Well thats funny 😂 but not likely the reunification councils had the East agreeing with the Catholic Councils and slightly smaller list not the other way around. Of course they fell through due to local politics but the fact the hierarchy and bishops of the East signed off on it gives us a good idea of that would work out now we didnt say the 3 books we disagree upon are apocrypha rather they are passed over and not rendered judgement in the West.
Hey Jimmy! Love the show. Could you please consider covering five things for mysterious world? (1) The (official) Lourdes miracles, (2) stigmata (their history, who they afflicted, their documentation, natural and supernatural explanations for them), (3) the best documented cases of demonic possession, and (4) the tilma of Our Lady of Guadalupe, and (5) the story and miracles of St. Maria Goretti?
I've had many Protestants flat out deny that St. Peter and St. Jude quote/directly reference from the Book of Enoch. Even when shown the references, they will STILL twist it that they aren't the same. They are too tied to their idea of "Sola Scriptura" that something outside of the Bible could influence the Bible. Then misapply "theopnuestos" (God breathed).
All you need to do is remind them that "ALL scriptures are God-breathed" (2 Tim 3:16) and must thus include Enoch. For it is not the Bible's Table of Contents, a "tradition of men" that must be believed, but sola scriptura. LOL. And if you convince them by this logic, invite them to further discussions regarding the Koran and the book of Mormon.
@@delightfulBeverage What's funny, is that people like John McArthur will now make the claim that the scriptures are infallible, but we have a fallible canon of scriptures. Some Protestants even deny that the actual books we have are infallible. Why? Because to admit that, is to admit Church Authority/Tradition. They also think that it bypasses the Deuterocanon book debate. But, that is even a worse position to take because then it leaves it up to the individual to add/remove something. I also point out to them that "theopnuestos" (God Breathed) is actually a mistranslation and it is why the Early Church Fathers didn't have the concept of Sola Scriptura OR try to use this verse in that manner. It is the ONLY time the word is used in the entire NT (or Greek Septuagint). Translators didn't know what the word really meant so they just broke it up into its components. The problem is, that it is not correct. For example, if years from now someone comes across the word "horsefly" and they didn't know what it meant and just broke it up into its components, they would think it was talking about a flying horse (Pegasus). We now have other writings from the same time period that have used this word. It actually means, "life-giving". In one work, it was used to describe a river that flowed through an area. We also have found this word in some of the Early Church Fathers writings. They used it to describe other Church Fathers' writings that aren't scripture. So IF, that word means that it came directly from God and means God inspired, then why aren't those other writings considered scriptures?
@@delightfulBeverage did you listen to the beginning of this video around the 2 min mark? 1:58 By no means. They are only scripture in the sense that some people once thought they are scripture. 2:05 And they're only lost in the sense that because they're not in the Bible, most people forgot about them. 2:10 Though scholars have rediscovered them and been studying them to see what light they can shed on the Bible and early Jewish and Christian beliefs. 2:18 The church does not regard them as divinely inspired and you shouldn't simply believe what they say. 2:24 Some of the things that these books say are dead wrong. However, these books are still interesting and their primary historical value is not 2:31 to tell us what happened, but to tell us what some ancient Jews and Christians believed.
This was extremely informative! I had only heard of the name Enoch Scriptures, but I had no idea what they were. Thank you so much for breaking it down for us!
I’ve always been fascinated by the fluidity of the Ethiopian canon. I was surprised to find out that they have 81 books, but the exact list changes depending on who makes the list.
I've watched Jimmy for a long time on Catholic answers and this is the first Mysterious World I tuned into. Very interesting I'll be watching more from this series
@@JimmyAkin you and Trent horn are my favorite apologists to watch on Catholic answers. He's had me cornered on TH-cam but this is definitely got you in the running on the TH-cam sphere. Looking forward to going through your hundreds of videos
Thank you, Jimmy. I've been looking forward to this episode. I really enjoyed your episode on the Book of Jubilees. I appreciate your content. I tune into every new episode. ❤😊
Good video, I wish it was much longer and went into more of the book. Looking forward to more episodes on the Book of Enouch in depth and hopefully Enoch 2 and 3 which were mentioned at the beginning too. God bless you 🙏 Thank you x
Since Jimmy mentioned that he has only a short list of topics that he's working on right now, I thought I might mention a few cryptids that are/were supposedly seen in Southern Illinois: The Piasa Bird, The Big Muddy Monster, The Enfield Horror, and The Thunderbirds
I've been a long standing proponent for an open canon, and I wanted to put the second half of this year into collecting my thoughts on that. Sadly, other more pressing needs have come up. 1 Enoch is definitely one of the books that I have notes on. I come down on the side that it's not inspired, but I intend to use it as a test case to show how complicated the question can be.
Yay, a Luna appearance! 🐶 On to the actual topic, I have heard friends and online people talk about Enoch and some of the stuff sounds interesting. However, I have yet to sit down and actually read any of it myself so honestly have no idea what it’s really about or how it fits in to everything. May have to set some time aside to do so soon.
Greatly appreciated delve into this Lost Book. My attention was pulled away as you were listing further resources, so if I'm repeating you, please excuse me. But for those who listen to audio books, there is a reading of the Book of Enoch included in the Libre Vox Library, which you may find online or even on TH-cam. It is an older translation, because Libre Vox recordings are all in the public domain. The Book of Enoch only came to my attention through means that had me questioning its authenticity as an ancient work. Honestly, I thought it was some kind of New Age thing when I first heard of it. Then I learned that different Orthodox Churches include one or more of the Books of Enoch in their Canons, so I paid attention. This episode is very helpful. Thank you.
It’s also worth note, apparently in the 1st century the Septuagint had an error in Daniel 7 which read as “I saw one coming, like a son of man… as the Ancient of Days” not “to the Ancient of Days” so many may have assumed that divine status even more directly
Interesting that Jude quotes it directly, Tertullerian and others considered it canonical, and that it was conspicuously found among the Dead Sea Scrolls. It would be interesting to come across a Greek or Aramaic translation. Thanks for an interesting episode, I just subscribed!
