Walck - The Son of Man in The Parables of Enoch and in Matthew (2011) PDF

Jewish and Christian Texts in Contexts
and Related Studies
Series
Executive Editor
James H. Charlesworth
Editorial Board of Advisors

Mordechai Aviam, Michael T. Davis, Casey D. Elledge, Loren L. Johns,
Amy-Jill Levine, Lee McDonald, Lidija Novakovic, Gerbern Oegema,
Henry W. Morisada Rietz, Brent A. Strawn
CO25117.indb 1 11/03/2011 11:58

This page intentionally left blank
The Son of Man in the Parables of
Enoch and in Matthew
Leslie W. Walck
CO25117.indb 3 11/03/2011 11:58

© Leslie W. Walck, 2011
Published by T&T Clark International

A Continuum imprint
The Tower Building, 11 York Road, London SE1 7NX
80 Maiden Lane, Suite 704, New York, NY 10038
www.continuumbooks.com
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or
by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording or any information
storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers.
Leslie W. Walck has asserted his right under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act, 1988, to
be identified as the Author of this work.
British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data

A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library
ISBN: HB: 978-0-567-02729-0
Typeset by Fakenham Prepress Solutions, Fakenham, Norfolk NR21 8NN

Printed and bound in the United States of America
CO25117.indb 4 11/03/2011 11:58

Abstract
Depictions of the Son of Man in the Gospel of Matthew and in the Parables of Enoch
(Par. En.) raise questions about their relationship. The meaning and origin of the term
“Son of Man” are discussed, as well as the possible influence of Par. En. on Matthew.
Literary, Redaction, Sociological and Narrative criticisms are employed.
Introductory questions of date, provenance and social setting are addressed for
both Matthew and Par. En. Dates as early as the early second century bce and as late
as the late third century ce have been proposed for Par. En., but a consensus seems to
be growing for the late first century bce. Therefore Matthew could have known Par.
En. Sociological methodologies reveal that the author and audience of Par. En. may
have been members of an ousted ruling elite, opposed to the current administration,
and yearning for a just reversal of fortunes.
Sets of characteristics of the Son of Man in Par. En. and Matthew are carefully
compared. Similarities in vocabulary as well as in the pattern of relationships prove
to be intriguing, showing that Matthew and Par. En., in contrast to other writings,
share a unique conception of the judgment scene focused on the Son of Man as
eschatological judge. This suggests quite strongly the shaping of Matthew’s concept
in the direction of Par. En.
CO25117.indb 5 11/03/2011 11:58

This page intentionally left blank
Table of Contents
Preface...................................................................................................................ix
List of Tables........................................................................................................xi
Abbreviations for Ethiopic manuscripts..............................................................xii
Acknowledgments...............................................................................................xiv
1. Introduction................................................................................................... 1
1.1 Subject and Anticipated Results.............................................................. 1
1.2 The Son of Man in the Parables of Enoch............................................. 2
1.3 The Son of Man and the Gospel of Matthew.......................................... 8
1.4 The Relationship between the Parables of Enoch and Matthew.......... 12
2. Dating, Sources and Social Setting of the Parables of Enoch............. 14
2.1 Introduction........................................................................................... 14
2.2 Dating the Parables of Enoch............................................................... 15
2.3 Sources for the Parables of Enoch........................................................ 23
2.4 The Social Setting of the Parables of Enoch........................................ 30
3. The Son of Man in the Parables of Enoch............................................... 50
3.1 Religio-Historical Background.............................................................. 50
3.2 Exegesis of 1 Enoch 46:1–5.................................................................. 53
3.3 Exegesis of 1 Enoch 48:2–7.................................................................. 82
3.4 Exegesis of 1 Enoch 62....................................................................... 100
3.5 Exegesis of 1 Enoch 63:11.................................................................. 113
3.6 Exegesis of 1 Enoch 69:26–29............................................................ 117
3.7 Exegesis of 1 Enoch 70....................................................................... 129
3.8 Exegesis of 1 Enoch 71:10–17............................................................ 139
3.9 Characteristics of the Son of Man in the Parables of Enoch.............. 156
4. The Son of Man in the conception of Matthew.................................... 165
4.1 Introduction to Matthean Passages to be Considered......................... 165
4.2 Exegesis of Mt. 10:23.......................................................................... 167
4.3 Exegesis of Mt. 13:37, 41................................................................... 170
4.4 Exegesis of Mt. 16:13, 21, 27–28....................................................... 175
4.5 Exegesis of Mt. 19:28.......................................................................... 183
vii
CO25117.indb 7 11/03/2011 11:58

