Are you Elijah? I am not. Then who are you? John 1:25.

 John the Baptist told those who came to question him that he was NOT Elijah, nor was he the Messiah.

“They asked him, “If you’re not the Messiah, Elijah, or the Prophet, why then are you immersing?” (John 1:25 TLV)

 It is interesting, primarily because, despite John's comment that he was NOT Elijah, people will tell you that Elijah came back as John the Baptizer.

I want you to pay attention to what Jesus said to the disciples.

“Six days later, Jesus took with him Peter and the brothers James and John and led them up a high mountain where they were alone. (2) As they looked on, a change came over Jesus: his face was shining like the sun, and his clothes were dazzling white. (3) Then, the three disciples saw Moses and Elijah talking with Jesus. (4) So Peter spoke up and said to Jesus, "Lord, how good it is that we are here! If you wish, I will make three tents here, one for you, one for Moses, and one for Elijah." (5) While he was talking, a shining cloud came over them, and a voice from the cloud said, "This is my own dear Son, with whom I am pleased—listen to him!" (6) When the disciples heard the voice, they were so terrified that they threw themselves face downward on the ground. (7) Jesus came to them and touched them. "Get up," he said. "Don't be afraid!" (8) So they looked up and saw no one there but Jesus. (9) As they came down the mountain, Jesus ordered them, "Don't tell anyone about this vision you have seen until the Son of Man has been raised from death." (10) Then the disciples asked Jesus, "Why do the teachers of the Law say that Elijah has to come first?" (11) "Elijah is indeed coming first," answered Jesus, "and he will get everything ready. (12) But I tell you that Elijah has already come, and people did not recognize him but treated him just as they pleased. In the same way, they will also mistreat the Son of Man."
(Matthew 17:1-12 GNB)

1. No photographs of Moses and Elijah existed, so how did the disciples know who was standing there talking to Jesus?

   The answer lies in the fact that the three were given an instant download of information. That download is the Holy Spirit. If you are that person who loves to argue and is willing to say, “that's impossible.” I ask you, had the Holy Spirit been restricted from operating on the earth? The answer is NO and if you are prone to argue against that, then prove your thesis. You cannot.

2. The three disciples started raving about building tabernacles for each “prophet,” talking with Jesus. If they had done this, those structures would have quickly become idolatrous structures, snares, and patterns for other idol worship, which Israel was very adept at.

   So what happens next?

   While they were talking, “a shining cloud came over them, and a voice from the cloud said, "This is my own dear Son, with whom I am pleased—listen to him!" God is trying to snap them out of this human response mode. This voice was much like when God spoke over Jesus at His baptism by John, where those that heard it said it sounded like thunder.

3. Note the next question.

   “Why do the teachers of the Law say that Elijah has to come first?

   That would be confusing, especially if you had just seen Elijah talking with Jesus. As I tried to put my thoughts together about Elijah, I was reminded that he left this earth without dying. The writer of Hebrews tells us that we must die. (Hebrews 9:27.)

   Other witnesses to this assertion that we must die.

   Psalms 103:13-14 NASB Just as a father has compassion on his children, So the LORD has compassion on those who fear Him. (14) For He Himself knows our frame; He is mindful that we are but dust.

   Made in the image of God, a spirit (Genesis 1:26,27.) It was not until Genesis 2:7 that the man was given a body, and this was after the seventh day. We are all built from the earth.

   The author of Ecclesiastes can be attributed to one who identifies as a “son of David,” but this does not necessarily mean it was Solomon. The author, talking about pottery, a created thing that must return to dust, says this.

   “Then the dust returns to the ground it came from, and the spirit returns to God who gave it.” (Ecclesiastes 12:7 TLV )

   Since the psalmist had already told us that we are dust, we will return to dust. But there is a small problem – we have a hope of eternal life filled with peace. So these bodies that will be changed must die, an event that happens in that twinkling of an eye. Why? Because it is the body that became corrupted and is the reason that God could NOT use humans to procreate the Son of God. Having a young girl that had never intimately known a man to be a surrogate mother bypassed the genetic brokenness called sin.

When, then, does Elijah return again?

Ah, when God sends the two witnesses to preach in the streets of Jerusalem. By the way, the world is about to see this happen.

