@@mrkenmt Psalms A Psalm of Asaph. Psalms 82 God standeth in the congregation of the mighty; he judgeth among the gods. 2 How long will ye judge unjustly, and accept the persons of the wicked? Selah. 3 Defend the poor and fatherless: do justice to the afflicted and needy. 4 Deliver the poor and needy: rid them out of the hand of the wicked. 5 They know not, neither will they understand; they walk on in darkness: all the foundations of the earth are out of course. 6 I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High. 7 But ye shall die like men, and fall like one of the princes. 8 Arise, O God, judge the earth: for thou shalt inherit all nations.
@@mrkenmt This is referring to idolatry. God is meant to be the center of your life. If you make something else the center of your life (for example, money), you are in essence making it your god. The full commandment is " I am the Lord thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. Thou shalt have no other gods before me." Egyptians at the time worshiped other gods. I'm sure you have heard of Egyptian gods before. We call them Egyptian gods because they were the "gods" that the Egyptians worshiped. Just because we call them that, doesn't mean they are really GOD. The commandment using the word "gods" in this way doesn't mean what you think it does. The bible is very clear that God, as in the God of the bible, YHVH, is the one true God.
The 1st and 2nd Maccabees were recognized as canon in the Council of Hippo (393 AD) and the Council of Carthage (397 AD), but those Councils didn't recognize the 3rd Maccabees, which isn't related to the first and second Maccabees. The Catholic canon only has the 1st and 2nd Maccabees, while the Easter n Orthodox canon has all 1,2, and 3 Maccabeeees in its Bible.
@chefrasercooks3922 Definitely none of those counsels were led by God, they no longer believed in revelations from God, so they didn't bother to ask God what was true. Instead man argued and compromised with man, until they came up with what we have now. They have been denying the power of God since the death of the Apostles, denying revelations.
Did you hear recently that the Book of psalms is with music for the Harp? I heard it sang the other day in Hebrew and English and the notes were accommodating in both languages. They took note of excessive punctuations and 1 researcher was a musician and realized they were notes. Truly beautiful.
@mikemental8285 not saying it's the inspired word of God but that the Jewish culture from which it derived seemed to approve of it, including inspired Apostles no less. Did those poems, plays, or philosophies relate to questions of doctrine such as the spirits in prison per the book of Enoch?
@joellavergne2001 Not jewish culture. According to historians Josephus and Philo, it was around 4000 essenes. Most widely speaded theory is that essenesses had those scrolls. Not "jews", but very small sect of jews thought Book of Enoch was worth to be preserved. Of course this does not mean that only essenesses were familiar with BoE. But they and some ethiopians were only who held those texts.
@@mikemental8285considering book of Enoch is legit and Jesus quoted from it, its in the oldest bible on earth the Ethiopian bible and many others. The dirty roman Catholics took it out because it explains and expands Genesis. It's Holy scripture. Amen
@@joellavergne2001its definitely inspired word of God. Don't let anyone tell you anything different. It points to Christ our salvation, it fills in all gaps in Genesis. It's the only book that explains our heavens, weather, stars, the fallen angels, azazal A. K. A Satan and his complete defeat. People wonder why genesis is so short... The enemy doesn't want you to know the real truth. Stars are angels, not spinning rocks ball floating in space
I am just under two years a Christian and this video has a lot of good info. I have been collecting the lost books of the Bible, and many of these are there. Some I might just delete and just keep my KJV. God Bless.
@@EzraCanslerThen why do Jude and Jesus Christ quote from the Book Of Enoch, and some other Apocryphal books get quoted or referenced in the New Testament? 🤔 Jesus Christ said that all the Prophets testified of him and were killed for it, so why doesn't the Old Testament have any of that? The only mention of Prophets being killed are the 70 by Jezebel, and we don't have any prophecies from them. But in many Apocryphal books it describes the Son of God and Prophets being killed in various ways. Yet the Jews rejected those books because they were too Christian, and the Christians also rejected them for being too Christian, and claiming to have been written before Jesus Christ, so the early churches assumed they had to be forgeries written later. Yet many of those same ideas were found in the Dead Sea Scrolls. Along with differences in the text from the King James Version, like Deuteronomy 32: 8 saying "the number of the sons of God" instead of "the number of the sons of Israel", which is why many modern translations say "the number of the sons of God"., along with other differences found in the Dead Sea Scroll's versions of the Old Testament books. The Dead Sea Scrolls include of copy of the Book Of Enoch under the name The Book Of The Giants. The Dead Sea Scrolls would be closer to the original text, without as many errors and changes. Yet many reject or pretend there aren't changes, for that would require living Prophets receiving new revelations to determine which translation is closest to the original words written by God's Prophets of old, and which parts of that closest translation are corrupted.
@EzraCansler Yeah, and books written by Prophets of God about God are scripture. They are the very definition of scriptures given in 2 Timothy 3: 16-17. Enoch contains many prophecies about Jesus Christ that were and are very instructive and useful for Doctrine.
8:16 I think you missed the actually controversial Maccabean book. 1&2 Maccabees are overall well received by most churches (or deemed apocryphal by others), but it is 3 Maccabee which is much limited in reception.
The 1st and 2nd Maccabees were recognized as canon in the Council of Hippo (393 AD) and the Council of Carthage (397 AD), but they didn't recognize the 3rd Maccabees, which isn't related to the first and second Maccabees. The Catholic canon only has the 1st and 2nd Maccabees, while the Easter Orthodox canon has all 1,2, and 3 Maccabeeees in its Bible.
@@anycyclopedia Also most Protestants are fine with it. It's just not holy. Belgic Confession, Article 6: We distinguish those sacred books (ed. the Protestant canon) from the apocryphal, viz: the third and fourth books of Esdras, the books of Tobit, Judith, Wisdom, Jesus Sirach, Baruch, the Appendix to the book of Esther, the Song of the Three Children in the Furnace, the History of Susannah, of Bel and the Dragon, the Prayer of Manasseh, and the two books of the Maccabees. All of which the Church may read and take instruction from, so far as they agree with the canonical books; but they are far from having such power and efficacy that we may from their testimony confirm any point of faith or of the Christian religion; much less may they be used to detract from the authority of the other, that is, the sacred books.
Maccabees isn't rejected. The Autocephalous rites in eastern and Oriental Orthodoxy along with Catholicism all use Maccabees as do some Protestants. It's only that most Protestants don't use Maccabees. Personally as a protestant I generally accept it's canonicity since most Christians did for most of Christian history. Even the Egyptian Jews from the 2nd and 1st centuries used to consider it canon scripture.
@@CrimsonWar5The problem is much bigger than that. It means the man that created Sola Scriptura (The Bible Only), the first thing he did was remove books accepted as Scripture by all major Christian religions at the time, since the only Christian religions were Roman Catholics and Greek Orthodox. Making it The Bible Only, except for the parts he didn't like. Just like the Roman Catholics and Greek Orthodox churches had done about a thousand years before with Apocryphal Writings.
The book of Adam and eve being written in Arabic tells you everything you need to know. It was written centuries AFTER Christ and after the canonisation of the Bible.
You mean being copied in Arabic? Like all the books we have that were in the Cannon are copies. We don't have ANY original manuscripts, they're all copies, some in multiple languages. We can't even definitively say what the original languages of the books were.
@bartonbagnes4605 and pray tell, what was the language of the original manuscript? Cause even with the NT, the original was written in Greek. So what's the language of the original? Syriac? That still puts it at a later stage. The same way the earliest manuscript of the "gospel" of Thomas is in Italian and Spanish. Languages that didn't exist at the time
@bartonbagnes4605 but we could tho by examining the quotes of the apostolic Fathers. They quoted scripture all the time and by comparing that with our earliest manuscripts we can come as close to the original. Also it is possible to definitely say what language it was written in because some statements just won't work in another language. The Bible contains many puns and literally devices that would have made sense in Greek but be a bit odd in any other language. You could search it up yourself
@Urfavigbo Since Romans was written to the Romans, it most likely was written in Greek. But those writing all the books of the New Testament were Jews, so they more likely wrote in Hebrew. Yet since we have no original manuscripts, we will never know. All the books of the Bible were translated into other languages that didn't exist when the books were first written, so that proves nothing and never could prove anything. The entire Old Testament would have been written in Paleo Hebrew, with few possible exceptions. But even in the Dead Sea Scrolls most are in Aramaic Hebrew that Israelites were required to speak during the Babylonian Captivity. Only 18 fragmentary manuscripts are entirely written in Paleo Hebrew. Other languages found among the Dead Sea Scrolls are Aramaic, Greek, Arabic and Latin. The Dead Sea Scrolls date from the 3rd century B.C. to the 1rst century A.D., with some nearby sites that date to the 8th century B.C. or the 11th century B.C., though I don't think those older sites have any biblical manuscripts, or we definitely would have heard about it. The point is we can never know what languages that the original manuscripts were written in, though if we ever found copies dating to a few years after the originals we could make a better guess.
@Urfavigbo The Bible has many puns that work just fine in english, you just have to know the meaning of the Hebrew names in english to get them. Like Dan meaning Judge, and the Bible saying Dan will be judged. Or Gad meaning a Troop, and the Bible saying, A troop shall over take them. Yet a name with the same meaning could replace the original names and the puns would still work just fine, without being able to tell what the original language was, like how Christ (Greek) replaced Messiah (Hebrew) in the New Testament, though that doesn't prove that the New Testament was written in Greek.
