300 BC. And now?Look at when Enoch was written.
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
300 BC. And now?Look at when Enoch was written.
Isaiah was never in Babylon.300 BC. And now?
What are you trying to tell me?Isaiah was never in Babylon.
There is no evidence for that. Luke never met Jesus.
What are you trying to tell me?
The term "Archangel" appears only twice in the whole Bible and one of them identifies Michael. But as I said, the Bible does not say that there is only one Archangel. "Arch" means "first/highest ranking" and that doesn't contradict at all that there can be several, because as I already explained, each archangel has its own troop. And of each of the Seven Troops, the Archangel is the highest ranking (leader). You have to imagine that the angels of God form a whole "army" and every archangel is a "commandat" so to speak.
And that you don't see the book Enoch as God's word is a pity but to discuss about it doesn't help, because it is a matter of faith.
Do you believe that in the bible all information is written?
@Deeje
Do you think the bible has an answer to all questions? Is there really everything in the Bible?
Just because Michael is called "the" archangel doesn't mean there's only one archangel. Sorry, but that's nonsense.We learn from Jude that Michael is the archangel. In fact, he is the only archangel, since no other archangel is mentioned in the Bible, nor does the Bible use “archangel” in the plural.
Michael doesn't have authority over everyone, he's just the leader of his angels. Only God alone has authority over all the angels. And Jesus is God Himself.Among God’s spirit servants, only two names are associated with authority over angels: Michael and Jesus Christ. (Matthew 16:27;25:31; 2 Thessalonians 1:7) This, too, argues that Jesus and Michael are one and the same.
Okay, you say it's all written in the Bible. I have a question for you, where do the demons come from and what are they?All the information we need is in God’s word...because it is GOD’S WORD......man did not choose its content nor did they choose the subject matter. What God chose to include fits the overall harmony of the whole book. It is clear that non-canonical books do not belong.
Just because Michael is called "the" archangel doesn't mean there's only one archangel. Sorry, but that's nonsense.
And Yes it is true that the Bible does not mention "Archangel" in the plural and yes no other is called Archangel but what is also true is that the Bible does not say that there is only one Archangel.
Michael doesn't have authority over everyone, he's just the leader of his angels. Only God alone has authority over all the angels. And Jesus is God Himself.
Okay, you say it's all written in the Bible. I have a question for you, where do the demons come from and what are they?
This is wrong. There was no Lilith either.Legend has it that after the fall Adam cohabited with Lilith for 150 years and she gave birth to demons.
This is wrong. There was no Lilith either.
True. The copies were hand written by scribes. They were literally circulated from church to church.Rare before the printing press.
True. The copies were hand written by scribes. They were literally circulated from church to church.
Neither in the book of Enoch nor in the Bible is there anything about Lilith.LOLOOLL.. exactly.. Lilith comes from the same mythology as the "giants" and the Nephilim.
Neither in the book of Enoch nor in the Bible is there anything about Lilith.
The story of Lilith is a lie.
I hope you know that the Nephilim ( The Giants ) are also mentioned in the Bible.No more a lie than the Nephilim and other folklore of Enoch.
Lilith in the Bible and Mythology - Biblical Archaeology ...
https://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/daily/biblical-topics/hebrew-bible/lilith-in-the...
May 03, 2019 · The Bible names the second woman Eve; Lilith was identified as the first in order to complete the story.” Accordingly, Genesis 1:27 describes the creation of Adam and an unnamed woman (Lilith); Genesis 2:7 gives more details of Adam’s creation; and Genesis 2:21–22 describes the creation of Eve from Adam .
The Legend of Lilith: Origins and History - learnreligions.com
https://www.learnreligions.com/legend-of-lilith-origins-2076660
Lilith is mentioned four times in the Babylonian Talmud, but it is not until the Alphabet of Ben Sira (c. 800s to 900s) that the character of Lilith is associated with the first version of Creation. In this medieval text, Ben Sira names Lilith as Adam’s first wife and presents a full account of her story.
I don't have a degree in comparative theology, nor do I have a clue as to whom those folk you agree with are.Along with Richard Carrier, Charles A. Gieschen and others, I would affirm that Jesus was conceived of as an angelic being, even though "angel" was not a typical form of address for him.
In all four canonical Gospels Jesus identifies himself with the pre-existent Son of Man who dwells in the clouds and at the End will come on those clouds "with Power" in great glory.
Paul's christology treats Jesus as a pre-existent celestial "Son" who was not God, but was sufficiently primordial to have taken an active, assisting hand in God's creation of the world.
John borrowed his Logos in the Prologue from the Jewish philosopher Philo of Alexandria, who claimed that the Logos is "a second god" who orders the universe.
Later Christian writers such as Justin Martyr also employ the language of angelomorphology in their descriptions of Jesus.
One key to this is that Jesus was said to have been "made" higher than the angels through his sacrificial redemptive work. This does not necessarily mean that Jesus was not an angel, but understood in context, probably means that Jesus's Passion, death and resurrection made him higher than all the other angels. Scripture explains Jesus's elevation above the angels in words to the effect: "What [other] angel did all the things that Jesus did?" Of course, no other angel did what Jesus did, which makes Jesus king of the angels, but does not disqualify him from acting as, and being, the functional equivalent of a "Greatest Archangel".
Correct again. Nevertheless, the books of todayś canon , except for a few books, were in circulation. This is confirmed by letters from early church fathers.There were lots and lots of writings floating around until about the 3-4th century AD. There was no "body" of work like NT or OT. Not until Constantine.
Correct again. Nevertheless, the books of todayś canon , except for a few books, were in circulation. This is confirmed by letters from early church fathers.
The junk books did not come into being before 200 AD, most are after that. This is one of the reasons why they were excluded from the canon.
Of course, the Gospels were in circulation verbally before 100 AD.
The Jews had the Torah and other OT books in the proper order long, long, before the time we are speaking of.
I don't recall the date of the Septuagint but it was quite early.