I think that's excessive. The poor souls are already forced to read this, and if you tag them, they'll have to read it twice. It'll turn into some kind of benefit performance for sad_autista. Unacceptable.

PARD mods only really respond to flamming issues or topics that get WAY too much spam in them. sometimes a big event happens and they leave up like 5 topics all on it. we had a dogmeat discussion open for years lol.

Have you considered not participating if you don't think it's a good PARD topic? I feel like that's your best option.

In Korean subforum?

i did consider that, but while i find the OP's motivations to be impure, and the question of why it's not in the bible to be settled, i do think the book of enoch generally is an interesting topic. fallen angels sleeping with and having children with humans? its fun fiction at the very least. and i find it to be more misguided than blasphemous, demons are fallen angels afterall.

That's an invalid excuse. Not including it in cannon is not up to the personal feelings of men. To do so would be to blot out the word of "god". Clearly a violation of scripture.
Deuteronomy 4:2
Do not add to what I command you and do not subtract from it, but keep the commands of the LORD your God that I give you.

There are many more books not included in cannon.

Also Christianity/Islam is Judaism that accepts (certain) sequals. The likely reason they are not included is because of contradictions or embarrassing claims the christian apologists were not prepared to reconcile.
Religion is a scam.

The council of Laodicea was a smaller synod and did not "remove" the book of Enoch, it wasn't even mentioned.
It never was apart of scripture, it was not in the septuagint nor was it used in liturgy. It wasn't accepted by the wider Church because its authorship was unverified, it was written much later than the real Enoch, and its esoteric theology did not align with the rest of scripture.

This post was edited by majorblood on Jul 14 2026 02:37pm

I think there is like 1/3 of the bible authors have no verification. So that excuse doesn't fly.
Also much of the Bible was written decades if not centuries after the so called "events" so if you going to exclude book of Enoch you must also exclude all the other books on same grounds.

For someone who preaches consistently you are anything but.

This post was edited by addone on Jul 14 2026 07:10pm

when I say unverified I mean the book of enoch makes a claim of the author, and that claim itself is unverified. the book itself literally contains the unverified information that it was written by enoch, not that it's an anonymous writer like Matthew that we know through Holy Tradition was written by Matthew (when I say Holy Tradition here, I mean it was orally known in the Church as the people at the time literally knew Matthew and his disciples).

the book of enoch was written thousands of years after the life of Enoch and was literally never viewed as scripture by the Church, it's viewed as a forgery.

the reason enoch was never included wasn't primarily "it was written later" I gave the reasons, primarily it was not at any point scripture. it wasn't "removed", it was never in liturgy at all. there was never a single moment in the history of the Church that the book of enoch was scripture.

It doesn't matter, nothing in the old testament does, it's not for Christians.
Only the new testament is.
Ever wonder why the God of the old testament is so different from the father Jesus spoke of?