Defending the Book of Enoch


The following are actual objections to the Book of Enoch, along with responses.


Objection: “To the Biblically ignorant reader, the Book of Enoch might have an appeal; but to a believer grounded in the Scriptures, the Book of Enoch is packed full of heresy.”

Response: Many have claimed the Book of Enoch to be “full of heresy,” but few offer any factual evidence to support this claim. The fact is that the Book of Enoch was hidden away from the Roman church for centuries. The result of this is that there is much in the Book of Enoch that did not directly influence the doctrines that make up the beliefs of the modern church. As such, it is not the Scriptures themselves that the Book of Enoch is “contradicting,” but the beliefs of the modern church that were formed over the span of time that the Book of Enoch was absent from the libraries of church literature.

– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

Objection: “If the Book of Enoch were valid, composing well over 100 chapters, there should be numerous New Testament references to it; but there aren’t… In sharp contrast to the Book of Enoch, the New Testament often quotes the Book of Genesis.”

Response: Contrary to popular belief, the Book of Enoch is referenced in the New Testament at least 40 times. Several of these are even direct quotations, though not specifically attributed to Enoch. One of these instances, Jude 1:14-15, is a direct quotation, attributed specifically to Enoch himself. Several “New Testament” concepts are found to have their source in the Book of Enoch: the springs of living waters, (John 4:13-14 / Enoch 48:1) the new heaven and new earth, (Revelation 21:1 / Enoch 91:16-17) and several of the Beatitudes. (Matthew 5, Luke 6 / Enoch 5:7, Enoch 94:8)

– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

Objection: “The Book of Enoch uses unfamiliar terminology, referring to the ‘Lord of Spirits’ and the ‘Head of Days.’  These terms are foreign to the Word of God.”

Response: An avid scholar would understand that the Book of Enoch has gone through several linguistic filters that are foreign to the Hebrew Scriptures. Terms like “Lord of Spirits” and “Head of Days” are found in the Word of God, but in different forms; “Lord of Spirits,” for instance, is translated from the Hebrew as “the Lord of Hosts;” “Head of Days” is likewise found in the Bible translated as “Ancient of Days.”

– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

Objection: “The Messiah is not directly mentioned… It is worthy to note that Christ’s deity is not evidenced in the Book of Enoch.”

Response: This objection is not remotely true; in fact, huge portions of the text are directed toward exalting the character and personage of the Messiah. The following Messianic titles are referenced in the Book of Enoch:

  • Elect One (Enoch 39:6, 40:6, 45:3-5, 49:2-4, 51:1-3, 52:6-9, 53:6, 55:4, 56:6, 61:5, 61:8-11, 62:1)
  • Son of Man (Enoch 46:2-4, 48:2, 60:10, 62:5-9, 62:14, 63:11, 69:26-30, 70:1, 71:14-16)
  • Anointed / Messiah (Enoch 48:10, 52:4)

– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

Objection: “Many terms from the Biblical Book of Revelation are quoted in the Book of Enoch…”

Response: The Book of Revelation was written about 90 A.D. The best of Biblical scholars date the Book of Enoch to the second century B.C.. Even the portion of the book reckoned as being part of the very latest authorship is now considered to predate the New Testament. In the words of James H. Charlesworth in The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha and the New Testament, “…no specialists now argue that I Enoch 37-71 is a Christian and postdates the first century.” So, if anything, the Revelation of John is quoting from the Book of Enoch. I prefer to think that both the Revelation of John and the Book of Enoch are quoting from God.

– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

Objection: “The King James translators, 48 scholarly men skilled in the Hebrew and Greek languages, didn’t believe the work was inspired by God.”

Response: The King James translators worked from 1604 through 1611. The Book of Enoch was considered “lost” from approximately through 1773, when it was rediscovered in several Ethiopian manuscripts. Hence, the King James translators did not even have access to any manuscripts of the Book of Enoch.

– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

Objection: “The sons of God are the godly line who have come down from Adam through Seth, and the daughters of men belong to the line of Cain. What you have here now is an intermingling and intermarriage of these two lines, until finally the entire line is totally corrupted (well, not totally; there is one exception). That is the picture that is presented to us here.”