Okay, that may cover one of the witnesses; who is the other? 

First, the question is unimportant, as the church will have gone up in the rapture, and we will NOT see any of that. Many think it will be Moses. But, unfortunately, it will not be Moses, and our evidence for that comes from the writings of Jude.

“But when Michael the archangel, disputing with the devil, was arguing about the body of Moses, he did not dare to render a judgment against him for slander, but said, “May the Lord rebuke you!” “
(Jude 1:9 TLV)

The devil would not be wasting his time arguing about the body of Moses unless there was a dead body. This would tell us that Moses died and was, therefore, excluded from returning to earth and being subjected to death once again. Even our “so-called” legal system prevents double jeopardy, for crying out loud. 

Having eliminated a “major” player, who is left?

There is only one more player left, and that is Enoch.

Yes, I am aware that most have no clue about Enoch and would never call him a prophet, as though being a prophet is a requirement for God to send you back to earth as a witness to the greatness of God.

A significant piece of evidence about Enoch is these words.

“And Enoch continually walked with God...” Genesis 5:24 TLV

Walked is the Hebrew word hālaḵ. The Word Study Dictionary tells us that: “this common word carries with it the basic idea of movement: the flowing of a river. Since the word is also used to describe natural movement, it applies to the descending of floods (Gen_8:3); the crawling of beasts (Lev_11:27); the slithering of snakes (Lev_11:42); the blowing of the wind (Ecc_1:6); the tossing of the sea (Jon_1:13). Since it is usually a person who is moving, it is frequently translated "walk."” “This word is also used metaphorically to speak of the pathways (i.e., behavior) of one's life.” And I add one more word from the NASEC dictionary – accompany.

Every description above speaks to me of an intimacy, whether it was in an up time or a down time. The relationship was mutual as Enoch, who was NO MORE spiritual than you or I, accompanied God/elohim in his everyday affairs. Think about the fact that Enoch, a husband, had to eat, till a field, hunt game, feed a family (he was, by the way, the father of Methuselah,) and he had to pass along the verbal understanding of who elohim is. Things I know about the man.

• Enoch lived 65 years, then fathered Methuselah.

• Enoch walked with God continually for 300 years after he fathered Methuselah.

• Enoch fathered other sons and daughters, which we know nothing about.

• All of Enoch’s days were 365 years. 

• Enoch continually walked with God.

• Enoch walked with God, and then he was no more because God had taken him away.
  (Gen 5:24 BSB)

I can remember when I read about Enoch, asking myself, where and how did Enoch understand what it was like to have such an intimate relationship? 

It would seem that “sin” had stripped that intimacy away, but that was only on our side. I say that because God still came to the couple, respecting their newly found discomfort, and spoke to them in the garden, as He killed some animals for sacrifice and coverings, which He gave them instructions on how to do all that. 

I started to do the math and discovered that Adam, a great-grandfather (many times over), was over 600 years old when Enoch was born. All the people on earth were related in some way to the man that walked with God, and none chose to pursue what this God – elohim, was like. The only man that ever walked with Him in the cool of the day was still alive, and Adam described those days with such longing and passion that even now, as I write, I can hardly see through the tears. 

I am painfully aware of many people who had the opportunity to God. Consider that Enoch had a son, Methuselah, and other children, but only one stands out, primarily because of his age when he died. 

Did you know that Methuselah's name had meaning and was, therefore, a prophecy? 

His name meant when he dies, it will come. 

What was coming?

A flood that would purge the earth of NOT just sin; the flood could not eliminate sin because that “sin” was embedded within the bodies of Noah and his extended family that God saved on that ark. The primary purpose of the flood was to eliminate the effects of fallen angels, sons of god, that were taking any woman they chose and having sexual relations with them. The only purpose behind this was to eliminate the heritage of God on earth. Those children Enoch had that did not get on the ark, descendants of Adam, and Methuselah's children, aside from Noah, were all killed in the flood because all of them had been genetically altered by the fallen angels. Only Enoch, Methuselah, and Noah's family, a descendant of Methuselah, escaped this perversion.

One last shot. Enoch was a prophet. 

