chore(sync): frameworks

frameworks/authority_canon_and_use/INDEX.md

@@ -0,0 +1,27 @@
+# Authority, Canon, and Use
+
+## Purpose
+
+This framework studies the distinction between:
+- canon
+- inspiration
+- authority
+- usefulness
+- dependence
+- quotation
+- conceptual inheritance
+
+It exists to prevent the research portfolio from collapsing all source relationships into a single category.
+
+## Why it matters
+
+A text does not need to be canonical to be:
+- important
+- authoritative in some limited sense
+- conceptually formative
+- interpretively necessary
+- used by biblical writers
+
+## Current supporting sources
+
+- Heiser, "The Book of Enoch in the Early Church"

frameworks/authority_canon_and_use/NOTES.md

@@ -0,0 +1,17 @@
+# Notes
+
+## Key ideas to preserve
+
+- Early Christians knew 1 Enoch well.
+- Some treated it as Scripture; many did not.
+- The debate was about canonical status, not whether the book mattered.
+- Heiser's position is that canonicity is not required for interpretive usefulness.
+- Peter and Jude's use of Enoch does not automatically settle canon, but it does settle importance.
+
+## Use in portfolio
+
+This framework should support:
+- Enoch authority articles
+- canon discussions
+- NT dependence discussions
+- anti-flattening methodology

frameworks/authority_canon_and_use/SOURCES.md

@@ -0,0 +1,15 @@
+# Sources
+
+## Core sources
+
+- Michael Heiser, "The Book of Enoch in the Early Church"
+- James C. VanderKam on Enoch in early Christianity
+- Nickelsburg on knowledge of Enoch and the Watchers story
+- Primary texts: Jude, 2 Peter, Barnabas, Tertullian, Origen, Irenaeus
+
+## Core questions
+
+- Must quotation imply canonicity?
+- Can a non-canonical text still be interpretively indispensable?
+- How did early Christians distinguish usefulness from Scripture?
+- How should Peter and Jude's use of Enoch be classified?