Response: The above thought process is an interpretation of Genesis 6:2 that is not based in reality. The passage states, “That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose.”  In the above thought process, the “sons of God”  are understood to be the descendants of Seth, whereas the “daughters of man”  are considered the descendants of Cain, but there are a handful of reasons why this thought process is not accurate. First, the phrase “sons of God”  is used elsewhere in Hebrew literature only when referring to angelic beings. Second, the action taking place in Genesis 6:2 was so grievous in God’s sight that it caused Him to say only a few passages later, “I will destroy man whom I have created from the surface of the ground… for I am sorry that I have made them.”  Yet this destructive proclamation is on the back of God having commanded mankind to “Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it.”  (Genesis 1:28) It is inconceivable that God was so grieved by human reproduction that He saw fit to destroy the world.

– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

Objection: “Jesus and the apostles never called it scripture.”

Response: There is actually a very strong example of Yeshua referring to the Book of Enoch as Scripture. In Matthew 22:29-30, Yeshua first chided the Sadducees for their lack of understanding of “the Scriptures,” then proceeded to teach a concept that is only found in the Book of Enoch.

– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

Objection: “A few early church fathers highly valued the book of Enoch but they never referred to it as scripture.”

Response: This statement is simply incorrect. Church father Tertulian writes as follows in his 2nd century work, On the Apparel of Women I 3:1-3, “I am aware that the Scripture of Enoch…”  Church father Origen appealed to the Book of Enoch as having the same canonical authority as he does the Book of Psalms in De Principiis IV. Irenaeus, in his work The Proof of the Apostolic Preaching 18, records a condensed retelling of Enoch 6-8. Lastly, the author of the Letter of Barnabas (not the Barnabas mentioned in the book of Acts) quotes Enoch multiple times along side the canonical Scriptures. To say that the early church fathers unanimously did not regard Enoch as Scripture is a blatant misrepresentation of historical fact.

– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

Objection: “One reason most Christian do not accept the Book of Enoch is that the Jewish teachers did not accept it as part of the Bible. It is not part of what Christians call the Old Testament.”

Response: This is yet another baseless objection. Of the Jewish sects of the first century, the ideas of what exactly constituted the “canon” of Scriptures varied from group to group. The ancient Pharisees used a set of books that is very similar the books that make up what we call today the Tanakh, or Old Testament, plus perhaps the Book of Sirach. The Essenes, on the other hand, accepted in their sacred library at Qumran an entire collection of holy texts, among which were the books of Tobit, Jubilees, Sirach, and even Enoch. To suggest that the ancient Jews did not accept the Book of Enoch is erroneous; it is better said that while some ancient Jews did not accept the Book of Enoch, others, in fact, did.

923 total views, 1 views today


  1. Yosef

    Hi, after reading your page I was very intrigued by the possiblity of an Extra-biblical book being inspired. I recieved the book of Enoch as a gift recently, as translated by Dr. Ken Johnson. Enoch 5:7 seems to imply that “salvation is for the elect, not for sinners”. The author even left in brackets “Salvation [Yeshua] shall be for the elect…” The full verse may have similarities to other scriptures. Yet I found a contradiction, which seems blatant. And it also should raise flags for the true born-again believer in Jesus Christ. Yeshua had said “I came NOT for the righteous, but to call sinners to repentance.” The book of Enoch seems to flip this around. How would you address this:

    Contradiction A)
    Enoch: Salvation for the elect
    Jesus: Salvation not for the righteous
    Contradiction B)
    Enoch: Salvation not for sinners
    Jesus: Salvation for sinners

    The scriptures say that the elect are sinners saved by grace through faith alone in Jesus Christ.

    Yet Enoch 5:7 seems to imply even a sinless perfection kind of salvation.

    Thank you.

    • Aish Tamid

      Hello Yosef!

      Thank you for your comment on this page. As far as I am aware, the translation by Ken Johnson is a good one. (If nothing else, you can’t go wrong with the classic translators either, like Schodde or Charles.)

      If I am understanding you right, there are two passages which seem to contradict. One is Enoch 5:7,

      “But for the elect there shall be light and joy and peace, and they shall inherit the earth. And for you the godless there shall be a curse.” (Charles trans.)

      The other is Matthew 9:12-13,

      “There is no need of a physician to heal the healthy, but to heal them that are sick. Therefore, go and learn what is written, ‘I desire mercy, and not sacrifice,’ (Hosea 6:6) for I have not come to call the righteous, but the sinners to repentance.”

