Greek Word Study Wednesday: μετετέθη (Metatithēmi, “He Was Translated”)

The Man Who Skipped Death, with an exploration of the 2 witnesses of Revelation 11

Hello brothers and sisters.

Every genealogy in Genesis 5 follows the same pattern. So-and-so lived X years, fathered a son, lived Y more years, had other sons and daughters, “and he died.” Every single entry in that genealogy ends the same way. Adam? “And he died.” Seth? “And he died.” Enosh, Kenan, Mahalalel, Jared? “And he died.” Over and over. It reads like a drumbeat. A funeral dirge.

Until you get to Enoch.

“And Enoch walked with God, and he was not, for God took him” (Genesis 5:24, NKJV).

Wait. What happened to “and he died”?

It’s just... not there. In its place, one of the most enigmatic sentences in all of Scripture. “He was not.” Gone. Vanished. Removed from the earth without passing through the door that every other human being must walk through.

The writer of Hebrews, looking back on this moment, chose a single Greek word to describe what happened to Enoch. A word that the Septuagint translators had already applied to this passage more than two centuries before Christ.

That word is μετατίθημι (metatithēmi). And in Hebrews 11:5, it appears in the specific form μετετέθη (metetethē): “he was translated.” “He was transferred.” “He was taken from one place and set down in another.”

It’s a word that carries enormous weight, not just for what it tells us about Enoch, but for what it reveals about God’s power over death itself.

Let’s dig in.

---

---

If you’re reading this in email, be aware that the text is likely to cut off without warning. For a smoother reading experience and all the features Substack has to offer (including audio voiceovers of my posts), you can go HERE or download the app.

---

---

The Word

μετατίθημι (metatithēmi)

Pronunciation: meh-tah-TITH-ay-mee

The specific form: μετετέθη (metetethē): aorist indicative passive, 3rd person singular. “He was translated/transferred.”

Strong’s: G3346

Meaning: To transfer from one place to another; to transpose; to change; to remove; to exchange; to desert or change sides

Root: A compound of μετά (meta, G3326, “after,” or indicating change/transfer) + τίθημι (tithēmi, G5087, “to set, to place, to lay down”). The compound literally means to place elsewhere; to pick something up from where it is and set it down somewhere different.

NT frequency: 6 occurrences in 5 verses

LXX usage: Found in Genesis 5:24 and in several other passages describing transfer or removal

---

Two Texts, One Translation, and a Crucial Difference

Before we look at the New Testament, we need to see what happened when the Septuagint translators rendered Genesis 5:24 into Greek. Because they didn’t just translate the verse. They interpreted it. And their interpretation changed something fundamental.

Here’s the Hebrew Masoretic Text:

Genesis 5:24 (MT):

“And Enoch walked with God (וַיִּתְהַלֵּ֥ךְ חֲנֹ֖וךְ אֶת־הָֽאֱלֹהִ֑ים, vayyithallekh Hanokh eth-ha’Elohim), and he was not (וְאֵינֶ֕נּוּ, ve’einennu), for God took him (כִּֽי־לָקַ֥ח אֹתֹ֖ו אֱלֹהִֽים, ki-laqach oto Elohim).”

And here’s the Septuagint:

Genesis 5:24 (LXX):

“And Enoch was well-pleasing to God (καὶ εὐηρέστησεν Ενωχ τῷ θεῷ, kai euērestēsen Enōch tō theō), and he was not found (καὶ οὐχ ηὑρίσκετο, kai ouch hēurisketo), because God transferred/translated him (ὅτι μετέθηκεν αὐτὸν ὁ θεός, hoti metethēken auton ho theos).”

Did you catch the differences? There are three, and they’re all significant.

First: “Walked with God” becomes “Was well-pleasing to God.”

The Hebrew says Enoch הִתְהַלֵּךְ (hithallekh)— “walked” —with God. It’s a beautiful idiom for intimate fellowship, a life lived in step with the Almighty. But the Septuagint translators rendered it with εὐηρέστησεν (euērestēsen), from εὐαρεστέω (euaresteō), meaning “to please, to be well-pleasing.” They shifted the emphasis from the activity (walking) to the result (pleasing God).

This matters enormously because the writer of Hebrews picks up the LXX’s reading, not the Hebrew. Hebrews 11:5 says, “before his translation he had this testimony, that he pleased God“ (NKJV). And then verse 6 builds directly on it: “But without faith it is impossible to please Him.”

