> From: Alberto Monteiro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > The Fool wrote: > > > >Non inspired books. Catholic versions of the bible contain Apocryphal > >books (that are not considered to be inspired, but are of note). There > >are other books not in either cannon that are apocryphal, like the > >'Gosphel of Thomas' and the 'Book of Enoch' (a glaring forgery written > >well after christ). > > > But it can't be *that* well after, because The Book of Enoch is mentioned in > one of the letters. Or is the forgery the invention of a book just because it > was quoted and lost?
The thing I was reading about it suggested it was written at least fifty years (but more like 200) after Christ. Doubt I could find it again. It _Is_ a forgery. BTW it contains the Julian calendar (Listed oddly enough, backwards). I am unsure about the jude reference. There may have been a different source, than that which is suggested. The OT contain references to several books that seem to have been lost.
