Is There a Contradiction?

[Josheb]

I do not see the NT as presenting it as death, as in the human spirit departing the human body.
Rather it is described as a change of the body. . .in the twinkling of an eye.

So, your answer is no.

Where does the text state the spirit leaves the body, and if it is a change of body then the spirit doesn't leave the body, the body housing the spirit is changed. Furthermore, the "twinkling" (vs. 52) specifically states the dead are changed. That change would not occur if Enoch were not dead. Can you see the inconsistencies in Post 52?

 

[Josheb]

A exception has been occasionally made by God.

Surely that is true. However, the exceptions in God's word never make God's word contradictory (and we're not supposed to base sound doctrine on the exceptions to the rules), so that doesn't truly resolve the seeming contradiction.

 

[Josheb]

What do you mean by spiritual body?

The better question is, what does scripture mean by spiritual body?

 

[Eleanor]

I agree Enoch didn't physically die, but this one translation change of Enoch was a single unique occurrence in all of human history. Nobody alive at Christ next coming will survive His appearing. After all, scripture says nobody can look on God's face and live through the experience. The human body must pass first through death and then be changed in the resurrection process before they can view God's face without perishing.

Except for all those of 1 Th 4:17, which Paul, along with the other early Christians, believed would occur in their lifetime because Jesus said he was returning "soon." (Rev 22:12).

So, your answer is no.

Where does the text state the spirit leaves the body, and if it is a change of body then the spirit doesn't leave the body, the body housing the spirit is changed. Furthermore, the "twinkling" (vs. 52) specifically states the dead are changed. That change would not occur if Enoch were not dead. Can you see the inconsistencies in Post 52?

I can see your inconsistency regarding Enoch.

 

[fastfredy0]

Re: If death is defined as "separation" then it is a form of death.

I agree.

But why would we defined death that way?

I can't answer the "Why would we define death that way". Many times I've wish there was a God inspired a bible dictionary. I have to rely on guys who know Hebrew and Greek.

Are there any other wholly-scriptural definitions of death that would also answer the question asked in the affirmative? If so, then what are they?

well, there are bible dictionaries on line to provide insight I suppose.... like Death - Easton's Bible Dictionary Online

Well, the fact of scripture is that scripture uses the word "death" and the concept of "dead" quite diversely. That shouldn't be a point of dispute for anyone here, but I can, if asked, expound on that further with LOTS of scripture. Some here implicitly define death singularly (maybe some did so explicitly). Given the diversity of scripture's revelation of death that is a mistake, imo. It is, apparently, assumed that a person already dead in Christ does not physically die even though Paul stated quite bluntly the body of corruptible mortal flesh is done away with. Are we to believe Enoch is walking around in a body of flesh and blood that cannot inherit the kingdom of God rather than a resurrected body of flesh and bone like the one Jesus had when he walked through walls with gaping holes in it? I find that immensely inconsistent with the whole of scripture, and it's due solely to various selective uses of scripture and the emphasis of one definition of death over another.

Insightful ... I agree.
I am of the opinion that Enoch at some point has to get a new incorruptible body and I classify this as death.

Aside: When I was younger and even less knowledgeable I thought one died and went to heaven with current body made alive again. Then I thought it would be better to die at an age where my body was not worn out ... *giggle*

Btw, 1 Corinthians 15:51 is defined as death. In speaking of the resurrection as a whole (not the resurrection of those buried in the dirt only) Paul explicitly stated that which you sow does not come to life unless it dies. Everything he wrote thereafter occurs within that context, including verse 51. We won't all "sleep" (be dead in the ground) but we will all be changed (it does not come to life unless it dies). Until the moment of resurrection we ALL remain corruptible and mortal - even though we have ALL been crucified with Christ and no longer live. To be dead to sin is to be dead in Christ. The once dead-in-sin Christian who is NOW dead in Christ will still be changed yet again. It is only through the process of transformative resurrection that our salvation from sin and death is made complete. Paul was already dead in Christ when he said that which is sown does not come to life unless it dies. The entire 1 Corinthians 15 narrative is couched in the falsehood some were teaching: the resurrection had already occurred.

Seems to me that we will be changed so much that I won't recognize myself possibly.
I wonder if we will recognize anyone we knew given:
Isaiah 65:17 Behold, I am creating new heavens and a new earth; And the former things [of life] will not be remembered or come to mind.
...gee, sounds like I won't know of my past ... gee, I might have to learn something as elementary as "how many toes do I have".