The entire theological argument of Hebrews 11:5-6 depends on the Septuagint’s word choice. If the author had followed the Hebrew (”walked with God”), the connection to “pleasing God” in verse 6 wouldn’t exist. The LXX reading gave the author of Hebrews the theological vocabulary he needed to make his point about faith.

This is one of those places where you can see the Septuagint shaping New Testament theology in real time.

Second: “He was not” becomes “He was not found.”

The Hebrew simply says וְאֵינֶ֕נּוּ (ve’einennu): “and he was not.” It’s stark. Absolute. Almost disturbing in its brevity. One moment Enoch exists; the next, he doesn’t.

The LXX adds a detail: οὐχ ηὑρίσκετο: “he was not found.” This implies that people went looking for him. Enoch didn’t just disappear in silence. People noticed. They searched. And they couldn’t find him.

This parallels what happened with Elijah. After Elijah was taken up in the whirlwind, the sons of the prophets insisted on sending fifty men to search for him: “Perhaps the Spirit of the Lord has picked him up and cast him on some mountain or into some valley” (2 Kings 2:16, NKJV). They searched for three days and found nothing.

The LXX’s “was not found” quietly links Enoch’s disappearance to Elijah’s, which sets up a typological connection between the only two men in the Old Testament who left this world without passing through death.

Third: “God took him” becomes “God transferred or translated him.”

The Hebrew uses the verb לָקַח (laqach), which simply means “to take.” It’s one of the most common verbs in the Old Testament, used for everything from taking a wife (Genesis 4:19) to taking spoils of war (Numbers 31:11) to God “taking” someone in the sense of receiving them. It’s a general word. It tells you that God acted, but not how.

The Septuagint translators chose something far more specific: μετέθηκεν (metethēken), from μετατίθημι. This word means to transfer from one place to another. It’s not just “God took him,” it’s “God relocated him.” “God picked him up from here and set him down there.”

The Septuagint translators made an interpretive decision. They understood לָקַח not as a vague or poetic statement, but as a literal, spatial event. God moved Enoch from one realm of existence to another.

---

The Word in Its Five Verses

μετατίθημι appears only six times in the New Testament, across five verses. Each usage illuminates a different dimension of this “placing elsewhere.” Let’s look at all of them.

Acts 7:16 — Physical Transfer

“And they were carried over (μετετέθησαν, metetethēsan) to Shechem and laid in the tomb that Abraham had bought.”

Stephen, in his speech before the Sanhedrin, describes the patriarchs’ bones being transported from Egypt to Shechem. This is the most straightforward usage: a physical transfer of something from one location to another. The bones went from here to there. Pure spatial movement.

Galatians 1:6 — Spiritual Desertion

“I marvel that you are turning away (μετατίθεσθε, metatithesthe) so soon from Him who called you in the grace of Christ, to a different gospel.”

Here Paul uses the middle voice: the Galatians are transferring themselves. They’re relocating their allegiance, moving from the true gospel to a counterfeit. Same root idea— movement from one position to another —but now applied to theological loyalty. And Paul is horrified by it.

Hebrews 7:12 — Institutional Change

“For the priesthood being changed (μετατιθεμένης, metatithemenēs), of necessity there is also a change of the law.”

The priesthood is “transferred,” moved from the Levitical order to the order of Melchizedek. This is still the same word, but now describing a fundamental shift in divine institutions. The old system is relocated to make way for the new. The very same verb that describes Enoch’s translation also describes the translation of the entire sacrificial system.

Think about the theological symmetry of that. Enoch was transferred out of the mortal world so he wouldn’t see death. The Levitical priesthood was transferred out of operation because Christ’s death made it obsolete. In both cases, something is taken from one place and set in another.

Hebrews 11:5 — Enoch’s Translation (used twice)

“By faith Enoch was translated (μετετέθη, metetethē) that he should not see death, and was not found, because God had translated (μετέθηκεν, metethēken) him; for before his translation (μεταθέσεως, metatheseōs) he had this testimony, that he pleased God.”

Notice: the word appears twice in the verse as a verb, and once more as the related noun μετάθεσις (metathesis, “translation/transfer”). The author of Hebrews is saturating the verse with this concept. Transfer, transfer, transfer. God relocated Enoch so thoroughly that he skipped death entirely.