viii Contents
4.6 Exegesis of Mt. 24:30–31.................................................................... 189

4.7 Exegesis of Mt. 25:31–34, 41, 46....................................................... 194
4.8 Matthew’s Portrait of the Son of Man................................................. 221
5. Conclusion.................................................................................................. 226
5.1 Similarities........................................................................................... 226
5.2 Two Levels of Similarity..................................................................... 243
5.3 Other Similarities................................................................................. 244
5.4 Other Judgment Scenes....................................................................... 246
5.5 Conclusion........................................................................................... 249
5.6 Prospects for Future Study.................................................................. 251
Bibliography...................................................................................................... 253
Index.................................................................................................................. 261
CO25117.indb 8 11/03/2011 11:58

Preface
The occurrence of the term “Son of Man” in the Parables of Enoch has raised scholars’
interests in the possible influence of the parables on the Christian Gospels. With many
common features, such as being a heavenly figure, accompanied by clouds, angels,
playing a judicial role in an eschatological setting, the term in the Gospels seems to
owe something to earlier traditions as represented by Daniel, 4th Ezra, and especially
by the Parables of Enoch. From the re-discovery of the Book of Enoch in Ethiopia
in the 19th century until the present, scholars have debated the possible relationship
between Jesus’ use of the term as presented in the Gospels and uses in Daniel, 4th
Ezra and the Parables of Enoch. R. H. Charles saw a tremendous influence of the
Book of Enoch on Christian literature. Others have questioned the likelihood of the
influence, especially in connection with the term “Son of Man.” E. Sjöberg, H. E.
Tödt, and J. Theisohn in the mid-twentieth century explored the relationship, while
others in the later part of the century rejected any influence especially of the Parables
of Enoch on the Gospels. This contrast proved to be fruitful ground for investigation,
and in this study, a slight revision of my 1999 Dissertation, “The Son of Man in
Matthew and the Similitudes of Enoch,” I look for positive evidence of the influence
of the parables on Matthew.
I wish to bring Literary, Redaction, Sociological and Narrative Criticism to bear
on the question to elucidate the relationships. A primary question to be resolved is
the dating of the work, for if the parables postdate Matthew, then no influence is
possible. Studying the setting of the kings and mighty ones as well as the righteous
and elect illuminates possible historical dynamics. An extensive comparison of
similarities seems to show that Matthew has shaped the concept of the Son of Man in
the direction of the parables.
If the influence of the parables on Matthew is quite plain, then interesting
questions are raised about the Gospel, the school that produced and preserved it and
the possible influence on Jesus himself.
I direct the reader also to all the work done by the biennial Enoch Seminar,
organized by Gabriele Boccaccini and others. I was privileged to be invited to the
3rd Enoch Seminar in June 2005 in Camaldoli, Italy, to which I contributed an essay
on Enoch and the Son of Man in the Christian Gospels. The proceedings of that
Seminar are published in Boccaccini, Gabriele, ed., Enoch and the Messiah Son of
ix
CO25117.indb 9 11/03/2011 11:58

x Preface
Man: Revisiting the Book of Parables. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans
Publishing Co., 2007.
I wish to thank and acknowledge the suggestions and encouragement of my
advisor, James C. VanderKam, and James H. Charlesworth, the editor of this series. I
am also grateful for the encouragement of Gabriele Boccaccini and other participants
in the Enoch Seminar; it is very much appreciated.
I also wish to thank my family for their continued encouragement, and Colfax
Lutheran Church, where I have served as pastor, for their understanding and support.
CO25117.indb 10 11/03/2011 11:58