Excellent video, thank you also for sharing the further reading! Perhaps even if the Canon isn’t expanded there can still be an increased use and trust for something like the book of Enoch.
Great episode! I figured a study of Enoch would eventually come up on your channel, especially with the current connections that many have made between Enoch and extraterrestrials. There are lots of fun interpretations out there!
Would be interesting to see you dialogue with David Száraz (and maybe Gary Michuta and William Albrecht) who makes interesting arguments that the Catholic Church _did_ close the canon at Trent: From David: This question regarding the "apocryphal books", is found in the Acta of Trent in the Capita Dubitationum. A few council fathers addressed the question whether some of the books that were part of of the Vulgate , should be explicitly rejected in the decree, or not. It doesn´t say, whether they should or should not be regarded as inspired. It only says, whether their uninspired status should be explicitly mentioned in the decree. The Capita Dubitationum in the acts says: "An libri qui vocantur APOCRYPHY, coniungi soliti in omnibus vulgatis bibliae codicibus cum libris sacris, sint per hoc decretum nominatim resecandi, an silentio praetereundi." (Concilium Tredentinum: Diariorum, Actorum, Epistularum, Tractatuum [Nova Collectio] edidit Societas Goerresiana, Tomus Quintus. Question four of the Capita Dubitationum, page 41, lines 30-31) English: "Whether the books, that are called APOCRYPHAL, that are usually included in all the Vulgate codices of the Bible with the sacred books , are to be "nominatim" rejected by this decree, or to be silently omitted." Now notice, even the question is fashioned in such a way there is already explicitly stated that these are the APOCRYPHAL (not inspired) books, which means that there was no question regarding their inspiration. The question only was whether they should be or should be not mentioned as "rejected" in the decree. Peter G. Duncker, who has a whole in depth article on the deliberations of Trent regarding the canon says: "We may be very brief here. This point arose as a result of an observation of some of the Fathers about such books as 3-4 Esd and 3 Mc; but there was no question that they should be regarded as Sacred Books . The term "apocryphal" has here undoubtedly the sense, as we Catholics understand the word, applied to the books that non-Catholics call "pseudepigraphic." The result of the vote indicated that only three Fathers wanted the books to be rejected expressly, eight did not express themselves, forty- two preferred that nothing be said about them. In the later Vulgate editions 3-4 Esd and the Prayer of Manasse were added, but as outside the Sacred Books." (P.G.Duncker, The Canon of the Old Testament at the Council of Trent) Not only the question was fashioned that way (as I showed it in the comment) but even the voting was fashioned that way. Here is the voting (page 52 of the same critical edition of the Acta as I cited in my first comment): "Libri APOCRYPHY sub silentio 42, exprimantur 3, dubii 8" (Concilium Tredentinum: Diariorum, Actorum, Epistularum, Tractatuum [Nova Collectio] edidit Societas Goerresiana, Tomus Quintus. Question four of the Capita Dubitationum, page 52) Notice even the first group affirmed these are apocryphal books (not inspired) - APOCRYPHY SUB SILENTIO. So the Acta is clear that here the fathers were dealing with Apocrypha. So "Pass over in silence" means they will not address the status of these books in the decree. And that is how Trent was consistent with all the previous councils, which did not address the status of the apocryphal books as well. Why would they? In fact, there is no reason to do this, since all those books beside the inspired ones are consequently not inspired. So why explicitly rejecting these in the decree? Makes little sense. Also, if the canonical status of these book would be an open question, then we should see more options in the acta, including the option to affirm the canonicity of these books, or at least discuss it. But the fathers could only: 1. explicitly reject, 2. not explicitly reject 3. not to vote. Since there was no possibility for voting for their canonicity, it is clear the canonicity of these books was not in question. This consequently aligns with the later Vulgate editions (Clemetine and Sixto-Clementine editions) , where these books were moved to an appendix, meaning these books are rightly distinguished as non-canonical. So the reason this question is being asked is only because some of these books were included in the Vulgate in that particular period (therefor some council fathers wanted to explicitly point out their non-canonical status). So the question is not raised due to their uncertain canonical status, but because they could be found in some Vulgate manuscripts. And this is a huge difference. And I think this also certainly has nothing to do with Eastern Orthodoxy accepting these or a potential of including these in the future in case of a reunion. First of all there is no hint of this in the Acta. Second, actually we can even demonstrate, that those eastern churches who are in communion with Rome (Uniate Churches), have the same canon, for example in the catechism of the Catechism of the Ukrainian Catholic Church we read they consider as inspired the same OT books as the Roman Catholics, even though before reunion they were Eastern Orthodox. (The Catechism of the Ukrainian Catholic Church, CHRIST - OUR PASCHA, page 23) Plus, in the Council of Florence there was an attempt to reunite the EO with RCC, there were delegates from EO churches, yet the list that is given in Florence is precisely that accepted by the RCC. So there is no reason to think Trent left the canon open. Just the opposite, it already stipulated which books were "transmitted as from hand to hand" from the apostles. If these particular books were handed down, then the list is complete. This is confirmed even by an Eastern Orthodox scholar (and editor of the Orthodox Study Bible) Rev. Fr. Eugen Pentiuc, PhD : "If one takes into account the clear-cut definition of biblical canon proposed by Ulrich, that the biblical canon is a "closed list" of books tied to the notion of institutional "authority", then strictly speaking only the Roman Catholic Church can claim for herself a biblical canon : a closed list of forty-six books of the Old Testament, officially endorsed by the Council of Trent." (Rev. Fr. Eugen Pentiuc, PhD, "The Old Testament in Eastern Orthodox Tradition, pages 129-130") Pentiuc further says that Ulrich´s definition cannot be applied to EO churches, since there never was an Ecumenical Council or Pan-Orthodox synod that would definitely settle their canon. Pentiuc even argues, in contrast to the RCC, the EO perspective of the canon is ambiguous. It is not clear what makes a book canonical - a formal