Jude 1:4 — Moral Perversion

“For certain men have crept in unnoticed, who long ago were marked out for this condemnation, ungodly men, who turn (μετατιθέντες, metatithentes) the grace of our God into lewdness.”

Here the word takes its darkest turn. False teachers are transferring God’s grace; taking it from its proper place and putting it somewhere it doesn’t belong. They’re relocating grace from the realm of holiness into the realm of license. Same root word. Opposite direction.

When you lay all six uses side by side, you get a comprehensive picture of what μετατίθημι means: to take something from its current position and place it elsewhere. That “elsewhere” can be a physical location (Acts 7:16), a spiritual state (Hebrews 11:5), a theological framework (Hebrews 7:12), a moral category (Jude 1:4), or an allegiance (Galatians 1:6).

---

Transfer, Not Transformation

Here’s something important to understand, because it’s a distinction that matters for how we interpret what happened to Enoch.

μετατίθημι primarily means transfer, not transformation. It’s about relocation, not metamorphosis. When the Septuagint says God μετέθηκεν Enoch, and when the writer of Hebrews says Enoch μετετέθη, the primary emphasis is on spatial movement: God took Enoch from here and placed him there.

This is different from the word Paul uses in 1 Corinthians 15:51-52 when he describes what will happen to believers at the resurrection: “We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed (ἀλλαγησόμεθα, allagēsometha)” (NKJV). The word there is ἀλλάσσω (allassō, G236), which means “to make other than it is; to exchange one thing for another; to transform.” That’s a word about nature change, about your mortal body being fundamentally reconstituted into something imperishable.

μετατίθημι is not ἀλλάσσω. Enoch’s “translation” and the believer’s future “change” are described with different Greek words carrying different primary meanings.

Does that mean Enoch experienced no transformation at all? Not necessarily. Paul tells us in 1 Corinthians 15:50 that “flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God.” If Enoch was indeed transferred into God’s presence bodily, something must have changed about his physical nature to make that possible. But the text doesn’t describe that change. The text describes the transfer. Whatever happened to Enoch’s body is inferred, not stated.

This is the Septuagint translators being careful. They told us what God did (relocated Enoch) and why (so he wouldn’t see death). They didn’t tell us how his body was altered in the process. That mystery, they left alone.

---

Enoch, the Apocrypha, and the Ancient Jewish Understanding

The Septuagint translators weren’t the only ones who pondered what happened to Enoch. The deuterocanonical books picked up this thread and ran with it.

Sirach 44:16 says:

“Enoch pleased the Lord and was translated, being an example of repentance to all generations.”

Here μετατίθημι appears again, but Sirach adds a fascinating detail: Enoch’s translation was connected to repentance. He was taken as a sign to the nations, a living testimony that God rewards those who turn to Him.

The Wisdom of Solomon goes further. Without naming Enoch directly, Wisdom 4:10-11 describes a righteous man who “pleased God and was loved by him, and while living among sinners was taken up. He was caught up lest evil change his understanding or guile deceive his soul.” Here the translation is framed as protective; God removed Enoch from a corrupt world before that corruption could touch him.

Both of these readings see the translation as grace. Not punishment. Not escape. Grace. God reached into a world spiraling toward the catastrophe of the Flood and pulled one righteous man out of it. Not because Enoch was perfect, but because he was faithful.

And notice: both passages echo the LXX’s “pleased God” language rather than the Hebrew’s “walked with God.” The Septuagint’s translation choice shaped an entire tradition of interpretation.

---

An Excursus: Enoch, the Two Witnesses, and What μετετέθη Does (and Doesn’t) Tell Us

Since we’re deep in the text of Enoch’s translation, I want to take a brief detour into one of the more fascinating debates in eschatology: the identity of the two witnesses in Revelation 11.

This is one of those topics that I hold my views on with open hands. I’ll tell you what I think and why, but I fully expect some of you to disagree, and I welcome that. These are exactly the kinds of questions we should be wrestling with together.

The Question

Revelation 11:3-12 describes two prophets who will testify in Jerusalem for 1,260 days, perform miraculous signs, be killed by the beast, lie dead in the streets for three and a half days, and then be resurrected and ascend to heaven in full view of their enemies.

Who are they?

