Results 1 - 2 of 2
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Did Enoch die? | Heb 11:13 | BradK | 232578 | ||
Hi Ed, Yes, I did read the article you referenced- in fact twice before I posted. This is what lead me to respond initially. I’ve now gone back and carefully re-read it for a third time. Here’s my assessment of it: Their entire argument seems to hinge upon a rather rigid view of John 3:13. There are also many (incorrect) assumptions made. I’ve already replied to much of this in my previous posts (232479, 232514, 232527) My first issue is with their attempted comparison of the Hebrew phrase “he was not” as given in Gen. 5:24. They refer to Ps. 37:36 and Ps 39:13, etc in support. They quote, “the phrase means the person “passed away” or “would eventually die”. I beg to differ. Nowhere in the definition of ‘ayin’ do I find this meaning. It ranges from ‘neither’, ‘never’, nowhere’, ‘to nought’, etc. In fact the TWOT says , “it’s basically a negative substantive. The word therefore has no single meaning and the exact translation must be determined in each context.” Next, what of Heb. 11:5? Do we now deny it’s plain meaning? I really see Hebrews 11 as a Divinely inspired commentary on Genesis 5:24 here in this instance particularly. The grammar ‘me ho eidon thanatos’ (did not see death), expands upon “he was not” from the Genesis passage. It tells us what happened to him. The fact that the verb here is not in the present tense has no bearing upon the meaning at hand! Rather (as it should be), it’s a verb, aorist, active and this takes us back to what happen to Enoch. They say, “we must conclude Enoch died the first death”? OK, but why? Because that’s your conclusion? They’re begging the question here. Further to say most people “carelessly assume without proof” seems overly dismissive to other valid views. That may be their opinion, but it’s not an established fact. I don’t think it’s careless to take Heb. 11:5 for what it says. (This is what they’re doing with John 3:13) I think there’s unnecessary confusion being created over “translate”. Of course it doesn’t mean to make ‘immortal’, but in the context of 11:5 it tells us he was “transported to another place”, where he did not see death! Death is negated here. My initial detraction is one of lack of credibility. Who are they and what makes them authoritative? I also think their lack of understanding the original languages shows and it poorly reflects upon the argument. The argument is certainly interesting, but it doesn’t persuade me to change my view- particularly in light of historical interpretation of this passage. Speaking the Truth in Love, BradK |
||||||
2 | Did Enoch die? | Heb 11:13 | EdB | 232581 | ||
Bradk I tend to agree with you but I have some exceptions to what you said. First I notice you do not address the issue of Elijah which I think this article had the stronger argument. Second you asked what made them authoritative. That is a question we can ask of anyone in today’s arena. At one time a person could stand before us and be considered authority because he knew something we didn't. However today with the internet we are seeing that even the most authoritative of the authoritative is just an opinion that some will support and others won't. That said I try to establish authority in scripture and consider the rest conjecture. Which brings us back to the original language and "ayin" that has a defined meaning of “there is not, non-existence” Complete Biblical Library Hebrew-English Dictionary - The Complete Biblical Library Hebrew-English Dictionary – Aleph-Beth. While you are correct context does decide the exact meaning of “ayin” it means more than someone isn’t around anymore, it much stronger word than that. In this case it implies they no longer exist. I think the article makes strong points and while we might not totally agree with it we must consider its point. That leads us to the question what effect theologically does Genesis 5:24 really have on us? If Enoch was taken directly to heaven we have the problem of a mortal being walking in the place of immortality. If he was translated from mortal to immortal then He in effect went through the same process of all that die in Christ will do. If he is only spiritually taken then again we have basically the same process we as Christians are told to expect, when Paul told us absent from the body is present with the Lord. If we are using Enoch’s lack of death as conjecture for saying he is one of the two witnesses of Rev 11:3 there are more problems with that, than what really took place in Gen 5:24. I guess what I'm saying is this subject is often debated, preached and etc but other than the fact it happened has little effect on us. |
||||||