Unless that which is sown* does not come to life unless it dies. Therefore, Enoch did die, and he died in multiple ways, but he wasn't first buried in the ground. It's not complicated when the whole of scripture is considered.

That's my leaning.

 

[Josheb]

I can't answer the "Why would we define death that way".

You understand the importance of the question, though, yes?

Many times I've wish there was a God inspired a bible dictionary.

LOL! Wouldn't that be nice. Imagine how surprised we'd all be if we could go back in time and ask Jesus or Paul to clarify and explain in greater detail X, Y, or Z.

I have to rely on guys who know Hebrew and Greek.

Ha! Don't ever rely on me or my posts! Please check every word I post and verify it for yourself, especially when it comes to original languages. I'm casually studying Greek and Hebrew and going through Mounce's textbook on Greek and I'm about homicidal every time I open anything on the subject. aaaarrrggh!

(i used to have hair)

.

 

[fastfredy0]

You understand the importance of the question, though, yes?

Yes, all questions are of limited value if the definition of the terms in the question are not clearly understood by the reader.

I'm casually studying Greek and Hebrew and going through Mounce's textbook on Greek and I'm about homicidal every time I open anything on the subject. aaaarrrggh!

You have more ambition in this area than I. Hopefully the language interpreters were inspired by the Spirit too.

 

[Josheb]

Hopefully the language interpreters were inspired by the Spirit too.

Oooooo.... That is a point of much reflection for me.

You've all (presumably) read my posts on the word "gospel" and how the New Testament writers used a word that carried specific denotative and connotative meaning other than what is nowadays assumed, as well as my commentary on the words "hel," hades," and "tartarus," (they mean something very specific in first century pagan cultures) and the premise Jesus probably did NOT use those words. Would translators be truer to the original words spoken by Jesus if they translated those words as "the grave" or "sheol," or would they be truer to Jesus' preaching by being truer to the Greek if they translated them as "the realm of the lesser god hades/hel"? Not germane to this op but.....


Maybe that'll be the topic of my next theological questions op .

 

[fastfredy0]

You've all (presumably) read my posts on the word "gospel" and how the New Testament writers used a word that carried specific denotative and connotative meaning other than what is nowadays assumed, as well as my commentary on the words "hel," hades," and "tartarus," (they mean something very specific in first century pagan cultures) and the premise Jesus probably did NOT use those words. Would translators be truer to the original words spoken by Jesus if they translated those words as "the grave" or "sheol," or would they be truer to Jesus' preaching by being truer to the Greek if they translated them as "the realm of the lesser god hades/hel"? Not germane to this op but.....

Way beyond my level of expertise. You may have to talk to people like James White for that level of understanding.

 

[Josheb]

Way beyond my level of expertise. You may have to talk to people like James White for that level of understanding.

I'm sure we'd agree on the former premise but maybe not on the latter. I've received a lot of pushback on the latter.


Simply put: Jesus was not affirming pagan mythologies of the surrounding cultures (implicitly or explicitly). Those mythologies asserted a view of death and the afterlife much different than 1) old school Judaism and 2) the teachings of Jesus. On that I'm sure White would agree. The language of the Greek manuscripts, therefore, proves problematic. On that I suspect he and I would have mixed views (agreeing in some respects but maybe not in others). It doesn't take a doctorate to understand these things (which is sort of one of the things I like about White: as well researched and sophisticated his arguments are sometimes, in their essence they are easily grasped by anyone once the case made is understood).


God night all. May your morning coffee be stronger than your day (and if not, Jesus surely is ).

 

[3 Resurrections]

Aside from the fact Post 51 recycles already posted content and I tend to agree with the interpretation therein, verse 5 does not specify physical death and verse 13 does not exclude Enoch or report faith is the reason for his mention.

???!! FAITH is the overwhelming topic of the entire chapter of Hebrews 11. The emphasis is on this theme alone. As for the seeming "contradiction" of "These all died in faith..." in Heb. 11:13 compared with Enoch who did not die in Heb. 11:5, all we have to do is look to the previous verse Heb. 11:12 to see just who that pronoun "THESE" referred to.

It was referring to all the children of faith that became Abraham's true progeny. "Therefore sprang there even of one, and him as good as dead, so many as the stars of the sky in multitude, and as the sand which is by the sea shore innumerable. THESE all died in faith..." (speaking of the numberless nameless ones which sprang forth from Abraham - the children of faith which descended from faithful Abraham, as in Galatians 3:7 - "Know ye therefore that they which are of faith, the same are the children of Abraham.") .

