The Book of Enoch (inspired writings) Pt 2- Creation

[Devolutionism]

well said sir!

[chaksheba]

Good points made! I am going to buy this book soon =)

[killforce787878]

Book of enoch lets us know what demons purposes are. That is why people back then knew what an evil spirit was and were not in shock when The Lord cast them out. They already knew cause of enochs writings.

[killforce787878]

people ask why demons and evil spirits are not mentioned in the old testament but are in the new testament. Enoch went into great detail of who they were and what they were...

[RaptureOrTribulation]

Because of my faith in GOD, I believe that somehow the Book of Enoch was tampered with slightly and therefore GOD chose to not allow it to be put into his Holy Bible. I do believe that Enoch's writings are inspired except for some part that may have been tampered with.

Hebrews 11:5

By faith Enoch was translated that he should not see death; and was not found, because God had translated him: for before his translation he had this testimony, that he pleased God.



[robrocksred]

i dont agree with everything you said

[tetrahydroscope]

once I heard dual I thought

**gasp** 'gnosticism!'

[TrustinJC]

@tetrahydroscope Is Paul gnostic for teaching about both a carnal mind and a spiritual mind? How can we be circumcised from our carnal if there is not something else? The mere fact that we are left with something after circumcision means that there was more than just the carnal mind. So we must have both the carnal and the spiritual if we are circumcised from the one. And scripture also says we are made in God's image, which refers to his spirit, not physical being.

[tetrahydroscope]

@TrustinJC Well, My fascination with the occult was what eventually lead me to love Jesus Christ. So I am just suspicious.

[TrustinJC]

@tetrahydroscope

I understand. Many people reject Enoch outright because of things they've heard from other Christians or pastors. But their information is usually biased and is not due to any personal research. People simply accept the teaching from their pastor and assume it's correct.

And dual nature in no way contradicts scripture. We are constanly at war with the one nature, while seeking peace and reconcilliation through and by the other.

Con't

[TrustinJC]

@tetrahydroscope God himself tells us in scripture that the heart is evil and decietful. Now do you suppose He is speaking about our spirit being evil and decietful? If we have only the one nature, and that nature is evil, than God would be evil to condemn any man. But if we have the two natures and we chose which to follow, than God is just.

[tetrahydroscope]

@TrustinJC I just feel that the book of Enoch is a good supplement. I think it is important to understand and explain the apparent genocide in the OT that atheists always bring up. Blavatsky spoke quite a bit about the Book of Enoch, but I do think I need a copy so I can see for my self.

[Adonimtg]

@TrustinJC The bible says that we had a sinful nature after we sinned not before

Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all sinned— 13 for sin indeed was in the world before the law was given, but sin is not counted where there is no law. 14 Yet death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those whose sinning was not like the transgression of Adam, who was a type of the one who was to come.

rom 5: 12

[TrustinJC]

@Adonimtg Where does the bible say the carnal nature came into being only after Adam ate from the tree? And how is this possible? If he did not already have that nature, he would not have disobeyed God.

The passage you cite speaks of sin entering the world. It does not speak to the nature of Adam. Sin entered the world because of Adams sinful nature. It was always in him, but was manifested into the world through the actual act of sinning.

[Adonimtg]

@TrustinJC If what you say is true that means Christ had a carnal nature. Jesus had a perfect human nature without sin like adam was. I sent you an email with a full article. 1 Cor 3 explains the carnal nature as the flesh (Sinful Nature) all the things described in that passage are sinful not just physical . In 1JohnThe word LUST is defined as "Desire for what is forbidden; an obsessive craving." Lust refers to the desire for things that are contrary to the will of God.

[TrustinJC]

@Adonimtg I agree, The carnal nature is not just physical. I never said it was. It represents the physical part of our being. it is seperate and apart from our spirit nature. We must become a new creature that is only spirit. This means being circumcised from our old carnal nature.

Scripture tells us Christ was of two nature natures - human and divine. But he emptied himself of his divinity so that he could become fully man. This is why being sinnles has any significance. He did it as a man.

