No Human has Gone to Heaven but Jesus!

[B-A-C]

You are forgetting Paul's own words speaking about what people are called to be via the Holy Spirit. Apostles

I actually agree with this also. I believe there were more than 12 apostles (Paul certainly)
But the only person other than Judas who might be considered one of the "twelve" was Matthias.
( Acts 1:15-26 )

Not Lazarus.

 

[backNforth]

delete

 

[Rhema]

No, but it doesn't say anyone else was there either.

I believe this is known as an argument from silence.

In essence, then, one can't prove anything one way or the other in this regard. (But the narrative doesn't make sense with only twelve present.)

I can prove John was there.

And Nobody said John wasn't there. This claim is spurious. It only adds noise to the discussion, to give you some false sense of victory.

So then.. who is adding words here?

(Well you did.) But I'm not adding in words. I'm expanding the narrative. The difference is that my version can be filmed, while yours can't. You can't do blocking with the narrative you present, because the physical actions and movements of the Twelve don't agree as you understand the Synoptics.

Hmmm.... well I agree, I sometimes make typos and mistakes, but in this case, I didn't.
I meant sponsorship.

But that's also not what you typed.

It seems no one but you on this entire forum believes in the Johnnine scholarship.

I'm not trying to score points on this, but I really need to stress that I can only answer the words you type.

also related.

I appreciated the link. But I hold that the Johannine Community is fiction.

You may not want to read links that someone else has posted, but in this case they agree with you more than me.

Thank you. (And I mean that most sincerely.) To be honest, I had no idea until this conversation that anyone out there had arrived at the same conclusion. My view about Lazarus came from my own independent study. It's a bit weird to find out that others might agree with me. That rarely happens, so I feel somewhat warm and fuzzy inside.

I wish, though, that you would address the question of "Who Cooked the Meal?".

Please don't ignore that. I can envision quite a number of other disciples present in the LARGE upper room to celebrate the Passover Meal, with Jesus and the Twelve then entering. It was a big deal. As I read the Synoptics, the accounts want to ensure that y'all know the Twelve were there, but they don't rule out the possibility that other disciples may have wanted to be present. And I'm not suggesting a rowdy party, but a gathering with the solemnity for which the occasion would call.

You, though, have the Twelve cooking and preparing the meal, and setting the table, etc. THEN, you have them leave in order for all Twelve with Jesus to come back and make an entrance. If you saw a film or TV scene where that happened, you'd go, WHAT?? It doesn't make sense. People don't act that way.

CRAP... Now you have me wondering what "The Chosen" is going to do. Thanks, I wasn't going to watch it. HA !!!

I contend that Lazarus may have been a boy of about 12 or 13 of whom Jesus was very fond, maybe even just 8 years old. (The disciple whom Jesus loved.)

You can't tell me that you've never had a grandchild or young nephew to whom you took a shine, and would play with. (Or that you've never seen such behaviour.) Even my own very stern grandfather-pastor would let me sit on his knee (leaning on his bosom) at supper when I was little. Would the adults take me seriously? No. And when Lazarus grew up and finally wrote his Gospel, it was from his point of view.

The authors of Matthew Mark and Luke wouldn't have felt it necessary to give an account of Lazarus as a little kid sitting near Jesus, JUST LIKE THEY GAVE NO ACCOUNT of who cooked the Meal, or who did the dishes.

Instead, the Synoptics hit the important highlights of the event, and that's it. Nowadays, everybody thinks the 12 actually sat on one side of the table thanks to da Vinci, when they would actually lay (lie?) down on their left side when eating. (Maybe it was the right side, I ain't gonna check.)

Since I can remember, I have always visualized anything I was going to do before actually doing it. I had the movie up inside my head from beginning to end before I picked up the wrench to even start replacing the head gasket on my engine, or replacing the hot water heater. It's just how my brain is wired.

What I'm asking you to do, is think about how you would film this. How the action would play out.

And while it's of no matter to you, I now have about a week's worth of work ahead of me, because I'm pretty sure I can establish a foundation for translating the phrase as "the disciple whom Jesus adored."

Finally, why didn't the author of "John" ever call himself the "Apostle whom Jesus loved." ???

Now there was leaning on Jesus' bosom one of his disciples, whom Jesus loved.​

- John 13:23 KJV

Shouldn't it say "Apostle" instead?

Kind regards,
Rhema

 

[Rhema]

You are forgetting Paul's own words speaking about what people are called to be via the Holy Spirit. Apostles

I actually agree with this also. I believe there were more than 12 apostles (Paul certainly)

You don't need to believe it

The text directly says this.

Which, when the apostles Barnabas and Paul had heard, rending their clothes, they leaped out among the people, crying,​

- Acts 14:14 DRB

Just thought I'd point this out.
Rhema

(This verse really gets Baptists wigged out.)

 

[Rhema]

And while it's of no matter to you, I now have about a week's worth of work ahead of me, because I'm pretty sure I can establish a foundation for translating the phrase as "the disciple whom Jesus adored."

@B-A-C

Interesting. It took all of three minutes to find this entry in Liddell Scott.

LINK to the LSL for AGAPE

A. I. to be fond of​

​

I was actually not expecting that.

 

[Bill]

I believe this is known as an argument from silence.

In essence, then, one can't prove anything one way or the other in this regard. (But the narrative doesn't make sense with only twelve present.)


And Nobody said John wasn't there. This claim is spurious. It only adds noise to the discussion, to give you some false sense of victory.


(Well you did.) But I'm not adding in words. I'm expanding the narrative. The difference is that my version can be filmed, while yours can't. You can't do blocking with the narrative you present, because the physical actions and movements of the Twelve don't agree as you understand the Synoptics.


But that's also not what you typed.

I'm not trying to score points on this, but I really need to stress that I can only answer the words you type.