The testiment of the 12 patriarchs was found in the dead sea scrolls. These copies date to at least 250 years before Christ. The testiment of Levi in that book contains a correct prophecy of the coming messiah, how during his death the temple curtain would be torn. The fact that these were written long before Jesus proves them to be scripture.
So was the book of Enoch. Just cause it’s old doesn’t make it scripture. But it is a very interesting book the the new testament authors would have read, and some quoted.
The books of Maccabees 1-2, Esdras 1-2, Judith, Sirach were all considered scripture. We know this because they were included in the LXX Septuagint scripture which was translated into Greek by the 72 Hebrew sages.
In Jewish tradition their is no source for the scholars translating anything aside the 5 books of Moses. In addition, Jewish tradition lists a few changes they made for different reasons. Most are not in the Septuagint. There is the perfectly possible explanation that the original Septuagint had translation for the rest of the books added later. (Aside from textual revisions) I think no proof exists from the Septuagint.
Enoch was a real man, without a doubt, but he DIDN'T WRITE The Book of Enoch. Many ancient texts, and particularly religious ones claim affiliation with famous figures who likely or definitely did not write them. There is even a term for this: "Pseudepigrapha" In the case of the Book of Enoch, regardless of whether all of it is reliable, or part of it, or none of it. What we can be certain of is that Enoch himself didn't write it. One, it isn't nearly that old. And two, if Enoch DID write anything, it would have been destroyed irrevocably in the Flood.
@@OhDarth Yeah, that’s what a psudoepigrapha is. But that along with several other Biblical and historical inconsistencies are why it’s not part of the canon.
I have listened to Bible scholars who would argue that Enoch told his own story and that he was a real man rather than legend. The writers of the Broadway Musical "Two by Two," were Jewish believers and studied this book as well as the Old testament through the story of Noah so that they could be genuine when they wrote the Musical. I studied about it when DSU did the Musical to help raise money for the campus's new student theater.
@mikemental8285 Tertullian, Alexander, (Not Alexander the Great) Stone (Writer of the Book "The Flowering Peach," the premise of the Musical "Two By Two,") and others. The Orthodox Church, which is a legitimate arm of the Roman Rite considers the Book of Enoch to be honest scripture, not a legend.
@mikemental8285 Those are Bible Scholars. You don't have to take my word for it. You can look them up on your own instead of picking a fight to show your prowess. I'm just not interested in Spiritual Sparring or Verbal Warfare.
@@DawnLapka-c8i You said "Bible scholars". Mr Stone got master's degree from Yale. He studied drama. You cannot be honest if you make stuff up and then hide behind "i don't want any spiritual sparring".
1 enoch is called scripture by Jesus when talking to the Sadducees. The prophecies (animal apocaylpse, 10 weeks, 70 generations, 10,000 years) make sense if someone knows the regular bible well.
Jude, THE Half-Brother of Jesus, Himself…quoted *THE FiRST Book of ENOCH*, like 3 times & referenced it within the very 1st Paragraph of his “Book” called, Jude. The penultimate Book of the NT.
@@cadedrury God talking to the sinful angels that left heaven and had sex with woman on earth 1 Enoch 15:7: "And therefore I have not appointed wives for you; for the spiritual ones of heaven, in heaven is their dwelling". Mathew 22 29 But Jesus answered and said to them, “You are mistaken, since you do not [d]understand the Scriptures nor the power of God. 30 For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels in heaven. The Sadducees quoted the book of Tobit but failed to mention the woman got married successfully he 8th time so Jesus might be calling Tobit/ the deuterocanon scripture too. google Jude Enoch for those verses
The gospel of Nicodemus is where the spear of longinus is named, it depicts the events that the nicene creed summarizes where jesus Christ enters hell and conquers death, There are 2 different endings, an earlier one that was too universalist for the developing church's hierarchy of the time, and a later amended version that is less so but still rejected
Nobody ever said it did. All the books we have are copies, most in multiple languages, so without the original manuscripts we can't even say for certain what the original languages were.
@@fantasia55 I didn't notice specifically hearing it, but just because it said the copy we have was written in Arabic, doesn't mean it's saying the original was. Plus he could have said Arabic when he meant Aramaic, or you could have heard it wrong. Such errors have happened to and about the books in the Bible from the beginning. As well as deliberate changes.
@Araplimosnr Since the sign on the cross was written in Greek, Latin and Aramaic-Hebrew, which replaced Paleo Hebrew during the Babylonian Captivity, the books of the New Testament could have been written in any of these, though Romans was most likely written in Greek or possibly Latin. Even the Dead Sea Scrolls were written mostly in Aramaic-Hebrew with some Paleo Hebrew, but had about an equal number of Aramaic and Greek texts, several Arabic texts dating no later than 70 A.D. and some Latin fragments. So Aramaic-Hebrew was the most likely language used for the New Testament, except those written specifically to Gentiles. There was probably a mixture of converts being taught to read and write Aramaic-Hebrew and the Jewish scriptures being translated into other languages later. Both would be difficult and time consuming back then.
The Odes of Solomon is a mid first-century hymnbook by an early Holy-Spirit Inspired christian prophet, such as those seen in Acts. Ode 10 coincidences with Acts 15 both doctrinally and its dating. Both internal doctrines and character show an early stage reminiscent of first-century church concerns.
@@fantasia55 yeh the 'rabbis' look at the 8 days of dedication of maccabees and mentions of lights and lights in isaiah about 7 fold brighter than made up the hannukah story. their whole religion is based on historical fiction
Some writings had famous men’s names added to the writings to give the appearance of authority or authenticity, but it doesn’t mean the writings are by those men or are real. The devil is a liar and has always been around, causing confusion.
I have asked SEVERAL theologians about Enoch. Jude quotes a prophecy that he says is from the book of Enoch. So should Enoch be in bibles or should Jude be removed? I have told them you can’t cherry pick God’s word. All writings should have been open for believers to read and discern for themselves. Instead men tried to decide what books could stay and what couldn’t. Enoch was also found in the Dead Sea Scroll… and Esther wasn’t. No theologians have ever responded to my pondering this.
You do. Do so wisely. I recommend being born again by the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. This occurs when by faith you believe in the death and resurrection of Jesus as the ultimate sacrifice for the sins of humanity.
James 1:5 people. Just pray about what you read in these books and go by what the Spirit tells you in your heart. It doesn't matter who wrote it or when or how, just if it is good and brings you a better understanding of God.
Being a Christian, having read the entire Bible numerous times, fifty or so years of starting the day out with scripture, I also enjoy reading other books related to Christianity and Gods Word! Reading the Book of Enock for a 2nd time, going to start on the Book of Jubilees soon. But #1 will always be Gods Inspired Word of the Bible!
Then how do you still believe if you actually read it? Funny you like MAN’s word! I read the Bible and it made me an Atheist seeing all the myth and fairytales in the Bible. Otherwise, where’s your Demonstrable Evidence for your myth?
The book of Enoch also tells us that there are 366 books. Where are they? And what makes you think that Enoch was not the author of any or all of these books? God gives prophets the words. So the truth is that God wrote these books. How is it that man gets to decide??? The fact is that God will find a way to get His word to us. No matter how hard Satan tries to confuse us.
The missing books from Protestant bibles ie the KJV were originally included. The translators considered the deuterocanonical because the RCC did so as well. Both believed that there was value to studying those uninspired works. However, believed that they were inspired by God. Eventually the Protestants removed them entirely. The Catholic Church, through tradition and without basis, regarded them as inspired. Thus the gap.
1 and 2 Maccabees were in the Jewish Canon until they were included in the Christian Canon. They were even translated by the Jewish scholars for the Greek scriptures. Maccabees had to be authentic at the time or they would not have been translated into Greek. Critical think it.
Enoch was "quoted" in the KJV & new versions. Which, I believe, makes it "scriptural." It is a part of the Coptic Bible. Jubilees and Maccabees, and a couple of others, I believe, are "relevant!"
How could you leave out that the Jews and Spartans are related to each other according to Maccabees Chapter 12? "When Jonathan felt that the time was favorable, he chose envoys and sent them to Rome in order to confirm and renew friendship with them. 2 He also sent letters in the same vein to the Spartans and to others. 3 The envoys went to Rome and entered the senate chamber. They said, “Jonathan the high priest and the Jewish nation have sent us to renew our former friendship and alliance.” 4 The Romans provided letters for them to give to various people to ask them to assure the envoys safe passage back to Judah. 5 This is a copy of the letter that Jonathan wrote to the Spartans: 6 The high priest Jonathan, the senate of the nation, the priests, and the rest of the Jewish people. To their brothers the Spartans. Greetings! 7 In the past, your king Arius sent a letter to the high priest Onias, stating that you are our relatives as the appended copy shows. 8 Onias welcomed the envoy with honor and received the letter, which contained a clear declaration of alliance and friendship. 9 Generally, we have no need of these things, since we have the holy scrolls as encouragement. 10 Yet we have desired to renew our family ties and friendship with you so that we may not become estranged from you, because considerable time has passed since you sent your letter to us. 11 We remember you constantly on every occasion-at our festivals and on other appropriate days, at the sacrifices that we offer, and in our prayers-as it is right and proper to remember relatives. 12 Furthermore, we rejoice at your success. 13 As for us, we have experienced many trials and many wars. The kings around us have waged war against us. 14 We have not wanted to bother you and our other allies and friends about these wars 15 because we have the help that comes from heaven. So we have been delivered from our enemies, and they have been humbled. 16 Therefore, we chose Numenius, Antiochus’ son, and Antipater, Jason’s son, and sent them to Rome to renew our former friendship and alliance with them. 17 We have told them to go to you as well and greet you and deliver to you this letter from us concerning the renewal of our family ties. 18 So please send us a reply. 19 This is a copy of the letter that they sent to Onias: 20 King Arius of the Spartans. To the high priest Onias. Greetings! 21 It has been discovered in a written record that the Spartans and the Jews are relatives and are both of the family of Abraham. 22 Since we have learned this, please let us know how you are. 23 On our part, we write to let you know that what is yours-your livestock and property-belongs to us, and ours belongs to you. We therefore command that our envoys report to you in keeping with this."
it doesnt actually say that, Jonathan is making an appeal to the spartans trying to give them the understanding they brothers through Abraham but if you read chronicles 1 and 2 that will make more sense, the biblical world view is that the children and decendants of abraham went on to populate europe, africa, central and south asia, which were all also the paths the original disciples of jesus went out to for similar beliefs
Thanks for bringing that up! The connection between the Jews and Spartans mentioned in Maccabees 12 is definitely an interesting part of the history. While I didn’t cover it in my discussion, it's a fascinating example of how ancient alliances and relationships were acknowledged in historical texts. I focused on other aspects, but I appreciate you pointing this out!