List of Tables
1. Distribution of Demonstrative Adjectives with the terms for “Son

of Man”.......................................................................................................... 71
2. Occurrences of Manbar/throne in the Parables of Enoch........................... 124
3. Characteristics of the Son of Man in the Parables of Enoch...................... 157
4. Other Features Relating to the Son of Man in the Parables of Enoch....... 163
5. The Matthean Portrait of the Son of Man................................................... 222
6. Speciï¬†c and Detailed Characteristics of the Son of Man
Shared by Par. En. and Matthew................................................................. 226
7. Patterns of Relationships of the Son of Man
8. Other Similarities Relating to the Son of Man
9. Features of Judgment Scenes in Parables of Enoch, Matthew and
Others........................................................................................................... 248
xi
CO25117.indb 11 11/03/2011 11:58

Abbreviations for Ethiopic manuscripts1
Eth I one family of Ethiopic manuscripts, so

identified by Flemming, Charles and Knibb.
It consists of the following:
BM 485 British Museum Orient. 485 Early 16th cent.
BM 485a A duplicate version of 97:6b–108:10 inserted
in 91:6 of BM 485.
BM 491 British Museum Orient. 491 18th cent.
Berl Berlin manuscript 16th cent.
Abb 35 Abbadanius 35 end of 17th cent.
Abb 55 Abbadanius 55 15th or 16th
cent.
Tana 9 Lake Tana manuscript 9 15th cent.
Eth II a second family of Ethiopic manuscripts, so
identified by Flemming, Charles and Knibb. It
consists of the following:
Bodl 4 Bodleian Library, catalogued by Dillmann as
no. 4 18th cent.
Bodl 5 Bodleian Library, catalogued by Dillmann as
no. 5 18th cent.
Frankfurt MS. Frankfurt manuscript 18th cent.
Curzon 55 Curzon manuscript 55, also known as
BM 8822 18th cent. (?)
Curzon 56 Curzon manuscript 56, also known as
BM 8823 18th cent. (?)
BM Add. 24185 British Museum Add. 24185 19th cent.
1
Taken from Michael A. Knibb, The Ethiopic Book of Enoch, Vol. 1 (Oxford: Clarendon
Press, 1978), 23–27, 53–54. See Knibb and R. H. Charles, The Ethiopic Version of the
Book of Enoch (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1906), xviii–xxi, for fuller descriptions of the
manuscripts.
xii
CO25117.indb 12 11/03/2011 11:58

Abbreviations for Ethiopic manuscripts xiii
BM Add. 24990 British Museum Add. 24990 18th cent.

Ryl John Rylands University Library
Ryland Ethiopic manuscript 232 18th cent.
Abb 16 Abbadanius 16 18th cent.
Vat 71 Vatican Ethiopic manuscript 71 18th cent.
Munich 30 Munich Ethiopic manuscript 30 18th cent.
Paris 114 Paris Ethiopic manuscript 114 17th cent.
Paris 32 Paris Ethiopic manuscript 32 18th cent.
Garrett MS. now at Princeton University Library 19th or end of
â•… 18th cent.
Westenholz Ms. at Hamburg Municpal Library 18th cent.
Ull Ullendorf manuscript early 18th cent.
British and British and Foreign Bible Society 17th cent.
Foreign Ethiopic ms
Bible Society
2
This is the base text of Knibb’s edition, and is characterized by him as “a fine representative
of what eventually emerged as the standard text of Enoch.” Mistakes in it are rare, although
at some point it was systematically corrected, yet in such a way as to be able to establish the
original reading.
CO25117.indb 13 11/03/2011 11:58

