Who Is This Son of Man
Page 22
45. Cf. also Isa. 49.7: ‘. . . because of the LORD, who is faithful, the Holy One of Israel, who has chosen you’ (ךרחבי).
46. Cf. allusion to Isa. 42.1 in 1QpHab. v.4: ‘. . . in the hand of his elect ones God will place the judgement over the nations’ (Mywgh lwk +p#m t) l) Nty wryxb dybw). In the context it is clear that the Habakkuk Pesher understands the noun ‘Elect One’ (ryxb) as a collective referring to Israel as a whole, while the Parables takes it as a singular.
7. The Elect Son of Man of the Parables of Enoch 145
But it is also clear that our author(s) did not stop there. The Elect son of man is also the ‘Shoot from Jesse’, that is, the Davidic Messiah. Explicitly termed the Messiah or Anointed One (48.10; 52.4), he has also received the outpouring of the seven-fold Spirit of Yahweh ( 1En. 49.3; 62.2) and the ability to slay sinners with his spoken word ( 1En. 62.2), both prophesied of the descendant of Jesse by Isaiah (11.2, 4).47 In addition to Isa. 11.1-9, our author probably also drew on the second Psalm, for it tells of ‘kings of the earth who take their stand and princes who take counsel together against Yahweh and his Anointed’ (2.2). In the formulation of our author(s) this has become, ‘the kings of the earth and the strong ones who possess the dry ground . . . have denied the Lord of Spirits and his Anointed’ ( 1En. 48.8, 10).48 Much more could be said about the use of the Hebrew Scriptures in the Parables. From what we have seen, however, it is clear that the depiction of the Elect son of man has resulted from a profound refl ection upon various passages deemed to foretell of God’s deliverance through a future mediator.
The Elect son of man’s eschatological offi ce
The principal role of the Elect son of man in the Parables is that of eschatological judge; that is, the Elect son of man offi ciates at the great Assize, on behalf of the Lord of Spirits and as the latter’s agent. At the beginning of the second parable, for example, the Lord of Spirits speaks concerning the ‘lot of sinners’:
On that day my Elect One49 will sit on the throne of glory and he will test 50 their 47. Isa. 11.1-9 was understood as a prophecy of the Davidic Messiah in a number of other texts roughly contemporary with the Parables, including the Qumranian Rule of Blessings (1QSb [1Q28] v.20-26); the War Rule (4Q285 + 11Q14) and the Isaiah Pesher (4QpIsaa
[4Q161] 8-10 iii. 11-25), and, outside of Qumran, the Psalms of Solomon (17.23-25, 29, 35, 37; 18.6-7), 4 Ezra (13.10-11, 37-38) and the Isaiah Targum op. cit. Cf. also Sib.Or. iii. 788–95.
48. Interestingly, the second psalm was understood as a prophecy of the Davidic Messiah in some of the same texts, mentioned in Note 47. Cf. e.g. PssSol. 17.23-25, 35; 18.6-7 and 4Ezra 13.3-35. Cf. also 4Q246 and 4Q174 1 i.18-19.
49. The Ethiopic manuscripts are divided between ‘my Elect One’ (
; xeruyya) and
‘the Elect One’ (
; xeruy).
50. See Note 18 for an explanation of this emendation.
146
‘Who is this Son of Man?’
works and their resting places51 will be innumerable and their souls will be hardened within them when they see my elect ones and those who take refuge in my glorious name (45.3).
Similarly, 62.1-12 describes at some length the judgement and condemnation of ‘the kings and the mighty, the exalted and those who possess the earth’.52
This latter passage is signifi cant in that the Elect son of man, in judging and condemning ‘the kings and mighty’, fulfi ls the offi ce of the Davidic Messiah as foretold by Isaiah: ‘the spirit of righteousness has been poured on him, and the word of his mouth slays all sinners and all the wicked are destroyed before his face’ (62.2).53 Moreover, we are told that nothing will escape the notice of the Elect son of man (69.29), no lie will be spoken in his presence (62.3), and his judgement will be comprehensive and fi nal (49.2; 63.5-11; 69.27, 29).