I appreciated the link. But I hold that the Johannine Community is fiction.


Thank you. (And I mean that most sincerely.) To be honest, I had no idea until this conversation that anyone out there had arrived at the same conclusion. My view about Lazarus came from my own independent study. It's a bit weird to find out that others might agree with me. That rarely happens, so I feel somewhat warm and fuzzy inside.

I wish, though, that you would address the question of "Who Cooked the Meal?".

Please don't ignore that. I can envision quite a number of other disciples present in the LARGE upper room to celebrate the Passover Meal, with Jesus and the Twelve then entering. It was a big deal. As I read the Synoptics, the accounts want to ensure that y'all know the Twelve were there, but they don't rule out the possibility that other disciples may have wanted to be present. And I'm not suggesting a rowdy party, but a gathering with the solemnity for which the occasion would call.

You, though, have the Twelve cooking and preparing the meal, and setting the table, etc. THEN, you have them leave in order for all Twelve with Jesus to come back and make an entrance. If you saw a film or TV scene where that happened, you'd go, WHAT?? It doesn't make sense. People don't act that way.

CRAP... Now you have me wondering what "The Chosen" is going to do. Thanks, I wasn't going to watch it. HA !!!

I contend that Lazarus may have been a boy of about 12 or 13 of whom Jesus was very fond, maybe even just 8 years old. (The disciple whom Jesus loved.)

You can't tell me that you've never had a grandchild or young nephew to whom you took a shine, and would play with. (Or that you've never seen such behaviour.) Even my own very stern grandfather-pastor would let me sit on his knee (leaning on his bosom) at supper when I was little. Would the adults take me seriously? No. And when Lazarus grew up and finally wrote his Gospel, it was from his point of view.

The authors of Matthew Mark and Luke wouldn't have felt it necessary to give an account of Lazarus as a little kid sitting near Jesus, JUST LIKE THEY GAVE NO ACCOUNT of who cooked the Meal, or who did the dishes.

Instead, the Synoptics hit the important highlights of the event, and that's it. Nowadays, everybody thinks the 12 actually sat on one side of the table thanks to da Vinci, when they would actually lay (lie?) down on their left side when eating. (Maybe it was the right side, I ain't gonna check.)

Since I can remember, I have always visualized anything I was going to do before actually doing it. I had the movie up inside my head from beginning to end before I picked up the wrench to even start replacing the head gasket on my engine, or replacing the hot water heater. It's just how my brain is wired.

What I'm asking you to do, is think about how you would film this. How the action would play out.

And while it's of no matter to you, I now have about a week's worth of work ahead of me, because I'm pretty sure I can establish a foundation for translating the phrase as "the disciple whom Jesus adored."

Finally, why didn't the author of "John" ever call himself the "Apostle whom Jesus loved." ???

Now there was leaning on Jesus' bosom one of his disciples, whom Jesus loved.​

- John 13:23 KJV

Shouldn't it say "Apostle" instead?

Kind regards,
Rhema

It is really good to see you explaining how you use your thinking cap. I feel this is something many do not bother with.

My example that i have used a number of times shows the once saved always saved philosophy to be false. It's just simply applying the scripture and taking time to read a variety of readings versus one piece or one sentence to explain.

In the sense of casting out demons as an example. We know that humans cannot do this by themselves this is shown to us in Acts as an individual tries to use his own authority to cast out the demon and the demon throttles him. And in the gospels Jesus says that Satan can't cast himself out. So the only conclusion is is that the person has to have God with them to cast the demons out.

So with this particular understanding, we know that Judas Iscariot had to have God with him to be able to cast the demons out. Daddy did not use his own authority to do this, and there's one little more detail about Judas Iscariot. After returning to Jesus and they were excited about all the things that they had been doing and casting out demons healing people and whatever else they were doing. Jesus told them not to Rejoice because of the fact that they were doing all those things, but to Rejoice because their names were written in heaven

Now this is Jesus himself saying it. And yeah later on when Judas allows the devil to come into him. Because you made the choice to betray Jesus. Jesus says it would be better that if he was never born. He would have been like the son of Jacob who threw away his entitlement over a bowl of stew.

So you have the philosophy of the one saved always saved crowd has gone out the window with all of this together.

Going back to you Rhema, I don't always agree with all that you say. But I do like the fact that you think about things and I do appreciate it

 

[Dave M]

Matthew 8:11
And I say unto you, That many shall come from the east and west, and shall sit down with Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, in the kingdom of heaven.

 

[B-A-C]

Matthew 8:11

Good catch. But even if we go to heaven "temporarily". It seems that won't be our final destination.

the final destination of believers is not "heaven" in the traditional sense, but rather dwelling with God in the New Jerusalem on the New Earth—because God Himself will dwell there.

​

“And I heard a loud voice from the throne, saying, ‘Behold, the tabernacle of God is among the people, and He will dwell among them, and they shall be His people, and God Himself will be among them.’”

This is a radical shift from the idea of people going up to heaven. Instead, heaven comes down—and God comes to dwell with humanity.

Rev 22:3 There will no longer be any curse; and the throne of God and of the Lamb will be in it, and His bond-servants will serve Him;

• God the Father and Jesus (the Lamb) are both described as being in the New Jerusalem (Revelation 21:22–23).
• The New Jerusalem is not just a city—it is the eternal dwelling place of God with His people.
• So, while believers may go to heaven temporarily after death, their eternal home is on the New Earth, in the New Jerusalem.

 

[Garee]

Good catch. But even if we go to heaven "temporarily". It seems that won't be our final destination.

the final destination of believers is not "heaven" in the traditional sense, but rather dwelling with God in the New Jerusalem on the New Earth—because God Himself will dwell there.

