Roger Pearse

I have no view on this. I merely point out the necessity to define our terms correctly, accurately and without possibility of error. This has not been done, so this again is a weakness in this idea. In other words, for the argument to work, it must be certain that it does not address a strawman.

Here also the strawman becomes a problem, if we're not careful.

I'm afraid that in general non-members of religious groups are not qualified to pronounce on theological matters of those groups. Renegades such as yourself are in even a worse position, in that their views are automatically liable to be unfair or inaccurate.

This is not personal criticism, note. I merely point out that the thesis needs some evidence, and that we cannot reasonably manufacture this ourselves and then claim it is objective.

All of this seems to have little to do with my original comment, tho.

All the best,

Roger Pearse

Naphtali Jones

If you are interested in finding out more about the Book of Enoch I would refer you to the Wikipedia reference on the subject. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Enoch This has a lot of information on it and is backed up with links to several scholary works and relevant ancient writings, including the Book of Enoch itself. I don't have at my disposal the many hours necessary to repeat them all here.

That's not enough?

2Peter 2:4 is very clearly a reference to Enoch, as is Jude 13 and the direct quote in 14,15. There are also direct similarities between the judgments in Revelation, especially the cosmic disturbances, and the imagery used in Enoch. As well, Jesus' teachings in Jerusalem after the triumphal entry in Matthew 21-25 are chock full of the same terminology and imagery used in the book of Enoch.

Don't take my word for it. Read the Book of Enoch for yourself and compare it to the gospels. As a true fundamentalist believer I was shocked when I did.

I believe I have done that.

This is a valid point but the remains of the Book of Enoch found in the Dead Sea scrolls prove that it predated the gospels.

~Nap

Naphtali Jones

I find this annoying. You fault me for not defining inspiration, but when I do you say that I might not be right and that I might not be qualified to have an opinion on the matter in the first place. Then when I ask you to provide a better definition you reply with: I'm sorry but that will not do. Either put up or shut up!

I gave you the working definition that I used and believed in during my days as a church leader. I thought it was a fair definition but if you see any points to dispute, let's hear some substantive reasons why my definition is invalid.

How can you say I just manufactured all of this? Haven't you listened to anything I've said.

Let's stay away from the underhanded personal attacks on my credibility and concentrate on debating the actual thesis.

~Nap