Acknowledgments
Many need to be acknowledged for their influence, help, support and patience over
the time that I have worked on this study in its many stages. First and foremost is
my Dissertation Advisor, Prof. James C. VanderKam, who has been unflaggingly
supportive and encouraging with what must have seemed a frustratingly slow and
easily distracted student. My readers, including Prof. Greg Sterling, Adela Yarbro
Collins and John P. Meier as well as other professors and teachers at the University
of Notre Dame, have influenced and helped me to varying degrees and all their help
has been very much appreciated. My work is much improved because of their input,
and yet any shortcomings remain completely my own. I especially thank Professors
VanderKam and Ulrich for modeling the best of the scholarly life and for the oppor-
tunities they made available to me.
I also wish to thank Dr. James H. Charlesworth, editor of this series, for his
accepting this study for inclusion and his encouragement along the way.
Others to be thanked are my wife, Megan, and daughter, Callie, who have
patiently endured this process, and are just as relieved as I that this project is finally
complete. My parents have also been pleased to see parts of my work, and their
support and encouragement has been an important bulwark. I owe many thanks to
the Church Council of Colfax Lutheran Church, who had the confidence to grant me
a study leave which resulted in significant progress, as well as to the Bishop’s office
of the Northwest Synod of Wisconsin—ELCA and other church offices for their
encouragement.
Another group requiring acknowledgement as influential are all my colleagues
along the way, with whom I read Greek, Hebrew, Aramaic and Ethiopic, with whom
I discussed some of my ideas, and who shared ideas with me. Those free-wheeling
discussions and exchanges of perspectives contributed greatly to my graduate studies,
as did the Graduate Student support group that helped me keep healthy perspectives
on the experience.
I am ever grateful
Leslie W. Walck
xiv
CO25117.indb 14 11/03/2011 11:58

1
Introduction
1.1â•‡ Subject and Anticipated Results

This study is a comparison of the uses of the term “Son of Man” in the Gospel of
Matthew and in the Parables of Enoch (Par. En.).1 Matthew’s particular use of that
term comes to light in the thirteen sayings in which Matthew exhibits a difference
from Q or Mark.2 All the “Son of Man” sayings, both those peculiar to Matthew,
and those shared by the other Gospels, exhibit the characteristics of appearing only
on Jesus’ lips, and of seeming to be non-revelatory to the narrative audience.3 The
sayings unique to Matthew, like all the others, can be divided amongst Bultmann’s
three categories of earthly, suffering, and future sayings.4 Seven of these sayings
are peculiar to Matthew and fall in the category of the future, or the prophetic
1
This study is based on my dissertation, The Son of Man in Matthew and the “Similitudes of
Enoch,” (Ann Arbor, Michigan: UMI Dissertation Services, 1999), which was submitted to
the Graduate School of the University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, Indiana., with Dr. James
C. VanderKam as my advisor.
2
Mt 10:23, 13:37, 13:41, 16:13, 16:27, 28, 17:12, 19:28, 24:30, 25:31, 26:2. In Mt 10:32 from
Q, and 16:21 from Mk, the third person pronoun appears rather than the term Son of Man.
3
These characteristics have been noted by all the commentators, including Joseph A.
Fitzmyer, The Gospel According to Luke (I–IX) (AB 28; New York: Doubleday, 1979)
208; Geza Vermes, “The Use of )#n-rb/#n-rb in Jewish Aramaic,” Appendix E in An
Aramaic Approach to the Gospels and Acts. ed. M. Black (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1967)
310–30; Jack Kingsbury, Matthew as Story (2nd ed., Philadelphia: Fortress, 1988), 95–103;
and George W. E. Nickelsburg, “Son of Man,” in David Noel Freedman ed., The Anchor
Bible Dictionary (vol 6; New York-London-Toronto-Sydney-Auckland: Doubleday, 1992),
VI.137–50.
4
Rudolf Bultmann, Theology of the New Testament (trans. K. Groebel: London: SCM,
1952) 30; he is followed by Philipp Vielhauer, “Gottesreich und Menschensohn in der
Verkündigung Jesu,” in Aufsätze zum Neuen Testament (Munich: Kaiser, 1965) 57–58;
Norman Perrin, A Modern Pilgrimage in New Testament Christology (Philadelphia: Fortress,
1974) 60–77; Heinz Eduard Tödt, The Son of Man in the Synoptic Tradition (trans. Dorothea
M. Barton; London: SCM, 1965); A. J. B. Higgins, The Son of Man in the Teaching of
Jesus (SNTSMS 39; Cambridge-New York: Cambridge University Press, 1980) 2; Barnabas
Lindars, Jesus Son of Man: A Fresh Examination of the Son of Man Sayings in the Gospels
and in the Light of Recent Research (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1983) vii.
CO25117.indb 1 11/03/2011 11:58

