In which we discuss Enoch; the problems with Enoch; and a theory about what happened to Enoch.

Tim:  “By faith Enoch was taken up so that he would not see death; and he was not found because God took him up; for he obtained the witness that before his being taken up he was pleasing to God. And without faith it is impossible to please him, for he who comes to God must believe that he is and that he is a rewarder of those who seek him.” (Hebrews 11:5-6)

You know honestly, this is a very difficult passage. What does this mean that he was “taken up” so that he would “not see death?” The traditional view of this is that Enoch walked with God and was translated, so that he did not die. This just means that he bypassed death and went to be with God in heaven. An old story says that God and Enoch were walking together and God says to Enoch, “We are closer to my place than yours. Why not just come home with me?”

It’s a cute story but it leaves a lot of unanswered questions. There are at least three things that are problematic about this verse. First, the author of Hebrews lists the Old Testament Saints in Chapter 11 – Abel, Enoch, Noah, Abraham, and so forth — and says in verse 13 that “…all of these died in faith.” I’m thinking, “Why wouldn’t that include Enoch?”

Valori: Were there witnesses of his being taken up because I am thinking he is just a missing person.

Tim: Genesis 5 is a record of the genealogies of Adam. After listing those men who would live for centuries, he says in verse 24, “Enoch walked with God; and he was not, for God took him.” Well, why didn’t I just read that before? That just makes everything so clear!” Seriously though, what does that mean?

Valori: “He was not,” as in no more?

Tim: It sounds like that’s one way of looking at it. The writer of Hebrews is quoting from the Septuagint, which is the Greek translation of the Old Testament. It’s that translation where we get the word “found.” Here, some speculate that he just disappeared, that he was not found, like they would be putting his picture on milk cartons. But then, we are still stuck with the author’s statement that all of these he listed died. That’s the first problem here.

Valori: I am just going to assume that he died and they did not have a record of his death because they did not witness it.

Tim: Maybe. Here’s another problem in the idea that he was translated into heaven. We understand from the Gospel that heaven is something that only happens after the resurrection. Haven’t we learned that, under the Old Covenant, everyone who dies goes to Sheol? This is also problematic in the statement that “…all these died in faith without receiving the promises.” If heaven was a promised blessing, Enoch could not have gone to heaven since that would mean he received the promise unlike the rest.

Valori: So, either he was very special, or he was just a missing person and they had no record of how he died.

Tim: Yes! The third problem we have, and it is a problem especially if you believe that Enoch went to heaven, that Jesus said in John 3:13 that, “…no one has ascended into heaven except he who descended from heaven, that is the Son of Man.” I don’t think Enoch was an exception here. Hebrews did not say, “All these died in faith; well, except for Enoch.” Nor did Jesus say, “No one except the Son of Man AND Enoch has ascended into heaven…” Everyone who died prior to the resurrection did not see the fulfillment of the promises. They had to wait until God resurrected the faithful into his presence. Why would Enoch be an exception?

Ron:  To go to Sheol you had to die. Well, he did not die, he did not experience death. That is what it says in here. At least it might because he did not experience death.

Roger: Is it just another way of saying, “God took him,” or is it just another way of saying that he died?

Ron: It specifically says he did not die. Anything is possible with God, we know that, but am just trying to say that. It says he did not experience death.

Tim: So, if he did not die, was he still around in the days of Noah? Was he still around in the days of Abraham? Was he still around in the days of Jesus? I mean, you are right, there are a lot of problems here.

Chuck: Where is this guy hanging out?

Roger: Where is he? Was he was abducted by God where he’s in some protective custody?

Valori: It sounds like God gave him special treatment.

Tim: I think some preachers have gone with that.

Ty: I do not deal well with confusion, so if you are going to unravel this, let’s get to it.

Roger: This one raises more questions than it answers.

Tim: I am going to give you my feeble interpretation. I think this makes sense, but there are still a lot of questions. I want to first take this word that he uses in verse five that my translation renders as “taken up.” Other translations used the word “translated.” This same word is actually used three times in this verse. Not in all of Hebrews, but in this one verse. “By faith, Enoch was taken up so that he would not see death. And he was not found because he was taken up; for before he was taken up, he was attested to have been pleasing to God.”