[modernrocks]

car·nal/ˈkärnl/

Adjective: Relating to physical, esp. sexual, needs and activities: "carnal desire". god did make adam and eve in a paradise with pysical needs and desires ie, eve desired the forbidden fruit before she dissobeyed god, we are pysical being in this world, that does not conflict with original sin after the fall. carnal existed in the old testament times, but the word comes from late latin, it means more litteratly of the flesh and this is what enoch would have wrote more or less

[natkra90]

Trustin, If Adam and Eve already had their sinful nature before they sinned, how could they already have obtained the spiritual nature and remained the same after they ate of the tree? Why is it that we must be born again? God said that they would die the day they ate of the tree. Paul says in Romans that sin entered into the world and death by sin by one man (Adam). All this doesn't seem to add up to me in light of your take on the fall of Adam. I'm probably missing something here.

[TrustinJC]

@natkra90 The death that entered the world is spiritual death, which is seperation from God, and not the physical death that most believe. We see this explained in Enoch when it is explained that the angels were created to be immortal, and therefore do not marry. But man was given the gift of marriage. We also see evidence of this when we are told Adam and Eve were kicked out of the garden before they could eat of the tree of life and thereby gain immortality.

[natkra90]

@TrustinJC Thanks for your quick response. I think I just misunderstood what you said in the video. Just to clarify, do you take the traditional position that Adam and Eve died spiritually when they ate of the fruit, or do you believe that they died spiritually at another time?

[hapi2bee]

I certainly agree! Praise God somebody else is led to know Enoch and believe he was divinely inspired by GOD.

[masreethio]

Sir, TrustinJC, if you really wont to know the truth, go to ETHIOPIA. Don’t west your time with ignorant people. Every thing start from ETHIOPIA, Every ignorant white people know that.

[joselinema]

I believe that the book Enoch is truthful and is consider to be for the elect ones of God who will be living in the days of tribulations(hard times). This book was protected by God for this generations. It also talks about the son of man which is Christ and the head of days which is God. It is such a great book full of wisdom and knowledge for this last days.

[blackjin23]

i agree it should be part of the bible

[IIAQUAII]

Trustin, If there was nothing in the fruit that opened the eyes of Adam and Eve why is it that they knew they were naked after they ate, but not before? It wasn't just that their rebellion revealed to them their sinful nature...the tree was called the tree of knowledge b/c the fruit bore knowledge.

[TrustinJC]

@IIAQUAII The knowledge was always in them. God's law is on every heart, as it was with Adam and Eve.

There was no law against murder, yet Cain was punished for his act.

Their act of rebellion opened their eyes and revealed things that they already knew but didn't think about. Paul descibes the law of Moses doing a similar thing, in that it opened his eyes to sin, and actually enticed him to sin more.

[IIAQUAII]

@IIAQUAII no...the fruit opened their eyes...that's why they knew they were naked. Their nakedness had nothing to do with their sinful nature...so there's no reason for their eyes to be opened to this. I am not going to argue about this though...there are more important things--Keep saving souls for Jesus God bless you

[NobodySpecial85]

It also goes again 'Once Saved Always Saved' as it shows 'blind sheep' falling into the fire.

[NobodySpecial85]

It's in 'The Dead Sea Scrolls Bible'. I'll be buying that Bible very soon.

[ViniHendrix23]

your a waste of time to real humans...dumb scripture filled donkey shit

[NobodySpecial85]

@ViniHendrix23 And you need to repent of your potty mouth. You won't inherit the kingdom of God if you are not BORN AGAIN. Repent.

[lambyeeros]

You have a good approach and methodology, and i commend you for it. In my Bible i decide how many books to include. The physical book is only a part of a greater collection. Do we need 66 books? The gospel of John chapters 14,15,16, 17 are the whole bible summed up in 4 chapters. I differ a little in regards to the tree. i will try and send you an extended private message regarding my understanding of it. my advise is... it is a great Mystery. Not a fairy tale. GOD BLESS YOU.

[lancelo96]

@fanof2cards

what everyone forgets is that important documents were copied over & over by scribes. we only see the last time it was copied. cow hide doesn't last forever. they kept copying it over and over. besides Moses literally quotes from Enoch in Genesis.