declaration of its inspiration or usage in liturgy? No-one knows, even the canons of particular EO churches differ from each other according to Pentiuc. So it is much more appropriate for the EO to adjust their canon to the RCC in case of reunion than vice versa. The acts are not magisterial documents. It is a record of the process of the council, also called "the minutes!. The decree is what is binding. However the acts are important to understand the decree, since the acts illuminate and help us understand what the council fathers meant, when they decreed something. The acts are similar to the recordings in the courtroom during a trial. The verdict of the judge is what is the outcome, and that is definitive. However there are persons recording the process. These recordings are important to know, how and why the judge made this or that verdict. So you actually cannot deviate from the acts, otherwise you claim you know better what the council fathers meant, than those who were actually present in the council and wrote the acta. And that is non-sensical. By the way, Vatican II also clarifies that the Divine Revelation, which includes both Scriptures and Tradition, were handed down in their "full integrity", which means its complete, hence the canon is closed. CHAPTER II, paragraph 7 HANDING ON DIVINE REVELATION In His gracious goodness, God has seen to it that what He had revealed for the salvation of all nations would abide perpetually *in its full integrity and be handed on to all generations* . Therefore Christ the Lord in whom the full revelation of the supreme God is brought to completion (see 2 Cor. 1:20; 3:13; 4:6), commissioned the Apostles to preach to all men that Gospel which is the source of all saving truth and moral teaching, (1) and to impart to them heavenly gifts. This Gospel had been promised in former times through the prophets, and Christ Himself had fulfilled it and promulgated it with His lips. This commission was faithfully fulfilled by the Apostles who, by their oral preaching, by example, and by observances handed on what they had received from the lips of Christ, from living with Him, and from what He did, or what they had learned through the prompting of the Holy Spirit. The commission was fulfilled, too, by those Apostles and apostolic men who under the inspiration of the same Holy Spirit committed the message of salvation to writing.
Also from David: The Appendix in the Sixto-Clementine Vulgate, which was promulgated by pope Clement VIII in 1952 says this: Oratio Manassa, necnon Libri duo, qui sub libri Tertii & Quarti Esdrae nomine circumferuntur, hoc in loco, extra scilicet seriem canonicorum Librorum , quos sancta Tridentina Synodus suscepit, & pro Canonicis suscipiendos decreuit, sepositi sunt, ne prorsus interirent, quippe qui a nonnullis sanctis Patribus interdum citantur, & in aliquibus Bibliis Latinis tam manuscriptis quam impressis reperiuntur. English: The Prayer of Manasseh, as well as two books, which circulate under the name of the Third and Fourth Book of Ezra, are set aside in this place-that is, outside the series of canonical books , which the holy Tridentine Synod accepted, and determined should be taken up for canonical-lest they should perish completely, since they are sometimes cited by some of the holy Fathers, and they are found in some Latin books, both manuscript and printed. This is important because, the appendix clearly appeals to the Council of Trent when it says, that "these are outside the series of canonical books", so it was understood, that what was not listed as canonical, are designated as non-canonical. Further after The Council of Trent lists the canonical books in the decree, it says that these books should be received as given in the Vulgate: "But if any one receive not, as sacred and canonical, the said books entire with all their parts, as they have been used to be read in the Catholic Church, and as they are contained in the old Latin vulgate edition ; and knowingly and deliberately contemn the traditions aforesaid; let him be anathema." So after the Council of Trent, when the new official Vulgate is published, the non-canonical books, that is, the books which are not listen as canonical in the Council of Trent, are now moved to an appendix with a qualification as extra scilicet seriem canonicorum Librorum - outside the series of canonical books .
I know the book of Enoch is a huge subject, but were you not interested in Timothy Alberino's brand new book on the subject? I hope Jimmy and Alberino will have a discussion (on a variety of topics) and you can post it soon.
One of my FAVORITE subjects. Pseudopigraphia. I am with Saint Augustine's opunion in his voluminous and brilliant City of God. 1 Enoch makes me think of a kind of spiritually prophetic, but angelical myth oriented text. Somewhat like we have Christopher Walken as an evil fallen angel referring to himself as Gabriel in The Prophecy movie series. Two other popular Apocalyptic sci fi movies are Keanu Reeves as the occult investagator Constantine with Tilds Swinton as a female Gabriel and Paul Bettany as an Archamgel Michael in the lesser known Legion. Both movies are very entertaining, but very convulted in their approach to theology being written by professed Protestant Christians. So iny view, Enoch literature is much like these movies. There are truths about the celestial beings portrayed in them and 1st Enoch has several rather beautiful Messianic prophecies that the Apostle St. jude was well aware of. Maybe it was their Star Wars or Lord of the Rings, just from an ancient Hebrew perspective. 2 Enoch contains an incredible amount of info about the planets, the 'seven heavens,' and the ways that angelic and even mythical beings maintain God's universe works. I kind of hope chalkydri and phoenixes are like the 'pets' of the celestial hierarchy (angels), that would ineffably cool. 😂There are also descriptions of Sheol, or Abraham's Bosom being bleow the surface of the earth as well as Gehinnom which is not Purgatory which could be Sheol? 🤔 😇 3 Enoch is also very fascinating and s bit frightening at times. As the animal kingdom can have affection for and love the human kingdom which is above it, they can and do have a fear of us as well, much like I think we do with the Celestial Hierarchy. The one error written of strangely is the ' transfiguration' of the patriarch Enoch jnto an angel named 'Metatron.' This the brother of another angel named Sandalphon who supposedly was the Prophet Elijah. In 3 Enoch, Saint Michael the Archangel gives a salve that was bright with illumination that Enoch applied to himself, thus becoming an angel. Nowhere in Catholic or Orthodox theology is it taught that we are ever 'transfigured' unto purely celestial beings. Its teue that Jesus said that we will be 'as the angels' in Heaven, but who can possibly know fully what He means by this until its our time to experience this?