2 The Son of Man in the Parables of Enoch and in Matthew
and apocalyptic,5 sayings. Of particular interest is the saying which introduces the
description of the Last Judgment (MtÂ€25:31–46). In Par. En., on the other hand, the
term “Son of Man” is one of several used of the eschatological, judicial ï¬†gure, who
is central to the three visions.6 The ï¬†gure is unknown to the kings and the powerful,
but is the hope of the elect and righteous. Most interesting is the role the Son of Man
plays as judge at the eschatological judgment.
Some have seen a clear dependence of Matthew upon Par. En. for the concept
of the ï¬†gure who is called the Son of Man,7 while others have argued against such a
dependence.8 Crucial to this study will be the dating of Par. En., for if Par. En. can be
dated as preceding Matthew, then dependence can be argued. The anticipated result
is that there is a clear, deï¬†nable, positive relationship between the two documents
as revealed in their portrayal of the Son of Man. A great deal of similarity exists
between the two documents, especially the image of the Son of Man sitting “upon the
throne of his glory,” and judging the mighty of the world. The basis of judgment is
the way the mighty and the powerful have treated the poor and disenfranchised. Both
images of the eschatological judge include the sending out of angels, and the reversal
of fortunes. Further, neither judge is recognized by the mighty and powerful. The
condemned plead for mercy in both documents, but none is forthcoming, and they are
sent to the place of their punishment. These similarities seem to indicate some kind
of a close relationship between the two documents, literary, oral or at the very least,
a common tradition shared by the two works. These similarities also merit a detailed
examination of the pertinent passages in both Par. En. and Matthew.
1.2â•‡ The Son of Man in the Parables of Enoch

1.2.1â•‡ The Parables of Enoch
The Son of Man in Par. En. is shaped by the genre of the work. The ‘macrogenre’
of Par. En. is clearly apocalypse.9 Its main theme is judgment day and the destiny of
5
This is Adela Yarbro Collins’ preferred designation for this group, when categorized
according to form and function, in “The Origin of the Designation of Jesus as ‘Son of Man’,”
HTR 80:4 (1987) 401–403.
6
James C. VanderKam, “Righteous One, Messiah, Chosen One, and Son of Man in
1Â€EnochÂ€37–71,” in J. H. Charlesworth, ed., The Messiah (Minneapolis: Augsburg Fortress,
1992) 174–75.
7
For example, David R. Catchpole, “The Poor on Earth and the Son of Man in Heaven: A
Re-appraisal of Matthew XXV.31–46,” BJRL 61 (1979) 355–97; and J. Theisohn, Der auser-
wählte Richter (SUNT 12; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1975) 149–201.
8
Such as Maurice Casey, Son of Man: The Interpretation and Influence of Daniel 7 (London:
SPCK, 1979); and Douglas R. A. Hare, The Son of Man Tradition (Minneapolis: Fortress,
1991); also see Casey’s subsequent work, The Solution to the ‘Son of Man’ Problem (London
& New York: T&T Clark International, 2007) 91–111.
9
John J. Collins, The Apocalyptic Imagination (New York: Crossroad, 1984) 143–45. See also
David W. Suter, “Apocalyptic Patterns in the Similitudes of Enoch,” in Paul J. Achtemeier,
CO25117.indb 2 11/03/2011 11:58