@@simpicusmaximusGod said he would sift Israel among all the nations of the earth. The Jews didn't know about the Americas or Australia or all the islands of the sea, but God said it and he did. And we are told that he cannot lie.
@@josecordova4144 But that IS how it works. You need to research it. You will find that alot of books were tossed out because "they" didn't like them. It's funny how they didn't catch (and remove) the scriptures that contradict each other.
@bradenglass4753 Athanasius never rejected Maccabees, he even praised it saying the blood that the Israelites shed in the book was heroic, you also have to look at the other church fathers and what they thought of the book. St. Polycarp, student of John, thought that it was a divinely inspired book and so did of the other church fathers
@IndoHelleneBall you seem confused- appraisal of a text for moral edification is not equivalent to canonicity. The early fathers had 3 categories for texts: 1. Canonical scripture 2. Useful for teaching, but not canonical 3. Spurious Athanasius saw the deuterocanon in the 2nd category, as do classical protestants. At Trent, the papist fathers disregarded the tripartite textual division, and placed an equivalence between the scripture and the deuterocanon, far more similar to Augustines view in doctrina christiana. They also issued anathemas on the issue, something unheard of in early Church disputes on canon Yet the earliest fathers did not equivocate the deuterocanon with the canonical books. Augustines influence was huge in incorporating these texts into mainstream liturgical use, and councils at carthage and hippo cited augustine as their source- against the opinion of Jerome, Athanasius, the early canon lists, and the later protestants.
@bradenglass4753 Sorry, most church father disagree and even quote it as scriptures Plus not all of us that accept maccabees are papist, it’s called Eastern Orthodox and we were the church established by Christ himself
@Faithfulfilled1 I'm aware that the orthodox make the same claim to authoritative church magisterium as Rome does, everybody knows it, it's not a mystery.
It was rejected because it is a forgery (Thomas did not write it) and it contains gnostic teaching. Certain passages of the Quran where copied from the infancy gospel.
The book of the watchers should have been included. I've never heard a good argument against that. We know there were fallen angels and there are legends of giants, worldwide.
@W_H_K No reason to throw away Enoch the patriarch. Book of Enoch instead is antichrist text, false writing. Its only value is religious historic value to tell us how little sect of second temple are jews believed. Nothing more
John references the revelation of Enoch, God already knew the book wouldn't make the Bible and made a plan to use John to reveal that it is indeed His word and not lies, as for the rest of apocrypha, well, I don't believe it until it's in the Bible, that's all I'll say about that
The books of Enoch and Jubilees were recognized as God given scripture by the ancient Jewish teachers. But they decided to hide them from the people because they contained too much information. This is recorded in the talmud.
Yeah and the talmud also states Jesus is burning in feces in gehena. Talmudic yews aren't exactly the oracles of truth when it comes to scripture. The masoretic texts and pseudo-diagraphical Manuscripts are more so hear-say and aren't to be taken seriously. Especially since they are produced and carried on by Gnostics and Pagans who reject Jesus Christ.
It is worth remembering that these books have mythological, social and moral influence from the different nations that colonized and enslaved Israel. This is why they are not considered true spiritual books and why they are not in the Bible
All of these books are all hereditary books was rejected for reason. God's chosen prophets all was inspired by God and not of their own intellect. We must never go outside of God's holy bible trying add on to it.
Your comment ignores the historical fact that the Bible, as we know it today, was assembled by men, some of whom may have been inspired by the Holy Spirit, and some that were inspired only by their own need for power.
In the bible it said the Angels that betrayed God took up wives. So when you read the book of enoch talks about how they born giants an it speaks of it in the bible as well so why people reject it. Which are the nephilim
@squidwardwithoutaclue read the whole part of Genesis 6 1-8 reccomend you and everyone else to do that. In book of the enoch it just gives more details of the fallen angels names. An the corruption they cause. They taught man how to make weapons to start wars, dyes , and even astronomy. This type of knowledge was from celestial beings. An more about the nephilim in detailed. But if you read Genesis 6 verse 4 "The nephilim were on earth in those days and also afterward when the sons of God came in to the daughters of man and they bore children to them. These were the mighty men who were of old the men of renown" So idk how people don't accept the book of enoch. It tell you more of what happen during the days of noah. Just like the book of jasher. But please read Genesis 6 it whole thing and don't let this video cloud your judgement always read the bible my friend.
Interesting that the Odes of Solomon dated 60 AD are before written texts of the NT. The NT does not have the word Trinity and was not a belief of the OT or the Hebrews. The Trinity, much debated, belief was not confirmed until the Council of Macedonia in 380 AD
In fact the earliest use of the word Trinity is in 170 A.D. by Theophilus, and is very different from what it would eventually become after centuries of arguments and changes. All without any help from God. The first description of the Trinity included a female entity Wisdom, associated with Asher of the Old Testament, the wife of El and mother of Yahweh in ancient Hebrew beliefs, instead of the Holy Ghost/Holy Spirit, who is always referred to as male.
Question of the day: Why is the "Songs of Solomon" in the bible collection while the book of Enoch was thrown out? Answer: Because the latter exposes lots about the devil, while the former is just for fun. Also, why was the book of Jubilees removed? Answer: Because it reveals the exact Bible geography and the identity of the real Israelites, which those of the synagogue of satan are struggling to hide. However, those who seek to "test all spirits" should read all these books to find out the truth for themselves because the whole world is under deception.
The Jewish soldiers had been so important to Alexander the Great, Ptolemy dedicated a quarter of Alexandria to them. It was the Hellenized scholars from them who were more likely responsible for the Septuagint. The Letter of Aristeas claims that there were no Lost Tribes of Israel
The Book of Enoch is mentioned in the New Testament three times: Jude 1:14-15: The Epistle of Jude quotes a passage attributed to "Enoch, the Seventh from Adam". This passage is not found in the Catholic and Protestant canons of the Old Testament. Some also believe that the First Epistle of Peter (1 Peter 3:19-20) and the Second Epistle of Peter (2 Peter 2:4-5) may reference Enochian material. The Book of Enoch was initially considered scripture by the Jewish and Christian communities.
No the book of Enoch was never thought to be cannon in the Tanakh for the jews. Some fragments were found in the septuagint of the dead sea scrolls but the jews never had the book of enoch in their cannon. We protestants dont have the apocrypha as they were added to the jewish cannon later, by the catholic church, so we figure if the jews did not have those books in their old testament why would we? However it get kind of dicey for me that esther made it into cannon and maccabees did not.
@@planes3333 The Books of Maccabees would have provided an intertestament bridge As to whether the Book of Enoch was ever considered or studied to be considered: There is no scholarly consensus on when the Hebrew Bible canon was established. Some scholars believe that the Hasmonean dynasty (140-40 BCE) fixed the canon, while others believe it was fixed in the 2nd century CE or later, between 150 and 250 CE. I, personally, think it makes sense that it occurred after the fall of the Second Temple, when Rabbinical Judaism was being codified
interesting answer. First I read the book of enoch, all of it. I was surprised by it as it was both very long, interesting, it talked about some of my favorite themes and it was also sort of redundant. I was glad to have read it though. Honestly it seemed legit in parts but in other parts it felt like fan fiction. It was in many parts and I cant remember all of it but the testament of solomon was in it too which again talked about biblical themes but also felt like fan fiction. as for the apocrypha, yeah this one had me kind of wondering too. However after the book of Malachi the last book there was a 400 year silence and no new prophets came. The jews closed their cannon for good in that they reject Jesus and the new testament. Their hebrew bible goes from Genesis to Malachi, basically the Tanakh. So they closed their bible at Malachi they knew the old testament writings and had also seen other books come around that they rejected. Like during those 400 years. In the 1500's the catholic church added those old apocrypha books in to account for some of their biblical heresies like purgatory, so it isnt that the protestants took books out of the old testament, its that the catholic church put those "hidden books" back in Some of them are good for reading, some of them are downright lies from and unbiblical and some are very close to being cannon, but they are not Gods inspired word. In my opinion the bible has 66 books.
