I have never done an IN-DEPTH study of ancient civilizations. I have studied them superficially, though. I do understand that there are passages in the Old Testament that feel pagan, and some of them are conflicting with other passages.
The website that I linked before (All about Sheol and hell) gave some pretty good explanations. I think it was very logical, commons sense kind of stuff. You don't need to know EVERYTHING about old civilizations to use your head.
True, but just because something sounds rational does not mean that it is what ancient civilizations believed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by herefornow
There are enough verses in the Old Testament scriptures that speak AGAINST all things pagan, especially in relation to the afterlife, and I would rather believe those prophets and such over the Babylonian, Greek kind of thinking.
But I can point to pagan influence in any book you can identify that speaks against it. At the same time, it each text comes from a different author with a different perspective, and often disparate ideologies. Many times single texts are made up of multiple historical layers. The simple fact is ancient Israelite religion was one brand of Canaanite religion. It polemicized and denigrated all the others, and managed to survive where others didn't, but their religious ideologies are demonstrably derivative.
Quote:
Originally Posted by herefornow
I'm sure the Old Testament folks were having a VERY hard time determining HOW the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob differed from the gods around them. It comes out in their writings.
From the earliest texts they declare that Israel's God was king and father of the gods. It isn't until the exilic and post-exilic periods that the nature of the other deities begins to really be marginalized.
Quote:
Originally Posted by herefornow
I find it interesting that so many verses talk of NO THOUGHT, NO ACTION, NO NOTHING, after you die. That was not typical thought in those days, was it?
No, it was. It's very similar to some Mesopotamian literature that discusses the afterlife.
Quote:
Originally Posted by herefornow
I really don't think the Old Testament Hebrews believed in the Egyptian immortal soul. It looks to me like they thought when you die, you die.
Kaput, End, Fin.
There were different ideas about this, but that the person lived on in some capacity is attested very early on.
Quote:
Originally Posted by herefornow
The New Testament speaks of putting on IMMORTALITY. It did not exist before. Yeshua gave us IMMORTALITY when He got the keys to the grave and ROSE FROM THE DEAD!
But texts like Job and the Psalms speak of immortality well before Christianity developed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by herefornow
Not too shabby, I think.
In regards to the SACRIFICES that God wanted, hmmm....
I have a bit more to study, but I THINK that the people were confused a lot. If you notice later in the Old Testament the prophets start writing about how God isn't even happy with their GRAIN and such. He just wanted their HEARTS!
This comes from the 8th/7th century prophets, who preached vehemently against the corruption of the Israelite aristocracy. That aristocracy comprised the priests and government officials. Isaiah and others preached against the cult in an effort to undermine their ideological hegemony. It was focused on purging the cult of oppressive rulers rather than marginalizing the cult itself. The text I cited from Exodus predates those prophets.
Quote:
Originally Posted by herefornow
So, I think that even if some of those old passages talk about sacrificing in the typical "kill your kids" kind of way, maybe that was just the primitive thought (as Mystic would say) that was coming from confused minds.
Creative, but I don't think there's any real evidence for it, and barring that, there's no reason to reject the simple reading (which, incidentally, is the object of much criticism later, further supporting the conclusion that child sacrifice was a common part of early Israelite religion).
Quote:
Originally Posted by herefornow
Some of the Old Testament stuff just doesn't fit with the Spirit of Yeshua, and He said He was equal with the Father. The Jews seemed pretty confused when Jesus showed up. So.......
Now this privileges the New Testament, which has issues of its own.
Quote:
Originally Posted by herefornow
I'm still thinking on these things and studying.
Good to hear. I can recommend resources for specific topics if you're interested.
True, but just because something sounds rational does not mean that it is what ancient civilizations believed.
But I can point to pagan influence in any book you can identify that speaks against it. At the same time, it each text comes from a different author with a different perspective, and often disparate ideologies. Many times single texts are made up of multiple historical layers. The simple fact is ancient Israelite religion was one brand of Canaanite religion. It polemicized and denigrated all the others, and managed to survive where others didn't, but their religious ideologies are demonstrably derivative.
From the earliest texts they declare that Israel's God was king and father of the gods. It isn't until the exilic and post-exilic periods that the nature of the other deities begins to really be marginalized.
