Enosh is not Enos, Enoch, nor Adam
Deuteronomy 32:26 I said, I would scatter them [sons of jacob] into corners, I would make the remembrance of them [sons of jacob] to cease from among Enosh: GOD VISITS ADAM, MINDFUL OF ENOSH In Hebrews 2:6, where Paul quoted Psalms 8:4, we must believe that he understood Hebrew well enough to know that there was not just one word "man" in the verse, but that it included both Enosh and Adam. Unfortunately the same Greek word "anthropos" [#444] is used to refer to both Enosh and Adam:
What is man [Enosh], that thou art mindful of him? and the son of man [Adam], that thou visitest him? Psalms 8:4 What4100 is man,582 that3588 thou art mindful2142 of him? and the son1121 of man,120 that3588 thou visitest6485 him?
But one in a certain place testified, saying, What is man, that thou art mindful of him? or the son of man, that thou visitest him? Hebrews 2:6
KING DAVID'S NIGHTMARE ABOUT ENOSH
The KJV translators were faithful to their work when they italicized the word "one" in Daniel 7:13, indicating that it was not in the original Scripture and that they added it, which is acceptable. But it's not acceptable to "translate" the proper noun Enosh into the common noun "man", translate the word "bar" which means "old" as "son", then add a capitol letter to "son" which could not have originally been there, particularly in this Scripture:
Knowing that Daniel was a son of Adam sure must have made it a nightmare for him to dream about Enosh taking dominion over the world. Had Daniel been describing a dream about the sons of Enosh, he would have used the Hebrew word "ben" as he did in Daniel 5:21 "And he was driven from the sons [ben, #1123] of men, ...". Instead, he used the word "bar" [#1247], which is translated as "old" in the following Scripture:
Dan 5:31 And Darius the Median took the kingdom, being about threescore and two years old. Is it possible that Daniel actually wrote "the old Enosh came with the clouds of heaven" rather than "the son of Enosh came with the clouds of heaven"? When Mark and Paul wrote "son of man" in the following verses, were they aware that the "anthropos" they referred to was the Hebrew word for "Enosh", and that this may have meant "old Enosh"?
Mat 26:64 Jesus saith unto him, Thou hast said: nevertheless I say unto you, Hereafter shall ye see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven. Mar 13:26 And then shall they see the Son of man coming in the clouds with great power and glory.
Luk 21:27 And then shall they see the Son of man coming in a cloud with power and great glory.
Joh 13:31 Therefore, when he was gone out, Jesus said, Now is the Son of man glorified, and God is glorified in him.
Joh 1:51 And he saith unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Hereafter ye shall see heaven open, and the angels of God ascending and descending upon the Son of man.
SON OF ENOS VS ADAMThe contradistinction between Adamites and Enosh is made clear in Psalms 144:3 where the appearance of "son of", which most of the time refers to Adam, is reversed, this time referring to descendants of Enosh:
LORD, what [is] man [Adam], that thou takest knowledge of him! [or] the son of man [Enosh], that thou makest account of him! Psalms 144:3
LORD,3068 what4100 is man,120 that thou takest knowledge3045 of him! or the son1121 of man,582 that thou makest account2803 of him!This is irrefutable proof that Enosh is a specific person who's different than Adam with specific, identifiable descendants who're different than Adam's descendants, both of whom were called "man" by the KJV translators. What's the difference between "takest knowledge of him" and "makest account of him"? Is "Adam" [as opposed to "son of Adam"] a lower form than Enosh, or son of Enosh? Would you rather be known by God, or merely thought of by Him? We know from the following verses that "thou takest knowledge" comes from "yada", which means "know", and "thou makest account" comes from "chashab" which means "think". The following two verses provide the necessary perspective:
Psa 109:27 That they may know [yada] that this is thy hand; that thou, LORD, hast done it. Eze 38:10 Thus saith the Lord GOD; It shall also come to pass, that at the same time shall things come into thy mind, and thou shalt think [chashab] an evil thought: So the actual meaning of Psalms 144:3 is:
LORD, what [is] Adam that thou know him! [or] the son of Enosh that thou think of him!GOD SAVES ADAM, DESTROYS ENOSH
Psa 90:3 Thou turnest man [Enosh] to destruction; and sayest, Return, ye children of men [Adam].
