deb young ( sent the following message

Question:I just listened to you on Hagman and Hagman 1/19/15 and I have a question about the books that aren’t included in the Bible.  I keep hearing that these books should be read, that they are historical and that Enoch and some others are really canonical.  I am a former Catholic, left that when I started to research the truth and all the inconsistencies of their teaching.  One of the things I had learned was that their extra books aren’t canonical which would make them not true teaching.  So I am trying to reconcile what I am hearing about Enoch and other books with Macobee not being true?  I hope my question makes sense?  As you know Macabee teaches about purgatory supposedly, so I guess I wonder if Enoch is correct , as well as others, if maybe Macabee is correct too.
thanks for your time!

Greetings Deb,


Thanks for listening! Your question about the “Apocrypha” (books included in the Roman Catholic Bible) depends on what one considers to be their canon (Latin for ” rule or measurement”). These books were considered canonical up until the Protestant Reformation when the Reformers presumed to create their own canon. Concerning the Book of Enoch, it is included to this day in the canon of the Ethiopian Orthodox Church,a Church much older than both the Roman Catholic and Protestant traditions. Not to mention, the various quotes and teachings found in our New Testament which can clearly be traced directly back to this source (e.g. Jude, 2 Peter, Gen. 6:4, John 1 and Paul’s teaching on the pre-incarnate Christ). So the question begs, who ultimately holds the authority to set the “rule, measurement, canon”, as this marker has been moved several times throughout history?

As I stated on the show, I am of the very strong opinion that much of our present doctrine and understanding of Church history is greatly distorted for lack of these sources being consulted in our contemporary biblical teaching. Just to give you an idea of how arbitrary this process was initially, the first proposition that later became accepted for our 27 books included in the New Testament first appeared in a letter from Bishop Athanasius, circa: 387 A.D. The issue is truly quite relative, despite the dogmatism which has been espoused by the organized Church only within the last 500 years! Ignorance has won the day, as demonstrated in the ridiculous exaltation of the KJV, an English version commissioned by a bloody tyrant, apostate King, as late as the 17th century.

I encourage you to allow the Holy Spirit to lead you in your study and bear witness concerning “inspiration”. For, despite the ignorant dogmatism of well meaning but historical knowledge deprived Christians, the question of canonicity remains an open question. Blessings

Dr. Danny