Amen

Three kinds of heavens. Satan would make it all one in the same. . .the temporal heaven what the eyes see . The god of this world, the lust of the flesh, lust of the eye the two building blocks of false pride.

As pilgrims and strangers, we do reign from a foreign land the third heaven, From there he sends us out two by two into the wilderness.

We go to heaven "temporarily". to receive the daily bread of his eternal will

 

[backNforth]

.

Phil 3:20 But our citizenship is in heaven, and we eagerly await a Savior from there, the Lord Jesus Christ,

What does citizenship mean? A - Illegal alien with no passport, B - resident with a passport who can come and go as they please?

Are bondmen of Christ citizens of any place in this world? No, we are not. Our citizenship does not reside in any Country or State because we are "...fellowcitizens with the saints, and of the household of God" (Ephesians 2:19). Therefore, we can't say, "I'm a fellow citizen with the saints and the household of God, but I'm also an American citizen." Well, that's the same thing as saying "I serve two masters," because citizenship has a very specific meaning; and that is "Who are you subject to?"

A true follower of Jesus Christ is a sojourner, a stranger in a land of which he is not a citizen. In the world but not of the world.

Getting back to the gist of the OP:

why do so many 'Christians' claim the dead fly off to heaven?

Can you explain to me where Enoch Elijah and Moses are please?

and

To consider would be those that Jesus, or anyone else has risen from death/sleep back to life. Would it be considered a resurrection of sorts, or even those on the Mount of Transfiguration as having died but being still being alive? If so, where do they now reside?

What saith Scripture?

Some people believe that Enoch did not die but was taken directly to heaven where God is. But, Enoch eventually died, as all humans die. How can we know? The apostle Paul mentioned the circumstances associated with Enoch in Hebrews 11:5, along with other men of faith, and then stated: "These all died in faith, not having received the promises" (Hebrews 11:13). Yes, Enoch died, and he did not receive the promise of heaven (verse 16) at the time the book of Hebrews was written.

Based on Hebrews 11:5, 13 and Jesus’ statement in John 3:13, "no man hath ascended up to heaven", how are we to understand the account of Enoch? Genesis 5:21-24 says that Enoch's days, alive on Earth, ended at 365 years old. The question is, did he die, was he taken to heaven alive, or was he transported to another location on Earth?

Let us examine the bold phrase in Genesis 5:24, where it says, "And Enoch walked with God: and he was not; for God took him" and compare the same Hebrew phrase in:

Psalms 37:36, "Yet he passed away, and, lo, he was not: yea, I sought him, but he could not be found."

Psalms 39:13, "O spare me, that I may recover strength, before I go hence, and be no more."

The Hebrew for the phrases in bold are the same Hebrew as Genesis 5:24. As in the Psalms, the phrase means the person "passed away" or would eventually die. Let’s look at the same phrase in the book of Genesis:

Genesis 42:13, "And they said, Thy servants are twelve brethren, the sons of one man in the land of Canaan; and, behold, the youngest is this day with our father, and one is not." This was spoken by his brothers of Joseph. What’d they mean by "is not"?

Genesis 44:20, "And we said unto my lord, We have a father, an old man, and a child of his old age, a little one; and his brother is dead, and he alone is left of his mother, and his father loveth him." Here, the brothers recount their previous discussion about Joseph with Pharaoh. When they first said, "and one is not," they meant Joseph "is dead."

Matthew 2:18, "In Rama was there a voice heard, lamentation, and weeping, and great mourning, Rachel weeping for her children, and would not be comforted, because they are not." Where were Rachel's children? Dead.

Hebrews 11:5, "By faith Enoch was translated that he should not see death; and was not found, because God had translated him:" Does the phrase that says Enoch "should not see death" mean Enoch never died? Hebrews 11:13, "These all died [including Enoch] in faith." But not only that, verse 13 goes on to say that they did not receive the promises. One of the promises was a heavenly country (verse 16). If Enoch were in heaven, wouldn't he have received that promise?

Psalma 89:48, "What man is he that liveth, and shall not see death? shall he deliver his soul from the hand of the grave? Selah." Why would this Psalmist ask such a question concerning physical death if he believed Enoch did not see a physical death? The fact is, the Psalmist believed Enoch was in the grave and therefore asked this question.

So what does the phrase "should not see death" mean? Notice it is not in the present tense, that he "did not see" death, but that he "should not see death." John 8:51, "Verily, verily, I say unto you, If a man keep my saying, he shall never see death" [see also John 11:26]. This phrase must mean "the second death," since all the Apostles kept Jesus’ sayings and yet died the first death.

Based on Hebrews 9:27, "And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment:" and Hebrews 11:13, "These all died in faith, not having received the promises," we must conclude that Enoch died the first death. To believe Enoch did not die is to deny the plain word of many other scriptures as well. For example, Romans 5:12; "...so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned" and Romans 5:14, "...death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned." Are we to believe that Enoch did not sin? Are we to believe that a man who was not yet cleansed of sin by the blood of Jesus could enter heaven and dwell in God's presence?

But what about his translation in Hebrews 11:5? Does that mean he didn’t die? That’s what most people carelessly assume without proof. The Bible does not say that Enoch went to heaven when he was translated. Instead, it says he "was not found." The word "translate" means "to put or place in another place, to transport, to transfer." Nowhere in the Scripture does ‘translate’ mean to make immortal!

The same Greek word is rendered "carried over" in Acts 7:16 where Jacob's body was ‘translated’ or ‘transported’ to Sychem, where he was buried! The Scriptures say Jacob was translated to the place of burial! God took Enoch and buried him somewhere so as not to be found, just as he did with the body of Moses in Deuteronomy 34:6. No man knows where Moses' or Enoch’s grave is. God hid them for reasons known only to Him.

