Your thoughts on 2 men, Trump and Osteen

[dwight92070]

Jude 14 - It is not mentioned anywhere in this verse that Jude is quoting from any book, much less the spurious Book of Enoch. As I said earlier, there is no proof that that false book even existed at the time Jude wrote his book. So where did Jude get his Information? I don't know but I would like to find out. One thing we do know: Peter said in 2 Peter 1:21: " ... for no prophecy was ever made by an act of human will, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God." It could have been revealed to him by God or he could have been quoting from another reliable book.

The issue of inerrancy vs. authenticity - I can see where they could be two different stances, as you put it. However, it looks like books or epistles were not allowed in the Muratorian Canon unless they were both authentic and inerrant. The following information is from the Muratorian Fragment: The Apocalypse of Peter was not allowed in the
canon because it was apparently false. "Some of us will not allow (it) to be read in church" is a quote from the fragment. The epistle to the Laodiceans was rejected, as was the epistle to the Alexandrians. Both of these were "forged in Paul's name to further the heresy of Marcion and several others, which cannot be received into the catholic Church - for it is not fitting that gall be mixed with honey." The fragment does mention, however, that Jude was accepted into the canon. "Moreover, the epistle of Jude and two of the above-mentioned (or, bearing the name of) John are counted for (or, used) in the catholic (Church)"

So it appears that Jude is both authentic, i.e. written by Jude, and also inerrant. Otherwise it, too, would have been rejected and not allowed into the canon.

[morbo3000]

Dwight.

Am I understanding you correctly that you believe that as a consequence of the canonized books being divine, they cannot possibly contain sources that would themselves not be labeled divine by the councils.

From your perspective, we know that the books of the Old and New Testament are divine, because the councils determined that. They selected certain books based on certain criteria. And this has been tested throughout the millennia.

The New Testament canon contains books by Paul and Matthew and others. The New Testament authors freely quote from the Old Testament.

If I'm understanding you correct, you believe that...
- It is OK for Paul to quote Isaiah in his letters because the councils determined that both Galatians and Isaiah are divinely authored.

- But it is not Ok for Jude to quote from Enoch, because the council affirmed Jude, but not Enoch.

Therefore, wherever that verse in Jude came from, it could not possibly have been from Enoch, because it would then be sourcing a document that did not have the council's approval that it was divine.

Is that your position?

[dwight92070]

No ,that is not my position. If the Book of Enoch did not exist when Jude wrote his book, then obviously he wasn't quoting from it. He got his information from another source. I gave 2 possible sources in my previous post. However, let's assume that it did exist and he was quoting from the book. That would not mean that Jude believed that Enoch was the author of the book, as Paidon asserted. It would simply mean that Jude knew that that excerpt from the book was, in fact, true, no matter who wrote it. Nor would Jude be putting his endorsement on the rest of the book.

Apparently there are many allusions to or quotes from extra-Biblical books in the Bible. Does that mean that the Bible is endorsing everything in all those books? Of course not, but it is acknowledging the truth of the quote that it got from another source.

Some examples of extra-Biblical information in the Bible:

1. Jude 9 Apparently Michael the archangel had a dispute with the devil about the body of Moses. There's no record of this in the Old Testament
2. 2 Timothy 3:8-9 Jannes and Jambres opposed Moses, according to Paul. Again, these names are not in the O.T. record.
3. & 4. Acts 17:28 and 1 Corinthians 15:33 are two more examples

[morbo3000]

This is an exceptional survey of research about the Book of Enoch. Which places it's date of authorship before Jude's authorship date. I think that among reputable scholars, it's a near unanimous position.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Enoch

I looked around online for conservative opinions. One of the best describes it as a "controversy without consequence."


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[dwight92070]

So then, if that is true, and I am not denying it, then somehow Jude knew that that particular excerpt from the Book of Enoch was true. How could he know that? That brings us back to Peter's declaration, "men moved by the Holy Spirit, spoke from God."
Either God revealed it to him supernaturally, as it appears many truths came to Paul, or there would have to be other natural sources.

[Paidion]

Jude possibly quoted from memory, as his quote is not identical to that in the book of Enoch—at least not as the book of Enoch exists today.

Jude:
It was also about these that Enoch, the seventh from Adam, prophesied, saying, “Behold, the Lord came with ten thousands of his saints, to execute judgment on all and to convict all the ungodly of all their deeds of ungodliness that they have committed in such an ungodly way, and of all the harsh things that ungodly sinners have spoken against him.” (Jude 1:14,15)

Enoch:
Behold, he comes with ten thousands of his saints, to execute judgment upon them, and destroy the wicked, and reprove the carnal for everything which the sinful and ungodly have done, and committed against him. (Enoch 2)

Despite a a few differences, if it can be accepted that Jude was indeed quoting from the book of Enoch, then my point stands. I was NOT making the point that Jude was not inspired by God. Nor was I making the point that Enoch should be included in the accepted "canon of Scripture."

My point was that the book of Jude is not inerrant, since Jude wrote that the Enoch who prophesied these words was the historic Enoch, the seventh from Adam, whom Moses states (Genesis 5:24), didn't die, but simply disappeared for "God took him." No it was not that Enoch who wrote these words, but they seem to have been written by a person who lived in the third century B.C. who pretended to be the historic Enoch. In chapter 54:9, the author wrote, "The chiefs of the East, among the Parthians and Medes, shall remove kings, in whom a spirit of perturbation shall enter." But the Parthians were unknown in history until around 250 B.C.

By the way, Jude quoted also from another "non-canonical" book called "The Assumption of Moses." This book was written in Hebrew shortly after the beginning of the Christian era. Here are the words from it that Jude quoted:

But when the archangel Michael, contending with the devil, was disputing about the body of Moses, he did not presume to pronounce a blasphemous judgment, but said, “The Lord rebuke you.” (Jude 1:9)

[morbo3000]

So then, if that is true, and I am not denying it, then somehow Jude knew that that particular excerpt from the Book of Enoch was true. How could he know that? Either God revealed it to him supernaturally, as it appears many truths came to Paul, or there would have to be other natural sources.

We don't know. We know nothing about the writing process that Jude went through composing this book.

Here's a diagram. Here we have Jude's book, or any other book in the pure isolation of it's authorship, context and audience.

[Jude's book]

At some point the councils determined that Jude's book was canon. Nothing changed about Jude's book. Only the council's declaration which was then read back onto the book.

[Jude's book] < ------------------------ Council labels divine.

This forces us to make all sorts of artificial assumptions about the process and background of his authorship. Where his sources did or didn't come from. Whether or not what he said was accurate.

¿ Background ? --> [Jude's book] < -------------------------- Council labels divine.

This does violence to the text. It doesn't let it be what it is. It requires Jude to conform to a standard applied after the fact. And reject any information that contradicts that standard.

That brings us back to Peter's declaration, "men moved by the Holy Spirit, spoke from God."

That verse has nothing to say about Jude's, Paul's, or any of the Gospels' divine authorship and trustworthiness. It is addressing the OT prophets pointing to Jesus.

It has *nothing* to say about New Testament books.

[dwight92070]

Paidon,

If Jude was quoting from the Book of Enoch, I believe he knew that the author was NOT the historic Enoch. But he also knew that the quote about the historic Enoch prophesying was a true statement, so he included that statement in his book in the Bible, the book of Jude. In other words, he "pulled" a factual statement out of a book that apparently had some falsehoods in it as well. Therefore he did not make a mistake. How could he be mistaken by putting a true statement in the Bible? So the historic Enoch did give a prophecy as Jude said he did, no matter who the author was of the Book of Enoch. Jude nowhere says or even implies that the historic Enoch wrote the Book of Enoch. In fact the term "Book of Enoch" is not even mentioned in Jude. Again, Jude makes no reference to or comment about the "book of Enoch". He only mentions the historic Enoch and what Enoch did, i.e. he prophesied.

[dwight92070]

Morbo,

You are mistaken in saying that 2 Peter 1:19-21 only refers to the Old Testament. In context, it is referring to any "prophecy of Scripture", and we know that Peter considered Paul's letters "Scripture". Peter clearly says that in 2 Peter 3:14-16.

[dwight92070]

Some thoughts on Joel Osteen: He says to speak positively. If you are poor, say "I am rich". But the Bible says: "Poor is he who works with a negligent hand, but the hand of the diligent makes rich." Proverbs 10:4 If someone is lazy, he can say "I am rich" all day long, and still be poor. I wouldn't be surprised if Osteen believes in hard work, but that is not his message.

"The Lord makes poor and rich; He brings low, He also exalts." Hannah's prophecy in 1 Samuel 1:2

Joel Osteen is a wealthy man. His net worth is over $40 million. His 20 books have brought in $55 million. His core message is "God is nice, you're nice, I"m nice." It is man-centered, not God-centered. As a "pastor", he is supposed to be preaching the Bible, not anything else. But if he did that, he probably would not have the money that he has. So what's more important, the truth of the Bible, or the money? He has made a fortune by telling others what they want to hear. They too can become like him - wealthy, powerful, influential.

The poor is hated even by his neighbor, but those who love the rich are many. Proverbs 14:20 He has become a celebrity.

There should be only one "star" in Christianity, i.e. The bright morning star, Jesus Himself.