[fanof2cards]

TrustinJC-

It would be much easier to talk with you if you made specific quotes from Enoch and the Bible. I had a class on Enoch in college. Everyone I've heard before says that Enoch was written no earlier than 300 BC. It's Psuedopigripha (a work written later with a historical figure-Enoch-attached so that people will accept it.) It's not that the Old Testament quoted Enoch, but Enoch quoted the Old Testament and expanded it.

[Ritsaart]

Hey Trustin,

There are even more books we don't know about! There was also found a book of judas. Do you know about the other books as well?

[TrustinJC]

Ritsaart

I am aware of the many books out there and have read a good portion of them. I especially liked Jubilees and the Shephered of Hermes.

Many books are obviously uninspired and need to be treated as such.

But in the case of Enoch, as I've shown, th apostles and Jesus himself considered his writings to be holy scripture. And it's what they considered to be scripture that's important rather then men 350 yrs after the birth of the church.

[ndependentwoman]

TrustinJC-I have always KNOWN there is much more to God than the 66 books of the bible. Also, I can no longer stand in silence and listen to the rants of specific denominations; ie, baptist, pentacostal, seventh day adventist, etc. My spirit has sensed the deception of division among separate denominations. THANK YOU FOR THIS POST. Please continue to provide us with new information.

[krushingu]

When Adam and Eve sinned, sin entered into this world and corrupted all of us. We are all born into sin and are sinful minded even at birth. This is why we need a Savior. I'm not sure what this has to do with being made in the image of God.

[eiriansilver]

"This is why we need a Savior. I'm not sure what this has to do with being made in the image of God"

Oddly, the Book of Enoch along with the Book of Adam and Eve both mention "The Anointed One". Both books explain the need for salvation quite well. As a matter of fact I have found nothing in either book that would go against the Christian religion. What most people believe is rarely based on their own research. Most of what we believe, we believe because somebody "told us" that it was true.

[krushingu]

Scripture doesn't say Adam and Eve were perfect but they hadn't sinned against God till they ate the fruit. If they were sinless before this, wouldn't that make them perfect? I am saying we weren't born with 2 natures. When we recieved Christ we became new creatures. Before this we were carnal sinners. We could not please God. We had only one nature and that was a sinful nature. After we trusted in the savior we recieved a new nature from God. But the sinful nature isn't totally destroyed yet.

[TrustinJC]

krushingu

By your definition then, all babies are born perfect and are perfect until tey commit their first sin.

Also, what then is the image that we are created in? Do you honestly believe it is our physical body?

[jonlv2dtown]

no its our mental, our mindstates are shifting to another level just like they did back then...they evolved to a higher state of "god" or "oneness" within themselves. they at least had the opportunity to, just like we do now. we can become perfect, if you know jesus you will know that you can become better than him. if you choose to be a slave its your fault but rules and laws are for the ones who need them

[jonlv2dtown]

hold on, your teaching the books of enoch so i know you must be living it now, right, or at least you must be on your path? are these videos the beginning for you or have you any other work...books, scripts etc...

[krushingu]

Our sinful nature didn't come from the dust it came from being disobedient towards God. In the begining Adam and Eve were perfect. It wasn't until they disobeyed God that they became sinful.

[TrustinJC]

krushingu:

Where does scripture say that Adam and Eve were created perfect?

[krushingu]

I don't believe we were created with 2 natures. The rest of the Bible tells us that we are born with a sinful nature. Only after we accept Christ do we become a new creation. Our old sinful nature is still there and we have to do battle with the Spirit.

[TrustinJC]

Krushingu:

Then please explain the terms canrnal natural and spiritual nature; both the inner man and the outer man.

If we have only one nature as you suggest and then we circumcise that nature, this then leaves us with nothing.

[cwfell1]

If the Book of Enoch was in the Bible, there would still be many denomiations. The problem is not in the Bible, but in the people who read the Bible. Enoch may some commentary on the bible, but I know of no fundamental truth that is dependent on the Book of Enoch. Everything you have said has been said by people who don't accept the book of Enoch.