Introduction 3
the righteous. It includes the motifs of revelation through vision during an ascent, an
angelic guide, concern for the transcendent world and the destiny of humanity, motifs
which are typical of apocalyptic writings.10 It lacks a review of history, however.
The frame story, 1Â€EnochÂ€37, 70–71 and the ï¬†rst vision are a reinterpretation of the
Book of the Watchers, but, instead of fallen watchers being judged, the rulers and
the mighty ones are to be judged. Enoch’s ascent and his message of judgment from
God are reinterpreted for the contemporary situation of the community which was
addressed in this work.
Par. En. contains three parables or visions (1Â€EnochÂ€38–44, 45–57, and 58–69).
Each one has an introductory chapter presenting the subject of that particular parable.
Overall, the theme is the eschatological resting place of the righteous and the wicked,
as revealed to Enoch, who has ascended to heaven and is thus able to receive this
information.11
The ï¬†rst parable (1Â€EnochÂ€38–44) includes a vision of the resting place of the
righteous with the angels and holy ones (1Â€EnochÂ€39). He sees myriads of angels, and
four archangels are before the Lord of Spirits (1Â€EnochÂ€40). Cosmological secrets are
revealed to Enoch (1Â€EnochÂ€41, 43–44). A portion of a Wisdom poem (1Â€EnochÂ€42)
asserts the opposite of Sirach 24, that wisdom is obscured on earth by iniquity.
The second parable (1Â€EnochÂ€45–57) is concerned with those who deny the
Name of the Lord of the Spirits. They will come neither to heaven nor to earth,
but will be judged when the Elect One will sit on his throne of glory (1Â€EnochÂ€45).
The Son of Man is introduced in a clear allusion to Daniel 7:13 (1Â€EnochÂ€46), and
the prayers of the righteous ascend to heaven (1Â€EnochÂ€47). Wisdom is revealed to
Enoch, “poured out like water,” and not withdrawn (1Â€EnochÂ€48–49). The theme
of judgment is addressed again (1Â€EnochÂ€50–51), more secrets of the heavens are
revealed (1Â€EnochÂ€52), and Enoch sees punishment being prepared for the wicked
(1Â€EnochÂ€53–57).
The third parable (1Â€EnochÂ€58–69) consists of cosmological mysteries, a vision
of the “head of days,” a noachic interpolation (1Â€EnochÂ€65–67), and the judgment of
the fallen angels (1Â€EnochÂ€68–69).
The function of the work is to provide consolation to the oppressed by raising
for them the hope of a future reversal of fortunes. They will be vindicated and their
oppressors overturned. In this way, the work helped deï¬†ne boundaries for the group.
They were the ones who acknowledged the Lordship of the Son of Man, while the
ed., SBLSP (Vol. 1; Missoula, Montana: Scholars Press, 1978) 8–12. The pertinent intro-
ductory questions of dating, sources and social setting will be addressed in Chapter 2.
10
John J. Collins, “Introduction: Towards the Morphology of a Genre,” Semeia 14 (1979) 9;
and Adela Yarbro Collins, “Introduction,” Semeia 36 (1986) 2, 7.
11
Collins, The Apocalyptic Imagination, 143–45. See also James C. VanderKam, Enoch, A
Man for All Generations (Columbia, South Carolina: University of South Carolina Press,
1995) 132–42. See also Gabriele Boccaccini, ed., Enoch and the Messiah Son of Man:
Revisiting the Book of Parables (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing
Co., 2007) 23–78.
CO25117.indb 3 11/03/2011 11:58