      Now there are a handful of things to keep in mind when we examine these supposed contradictions. The first question I would ask is this: when Enoch speaks of “the elect,” who is he speaking of? Torah gives us the answer, in Deuteronomy 7:6,

      “You are a Set-Apart people unto YHWH your Elohim; YHWH your Elohim has chosen you to be His own treasure, out of all peoples that are upon the face of the earth.” (HRV)

      The language might be a bit different- and certainly, part of that is the fault of translators and linguistic differences- but look at the who and the what that is actually being discussed in both passages: the people whom YHWH has “chosen” in Deuteronomy 7:6 are the “elect” of Enoch 5:7. This is an easy conclusion to make, as “chosen” and “elect” are interchangeable terms for all twelve tribes of the House of Israel.

      Now let’s look at the scope of Yeshua’s ministry: the lost sheep of the House of Israel. (Matthew 15:24) These are the elect of Enoch 5:7, and the chosen people of Deuteronomy 7:6. Now what is meant by “I have not come to call the righteous, but the sinners?” Notice how this passage ends: “to repentance.” Enoch is absolutely correct when he says that salvation is not for sinners: because salvation is for sinners **WHO REPENT.** This is why in the preceeding verse, Yeshua said that “There is no need of a physician to heal the healthy, but to heal them that are sick.” Yeshua came to heal the sick- to turn the lost sheep of the house of Israel back to Torah.

      I hope this helps you in your studies!

  2. Hi, I just found your website and I’m glad someone out there is trying to defend the Book of Enoch! The reason I came across your site is because I’ve been searching for someone who can tackle the subject of supposed “contradictions” within the Book of Enoch itself. Now I’m not talking about questions regarding its origins, or authorship. What I want to see is someone explaining some of these textual discrepancies that numerous anti-BOE sites are dedicated to pointing out..some examples would be
    1. Why God tells the angels to build the ark, whereas in Genesis Noah is told to build it?
    2. The Fallen angels are bound for 10,000 years whereas in another part it says 70 generations. What’s the difference?
    3. Why do the leaders of the angels have different names in the different sections where they are listed?

    These are just a few of the many discrepancies that some websites, like point out. I was hoping that maybe you could tackle these issues on your website. I do believe Enoch to be inspired, I just want assurance that we’re not being led astray… Hope you can help! Thanks and God Bless

    • Aish Tamid

      Hello Priscilla! I am glad this article is of help to you.

      I read through a good portion of the site you suggested. My initial reaction is that a good portion of the article is pure conjecture, and inconsistent at that. For example, the author appeals to the same “scholarly” dating system to date the Book of Enoch that also dates the prophetic book of Isaiah as having been written in three different sections, by multiple authors, over the course of several centuries. Now we know this is false, because Yeshua quoted from all three of these portions of the Book of Isaiah, and cited the prophet Isaiah as his source every time. The same logic should hold true for the Book of Enoch: if we accept it as a work of Scripture, then we accept it on faith, in spite of the opinions of secular scholars.

      That having been said, I would be glad to take a stab at the following specific questions you posed:

      1. Why God tells the angels to build the ark, whereas in Genesis Noah is told to build it?

      In chapter 67, God speaks with Noah, telling him that the angels are working on a wooden building. It does not say that God commanded the angels to build the ark; simply, it says that the angels were performing a function. God did command Noah to build the ark in Genesis 6; however, there is nothing wrong with the assumption that the angels simply helped Noah to build it. All throughout the following accounts in the Genesis narrative, angels are seen helping humanity.

