Book of Enoch

Add a Comment

12 Comments

Comment by J. Jury on October 17, 2009 at 7:13pm

Would you suggest that the Ethiopic is unreliable? Then there is also the Book of Jubilees, which also recounts a 364 day year, though also in Ethiopic. Your thoughts?

Comment by James Trimm on October 17, 2009 at 1:17pm

The problem with the Astronomical section of the Book of Enoch is that we have no reliable copy of it. The Aramaic fragmanets found at Qumran have little agreement with the Ethiopic and Greek texts, yet not enough of the Aramaic survives to even think about a reconstruction. Basing anything solid on what the Astronomical section says is ill advised.

Comment by J. Jury on October 15, 2009 at 11:40pm

I too have read Sakach's revision of the book of Enoch, and have personally corresponded with him on a few occasions. I have to say that his theory regarding the calendar is completely lacking in the "facts" department. For instance...

There is no documented place in Scripture to denote why the calendar starts on the 4th day of the week.
There is no Scriptural support by which the Sabbath can ever be changed; the Sabbath that Yahshua celebrated (sundown Fri to sundown Sat) is the same we celebrate today, yet he advocates changing it to Mondays some years based on improper intercalation methods.

Please don't think that I'm arguing against the Enoch calendar (I myself follow, to some degree, my own home made version). Nor am I saying anything against his translation of the book of Enoch (it is somewhat decent, despite his fictitious and unsupported calendar claims).

What I am saying is this: be wary of the Sakach's flawed rendition of the Enoch calendar. It is a smoke-and-mirrors show, that has very little actual support from the book of Enoch.

Comment by James Trimm on October 14, 2009 at 7:28pm

http://nazarenespace.ning.com/profiles/blogs/fall-of-the-lunar-sabbath

Comment by James Trimm on October 14, 2009 at 7:22pm

The leadership of this movement looked into the Lunar Sabbath theory years ago, not long after it was invented by an anti-semite who went to federal prison for aiding and abetting two skin heads who vandalized a synagogue. We have disproved it several times over the years, and need not bog the movement down disproving it again every time someone else presents it.

Comment by J. Jury on September 27, 2009 at 1:45pm

ShinobiDJ, I believe the "Luminaries" referred to in Enoch are referring to the heavens or heavenly bodies. Just a thought

Comment by ShinobiDJ on June 15, 2009 at 12:33am

My only comment at this time about the book of Enoch is its mention of the Luminaries, which i believe to be the illuminati,

anyone care to say anything about that?

Comment by Lionel Lenox on June 1, 2009 at 9:08am

Thank you for the invite.

Yours in Yeshua,
Lionel

Comment by David Katcher on July 21, 2008 at 9:00pm

I will get this book very soon

Comment by Vitally on July 14, 2008 at 8:41pm

do you want to elaborate on the book of the giants, Ogiah son of Azazel and fought a Serafim and had 2 sons Sihon and Og. The falen angels Nefalim.
Vitally

• 1
• 2