Quote:
Originally Posted by masterlee
The importance of the books of Gad, the relevance of Enoch, cannot be dismissed easily just by saying they are not included in the Bible, and therefore cannot be considered scripture.
|
And I haven't done that. I haven't been given sufficient reason to consider them scripture. I'm afraid someone just saying, "they are sacred" is not a reason to believe them to be sacred. It's irrespobsible on my part, and yours because you have no idea what they say.
I also keep saying I have Enoch on me. I'm ready to put it back in the bible should you give me sufficient reason to do so.
Paul, in Acts 17:28, quotes from Aratus (Phaenomena 5). Are you ready to accept Aratus, a Greek pagan poet, as scripture simply because Paul mentions him once? Paul, in Titus 1:12, quotes from Epimenides. Is Epimenides, another Greek pagan, now to be considered scripture? Surely you would answer "no" to both of those, and if so, you must alter your standard. If you don't alter your standard, you must accept pagan literature as scripture in order to remain consistent. I doubt, and hope, you won't be proclaiming Zeus by the end of the thread. Fortunately, I don't accept things as scripture simply because they are mentioned in passing, or even quoted in part, and so I won't be a Greek pagan by the end of this thread.
Quote:
|
You are ignoring the facts--the prophets and apostles in the Old and New Testaments were more than familiar with these books.
|
Most of these books are mentioned once in passing, which indicates to me they aren't that important at all. Most of them say things along the lines of, "oh, this list of capable soldiers is written in Gad's book too", like a throw away comment. Most of the most obscure ones, like Gad the Seer, are mentioned in historical books like Samuel, Chronicles, and Kings, which indicates that the books are probably nothing more than historical documents and not prophetic like a Daniel, Ezekiel, or Isaiah. And which of these obsucre books are mentioned in the prophetic writings? There is also no indication at all that there was wide familiarity with a book like Gad the Seer's. You keep asserting things without sufficient reason to believe your assertions.
Quote:
|
They considered them sacred.
|
You keep saying that, and you can say it, but that's exactly what I've been calling into question. There is no indication that they considered them sacred. There are numerous psalms that sing about Torah and numerous writings that that draw on things found in the Torah, which makes it rather obvious that the books of the Torah are sacred to lots of peoeple, but I can only find one obscure reference to a book by (for example) Gad the Seer. That's not what someone who considered the book sacred would do.