@@planes3333 The Book of Enoch highly syncretic, also blending with Jewish elements Persian, Greek, Chaldean, and Egyptian ones. You probably know the influence it has had in shaping the unofficial narrative of Satan (originally, the Adversary, directed by God to test faith) The Book of Job is of interest to the story of the Book of Enoch in that it shows the one of the earliest Persian (Zoroastrian) influence on the Jews (the Pharisees?) Going by what modern scholars contend, though not set in the Intertestament era, these books may well have been written then: Song of Songs (retelling of the "sacred marriage" of Tammuz and Ishtar), Ruth (in answer to the xenophobic Ezra-Nehemiah), Daniel (judged to be the last canon book written, around the reign of Antiochus IV, 167-163), Esther (where God is not mentioned)
Esdras 1 & 2 and Maccabees 1, 2, 3, & 4 are in the Bible, just not the Protestant versions. Enoch is still in the Ethiopian Orthodox Bible. Even the entire Apocrypha used to be in the 1611 KJV but they got rid of that too. Protestants have a history of reducing the size of the Bible and translating it incorrectly to appeal to a modern audience.
Reject the word ,but never reject the dead thing$ the Fallen and $atan deceive and rule the whole world by. Make a friend of the world and make an enemy of God.
Ultimately, (Matt. 6:33) teaches; "Seek ye first the kingdom of God & His righteousness & all of these things shall be added unto you." The books mentioned in vid, are not necessary parts of the Bible bcs they don't actually contribute anything "New" to the message in the Bible. In the majority of cases; most of the individual comments made, giving Credence to these books; usually include, how they mention things previously noted elsewhere in God's Holy word. Aside from the fact that; as the narrator in this video notes; that Enoch himself, did not write the book of the same name. The real author, is still unknown. It's part of the "pseudepigrapha" and it was written between the 3-BC & 1-AD. Instead, Enoch was given the credit of writing the book, by the actual true authors, who used his name in order to give it "an aura of ancient wisdom and authority". With similar characteristics in the other books. Which doesn't mean they aren't useful in their own way.
Jude 1-4 calls Enoch a prophet ,the 7th from Adam, quoting him verbatim from 1 Enoch 1-9. A prophet leaves writings behind him. And his book was among the most frequent of dead sea scrolls. Enoch is mentioned by name by 4 different authors, throughout the ages, first Moses in Genesis, then David in one of his Psalms, the author of the book of Hebrews and then Jude. It's the same person with 4 authors attesting of his existence. I could also bring here direct quotes from Enoch's writings from new testament authors and Jesus, but utube just don't like it.
@angelxdv518 I would but the censorship is off the chart, so far has been suppressed: *One reply suggesting THEGODCULTURE Channel here on the plateform *Another one giving you the verses of the New testament quoting from that book *This one reply also very likely will not make it
You can find them online. It was a period of Hebrew revolt against the Hellenistic (Greek influenced) rulers. Not considered scripture (some denominations keep them) but interesting historically. It's why some thought the Messiah might come to do the same thing. Save his people through armed revolution.
@@Jonahch2v9 ah interesting. I guess my people took it out not out of spite, but simply not to make confusion in the scripture...were focusing on the prophesy and stories to Christ. And I guess my people believe it doesn't belong, buy who knows. Maybe were wrong in that area
I get a kick out of hearing titles such as "The Lost Books of the Bible". Do people really believe that Almighty God doesn't have the power and authority to make sure his Word, that he intends for us to have is going to somehow be circumvented by man? Some of those books listed may have some historical value,but God didn't include them. There is a book mentioned in the O.T. called Gad the Seer. I have that book, and there seems to be a little insight that the other legitimate books omit,but Gad the Seer is not included in the other 66 books of the Holy Bible. God has given us all we need in the Holy Bible,and according to Jesus, most will still miss the mark-Matthew 7:14 and vs.21-23.
Book of Enoch is Genesis! It's found in the oldest bible on earth, the Ethiopian bible. It's explains everything that science has lied about, weather, stars/space and creation. Also it's a book azazal a.k.a Satan doesn't want you to read. It explains his downfall, the birth of gaints and his defeat. Also points to Christ and salvation.
@@MIkeB1980 Are you sure? As flat earther, you don't believe that sun lights up the moon, do you? That moon is lit up from the sun? Now do you? Oh, you did not read the Book of Enoch😀 78:10 "And Uriel showed me another law: - when light is transferred to the Moon, and on which side it is transferred from the Sun." According to BoE sun lights up the moon. According to your true source of reality, youtube's fe-channels, moon is lightsource itself. You got fooled.
No book of judas?? Basically how judas was the most loyal and choose to sacrifice his life and more to be a marter he did what we know he did not out of greed but cause he was asked to do... it so that jeaus could die for our sins and be reborn
There NOT rejected books of the bible, their rejected books that are not the words of God, any student of Gods word can read these fairy tales and tell they are not Gods word, Paul even talked about fake gospels during his life
![[#2024MAMA] G-DRAGON - 무제(Untitled, 2014)+POWER+HOME SWEET HOME+뱅뱅뱅+FANTASTIC BABY | Mnet 241123 방송](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Ox29z5Nf1Uk/mqdefault.jpg)
Most people reject the 10 Commandments; thinking them to be suggestions. Christ said keep the Commandments.
The very first commandment says something about having no other gods before me...
Uhhh - - -
Isn't he the ONLY god?
@@mrkenmt
Psalms A Psalm of Asaph.
Psalms 82 God standeth in the congregation of the mighty; he judgeth among the gods.
2 How long will ye judge unjustly, and accept the persons of the wicked? Selah.
3 Defend the poor and fatherless: do justice to the afflicted and needy.
4 Deliver the poor and needy: rid them out of the hand of the wicked.
5 They know not, neither will they understand; they walk on in darkness: all the foundations of the earth are out of course.
6 I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High.
7 But ye shall die like men, and fall like one of the princes.
8 Arise, O God, judge the earth: for thou shalt inherit all nations.
@@mrkenmt This is referring to idolatry. God is meant to be the center of your life. If you make something else the center of your life (for example, money), you are in essence making it your god.
The full commandment is " I am the Lord thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. Thou shalt have no other gods before me."
Egyptians at the time worshiped other gods. I'm sure you have heard of Egyptian gods before. We call them Egyptian gods because they were the "gods" that the Egyptians worshiped. Just because we call them that, doesn't mean they are really GOD.
The commandment using the word "gods" in this way doesn't mean what you think it does. The bible is very clear that God, as in the God of the bible, YHVH, is the one true God.
@jzax9959 awww, you spoiled my fun.
Much of humanity has made paper their god. Money. ~eer
Not most but a few idiots.
The 1st and 2nd Maccabees were recognized as canon in the Council of Hippo (393 AD) and the Council of Carthage (397 AD), but those Councils didn't recognize the 3rd Maccabees, which isn't related to the first and second Maccabees. The Catholic canon only has the 1st and 2nd Maccabees, while the Easter n Orthodox canon has all 1,2, and 3 Maccabeeees in its Bible.
Hippo and Carthage affirmed the original biblical canon, from the Council of Rome in AD 382.
I'm sure you meant Eastern Orthodox, not Easter Orthodox. 😆
@@bartonbagnes4605 Ha Ha Ha
All those councils were heretical.
@chefrasercooks3922 Definitely none of those counsels were led by God, they no longer believed in revelations from God, so they didn't bother to ask God what was true. Instead man argued and compromised with man, until they came up with what we have now. They have been denying the power of God since the death of the Apostles, denying revelations.
Did you hear recently that the Book of psalms is with music for the Harp? I heard it sang the other day in Hebrew and English and the notes were accommodating in both languages. They took note of excessive punctuations and 1 researcher was a musician and realized they were notes. Truly beautiful.
Where may I find the music?
Where can I locate it?
It was written on ancient scrolls. Watched it on YT the other day. Originally posted 5 yrs ago. History makers TV
@@adedoyinezekiel8781 History makers TV on (YT)
@@dimanigo120 Michael-David, a Harp master provides it
The book of Enoch was included in the Dead Sea Scrolls and is quoted by Peter and Jude in the NT.
Paul quoted poetry, greek plays and philosophers. Are those inspired Word of God too, because Paul quoted them?
@mikemental8285 not saying it's the inspired word of God but that the Jewish culture from which it derived seemed to approve of it, including inspired Apostles no less. Did those poems, plays, or philosophies relate to questions of doctrine such as the spirits in prison per the book of Enoch?
@joellavergne2001
Not jewish culture.
According to historians Josephus and Philo, it was around 4000 essenes.
Most widely speaded theory is that essenesses had those scrolls. Not "jews", but very small sect of jews thought Book of Enoch was worth to be preserved.
Of course this does not mean that only essenesses were familiar with BoE. But they and some ethiopians were only who held those texts.
@@mikemental8285considering book of Enoch is legit and Jesus quoted from it, its in the oldest bible on earth the Ethiopian bible and many others.
The dirty roman Catholics took it out because it explains and expands Genesis. It's Holy scripture. Amen
@@joellavergne2001its definitely inspired word of God. Don't let anyone tell you anything different. It points to Christ our salvation, it fills in all gaps in Genesis. It's the only book that explains our heavens, weather, stars, the fallen angels, azazal A. K. A Satan and his complete defeat.
People wonder why genesis is so short... The enemy doesn't want you to know the real truth. Stars are angels, not spinning rocks ball floating in space
I am just under two years a Christian and this video has a lot of good info. I have been collecting the lost books of the Bible, and many of these are there. Some I might just delete and just keep my KJV. God Bless.