No, it was. It's very similar to some Mesopotamian literature that discusses the afterlife.
There were different ideas about this, but that the person lived on in some capacity is attested very early on.
But texts like Job and the Psalms speak of immortality well before Christianity developed.
This comes from the 8th/7th century prophets, who preached vehemently against the corruption of the Israelite aristocracy. That aristocracy comprised the priests and government officials. Isaiah and others preached against the cult in an effort to undermine their ideological hegemony. It was focused on purging the cult of oppressive rulers rather than marginalizing the cult itself. The text I cited from Exodus predates those prophets.
Creative, but I don't think there's any real evidence for it, and barring that, there's no reason to reject the simple reading (which, incidentally, is the object of much criticism later, further supporting the conclusion that child sacrifice was a common part of early Israelite religion).
Now this privileges the New Testament, which has issues of its own.
Good to hear. I can recommend resources for specific topics if you're interested.
Wow! Quick reply! Yes, I am interested in the resources you have. Thank you.
That's right Herefornow......this is something that's been around for 2000 years! There are a lot of false teachings out there but I don't think it is any more than it was all those years ago. We are just more aware via our technology. So what do you mean by "it's time is definitely up"....just trying to clarify what you said.
Hi Ilene,
I just found this post of yours and it look like I never answered your question. Some of the answer to your question can probably be found in my posts on the thread "Who Is Babylon?"
I just mean that ALL religion will come crashing down soon enough. Christianity is most definitely on it's way out, though. It will not SEE with it's spiritual eyes and has become blinded. The beast is almost through with it.
That's all.
(maybe not so comforting to some, but I am starting to understand the Restoration of All Things, so I'm not in panic mode or anything)
Quote:
Originally Posted by CantWait2Leave
Actually, many think it isn't a parable. All parables, are "true-to-life" realistic stories that could easily substitute for a newspaper headline or a common every day human experience. Like the "parable of the sower", everyone understands, from human experience a man planing a garden! In Luke 16, the entire scene in the "grave" is entirely outside the realm of human experience. And if this is a parable, then it is the ONLY one in the Bible where Jesus based his teaching on something outside human experience. The fact that Lazarus was actually named gives strong evidence this is a true story. No parables of Jesus ever gives specific names.
Ezekiel 23 1-4 gives specific names for that parable (Aholah and Aholibah).
Luke 4:23 says Jesus is a physician.
Matthew 13:37 mentions the Son of Man.
Parables can and do use identifiable persons in them. For sure.
There are others I can give you if you would like.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katzpur
You've made some really good points and some I'd never thought of before. It sounds like you've really done your homework. I'll admit, you made a very good case.
I'm curious, though, as to how you would explain Jesus' visit to the Spirit World during the time His body lay in the tomb. Obviously, he spoke to the spirits of individuals who had the capability of listening to Him and hearing what He said. If the dead are unaware of their surroundings, how could this be? And why did Christ tell the thief on the cross that He see him that day in Paradise if the thief wasn't going to be aware of their meeting. I really do believe that when the spirit leaves the body at death, it continues to exist as a cognizant entity until the resurrection. To me, these two situations make that pretty clear.
I believe that He was "speaking" with His Spirit to the angels that had been a part of Noah's time for some reason. I can't quite figure some of this out. I have been talking to Pneuma on our witnessing to angels and such, as there is a verse that talks about us judging angels, and also that they will be reconciled because of us. I'm just not sure how, yet.
And, I believe that when Jesus spoke to the thief on the cross he was saying, "I tell you today, you will be with me in paradise." I know that the old writing had no punctuation, and it just would not make any sense any other way. He could not have gone to "paradise" that day. Jesus was busy doing other things, and NOBODY was in paradise at that time. That is a fact. Jesus had not even ascended back to His Father until weeks later. And, of course, I do not believe in the good compartment/bad compartment. There is NOWHERE in the Bible that speaks of this, EXCEPT in the parable of Lazarus And The Rich Man, which I already explained quite well, I think.
Jesus was probably using the Jew's silly ideas against them, is what I am thinking. He would do that kind of thing, especially when He was angry! And He was VERY ANGRY with them! They brought a LOT of nonsense into their thinking and used it against the masses.
So.......
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