Three main sets of candidates have been proposed across the history of the church: Moses and Elijah, Enoch and Elijah, or two unknown future prophets. Each view has its reasons and its problems.

The Case for Enoch as One of the Witnesses

The earliest clear identification of the two witnesses as Enoch and Elijah comes from Hippolytus of Rome (c. 170-235 A.D.), who wrote in his On Christ and Antichrist: “By one week, therefore, he meant the last week which is to be at the end of the whole world, of which week the two prophets Enoch and Elias will take up the half.” This view was widely held in the early church and was the dominant interpretation for centuries.

The logic runs like this:

Hebrews 9:27 says, “It is appointed for men to die once, and after this the judgment” (NKJV). If death is universally appointed, then Enoch and Elijah— the only two people in the Old Testament who departed this life without dying —must eventually die. The two witnesses in Revelation 11 are killed and then raised. Perhaps this is God’s appointed time for these two men to finally experience death, fulfilling Hebrews 9:27.

Furthermore, Jude 14-15 portrays Enoch as a prophet of judgment who proclaimed God’s coming in glory to execute justice on the ungodly. If Enoch was a prophet of end-times judgment in his own era, perhaps it’s fitting that he returns to prophesy judgment again at the end of the age.

The Objection from μετετέθη

Now, there is an objection to the Enoch-and-Elijah view that I want to address honestly, because it comes directly from the word we’ve been studying.

The word μετετέθη, as we’ve seen, primarily describes a transfer, God relocating Enoch from one mode of existence to another. While the word doesn’t explicitly describe a transformation of Enoch’s body, the reality is that if Enoch was taken into God’s presence without dying, something had to change about his nature. Paul is clear: “flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God” (1 Corinthians 15:50, NKJV). If Enoch was taken to where God is, his mortal frame couldn’t have remained entirely as it was.

So here’s the objection: if Enoch already underwent some kind of change that allowed him to bypass death and enter God’s presence, would it be possible for him to return to earth in mortal form, prophesy for three and a half years, be killed, lie dead in the street, and then be resurrected again? Is that not, as one might say, like trying to un-bake a cake?

And there’s a further wrinkle. Hebrews 11:5 is emphatic: Enoch was translated so that he should not see death. The purpose clause is clear. Death was precisely what the translation was designed to prevent. If Enoch returns as a witness only to be killed, doesn’t that seem to undermine the very purpose of his translation?

I’ve wrestled with this. But here’s what I’ve concluded.

First, the word μετατίθημι means to transfer, not to transform. It describes the relocation, not necessarily the reconstitution of Enoch’s body. Whether Enoch received something analogous to a resurrection body, or was preserved in some intermediate state, or was changed in some other way that Scripture doesn’t describe, the text simply doesn’t say. We’re making inferences, not reading explicit statements. The word itself doesn’t tell us that Enoch’s change was permanent and irreversible.

Second, God is omnipotent. He can do anything that can be done. Since we know He can translate a man past death, there’s no reason not to believe that He is just as capable of reversing that translation for His own purposes. We serve the God who raised Lazarus from a tomb after four days, who brought dry bones to life in Ezekiel’s valley, and who will one day call every sleeping saint out of the ground (even those who were cremated or incinerated). The God we serve can certainly send Enoch back to earth if it serves His plan.

And third— and this is the point I think clinches it —the purpose of Enoch’s translation in Hebrews 11:5 was that he should not see death at that time. Enoch was spared from death in his generation, a generation hurtling toward the catastrophe of the Flood. But “spared from death” is not the same as “exempted from death forever.” It may be that Enoch’s translation was less of a permanent escape and more of a divine holding pattern. A preservation for a future purpose. He was set aside, not checked out.

What About Moses and Elijah?

I should address the strongest competing view, because it deserves a fair hearing.

The miraculous signs described in Revelation 11:6 match the specific miracles of Moses (turning water to blood, sending plagues) and Elijah (shutting the sky so that it doesn’t rain). Enoch isn’t associated with either of these signs anywhere in Scripture.

Moses and Elijah appeared together with Jesus at the Transfiguration (Matthew 17:1-8). Enoch wasn’t there. If you’re looking for two Old Testament figures who have already been shown standing with Christ in glory, it’s Moses and Elijah, not Enoch and Elijah.