Thanks very informative. If an inspired author Jude, (debatable who he was) references the book of Enoch this must raise serious questions over Jude’s canonicity?
Jimmy I think you are wrong about the long ages. It says in Genesis Chapter 6 that man can live up to 120 years after the spirit of Hod left. Today science now says we can all live to about 120 years.
There was a woman in recent recorded history who lived longer than 120 years. You can look her up in Wikipedia. I am super curious whether the common belief that the ages were symbolic is mostly based on current life expectancy or if there is additional archeological evidence. I know Jimmy has spoken about genes getting dropped when they are no longer beneficial such as the genes for dark skin in people who migrated to climates with less sun. Could it be that humans had a longevity gene that dropped off, perhaps due to war and other untimely deaths making such a gene less relevant? Jimmy cited other cultures claiming their ancestors were long-lived as evidence that the scripture writers were mimicking that tradition and claiming their ancestors were just as great. However, what if the evidence is instead really due to people actually living so long back then?
I hear mention of a Saint Michael's Lent which us a blessed and beautiful idea. My own personal deviotion is a TAN book entitled 'Saint Michael and the Angels' which goes day by day in September until September 29th the feast day of the Holy Archangels who pray for military and law enforcement, St. Michael, the media and communication, St. Gabriel, and transportation and the medical field, St. Raphael. Just a request for Jimmy...the author Matthew Bunson wrote a great reference work about angels wrote of a Council of Rome in 745 A D. that condemned the 'naming of angels' by adding the suufix 'El' or 'God' to the end of a Hebrew word, thus somehow making it angelic. One of the angels named was Saint Uriel (flame of God) who, in epic poems like Paradise Lost, is said to be the regent of the sun. This name was apparently condemned specifically by that Council and I'd like to know the reason as my late mother of blessef memory purchased a small set of statues at EWTN's gift shop that fearures St. Uriel holding a sword. Personally, I believe he somehow maintains the sun and this sword he holds could be reminiscent of the 'cherub' who drove Adam and Eve out of Gan Eden with a fiery sword. I believe this means the sun, which practically turned Eden into the desert-like wilderness of the Middle-East. I dont pray to St. Uriel as the Church only likes to refer to the three Archangels mentioned in canonical Scripture and I am just fine with that. But I wonder if in art that is okay because I have drawn Archangels myself. I refuse to veer off into New Age practices trying to gain powers from celestial spirits in an unOrthodox manner. Better to pray 🙏 good private devotions like from TAN books or the Saint Michael Chaplet.
💐🍷 Flowers and sweet red for the algorithm gods! Jimmy, I wonder if the book of Enoch and the introduction of forbidden things to mankind is where the notion women shouldn't wear make-up, jewelry, or cut/style their hair comes from.
I think there was a Pints with Aquinas episode (way back when they were still primarily discussing Aquinas) that covered this topic. As late as Aquinas's day, women who did those things were offering their bodies and services and trying to attract customers. If I recall correctly, the general conclusion was: Now that wearing makeup, etc. is something that the general female population does, it is no longer tied to immorality.
I think at one point you pronounce the word “ancient” as “ank-shent”. Can you work on that? I don’t think there is any such valid pronunciation of this word. Please correct me if I am wrong.
Another fascinating 'legend' of the Archangel Saunt Raphael, who is sadly left out of the canon if the KJV, some scholars made an assumption that Archangels have multiple names snd I am compelled to add what a pious priest friend if mine stated in a good homily on the subject. There actually is no inherent value in knowing the names of the angels ir devils other than what they mean in dedinition. There is no power or magic in knowing such things. However I have read that some consider St. Raphel synonymous with the actial angel of death, Azrael, the name of which means in Hebrew 'whom God helps.' Raphael, of course, is the patron of those travelling by land, sea, or air, but more essentially, of the medical field. Its speculated that he is the spirit of silence and I contemplate this l about hospitals, nursing homes, and funeral homes. Places that are more iften silent than not.
So when we reunite with the Eastern Orthodox, Fr. Mike will have to totally redo Bible in a Year. Well worth it.
Well thats funny 😂 but not likely the reunification councils had the East agreeing with the Catholic Councils and slightly smaller list not the other way around. Of course they fell through due to local politics but the fact the hierarchy and bishops of the East signed off on it gives us a good idea of that would work out now we didnt say the 3 books we disagree upon are apocrypha rather they are passed over and not rendered judgement in the West.
A hypothetical reunion would likely yield the Catholic canon, although with a greater appreciation for the tritocanonicals
Will never happen.
@@zoejay never say never Jesus is control over his church ultimately
*etheopian orthodox
I have listened to your podcast since you started when I was in highschool and have waited for you to cover this topic!! Thank you Jimmy!
Hey Jimmy! Love the show. Could you please consider covering five things for mysterious world? (1) The (official) Lourdes miracles, (2) stigmata (their history, who they afflicted, their documentation, natural and supernatural explanations for them), (3) the best documented cases of demonic possession, and (4) the tilma of Our Lady of Guadalupe, and (5) the story and miracles of St. Maria Goretti?
First, thank you for this video. I've been fascinated by Enoch for decades. Second, ooh, look! The cute doggy is back! ❤
I've had many Protestants flat out deny that St. Peter and St. Jude quote/directly reference from the Book of Enoch. Even when shown the references, they will STILL twist it that they aren't the same. They are too tied to their idea of "Sola Scriptura" that something outside of the Bible could influence the Bible. Then misapply "theopnuestos" (God breathed).
Those are protestants who don't understand what sola scriptura means.
All you need to do is remind them that "ALL scriptures are God-breathed" (2 Tim 3:16) and must thus include Enoch. For it is not the Bible's Table of Contents, a "tradition of men" that must be believed, but sola scriptura. LOL. And if you convince them by this logic, invite them to further discussions regarding the Koran and the book of Mormon.