Psa 90:3 Thou turnest7725 man582 to5704 destruction;1793 and sayest,559 Return,7725 ye children1121 of men.120ADAM SCARLET, ENOSH WORM
Had Enosh been a son of Adam, there would have been no need to include both referrences "Enosh" and "Son of Adam" in so many different Scriptures, proving that Strong's is wrong: Enosh and Enos cannot be the same person:
How much less man [Enosh], that is a worm [rimmah]? and the son of man [Adam], which is a worm [tola]? Job 25:6 In most of the rest of the Holy Bible, "tola" is translated as "scarlet". The contradistinction becomes apparent only when the italicized words [the ones added by the translators] are removed and the actual original meaning is understood:
EXAMPLE OF SCARLET: Moreover thou shalt make the tabernacle with ten curtains of fine twined linen, and blue, and purple, and scarlet: with cherubims of cunning work shalt thou make them. Exodus 26:1
Obviously Enosh, who are compared to worms, are not God's holy people, whereas Adamites, who are compared to the curtains of God's Temple, are. Similarly, Job 35:8 compares Ish to wickedness and Adamites to righteousness.TRUST ADAM, FEAR ENOSH
I, [even] I, [am] he that comforteth you: who [art] thou, that thou shouldest be afraid of a man [Enosh] [that] shall die, and of the son of man [Adam] [which] shall be made [as] grass; Isaiah 51:12
First we must remove the italicized words to grasp what's being written here:
Then we must look at how other words in this verse are used in other parts of Scripture. The word "he" is translated from "hu" which almost always means "this". The phrase "shall die" is translated from "muth" which is often translated as "kill" or "slay". The phrase "shall be made" is translated from "nathan", which usually means "give". The word "grass" is translated from "chatsiyr" which also means hay or herbs.
ADAM UPHOLDS, ENOSH KEEPS SABBATH
The following Scripture is a reminder that Enosh must keep the sabbath but that Adamites must uphold it, providing a clue about the chain of command in the Israelite community:
Blessed [is] the man [Enosh] [that] doeth this, and the son of man [Adam] [that] layeth hold on it; that keepeth the sabbath from polluting it, and keepeth his hand from doing any evil. Isaiah 56:2
"Layeth hold on" is translated from "chazaq" which means "strengthened" or "hardened", leaving us with the following contradistinction between Enosh and Adamites:
ADAM PROVIDES, ENOSH CONSUMES
He causeth the grass to grow for the cattle, and herb for the service of man [Adam]: that he may bring forth food out of the earth; And wine that maketh glad the heart of man [Enosh], and oil to make his face to shine, and bread which strengtheneth man's [Enosh]'s heart. Psalms 104:14-15 ADAM SEES, ENOSH BEHOLDS
Every man [Adam] may see it; man [Enosh] may behold it afar off. Job 36:25 Hast thou eyes of flesh? or seest thou as man [Enosh] seeth? Job 10:4 Have you ever wondered what "eyes of flesh" are? Well, the word "flesh" is translated from the Hebrew word "basar" [Strong's #1320], which appears as "kin" in the following Scripture:
Lev 18:6 None of you shall approach to any that is near of kin to him, to uncover their nakedness: I am the LORD. Lev 25:49 Either his uncle, or his uncle's son, may redeem him, or any that is nigh of kin unto him of his family may redeem him; or if he be able, he may redeem himself.
Hast thou eyes of your kin? or seest thou as Enosh seeth?
Arise, O LORD; let not man [Enosh] prevail: let the heathen be judged in thy sight.Psalms 9:19
Hearken unto me, ye that know righteousness, the people in whose heart is my law; fear ye not the reproach of men [Enosh], neither be ye afraid of their revilings.Isaiah 51:7
Is it good that he should search you out? or as one man [Enosh] mocketh another, do ye so mock him? Job 13:9
He shall pray unto God, and he will be favorable unto him: and he shall see his face with joy: for he will render unto man [Enosh] his righteousness.Job 33:26 Man [Enosh] knoweth not the price thereof; neither is it found in the land of the living.Job 28:13 Eze 25:2 Son of man [Adam], set thy face against the Ammonites, and prophesy against them;
Job 13:9 Is it good that he should search you out? or as one man [Enosh] mocketh another, do ye so mock him?
Is it good that he should search you out? if Enosh deceive, do ye so deceive?
ENOSH VS ENOS
Strong's Concordance and many other Biblical references erroneously claim that Enos [Strong's 583] and Enosh [Strong's 582] are one and the same, but we know from Scripture that Enos is a son of Adam, whereas Enosh is not:
Gen 5:6 And Seth lived a hundred and five years, and begot Enos:
Gen 5:9 And Enos lived ninety years, and begot Cainan:
1Ch 1:1 Adam, Sheth, Enosh,
Even though Enos is spelled Enosh in 1 Chronicles 1:1, it's still Strong's #583, further adding to the confusion. However, numerous references to Strong's #582 in the Old Testament reveal the contradistinction between Enosh and Son of Adam.
For further clarification of the real meaning of this Scripture, please see the exegesis of the word "man".
Rather than "Enosh" being in the following Scripture as Strong's Concordance shows, it's instead the word "Ish", further confusing the issue:
Bertrand Comparet's excellent analysis.Strong's Concordance fails to make a distinction between Adam, Enosh, Ish, Methim, or Geeber.
Nave's Topical Bible fails to make a distinction between Adam, Enosh, Ish, Methin, or Geeber.
Brown-Driver-Briggs fails to note that Enosh was different from Adam:
Part of Speech: noun masculine
A Related Word by BDB/Strongs Number: from H605
Torrey's New Topical Text Book fails to even mention that Adam, Enosh, Ish, Methim, or Geeber are references to different peoples:
Webster's 1828 Dictionary fails to note that not all men are descendants of Adam: