What edition of the Holy Bible is the Book of Enoch in?  I \nbelieve that it is in the Ethiopian Orthodox Bible, but I am not certain for sure. I would also like to know at what website that I could purchase one when I do find out.
204303
The Book of Enoch is found in the Oriental Orthodox Bible. For further information  on this see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_enoch.  If you want to read the Book of Enoch online, this article gives several links to various translations including this one: http://www.heaven.net.nz/writings/thebookofenoch.htm
292609
what is the reference of this verse. i want to read the whole thing before it and after it, not just picking a verse from the middel\n\nbut you are correct. we all are brother of blood, we should remain in peace with each other regardless what governments do. we all worship One God.
376316
Your difficulty at understanding some parts of the Bible is common.\nIn Acts 8:30, Phillip goes to an Ethiopian who is reading the Bible and asks:\n“Do you actually know what you are reading?” \nThe Ethiopian replies: \n“Really, how could I ever do so, unless someone guided me?”\nIT ALWAYS HELPS IF A MORE KNOWLEGEABLE ONE GUIDES YOU.\nFind one.\nGod is not working through individuals. He provided a book ...the Bible.\nProverbs 2:4,5 mentions to what extent we should ardently search/study the pages of the Bible.
58187
First, we don't know that Jude is actually quoting the Book of Enoch.  It is just that what little of the Book of Enoch that survived is the only other reference we have to this apparently real event.  \n\nSecond, apparantly neither the church nor the Jews felt that it was an inspired writting.  \n\nThird, the Book of Enoch seemed to be an "Old Testament" book that was written during "New Testament" times.  It is even possible that the Book of Enoch was written shortly AFTER Jude.  Christians certainly recognized that there were no prophets still writting books to the Jews.  Isreal had not had a prophet in over 400 years.  If God had sent a new prophet surely he would not be writting about Enoch, but about what was going on with what they believed to be a great apostacy (Christianity).  \n\nIt is also very likely, since very little of the book remains for us to examine, that it did not claim to be anything but a story.  Many such "books" were written, and never meant to be taken as Scripture.  We have Christian devotional and fictional books being written all the time today, too.\n\nThe event to which Jude refers to seems to have actually taken place.  We know this because we have an inspired author telling us about it.  That does not mean that, even if he quoted this book, that the book is Scripture.  Paul quoted greek philosophers, too.
556839
Dear Allen T,\n I hear by subjugate your reality and implant my own.\n\nDid you know that the "Bible" has been changed over the past two millennia. Since the Catholic church has left out the good parts of the "Bible" we no longer know what is true, but in the name of Jesus, Christians have destroyed other faiths of the world to supplant their own beliefs on other nations and people which in the "Bible" God says do not JUDGE others or their way of belief.\nAnd I quote nowhere in Genesis does it state that the entire world was governed by God.\n\nIf we did find Atlantis it would rewrite everything we know.\n\n"And Cain went out from the presence of the LORD, and dwelt in the land of Nod, on the east of Eden. And Cain knew his wife; and she conceived and bore him Enoch: and he built a city, and called the name of the city, after the name of his son, Enoch."\nGenesis 4:16&17\n\nNod means to wounder in ancient Hebrew coptic scripts. And we have yet to find "EDEN". AND ENOCH WAS A GOOD PRE-FLOOD CIVILAZATION AND IRRONICLY THE CHILDREN ARE OF CAIN............\n\n*stps off soap box* "Thank you. I'll be back next week." bows and exits stage right.
472931
have you tried bible.org.  sometimes if you word it differently that could help you find it as well.  Blueletterbible.org works too
382853
The Holy Bible Douay-Rheims Version \n\nWith Challoner Revisions 1749-52\n1899 Edition of the John Murphy Company\n\nIMPRIMATUR: \nJames Cardinal Gibbons, Archbishop of Baltimore, September 1, 1899.\n\nPope Damasus assembled the first list of books of the Bible at the Roman Council in 382 A.D. He commissioned St. Jerome to translate the original Greek and Hebrew texts into Latin, which became known as the Latin Vulgate Bible and was declared by the Church to be the only authentic and official version, in 1546. \n\nThe DR New Testament was first published by the English College at Rheims in 1582 A.D. The DR Old Testament was first published by the English College at Douay in 1609 A.D. The first King James Version was not published until 1611. This online DRV contains all 73 books, including the seven Deutero-Canonical books (erroneously called Apocrypha by Protestants). These seven books were included in the 1611 KJV, but not in later KJV Bibles. \n\nThe whole Douay-Rheims Bible was revised and diligently compared with the Latin Vulgate by Bishop Richard Challoner in 1749-1752 A.D. The notes included in the text were written by Dr. Challoner. \n\nThe DR Bible was photographically reproduced from the 1899 edition of the John Murphy Company, Baltimore, Maryland, by Tan Books in 1971. Eventually, this edition was optically scanned to produce a large text file which this publisher used for creating this website, with the aid of text-processing software. \n\nOne important goal of this project was to preserve the original text "as is", without making any changes in the wording, because the original text had the Imprimatur of James Cardinal Gibbons, Archbishop of Baltimore, dated Sept 1st 1899. \n\nThe text file was checked quite thoroughly by software written by the publisher for punctuation errors and verses out of order. The index was humanly checked for misspelled words and the corrections were made to the text. However, some spelling errors may still be present in the text. Many verses were out of order in the original file. These have been corrected. \n\nEvery effort was made to ensure that this online version is an exact match to the original printed version. No words were added or ommitted from the text, except for correcting errors caused by the scanning process. No words were rearranged. No verse numbers were changed, except in the case of Psalm 9. \n\nPsalm 9 originally contained 21 verses and there were 2 versions of Psalm 10, numbering 1-18 and 1-8. This obviously caused a conflict, so it was decided to make the first Psalm 10 as the last part of Psalm 9 and renumber the verses 22-39. This retains the same numbering as all the Douay Rheims. Note, in the Protestant Bibles the numbering of Psalms 10 through 146 differs by one.