Notice another proof that ‘translate’ does not mean to make immortal. Paul wrote that the Father "hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son" (Colossians 1:13). The apostle Paul says that he was already translated, even though he was still physically alive! Although he was once part of the darkness of this world, he was translated, removed from darkness, into the light of the kingdom of God while he was physically alive!

At the age of 65, Enoch had a son named Methuselah. But how long did Enoch walk with God?

Genesis 5:22, "And Enoch walked with God after he begat Methuselah three hundred years, and begat sons and daughters."

So, Enoch followed God’s ways for three hundred years. Notice that the Scripture does not record that Enoch is still walking with God. It says that Enoch WALKED with God for three hundred years, and not one year more. Why? Because "all the days of Enoch were three hundred sixty and five years" (Genesis 5:23). Paul says, in Colossians 1:10, "That ye might walk worthy of the Lord." Enoch walked with God and pleased God. This is what Genesis 5:22, 24 means when it says "Enoch walked with God."

1 Corinthians 15:20-23 says that all die and all shall be resurrected, but Messiah must be first in the order. Enoch could not possibly have preceded him, especially if he were still flesh and blood as it says in verses 49-52.

We know there is a resurrection of life, and another resurrection to judgment. Now Daniel might have communicated it a bit differently, but I take it with the same meaning when he spoke of those who sleep rising again to everlasting life, and others to everlasting contempt. Yet, it still does not speak of those who were risen from the dead in the OT, and where they might have been.

and

So then the question becomes... what is resurrected.. on the last day? Just the body? Just the soul? Neither? Both?
According to 1Cor 15... we will get new spiritual, bodies. If this is so... why do we need our old bodies that return to the dust?

If we simply read the various prophetic verses about the return of Christ, the Bible clearly teaches that believers will be “gathered” at the second coming -- not some secret, invisible return that precedes his BIG second coming at the end of the tribulation. The problem isn’t in our understanding of the rapture, because the rapture as routinely taught today doesn’t even exist; the difficulty is in our understanding of the resurrection.

In John chapter five, Jesus tells us how God The Father has committed the power of resurrection to him. Jesus says “He that heareth my word and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life...for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice. 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.” (John 6:24, 28, 29) According to these passages, apparently there are two resurrections: one for those “that have done good,” and a resurrection for those “that have done evil.”

In one of the parallel accounts, a verse in Luke has Christ himself saying that the believer shall “be recompensed at the resurrection of the just.” (Luke 14:14) Another proof text of this dual aspect of the resurrection is found in the book of Acts when the Apostle Paul was brought before the Roman governor Felix and charged with heresy by the Jews.

Paul stated that he believes, as the Jews did, “that there shall be a resurrection of the dead, both of the just and the unjust.” (Ezekiel 33:8, 4) A further example of this understanding of two resurrections is found in the Old Testament, when the prophet Daniel was instructed by the archangel Michael concerning the tribulation and the resurrection. In that instance, Michael said that in the time of the end, “many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt.” (Daniel 12:2)

Back in the New Testament book of Revelation, we find a reference to “the first resurrection.” (Rev. 20:5) This first resurrection clearly relates to believers in Jesus, for the text states that they “lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.” (Rev. 20:4)

In the same chapter, John (the writer of Revelation) says “the rest of the dead live not again until the thousand years were finished.” (Rev. 20:5) Later in the chapter John says, “when the thousand years are expired...I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God...and the dead were judged...” (Rev. 20:7, 12) These verses plainly state that there are two resurrections -- one for believers and one for unbelievers.

The Revelation passages further clarify that these two resurrections are separated by one thousand years; this being the period we commonly call the millennium during which the resurrected believers shall “reign with him a thousand years.” (Rev. 20:6)

But even if we go to heaven "temporarily". It seems that won't be our final destination.

the final destination of believers is not "heaven" in the traditional sense, but rather dwelling with God in the New Jerusalem on the New Earth—because God Himself will dwell there.

Believers don’t do the hackneyed “go to heaven” thing; rather, Christ sets up his kingdom here, with us. We, being "caught up" with others, meet the Lord in the air and then return back to earth with him.

For example, if your friends fly in from another country to visit you, you might travel to your local airport to meet them when their plane lands and then escort them back to your place. If they’re VIP friends, you might have a delegation meet them at your country's main airport, and then escort them back to your place. In either case, you don’t go to your airport, meet your friends, get on your friend’s plane, and then travel back with your friends to their place of origin!

So, do we have a scriptural witness to this scenario? Yes.

...we came the next day to Puteoli: Where we found brethren, and were desired to tarry with them seven days: and so we went toward Rome. And from thence, when the brethren heard of us, they came to meet us as far as Appii forum, and The three taverns: whom when Paul saw, he thanked God, and took courage. And when we came to Rome... -- Acts 28:13-16

The brothers in Rome got word of their impending visitors, and so went out to meet them at Appii forum, and then escorted them back to Rome.

meet = same word in both Acts 28 and 1 Thes. 4.

Here are all four usages of the word meet:

Mat. 25:1 - Then shall the kingdom of heaven be likened unto ten virgins, which took their lamps, and went forth to meet the bridegroom.

Mat. 25:6 - And at midnight there was a cry made, Behold, the bridegroom cometh; go ye out to meet him.

Acts 28:15 - And from thence, when the brethren heard of us, they came to meet us as far as Appii forum, and The three taverns: whom when Paul saw, he thanked God, and took courage.

1 Thes. 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.

All four are consistent with “meet and greet and return to base.“
.

 

[Bill]

.

Are bondmen of Christ citizens of any place in this world? No, we are not. Our citizenship does not reside in any Country or State because we are "...fellowcitizens with the saints, and of the household of God" (Ephesians 2:19). Therefore, we can't say, "I'm a fellow citizen with the saints and the household of God, but I'm also an American citizen." Well, that's the same thing as saying "I serve two masters," because citizenship has a very specific meaning; and that is "Who are you subject to?"

