Posted on 02/21/2007 8:27:10 AM PST by DouglasKC
It can. But it can also meant to transfer.
Note that of the other biblical uses of this word, none suggests movement:
You left out an important one:
Act 7:15 So Jacob went down into Egypt, and died, he, and our fathers,
Act 7:16 And were carried over (metatithemi) into Shechem, and laid in the sepulcher that Abraham bought for a sum of money of the sons of Hamor the father of Shechem.
This is the same word translated "translated" in Hebrews 11:5. Interestingly, it conveys probably exactly what happened. God carried over, took, Enochs body somewhere and buried it. He was not found.
I'd be the first to agree that anything about exactly what happened to him is speculation. Scripture says God took him, transposed him, translated him, whatever. But doesn't say where. I would agree though that he's not in "heaven", or doesn't have his final reward. I'm making the assumption that he's awaiting the return of Christ and will be resurrected at Christ's coming.
"God took him up" is a translation based upon a preconceived bias that God took him to heaven. There is nothing in the greek to indicate that he went to heaven.
Why do you suppose they translate it "would not see death" instead of "did not see death" in the NASB?
That omission was accidental; I used BlueLetterBible.com, and it did list "carry over" as a translation, but found no hits when I clicked it to find usages in the bible. (carry* over =/= carried over)
I would argue, however, that burying someone in a sepulchre which would become a national monument fits the connotation of "metatithini" of "establishing a place," whereas it would be odd use of the word if the body were left somewhere no-one would ever find it. Given that the story of the Book of Enoch was accepted at least as common myth (if not scripture), it seems hard to suggest that Paul didn't mean what people would obviously *think* he meant. And if the Book of Enoch *is* mere myth, then it probably arose from the supposition of what Genesis meant when he said that God "took" Enoch, and "Enoch was no more."
In fact, I would say that "Enoch was no more" would mean Enoch wasn't merely after he died. (I suppose that in isolation, I might agree that one could suppose that Enoch had been mortally wounded and then God took him, but that sounds a little silly.)
"...and gone to the castle of AAAAARGHHH."
"What do you mean 'the castle of AAAAARGHHH?"
"That what it says, right here. Maybe he was killed while he was writing it?"
"Well, then he would just say, 'AAAAAARGHEEE'; why would be write it?"
"Maybe 'e was giving dictation?"
Interesting topic. Are we all created at our conception? The position taken in your article would seem to require it.
A day of the Lord is like a thousand years to man, right? On the seventh day, while God rested, were none born? On the sixth day, men & women were created. Sure all that were created on that day were born that day?
Biblically speaking, I would say yes. Adam didn't exist before God formed him. It's not a stretch to think that we don't exist until God creates us. It seems that this is what Paul is driving at:
1Co 15:44 It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body.
1Co 15:45 And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.
1Co 15:46 Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual.
1Co 15:47 The first man is of the earth, earthy: the second man is the Lord from heaven.
1Co 15:48 As is the earthy, such are they also that are earthy: and as is the heavenly, such are they also that are heavenly.
1Co 15:49 And as we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly.
A day of the Lord is like a thousand years to man, right? On the seventh day, while God rested, were none born? On the sixth day, men & women were created. Sure all that were created on that day were born that day?
Or the 6th day was just a day long.
Doug, I'm not the one with the preconcieved bias here. The dude didn't die. Where else would he have gone?
Why do you suppose they translate it "would not see death" instead of "did not see death" in the NASB?
How's about the YLT?
Heb 11:5 By faith Enoch was translated--not to see death, and was not found, because God did translate him; for before his translation he had been testified to--that he had pleased God well,
Odd, but you seem to have skipped this verse when you were trying to straighten me out:
1Co 15:51 Behold, I tell you a mystery; we will not all sleep, but we will all be changed,
Let the scriptures say what they say here, and everywhere for that matter.
Ezekiel 37 is the first resurrection, Doug.
Good question. Neither one has posted since signing up.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/user-posts?name=enoch
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/user-posts?name=elijah
I would of course disagree:
Eze 37:6 And I will lay sinews upon you, and will bring up flesh upon you, and cover you with skin, and put breath in you, and ye shall live; and ye shall know that I am the LORD.