      2. The Fallen angels are bound for 10,000 years whereas in another part it says 70 generations. What’s the difference?

      One thing to keep in mind when studying the Book of Enoch, from an academic and linguistic perspective, is that we are handling a text that has gone through several layers of transmission. The Book of Enoch was likely originally written in Hebrew or Aramaic, or something even older; but the English translations we have today have been also filtered through the Ethiopian liturgical language. In the prologue to Sirach, the author expresses it this way: “What was originally expressed in Hebrew does not have exactly the same sense when translated into another language. Not only this book, but even the Torah itself, the Prophecies, and the rest of the books differ not a little when read in the original.” Keeping that in mind, we do have three public domain, fairly good translations of the Book of Enoch, to be able to easily study out these translation errors. Most of the time, when people have issues with something in Enoch, they look only at one translation of it- likely, the Charles translation- when in fact, there are two others that offer very satisfactory explanations. For example, concerning the 10,000 years in chapter 18, where Charles translates “ten thousand” as a concrete number, Schodde translates “the year of mystery,” and Laurence translates “the secret year.” Further, in chapter 21, where Charles again translates “ten thousand” as a concrete number, Schodde translates “ten thousand worlds,” and Laurence translates “infinite number of days.” Backing up a few chapters, in chapter 10, all three translations have “seventy generations.” There is no real discrepancy here; chapters 18 and 21 are discussing time in abstract terms, whereas chapter 10 gives a slightly more concrete (though not definite) time frame.

      3. Why do the leaders of the angels have different names in the different sections where they are listed?

      Why do the Apostles have different names in each of the Gospels? Bartholomew in Matthew and Mark is also called Nathaniel in Luke and John; Thomas is also called Didymus in John; Matthew is called Levi in Mark and Luke; Thaddaeus in Matthew and Mark is called Jude in Luke, and Jude “not Iscariot” in John; and the same Simon who is called “the Cananite” in Matthew and Mark is called “the Zealot” in Luke. The point I’m getting at is that we have to keep an open mind about things, and not get caught up on details that have very plausible explanations. We can make mountains out of molehills, or we can get past the minutiae and focus on the big picture of what YHWH is trying to say to us.

      I hope this dialog has helped. I wish you the very best in your pursuit of the truth, and hope that your studies of the Book of Enoch help to further your faith!

  3. Benjamin farley

    Also on that last note using the bloodline in the gospels: counting 70 from noah ends with Joseph or mary depending on which you use. The fallen were locked away to stop their influence. over man and also for their bloodline to be breed out. after this was done and man could know something more in his heart than wickedness, Yeshua came to offer his testimony to all those who would repent.
    also the angels gathered the animals,

  4. Robert woods

    I have the calendar of enoch are you interested . it is a 364 day calendar and is absolutely astounding contact me if you are interested!

    • Aish Tamid

      Hello Robert,

      Thank you for your response.

      Although I love and cherish the Book of Enoch, I do not believe in the validity of its calendar. I believe, to keep us in unity with our Jewish brethren, we should keep the Hillel II calendar, until such a time as a Levitical Sanhedrin is restored, and/or the Messiah Himself comes to change it.

  5. wonde

    Thanks to Ethiopians who preserved such a wonderful book which should have been part of the bible. for ur info it’s part of the bible in Ethiopia among with other additional books. l appreciate your responses for the objections keep up.

    • Aish Tamid

      Thank you, Wonde!

      I agree, we owe a great debt of gratitude to the Ethiopian church for their preservation of this most special text.

  6. Jermaine Mars

    I have only one question, I do believe that the Book of Enoch is inspired, but I have a problem with one part, when the sons of God the fallen bore children they begat giants the Nephilem, and some of them were 3000 cubits high or some translations say 3000 elves, I know from archeology, we find megalithic structures and hominid giants and weird skulls and ancient technology of the time of Enoch destroyed by the flood, I’m just wondering if this would hold any weight?

    • Aish Tamid

      That’s a great observation.

      In my opinion- as someone who also believes in the inspiration of the Book of Enoch- I believe we are working with a very, very ancient text. As such, we have to be open to some degree of cultural mistranslations that have developed over the course of time. If Enoch is genuine- which I believe it is- it would have been first written in an antediluvian language, then translated into some variant of early Hebrew, then a later form of Hebrew or Aramaic, which was then lost completely- but a translation was made into Ethiopic, which survived, and was then brought into English. That’s at least five separate forms of this work. So there are certainly bound to be certain kinds of technical oddities. Perhaps an early scribe thought they were doing the best they could when converting whatever “3000 ells” was into cubits, and perhaps “3000 ells” is really more like 15 feet.

      Errors like this do not mean that the original text of Enoch was not inspired; rather, they simply mean that our English translations are not perfect. We can still read Enoch as an inspired text- we just have to read it with an open mind and good scholarly sources at our side.

      Hope this helps you, Jermaine!

