It seems to be somewhat contradictory of a story though. If it’s interpreted as written, Paul was wrong. Jesus was not the first resurrected, not even to heaven.
Jesus was seen conversing with Moses and Elijah in the transfiguration while Jude mentions Michael disputing with the Devil over the body of Moses, who are considered in both biblical and Jewish lore to have been resurrected to an afterlife as well (eg 2 Kings chapter 2).
Likewise Enoch seemed to be sin-free and although at that point in history the concept of heavens and resurrections or even sin did not exist yet in Jewish lore, he was taken by God because the original text can be interpreted as saying he was free of blame. The concept of sinners not being able to coexist in the presence of God was known (the stories of Aaron and Moses, tabernacle and the presence of god meaning the absence of even the priests) so it makes sense that Enoch was considered free of sin. According to the Jewish Midrah, I believe 8 total figures of scripture are said to have entered heaven “alive” or without dying.
The Pauline doctrine however wants to establish a Christianity with strong Jewish overtones which is different than the gospel message. You can really split those two sets of stories (and John of Patmos and the so-called apocrypha would be a third version of more Miracle and Doomsday Cult Christians) into their own versions of Christianity. In the more Jew-centric versions, Jesus is simply the same person, the return of Moses etc, that is what Jews expected of a Messiah. However the more standalone version of Christianity in the gospels has Jews asking whether he was Moses or Elijah throughout the gospel, Jesus sort-of denying it but not really and the story of the transfiguration story kind of tried to suppress the idea altogether.
Suffice to say, reconstructing 1800-1900 year old religious sects to figure out what they each believed while history did its best to compound them into a single religion is really hard.