One wonders why the book of Enoch is not canonical. In other words, it is not found in the writings considered sacred. For this answer we must carefully analyze the book of Enoch.
In the first verse of the book of Enoch Ethiopian version, we have that angels gave Enoch a vision to understand things of a future generation. In this we can define that there is nothing wrong with the linearity of sacred writings.
But in the second verse we have an extremely complicated phrase that says "I start my parables", what are parables? They represent allegories, ie parable is a short narrative that uses allegories to convey a moral lesson. Parables are normal in prophets and writers after the period of David, but they are not common before that. But here it defines a parable for the Enoch period. Now supposing that the story of Enoch passed through the oral system to the descendants, it should be natural for Moses to use such a tool, but it does not.
And we still have an aggravating factor, the prophetic system being a parable, would define that what we talk about is just a moral lesson. Which is complicated if the book of Jude is speaking of a parable as if it were something literal.
And we see in verse 6 the famous text of connection with the book of Jude, all would be very good if in verse 2 had not defined that it is a parable.
Now we have a problem did the book of Judas use a parable as something literal? Or did the book of Enoch lie in saying it was a parable?
If Judas used a parable as literal, then he is wrong to say that something would happen when it would not happen. But if Enoch's book lied that it was a parable, then Judas used an unreliable book to define the prophecy. So here we have a pandora's box or an Achilles heel that states that no matter where you go, the book of Judas risks being a book that should not be in the canonical books.
We can say that Judas received a prophecy without having contact with the book of Enoch. Which would be somewhat like an attempt to escape the truth. To attempt to construct that Judas received a divine inspiration independent of Enoch would be very difficult to justify.
In fact, the acceptance of the book of Judas would also define the acceptance of the book of Enoch, and therefore several books considered apocryphal. Which would not be of much use. If you put the apocryphal books together, they would generate so many contradictions with the canonical texts that in the end would generate total disbelief. The most rational would have been to not consider the book of Jude as canonical. And indeed the book of Judas had a great deal of trouble to accept.
But pastors and denominations are now trying to get away from these issues, and we often see meaningless, tangled justifications. All this because entering into the judgment of which book is canonical and which book is not canonical can violate or even destroy certain religions. One of the great controversies is why is the book Song of Solomon canonical?
But going
In the first verse of the book of Enoch Ethiopian version, we have that angels gave Enoch a vision to understand things of a future generation. In this we can define that there is nothing wrong with the linearity of sacred writings.
But in the second verse we have an extremely complicated phrase that says "I start my parables", what are parables? They represent allegories, ie parable is a short narrative that uses allegories to convey a moral lesson. Parables are normal in prophets and writers after the period of David, but they are not common before that. But here it defines a parable for the Enoch period. Now supposing that the story of Enoch passed through the oral system to the descendants, it should be natural for Moses to use such a tool, but it does not.
And we still have an aggravating factor, the prophetic system being a parable, would define that what we talk about is just a moral lesson. Which is complicated if the book of Jude is speaking of a parable as if it were something literal.
And we see in verse 6 the famous text of connection with the book of Jude, all would be very good if in verse 2 had not defined that it is a parable.
Now we have a problem did the book of Judas use a parable as something literal? Or did the book of Enoch lie in saying it was a parable?
If Judas used a parable as literal, then he is wrong to say that something would happen when it would not happen. But if Enoch's book lied that it was a parable, then Judas used an unreliable book to define the prophecy. So here we have a pandora's box or an Achilles heel that states that no matter where you go, the book of Judas risks being a book that should not be in the canonical books.
We can say that Judas received a prophecy without having contact with the book of Enoch. Which would be somewhat like an attempt to escape the truth. To attempt to construct that Judas received a divine inspiration independent of Enoch would be very difficult to justify.
In fact, the acceptance of the book of Judas would also define the acceptance of the book of Enoch, and therefore several books considered apocryphal. Which would not be of much use. If you put the apocryphal books together, they would generate so many contradictions with the canonical texts that in the end would generate total disbelief. The most rational would have been to not consider the book of Jude as canonical. And indeed the book of Judas had a great deal of trouble to accept.
But pastors and denominations are now trying to get away from these issues, and we often see meaningless, tangled justifications. All this because entering into the judgment of which book is canonical and which book is not canonical can violate or even destroy certain religions. One of the great controversies is why is the book Song of Solomon canonical?
But going
Category
📚
Aprendizado