Just read the KJV. Thats the standard.
KJV is the only God breathed Bible in English.
@@EzraCanslerThen why do Jude and Jesus Christ quote from the Book Of Enoch, and some other Apocryphal books get quoted or referenced in the New Testament? 🤔 Jesus Christ said that all the Prophets testified of him and were killed for it, so why doesn't the Old Testament have any of that? The only mention of Prophets being killed are the 70 by Jezebel, and we don't have any prophecies from them. But in many Apocryphal books it describes the Son of God and Prophets being killed in various ways. Yet the Jews rejected those books because they were too Christian, and the Christians also rejected them for being too Christian, and claiming to have been written before Jesus Christ, so the early churches assumed they had to be forgeries written later. Yet many of those same ideas were found in the Dead Sea Scrolls. Along with differences in the text from the King James Version, like Deuteronomy 32: 8 saying "the number of the sons of God" instead of "the number of the sons of Israel", which is why many modern translations say "the number of the sons of God"., along with other differences found in the Dead Sea Scroll's versions of the Old Testament books. The Dead Sea Scrolls include of copy of the Book Of Enoch under the name The Book Of The Giants. The Dead Sea Scrolls would be closer to the original text, without as many errors and changes. Yet many reject or pretend there aren't changes, for that would require living Prophets receiving new revelations to determine which translation is closest to the original words written by God's Prophets of old, and which parts of that closest translation are corrupted.
@
Yep, many at that time probably knew the book of Enoch. Jews used lots of books that wasn’t scripture.
@EzraCansler Yeah, and books written by Prophets of God about God are scripture. They are the very definition of scriptures given in 2 Timothy 3: 16-17. Enoch contains many prophecies about Jesus Christ that were and are very instructive and useful for Doctrine.
Thank you for the good work. Simple and easy to understand.
This means more than you realize.
8:16 I think you missed the actually controversial Maccabean book. 1&2 Maccabees are overall well received by most churches (or deemed apocryphal by others), but it is 3 Maccabee which is much limited in reception.
Why?
The 1st and 2nd Maccabees were recognized as canon in the Council of Hippo (393 AD) and the Council of Carthage (397 AD), but they didn't recognize the 3rd Maccabees, which isn't related to the first and second Maccabees. The Catholic canon only has the 1st and 2nd Maccabees, while the Easter Orthodox canon has all 1,2, and 3 Maccabeeees in its Bible.
I've heard of it.
@@anycyclopedia Also most Protestants are fine with it. It's just not holy.
Belgic Confession, Article 6: We distinguish those sacred books (ed. the Protestant canon) from the apocryphal, viz: the third and fourth books of Esdras, the books of Tobit, Judith, Wisdom, Jesus Sirach, Baruch, the Appendix to the book of Esther, the Song of the Three Children in the Furnace, the History of Susannah, of Bel and the Dragon, the Prayer of Manasseh, and the two books of the Maccabees. All of which the Church may read and take instruction from, so far as they agree with the canonical books; but they are far from having such power and efficacy that we may from their testimony confirm any point of faith or of the Christian religion; much less may they be used to detract from the authority of the other, that is, the sacred books.
Maccabees isn't rejected.
The Autocephalous rites in eastern and Oriental Orthodoxy along with Catholicism all use Maccabees as do some Protestants. It's only that most Protestants don't use Maccabees.
Personally as a protestant I generally accept it's canonicity since most Christians did for most of Christian history.
Even the Egyptian Jews from the 2nd and 1st centuries used to consider it canon scripture.
Yes that's makes it rejected, but not universally rejected. That's a you problem bud.
@@CrimsonWar5The problem is much bigger than that. It means the man that created Sola Scriptura (The Bible Only), the first thing he did was remove books accepted as Scripture by all major Christian religions at the time, since the only Christian religions were Roman Catholics and Greek Orthodox. Making it The Bible Only, except for the parts he didn't like. Just like the Roman Catholics and Greek Orthodox churches had done about a thousand years before with Apocryphal Writings.
That it correct. It was originally in the Bible till the whole Martin Luther Protestant thing
@@CrimsonWar5 than revelation is rejected not universally rejected because Swiss Anabaptists took the book of revelation out of the bible
@@pblodaplug6133 there's still Protestants who use it
The book of Adam and eve being written in Arabic tells you everything you need to know. It was written centuries AFTER Christ and after the canonisation of the Bible.
You mean being copied in Arabic? Like all the books we have that were in the Cannon are copies. We don't have ANY original manuscripts, they're all copies, some in multiple languages. We can't even definitively say what the original languages of the books were.
@bartonbagnes4605 and pray tell, what was the language of the original manuscript? Cause even with the NT, the original was written in Greek. So what's the language of the original? Syriac? That still puts it at a later stage. The same way the earliest manuscript of the "gospel" of Thomas is in Italian and Spanish. Languages that didn't exist at the time
@bartonbagnes4605 but we could tho by examining the quotes of the apostolic Fathers. They quoted scripture all the time and by comparing that with our earliest manuscripts we can come as close to the original. Also it is possible to definitely say what language it was written in because some statements just won't work in another language. The Bible contains many puns and literally devices that would have made sense in Greek but be a bit odd in any other language. You could search it up yourself
@Urfavigbo Since Romans was written to the Romans, it most likely was written in Greek. But those writing all the books of the New Testament were Jews, so they more likely wrote in Hebrew. Yet since we have no original manuscripts, we will never know. All the books of the Bible were translated into other languages that didn't exist when the books were first written, so that proves nothing and never could prove anything. The entire Old Testament would have been written in Paleo Hebrew, with few possible exceptions. But even in the Dead Sea Scrolls most are in Aramaic Hebrew that Israelites were required to speak during the Babylonian Captivity. Only 18 fragmentary manuscripts are entirely written in Paleo Hebrew. Other languages found among the Dead Sea Scrolls are Aramaic, Greek, Arabic and Latin. The Dead Sea Scrolls date from the 3rd century B.C. to the 1rst century A.D., with some nearby sites that date to the 8th century B.C. or the 11th century B.C., though I don't think those older sites have any biblical manuscripts, or we definitely would have heard about it. The point is we can never know what languages that the original manuscripts were written in, though if we ever found copies dating to a few years after the originals we could make a better guess.
@Urfavigbo The Bible has many puns that work just fine in english, you just have to know the meaning of the Hebrew names in english to get them. Like Dan meaning Judge, and the Bible saying Dan will be judged. Or Gad meaning a Troop, and the Bible saying, A troop shall over take them. Yet a name with the same meaning could replace the original names and the puns would still work just fine, without being able to tell what the original language was, like how Christ (Greek) replaced Messiah (Hebrew) in the New Testament, though that doesn't prove that the New Testament was written in Greek.
Thank you for this video.....I've often wondered about these "missing" books! ;-)
The testiment of the 12 patriarchs was found in the dead sea scrolls. These copies date to at least 250 years before Christ. The testiment of Levi in that book contains a correct prophecy of the coming messiah, how during his death the temple curtain would be torn. The fact that these were written long before Jesus proves them to be scripture.
So was the book of Enoch. Just cause it’s old doesn’t make it scripture. But it is a very interesting book the the new testament authors would have read, and some quoted.
All those Books are inspired by the true Word of God that’s why prophecies are being fulfilled
@@jhongamboa3197no they aren’t.
Where can i find these books? Thank you for this very interesting bibical information.😊😊😊
The books of Maccabees 1-2, Esdras 1-2, Judith, Sirach were all considered scripture. We know this because they were included in the LXX Septuagint scripture which was translated into Greek by the 72 Hebrew sages.
In Jewish tradition their is no source for the scholars translating anything aside the 5 books of Moses.
In addition, Jewish tradition lists a few changes they made for different reasons.
Most are not in the Septuagint.
There is the perfectly possible explanation that the original Septuagint had translation for the rest of the books added later. (Aside from textual revisions)
I think no proof exists from the Septuagint.
Enoch was a real man, not legendary ✝️✝️✝️
Enoch was a real man, without a doubt, but he DIDN'T WRITE The Book of Enoch. Many ancient texts, and particularly religious ones claim affiliation with famous figures who likely or definitely did not write them. There is even a term for this: "Pseudepigrapha"
In the case of the Book of Enoch, regardless of whether all of it is reliable, or part of it, or none of it. What we can be certain of is that Enoch himself didn't write it. One, it isn't nearly that old. And two, if Enoch DID write anything, it would have been destroyed irrevocably in the Flood.
They’re discussing the Book. Much like St. Thomas or St. Peter, Historians and Theologian highly doubt they wrote their so called "Gospels".
Yes he was but the book of enoch seems to be somewhat true in some parts but mostly fan fiction in all the rest.
@@Vales55 it wasn't said to have been written by him, but it was attributed to him for dramatic effect.
@@OhDarth Yeah, that’s what a psudoepigrapha is.
But that along with several other Biblical and historical inconsistencies are why it’s not part of the canon.
The book of Tobit also is not in many bibles. My favorite Old Testament book.
2:17 Solomon didn’t write Psalm 72, David wrote it as a prophecy about the reign of Solomon.
Catholics have 1st and 2nd Maccabees and Eastern Orthodox have both + 3rd Maccabees
Thank You...the continuous sssss sound in almost every word makes this very well written work difficult to focus upon.
Wasnt the book of enoch originally part of the ethiopian bible?