Enoch did not "see" death, but he is counted among those who died in faith.

Enoch did not die in faith - he lived in faith and was the single, unique individual who would ever be translated by God so that he did not physically die.

 

[3 Resurrections]

Except for all those of 1 Th 4:17, which Paul, along with the other early Christians, believed would occur in their lifetime because Jesus said he was returning "soon." (Rev 22:12).

Of course Christ bodily returned in Paul's lifetime. Christ made that quite clear in Matthew 16:27-28 and elsewhere. And of course there were Christians alive at the time of Christ's bodily return back then. But none of these living saints were promised a "rapture" and a translation change of their bodies without physically dying at Christ's return. That would go against the rule that "as in Adam ALL die", and the Heb. 9:27 rule that "it is appointed unto men ONCE to die, and after that the judgment."

Too many people are trying to concoct a sort of "Get out of jail free card" by teaching a general translation change for all the living saints at Christ's next return so that they can skip the consequences of this rule of humanity's one-time only appointment with death.

There is only one resurrection, not three, in authoritative NT teaching; i.e., 1 Co 15:51-52, 1 Th 4:16-17.

Neither of those texts teach that there in ONLY ONE resurrection event. In fact, 1 Corinthians 15:23 teaches TWO bodily resurrection events at the least, ranked in order of when they happen.

So sinful bodies and sinful natures will be caught up to meet Christ in the air. . .

Of course not. That's the point. No living saints who had not died and been resurrected were to be "caught up" to meet Christ in the air in 1 Thess. 4. Neither were they to be given a "translation" type of change of their living bodies. Consequently, those living saints would be left on earth.

You are missing the entire point as to WHY Paul was writing on this resurrection theme in 1 Thess. 4. Hymenaeus and Philetus had been teaching the discouraging error to the church that the resurrection event was "already past" back then, and that there would not be another resurrection event (1 Cor. 15:12 and 2 Timothy 2:18). In one sense, these two men were correct that Christ and the many Matthew 27:52-53 saints had already been raised from the dead earlier, back in AD 33.

But Hymenaeus and Philetus were incorrect that this was the only resurrection event that would ever happen. Paul predicted another resurrection that was soon coming in that first-century generation at Christ's return. Any resurrected saints who had already been made "alive", but who had "remained" on earth in those days (like the already-resurrected Matt. 27:52-53 saints) would NOT be the first to ascend to heaven with Christ. They would wait and be caught up with the rest of the newly-resurrected saints who would precede them by rising FIRST, to meet the Lord in the air together.

those still living will be changed (made imperishable) in the twinkling of an eye (1 Co 15:51-52) and
then would be caught up together in the clouds with the changed resurrected to meet the Lord in the air (rapture).

"We (those alive when Jesus comes) will not all sleep (die), but we will all be changed--in a flash, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet.

That 1 Cor. 15:51-55 text was NOT describing a translation-type change of the living. It was describing how the dead mortal remains of the saints in the grave would be changed in the twinkling of an eye.

"We will not all sleep" means "NONE of us saints shall remain asleep in the grave, but we will all be changed" from that physically-dead status into incorruptible, immortal-fleshed bodies. This does NOT teach that there will be translation-type exceptions for the living saints who haven't died yet. That interpretation totally contradicts the Hebrews 9:27 rule for all humanity to DIE the ONE time before a judgment.

 

[Josheb]

???!! FAITH is the overwhelming topic of the entire chapter of Hebrews 11.

What's the overwhelming topic of this op?

 

[3 Resurrections]

As for the seeming "contradiction" of "These all died in faith..." in Heb. 11:13 compared with Enoch who did not die in Heb. 11:5, all we have to do is look to the previous verse Heb. 11:12 to see just who that pronoun "THESE" referred to.

It was referring to all the children of faith that became Abraham's true progeny. "Therefore sprang there even of one, and him as good as dead, so many as the stars of the sky in multitude, and as the sand which is by the sea shore innumerable. THESE all died in faith..." (speaking of the numberless nameless ones which sprang forth from Abraham - the children of faith which descended from faithful Abraham, as in Galatians 3:7 - "Know ye therefore that they which are of faith, the same are the children of Abraham.") .

THIS above answers the seeming "contradiction" between Hebrews 11:5 and Hebrews 11:12-13.