Malachi 4:5 specifically promises the return of Elijah “before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the Lord.” While many understand this as fulfilled in John the Baptist (and Jesus Himself affirmed this in Matthew 11:14), the language about “the great and dreadful day” suggests an end-times dimension as well.

Moses’ death and burial are uniquely mysterious. God Himself buried Moses, and “no one knows his grave to this day” (Deuteronomy 34:6, NKJV). And in Jude 1:9, Michael the archangel contends with the devil “about the body of Moses.” Why would Satan want Moses’ body? Perhaps because he knew it had a future role to play.

Where I Land

If I’m being straightforward with you, I believe the two witnesses are Enoch and Elijah. And the reason is simple: Hebrews 9:27.

“It is appointed for men to die once, and after this the judgment.”

That’s a universal statement. All men are appointed to die. Not most men. Not the unlucky ones. All. And Enoch and Elijah are the only two people in all of Scripture who have never passed through that door. Everyone else— every patriarch, every prophet, every king, every priest —has died. Moses died. Abraham died. David died. Even Lazarus, whom Jesus raised, eventually died again.

But Enoch and Elijah haven’t. Not yet.

If Hebrews 9:27 is true— and as Inspired Scripture, I believe it must be —then at some point, these two men must experience death. And Revelation 11 describes exactly that: two prophets who testify, are killed, lie dead for three and a half days, and are then resurrected and taken to heaven.

That’s Hebrews 9:27 being fulfilled. They die once. And after this, the judgment.

I understand the case for Moses and Elijah, and I take it seriously. The miraculous signs in Revelation 11:6 do match the profiles of Moses and Elijah. The Transfiguration does place Moses and Elijah together with Jesus. Malachi 4:5 does promise Elijah’s return. These are real arguments made by thoughtful interpreters, and I don’t dismiss them lightly.

But here’s my problem with Moses: he already died. Deuteronomy 34:5-6 is explicit about it. Yes, his burial is mysterious: God Himself buried him, no one knows where, and Michael contends with the devil over his body (Jude 1:9). Those are fascinating details. But Moses did die. If Moses returns as one of the two witnesses and is killed again, that’s dying twice, which seems to me to be in tension with “it is appointed for men to die once.”

You could argue that Lazarus died twice, and that’s true. But Lazarus’s first death wasn’t his appointed death— it was interrupted by Jesus for the specific purpose of displaying God’s glory. His appointed death still came later. I don’t believe the same logic applies to Moses, who died at 120 years old in what Scripture presents as the natural, God-ordained conclusion to his earthly ministry.

Enoch, on the other hand, has never died at all. Neither has Elijah. And the earliest church tradition— going back to Hippolytus in the early third century —identified these two as the witnesses for exactly this reason.

I also think Jude 14-15 is relevant. Jude portrays Enoch as a prophet of end-times judgment: “Behold, the Lord comes with ten thousands of His saints, to execute judgment on all.” If Enoch was already a prophet of the Lord’s coming in judgment, there’s a certain fitness to his returning at the end of the age to deliver that same message one final time.

Now, I hold this with open hands. The text of Revelation 11 doesn’t name either witness, and I’m humble enough to admit I don’t have all the answers. Not to mention that the Moses-and-Elijah view has strong proponents and strong arguments, and I respect the believers who hold it.

But when I weigh the evidence, the Hebrews 9:27 argument is decisive for me. Two men have never died. Two witnesses must die. I think the math is straightforward.

And μετετέθη, while it doesn’t settle this debate on its own, fits naturally within this framework. God transferred Enoch past death. Not permanently, but purposefully. Not as a final destination, but as a divine holding pattern. Enoch was set aside, preserved, kept for a future moment when he would be sent back to do what every prophet before him had done: speak God’s truth to a rebellious world, at the cost of his own life.

That, to me, is the beauty of it. Enoch’s translation wasn’t an escape from the human story. It was a preparation for a role within it that hasn’t played out yet.

But in the end, none of us can be truly certain. This is one of the many textual mysteries present in scripture and I absolutely respect that.

Maybe that’s the point, though. Maybe the mystery is there on purpose, to keep us humble and watchful and focused on what Scripture does tell us clearly: that God rewards faithfulness, that He has power over death, and that His plan will unfold exactly as He intends.