Still is
Read these books for yourself. Do not take this man's opinion above your own. Ask God for wisdom, understanding, and act accordingly. It is easy. :)
Good advice
I have listened to Bible scholars who would argue that Enoch told his own story and that he was a real man rather than legend. The writers of the Broadway Musical "Two by Two," were Jewish believers and studied this book as well as the Old testament through the story of Noah so that they could be genuine when they wrote the Musical. I studied about it when DSU did the Musical to help raise money for the campus's new student theater.
@@DawnLapka-c8i
Can you show us these scholars?
Or did you made up those?
I bet you did
@mikemental8285 Tertullian, Alexander, (Not Alexander the Great) Stone (Writer of the Book "The Flowering Peach," the premise of the Musical "Two By Two,") and others. The Orthodox Church, which is a legitimate arm of the Roman Rite considers the Book of Enoch to be honest scripture, not a legend.
@@DawnLapka-c8i you said, Bible scholars...
@mikemental8285 Those are Bible Scholars. You don't have to take my word for it. You can look them up on your own instead of picking a fight to show your prowess. I'm just not interested in Spiritual Sparring or Verbal Warfare.
@@DawnLapka-c8i
You said "Bible scholars".
Mr Stone got master's degree from Yale. He studied drama.
You cannot be honest if you make stuff up and then hide behind "i don't want any spiritual sparring".
1 enoch is called scripture by Jesus when talking to the Sadducees. The prophecies (animal apocaylpse, 10 weeks, 70 generations, 10,000 years) make sense if someone knows the regular bible well.
Jude, THE Half-Brother of Jesus, Himself…quoted *THE FiRST Book of ENOCH*, like 3 times & referenced it within the very 1st Paragraph of his “Book” called, Jude. The penultimate Book of the NT.
@@dustinhellstern7728 amen
what verses? i’m interested
@@cadedrury God talking to the sinful angels that left heaven and had sex with woman on earth
1 Enoch 15:7: "And therefore I have not appointed wives for you; for the spiritual ones of heaven, in heaven is their dwelling".
Mathew 22 29 But Jesus answered and said to them, “You are mistaken, since you do not [d]understand the Scriptures nor the power of God. 30 For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels in heaven.
The Sadducees quoted the book of Tobit but failed to mention the woman got married successfully he 8th time so Jesus might be calling Tobit/ the deuterocanon scripture too.
google Jude Enoch for those verses
@@dustinhellstern7728 so what? It just means the book was around and he read it
The gospel of Nicodemus is where the spear of longinus is named, it depicts the events that the nicene creed summarizes where jesus Christ enters hell and conquers death,
There are 2 different endings, an earlier one that was too universalist for the developing church's hierarchy of the time, and a later amended version that is less so but still rejected
For good reason. It's nonsensical and contradicts canon a lot
Jesus going to hell to free the faithful Jews from the bosom of Abraham is in Peter.
Really insightful video, thank you.
fake
I notices the subs were at 666 so I subbed to make it 667
Well bless your heart
@@mrkenmt LOL
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Why are you always says this number 666, instead of 777. Please, stop saying that
@sniperjugevillafane8811 right! It's 895 now... Well, that's what the algorithm shows me. But even I know THAT isn't right
Arabic was not spoken in Egypt until the 7th century AD. Arabic language did not exist in centuries BC.
Nobody ever said it did. All the books we have are copies, most in multiple languages, so without the original manuscripts we can't even say for certain what the original languages were.
@bartonbagnes4605 The video did.
@@fantasia55 I didn't notice specifically hearing it, but just because it said the copy we have was written in Arabic, doesn't mean it's saying the original was. Plus he could have said Arabic when he meant Aramaic, or you could have heard it wrong. Such errors have happened to and about the books in the Bible from the beginning. As well as deliberate changes.
Jesus spoke aramaic language,
He also learned Hebrew, given that the Jews books were written in Hebrew.
@Araplimosnr Since the sign on the cross was written in Greek, Latin and Aramaic-Hebrew, which replaced Paleo Hebrew during the Babylonian Captivity, the books of the New Testament could have been written in any of these, though Romans was most likely written in Greek or possibly Latin. Even the Dead Sea Scrolls were written mostly in Aramaic-Hebrew with some Paleo Hebrew, but had about an equal number of Aramaic and Greek texts, several Arabic texts dating no later than 70 A.D. and some Latin fragments. So Aramaic-Hebrew was the most likely language used for the New Testament, except those written specifically to Gentiles. There was probably a mixture of converts being taught to read and write Aramaic-Hebrew and the Jewish scriptures being translated into other languages later. Both would be difficult and time consuming back then.
The Odes of Solomon is a mid first-century hymnbook by an early Holy-Spirit Inspired christian prophet, such as those seen in Acts. Ode 10 coincidences with Acts 15 both doctrinally and its dating. Both internal doctrines and character show an early stage reminiscent of first-century church concerns.
Jesus celebrated Hannukah, which is from Maccabbes.
the dedication of the temple in maccabees and referenced in the NT is different than the hannukah which is the myth version of it
@Sam-fp8zm okey dokey
@@fantasia55 yeh the 'rabbis' look at the 8 days of dedication of maccabees and mentions of lights and lights in isaiah about 7 fold brighter than made up the hannukah story. their whole religion is based on historical fiction
Some writings had famous men’s names added to the writings to give the appearance of authority or authenticity, but it doesn’t mean the writings are by those men or are real.
The devil is a liar and has always been around, causing confusion.
Ethiopian Orthodox and Eritrean Orthodox have Enoch in their canon, and most apostolic christian denominations have the maccabbees in their canon
I have asked SEVERAL theologians about Enoch. Jude quotes a prophecy that he says is from the book of Enoch. So should Enoch be in bibles or should Jude be removed? I have told them you can’t cherry pick God’s word. All writings should have been open for believers to read and discern for themselves. Instead men tried to decide what books could stay and what couldn’t. Enoch was also found in the Dead Sea Scroll… and Esther wasn’t. No theologians have ever responded to my pondering this.
@thecastorclan3017 exactly bro! People don't realize certain books they hold onto like Esther were controversial in the early church!
@@thecastorclan3017Jesus Christ himself also quotes Enoch.
what about the book /gospel of judas ??
So who decides what books get left out of the bible?
God!!!!
Politicians and merchants.
A Committee.
You do.
Do so wisely.
I recommend being born again by the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. This occurs when by faith you believe in the death and resurrection of Jesus as the ultimate sacrifice for the sins of humanity.
What about the Book of Jashar?
i'll try to cover that in another video.
@@BelieversvoiceMinistriesThank You
Thank you for this information 🕊️🕊️🕊️
James 1:5 people. Just pray about what you read in these books and go by what the Spirit tells you in your heart. It doesn't matter who wrote it or when or how, just if it is good and brings you a better understanding of God.
Which apocryphal book of the bible explains how a 3rd century bishop from asia minor ended up in the north pole?? Were they taking dmt???
Being a Christian, having read the entire Bible numerous times, fifty or so years of starting the day out with scripture, I also enjoy reading other books related to Christianity and Gods Word! Reading the Book of Enock for a 2nd time, going to start on the Book of Jubilees soon. But #1 will always be Gods Inspired Word of the Bible!
Sounds like a balanced POV!
Then how do you still believe if you actually read it? Funny you like MAN’s word! I read the Bible and it made me an Atheist seeing all the myth and fairytales in the Bible. Otherwise, where’s your Demonstrable Evidence for your myth?
The book of Enoch also tells us that there are 366 books. Where are they? And what makes you think that Enoch was not the author of any or all of these books? God gives prophets the words. So the truth is that God wrote these books. How is it that man gets to decide??? The fact is that God will find a way to get His word to us. No matter how hard Satan tries to confuse us.
I thought the 10 tribes were lost during the Assyrian exile, so how is it possible to get 72 translators from the 12 tribes if 10 were lost?
🤔
Jesus quoted directly from Esdras in Matthew 23:37.
Well done. I am happy to subscribe...
Hmmm i feel like the gospel of judas should be added it seems soooooo futuristic
The missing books from Protestant bibles ie the KJV were originally included. The translators considered the deuterocanonical because the RCC did so as well.
Both believed that there was value to studying those uninspired works. However, believed that they were inspired by God.
Eventually the Protestants removed them entirely.
The Catholic Church, through tradition and without basis, regarded them as inspired.
Thus the gap.
rejected by who...
1 and 2 Maccabees were in the Jewish Canon until they were included in the Christian Canon. They were even translated by the Jewish scholars for the Greek scriptures. Maccabees had to be authentic at the time or they would not have been translated into Greek. Critical think it.
Very Educational.
Who are the rejecters?
What about peter's apocalypse and paul's apocalypse?
Enoch was "quoted" in the KJV & new versions. Which, I believe, makes it "scriptural." It is a part of the Coptic Bible. Jubilees and Maccabees, and a couple of others, I believe, are "relevant!"
the maccabbees are included in the Roman Catholic Bible
Amen ‼️❤️🔥✝️🇻🇦
Correct
It was in the KJV till 1880's.
Maccabees is in the catholic bible and wisdom of Salomon to
How could you leave out that the Jews and Spartans are related to each other according to Maccabees Chapter 12?