What's the overwhelming topic of this op?

Your original post proposed that there is a "contradiction" in this Hebrews 11 text, but there is not. The entire subject in Hebrews 11 is FAITH - not an introduction of a supposed "contradiction" between the single man Enoch who was translated so that he did not see physical death, and all the children of faith descending from faithful Abraham who did physically die.

Enoch did not descend from Abraham. Enoch the seventh from Adam preceded Abraham, so he is not included in the pronoun referent of "THESE all died in faith" as being one of all these numberless children of Abraham who died in faith.

 

[EarlyActs]

I agree Enoch didn't physically die, but this one translation change of Enoch was a single unique occurrence in all of human history. Nobody alive at Christ next coming will survive His appearing. After all, scripture says nobody can look on God's face and live through the experience. The human body must pass first through death and then be changed in the resurrection process before they can view God's face without perishing.

Do you all ever study the Silmarillion? I know it is fantasy, but some logic is involved in explaining beings like the sons of God etc.

 

[Eleanor]

Of course Christ bodily returned in Paul's lifetime. Christ made that quite clear in Matthew 16:27-28 and elsewhere. And of course there were Christians alive at the time of Christ's bodily return back then. But none of these living saints were promised a "rapture" and a translation change of their bodies without physically dying at Christ's return. That would go against the rule that "as in Adam ALL die", and the Heb. 9:27 rule that "it is appointed unto men ONCE to die, and after that the judgment."

I will not be debating with you the second coming of Christ having occurred since his resurrection in the NT.

 

[Mr GLee]

Of course Christ bodily returned in Paul's lifetime. Christ made that quite clear in Matthew 16:27-28 and elsewhere. And of course there were Christians alive at the time of Christ's bodily return back then. But none of these living saints were promised a "rapture" and a translation change of their bodies without physically dying at Christ's return. That would go against the rule that "as in Adam ALL die", and the Heb. 9:27 rule that "it is appointed unto men ONCE to die, and after that the judgment."

Be carefull how we hear wh o we say we do . Christ the Spirit of the husband works in the body or bride. Just as with the Son of Man Jesus .Jesus declared Not as I will no power living in a earthen body of death but as you will the one with power to give new spirit life. . born again

The one promised denonstration of Christ working in the flesh of the Son of man Jesus is over. Some would crucify him over and over to public shame as if one outward demonstration was not enough .

Faith is a work or labor of Christ working in us, we have the treasure or power of His faith working in us but would never assume any of it was of us

 

[Josheb]

THIS above answers the seeming "contradiction" between Hebrews 11:5 and Hebrews 11:12-13.

No, it doesn't.

Your original post proposed that there is a "contradiction" in this Hebrews 11 text, but there is not.

No, it did not "propose" a contradiction. It asked if such a contradiction exists and no one in the thread has said there was.



Go back and re-read the thread so a a more accurate view is grasped.

 

[Mr GLee]

No, it doesn't.

No, it did not "propose" a contradiction. It asked if such a contradiction exists and no one in the thread has said there was.



Go back and re-read the thread so a a more accurate view is grasped.

Yes, no contradiction.

If there was that would make the faith as the power needed to believe God without effect

Satan removing the "let there be" unseen power" to no effect' by drawing dying mankind by the two building blocks of false pride.

1 John 2:1For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world.

Satan is not subject to the gospel (no spiritual understanding) he works through is own lying wonders to wonder, wonder, wonder, marvel after as if prophecy (sola scriptura)

Christ restored the power of faith . "Let there be" marked it as golden good Gold to represent eternal faith the only rudiment of this dying world said to be good.

Golden good the measure of faith (power)

Not of our selves . . faithless ones. no power

Genisis 2:12 And the gold of that land is good: there is bdellium and the onyx stone.

 

[Mr GLee]

The better question is, what does scripture mean by spiritual body?

Hi Thanks I would offer

A body made with rudiments "created things" in which Christ breathes in eternal spirit of life.( spiritual body) one we are experiencing here.

What they will be know ones knows it will not be made of the corrupted rudiments of this world Different chemical chart. perhaps.

We do not know Christ after the rudiments of this world, the vain philosophies of dying mankind vain oral traditions .

The whole creation groans for new elements

Luke 24:39 Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have.

New bodies, as the one bride of Christ neither male nor female, New heaven and earth. Just over the horizon . The true light the gospel at the end of the dark tunnel. Not a steam locomotive this time