Yes, Enoch and Elijah went to heaven [Akin]

[thistle]

Catholic Answers: Yes, Enoch and Elijah went to heaven
Jimmy Akin
catholic.com/blog/jimmy-akin/yes-enoch-and-elijah-went-to-heaven

Many Catholics are aware that Jesus “opened the gates of heaven” and allowed the righteous dead to go there.

The Catechism even says it:

CCC 637 In his human soul united to his divine person, the dead Christ went down to the realm of the dead. He opened heaven’s gates for the just who had gone before him.

This leads to a question that comes up periodically: What about figures like Enoch and Elijah, who seem to have been assumed into heaven prior to the time of Christ?

The obvious answer, I’ve always held, is that they were exceptions. As a general rule, heaven was not open to those who lived before the time of Christ, but God is omnipotent, and he can make exceptions if he chooses.

Some of the people I’ve discussed this with seem to struggle with it, and I haven’t understood the source of their difficulty.

God can clearly give the blessings of the Christian age to someone prior to the time of Christ, on the basis of what Christ did. After all, that’s why the Virgin Mary was immaculately conceived. The Catechism explains:

CCC 492 The “splendor of an entirely unique holiness” by which Mary is “enriched from the first instant of her conception” comes wholly from Christ: She is “redeemed, in a more exalted fashion, by reason of the merits of her Son.”

CCC 508 From among the descendants of Eve, God chose the Virgin Mary to be the mother of his Son. “Full of grace”, Mary is “the most excellent fruit of redemption” (SC 103): from the first instant of her conception, she was totally preserved from the stain of original sin and she remained pure from all personal sin throughout her life.

If God could apply the redemption Christ wrought to Mary before his death and resurrection, then he could similarly apply its fruits to others as well—at least on an exceptional basis.

And the way that Enoch and Elijah’s lives concluded was clearly exceptional.

In Enoch’s case, Genesis 5:24 says that God “took” him, but doesn’t say where. Sirach 44:16 and 49:14 make it clear that he was taken up from the earth, and Hebrews 11:5 adds “so that he should not see death.”

In Elijah’s case, 2 Kings 2:11 states that “Elijah went up by a whirlwind into heaven.” First Maccabees 2:58 adds, “Elijah because of great zeal for the Law was taken up into heaven.”

Both 2 Kings and 1 Maccabees both use the ordinary Hebrew and Greek words for “heaven” (shamayim and ouranos, respectively)—indicating that heaven was where they went.

Recently I was rereading St. John Paul II’s general audience on heaven and noticed that he also acknowledged this:

The depiction of heaven as the transcendent dwelling-place of the living God is joined with that of the place to which believers, through grace, can also ascend, as we see in the Old Testament accounts of Enoch (cf. Gn 5:24) and Elijah (cf. 2 Kgs 2:11) [General Audience, July 21, 1999].

It thus seems that John Paul II—who is now himself in heaven—acknowledged the exceptional nature of Enoch and Elijah’s admission to that blessed realm.

The Church does not teach there were exceptions for Elijah and Enoch to allow them into Heaven before Christ opened the gates.
NOBODY entered Heaven prior to Christ opening the gates after his death and resurrection.

By the way, nobody prior to or after the death and resurrection of Christ ever ascended to Heaven. Only Christ ascended. Do not confuse ascension and assumption.

 

[AmbroseSJ]

CCC 637 is correct. But did Elijah die like the other fathers and go to the realm of the dead OR was he different in that he went directly to heaven as scripture says?

As you interpret Scripture that is.

Scripture is very clear on this too: John 3:13 “No one has ascended into heaven, but He who descended from heaven: the Son of Man.”

This is from Our Lord’s own mouth. Not someone’s interpretation.

I can never understand WHY it is SO IMPORTANT that Enoch and Elijah (and sometimes Moses) were somehow exempt (yet not Abraham?, not Noah?, Not Isaac? Not Jacob? etc.) Why they are so quick to suppose that because a unique grace that was bestowed upon the Virgin Mary (the Immaculate Conception) which was NOT for her benefit, but rather as a fitting grace for the most Holy Incarnation. Therefore to extrapolate, that since God did this for Mary (which He did not) and suppose that He capriciously sprinkled this same largesse upon a select few others is erroneous and poorly thought out. This same erroneous thinking leads to such sayings that none of them died, and that they were similarly given the grace of the Immaculate Conception. Although this may not be what Jimmy Akin is saying, it is where this train of thought DOES lead.

 

[Jerry-Jet]

Is it possible that Enoch and Elijah went to just outside the gates of Heaven? Could there be another place other than inside the gates of Heaven–Abraham’s bosom–Purgatory–and Hell?

I think that maybe the reason that they were just outside the gates of Heaven and NOT in Abraham’s bosom is that they did not die and that one day they will be the two witnesses spoken of in Revelation. Maybe they will die later at that time?

Is this possible?

 

[Cathoholic]

What thistle says here . . .

By the way, nobody prior to or after the death and resurrection of Christ ever ascended to Heaven. Only Christ ascended. Do not confuse ascension and assumption.

. . . is a good point.

So as not to confuse; the only reason I used the word “ascend” (in post 17) . . . .

. . . . Believers CAN (through grace) ascend into Heaven (in this sense).

and explicitly put “in this sense” and “through grace” was because . . . .

. . . was because . . . that was the language of the TRANSLATION of Pope John Paul II’s talk that Mr. Akin cited.

But yes thistle and AmbroseSJ are correct.

ONLY Jesus “Ascends” to Heaven in the fullest sense. Or as Karl Keating says; “Jesus is the only one who can go into Heaven under His own horsepower.”

 

[irenaeuslyons]

As you interpret Scripture that is.

Scripture is very clear on this too: John 3:13 “No one has ascended into heaven, but He who descended from heaven: the Son of Man.”

This is from Our Lord’s own mouth. Not someone’s interpretation.

I can never understand WHY it is SO IMPORTANT that Enoch and Elijah (and sometimes Moses) were somehow exempt (yet not Abraham?, not Noah?, Not Isaac? Not Jacob? etc.) Why they are so quick to suppose that because a unique grace that was bestowed upon the Virgin Mary (the Immaculate Conception) which was NOT for her benefit, but rather as a fitting grace for the most Holy Incarnation. Therefore to extrapolate, that since God did this for Mary (which He did not) and suppose that He capriciously sprinkled this same largesse upon a select few others is erroneous and poorly thought out. This same erroneous thinking leads to such sayings that none of them died, and that they were similarly given the grace of the Immaculate Conception. Although this may not be what Jimmy Akin is saying, it is where this train of thought DOES lead.

JUST TO BE CLEAR: I NEVER SAID ANYONE ASCENDED INTO HEAVEN. THAT WAS POPE ST JOHN PAUL II AS CITED BY JIMMY AKIN. AND THAT WAS NEVER MY INTENTION TO COMPARE IT TO CHRIST’S

“Even Elijah, in his quick translation to heaven could not take his mantle with him, but left in the world the garments of the world.”
-St Jerome (Doctor of the Church)

“But many ask whither Enoch was translated, and why he was translated, and why he did not die, neither he nor Elijah, and, if they are still alive, how they live, and in what form. But to ask these things is superfluous. For that the one was translated, and that the other[Elijah] was taken up, the Scriptures have said.”
-St Chrysostom (Doctor of the Church)

“Henoch pleased God, and was translated into paradise, that he may give repentance to the nations.”
Sir44:16

"Caleb, for bearing witness before the congregation, received an inheritance. David by his mercy obtained the throne of an everlasting kingdom. Elias, while he was full of zeal for the law, was* taken up into heaven**."*
1 Mac 2: 56-58

The Doctors of the Church agree, and the Holy Scriptures agree that Enoch and Elijah were taken up into heaven. How we create a harmony with the gates of heaven being closed before Christs death is a matter for valid theological speculation. They both are mysteriously true. Just as the scripture saying “All have sinned” is true while making exceptions for Mary and Christ.

 

[Cathoholic]

Irenaeuslyons.

None of these quotes necessarily mean the sense of Heaven as in Christ leading captives to.

And even if the Fathers did, it wouldn’t mean that they were brought to Heaven on that given day.

“Even Elijah, in his quick translation to heaven could not take his mantle with him, but left in the world the garments of the world.”
-St Jerome (Doctor of the Church)

I don’t know what the Latin word for Heaven that St. Jerome was using, or if he was writing in Greek, but if (I am not saying he was, but “if”) he was using the Greek word ouranos, this could merely mean “the sky”.

IF (admittedly, I don’t know the original language) St. Jerome used the word “ouranos” here, it may merely imply . . . .

“Even Elijah, in his quick translation into the sky could not take his mantle with him, but left in the world the garments of the world.”
-St Jerome (Doctor of the Church)

Or it may merely mean Elijah was “translated into Heaven” in the sense of “the bosom of Abraham”.

“Even Elijah, in his quick translation into the bosom of Abraham could not take his mantle with him, but left in the world the garments of the world.”
-St Jerome (Doctor of the Church)

ROMAN CATECHISM . . . Wherefore before His death and Resurrection heaven was closed against every child of Adam. The souls of the just, on their departure from this life, were either borne to the bosom of Abraham; or, . . . were purified in the fire of purgatory.

You COULD draw more conclusions from the Fathers and Old Testament quotes, but I think with the data of the Roman Catechism, I don’t see how you can harmonize the two while trying to assert other people went to Heaven before Jesus.

EVERY Child of Adam . . . Either

• Bosom of Abraham
• Purgatory

With the idea that Elijah (and Enoch) being in Heaven in the sense of full Heavenly glory (minus their glorified bodies–which presents yet another problem for thinking Enoch and Elijah were in Heaven), it seems you must accept the Fathers and ignore the Roman Catechism.

With the idea that Elijah (and Enoch) are in some sense “translated”, yet Jesus leads the captives into Heaven, you CAN EASILY harmonize all the data.

ROMAN CATECHISM Wherefore before His death and Resurrection heaven was closed against every child of Adam.

“Henoch pleased God, and was translated into paradise, that he may give repentance to the nations.”
Sir44:16

Remember, the Good thief was “in paradise” with Jesus that very day on Good Friday or, “this day”.

Yet we also know that Jesus had “not yet ascended to my Father” (John 20:17) on Easter Sunday.

So “paradise” is not going to be convincing in the face of what is taught in the Roman Catechism either.

You have to harmonize ALL the data.

Including what the Roman Catechism states about Heaven being closed to EVERY child of Adam.

 

[Cathoholic]

One addendum to my post 23.

I said:

I don’t see how you can harmonize the two while trying to assert other people went to Heaven before Jesus.

Of course Jesus is God and is Eternal, resides in Heaven, etc. etc. But in the above quote, what I am talking about is meant in the sense of the place Jesus is leading the captives to, that beforehand was closed to “every child of Adam”.

 

[thistle]

JUST TO BE CLEAR: I NEVER SAID ANYONE ASCENDED INTO HEAVEN. THAT WAS POPE ST JOHN PAUL II AS CITED BY JIMMY AKIN. AND THAT WAS NEVER MY INTENTION TO COMPARE IT TO CHRIST’S

"Even Elijah, in his quick translation to heaven could not take his mantle with him, but left in the world the garments of the world."
-St Jerome (Doctor of the Church)

"But many ask whither Enoch was translated, and why he was translated, and why he did not die, neither he nor Elijah, and, if they are still alive, how they live, and in what form. But to ask these things is superfluous. For that the one was translated, and that the other[Elijah] was taken up, the Scriptures have said."
-St Chrysostom (Doctor of the Church)