34993
1. What scripture verse was translated incorrectly (What did the incorrect verse say)\n\nHERE IS THE WHOLE STORY, FOR THOSE WHO MAY NOT KNOW:::\n\n          Exodus 34:28-35  28 And he was there with the \n          Etrnl forty days and forty nights; he did \n          neither eat bread, nor drink water. And he wrote \n          upon the tables the words of the covenant, the \n          ten commandments. 29  And it came to pass, when \n          Moses came down from mount Sinai with the two \n          tables of testimony in Moses' hand, when he came \n          down from the mount, that Moses wist not that \n          the skin of his face shone while he talked with  \n          him.  כי קרן עור פניו בדברו אתו׃\n          30  And when Aaron and all the children of \n          Israel saw Moses, behold, the skin of his face \n          shone; and they were afraid to come nigh him. \n          31  And Moses called unto them; and Aaron and \n          all the rulers of the congregation returned unto \n          him: and Moses talked with them. 32  And \n          afterward all the children of Israel came nigh: \n          and he gave them in commandment all that the \n          Etrnl had spoken with him in mount Sinai. 33  \n          And till Moses had done speaking with them, he \n          put a vail on his face. 34  But when Moses went \n          in before the Etrnl to speak with him, he took \n          the vail off, until he came out. And he came \n          out, and spake unto the children of Israel that \n          which he was commanded. 35  And the children of \n          Israel saw the face of Moses, that the skin of \n          Moses' face shone: and Moses put the vail upon \n          his face again, until he went in to speak with\n          him. \n\nThe verse incorrectly translated is, of course, Exodus 34:29 above, and i have supplied the Hebrew. The word mistranslated is the word, 'KEREN,' meaning 'beam,' like a beam of light. Unfortunately, the word also means horn, as in a 'horn of plenty.'\n\n2. and what is the correct translation?\n\nMay own translation:::\n\nExo 34:29 ויהי ברדת משׁה מהר סיני ושׁני לחת העדת ביד־משׁה ברדתו מן־ההר ומשׁה לא־ידע כי קרן עור פניו בדברו אתו׃\n\nAnd when Moses came down from the Mountain of Sinai, with the two tablets of the testimony in the hand of Moses, when he came down from the Mountain, and Moses did not know that beams of light (keren or) shone from his face when he spoke with Him.\n\nAdditional information:: When i was a kid, i actually had Christians come up to me, asking me where my horns were? Their ministers and their families had taught them that the Jews actually had horns, based on the New Testament quotation, when Jesus calls The Jews children of Satan!!!!
521514
The bottom line of Poki's post is "because someone said so". But that isn't true. \n\nThe oldest book on earth, a copy of Isaiah found with the dead sea scrolls, is essentially identical to what we have today. Through the dead sea scrolls we have again proven that the Bible that we have is reliable and accurate and consistent in it's message. There is no scholarly authority or archaeological evidence that proves otherwise. Nada. \n\nSaying the Bible is corrupt is just the same old lie; "Yea, hath God said...?"
193495
Did you know that John 3:16 perfectly sums up the entire message of the Bible? http://tinyurl.com/ojljl\n\nIf I were to try and rewrite it, it would be imperfect.\n____________________\nYou sent me an email but I cannot reply as your email address has not been "confirmed".