It was also about these men that Enoch, in the seventh generation from Adam, prophesied, saying, "Behold, the Lord came with many thousands of His holy ones, 

(Jude 1:14 NASB)

An intensive look at Enoch. Part one.

I have been looking at Enoch and attempting to write about him, and his surroundings, for weeks now. It has been nothing less than a struggle as the things I talk about here, are controversial (I know this because I have been around religion for a long time and I have had first-hand experience with this.) And, as I will mention in the post, there seems to be so little known about the man; at least that is the impression we were given growing up in church.
May I interject something here? Growing up in church rarely brings you to an understanding of who God is. Oh sure, you can walk away with a boatload of traditions and opinions, but few of them are correct, accurate, or appropriate. For example: In today's morning study, the leader said, "you will not find a Pharisee in heaven." I do not believe that is a valid statement, nor was it appropriate. For weren't Nicodemus and Joseph of Arimethia Pharisees?

Mark 15:43 CJB  Yosef of Ramatayim, a prominent member of the Sanhedrin who himself was also looking forward to the Kingdom of God, went boldly to Pilate and asked for Yeshua's body.

John 3:1 NASB Now there was a man of the Pharisees, named Nicodemus, a ruler of the Jews;

So for someone to make such a brash statement like NO Pharisees will be found in heaven, is blatantly untrue. There is a point to this tirade and that is, that there is a multitude of things being preached and taught that are at worst decrepit lies, and at best, false teachings;  none-the-less, both can send you into a pit of deception. If we have bought into the lies, choosing to not challenge what we hear by reading the Word of God for ourselves. Then how will we know what is true? Jesus, by the way, is the one who said, "no one comes to the Father but through me." Is it possible that: the tearing of the veil in the temple; giving himself as the final sacrifice; pouring out his own blood on the heavenly altar, and giving his life as the payment for the redemption of the world is the thing that restored our way back to the Father?  Seriously, the price has been paid; and all that is required is that WE acknowledge and accept Jesus as that final lamb that slaughtered for us.
But what does religion do? It clouds the issue, creates more rules, and condemns every stupid thing we do as we stumble through this thing called life.

Having said all that, I give you an intensive look at Enoch.

Enoch is a man that few talk about, and yet, Enoch's legacy is found in Genesis, the book of Jude, Hebrews 11 and 2 Peter 2. We also see Enoch's name entwined in the history of Middle East. There is no doubt that Enoch interacted with the Nephilim, and, that he walked with God in such a way that he was able to walk off the earth.

By faith Enoch was translated that he should not see death; and was not found, because God had translated him: for before his translation he had this testimony, that he pleased God. (Heb 11:5, UKJV)

A man like this is worthy of a concentrated look and study.

The first reference we have to the name Enoch is in Genesis 4:17 where the wife of Cain, (the man who killed his brother Abel,) is having a baby. They named that baby Enoch. This child is not the Enoch we are looking for but is the son of Cain and the father of another called Enoch. This son of Cain built a city and named that city after his son, Enoch. However, neither of these play a role in getting us to the Enoch we desire to understand. If I look carefully at the genealogy provided in Genesis chapter five, I find that Cain played NO role in the bloodline that leads us to Noah. We will probe a possible reason why Cain is excluded further on in the thesis.

Do we have other methods of determining which Enoch we want, as there are two so far?
Yes, and one of the answers comes from the book of Jude.

And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord comes with ten thousands of his saints, (Jude 1:14, UKJV)

Genesis provides an excellent genealogy through Seth, not Cain.

And the days of Adam after he had begotten Seth were eight hundred years: and he brings forth sons and daughters: And all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years: and he died. And Seth lived a hundred and five years, and brings forth Enos: And Seth lived after he brings forth Enos eight hundred and seven years, and brings forth sons and daughters: And all the days of Seth were nine hundred and twelve years: and he died. And Enos lived ninety years, and brings forth Cainan: And Enos lived after he brings forth Cainan eight hundred and fifteen years, and brings forth sons and daughters: And all the days of Enos were nine hundred and five years: and he died. And Cainan lived seventy years and brought forth Mahalaleel: And Cainan lived after he brings forth Mahalaleel eight hundred and forty years, and brings forth sons and daughters: And all the days of Cainan were nine hundred and ten years: and he died. And Mahalaleel lived sixty and five years, and brings forth Jared: And Mahalaleel lived after he brings forth Jared eight hundred and thirty years, and brings forth sons and daughters: And all the days of Mahalaleel were eight hundred ninety and five years: and he died. And Jared lived an hundred sixty and two years, and he brings forth Enoch: And Jared lived after he brings forth Enoch eight hundred years, and brings forth sons and daughters: And all the days of Jared were nine hundred sixty and two years: and he died. And Enoch lived sixty and five years and brings forth Methuselah: (Gen 5:4-21, UKJV)