@@delightfulBeverage What's funny, is that people like John McArthur will now make the claim that the scriptures are infallible, but we have a fallible canon of scriptures. Some Protestants even deny that the actual books we have are infallible. Why? Because to admit that, is to admit Church Authority/Tradition. They also think that it bypasses the Deuterocanon book debate. But, that is even a worse position to take because then it leaves it up to the individual to add/remove something.
I also point out to them that "theopnuestos" (God Breathed) is actually a mistranslation and it is why the Early Church Fathers didn't have the concept of Sola Scriptura OR try to use this verse in that manner. It is the ONLY time the word is used in the entire NT (or Greek Septuagint). Translators didn't know what the word really meant so they just broke it up into its components. The problem is, that it is not correct. For example, if years from now someone comes across the word "horsefly" and they didn't know what it meant and just broke it up into its components, they would think it was talking about a flying horse (Pegasus). We now have other writings from the same time period that have used this word. It actually means, "life-giving". In one work, it was used to describe a river that flowed through an area. We also have found this word in some of the Early Church Fathers writings. They used it to describe other Church Fathers' writings that aren't scripture. So IF, that word means that it came directly from God and means God inspired, then why aren't those other writings considered scriptures?
@@delightfulBeverage did you listen to the beginning of this video around the 2 min mark?
1:58 By no means. They are only scripture in the sense that some people once thought they are scripture.
2:05 And they're only lost in the sense that because they're not in the Bible, most people forgot about them.
2:10 Though scholars have rediscovered them and been studying them to see what light they can shed on the Bible and early Jewish and Christian beliefs.
2:18 The church does not regard them as divinely inspired and you shouldn't simply believe what they say.
2:24 Some of the things that these books say are dead wrong. However, these books are still interesting and their primary historical value is not
2:31 to tell us what happened, but to tell us what some ancient Jews and Christians believed.
Interesting to know about Enoch and the resemblance and why is not a bíblical book. Thank you very much for being clear and objective.
This was extremely informative! I had only heard of the name Enoch Scriptures, but I had no idea what they were. Thank you so much for breaking it down for us!
I’ve always been fascinated by the fluidity of the Ethiopian canon. I was surprised to find out that they have 81 books, but the exact list changes depending on who makes the list.
Hi Mr. Akin! Do you plan on making an episode about Emanuela Orlandi, the "Missing girl from Vatican"? Her story is mysterious.
Great video Mr. Akin. God bless
Great episode, Jimmy! It is interesting to hear about these "lost/apocryphal" books from an educated scholar.
I've watched Jimmy for a long time on Catholic answers and this is the first Mysterious World I tuned into. Very interesting I'll be watching more from this series
Hope you find the show enjoyable and informative!
@@JimmyAkin you and Trent horn are my favorite apologists to watch on Catholic answers. He's had me cornered on TH-cam but this is definitely got you in the running on the TH-cam sphere. Looking forward to going through your hundreds of videos
Thanks for covering this.
Awesome! Thanks for doing this as a full episode!
I have not seen the entire video, but still, good video!
Thank you Jimmy. Your intelligence really astounds me every episode.
Thank you, Jimmy. I've been looking forward to this episode. I really enjoyed your episode on the Book of Jubilees. I appreciate your content. I tune into every new episode. ❤😊
Very interesting episode, I look forward to the next!
Your dog is just incredibly cute...
That’s his sister’s dog, Luna.
Doin the Jimmy Akin thang: Liking, Commenting, and Subscribed. Awwwwwww!! Your Sister’s Puppy!! ❤️❤️❤️❤️
May God bless you and your work examining mysteries from the twin perspectives of faith and reason.
Good video, I wish it was much longer and went into more of the book. Looking forward to more episodes on the Book of Enouch in depth and hopefully Enoch 2 and 3 which were mentioned at the beginning too. God bless you 🙏 Thank you x
This is a really good commuting podcast
Since Jimmy mentioned that he has only a short list of topics that he's working on right now, I thought I might mention a few cryptids that are/were supposedly seen in Southern Illinois: The Piasa Bird, The Big Muddy Monster, The Enfield Horror, and The Thunderbirds
I've been a long standing proponent for an open canon, and I wanted to put the second half of this year into collecting my thoughts on that. Sadly, other more pressing needs have come up. 1 Enoch is definitely one of the books that I have notes on. I come down on the side that it's not inspired, but I intend to use it as a test case to show how complicated the question can be.
Yay, a Luna appearance! 🐶
On to the actual topic, I have heard friends and online people talk about Enoch and some of the stuff sounds interesting. However, I have yet to sit down and actually read any of it myself so honestly have no idea what it’s really about or how it fits in to everything.
May have to set some time aside to do so soon.
Keep up the good work.
Greatly appreciated delve into this Lost Book. My attention was pulled away as you were listing further resources, so if I'm repeating you, please excuse me. But for those who listen to audio books, there is a reading of the Book of Enoch included in the Libre Vox Library, which you may find online or even on TH-cam. It is an older translation, because Libre Vox recordings are all in the public domain.
The Book of Enoch only came to my attention through means that had me questioning its authenticity as an ancient work. Honestly, I thought it was some kind of New Age thing when I first heard of it. Then I learned that different Orthodox Churches include one or more of the Books of Enoch in their Canons, so I paid attention. This episode is very helpful. Thank you.
Looking forward to listening on weekend road trip.
It’s also worth note, apparently in the 1st century the Septuagint had an error in Daniel 7 which read as “I saw one coming, like a son of man… as the Ancient of Days” not “to the Ancient of Days” so many may have assumed that divine status even more directly
Interesting that Jude quotes it directly, Tertullerian and others considered it canonical, and that it was conspicuously found among the Dead Sea Scrolls. It would be interesting to come across a Greek or Aramaic translation.