However, the Elect son of man will not only judge human sinners. He will also pronounce judgement on the Watchers who taught humankind to rebel at the dawn of history (55.4), and will even ‘weigh in the balance’ the deeds of the righteous (61.8). As mentioned above, the Elect son of man’s judgement serves both to condemn ‘the kings and the mighty’ and to vindicate ‘the righteous and the elect’. The two verdicts are of equal importance for our author(s). Indeed, it would appear that the one presupposes the other: because ‘the kings and the mighty’ actively persecute ‘the righteous and elect’ (46.4-8; 47.1-4; 48.8-9) they will be condemned, while the latter will be vindicated. In all this, as intimated above, the Elect son of man acts as the agent of the Lord of Spirits, judging ‘by the word of the name of the Lord of Spirits’ and ‘by the way of the righteous judgement of the Lord of Spirits’ (61.9). His appointment by the Lord of Spirits is repeatedly mentioned (61.8; 62.2; cf. 69.27).
It is clear that the Elect son of man accomplishes his task of rendering the fi nal judgement while seated on the divine throne, the throne of the Deity himself. This throne is named throughout the Parables ‘the Throne of Glory’
(
; manbara sebḥat) or ‘the Throne of His Glory’ (
51. The text here appears to be corrupt. ‘Resting places’ hardly fi ts. See Black, Book of Enoch, p. 205 for possible emendations.
52. The majority of manuscripts read ‘and those who dwell on the earth’, but two of the earliest, Tana 9 and EMML 2080, have the reading I have translated.
53. Cf. Isa. 11.2, 4.
7. The Elect Son of Man of the Parables of Enoch 147
; manbara sebḥatihu), which must go back to the Hebrew phrase )sk dwbk(h).54 To be sure, Ethiopic has no defi nite article and so either phrase could be rendered ‘a throne of (His) glory’ or ‘(His) glorious throne’. Nonetheless, it is certain that the one divine throne is in view. I have examined this issue at length elsewhere.55
To summarize my arguments presented there, fi rst, the phrase dwbk )sk is a technical term for the throne of God. In the Old Testament it is already used for the divine throne (Jer. 14.21; 17.12), although it is also used in the sense of
‘a seat of honour’ (1 Sam. 2.8; Isa. 22.23). In the rabbinic period dwbk(h) )sk was a technical term for the throne of God and could mean nothing else. In between, in the Second Temple period, one can note a marked tendency in the same direction (Wis. 9.10; Dan. 3.54 LXX; 1En. 9.4; T. Levi 5.1; PssSol.
2.19; 4Q405 23 i.23; 11Q17 x.7). Two possible exceptions do exist (Sir. 47.11; 4Q161 iii.20) but neither is textually certain. Second, within the text of the Parables it is notable that the Head of Days is himself situated on ‘the Throne of Glory’ (47.3).56 The use of the same term for a different throne would have required some clarifi cation, but none is ever given. Finally, 1En. 62.3-5 is very signifi cant. It describes how ‘the kings and the mighty, the exalted and those who possess the earth’ will be terrifi ed and experience the pain of a woman in childbirth ‘ when they see the son of man sitting on the Throne of His Glory’
(v. 5) and because they ‘recognize that he sits on the Throne of His Glory’ (v. 3).
Such an emphasis would be completely unnecessary if the Elect son of man merely occupied a glorious heavenly throne, one among many. That the Elect son of man sits on the divine throne in order to accomplish his eschatological role serves to validate his authority to render judgement. Because he fulfi ls a task usually reserved for the Deity, i.e., executing judgement, he is also granted the privilege of occupying the very symbol of that judgement.
In addition to his role as judge, there are other details which make clear the eschatological setting of the Elect son of man. His appearance will signal the end of warfare and the forging of weapons (52.8-9), as well as the 54. This is true even if the Parables were composed in Aramaic and the phrase used there was rqy ())srwk, or something similar. For behind this would have been the biblical dwbk )sk.
55. Hannah, ‘The Throne of His Glory’, pp. 82–87.
56. Cf. also 60.2, although this passage belongs to the Noahic additions.
148
‘Who is thi
s Son of Man?’
transformation of the earth (50.1-51.5). Moreover, the resurrection of the dead will take place on ‘the day of the Elect One’ (61.1-5). Finally, in the period of blessedness, which will follow the resurrection of the dead and the transformation of the heaven and the earth, the righteous and elect ones will be granted the privilege of dwelling (45.4-5) and feasting (62.14) with the Elect son of man.