Since Jude says that Enoch was the seventh generation from Adam, let's test the claim. Adam; Seth; Enos; Cainan; Mahalaleel; Jared; Enoch. There it is, seven generations.

The name Enoch alone tells us much about the man, as his name means dedicated or disciplined. This dedication must have been a predominant aspect of his life because we have this,

And Enoch walked with God after he brings forth Methuselah three hundred years, and brings forth sons and daughters: And all the days of Enoch were three hundred sixty and five years: And Enoch walked with God: and he was not; for God took him. (Gen 5:22-24, UKJV)

What do we have that could explain Enoch's understanding of God and how to communicate with God as if that is a big mystery?

If we do the math, we find that Adam was 622 years old when Enoch is born, and Adam lived to be 930 years old. Therefore Adam may have had a substantial impact on Enoch, and Adam is the only logical choice to influence Enoch.

If Adam was able to inform Enoch and demonstrate what this idea of walking with God looked like, Why then didn't Adam merely walk off the earth as Enoch did?
Maybe the answer, as with Cain, has more to do with their cataclysmic errors in judgment.

The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges explains this walk that Enoch lived as a combination of fellowship and progress.

[walked with God] The phrase here, as in Genesis 5:24, used of Enoch, has passed into common use to express intimacy of communion with God. It denotes more than either standing in His presence, or walking before Him (Genesis 6:9, Genesis 17:1), or following after Him. It combines the ideas of fellowship and progress. It is the picture of one who has God with him in all the various scenes of life.

The word took, is explained in the Cambridge Bible commentary as well.

This expression is used to denote an unaccountable disappearance, cf. Genesis 42:13; Genesis 42:36; 1Kings 20:40. In order to make it quite clear that the words did not imply death, LXX renders οὐχ εὑρίσκετο; Vulg. “ non-apparuit.” The shortness of his life as compared with the other patriarchs might have been regarded as a proof of Divine displeasure if the next sentence had not been added to explain the circumstance. [for God took him] “Took,” or “received,” him, i.e., into His own abode, without death.

The Hebrew word for took is lāqaḥ: A verb meaning to take, to get. Its exact meaning must be discerned from its context. It is used of grasping or seizing a person or an animal. Word Study Dictionary.

You will also find the word lāqaḥ used in Ezekiel 8:3 where Ezekiel describes the spirit, lifting him up by the hair and taking him, by visions, to God.

This word lāqaḥ is very similar to the Greek word Harpazo, which also means to snatch away. Harpazo is the Greek word that we substitute for the word rapture. In either case, it conveys the rapid removal of the church from the earth prior to God's wrath being poured out on the planet – just like Noah and the flood; and, just like Lot before the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah.

In the book of Jude, we have a prophecy attributed to Enoch which cannot be verified in the Old Testament by direct comparison, because it is only found in The Book of Enoch (Enoch 1:9.)

Jude 1:14-15 MKJV And Enoch, the seventh from Adam, also prophesied to these, saying, Behold, the Lord came with myriads of His saints, 15) to do judgment against all, and to rebuke all the ungodly of them concerning all their ungodly works which they ungodly did, and concerning all the hard things ungodly sinners spoke against Him.

Assuming you don't have a copy of the Book of Enoch, is a statement like this so odd?
Hardly, and here are some examples that convey that theme, although they came long after Enoch.

Daniel 7:18 But the saints of the Most High shall take the kingdom and possess the kingdom forever, even forever and ever.

Zechariah 14:5 MKJV And you shall flee to the valley of My mountains; for the valley of the mountains shall reach to Azal. And you shall flee as you fled from before the earthquake in the days of Uzziah king of Judah. And Jehovah my God shall come, and all the saints with you.