There are the three uses in this one verse. This word is actually used in another verse in Hebrews. Look at Hebrews 7:11-12 which might give us an insight into how the word is used. “So if perfection was through the Levitical priesthood (for on the basis of it the people received the law), what further need was there for another priest to arise according to the order of Melchizedek, and not be designated according to the order of Aaron? For when the priesthood is changed, of necessity there also takes place a change of law also.”

The word for “change” in verse 12 is the same Greek word used to refer to Enoch’s being “taken up.” If you want another verse where this word is used, look at Galatians 1:6, where Paul says, “I am amazed that you are so quickly deserting him who called you by the grace of Christ.” That is the word translated “deserting.” The word is used in all three of those verses, so it has a lot of nuances.

In the case of Hebrews 7, he is talking about a change of things that were firmly instituted or already established. The established tradition was that the Levites alone were qualified to be priests, but under the New Covenant, Jesus is also considered a priest. If we are to understand the Gospel, we will need to accept that there has been a change in established law. With the new way of thinking, there must be a “change” or  “taking up” of the old way. Or the old way must be taken away and there must be established a brand new way of thinking.

 In Galatians, Paul is saying that they used to be established in the Gospel, but on the arrival of the Judaizers they altered their thinking to reflect differently from what they previously thought. They had departed from an established way of thinking.

Ron: So, is the new way looking for the savior and the old way is following the law? Was it just a new contract here?

Tim: It was not just following the law, but the whole of the law which would have consequences for disobedience.

Ron:  So, this is where they set their eyes to looking for a savior.

Tim: In the days of Jesus, he began to teach that there was a vast difference between him and what they had in the law of Moses. There is definitely a change on the horizon.

Ron: It was the change that kept Adam and Eve out of the Garden of Eden. And this was where people looked forward to something in the future by faith.

Tim: Keep that in mind and we will address it later.

Roger: This dismantles any argument that the New Covenant is a renewed covenant that is a mixture of old and new. It is not. They are totally different. Everything about them is different.

Tim: Yes, this is highly significant! This must factor into our thinking about the Gospel. The Gospel is corrupted when we try to meld the two together into a hybrid type of covenant.

Recently, Louisiana passed a law mandating the Ten Commandments be taught in schools and should be posted in the classrooms. This is an argument that’s been going on for decades. My complaint is that, if we are Christians and believers in the Gospel, why post the Ten Commandments? Why not post what Paul says in Romans 13 that all the commandments are summed up in one word, that we shall love our neighbor as ourselves? Why not add the rest, that “…love does no wrong to a neighbor because love is the fulfillment of the law?” Why not post that?

Valori: If we are going to teach our children anything, let us teach them to act upon love rather than to be in fear of laws.

Tim: Let’s get back to Enoch. Let me throw in a mention from The Apocrypha, particularly the book of Ecclesiasticus (also known as the Book of Sirach) chapter 44. It’s an interesting passage because it is making brief commentary on some of the Old Testament heroes, very similar to Hebrews 11. The chapter begins with the author saying, “Let us now praise famous men and our fathers that begat us.”

This is what is said about Enoch, “Enoch pleased the Lord, and was translated, being an example of repentance to all generations” (v. 16). Now, remember how we have defined “repentance.” Repentance is turning from the Old Covenant law. It is not turning from bad things to good things (although that’s not untrue). Repentance is turning from the bondage of the Old Covenant law to embrace the New Covenant in Christ; this is how we are transformed.

We don’t know for certain how influenced the New Testament writers were by Ecclesiasticus. It is thought to have been written between 196 and 175 BC. We can still ponder the idea that it was known by the early church and may help us understand why the writer of Hebrews included Enoch in his list.

Remember, the word the author uses in Hebrews 7:12 where he says the priesthood is “changed,” is the same Greek word he uses in Hebrews 11:5 where he says Enoch was “taken up.” Was his being “taken up” referring to the change he made, or his repentance as in Ecclesiasticus? It is like the “change of law” that went from the priesthood of Aaron to the priesthood of Melchizedek. It is the same Greek word, so did Enoch experience the same change?