"Henoch pleased God, and was translated into paradise, that he may give repentance to the nations."
Sir44:16

"Caleb, for bearing witness before the congregation, received an inheritance. David by his mercy obtained the throne of an everlasting kingdom. Elias, while he was full of zeal for the law, was** taken up into heaven**."
1 Mac 2: 56-58

The Doctors of the Church agree, and the Holy Scriptures agree that Enoch and Elijah were taken up into heaven. How we create a harmony with the gates of heaven being closed before Christs death is a matter for valid theological speculation. They both are mysteriously true. Just as the scripture saying “All have sinned” is true while making exceptions for Mary and Christ.

They were not taken up into what the Church teaches is Heaven where all the saints and angels are with God (beatific vision). The Church teaches that after the death and resurrection of Christ he opened the gates of Heaven. Nobody entered Heaven prior to that and the Church does NOT teach there were exemptions for Elijah, Enoch or anyone else.

 

[AmbroseSJ]

irenaeuslyons:

The Doctors of the Church agree, and the Holy Scriptures agree that Enoch and Elijah were taken up into heaven. How we create a harmony with the gates of heaven being closed before Christs death is a matter for valid theological speculation. They both are mysteriously true. Just as the scripture saying “All have sinned” is true while making exceptions for Mary and Christ.

What we take away from this apparent contradiction is that the Church has the final say. We don’t quote the Fathers to contradict the Church. The catechism is clearly against the supposition that Enoch, Elijah, maybe Moses and others were taken to that Heaven which was revealed to us by Jesus Christ at His coming. Before the Gospel, there was the Bosom of Abraham (as Jesus states in his parable.) Therefore any reference to heaven before the revelation of the Gospel, has to be interpreted as either the sky (or heavens) or the Bosom of Abraham. This is the ONLY way these two contradictory statements of Scripture can be harmonized in Catholicism. This also agrees well with other Scripture statements such as John 3:13.

We also have Church dogma on Original Sin and its consequences. Of course God is able to work any mystery that pleases Him. However, that alone should not be a justification in our minds for exemptions to the Gospel. We all know that the Central Mystery of Christianity, the Incarnation, did result in the exemption of the Virgin Mary from Original Sin. But it was not a special favor to her. It was for the sake of the pure and Holy Incarnation Himself. Therefore, because of this one exemption in the entire economy of Salvation, we are not therefore given liberty to assume this would happen to others if our faulty reading of the Scriptures would have it so.

Now some may object that the Assumption was also another exemption as a special grace to the Virgin Mary. Yes that is true. But it may not in reality be an exemption, seeing as how NO ONE before or since has been born without Original Sin. Since the Virgin Mary preserved her soul pure and undefiled throughout her life, it may have been a grace DUE to her Merit. Again, not something that would apply to anyone else in all of human history. Although Adam and Eve were born without Original Sin, they did in fact sin.

What this whole argument boils down to is one of Biblical Exegesis. In that we have The Church to show us the way.

 

[irenaeuslyons]

What we take away from this apparent contradiction is that the Church has the final say. We don’t quote the Fathers to contradict the Church. The catechism is clearly against the supposition that Enoch, Elijah, maybe Moses and others were taken to that Heaven which was revealed to us by Jesus Christ at His coming…

The Doctors of the Church I quoted were not contradicting the Church, they were contradicting your fundamentalist reading of the catechism.

The Doctors of the Church and Scripture are an expression of the Deposit of Faith. If Scripture, Chrysostom, Augustine, Jerome, John Paull II are saying it, i can say it and Jimmy Akin can say it… period, end of story.