Thanks for an interesting episode, I just subscribed!
Thank guys, great video
Thank you 😊
Mind blowing stuff. The canon isn’t officially closed?! Wow
Love the dawg chilling in the background.
Interesting topic.
Fascinating
Excellent video, thank you also for sharing the further reading! Perhaps even if the Canon isn’t expanded there can still be an increased use and trust for something like the book of Enoch.
Hey Jimmy, love your dog! And also the video on ENOCH. Thank you.
Sorry, Jimmy I'm trying to pay attention to your video, but your dog is some adorable 🥰🥰. He has all my attention 😊❤.
Awesome
Great episode! I figured a study of Enoch would eventually come up on your channel, especially with the current connections that many have made between Enoch and extraterrestrials. There are lots of fun interpretations out there!
Extraterrestrials? You mean demons?
Super cool stuff! I've learned a lot about Enoch over the years, but there were more cool things I hadn't learned here.
Thanks Jimmy love your content learning so much
great video!
Would be interesting to see you dialogue with David Száraz (and maybe Gary Michuta and William Albrecht) who makes interesting arguments that the Catholic Church _did_ close the canon at Trent:
From David:
This question regarding the "apocryphal books", is found in the Acta of Trent in the Capita Dubitationum. A few council fathers addressed the question whether some of the books that were part of of the Vulgate , should be explicitly rejected in the decree, or not. It doesn´t say, whether they should or should not be regarded as inspired. It only says, whether their uninspired status should be explicitly mentioned in the decree.
The Capita Dubitationum in the acts says:
"An libri qui vocantur APOCRYPHY, coniungi soliti in omnibus vulgatis bibliae codicibus cum libris sacris, sint per hoc decretum nominatim resecandi, an silentio praetereundi."
(Concilium Tredentinum: Diariorum, Actorum, Epistularum, Tractatuum [Nova Collectio] edidit Societas Goerresiana, Tomus Quintus. Question four of the Capita Dubitationum, page 41, lines 30-31)
English: "Whether the books, that are called APOCRYPHAL, that are usually included in all the Vulgate codices of the Bible with the sacred books , are to be "nominatim" rejected by this decree, or to be silently omitted."
Now notice, even the question is fashioned in such a way there is already explicitly stated that these are the APOCRYPHAL (not inspired) books, which means that there was no question regarding their inspiration. The question only was whether they should be or should be not mentioned as "rejected" in the decree.
Peter G. Duncker, who has a whole in depth article on the deliberations of Trent regarding the canon says:
"We may be very brief here. This point arose as a result of an observation of some of the Fathers about such books as 3-4 Esd and 3 Mc; but there was no question that they should be regarded as Sacred Books .
The term "apocryphal" has here undoubtedly the sense, as we Catholics understand the word, applied to the books that non-Catholics call "pseudepigraphic." The result of the vote indicated that only three Fathers wanted the books to be rejected expressly, eight did not express themselves, forty- two preferred that nothing be said about them. In the later Vulgate editions 3-4 Esd and the Prayer of Manasse were added, but as outside the Sacred Books." (P.G.Duncker, The Canon of the Old Testament at the Council of Trent)
Not only the question was fashioned that way (as I showed it in the comment) but even the voting was fashioned that way.
Here is the voting (page 52 of the same critical edition of the Acta as I cited in my first comment):
"Libri APOCRYPHY sub silentio 42, exprimantur 3, dubii 8"
(Concilium Tredentinum: Diariorum, Actorum, Epistularum, Tractatuum [Nova Collectio] edidit Societas Goerresiana, Tomus Quintus. Question four of the Capita Dubitationum, page 52)
Notice even the first group affirmed these are apocryphal books (not inspired) - APOCRYPHY SUB SILENTIO. So the Acta is clear that here the fathers were dealing with Apocrypha. So "Pass over in silence" means they will not address the status of these books in the decree. And that is how Trent was consistent with all the previous councils, which did not address the status of the apocryphal books as well. Why would they? In fact, there is no reason to do this, since all those books beside the inspired ones are consequently not inspired. So why explicitly rejecting these in the decree? Makes little sense. Also, if the canonical status of these book would be an open question, then we should see more options in the acta, including the option to affirm the canonicity of these books, or at least discuss it. But the fathers could only: 1. explicitly reject, 2. not explicitly reject 3. not to vote. Since there was no possibility for voting for their canonicity, it is clear the canonicity of these books was not in question.
This consequently aligns with the later Vulgate editions (Clemetine and Sixto-Clementine editions) , where these books were moved to an appendix, meaning these books are rightly distinguished as non-canonical.
So the reason this question is being asked is only because some of these books were included in the Vulgate in that particular period (therefor some council fathers wanted to explicitly point out their non-canonical status). So the question is not raised due to their uncertain canonical status, but because they could be found in some Vulgate manuscripts. And this is a huge difference. And I think this also certainly has nothing to do with Eastern Orthodoxy accepting these or a potential of including these in the future in case of a reunion. First of all there is no hint of this in the Acta. Second, actually we can even demonstrate, that those eastern churches who are in communion with Rome (Uniate Churches), have the same canon, for example in the catechism of the Catechism of the Ukrainian Catholic Church we read they consider as inspired the same OT books as the Roman Catholics, even though before reunion they were Eastern Orthodox.
(The Catechism of the Ukrainian Catholic Church, CHRIST - OUR PASCHA, page 23)
Plus, in the Council of Florence there was an attempt to reunite the EO with RCC, there were delegates from EO churches, yet the list that is given in Florence is precisely that accepted by the RCC.