There is no doubt in my mind that Jesus will come as described in Revelation 19:14 with all the armies of heaven, just as Enoch described.

If this was all the Biblical information I had on Enoch, what then do I make of this man.

I think it would be safe to say that:

• Enoch was a good man.
  While the majority of the world was going crazy, Enoch remained sane.
  Genesis 6:5 NASB Then the LORD saw that the wickedness of man was great on the earth and that every intent of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.
  The passage implies that the whole world had gone mad. Even if one man had not, then I should not be allowed to say all. It is safe to assume that something close to all is being suggested, however, Enoch cannot be counted among that number.
  While it is safe to assume that Enoch was a good man, all we have is Hebrews 11:5 to validate that claim. There is something certain about Hebrews 11:5, as the writer of Hebrews had no more information about Enoch than we have, unless they had access to a copy of The Book of Enoch, as J.R. Church claims they did. Suddenly it seems the Bible itself is validating this Book of Enoch.
• He was a worshiper of God.
  Enoch seems to have taken worship to the next level; something I wish I could attain. But again, there is nothing in the Old Testament to validate this claim outside of this,
  Genesis 5:24 NASB Enoch walked with God; and he was not, for God took him.
  There is, however, this line we find in Hebrews 11:5,
  “ for he obtained the witness that before his being taken up he was pleasing to God.”
  The words obtained and witness are the same word marturéō which means (according to the Word Study Dictionary) To bear witness, to testify to the truth of what one has seen, heard, or knows. Now, did God bear witness to Enoch, or did Enoch bear witness to God? Since The Book of Enoch was known and read throughout the early church for the first 700 years of its existence; then it is safe to say that Enoch bore witness to: not only the current and future acts of the living God (prophetically,) but also the activities of the fallen angels - as they attempted to prevent God from bringing in the seed (through man) that would crush Satan's head.
• It is safe to say that Enoch walked the earth at the same time as the Titans.
  Dissecting this requires that we use our brains and think outside the religious boxes in which we entrench ourselves. Our principal source of information comes from Genesis 6. What is the problem with that? The problem is that we make immediate and critical assumptions based upon the placement of the information in the, so called, Bible “chronology.”
  Allow me to explain. We know that God created man (male and female,) put a body on them, and placed them in the garden. We assume that garden was a small selective spot and that they never left it, but neither of those ideas is valid. All you have to do is travel a bit, stop at the local museum, and you find that the barren location you are now standing on was once a vibrant, tropical garden.
  What we do know is this,
  Genesis 3:1-3 NASB Now the serpent was more crafty than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said to the woman, "Indeed, has God said, 'You shall not eat from any tree of the garden'?" 2) The woman said to the serpent, "From the fruit of the trees of the garden we may eat; 3) but from the fruit of the tree which is in the middle of the garden, God has said, 'You shall not eat from it or touch it, or you will die.'"
  In this expansive place called a garden was a plot of ground considered to be the center. Here is where the fall of man took place.
  Another assumption we make is that there were no children born to Adam and Eve until the fall. If that was the case, then why would God have to make this declaration to Eve?
  Genesis 3:16 NASB To the woman He said, "I will greatly multiply Your pain in childbirth, In pain, you will bring forth children;
  This comment by God would make no sense to Eve unless she was producing children without all the pain and discomfort normally associated with childbirth. Add to this piece of logic a question recently thrown at me, once again; “where did Cain get his wife?” The answer lies in setting aside tradition, assumption, and faulty teaching. Since we legitimately do not know how long Adam and Eve walked this earth prior to the fall. It is only natural to think that two naked humans would have had intercourse, only without the self-serving motives sin brings. And, this, is the only reasonable explanation for Cain to obtain a wife. The alternative, of Cain, waiting for his parents to produce a female child is ridiculous. Besides that, we relish the idea of clinging to twisted chronological logic, which cannot explain why Cain would say, people, will kill me, especially when we want to believe that there were no other people. And do we have any reason that logically explains why Cain was able to go to a city? Mind you, at this time in civilizations history; a city could have been several thatch huts and a fire pit. It still implies others living there and the probability of families of their own.
  If this idea of children before the fall is valid, then what kind of mentality would they have had? They were just like their parents, godlike.