A true follower of Jesus Christ is a sojourner, a stranger in a land of which he is not a citizen. In the world but not of the world.

Getting back to the gist of the OP:



and

What saith Scripture?

Some people believe that Enoch did not die but was taken directly to heaven where God is. But, Enoch eventually died, as all humans die. How can we know? The apostle Paul mentioned the circumstances associated with Enoch in Hebrews 11:5, along with other men of faith, and then stated: "These all died in faith, not having received the promises" (Hebrews 11:13). Yes, Enoch died, and he did not receive the promise of heaven (verse 16) at the time the book of Hebrews was written.

Based on Hebrews 11:5, 13 and Jesus’ statement in John 3:13, "no man hath ascended up to heaven", how are we to understand the account of Enoch? Genesis 5:21-24 says that Enoch's days, alive on Earth, ended at 365 years old. The question is, did he die, was he taken to heaven alive, or was he transported to another location on Earth?

Let us examine the bold phrase in Genesis 5:24, where it says, "And Enoch walked with God: and he was not; for God took him" and compare the same Hebrew phrase in:

Psalms 37:36, "Yet he passed away, and, lo, he was not: yea, I sought him, but he could not be found."

Psalms 39:13, "O spare me, that I may recover strength, before I go hence, and be no more."

The Hebrew for the phrases in bold are the same Hebrew as Genesis 5:24. As in the Psalms, the phrase means the person "passed away" or would eventually die. Let’s look at the same phrase in the book of Genesis:

Genesis 42:13, "And they said, Thy servants are twelve brethren, the sons of one man in the land of Canaan; and, behold, the youngest is this day with our father, and one is not." This was spoken by his brothers of Joseph. What’d they mean by "is not"?

Genesis 44:20, "And we said unto my lord, We have a father, an old man, and a child of his old age, a little one; and his brother is dead, and he alone is left of his mother, and his father loveth him." Here, the brothers recount their previous discussion about Joseph with Pharaoh. When they first said, "and one is not," they meant Joseph "is dead."

Matthew 2:18, "In Rama was there a voice heard, lamentation, and weeping, and great mourning, Rachel weeping for her children, and would not be comforted, because they are not." Where were Rachel's children? Dead.

Hebrews 11:5, "By faith Enoch was translated that he should not see death; and was not found, because God had translated him:" Does the phrase that says Enoch "should not see death" mean Enoch never died? Hebrews 11:13, "These all died [including Enoch] in faith." But not only that, verse 13 goes on to say that they did not receive the promises. One of the promises was a heavenly country (verse 16). If Enoch were in heaven, wouldn't he have received that promise?

Psalma 89:48, "What man is he that liveth, and shall not see death? shall he deliver his soul from the hand of the grave? Selah." Why would this Psalmist ask such a question concerning physical death if he believed Enoch did not see a physical death? The fact is, the Psalmist believed Enoch was in the grave and therefore asked this question.

So what does the phrase "should not see death" mean? Notice it is not in the present tense, that he "did not see" death, but that he "should not see death." John 8:51, "Verily, verily, I say unto you, If a man keep my saying, he shall never see death" [see also John 11:26]. This phrase must mean "the second death," since all the Apostles kept Jesus’ sayings and yet died the first death.

Based on Hebrews 9:27, "And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment:" and Hebrews 11:13, "These all died in faith, not having received the promises," we must conclude that Enoch died the first death. To believe Enoch did not die is to deny the plain word of many other scriptures as well. For example, Romans 5:12; "...so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned" and Romans 5:14, "...death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned." Are we to believe that Enoch did not sin? Are we to believe that a man who was not yet cleansed of sin by the blood of Jesus could enter heaven and dwell in God's presence?

But what about his translation in Hebrews 11:5? Does that mean he didn’t die? That’s what most people carelessly assume without proof. The Bible does not say that Enoch went to heaven when he was translated. Instead, it says he "was not found." The word "translate" means "to put or place in another place, to transport, to transfer." Nowhere in the Scripture does ‘translate’ mean to make immortal!

The same Greek word is rendered "carried over" in Acts 7:16 where Jacob's body was ‘translated’ or ‘transported’ to Sychem, where he was buried! The Scriptures say Jacob was translated to the place of burial! God took Enoch and buried him somewhere so as not to be found, just as he did with the body of Moses in Deuteronomy 34:6. No man knows where Moses' or Enoch’s grave is. God hid them for reasons known only to Him.

Notice another proof that ‘translate’ does not mean to make immortal. Paul wrote that the Father "hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son" (Colossians 1:13). The apostle Paul says that he was already translated, even though he was still physically alive! Although he was once part of the darkness of this world, he was translated, removed from darkness, into the light of the kingdom of God while he was physically alive!

At the age of 65, Enoch had a son named Methuselah. But how long did Enoch walk with God?

Genesis 5:22, "And Enoch walked with God after he begat Methuselah three hundred years, and begat sons and daughters."

So, Enoch followed God’s ways for three hundred years. Notice that the Scripture does not record that Enoch is still walking with God. It says that Enoch WALKED with God for three hundred years, and not one year more. Why? Because "all the days of Enoch were three hundred sixty and five years" (Genesis 5:23). Paul says, in Colossians 1:10, "That ye might walk worthy of the Lord." Enoch walked with God and pleased God. This is what Genesis 5:22, 24 means when it says "Enoch walked with God."

1 Corinthians 15:20-23 says that all die and all shall be resurrected, but Messiah must be first in the order. Enoch could not possibly have preceded him, especially if he were still flesh and blood as it says in verses 49-52.


and

If we simply read the various prophetic verses about the return of Christ, the Bible clearly teaches that believers will be “gathered” at the second coming -- not some secret, invisible return that precedes his BIG second coming at the end of the tribulation. The problem isn’t in our understanding of the rapture, because the rapture as routinely taught today doesn’t even exist; the difficulty is in our understanding of the resurrection.

