What about eclipses? Do you find eclipses at least a little bit inconvenient, given that you still claim that the moon emits light? You seem to prefer to be silent about the obvious.

No inconvenience. I don't think I've been silent. I've studied eclipses for years. The moon emits light. Scripture says the moon is a light. Enoch says the moon is a light. He explains that the moon gets 1/7 of its light from the sun. Any clues should be investigated before taking on modern pagan science.  

Are you serious? Compare the moon in a normal night with a solar eclipse!


About the luminaries, it doesn't say how they work.


I'm Catholic. No Book of Enoch accepted. (Isn't that even Jєωιѕн crap?)

Explain your concern with eclipses. About the luminaries, we have what we have though modern science contradicts it. Should we ignore the differences we're encountering and only go with the narrative? How do you think the luminaries work? Enoch is referenced in scripture several times which offers the book a notch of credibility above modern pagan science and at least consideration.

Really? I need to explain this to you?

Well, look at the everydaynight moon. It looks relatively bright in the night, like a luminary. But then, when it blocks the sunlight during an eclipse, it looks black. Not luminary at all, rather blocking light and emitting nothing.


I don't care much about modern science. Why mention them at all? Long before modern science, people were able to recognize that the moon reflects the light of the sun.


I don't know how the sun works. But it's obvious that the moon reflects light (primarily) from the sun, as explained before.


You seem to suggest that the "Book of Enoch" (aren't there several such?) was written by Enoch. I don't think so.

I'm sticking to the book of Enoch for now. It is referenced in scripture, so what is the problem?

Scripture does not reference any "book of Enoch". Why fool yourself?

You are woefully mistaken.  There are multiple references to the Book of Enoch in Scripture, as this book was considered part of the Old Testament by the Jєωs.


Jude 1:14-15, quoting Enoch 1:9 {2:1} [1]

"And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints,
"To execute judgment upon all, and to convince all that are ungodly among them of all their ungodly deeds which they have ungodly committed, and of all their hard speeches, which ungodly sinners have spoken against him."

Do you mean the book of Enoch was considered part of the Hebrew Bible? When? Why not more? By whom?

The quote of the epistle of Jude doesn't prove your claim that Scripture references the book of Enoch. Both may e.g. quote another source. 

Yes the book of Enoch was considered inspired by God, by the Jєωs.  Christ quoted it precisely due to this fact.  Plenty of historical evidence for this. 


It wasn’t included in the catholic bible, 400 yrs later, because after the Romans destroyed Jerusalem in 70 AD, some Old Testament books were lost.  when they were “found” a few hundred years later by Jєωιѕн leaders, the Church Fathers were suspicious that the books had been edited.  So they couldn’t be trusted to be considered canon. 

However in the 1800/1900s some Protestants rediscovered the book of Enoch and translated it.  I’ve read it, it’s not very long and I see no anti-Catholicism in it at all.  Could it still be missing things?  Yes.  Is it still inspired?  No we can’t say that anymore.  But...it’s a unique book because it talks PRECISELY about our times and the enemies we face.  

12. Uriel likewise showed me another regulation, when light is poured into the moon, how it is poured into it from the sun.

How about that, Tradman? Light from the sun is poured into the moon, says the book of Enoch!

15. It becomes precisely completed on the day that the sun descends into the west, while the moon
ascends at night from the east.
16. The moon then shines all the night, until the sun rises before it; when the moon disappears in
turn before the sun.

The sun descends and the moon ascends. Looks bad for a FE-model, where sun and moon circle above a disc.

Quod gratis asseritur, gratis negatur.

  It's not my assertion; it's historical fact.