  7. I am interested in the book of enoch and see a lot of connection to the new testament. But you said Jesus came to bring us back to the torah. That simply is not true. He came to reconcile us to God. An d he nailed the torah to the cross. No one has or will be able to keep the torah

    • Aish Tamid

      Thank you so much Walkin for your interest in the Book of Enoch. It is an amazing text, to be sure.

      Regarding your statement that the Messiah did away with the Torah, the Torah itself tells us that this is a falsehood.

      First off we read in Deuteronomy 30:11-14,

      For this commandment which I command you this day, it is not too hard for you, neither is it far off. It is not in heaven, that you should say, “Who shall go up for us to heaven, and bring it to us, and make us to hear it, that we may do it?” Neither is it beyond the sea, that you should say, “Who shall go over the sea for us, and bring it to us, and make us to hear it, that we may do it?” But the word is very near to you, in your mouth, and in your heart, that you may do it.

      Similarly, we read in Luke 16:31,

      If they don’t listen to Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded if one rises from the dead.

      The Messiah Yeshua (Jesus) pretty clearly here reitterated the words of Moses, that the Messiah is not a scapegoat to bypass the Torah, or somehow “dumb it down” for us; rather, the Torah should be viewed as a cornerstone of our faith.

      Finally, we have the Apostle John teaching in 1 John 2:3,

      This is how we know that we know him: if we keep his commandments.

      And 1 John 5:3,

      For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments. His commandments are not grievous.

      In fact, if we take Paul out of the equation, we don’t ever get the idea- anywhere in the New Testament- that the Torah was ever meant to be temporary, or done away with.

      I encourage you to continue your studies in the Book of Enoch. I hope some of the articles I have on this site are helpful.

      • Anonymous

        Jesus did not come to do away with the law but to fulfill it, the purpose of the law was to make one righteous. Therefore Jesus is the ONLY way to righteousness having fulfilled the law. He taught two commandments love the lord your God with all your heart, and love your neighbor as yourself. By this we do keep the whole law. I

        • Jesse ben Yosef

          The purpose of the Torah was to make one righteous, this much is true; but on a much simpler scale, it was also to show one how to live a set apart lifestyle to God.

          Now I love Jesus (whom I call Yeshua) as much as the next believer, but the whole idea that Yeshua is THE ONLY way to righteousness is not a Scriptural one. Let’s look at a few passages, first and foremost Deuteronomy 30:10-14:

          “For this commandment which I command you this day, it is not too hard for you, neither is it far off. It is not in heaven, that you should say, “Who shall go up for us to heaven, and bring it to us, and make us to hear it, that we may do it?” Neither is it beyond the sea, that you should say, “Who shall go over the sea for us, and bring it to us, and make us to hear it, that we may do it?” But the word is very near to you, in your mouth, and in your heart, that you may do it.”

          The Torah itself testifies that one DOES NOT need to come down from heaven to dumb down the Torah to make it easier for us to do.

          Examples of righteous men can be seen in the Torah as well: Noah is called “a righteous man, blameless among the people of his time,” (Genesis 6:9) and Abraham is said to have “believed in HaShem; and He reckoned it to him for righteousness.” (Genesis 15:6) God’s commandment to the entire Nation of Israel was to “Be holy; for I am holy,” (Leviticus 11:44) elaborating further that “You shall be holy to Me, for I, HaShem, am holy, and have set you apart from the peoples, that you should be Mine.” (Leviticus 20:26)

          Let’s fast forward a few thousand years to Luke 1:5-6,

          “There was in the days of Herod, the king of Judea, a certain priest named Zacharias, of the priestly division of Abijah. He had a wife of the daughters of Aaron, and her name was Elizabeth. They were both righteous before God, walking blamelessly in all the commandments and ordinances of the Lord.”

          As you can see, Zechariah and Elizabeth were counted as righteous before God, walking blamelessly in the Torah, PRIOR to and APART FROM Jesus.

          As for the two Greatest Commandments- which, by the way, were not Jesus’ own teachings, but came straight from the Torah in the first place- I agree that they are a summation of the Torah, but that does not mean that they negate everything else within the Torah. In other words, while we can both agree that we are to love God above all else, the Torah actually tells you HOW to do that. This is what the Apostle John meant when he wrote, “For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments. His commandments are not grievous.” (1 John 5:3) The idea here is that the commandments of the Torah function as a hierarchy under the two greatest commandments.