So let’s toy with this, that the thinking involves the covenants. Everyone listed in Hebrews 11 exhibited, by faith, a dissatisfaction with the covenantal world at that time. They had to look into the future, sometimes far into the future, to see the promise of a New Covenant and a new life with God. By faith, Enoch changed in his thinking. He was dissatisfied with the Old Covenant world where they feared death and saw ahead a day when they would be liberated from death and its bondage.

Roger: It’d be the same thing as saying, “By faith, Abraham believed God, and it was accounted unto him as righteousness.”

Tim: Somewhere along the way, he got a glimpse into the future. When he saw that, the idea of death no longer struck him as fearful.

Ty: Anytime we’re talking about death or life, we are talking about the physicality of it. That’s easy because with the physical, there’s a clear delineation between life and death. When it comes to these ideas in a spiritual sense, we experience a change in thinking. Enoch was changed spiritually versus being changed physically.

Tim: I think that’s the direction I’m headed. He walked with God and he saw long life in his ancestors, but eventually it came to an end. That same Greek word for Enoch being taken up is also used in Galatians 1:6 where Paul chastens the Galatians about deserting Jesus for a different Gospel. It is a radical turnaround that is described, like the abandoning of one set of laws for another.

So Enoch was, by faith, liberated that day from his fear of death. He knew that one day death would be eradicated along with Hades. In the end, death and Hades were cast into the lake of fire. I think this change in perspective came about when Enoch walked with God. His faith in this transformed him.

We are told in Jude that Enoch is the seventh generation from Adam. It is interesting that in the previous six generations that all that is said is that they were born, lived X number of years, and then they died. That was a pattern for those six times. It says they had sons and daughters, lived X more years and then died. Did this mean that they were the generations that lived out the consequences of eating of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil?

Enoch appears and he breaks that pattern. He is walking with God as Adam and Eve did in the garden before the fall. Enoch revived the idea of walking in the garden with God in loving intimacy that Adam had abandoned. There are six generations living that fallen life, then the seventh generation breaks the pattern.

Valori: Isn’t seven like a special number?

Tim: In biblical numerology, seven is the number of creation, as in the seven days of creation. It’s also the number of rest, as God rested on the seventh day.

Ty: I’ve also seen where the number seven is interpreted as completion. That could be with Enoch that the generations have been completed so he can walk again with God.

Ron: I just need a summary of where it says he did not die. What happened to him?

Tim: The popular view is that he didn’t die but just went straight to heaven. That’s a problem because Jesus said, “No one has ascended into heaven except he that descended, that is the son of man” (John 3:13). Has he been alive since that day, making him six-thousand years old?  Chuck pointed out the question, “Where’s this guy been hanging out?” Maybe he changed his name to Elon Musk.

Ron: Let me ask another question. In the Old Testament, Sheol was the place people stayed waiting to go to heaven or hell. There was a good side and a bad side.

Tim: Yes, there was the “bosom of Abraham” where the righteous would dwell until the time of the resurrection. The other side was the fiery realms where the unrighteous dwelt until the separation of the sheep and goats. If you’re interested in more detail read Josephus’ An Extract Out of Josephus’ Discourse to the Greeks Concerning Hades (Hades is the Greek word for Sheol).

So, here’s my theory regarding Enoch. Did Enoch die physically? I think he did based upon Hebrews saying, “all these died in faith.” He did go to Sheol until the Messiah came and released its inhabitants. I say this because they would not get into heaven until the promises are all fulfilled. It’s certainly not a perfect theory, but there you are. I believe he was delivered from the fear of death, fear of eternal separation from God.

Fear of death did not hold him in bondage, because I think by faith he looked ahead and saw that day when death and Hades were cast into the lake of fire. This is what it means when it says he would not taste death, in other words the fear of death as Adam and Eve knew it. Enoch had that same attitude as David, and later Christ, who held the assurance that God “…would not abandon his soul to Sheol” (Psalm 16:10; Acts 2:27).