In John chapter five, Jesus tells us how God The Father has committed the power of resurrection to him. Jesus says “He that heareth my word and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life...for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice. 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.” (John 6:24, 28, 29) According to these passages, apparently there are two resurrections: one for those “that have done good,” and a resurrection for those “that have done evil.”

In one of the parallel accounts, a verse in Luke has Christ himself saying that the believer shall “be recompensed at the resurrection of the just.” (Luke 14:14) Another proof text of this dual aspect of the resurrection is found in the book of Acts when the Apostle Paul was brought before the Roman governor Felix and charged with heresy by the Jews.

Paul stated that he believes, as the Jews did, “that there shall be a resurrection of the dead, both of the just and the unjust.” (Ezekiel 33:8, 4) A further example of this understanding of two resurrections is found in the Old Testament, when the prophet Daniel was instructed by the archangel Michael concerning the tribulation and the resurrection. In that instance, Michael said that in the time of the end, “many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt.” (Daniel 12:2)

Back in the New Testament book of Revelation, we find a reference to “the first resurrection.” (Rev. 20:5) This first resurrection clearly relates to believers in Jesus, for the text states that they “lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.” (Rev. 20:4)

In the same chapter, John (the writer of Revelation) says “the rest of the dead live not again until the thousand years were finished.” (Rev. 20:5) Later in the chapter John says, “when the thousand years are expired...I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God...and the dead were judged...” (Rev. 20:7, 12) These verses plainly state that there are two resurrections -- one for believers and one for unbelievers.

The Revelation passages further clarify that these two resurrections are separated by one thousand years; this being the period we commonly call the millennium during which the resurrected believers shall “reign with him a thousand years.” (Rev. 20:6)


Believers don’t do the hackneyed “go to heaven” thing; rather, Christ sets up his kingdom here, with us. We, being "caught up" with others, meet the Lord in the air and then return back to earth with him.

For example, if your friends fly in from another country to visit you, you might travel to your local airport to meet them when their plane lands and then escort them back to your place. If they’re VIP friends, you might have a delegation meet them at your country's main airport, and then escort them back to your place. In either case, you don’t go to your airport, meet your friends, get on your friend’s plane, and then travel back with your friends to their place of origin!

So, do we have a scriptural witness to this scenario? Yes.

...we came the next day to Puteoli: Where we found brethren, and were desired to tarry with them seven days: and so we went toward Rome. And from thence, when the brethren heard of us, they came to meet us as far as Appii forum, and The three taverns: whom when Paul saw, he thanked God, and took courage. And when we came to Rome... -- Acts 28:13-16

The brothers in Rome got word of their impending visitors, and so went out to meet them at Appii forum, and then escorted them back to Rome.

meet = same word in both Acts 28 and 1 Thes. 4.

Here are all four usages of the word meet:

Mat. 25:1 - Then shall the kingdom of heaven be likened unto ten virgins, which took their lamps, and went forth to meet the bridegroom.

Mat. 25:6 - And at midnight there was a cry made, Behold, the bridegroom cometh; go ye out to meet him.

Acts 28:15 - And from thence, when the brethren heard of us, they came to meet us as far as Appii forum, and The three taverns: whom when Paul saw, he thanked God, and took courage.

1 Thes. 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.

All four are consistent with “meet and greet and return to base.“
.

Enoch, Elijah, and Moses are with God the Father in Heaven

 

[Garee]

If we simply read the various prophetic verses about the return of Christ, the Bible clearly teaches that believers will be “gathered” at the second coming -- not some secret, invisible return that precedes his BIG second coming at the end of the tribulation. The problem isn’t in our understanding of the rapture, because the rapture as routinely taught today doesn’t even exist; the difficulty is in our understanding of the resurrection.

Why would a believer look to another visual change or sign of reformation other that the first century (Hebrew 9) When Christ returned reigning from heaven?

The atheist Jews in 1 Samuel 8 Had become jealous of all the surrounding pagan nations And according to their foundation .....:"Out of sight out of mind. They demanded a visual king to reign over them. God gave them over till the time of first century reformation .A standard (sola scriptura) for any restoring of the faith of Chrsit labor of love

Remember first and foremost without parables Christ the husband as God spoke not . Not that He prophesied declared a parable sometimes. Parable teach us how to walk by faith. the invisible eternal things

Hiding the spiritual understnding in parable from Satan . Satan is not subject to the gospel interpretation. He is the guessing god . saying ; If you are the Son of God.

In Mathew 16 Satan thought Peter was the son of man Jesus and gave Perter words of false prophecy by which Peter rebuked the Holy unseen Father and forbid Jesu the Son of men from doing the good "Let there be will" of the Holy father

Biblical parables mixing or comparing the temporal things seen with the unseen eternal as a sign or shadow that points to the future. The recipe to rightly divide or interpretate the parables (2 Corithian 4:18) All of the Old Testament ceremonial laws as parables used as shadow metaphors become sight

One new ceremonial law as a shadow 1 Corinthians 11. the head covering. . . taking of bread and drink the blood of the grape the upcoming wedding supper

Hebrew 9::8-11;The Holy Ghost this signifying (use the temporal things seen) , that the way into the holiest of all was not yet made manifest, while as the first tabernacle was yet standing:;Which was a figure (parable)for the time then present, in which were offered both gifts and sacrifices, that could not make him that did the service perfect, as pertaining to the conscience;;Which stood only in meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances, imposed on them until the time of reformation.