So there is no reason to think Trent left the canon open. Just the opposite, it already stipulated which books were "transmitted as from hand to hand" from the apostles. If these particular books were handed down, then the list is complete. This is confirmed even by an Eastern Orthodox scholar (and editor of the Orthodox Study Bible) Rev. Fr. Eugen Pentiuc, PhD :
"If one takes into account the clear-cut definition of biblical canon proposed by Ulrich, that the biblical canon is a "closed list" of books tied to the notion of institutional "authority", then strictly speaking only the Roman Catholic Church can claim for herself a biblical canon : a closed list of forty-six books of the Old Testament, officially endorsed by the Council of Trent." (Rev. Fr. Eugen Pentiuc, PhD, "The Old Testament in Eastern Orthodox Tradition, pages 129-130")
Pentiuc further says that Ulrich´s definition cannot be applied to EO churches, since there never was an Ecumenical Council or Pan-Orthodox synod that would definitely settle their canon. Pentiuc even argues, in contrast to the RCC, the EO perspective of the canon is ambiguous. It is not clear what makes a book canonical - a formal declaration of its inspiration or usage in liturgy? No-one knows, even the canons of particular EO churches differ from each other according to Pentiuc. So it is much more appropriate for the EO to adjust their canon to the RCC in case of reunion than vice versa.
The acts are not magisterial documents. It is a record of the process of the council, also called "the minutes!. The decree is what is binding. However the acts are important to understand the decree, since the acts illuminate and help us understand what the council fathers meant, when they decreed something. The acts are similar to the recordings in the courtroom during a trial. The verdict of the judge is what is the outcome, and that is definitive. However there are persons recording the process. These recordings are important to know, how and why the judge made this or that verdict.
So you actually cannot deviate from the acts, otherwise you claim you know better what the council fathers meant, than those who were actually present in the council and wrote the acta. And that is non-sensical.
By the way, Vatican II also clarifies that the Divine Revelation, which includes both Scriptures and Tradition, were handed down in their "full integrity", which means its complete, hence the canon is closed.
CHAPTER II, paragraph 7
HANDING ON DIVINE REVELATION
In His gracious goodness, God has seen to it that what He had revealed for the salvation of all nations would abide perpetually *in its full integrity and be handed on to all generations* . Therefore Christ the Lord in whom the full revelation of the supreme God is brought to completion (see 2 Cor. 1:20; 3:13; 4:6), commissioned the Apostles to preach to all men that Gospel which is the source of all saving truth and moral teaching, (1) and to impart to them heavenly gifts. This Gospel had been promised in former times through the prophets, and Christ Himself had fulfilled it and promulgated it with His lips. This commission was faithfully fulfilled by the Apostles who, by their oral preaching, by example, and by observances handed on what they had received from the lips of Christ, from living with Him, and from what He did, or what they had learned through the prompting of the Holy Spirit. The commission was fulfilled, too, by those Apostles and apostolic men who under the inspiration of the same Holy Spirit committed the message of salvation to writing.
Also from David:
The Appendix in the Sixto-Clementine Vulgate, which was promulgated by pope Clement VIII in 1952 says this:
Oratio Manassa, necnon Libri duo, qui sub libri Tertii & Quarti Esdrae nomine circumferuntur, hoc in loco, extra scilicet seriem canonicorum Librorum , quos sancta Tridentina Synodus suscepit, & pro Canonicis suscipiendos decreuit, sepositi sunt, ne prorsus interirent, quippe qui a nonnullis sanctis Patribus interdum citantur, & in aliquibus Bibliis Latinis tam manuscriptis quam impressis reperiuntur.
English: The Prayer of Manasseh, as well as two books, which circulate under the name of the Third and Fourth Book of Ezra, are set aside in this place-that is, outside the series of canonical books , which the holy Tridentine Synod accepted, and determined should be taken up for canonical-lest they should perish completely, since they are sometimes cited by some of the holy Fathers, and they are found in some Latin books, both manuscript and printed.
This is important because, the appendix clearly appeals to the Council of Trent when it says, that "these are outside the series of canonical books", so it was understood, that what was not listed as canonical, are designated as non-canonical. Further after The Council of Trent lists the canonical books in the decree, it says that these books should be received as given in the Vulgate:
"But if any one receive not, as sacred and canonical, the said books entire with all their parts, as they have been used to be read in the Catholic Church, and as they are contained in the old Latin vulgate edition ; and knowingly and deliberately contemn the traditions aforesaid; let him be anathema."
So after the Council of Trent, when the new official Vulgate is published, the non-canonical books, that is, the books which are not listen as canonical in the Council of Trent, are now moved to an appendix with a qualification as extra scilicet seriem canonicorum Librorum - outside the series of canonical books .
th-cam.com/video/f6RzzqYZVDI/w-d-xo.html
That was something I didn't realize that it's possible to add books in.
Thanks for covering Enoch. It's always been somehow a thorn... e.g. should I take into account or not?
I know the book of Enoch is a huge subject, but were you not interested in Timothy Alberino's brand new book on the subject? I hope Jimmy and Alberino will have a discussion (on a variety of topics) and you can post it soon.
Very interesting.