          A clear example of this line of reasoning is seen as follows: the second of the two great commandments is to love others. An aspect of loving others is not to steal from them. (Exodus 20:15) The Torah then gives legislation surrounding theft, and how to make proper restitution for loss, theft, and damage to one’s property. (Exodus 22:1-17)

          Hope this helps.

  8. Mary

    Hello~ I was looking around at some various things online regarding biblical prophecy, and seeing if there were things that might be relevant- one being the book of Enoch, and another being transhumanism. I came across your site, and just want to say that it looks really interesting, and I’m going to enjoy reading more. I would also like to say that I believe everything that was written by the Lord from the beginning with Torah, all the way through to the book of Revelation displays a beautiful panorama of a God who is drawing mankind back to Himself, and that it all fits together beautifully, although we don’t always understand how, or why.

    Thanks again for your site 🙂

  9. Paul

    To: Jesse ben Yosef. The law was brought forth from the Lord to expose sin, for the understanding of the sin that was in the world.

    10when you obey the Lord, your God, to observe His commandments and His statutes written in this Torah scroll, [and] when you return to the Lord, your God, with all your heart and with all your soul. יכִּי תִשְׁמַע בְּקוֹל יְהֹוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ לִשְׁמֹר מִצְו‍ֹתָיו וְחֻקֹּתָיו הַכְּתוּבָה בְּסֵפֶר הַתּוֹרָה הַזֶּה כִּי תָשׁוּב אֶל יְהֹוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ בְּכָל לְבָבְךָ וּבְכָל נַפְשֶׁךָ:
    11For this commandment which I command you this day, is not concealed from you, nor is it far away. יאכִּי הַמִּצְוָה הַזֹּאת אֲשֶׁר אָנֹכִי מְצַוְּךָ הַיּוֹם לֹא נִפְלֵאת הִוא מִמְּךָ וְלֹא רְחֹקָה הִוא:

    *is not concealed from you: לֹא-נִפְלֵאת. It is not concealed from you, just as it is said: כִּי יִפָּלֵא (Deut. 17:8), [which the Targum renders as:] אֲרִי יִתְכְּסֵי [lit.,“(If the matter) is concealed”]; similarly, the verse, וַתֵּרֶד פְּלָאִים (Lam. 1:9), [which means,] “she went down into concealment,” [i.e.,] she was covered and considered [as if] hidden.

    12It is not in heaven, that you should say, “Who will go up to heaven for us and fetch it for us, to tell [it] to us, so that we can fulfill it?” יבלֹא בַשָּׁמַיִם הִוא לֵאמֹר מִי יַעֲלֶה לָּנוּ הַשָּׁמַיְמָה וְיִקָּחֶהָ לָּנוּ וְיַשְׁמִעֵנוּ אֹתָהּ וְנַעֲשֶׂנָּה:

    *It is not in heaven: for if it were in heaven, you would have to climb up after it [in order] to learn it. – [Eruvin 55a]

    13Nor is it beyond the sea, that you should say, “Who will cross to the other side of the sea for us and fetch it for us, to tell [it] to us, so that we can fulfill it?” יגוְלֹא מֵעֵבֶר לַיָּם הִוא לֵאמֹר מִי יַעֲבָר לָנוּ אֶל עֵבֶר הַיָּם וְיִקָּחֶהָ לָּנוּ וְיַשְׁמִעֵנוּ אֹתָהּ וְנַעֲשֶׂנָּה:
    14Rather,[this] thing is very close to you; it is in your mouth and in your heart, so that you can fulfill it.

    *Rather, [this] thing is very close to you: The Torah was given to you in writing and [accompanied by an] oral [explanation].

    • Jesse ben Yosef

      I appreciate your perspective, Paul- though I personally do not believe the Oral traditions accompanying the Torah are binding upon non-Jews.

      When the kingdom of Israel was divided into two kingdoms, one half (Judah) became Jewish, and adopted a specific way of walking out Torah observance. The other kingdom has never had a Jewish identity, and many aspects of Judaism are totally foreign to them- even those who have since returned to the Torah.

      • Paul

        My thought is that there was a misunderstanding of the verse above. Jesus did not come to dumb down the Torah. If you break one commandment your guilty of breaking All.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Current day month ye@r *