Eze 37:7 So I prophesied as I was commanded: and as I prophesied, there was a noise, and behold a shaking, and the bones came together, bone to his bone.
Eze 37:8 And when I beheld, lo, the sinews and the flesh came up upon them, and the skin covered them above: but there was no breath in them.
Flesh, sinew and bone are all corruptible. All able to experience a second death.
Glorified, spiritual bodies are eternal, incorruptible, unable to experience death. That's the stuff of the first resurrection.
Rev 20:6 Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years.
1Co 15:50 Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption.
Recall also that those who take part in the first resurrection will be priests of God. The folks who are resurrected in Ezekiel 37 are the "whole house of Israel", are you telling me that the "whole house of Israel" and "my people" are doomed to the resurrection of judgement? That's absolutely ridiculous.
Now, you keep posting that bit about flesh and bone inheritting the kingdom. If you read the whole chapter, it appears that Paul is talking to some really smart pagans trying to tell them that the things of this world are perishable, and that they ought to keep their minds set on the things above. A literal interpretation of those passages leads directly to Gnosticism, do not pass go.
He did die. Scripture expressly says that he died.
Heb 11:13 These all died in faith, not having received the promises, but having seen them afar off, and were persuaded of them, and embraced them, and confessed that they were strangers and pilgrims on the earth.
And if he didn't die, where indeed could he have gone? Not to heaven. He didn't have his sins forgiven because Christ had not yet been sacrificed. And scripture doesn't say he went to heaven. Anywhere. Scripture says that he was taken by God. "The Lord took him" is still today a euphemism for death.
I suspect that this is one of the reasons that Catholicism came up with the concept of purgatory.
There are a couple of explanations that make sense. As pointed out, this could be the second death, yet to happen.
Another theory is that God took Enoch away so that he wouldn't see death from people who were trying to kill him because of his preaching:
The word "translated" in the Greek means "moved to another place." The same Greek word for "translated" here is used in Acts 7:16 as "carried over", referring to transferring Jacob's dead body to Sychem. Because Enoch's preaching was gaining opposition and he was likely to be killed in that age of violence, Genesis 6:11, God took him, and he was not to be found, Genesis 5:24. The Almighty took Enoch bodily to another place, exactly as described in Acts 7:16.
There are any number of explanations that can be postulated without resorting to a notion that just ONE or TWO people in the whole bible went to heaven at the exclusion of everyone else.
1Co 15:51 Behold, I tell you a mystery; we will not all sleep, but we will all be changed,
It's just another way of restating that there would be some Christians alive when Christ returns.
1Th 4:15 For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep.
1Th 4:16 For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:
1Th 4:17 Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.
The "resurrection of judgment" isn't the "resurrection of condemnation". Compare "judgment" to a trial. The "judgment" process doesn't just consist of a guilty or not guilty. The process is the whole trial. Evidence is presented, evidence is collected.
Rom 11:25 For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fullness of the Gentiles be come in.
Rom 11:26 And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Zion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob:
Now, you keep posting that bit about flesh and bone inheritting the kingdom. If you read the whole chapter, it appears that Paul is talking to some really smart pagans trying to tell them that the things of this world are perishable, and that they ought to keep their minds set on the things above. A literal interpretation of those passages leads directly to Gnosticism, do not pass go.
I don't think a literal interpretation leads to gnosticism. Paul was taking great pains to make it clear exactly how the first resurrection is to be manifested.
1Co 15:35 But some man will say, How are the dead raised up? and with what body do they come?
He's answering a specific question, and he's being literal:
1Co 15:36 Thou fool, that which thou sowest is not quickened, except it die:
1Co 15:37 And that which thou sowest, thou sowest not that body that shall be, but bare grain, it may chance of wheat, or of some other grain:
1Co 15:38 But God giveth it a body as it hath pleased him, and to every seed his own body.
1Co 15:39 All flesh is not the same flesh: but there is one kind of flesh of men, another flesh of beasts, another of fishes, and another of birds.