[cwfell1]

So once again, Enoch is the vital key to understanidng truth and without it we are denied to truth. I guess it follows that without the truth of Enoch all are doomed (John 8:32), since we can't know the truth without Enoch. Im curious what doctrine you want to defend with the Book of Enoch that can't be defended by the Holy Bible. What is the truth that can only be found in the book of Enoch by which our salvation is in danger without?

[TrustinJC]

cwfell1:

There is a crazy number of christain denominations with doctrine ranging from only a extremely small number recieving salvation to everyone recieving salvation, including satan himself. Doctrine regarding hell varies from it being only symbolic to being real and eternal.

Having only part of Gods word has led to these many false teachings that are leading many to hell.

[TrustinJC]

cwfell1 Pt 2

I'll be talking about slavation and what Enoch has to say soon enough.

[cwfell1]

What fudamental truth have you found that can't be know without the book of Enoch?

[TrustinJC]

The problem is that without Enoch 23,000 to 30,000 different so called truths and doctrines can be, and are defended.

[mastersniperjinx]

Wasn't the book of Enoch removed because it wasn't considered the writings of God? So you are saying that right now, as the Bible stands, it has many different loop-holes for different doctrines and that's the reason why Satan has so much control over this earthly world? I see no need to add anything else to the scriptures and to even consider the book of Enoch is a bit...risky. There may be references from the New Testament about Enoch but that doesn't mean that it's inspired by God.

[TrustinJC]

masters:

There is more then just a few references. Enochs writings are THE most referenced writings, surpassing Psalms, proverbs, Isaiah, ect. People are unaware though of where most writers in the bible were basing their writings on. And if most other writers were basing their writings on the teachings of Enoch, surely it follows that we should as well.

[mastersniperjinx]

-continued from last post- But that's almost like saying that the book of Judas is necessary for all of us to read and understand. Not everything that was written during that time line makes it God Inspired scriptures. Having a reference within the scriptures of the bible =/= that the book of Enoch is God inspired.

[TrustinJC]

Masters:

It is nothing at all like suggesting Judas should be accepted. Other writers were not quoting or referencing Judas.

If you keep watching the video series I will demonstrate much more then what you've yet seen. I will be talking about the canon proces. But int he meantime why not do some research for yourself?

The protestant bible's OT is based on the Jewish canon. The Jewish canon was created approx 70 - 100 yrs AFTER the death of Christ.

Con't

Con't

[TrustinJC]

Masters Pt 3

The books choosn for the Jewish canon were choosen, in part, for the purpose of refuting the new, and growing religion of Christiananity. So books were rejected that the apostles and Christ refered heavily too. They also rejected books that strongly pointed to Jesus being the person he claimed to be. As well, they rejected books that strongly supported the doctrine of resurrection due to the believes of the Saducees.

Con't

[TrustinJC]

Masters Pt 4

Now skip ahead a few hundred yrs and we finds christians creating their own canon version based on the same canon that was created to refute christiananity and Christ.

Now does this make sense to you?

[thequakerchannel]

This is why I believe that the correct Old Testament is the Septuagint. GBU!

[thequakerchannel]

TrustinJC. I am sure that even if the Book of Enoch was in the Canon the 23000 different groups would find ways to explain it as they like, just as they do with the Canonical books...

GBU!

[TrustinJC]

thequaker

The Septuagint is probably a better version then what the protestants use. But there are problems with it as well. As I have shown, the apostles and Jesus taught heavily from the writings of Enoch. In fact, more so then any other writer of scripture.

When the Jews returned from Babylon they were not the same when they had been taken captive.

Pharisees and Saducees became the chief instructors of religious law instead of levites and preists following in the old tradition.

Con't

[TrustinJC]

The Saducees did not believe in resurrection. Therefore, the scriptures they choose to reference, study and teach from reflected their beliefs.

Now, as a bible schoolar, can you tell me if it was the Pharisees or Saducees who decided which books were canonized for the jewish holy scriptures.

Most scholars accept that the year 90 AD is when the first Jewish canon became official.