The Elect son of man is an exalted fi gure, who enjoys certain privileges which elsewhere in Second Temple Judaism are reserved for the Deity. He occupies the divine throne and acts as the eschatological Judge. His appearance on earth will cause mountains consisting of various metals to melt as wax in a fl ame of fi re (52.6; 53.7). The same is said of Yahweh in more than one of the Hebrew Scriptures (Mic. 1.3-4; Ps. 97.5; Nah. 1.5; cf. also 1En. 1.4-6).57
Despite all this and despite claims to the contrary,58 the Parables never unambiguously depict the Elect son of man as a recipient of worship. While a number of passages unequivocally depict the worship of the Lord of Spirits (39.8-14; 61.9-11; 62.6; 63.2, 4-5), two could be read as depicting the worship of the Elect son of man, but it is more probable that the Lord of Spirits is the intended recipient (46.5; 48.5). Another passage, 62.9, describes how ‘the kings and mighty and the exalted and those who rule the earth’, after their condemnation, will seek mercy from the Elect son of man. Five verbs are used to describe their actions vis-à-vis the Elect son of man – falling on their faces, bowing down, hoping, pleading and asking for mercy – all of which convey supplication, but none needs to be understood in terms of worship. To be sure, the Elect son of man is exalted, he receives homage, at least at the Eschaton, but to conclude that he was given cultic veneration by the group behind the Parables goes beyond the evidence.
Pre-existence
Four passages taken together indicate that, in the mind of our author(s), the Elect son of man enjoyed a pre-mundane pre-existence. Not one of the four, in isolation from the others, makes the case without any ambiguity. Taken together, however, it is clear the Elect son of man existed from before creation.
57. Similarly, in 46.4 the Elect son of man crushes the teeth of sinners; an action of Yahweh in Pss. 3.7 and 58.6.
58. E.g. L. W. Walck, ‘The Son of Man in the Parables of Enoch and the Gospels’, in Boccaccini, Enoch, pp. 299–337, citing 304.
7. The Elect Son of Man of the Parables of Enoch 149
In the fi rst passage we are told that before the creation of sun, constellations and stars ‘that son of man was named in the presence of the Lord of Spirits and his name (was named) before the Head of Days’ (48.2-3). A little later it is stated that although ‘the Elect One had been chosen and hidden in the presence [of the Lord of Spirits] before the world was created and for ever, the wisdom of the Lord of Spirits has revealed him to the holy and righteous ones’ (48.6-7).
It is possible to read the fi rst of these as merely a statement of an ideal existence in the mind of God, i.e., foreknowledge on the part of God, rather than an ontological pre-existence on the part of the Elect son of man. Rabbinic literature provides lists of ‘the seven things created before the creation of the world: the Torah, repentance, the Garden of Eden, Gehenna, the Throne of Glory, the Holy Place (i.e., the temple) and the name of the Messiah’ ( bPes. 54a
= bNed. 39b).59 Here the phrase ‘the name of the Messiah’ probably indicates not that the Messiah was himself created before the world, but rather that his name, i.e., his identity, was already in the mind of God before the creation of the world. The statement of 48.2-3, taken in isolation, could be understood in a similar manner. The second statement, that the son of man was hidden in the presence of the Lord of Spirits, does not lend itself so easily to a mere affi rmation of God’s foreknowledge. To be hidden presupposes some kind of existence. This latter passage poses a real diffi culty for those who would argue that the Parables know only a divine foreknowledge of the Elect son of man. James VanderKam, for example, is left with contrasting 48.6-7 with ‘the Lord’s subsequent act of revealing [the son of man] to the holy and righteous ones’, and lamely concludes ‘[p]erhaps, then, the choosing and hiding refer to no more than pre-mundane election and concealment of [the son of man’s]
identity’.60 VanderKam has, in my opinion, missed the signifi cance of 70.1:
‘And after this it happened that his name, while living, was raised up to that son of man and to the Lord of Spirits.’61 Here it cannot be merely Enoch’s identity, as opposed to his person, which is exalted to heaven. Here rather we have to do with the phenomenon, not unknown in biblical literature, in which
‘name’ (M#; o1noma) stands for ‘person’ (Num. 1.18, 20; 26.53, 55; Acts 1.15; Rev. 3.4; 11.13; cf. also Ignatius, Smyrn. 13.2; Polyc. 8.3). The use of ‘name’
59. In both passages the tradition is identifi ed as a baraita.
60. VanderKam, ‘Righteous One’, p. 180.
61. For a defence of this translation and the text which lies behind it, see below.
150
‘Who is this Son of Man?’
in this manner at 70.1 does not guarantee an equivalent use in 48.2-3, but it does tip the balance in that direction.