We can also note that earlier in Hebrews 2:14-15, the author has already spoken of this subject. He talks of Jesus taking on flesh and blood, “…so that through death he might destroy the one who has the power of death, that is, the devil, and free those who through fear of death were subject to slavery all their lives.” This is what Jesus came to accomplish. Could we say that Enoch looked ahead and saw this?

Enoch is the next person mentioned after Abel, who offered a better sacrifice by faith. Perhaps Enoch was the next in line to turn from the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil to embrace the Tree of Life. While they continued to live in the wilderness, they looked ahead to a time when God would send a Messiah to restore the garden.

Roger: Faith is defined as “…the assurance of things hoped for.” Meaning, they don’t have those things, but they consider them to be real. It is also “…the substance of things unseen.” This is how faith operates. What they were looking for, we have and enjoy daily. They hoped for that, and they had an assurance of it that it was going to happen. In their mind, God’s future promises were substance, and they were approved by God because of their faith. Like it is said of Abraham, he believed God and it was counted to him as righteousness.

Tim: Looking back at Abel, it was because of his faith that he presented a better sacrifice when he looked ahead and had evidence of things that he could see in the future. He knew it was there. After being cast out of the garden, Abel seems to be the first one to understand a need for something new. It was a sacrifice better than his brother’s who presented a sacrifice of sweat. Abel’s sacrifice was accepted because he looked ahead and knew the effectual sacrifice would be a blood sacrifice.

It’s the same thing with Enoch. I think Enoch looked ahead and saw beyond the curse that said “…in the day you eat of it you will die.” Way before David, he had the conviction that God would not abandon his soul to Sheol. He believed that and was approved by God. In walking with God, the fear of death disappeared. He was confident that when he slept with his fathers, that a day would come when he would be awakened in the resurrection.

The first century Christians we’re in a place to break the mold of Old Covenant thinking. They would break the mold of what it was like to live in the wilderness. They were cognizant that a time had come when the wilderness would be turned back into a garden. Able, Enoch, and the rest of the Old Testament saints saw this by faith, but Jesus was the start of a generation that would see the end of the old and the introduction of the new.

Hebrews goes on to say, “And without faith it is impossible to please him, for the one who comes to God must believe that he exists, and that he proves to be one who rewards those who seek him” (v. 6). I think he’s encouraging his readers to look ahead to the reward. The Old Testament saints rejoiced at the reward they saw ahead of them, but died before seeing their fulfillment. All the promises God had made were to be fulfilled in that first-century generation. Christ was and is the embodiment of every promise fulfilled. 2 Corinthians 1:20, “For as many as the promises of God are, in him they are yes…”

As his fellow believers are suffering under persecution, the author is telling them, “Our Old Testament brothers and sisters did not receive the promise, just like you and me right now.” He explains that they saw them from afar and welcomed them from afar, but they didn’t receive them. “We are the same,” he says, “but there is a huge difference; we are the generation that will see the promises kept!” He’s saying, “You know all those promises that they were looking ahead to? Well, you and I are about to watch them be fulfilled!”

Valori: This would have been very encouraging to those who had lost friends and family. They knew that during this whole process, they would be safe.

Roger: When we get to the end of this chapter, there is a list of some pretty atrocious things that they suffered.

Tim: Yes, but in all the things that happened to them, either good or bad, all these people found the approval of God. Those that received the victories and those that suffered the atrocities, it didn’t matter. Their faith gave them the approval of God; time would give them the promises of God.

Roger: Everything we look at we must put it in the context of the covenants to understand it. It’s using different words to say the same thing.

Tim: It’s difficult to interpret a verse like the one about Enoch. Here we are told, “he was not for God took him.” To the western mind twenty-one centuries later, that doesn’t make a lot of sense. But if we keep in mind that the story of redemption beginning with Genesis is a continual conflict between two covenants, it makes a bit more sense. It explains the struggle between Abel with Cain, and Jesus with the scribes and Pharisees. It explains the conflicts between the apostles and the religious leadership leading up to the destruction of the temple.

Roger: When you see that progression starting with the New Covenant and going back to the Old, you get a better picture of what we’ve been freed from and we don’t try to put a burden on somebody else with those laws, rules, and regulations. It’s beautiful that it’s been fulfilled and completed!