Now, do you agree or disagree that the books choosen were picked with refuting christiananity in mind?

[thequakerchannel]

TrustinJC: You ask me, "Now, do you agree or disagree that the books choosen were picked with refuting christiananity in mind?" Yes, I do agree and this is why I believe in the Deutero-Canonical Books too (all 10 of them) . GBU!

[thequakerchannel]

TrustinJC: I think that the Protestants made a mistake to accept the Jewish Canon over the Books the Christians were using. GBU!

[TrustinJC]

thequaker

And what are your thoughts on the Didache?

[thequakerchannel]

TrustinJC. The Books of the Apostolic Fathers including Didache are good reading but I do not agree with everything in them and I do not consider them inspired by God. GBU!

[TrustinJC]

thequaker Pt 3

Don't you find it odd that two groups of religious leaders who were never known to exist before being exiled to Babylon should be the ones to create a canon at a time when Christiananity was still in it's infant stages? Books left out were left out for the purpose of discrediitng Jesus and his followers. So the books left out were the ones Jesus and the apostles most referenced and taught from. Then 300 yrs later christians adopt the same canon.

[thequakerchannel]

TrustinJC. I must tell you something. I believe that after the death of the last Apostle the Church started falling into the Apostasy, replacing the inward realities with outward forms. And that the Apostasy ended in the 17th Century when the Quakers restored Primitive Christianity, I know that these claims may not be new to you since the majority of the different denominations claim it for themselves but this is what I believe. GBU!

[TrustinJC]

thequaker

You are close in the first part of what you say. But the Apostasy did not begin with the death of the last apostle.

Rev 12 speaks of a woman protected for a time, times and half a time. The woman being protected is the church, or bride of Christ. The time spoken of here is one jubilee year which equals 50 yrs. The time, therefore, actual refers to 175 yrs of protection for the bride. This makes it around the year 208 AD (175 yrs after Christs death)

Con't

[TrustinJC]

thequaker pt 2

Unfortunately, you are mistaken about the quakers ending the Apostasy. Though they may be closer to the truth then most others. I say this because the only way to climb out of the pit that the church is now in is by returning to the way it was up to but not past the first 175 yrs after Christ. This means, in part, reading all of the scripture that we know they considered to be holy scripture.

[cwfell1]

But, what fundament truth have you found thant can't be known without the book of Enoch?

[TrustinJC]

cwfell1

We are created with two natures.

That the tree of good and evil was created for the purpose of showing Adam his sinful nature.

That hell is eternal, but it is not eternal in the way that we think of time.

There are different levels to heaven.

Prophecy will be discussed in another video, as will salvation.

Now some people will say that they already follow all the teachings that I bring forward. And that is great.

But for the majority what I say will go against their doctrine.

[TrustinJC]

resurrectionway

All scripture is inspired by God. So if a prophet has revelation about scripture or writes about the teachings found in scripture then he is, in essence, writing about Gods word, which came from God and not from man. All prophecy, for example, comes from God and not from mans understanding.

The point as well, for showing that the apostles and Jesus read and referenced the writings of Enoch is to demonstrate they considered the writings scripture just as Isaiah or others were.

[resurrectionway]

i think you are correct to say that. it make sense . but are you 100% sure their read the book. the language in which The book of Enoch was 1000's of years old so even if it was Greek of Hebrew it would not be the same as what they had in their time just like the English we speak we couldn't understand the English language for 1000 Years ago

Carlos

[TrustinJC]

resurrectionway

I think they would have trusted in the same way that we must trust the version and translated bible we read today. For if what they read was corrupted, then what chance do we have that ours is not corrupted.

I have to believe that if today we have the word of God in an uncorrupted state that they to would have had the same. I fully trust God in that he could and would maintain an uncorrupted translated version of His word.

[resurrectionway]

I would also hope that God would have maintain the scripture uncorrpted

[resurrectionway]

if you say that Peter and Paul wrote there parts of the bible because they read the book of Enoch are you not then saying that the scriptures are not inspired by God but the the scripture are inspired by another mans wittings.

Carlos