"Enoch has a very short life span, only 365 years"
: )
Thank you
One of my FAVORITE subjects. Pseudopigraphia. I am with Saint Augustine's opunion in his voluminous and brilliant City of God. 1 Enoch makes me think of a kind of spiritually prophetic, but angelical myth oriented text. Somewhat like we have Christopher Walken as an evil fallen angel referring to himself as Gabriel in The Prophecy movie series. Two other popular Apocalyptic sci fi movies are Keanu Reeves as the occult investagator Constantine with Tilds Swinton as a female Gabriel and Paul Bettany as an Archamgel Michael in the lesser known Legion. Both movies are very entertaining, but very convulted in their approach to theology being written by professed Protestant Christians. So iny view, Enoch literature is much like these movies. There are truths about the celestial beings portrayed in them and 1st Enoch has several rather beautiful Messianic prophecies that the Apostle St. jude was well aware of. Maybe it was their Star Wars or Lord of the Rings, just from an ancient Hebrew perspective. 2 Enoch contains an incredible amount of info about the planets, the 'seven heavens,' and the ways that angelic and even mythical beings maintain God's universe works. I kind of hope chalkydri and phoenixes are like the 'pets' of the celestial hierarchy (angels), that would ineffably cool. 😂There are also descriptions of Sheol, or Abraham's Bosom being bleow the surface of the earth as well as Gehinnom which is not Purgatory which could be Sheol? 🤔 😇 3 Enoch is also very fascinating and s bit frightening at times. As the animal kingdom can have affection for and love the human kingdom which is above it, they can and do have a fear of us as well, much like I think we do with the Celestial Hierarchy. The one error written of strangely is the ' transfiguration' of the patriarch Enoch jnto an angel named 'Metatron.' This the brother of another angel named Sandalphon who supposedly was the Prophet Elijah. In 3 Enoch, Saint Michael the Archangel gives a salve that was bright with illumination that Enoch applied to himself, thus becoming an angel. Nowhere in Catholic or Orthodox theology is it taught that we are ever 'transfigured' unto purely celestial beings. Its teue that Jesus said that we will be 'as the angels' in Heaven, but who can possibly know fully what He means by this until its our time to experience this?
Thanks very informative. If an inspired author Jude, (debatable who he was) references the book of Enoch this must raise serious questions over Jude’s canonicity?
Jimmy I think you are wrong about the long ages. It says in Genesis Chapter 6 that man can live up to 120 years after the spirit of Hod left. Today science now says we can all live to about 120 years.
There was a woman in recent recorded history who lived longer than 120 years. You can look her up in Wikipedia.
I am super curious whether the common belief that the ages were symbolic is mostly based on current life expectancy or if there is additional archeological evidence. I know Jimmy has spoken about genes getting dropped when they are no longer beneficial such as the genes for dark skin in people who migrated to climates with less sun. Could it be that humans had a longevity gene that dropped off, perhaps due to war and other untimely deaths making such a gene less relevant? Jimmy cited other cultures claiming their ancestors were long-lived as evidence that the scripture writers were mimicking that tradition and claiming their ancestors were just as great. However, what if the evidence is instead really due to people actually living so long back then?
I hear mention of a Saint Michael's Lent which us a blessed and beautiful idea. My own personal deviotion is a TAN book entitled 'Saint Michael and the Angels' which goes day by day in September until September 29th the feast day of the Holy Archangels who pray for military and law enforcement, St. Michael, the media and communication, St. Gabriel, and transportation and the medical field, St. Raphael. Just a request for Jimmy...the author Matthew Bunson wrote a great reference work about angels wrote of a Council of Rome in 745 A D. that condemned the 'naming of angels' by adding the suufix 'El' or 'God' to the end of a Hebrew word, thus somehow making it angelic. One of the angels named was Saint Uriel (flame of God) who, in epic poems like Paradise Lost, is said to be the regent of the sun. This name was apparently condemned specifically by that Council and I'd like to know the reason as my late mother of blessef memory purchased a small set of statues at EWTN's gift shop that fearures St. Uriel holding a sword. Personally, I believe he somehow maintains the sun and this sword he holds could be reminiscent of the 'cherub' who drove Adam and Eve out of Gan Eden with a fiery sword. I believe this means the sun, which practically turned Eden into the desert-like wilderness of the Middle-East. I dont pray to St. Uriel as the Church only likes to refer to the three Archangels mentioned in canonical Scripture and I am just fine with that. But I wonder if in art that is okay because I have drawn Archangels myself. I refuse to veer off into New Age practices trying to gain powers from celestial spirits in an unOrthodox manner. Better to pray 🙏 good private devotions like from TAN books or the Saint Michael Chaplet.
I sometimes wonder if when they say they lived 950 years they are speaking about the last name. Just a thought.
God is awesome! ✝️
I enjoyed the novel Enoch Primeval by Brian Godawa
What does it mean when the people in the Bible tear their clothes?
🙏🙏🙏🌟
What about 3 Maccabees? The Orthodox Study Bible has it.
Perhaps the real reason Ethiopian clergy are confined to the roof of The Holy Sepulchre...
💐🍷 Flowers and sweet red for the algorithm gods! Jimmy, I wonder if the book of Enoch and the introduction of forbidden things to mankind is where the notion women shouldn't wear make-up, jewelry, or cut/style their hair comes from.
I think there was a Pints with Aquinas episode (way back when they were still primarily discussing Aquinas) that covered this topic. As late as Aquinas's day, women who did those things were offering their bodies and services and trying to attract customers. If I recall correctly, the general conclusion was: Now that wearing makeup, etc. is something that the general female population does, it is no longer tied to immorality.
What I meant to say is that if Enoch was forbidding those things, it was likely for the same reasons Aquinas was.
I think at one point you pronounce the word “ancient” as “ank-shent”.
Can you work on that? I don’t think there is any such valid pronunciation of this word. Please correct me if I am wrong.
If ancient ages were symbolic, why did later God have to limit lifespan to 120 years?
I'd like to buy a bouquet for the like-button
6:32 didn't know you had a dog!
He is helping to take care of his sister's dog.
Another fascinating 'legend' of the Archangel Saunt Raphael, who is sadly left out of the canon if the KJV, some scholars made an assumption that Archangels have multiple names snd I am compelled to add what a pious priest friend if mine stated in a good homily on the subject. There actually is no inherent value in knowing the names of the angels ir devils other than what they mean in dedinition. There is no power or magic in knowing such things. However I have read that some consider St. Raphel synonymous with the actial angel of death, Azrael, the name of which means in Hebrew 'whom God helps.' Raphael, of course, is the patron of those travelling by land, sea, or air, but more essentially, of the medical field. Its speculated that he is the spirit of silence and I contemplate this l about hospitals, nursing homes, and funeral homes. Places that are more iften silent than not.
I hear from a jew that Enoch has transformed in the angel metatron and he is the second yahweh
Thank you❤️
Interesting topic.
Thank you 🙏