FYI, for the -]bible/-] catechism alone types, the catechism is only a condensed view of the faith. It does not contain everything that is part of the Deposit. Admittedly, it is more complete than previous catechisms, but you will not find thousands of teachings that are derived from the councils, scripture, encyclicals, bulls, iconography, ancient rites, etc, etc in the catechism. It is merely a summary of the faith that should be read in light of the Deposit of Faith that already exists in Scripture and Tradition. That’s why it is heavily footnoted in the first place. So it is quite sad to read more than one person on this thread treat the catechism as if it is the exclusive source of the Deposit of Faith and use it over and against that which is already part of the Deposit.

**Your solution that “heaven” is limbo of the fathers **betrays an ignorance of the differences between heaven and limbo patrum. Christ opened the gates to hell. Guess what was on the other side of the Gates of Hell? hint…Limbo Patrum, (As can be seen in ancient iconography and attested to by the doctors of the church) because limbo is part of hell not heaven. So how can that be a solution?

Since you are equating limbo patrum with heaven, why don’t you read this first. newadvent.org/cathen/07207a.htm

*Theologians distinguish four meanings of the term hell:

1. Hell (infernus of the damned) in the strict sense, or the place of punishment for the damned, be they demons or men;
2. Limbo of infants (limbus parvulorum), where those who die in original sin alone, and without personal mortal sin, are confined and undergo some kind of punishment;
3. Limbo of the Fathers (limbus patrum), in which the souls of the just who died before Christ awaited their admission to heaven; for in the meantime heaven was closed against them in punishment for the sin of Adam;
4. Purgatory, where the just, who die in venial sin or who still owe a debt of temporal punishment for sin, are cleansed by suffering before their admission to heaven.*

Guess what… none of those are Heaven, because in Heaven there is no separation from God. Those four meanings of hell all have one thing in common… separation from the Beatific Vision of God.

 

[newcalling]

The Jewish people believe, and believed before the time of Yeshua, that Enoch, Elijah and Moses were taken to heaven and didn’t go into Sheol. My friends who are Jewish especially believe that about Elijah and Moses, including the Messianic Jewish people with whom I used to study and attend services. This belief is part of why it was significant that Elijah and Moses appeared at the Transfiguration of Yeshua, followed by the Holy Spirit. I realize that it seems to contradict the recorded words of Yeshua, and by extension the Catechism, but all I can say is that it is a mystery. There is likely something that we don’t understand. However, I don’t think that our belief on this matter will affect our eternal salvation, so it is something we can discuss and safely disagree.

Anyway, any thoughts about the appearance of Elijah and Moses at the Transfiguration? What about Jude verse nine where it alludes to a story of the Archangel Michael contending with the devil for the body of Moses?

My thread on the topic was merged with this one (a good thing) so I’m just now catching up with the full discussion.

 

[thistle]

The Doctors of the Church I quoted were not contradicting the Church, they were contradicting your fundamentalist reading of the catechism.

The Doctors of the Church and Scripture are an expression of the Deposit of Faith. If Scripture, Chrysostom, Augustine, Jerome, John Paull II are saying it, i can say it and Jimmy Akin can say it… period, end of story.

FYI, for the -]bible/-] catechism alone types, the catechism is only a condensed view of the faith. It does not contain everything that is part of the Deposit. Admittedly, it is more complete than previous catechisms, but you will not find thousands of teachings that are derived from the councils, scripture, encyclicals, bulls, iconography, ancient rites, etc, etc in the catechism. It is merely a summary of the faith that should be read in light of the Deposit of Faith that already exists in Scripture and Tradition. That’s why it is heavily footnoted in the first place. So it is quite sad to read more than one person on this thread treat the catechism as if it is the exclusive source of the Deposit of Faith and use it over and against that which is already part of the Deposit.

**Your solution that “heaven” is limbo of the fathers **betrays an ignorance of the differences between heaven and limbo patrum. Christ opened the gates to hell. Guess what was on the other side of the Gates of Hell? hint…Limbo Patrum, (As can be seen in ancient iconography and attested to by the doctors of the church) because limbo is part of hell not heaven. So how can that be a solution?