Before we move on, I just want to point out one thing that is of vital importance:

Who the witnesses are (or the progression of future events, the realities of Revelation, and a whole host of other things that believers like to argue about) is NOT an issue of salvation. It is not an issue that should divide believers. So when you see someone holding a position that you don’t agree with, check your humility. Do you really need to tell them that you think they’re wrong? Do you really need to correct them?

By all means engage in thoughtful conversation, but if it is not an issue of salvation then there is no reason whatsoever to engage in arguments about it.

---

What the LXX Did That Hebrews Builds On

Let me pull us back to the main thread now, because there’s a beautiful piece of theology we can’t miss.

The author of Hebrews doesn’t just borrow the LXX’s μετατίθημι for Enoch. He builds his entire argument on the Septuagint’s interpretive framework. Watch how it works:

The Hebrew says Enoch “walked with God.” The LXX says Enoch “pleased God.” Hebrews picks up “pleased God.”

The Hebrew says God “took” Enoch (לָקַח). The LXX says God “transferred” Enoch (μετέθηκεν). Hebrews picks up “transferred” (μετετέθη).

And then Hebrews adds: “for before his translation he had this testimony, that he pleased God. But 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 diligently seek Him” (Hebrews 11:5-6, NKJV).

The whole point hangs on the LXX’s word choice. The argument flows like this: Enoch was transferred → because he pleased God → and pleasing God requires faith → therefore Enoch had faith → and faith is what makes it possible to approach God.

If you only had the Hebrew text, you’d get “walked with God” and “God took him,” which is still beautiful, and still profound. But you wouldn’t get the specific theological chain that connects Enoch’s translation to faith and pleasing God.

The Septuagint gave the author of Hebrews the vocabulary to make this argument. And he used it to write one of the most foundational statements about faith in the entire New Testament.

This is what I mean when I talk about the Masoretic Text and the Septuagint telling the fuller story together. The Hebrew gives us the intimacy: walking with God. The Greek gives us the result: pleasing God. And Hebrews takes both and says: this is what faith looks like in practice. You walk so closely with God that He’s pleased with you. And when God is pleased, He transfers you from where you are to where He is.

---

What This Means for Us

Three things.

First: Faith changes your location. This is the literal point of μετετέθη. Enoch’s faith resulted in God moving him from one place to another. From mortality to immortality. From the world of death to the presence of God. Faith doesn’t just change your behavior. It changes your position. It relocates you. Paul says the same thing in Colossians 1:13 (NKJV):

“He has delivered us from the power of darkness and conveyed us into the kingdom of the Son of His love.”

Different word, same idea. God specializes in taking people from where they are and putting them where He wants them.

Second: The pattern of Enoch prefigures the hope of every believer. What God did for one man in Genesis 5, He promises to do for all who are in Christ. “We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed—in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet” (1 Corinthians 15:51-52, NKJV). Enoch’s μετετέθη is a preview of the great ἀλλαγησόμεθα (”we shall be changed”) that awaits the church. Different words, because the events are not identical in every detail. But the same God, the same power, and the same result: death bypassed, mortality swallowed up in life.

Third: Pleasing God is the prerequisite. Hebrews doesn’t say Enoch was translated because he was powerful, or wealthy, or educated, or from the right family. He was translated because he pleased God. And he pleased God because he had faith. And faith, as the author of Hebrews defines it, means believing that God exists and that He rewards those who seek Him (Hebrews 11:6).

That’s it. That’s the foundation. Believe God is real. Believe He rewards faithfulness. And then walk with Him so closely that the intimacy itself becomes the evidence.

Enoch didn’t have the Torah. He didn’t have the prophets. He didn’t have the New Testament or the church or two thousand years of Christian theology. He lived in a world that was spiraling toward divine judgment. And he pleased God anyway. By faith.

If Enoch can do that in a pre-Flood world, what’s our excuse?

---

---

---

---

If you’ve found this helpful or insightful, please share it with a friend who loves Scripture as much as you do.

---

---

And if you want to go deeper with a full exploration of the “70 Weeks” of Daniel 9, a deep exploration of biblical idolatry with modern context, and other exclusive content (including the ongoing 8-part series exploring the idiom of a woman in travail as a metaphor for the end times), consider becoming a paid subscriber for just $7/month. Your support keeps the scrolls unrolling.

---

On the other hand, if this work has blessed you but a paid membership isn’t feasible right now, please consider buying me a coffee as a one-time show of support

---

---

© 2026 LXX Scrolls. All rights reserved.