Dismissive name calling will never lead to the truth.
Anyone with an open mind can see there is a huge difference in the old testament god and the father Jesus spoke of.

It is not "dismissive name calling" to tell the truth. Christ himself did not mince words and insulted plenty, but you do not know Him. You called His Father "Satan", you cannot even recognize Christ when He says He was the one Moses wrote about.

Your mind is so "open" you have let demons influence it clearly as you think you can interpret Holy Tradition privately and come to profane views, as I said you are suffering from extreme prelest.

Repent, heretic.

"they're different" is fine, "OT god was satan" is absurd. has been correct here entirely in his posts.

"your religion i dont believe in didnt follow the rules i made up for making it's own cannon that i dont believe in".

ok guy

Weird I thought the "cannon" books were put together by jesus himself according to his "rules"?

Yet there is a different amounts of books depending which cannon you want to subscribe to. Was jesus dyslexic or is it because you dont have bible prime?

while there are different versions of the bible, all versions outside of Ethiopian orthodoxy that i'm aware of contain books that have no contradictions between them. Enoch directly contradicts other books of the bible, which is why Enoch and other books were not ever adapted into the bible. There is a long history of people suggesting that other works be entered into biblical cannon, but Enoch never passes the smell test. Both because of it's likely false origin story and its contradiction to the work of the disciples.

but your first sentence is incorrect, the bible as we know it was assembled in the late 4th century, not during Jesus time, if that's what you're implying.

The Bible features roughly 80 miracles in the Old Testament and around 40 in the New Testament, categorized into major themes of provision, healing, and authority. Yet Enoch didnt pass the smell test.


Crazy....

im not sure i understand your point. the old testament is a collection of the stories of what? a hundred prophets and their miracles? the new testament is the story of a single man and his miracles. generally speaking anyways.


but as majorblood already said, Enoch contains contradiction to the accepted cannon, and the claimed author and the date of writing don't line up.

if this were a topic of star wars and i said george lucas wrote a book that says luke skywalker can fly now and shoot laser beams from his eyes, and i said it was written in 1979, but also my only proof is a microsoft word document people wouldn't accept that as cannon either.

I question the decision makers as to which version of the Bible included miracles and included Enoch. These examples are why I questionChristians.

im still confused. you think that because the old testament contains more miracles than the new testament that this means the decision not to include the book of enoch is suspect? i just dont see the connection tbh. nor why the number of miracles in the two books matters specifically.