It is much more diffi cult to ascribe an ‘ideal pre-existence’ or divine foreknowledge to the next passage. Here an ontological pre-existence seems to be affi rmed:
For from the beginning the son of man was hidden
and the Most High preserved him in the presence of his host,
and he revealed him to the elect ones. (62.7)
That the Most High kept or preserved the Elect son of man before his revelation to the kings and mighty (cf. 62.1-6) in the company of the heavenly host strongly implies an ontological pre-existence. The reference to the angelic host rules out merely an idea in the mind of God; such could not be preserved with or in the presence of the angelic host. It is true that the middle line is often rendered differently. Nickelsburg and VanderKam, for example, translate it as ‘and the Most High preserved him in the presence of his might’.62 What
‘in the presence of his might’ might mean, however, is not at all clear. While the phrase occurs nowhere else in the Book of Enoch,63 the word rendered by Nickelsburg and VanderKam as ‘might’,
( xāyl), regularly refers to the
angelic host in the text of Enoch.64 For example, in close proximity to 62.7, we read of the Lord of Spirits summoning ‘the host of heaven’ (
;
xāyla samāyāt), ‘the host of God’ (
; xāyla ‘egzi’abḥēr) and ‘the
other host who are on the earth and over the water’ (
; wa-kāle’ xāyla ‘ella westa yabs wa-diba māy), as well as various other classes of angelic beings and other denizens of heaven, including the Elect One (61.10-11).65 This latter passage offers an apt parallel to 62.7: The Elect son of man, as a denizen of heaven, is closely associated with the various classes of angels. On the other hand, there is no parallel in Enoch which offers 62. So also the translations of Charles, Knibb and Uhlig.
63. The Ethiopic is
( ba-qedma xāyl). A single manuscript, Abbadianus 55,
has
( ba-xāylu; ‘by his might’), but this is clearly a secondary attempt to clarify the text.
64. Cf.
Black,
1 Enoch, p. 236, who plausibly suggests the Hebrew original was w)bc ynpl and Casey, Solution, p. 102, who suggests the Aramaic hlyx Mdq.
65. Cf. also 18.14; 47.3; 60.1, 4; and 82.7 for
( xāyl) as the, or a, ‘host’ of angels.
7. The Elect Son of Man of the Parables of Enoch 151
support for the translation ‘in the presence of his might’. Further, it is true, as VanderKam argues,66 that the Ethiopic phrase rendered above ‘from the beginning’ (
; ‘ em-qedmu), could be translated ‘prior to this’ or something similar. Nonetheless, the phrase undoubtedly is used elsewhere in Enoch to indicate ‘from the beginning’ (39.10). Moreover, even Vand
erKam accepts that 62.7 is an allusion to the prophecy of the Ruler who is to come from Bethlehem (Mic. 5.2). Now, while the Hebrew text of Micah can be understood to assert that this Ruler’s origin is in the ancient past, not necessarily pre-mundane, the LXX rendering (a0p’ a0rxh=j e0c h9merw~n ai0w~noj)67 proves that Mic. 5.2 could also be taken to refer to a pre-mundane pre-existence, even if only in an ideal sense.68 The Elect son of man’s preservation in the presence of the angelic host in 62.7, thus, affi rms a real, as opposed to an ideal, existence and strongly suggests a pre-mundane setting (cf. Job 38.6-7).
The last passage which implies some kind of pre-existence is the most subtle and, therefore, potentially the most revealing. In 39.4-9 Enoch observes the righteous dead in their heavenly dwellings interceding for ‘the sons of men’
(39.4-5) – obviously, this must mean for those who are still living on earth. In this context, Enoch also sees ‘the Elect One of righteousness and faithfulness’
(39.6). The pre-eschatological setting means the Elect son of man must have ontological existence before his revelation and the fulfi lment of his role as eschatological judge, for he is seen by Enoch.69 A pre-mundane pre-existence is not necessarily included, but the passage coheres with what we have seen above. It is, therefore, best to understand these four passages as affi rming both an ontological and a pre-mundane pre-existence: Before his revelation at the 66. VanderKam, ‘Righteous One’, p. 181.
67. Cf. Gen. 1.1 LXX!
68. Tg. Micah on 5.1(2) makes explicit that it is the Messiah who will come from Bethlehem, ‘he whose name was mentioned from of old, from ancient times’. Cf. also Tg. Zech.
4.7.
69. VanderKam’s arguments (‘Righteous One’, pp. 184–85) that (1) this is an eschatological vision and so the prayers belong to the future period and that (2) the only verb used with regard to the Elect One is imperfect (‘there will be righteousness in his days’) can only be termed special pleading. First, the setting is clearly pre-eschatological; the intercession of the holy ones will have been brought to an end at the Eschaton. Second, the imperfect verb is used because the Elect son of man will only establish righteousness in the future. Nonetheless, he is clearly seen by Enoch in heaven prior to the End. The fulfi lment of his offi ce belongs to the future, but his existence is already a reality.