"When Jonathan felt that the time was favorable, he chose envoys and sent them to Rome in order to confirm and renew friendship with them. 2 He also sent letters in the same vein to the Spartans and to others. 3 The envoys went to Rome and entered the senate chamber. They said, “Jonathan the high priest and the Jewish nation have sent us to renew our former friendship and alliance.” 4 The Romans provided letters for them to give to various people to ask them to assure the envoys safe passage back to Judah. 5 This is a copy of the letter that Jonathan wrote to the Spartans:
6 The high priest Jonathan, the senate of the nation, the priests, and the rest of the Jewish people. To their brothers the Spartans. Greetings!
7 In the past, your king Arius sent a letter to the high priest Onias, stating that you are our relatives as the appended copy shows. 8 Onias welcomed the envoy with honor and received the letter, which contained a clear declaration of alliance and friendship. 9 Generally, we have no need of these things, since we have the holy scrolls as encouragement. 10 Yet we have desired to renew our family ties and friendship with you so that we may not become estranged from you, because considerable time has passed since you sent your letter to us. 11 We remember you constantly on every occasion-at our festivals and on other appropriate days, at the sacrifices that we offer, and in our prayers-as it is right and proper to remember relatives. 12 Furthermore, we rejoice at your success.
13 As for us, we have experienced many trials and many wars. The kings around us have waged war against us. 14 We have not wanted to bother you and our other allies and friends about these wars 15 because we have the help that comes from heaven. So we have been delivered from our enemies, and they have been humbled. 16 Therefore, we chose Numenius, Antiochus’ son, and Antipater, Jason’s son, and sent them to Rome to renew our former friendship and alliance with them. 17 We have told them to go to you as well and greet you and deliver to you this letter from us concerning the renewal of our family ties. 18 So please send us a reply.
19 This is a copy of the letter that they sent to Onias:
20 King Arius of the Spartans.
To the high priest Onias. Greetings!
21 It has been discovered in a written record that the Spartans and the Jews are relatives and are both of the family of Abraham. 22 Since we have learned this, please let us know how you are. 23 On our part, we write to let you know that what is yours-your livestock and property-belongs to us, and ours belongs to you. We therefore command that our envoys report to you in keeping with this."
it doesnt actually say that, Jonathan is making an appeal to the spartans trying to give them the understanding they brothers through Abraham but if you read chronicles 1 and 2 that will make more sense, the biblical world view is that the children and decendants of abraham went on to populate europe, africa, central and south asia, which were all also the paths the original disciples of jesus went out to for similar beliefs
Spartans are the descendants of Hercules (according to Greek Tradition)
Thanks for bringing that up! The connection between the Jews and Spartans mentioned in Maccabees 12 is definitely an interesting part of the history. While I didn’t cover it in my discussion, it's a fascinating example of how ancient alliances and relationships were acknowledged in historical texts. I focused on other aspects, but I appreciate you pointing this out!
You're right! The Spartans do trace their lineage to Hercules in Greek tradition. Thanks for adding!
@@simpicusmaximusGod said he would sift Israel among all the nations of the earth. The Jews didn't know about the Americas or Australia or all the islands of the sea, but God said it and he did. And we are told that he cannot lie.
I got rid of all of the books, in the bible, that I too didn't like. Now my bible is empty. Let's ALL pick-and-choose.
That's not how it works. You dont just take out scripture. This is books taken out by God.
@@josecordova4144 But that IS how it works. You need to research it. You will find that alot of books were tossed out because "they" didn't like them.
It's funny how they didn't catch (and remove) the scriptures that contradict each other.
@@josecordova4144 god didn't do anything. Man wrote it and man removed it.
It’s the Christian cult way to pick and choose and lie about it all!
@@josecordova4144its EXACTLY how it works! How can a make believe being take books out?
maccabees wasnt reject, protestants took it out lmao
Athanasius and jerome disagree with you, as does Eusebius, as do the 2nd century Christian canon lists. Sorry papist.
@bradenglass4753 Athanasius never rejected Maccabees, he even praised it saying the blood that the Israelites shed in the book was heroic, you also have to look at the other church fathers and what they thought of the book. St. Polycarp, student of John, thought that it was a divinely inspired book and so did of the other church fathers
@IndoHelleneBall you seem confused- appraisal of a text for moral edification is not equivalent to canonicity. The early fathers had 3 categories for texts:
1. Canonical scripture
2. Useful for teaching, but not canonical
3. Spurious
Athanasius saw the deuterocanon in the 2nd category, as do classical protestants. At Trent, the papist fathers disregarded the tripartite textual division, and placed an equivalence between the scripture and the deuterocanon, far more similar to Augustines view in doctrina christiana. They also issued anathemas on the issue, something unheard of in early Church disputes on canon
Yet the earliest fathers did not equivocate the deuterocanon with the canonical books. Augustines influence was huge in incorporating these texts into mainstream liturgical use, and councils at carthage and hippo cited augustine as their source- against the opinion of Jerome, Athanasius, the early canon lists, and the later protestants.
@bradenglass4753
Sorry, most church father disagree and even quote it as scriptures
Plus not all of us that accept maccabees are papist, it’s called Eastern Orthodox and we were the church established by Christ himself
@Faithfulfilled1 I'm aware that the orthodox make the same claim to authoritative church magisterium as Rome does, everybody knows it, it's not a mystery.
Where can the "Infancy Gospel Of Thomas" be found? is it in the actual Bible or was it rejected? I'd like to know about Jesus' upbringing.
It was rejected because it is a forgery (Thomas did not write it) and it contains gnostic teaching. Certain passages of the Quran where copied from the infancy gospel.
So. Someone rejected the word of God?
What about the discovery of papyrus reeds we hear everyday? Can't they be added to the bible?
The book of the watchers should have been included. I've never heard a good argument against that. We know there were fallen angels and there are legends of giants, worldwide.
Legends.
Myths.
Fables.
Paul warned about believing in those.
Book of Enoch is antichrist text.
Only fools throw away Enoch.
@W_H_K
No reason to throw away Enoch the patriarch.
Book of Enoch instead is antichrist text, false writing.
Its only value is religious historic value to tell us how little sect of second temple are jews believed. Nothing more
Why would they die out?? They'd be on top of the food chain
Jasher, Josephus, and more. What are they hiding?
John references the revelation of Enoch, God already knew the book wouldn't make the Bible and made a plan to use John to reveal that it is indeed His word and not lies, as for the rest of apocrypha, well, I don't believe it until it's in the Bible, that's all I'll say about that
The books of Enoch and Jubilees were recognized as God given scripture by the ancient Jewish teachers. But they decided to hide them from the people because they contained too much information. This is recorded in the talmud.
Reference please? I’m interested in your comment
I'm interested too. I don't recall reading that but ?!
Yeah and the talmud also states Jesus is burning in feces in gehena. Talmudic yews aren't exactly the oracles of truth when it comes to scripture. The masoretic texts and pseudo-diagraphical Manuscripts are more so hear-say and aren't to be taken seriously. Especially since they are produced and carried on by Gnostics and Pagans who reject Jesus Christ.
It is worth remembering that these books have mythological, social and moral influence from the different nations that colonized and enslaved Israel. This is why they are not considered true spiritual books and why they are not in the Bible
Nice video.
All of these books are all hereditary books was rejected for reason. God's chosen prophets all was inspired by God and not of their own intellect. We must never go outside of God's holy bible trying add on to it.
Your comment ignores the historical fact that the Bible, as we know it today, was assembled by men, some of whom may have been inspired by the Holy Spirit, and some that were inspired only by their own need for power.
In the bible it said the Angels that betrayed God took up wives. So when you read the book of enoch talks about how they born giants an it speaks of it in the bible as well so why people reject it. Which are the nephilim
Why did they only got women ONE time ??? Doesn't make sense. Also that they got to do at all
@squidwardwithoutaclue read the whole part of Genesis 6 1-8 reccomend you and everyone else to do that. In book of the enoch it just gives more details of the fallen angels names. An the corruption they cause. They taught man how to make weapons to start wars, dyes , and even astronomy. This type of knowledge was from celestial beings. An more about the nephilim in detailed. But if you read Genesis 6 verse 4 "The nephilim were on earth in those days and also afterward when the sons of God came in to the daughters of man and they bore children to them. These were the mighty men who were of old the men of renown" So idk how people don't accept the book of enoch. It tell you more of what happen during the days of noah. Just like the book of jasher. But please read Genesis 6 it whole thing and don't let this video cloud your judgement always read the bible my friend.
If you are wondering how to approach these books approach him as commentaries.
The books of Esdras and The Maccabees are apart of the canon and are only rejected by some Protestants.
I read the books of Enoch, Jubilees all 4 Macabees and several others.
"The book of history has many missing pages, murmurs the Madonna of the middle ages."
Those guys definitely wrong about Enoch
Sooo, mortals decided what was sacred? Might as well believe in light sabers and the force.
Interesting that the Odes of Solomon dated 60 AD are before written texts of the NT. The NT does not have the word Trinity and was not a belief of the OT or the Hebrews. The Trinity, much debated, belief was not confirmed until the Council of Macedonia in 380 AD
In fact the earliest use of the word Trinity is in 170 A.D. by Theophilus, and is very different from what it would eventually become after centuries of arguments and changes. All without any help from God. The first description of the Trinity included a female entity Wisdom, associated with Asher of the Old Testament, the wife of El and mother of Yahweh in ancient Hebrew beliefs, instead of the Holy Ghost/Holy Spirit, who is always referred to as male.
God bless❤
Are are many other books mentioned within the bible that nearly nobody has.
Top video
appreciate it.
Roman Catholic Church is the one true church. It has all the answers.
Question of the day: Why is the "Songs of Solomon" in the bible collection while the book of Enoch was thrown out?
Answer: Because the latter exposes lots about the devil, while the former is just for fun.
Also, why was the book of Jubilees removed?
Answer: Because it reveals the exact Bible geography and the identity of the real Israelites, which those of the synagogue of satan are struggling to hide.
However, those who seek to "test all spirits" should read all these books to find out the truth for themselves because the whole world is under deception.
If only it were true if only it mattered which realy it doesnt mate does it ?
The Apocrypha is the Greek Captivity
The Jewish soldiers had been so important to Alexander the Great, Ptolemy dedicated a quarter of Alexandria to them. It was the Hellenized scholars from them who were more likely responsible for the Septuagint. The Letter of Aristeas claims that there were no Lost Tribes of Israel
Thanks. 😉👍♥️
The Book of Enoch is mentioned in the New Testament three times:
Jude 1:14-15: The Epistle of Jude quotes a passage attributed to "Enoch, the Seventh from Adam". This passage is not found in the Catholic and Protestant canons of the Old Testament.
Some also believe that the First Epistle of Peter (1 Peter 3:19-20) and the Second Epistle of Peter (2 Peter 2:4-5) may reference Enochian material.
The Book of Enoch was initially considered scripture by the Jewish and Christian communities.
No the book of Enoch was never thought to be cannon in the Tanakh for the jews. Some fragments were found in the septuagint of the dead sea scrolls but the jews never had the book of enoch in their cannon. We protestants dont have the apocrypha as they were added to the jewish cannon later, by the catholic church, so we figure if the jews did not have those books in their old testament why would we? However it get kind of dicey for me that esther made it into cannon and maccabees did not.
@@planes3333 The Books of Maccabees would have provided an intertestament bridge
As to whether the Book of Enoch was ever considered or studied to be considered:
There is no scholarly consensus on when the Hebrew Bible canon was established. Some scholars believe that the Hasmonean dynasty (140-40 BCE) fixed the canon, while others believe it was fixed in the 2nd century CE or later, between 150 and 250 CE.
I, personally, think it makes sense that it occurred after the fall of the Second Temple, when Rabbinical Judaism was being codified
@@tomdouge6618 🙂
interesting answer. First I read the book of enoch, all of it. I was surprised by it as it was both very long, interesting, it talked about some of my favorite themes and it was also sort of redundant. I was glad to have read it though. Honestly it seemed legit in parts but in other parts it felt like fan fiction.
It was in many parts and I cant remember all of it but the testament of solomon was in it too which again talked about biblical themes but also felt like fan fiction.
as for the apocrypha, yeah this one had me kind of wondering too. However after the book of Malachi the last book there was a 400 year silence and no new prophets came. The jews closed their cannon for good in that they reject Jesus and the new testament. Their hebrew bible goes from Genesis to Malachi, basically the Tanakh.
So they closed their bible at Malachi they knew the old testament writings and had also seen other books come around that they rejected. Like during those 400 years.
In the 1500's the catholic church added those old apocrypha books in to account for some of their biblical heresies like purgatory, so it isnt that the protestants took books out of the old testament, its that the catholic church put those "hidden books" back in
Some of them are good for reading, some of them are downright lies from and unbiblical and some are very close to being cannon, but they are not Gods inspired word.
In my opinion the bible has 66 books.
@@planes3333 The Book of Enoch highly syncretic, also blending with Jewish elements Persian, Greek, Chaldean, and Egyptian ones. You probably know the influence it has had in shaping the unofficial narrative of Satan (originally, the Adversary, directed by God to test faith)
The Book of Job is of interest to the story of the Book of Enoch in that it shows the one of the earliest Persian (Zoroastrian) influence on the Jews (the Pharisees?)
Going by what modern scholars contend, though not set in the Intertestament era, these books may well have been written then: Song of Songs (retelling of the "sacred marriage" of Tammuz and Ishtar), Ruth (in answer to the xenophobic Ezra-Nehemiah), Daniel (judged to be the last canon book written, around the reign of Antiochus IV, 167-163), Esther (where God is not mentioned)
Book of Enoch, Book of Adam and Eve, Book of jubiles is canon in the Orthodox Tewahedo Church.
Are these books supposed to be accurate accounts.
Esdras 1 is EZRA in the bible and Esdras 2 is NEHEMIAH in the bible. I've studied and compared it word for word.
Esdras 1 & 2 and Maccabees 1, 2, 3, & 4 are in the Bible, just not the Protestant versions. Enoch is still in the Ethiopian Orthodox Bible.
Even the entire Apocrypha used to be in the 1611 KJV but they got rid of that too. Protestants have a history of reducing the size of the Bible and translating it incorrectly to appeal to a modern audience.
Reject the word ,but never reject the dead thing$ the Fallen and $atan deceive and rule the whole world by. Make a friend of the world and make an enemy of God.
Ultimately, (Matt. 6:33) teaches;
"Seek ye first the kingdom of God & His righteousness & all of these things shall be added unto you."
The books mentioned in vid, are not necessary parts of the Bible bcs they don't actually contribute anything "New" to the message in the Bible.
In the majority of cases; most of the individual comments made, giving Credence to these books; usually include, how they mention things previously noted elsewhere in God's Holy word.
Aside from the fact that; as the narrator in this video notes; that Enoch himself, did not write the book of the same name. The real author, is still unknown. It's part of the "pseudepigrapha" and it was written between the 3-BC & 1-AD.
Instead, Enoch was given the credit of writing the book, by the actual true authors, who used his name in order to give it "an aura of ancient wisdom and authority".
With similar characteristics in the other books. Which doesn't mean they aren't useful in their own way.
Enoch is mentioned in the New Testament at least two hundred times.
The catholic church composed this.
Jude 1-4 calls Enoch a prophet ,the 7th from Adam, quoting him verbatim from 1 Enoch 1-9.
A prophet leaves writings behind him. And his book was among the most frequent of dead sea scrolls.
Enoch is mentioned by name by 4 different authors, throughout the ages, first Moses in Genesis, then David in one of his Psalms, the author of the book of Hebrews and then Jude. It's the same person with 4 authors attesting of his existence.
I could also bring here direct quotes from Enoch's writings from new testament authors and Jesus, but utube just don't like it.
Would you quote all the remaining verses so I can go read it?
@angelxdv518
I would but the censorship is off the chart, so far has been suppressed:
*One reply suggesting THEGODCULTURE Channel here on the plateform
*Another one giving you the verses of the New testament quoting from that book
*This one reply also very likely will not make it
Jude quoted Enoch
As a Protestant what is the Maccabees
You can find them online. It was a period of Hebrew revolt against the Hellenistic (Greek influenced) rulers. Not considered scripture (some denominations keep them) but interesting historically. It's why some thought the Messiah might come to do the same thing. Save his people through armed revolution.
@@Jonahch2v9 ah interesting. I guess my people took it out not out of spite, but simply not to make confusion in the scripture...were focusing on the prophesy and stories to Christ. And I guess my people believe it doesn't belong, buy who knows. Maybe were wrong in that area
@Jonahch2v9
>not considered scripture
They absolutely are, they're called "deutrocannon."
@@AndrewPont-w1j uh I let u and him fight am protestant we out of this
*skidaddle and run away*
Where is your Voice???
All those books are in the Ethiopian bible.
Not all. Many books like infancy gospel isn't there
I need to see if I can find a Ethiopian Bible somewhere.
@Thespeedrap it's the one black people should be reading it's the most authentic of all versions too stay woke gang🎯🎯🎯💪💪💪💯💯💯
@@gman2503Where do you find those at?
This guy definitely wrong about Enoch
I get a kick out of hearing titles such as "The Lost Books of the Bible". Do people really believe that Almighty God doesn't have the power and authority to make sure his Word, that he intends for us to have is going to somehow be circumvented by man? Some of those books listed may have some historical value,but God didn't include them. There is a book mentioned in the O.T. called Gad the Seer. I have that book, and there seems to be a little insight that the other legitimate books omit,but Gad the Seer is not included in the other 66 books of the Holy Bible. God has given us all we need in the Holy Bible,and according to Jesus, most will still miss the mark-Matthew 7:14 and vs.21-23.
Book of Enoch is Genesis! It's found in the oldest bible on earth, the Ethiopian bible.
It's explains everything that science has lied about, weather, stars/space and creation. Also it's a book azazal a.k.a Satan doesn't want you to read. It explains his downfall, the birth of gaints and his defeat. Also points to Christ and salvation.
true!
@@MIkeB1980
Are you sure?
As flat earther, you don't believe that sun lights up the moon, do you?
That moon is lit up from the sun? Now do you?
Oh, you did not read the Book of Enoch😀
78:10
"And Uriel showed me another law: - when light is transferred to the Moon, and on which side it is transferred from the Sun."
According to BoE sun lights up the moon. According to your true source of reality, youtube's fe-channels, moon is lightsource itself.
You got fooled.
Still doesn't explain the absence of miracles after the main OT story
No book of judas?? Basically how judas was the most loyal and choose to sacrifice his life and more to be a marter he did what we know he did not out of greed but cause he was asked to do... it so that jeaus could die for our sins and be reborn
There NOT rejected books of the bible, their rejected books that are not the words of God, any student of Gods word can read these fairy tales and tell they are not Gods word, Paul even talked about fake gospels during his life