1Co 15:40 There are also celestial bodies, and bodies terrestrial: but the glory of the celestial is one, and the glory of the terrestrial is another.
1Co 15:41 There is one glory of the sun, and another glory of the moon, and another glory of the stars: for one star differeth from another star in glory.
1Co 15:42 So also is the resurrection of the dead. It is sown in corruption; it is raised in incorruption:
1Co 15:43 It is sown in dishonor; it is raised in glory: it is sown in weakness; it is raised in power:
1Co 15:44 It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body.
1Co 15:45 And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.
1Co 15:46 Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual.
1Co 15:47 The first man is of the earth, earthy: the second man is the Lord from heaven.
1Co 15:48 As is the earthy, such are they also that are earthy: and as is the heavenly, such are they also that are heavenly.
1Co 15:49 And as we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly.
1Co 15:50 Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption.
1Co 15:51 Behold, I show you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed,
1Co 15:52 In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed.
1Co 15:53 For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality.
1Co 15:54 So when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory.
Hebrews 11:5 is pretty darn clear, man.
And if he didn't die, where indeed could he have gone? Not to heaven. He didn't have his sins forgiven because Christ had not yet been sacrificed. And scripture doesn't say he went to heaven. Anywhere. Scripture says that he was taken by God. "The Lord took him" is still today a euphemism for death.
Are you saying that the Creator of the Universe is bound by time - time that He created? Are you saying that Jesus didn't know what the future held, even though He invented the future? BTW, don't the folks who use that particular phrase believe in immortal souls?
There are any number of explanations that can be postulated without resorting to a notion that just ONE or TWO people in the whole bible went to heaven at the exclusion of everyone else.
One is that they are examples for how we should live in order to attain the same reward.
1Th 4:17 Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.
And again, you have made my point. The folks who perserve in the end times won't see death, either. Ever. They ain't gonna die. Enoch and Elijah are examples of things that will happen large scale.
The resurrection of judgment and the resurrection of damnation are exactly the same resurrection.
NASB
Joh 5:28 "Do not marvel at this; for an hour is coming, in which all who are in the tombs will hear His voice,
Joh 5:29 and will come forth; those who did the good deeds to a resurrection of life, those who committed the evil deeds to a resurrection of judgment.
KJV
Joh 5:28 Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice,
Joh 5:29 And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.
His statement is that they "These all died in faith, not having received the promises, but having seen them afar off, and were persuaded of them, and embraced them, and confessed that they were strangers and pilgrims on the earth."
The fact that he mentioned that they all died is part of a larger thought.
Are you saying that the Creator of the Universe is bound by time - time that He created? Are you saying that Jesus didn't know what the future held, even though He invented the future? BTW, don't the folks who use that particular phrase believe in immortal souls?
If we don't "really" need the death and resurrection of Christ as an atonement then his incarnation must have been nothing more than a magic trick, a demonstration, a show. I don't believe that.
One is that they are examples for how we should live in order to attain the same reward.
There's not much examples from Enoch on how to live contained in scripture.
And again, you have made my point. The folks who perserve in the end times won't see death, either. Ever. They ain't gonna die. Enoch and Elijah are examples of things that will happen large scale.
We know that the bible speaks over and over about death being a sleep. That the dead know nothing. That there is nothing until the resurrection. Enoch and Elijah are one of the few scriptures that are misinterpreted in an attempt to overthrow this clear biblical teaching. I suspect that this was done in order to prove the doctrine of the immortal soul and also to justify the doctrine that Mary was assumed bodily into heaven.
Eternity.
To paraphrase Doc Brown: "The appropriate question is, When the heck are they?"
Hi Johnny, I agree. I think we're saying the same thing in a different way.
That would get back to the question: Would God have made an eternal, unforgiven sinner? Because that's what he would have been if he was made eternal before the sacrifice of Christ.
I know that the argument can be (and has been) advanced that eternity touches all aspects of time so someone can be "saved" before the actual physical sacrifice of Christ, but if that's so, then why was God so pissed at Adam and Eve? After all, he could have just kept them in the garden because they were "saved" anyways.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.