629587
That's actually a really interesting question, and I'm afraid I don't have much time to fully answer it, but I'll give you a basic overview.\n\n\nBack when all the texts were compiled and what should (or not) be included in the New and Old Testaments was decided, some of the texts were left out.\nWhile some were fully censored and destroyed (for example, the newly discovered "Gospel of Judas"), others were simply censored or adapted.\nThe existence of Nephilim was one of those situations, where the scriptures were slightly censored and therefore some rare references to generally unknown things can be read in there. Never heard of Lilith? That's another example of a removed text.\n\nWhile in the link I'll provide below there is some information about your subject, you could also try to read the "Dead Sea Scrolls" or "Apocrypha", as they have some of the texts that were cut out and (perhaps) provide more information on Nephilim.
309066
Does this mean that the first man in the holy book was the bastard son of a goddess? Who got her pregnant. I like this story. Was it one of the other Gods?
330866
The Book of Revelations is the most difficult Bible book to understand.  I have ALL 12 volumns of this series on a very special place on my library shelf... and since I have read this fictional work... I am able to read the Book of Revelations and understand it much easier... I think it should be on everyone's list of reading material, especially in this time of world events... \n\nI like it all... and I even have other books these two authors have written in their studies...added to my library.  I keep my eye on the world events.. don't you???
561739
Interesting, but my translation says "God takes his stand in his own congregation".  (New American Standard).  We would need to discuss it with an expert in ancient hebrew to form an informed opinion, so take it easy.
173221
How long do you think it will be before a person or group successfully reassembles the bible to include recently discovered religious texts that they feel better suit modern times?\n\nNever.  For all practical purposes, the Bible as now been “set in stone.”\n\nWhat do you think about this?\n\nI believe that those who tend to be the loudest on this topic have either done the least amount of study or have very extensive time invested in their current belief.  Most claim as articles of fact pieces of information which are not true.  Less than one in one billion (if any) could give me that actual names of the men who met to determine which books and works were included in either Testament.  Yet they propose that these men were inspired by G-d to make these choices for all time.  They are seem to ignore that most works which were not included were systematically searched for and burned as heretical.  The mere fact that any remain after 2000 years is a miracle.\n\nWhat will the cultural/spiritual ramifications of this be?\n\nA continuation of our current position.  As beautiful as the KJV is to read, it is flawed.  This fact has been shown over and over again by scholars who do know the languages involved.  Yet look at the number of supporters that it has.  The sad part of this is that many who claim to understand the meaning of the KJV of the Bible (which is a very serious and metaphysical work) do not understand and cannot follow a simple Shakespearean play (which is light entertainment) that was written at about the same time.  What does this yell you about the ignorance of humans?  And ignorance is bliss.\n\nIf God is really solely responsible for the bible's contents why does he have hundreds of millions of Christians using different versions?  And how would a new version be any worse?\n\nThose humans who claim to be privileged to the plans or purposes of Divinity are deluded.  No human has that capability.  Only Divinity is perfect.  Humanity is arrogant, not understanding that the message is important, not the delivery of the message.  Those that must quote scripture for every answer (especially those claiming that it is the Word of G-d) are probably idolaters.  They have worshipped the written word instead of Divinity.  Each believing that they are right and all others wrong.  They are the cause of the fragmentation of the Church and people like them are usually too stubborn to see their own sins.\n\nA new version of the Bible is not needed.  These recently discovered and translated works should be made available to the widest reading audience for study and debate.  At least by those who are capable of understanding that Humanity did not have the message right then and still is lacking in understanding.  This is human nature.  Divinity is the only proper judge; and Divine Judgment, unlike human opinion and understanding, IS perfect.
620087
Go cry it on the mountain.\n\nBTW.  There are 65 other Books, in the Bible.\n\nYour never going to get your Scholarship in Theo. Like this.\n\nGood Luck.
18966
Heh, heh... thanks bro. ;)\n\nI have seen some rare textual changes that have changed the meaning or even elimination of a word because they could not see how it fits. Hebrew letters can look very close to one another, much like our "l" and "i". So any distortion in the leather parchment could be a problem or the flaking of the ink could cause problems as well.\nMy mentor once told me that when the military creates a complex code, they transmit it with parity, or multiple times, so that if the coded message is in any way garbled, they can compare it to earlier or later transmissions. The Bible does the same thing by repeating the important messages several times. This is why Deuteronomy is called Deuteronomy. It's "repeating what we already know is true".\nCan these people explain to me why the entire 2,000 year old Isaiah scroll found in Qumran is virtually identical with the modern copies found in every synagogue in the world?\nRemember that Revelation carries an eternal curse of damnation for anyone who adds or subtracts from the text of scripture, and I do not think King James was hoping for political advantage at the expense of his soul.\nToday, we still have the original Hebrew and Greek text. Changing the scriptures would offer us ZERO political gain. Yet is still translates the same as the original King James, only with todays vernacular. \nI wonder if these people even research beyond their own notions. Do they have such skepticism when they read their dosage instructions for medication?