Since you are equating limbo patrum with heaven, why don’t you read this first. newadvent.org/cathen/07207a.htm

*Theologians distinguish four meanings of the term hell:

1. Hell (infernus of the damned) in the strict sense, or the place of punishment for the damned, be they demons or men;
2. Limbo of infants (limbus parvulorum), where those who die in original sin alone, and without personal mortal sin, are confined and undergo some kind of punishment;
3. Limbo of the Fathers (limbus patrum), in which the souls of the just who died before Christ awaited their admission to heaven; for in the meantime heaven was closed against them in punishment for the sin of Adam;
4. Purgatory, where the just, who die in venial sin or who still owe a debt of temporal punishment for sin, are cleansed by suffering before their admission to heaven.*

Guess what… none of those are Heaven, because in Heaven there is no separation from God. Those four meanings of hell all have one thing in common… separation from the Beatific Vision of God.

Please direct us to the actual Church teaching that states while the gates of Heaven were only opened by Christ after his death and resurrection an exception was made for Elijah and Enoch.
Quoting the Church Fathers does not count. Aquinas did not believe in the Immaculate Conception so does that make the Church teaching wrong.
The only thing that matters is the actual Church teaching on an issue.

 

[The_Serpent]

St. Thomas Aquinas indirectly touches on this subject in the Summa. Under Question 69 (Of matters concerning the Resurrection, and the first of the place where souls are after death), Seventh Article, Objection 5. Objection 5 states the view that Enoch and Elias were taken to the earthly paradise. St. Thomas doesn’t address the matter in his answer to the question, which is about how many abodes there are. But it does show this was the view on this in the past.

Also, St. Ephrem the Syrian in his “Hymns on Paradise” Hymn Six mentions the Watchers (angels) seeing Elias in Paradise.

So a case can be made that Elias and Enoch went to the Paradise, which Adam and Eve were cast out of. Not necessarily Heaven, though it might be viewed as one level of Heaven.

 

[MarcoPG]

Their entrance into heaven was only sequenced temporally as before the crucifixion. However, time has no bearing on eternity since time does not exist in the eternal state. Therefore God did accept them as redeemed by Christ without respect to the sequencing of time, just as Mary was.

This is clear, simple and short . even if heaven here cannot be the beatific vision immediately.

However, my problem is that they were assumed bodily, and how can there be bodies in Heaven which are not Jesus’ and Mary’s? Well that is secondary, but some private revelations have Mary saying [paraphrasing] “There is no other body in Heaven than my Son’s and mine”. Private revelation isn’t binding, but it is worth noting.

Moreover, how does this harmonize with the belief tat they may return bodily at the End of Times, die, and so on?

 

[irenaeuslyons]

Hi MarcoPG,

Yeah that post was if I was forced to rationalize it. Personally, i prefer to just leave it as a mystery, while recognizing the truth in scripture.

Based on some further research and also what “The Serpent” said below. I think the way this was harmonized by the Doctors was with a place not unlike the Garden of Eden. God was present in the garden. It was heaven on earth as anywhere you can enjoy the Beatific Vision is heaven. I found a treatise by St. Augustine speaking about paradise, and it was nice to see both Aquinas and Ephraim the Syrian cite the same line of thinking as well.

“…but ever since their[Enoch/Elijah] translation they so live, as to enjoy such a sufficiency as was provided during the forty days in which Elijah lived on the cruse of water and the cake, without substantial food; or else, if there be any need of such sustenance, they are, it may be, sustained in Paradise in some such way as Adam was, before he brought on himself expulsion therefrom by sinning. And he, as I suppose, was supplied with sustenance against decay from the fruit of the various trees, and from the tree of life with security against old age.”
-St Augustine

So while paradise was heaven on earth, it was not the same as the heaven in eternity which would receive our resurrected bodies.

 

[AmbroseSJ]

Hi MarcoPG,

Yeah that post was if I was forced to rationalize it. Personally, i prefer to just leave it as a mystery, while recognizing the truth in scripture.

Based on some further research and also what “The Serpent” said below. I think the way this was harmonized by the Doctors was with a place not unlike the Garden of Eden. God was present in the garden. It was heaven on earth as anywhere you can enjoy the Beatific Vision is heaven. I found a treatise by St. Augustine speaking about paradise, and it was nice to see both Aquinas and Ephraim the Syrian cite the same line of thinking as well.

"…but ever since their[Enoch/Elijah] translation they so live, as to enjoy such a sufficiency as was provided during the forty days in which Elijah lived on the cruse of water and the cake, without substantial food; or else, if there be any need of such sustenance, they are, it may be, sustained in Paradise in some such way as Adam was, before he brought on himself expulsion therefrom by sinning. And he, as I suppose, was supplied with sustenance against decay from the fruit of the various trees, and from the tree of life with security against old age."
-St Augustine

So while paradise was heaven on earth, it was not the same as the heaven in eternity which would receive our resurrected bodies.

Although this is not something I would argue for, I would not argue against it either. There are too many unknowns, and as you have it stated above, it does not seem to contradict any Church teaching on Original Sin or Redemption. Our Lord also said “In My Father’s house are many mansions.” So who knows?

 

[MarcoPG]

If they are in the Garden, then multiple questions come to mind anyway: is it on earth ?(so it wouldn’t be heavven in any sense, since our planet has become more of a purgatory);

is it in the sky?;

What about the guards there?

 

[irenaeuslyons]

If they are in the Garden, then multiple questions come to mind anyway: is it on earth ?

What was described was not part of the eternal heaven, so yes, it would be like the paradise of the garden of Eden on earth. Though not necessarily the same.

so it wouldn’t be heavven in any sense, since our planet has become more of a purgatory

It would be like heaven just as the paradise of the garden was like heaven. Anywhere you can see God face to face… that is heaven. Such was the garden of Eden.

What about the guards there?

It was Gods will they be there.

 

[MarcoPG]

What was described was not part of the eternal heaven, so yes, it would be like the paradise of the garden of Eden on earth. Though not necessarily the same.

It would be like heaven just as the paradise of the garden was like heaven. Anywhere you can see God face to face… that is heaven. Such was the garden of Eden.

It was Gods will they be there.

Thank you. And about my previous post: What about the belief that they will return in their bodies and die? If they are in Heaven, they won’t die anymore. Come once again, I don’t think either. This idea of the two winesses is somewhat unclear, we don’t know if they are Elijah and Enoch, but if they are, why should they die?

See St. Justin Martyr, (q. So. ad Orthodoxos). Finally, that they shall return into the company of men in the end of the world, to preach against Antichrist, and to invite both Jews and Gentiles to penance, and so be martyred, as this place of the Apocalypse seems plain, so we have in part other testimonies of this, Malachi 4. Sirach 44:16. 48:10. Mat. 17:11. See also Hippolytus’s book of “Antichrist and the end of the world.” All which being well considered, the heretics are too combative and doubtful, to discredit the same, as they commonly do. (Posted by Copland3 some time ago)

 

[GaryTaylor]

Their entrance into heaven was only sequenced temporally as before the crucifixion. However, time has no bearing on eternity since time does not exist in the eternal state. Therefore God did accept them as redeemed by Christ without respect to the sequencing of time, just as Mary was.

Right, well said. Think too about the Transfiguration.

1 Peter 1:16-18

16 For we have not followed cunningly devised fables, when we made known unto you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of his majesty. 17 For he received from God the Father honour and glory, when there came such a voice to him from the excellent glory, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased. 18 And this voice which came from heaven we heard, when we were with him in the holy mount.

Here this is understood in the experience to represent the “return” of Jesus Christ, which included Moses and Elijah