Tefe wants to use words that the average reader neither knows nor cares to know, as if somehow implying by my use of simple, plain speaking that I am not as believable as he is. Several of his arguments do not address the points I made, but are smokescreens. I will respond to these.

"It has recently been opined that the mere citing and posting of sections of certain books (Apocryphal, pseudepigrapha, Targumic, Talmudic etc.) that were not retained in the Protestant canon of 66 books is viewed/believed to constitute blasphemy, or bordering on such."

To "supplement" the teachings of the Bible by reading and following as scriptural anything that is questionable is bordering on blasphemy, in my opinion, and certainly is confusing.

"Following as scriptural" does not equate to "citing and posting ", but supplementing the teachings of the Bible with questionable teachings certainly is confusing. The average person has a difficult time simply reading and understanding the words of the Bible without adding a myriad of opinions and questionable teachings from other sources.

Regarding "The Book of Enoch", show me in scripture where the writings of Enoch are mentioned, or show me that the book commonly accepted as "The Book of Enoch" is the actual written word from Enoch, the man who walked with God and then was no more. I noticed that you omitted, from your lists of verses that "favorably mention Enoch", Gen. 4:17 - 18, which describes the son of CAIN named Enoch, who is not the same Enoch as the descendant of SETH. More confusion, yet who is to prove that this Enoch from the line of Cain did not write the book of Enoch you wish to support? Or perhaps the CITY named Enoch, mentioned in Gen 4: 17, was the home of the author of the same book?

Some scholars question this book as having been written by the biblical Enoch who walked with God. To quote from one website, and there are many, http://www.new-life.net/faq013.htm :

"The Book of Enoch is a book written between the Old and New Testaments. Probable date of writing was between 150-80 B.C. Copies of the Book of Enoch have been found among the Dead Sea scrolls. If this date is accurate, obviously the Book of Enoch was not written by the real Enoch who lived before the flood."

The name "Azzazel", which you mentioned, is nowhere to be found in the Bible, but the term "scapegoat ", is. Many people are familiar with the term "scapegoat ", but may not be aware that it originates in the Bible, in the book of Leviticus 16:8, 10, and 26. The scapegoat was to bear the sins of the people and carry them into the wilderness, in the same way that Jesus later became the scapegoat for our sins.

You seem to place a lot of importance upon the books you mentioned in your point #3, but they are also non-canonical, so the logic of quoting them is circular. To say that they were held in high esteem by "early ecclesiastical fathers, historians, clerics, redactors, translators and editors" does not verify their authenticy as being divinely inspired the Living God. By the same logic, the fact that evolution is taught as scientific fact in most public schools does not make it true. You also said:

I will not argue that they may provide these details, but that does not make them any more divinely inspired than the Encyclopedia Britannica.

"The Didache has many erronious teachings that confirm some of the false teachings of the Roman Catholic Church, such as infant baptism, the Eucharist, and the unpardonable sin, which is NOT "questioning a prophet", but IS blasphemy against the Holy Spirit.

I never said the Didache was "penned by Roman Catholics", nor did I say that made it blasphemous. I did not say who wrote the Didache, though the authorship is in question, nor that it was blasphemous. I did say that you were wrong in claiming that the unpardonable sin is "Questioning a prophet". The Bible tells us that blasphemy against the Holy Spirit is the unpardonable, or unforgivable, sin.

Matt. 12:31-32 "Wherefore I say unto you, All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men: but the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven unto men. And whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the world to come."

Show me a scripture which tells us that if we question a prophet, that is an unpardonable sin. My Bible tells me that many false prophets will prophesy, and that in order to not be deceived by them we need to test them. There are too many scriptures that speak of this to list, but I will give you these, in which the Lord Jesus himself tells us not to believe false prophets:

Matt. 24: 23-24 "Then if any man shall say unto you, Lo, here is Christ, or there; believe it not. For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect. "

There are several pages worth of references to prophets in Strong's Concordance, and many of them have to do with false prophets and how to test them. I would suggest you study these biblical admonitions in order that you be not deceived by them. We are also told that by their fruits we will know them, in the same passage where Jesus speaks of false prophets.

Matt 7:15-20 "Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit. A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit. Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them. "

To argue about the decisions over what was accepted as divinely inspired, or canonical scripture would take many pages here. However, as I said before,

"To question the authenticity of the Bible as it has been delivered unto us, to pretend that some books should have been included in the canon, but were left out by men, is to say that the Creator of the universe made a mistake."

We know that the Lord is a God of order, and the perfect order of the 66 books of the Bible, commonly accepted by true believers, confirms this. An interesting website that further explores the perfect order and symmetry of the Bible in its orderly arrangement of 66 books, and no other number, and has been mentioned here at Five Doves is:

We are told in 2 Tim. 3 16-17 "All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works."

This verse applies to scripture, not extra-biblical sources, which only leads to confusion. Again, I will say, we know where the confusion comes from.

"It may come as a surprise that almost all publishers are getting ready to put the Apocryphal books back into their editions and very soon!!"

Yes, this is a surprise to me, but not necessarily true. There are many versions of the Bible, and many publishers. Many publishers have questionable motivations for publishing the version they do, and it would not be surprising that they would decide to add to the words of this Book.

Rev.22: 18-19 "For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book."

This is a very serious warning that these publishers should heed. The modern perversions that many accept as valid are not always reliable interpretations, and though you may criticize the Authorized King James version, I find it the best translation. A website which gives ample evidence for the reliability of the AKJV is:

I believe if we are to trust in the Almighty God of the Universe, then we have to accept that He would deliver the Book to us as He wished us to receive it, or call Him a liar. We are reminded in 1 Peter 1:19-21:

"We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts: Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost."

We are also given this promise in Psalm 6: 6-7: "The words of the Lord are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.Thou shalt keep them, O Lord, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever."

Rev. 3:18 "I counsel thee to buy of me gold tried in the fire, that thou mayest be rich; and white raiment, that thou mayest be clothed, and that the shame of thy nakedness do not appear; and anoint thine eyes with eyesalve, that thou mayest see."