In effect in that parable when the veil was rent and there was no Jewish dying man and as King of kings, The two 15 ft high walls,( an abomination of desolation) they fell. The first high wall separated the Jewish men's only club from the Jewish women and the second wall all gentiles separated from Jews

The gospel explosion mixed family members could now gather together to worship our unseen eternal God without racist dividing walls. the political left it would seem being reformed .Sound the Trump .Pray for humility.

The first century reformation . . . a great joy one like never before or ever again for the born-again believer .A great tribulation for the outward Jews that was falsely hoping dying Jewish flesh could profit for something.one like never before or ever again

Mathew 24:21-25For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be.;And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect's sake those days shall be shortened.
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. Behold, I have told you before. (before the closing of the last chapter Revelation

 

[Christ4Ever]

To consider would be those that Jesus, or anyone else has risen from death/sleep back to life. Would it be considered a resurrection of sorts, or even those on the Mount of Transfiguration as having died but being still being alive? If so, where do they now reside?

What saith Scripture?

Now after six days Jesus took Peter, James, and John his brother, led them up on a high mountain by themselves; 2 and He was transfigured before them. His face shone like the sun, and His clothes became as white as the light. 3 And behold, Moses and Elijah appeared to them, talking with Him. 4 Then Peter answered and said to Jesus, "Lord, it is good for us to be here; if You wish, let us make here three tabernacles: one for You, one for Moses, and one for Elijah." 5 While he was still speaking, behold, a bright cloud overshadowed them; and suddenly a voice came out of the cloud, saying, "This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased. Hear Him!" 6 And when the disciples heard [it], they fell on their faces and were greatly afraid. 7 But Jesus came and touched them and said, "Arise, and do not be afraid." 8 When they had lifted up their eyes, they saw no one but Jesus only. 9 Now as they came down from the mountain, Jesus commanded them, saying, "Tell the vision to no one until the Son of Man is risen from the dead." 10 And His disciples asked Him, saying, "Why then do the scribes say that Elijah must come first?" 11 Jesus answered and said to them, "Indeed, Elijah is coming first and will restore all things. 12 "But I say to you that Elijah has come already, and they did not know him but did to him whatever they wished. Likewise the Son of Man is also about to suffer at their hands." 13 Then the disciples understood that He spoke to them of John the Baptist. Matthew 17:1-13 NKJV

So, you can say, they were not raised from the dead just for a meeting, though I guess if one is looking for possibilities that could be one. Still, one could also say that they existed in another fashion (heaven), where they could travel from the spiritual to the temporal. A lot of what ifs in this, but no doubt that you had 1 Moses who had been for a very long time, with body never actually accounted for after being fought over and another Elijah who had not died but taken to heaven. Unknown after he had come back as John the Baptist. So, still living, where one would presume was heaven, and brought back as John and dying not too long before this meeting and back to heaven, or resurrected for just this purpose. For me it still speaks to the likelihood being that they were both in heaven.

I would continue commenting on the other review you have undertaken, which I can appreciate. However, words like ascended, translated which you use for Enoch, along with "these all" amongst others leaves for a lot of conjecture, and like the transfiguration suppositions that are best left to accepting as written vs seeing conflict that pits one part of scripture against another that in truth the context of doesn't necessarily mean they are all inclusive comments from Gen-Rev. For if you do, then you have to reject one part of scripture for another by coming up with even more suppositions.

and

More questions with suppositions/conjecture for answers.

Dear brother, I appreciate all that you have written and the work you put into it, but I am a simple man, that has too little hair as it is to keep scratching it over this. Especially being that we'll find out soon enough. One way or the other it doesn't govern my walk. I tossed the Transfiguration into it, because it had not been talked of. Clearly an evident that occurred, in which the witness' of were told not to speak of until after His resurrection.

With the Love of Christ Jesus.
YBIC/Moderator
Nick
\o/
<><

 

[Garee]

Enoch, Elijah, and Moses are with God the Father in Heaven

Which born again saint is not with God our Father in heaven.?

 

[Bill]

Which born again saint is not with God our Father in heaven.?

What does it mean to be born again?
Born again is having Jesus in your heart.

What is Jesus then if those who do not know Jesus as the person still recieve Him in thier hearts. Jesus is God who is love.

Enoch loved God, God loved Enoch. Enochs heart was circumsized with God's love. The very thing Paul talks about. A true Jew is one whose heart is circumsized

 

[backNforth]

So, you can say, they were not raised from the dead just for a meeting, though I guess if one is looking for possibilities that could be one. Still, one could also say that they existed in another fashion (heaven), where they could travel from the spiritual to the temporal. A lot of what ifs in this, but no doubt that you had 1 Moses who had been for a very long time, with body never actually accounted for after being fought over and another Elijah who had not died but taken to heaven. Unknown after he had come back as John the Baptist. So, still living, where one would presume was heaven, and brought back as John and dying not too long before this meeting and back to heaven, or resurrected for just this purpose. For me it still speaks to the likelihood being that they were both in heaven.

After the Transfiguration, Jesus said, while leaving the mountain, "Tell the vision to no man" (Matthew 17:9). Jesus calls the transfiguration a vision! A vision is not a material reality, but a supernatural picture observed by the eyes. The same Greek word for "vision" was used of Peter's vision of the unclean beasts being made clean (Acts 10:3, 17, 19; 11:5). They were not real but a supernatural picture. In the case of the transfiguration, it was a prophetic vision which would take place in the future. Peter, James and John saw the Son of Man glorified in the Kingdom through a prophetic vision. Here are other examples:

Acts 16:9, "And a vision appeared to Paul in the night; There stood a man of Macedonia, and prayed him, saying, Come over into Macedonia, and help us." This also is something that was to happen in the future.

Acts 18:9-10, "Then spake the Lord to Paul in the night by a vision, Be not afraid, but speak, and hold not thy peace: For I am with thee, and no man shall set on thee to hurt thee: for I have much people in this city." Jesus is telling Paul that, in the near future, no man shall hurt him.

Visions should not be interpreted as literal. For example, look at Genesis 37:5-10. When Joseph dreamed that his "sheaf arose, and stood upright," and his brother’s sheaves bowed down to Joseph’s sheaf (verse 7), or when Joseph dreamed that "the sun and the moon and the eleven stars" bowed down to Joseph (verse 9); is this literal? No. This was a prophetic vision of something that was to occur in the future; when Joseph’s mother, father, and brothers would bow down to him as King.

Both Moses and Elijah were still in their graves, but in vision both they and Jesus were seen in glory of the resurrection, and event to which Moses and Elijah have not yet attained at that time (Hebrews 11:39). The vision was granted the disciples after Jesus had spoken of the glory of immortality in the coming Kingdom.

 

[Christ4Ever]

In the case of the transfiguration, it was a prophetic vision which would take place in the future. Peter, James and John saw the Son of Man glorified in the Kingdom through a prophetic vision.

I would tend to agree with you if it was not for the transfigured Jesus.

There stood a man of Macedonia, and prayed him, saying, Come over into Macedonia, and help us." This also is something that was to happen in the future.

It spoke of a future event, but was in itself not a future event, but a present one or even possible a past occurrence that had just been communicated. Meaning the man was praying at the time Paul saw the vision is how I see it or shortly before. Communication even then could be a bit slow by way of visions.

Jesus is telling Paul that, in the near future, no man shall hurt him.

Agree, but that has nothing to do with the prayer itself.

Visions should not be interpreted as literal.

Should not, but they can be depending on the context of what is being shown. We could go back and forth on this, since if you think about the Book of Revelation, which many consider vision/s.

Both Moses and Elijah were still in their graves, but in vision both they and Jesus were seen in glory of the resurrection, and event to which Moses and Elijah have not yet attained at that time (Hebrews 11:39). The vision was granted the disciples after Jesus had spoken of the glory of immortality in the coming Kingdom.

Moses, maybe, Elijah was not. That God would treat them as special is a consideration not without merit.
Still your position is a valid position to have but not the only one that has validity. I know that Hebrews 11:39 says "all", but "all" of those from v38. Elijah walked these areas, but he was taken up, just like our Lord was which is not the same thing as wandering, not seeing the promise and dying. Plus, you have to acknowledge Elijah was special, because he was also John the Baptist.

Thanks for sharing your thoughts brother.

With the Love of Christ Jesus.
YBIC/Moderator
Nick
\o/
<><

 

[backNforth]

.

Should not, but they can be depending on the context of what is being shown. We could go back and forth on this, since if you think about the Book of Revelation, which many consider vision/s

Yep.

I am a simple man, that has too little hair as it is to keep scratching it over this.

I can relate.

<scratch scratch>

Moses, maybe, Elijah was not.

"Special" or not, the mainstream bugaboo, the conditioned view that still trips up a majority, is the belief that "translated" = "taken to heaven" or "made immortal".
.

 

[Christ4Ever]

"Special" or not, the mainstream bugaboo, the conditioned view that still trips up a majority, is the belief that "translated" = "taken to heaven" or "made immortal".

It really on how one interprets Elijah's 2 Kings 2:10-13 story. It depends not only on the "went up by a whirlwind into heaven", but also when Elisha took "the mantle of Elijah that fell from him" part.

And he said, Thou hast asked a hard thing: [nevertheless], if thou see me [when I am] taken from thee, it shall be so unto thee; but if not, it shall not be [so]. 11 And it came to pass, as they still went on, and talked, that, behold, [there appeared] a chariot of fire, and horses of fire, and parted them both asunder; and Elijah went up by a whirlwind into heaven. 12 And Elisha saw [it], and he cried, My father, my father, the chariot of Israel, and the horsemen thereof. And he saw him no more: and he took hold of his own clothes, and rent them in two pieces. 13 He took up also the mantle of Elijah that fell from him, and went back, and stood by the bank of Jordan; 2 Kings 2:10-13 KJV

Interesting to say the least.

With the Love of Christ Jesus.
YBIC/Moderator
Nick
\o/
<><

 

[backNforth]

..
.

It really on how one interprets Elijah's 2 Kings 2:10-13 story. It depends not only on the "went up by a whirlwind into heaven", but also when Elisha took "the mantle of Elijah that fell from him" part.

Some personal thoughts:

The whirlwind thing was a good way to both shift the mantle which was "blown" off from the one to the other, AND to ensure that there would be continuity between the two positions. Elijah's last miracle shall be Elisha's first; thus he begins where Elijah left off, ensuring there is no vacancy. The whirlwind thing was a smooth and effective maneuver.

Elisha's first comment was NOT "Where is Elijah?", but "Where is God?" (v. 14).

Also, with the whirlwind thing, it was not obvious to the other attendees that Elijah was, in fact, taken permanently off the earth. For example, they sent 50 men to check if Elijah had been removed to some mountain or valley (v. 16-17). There was a serious question raised by them about exactly where Elijah had been transported to. Obviously, many believed he had not been taken away permanently "to heaven." Perhaps something about the whirlwind, about the entire nature of the "transport," that had them doubting that Elijah had been taken into God's presence permanently.

The scriptural kicker for me is that the Holy Bible does not say that Enoch went to heaven when he was translated. Instead, it says he "was not found." The word "translate" means "to put or place in another place, to transport, to transfer." Nowhere in the Scripture does ‘translate’ mean to make immortal. The same Greek word is rendered "carried over" in Acts 7:16 where Jacob's body was ‘translated’ or ‘transported’ to Sychem, where he was buried.

I am confident we WILL learn the truth of the matter...
.