mighty and the powerful did not, and therefore would be judged. The Son of Man
is portrayed as the eschatological judge, who in the end will vindicate them. This
portrayal arises out of the apocalyptic genre of the work.
1.2.2â•‡ The Son of Man in Par. En.
Three terms for the Son of Man are used in Par. En.12 They are walda sab), walda
be)si, and walda )egwāla )emma-h[ eyāw. They are interchangeable, for the same
attributes are shared by all three terms. Together with the “Righteous One,” the
“Anointed,” and the “Elect One,” they refer to the messianic ï¬†gure. The term Son of
Man has been based on DanielÂ€7:13, with exegetical developments based on passages
in Isaiah and Jeremiah. Some argue that the term in Daniel 7, “one like a son of man”
(i.e. a human one) seems to have been a corporate symbol for the people of God
who will supplant the four beastly empires.13 Others argue that the term referred to
an angelic patron of Israel.14 In Par. En. the term refers to an individual, who is the
ï¬†nal judge.
Four issues have been debated rather extensively regarding the Son of Man:
1)Â€ whether the term is a title; 2) Enoch’s identiï¬†cation as the Son of Man; 3)Â€ the
signiï¬†cance of the “hiddenness” of the Son of Man and whether it implies his
pre-existence; and 4) the eschatological function of the Son of Man.
Is “Son of Man” a Title?

Maurice Casey15 and George Nickelsburg16 argue that “Son of Man” is not a title
in Par. En. because the demonstrative is often used with it. The term is also often
qualiï¬†ed in other ways, a fact which leads Nickelsburg to suggest that it is a general
term for a human being, and that that human being is gloriï¬†ed. The actual titles used
of that human one are the “Elect One” or the “Righteous One.”17 Casey points out that
the title the “Elect One” is never used with a demonstrative.
E. Sjöberg agrees in part.18 He believes that the term is not a formal title in Par.
En. because of the use of the demonstrative. It has, however, become a “ï¬†xed term,”
which Sjöberg views as an intermediate step on the way toward becoming a title. By
12
VanderKam, “Righteous One,” 174–75.
13
Casey, Son of Man, 18, 40–44. Also see the section on the Religio-Historical Background in
the next chapter.
14
John J. Collins, The Apocalyptic Vision of the Book of Daniel (HSM 16: Missoula: Scholars
Press, 1977) 141–46.
15
Maurice Casey, “The Use of Term ‘Son of Man’ in the Similitudes of Enoch,” JSJ 7 (1976)
11–29. See also Casey, Solution, 111.
16
George W. E. Nickelsburg, Jewish Literature Between the Bible and the Mishnah
(Philadelphia: Fortress, 1981) 221–22.
17
Nickelsburg, Jewish Literature, 215.
18
E. Sjöberg, Der Menschensohn in Äthiopischen Henochbuch (Skrifter Utgivna av kungl.
Humanistiska Vetenskapssamfundet in Lund 41; Lund: C. W. K. Gleerup, 1946).
CO25117.indb 4 11/03/2011 11:58

Introduction 5
1Â€EnochÂ€71, Sjöberg claims, the term has become a title. Matthew Black comes to a
similar conclusion.19
The Identification of Enoch as the Son of Man

John J. Collins20 and VanderKam21 have written on the issue of the identiï¬†cation of
Enoch as the Son of Man, and take opposing viewpoints. Collins states the problem
succinctly. As the text now stands, 1Â€EnochÂ€71:14 identiï¬†es the Son of Man with
Enoch. This means, then, that throughout Par. En. he sees the Son of Man but
does not recognize himself as the Son of Man. Only at the end is this identiï¬†cation
revealed to him. If this reading is authentic, then it is the only instance of apocalyptic
auto-vision that survives, in which the seer does not recognize himself. But John J.
Collins suggests that it is unlikely that Enoch would be viewing himself throughout
Par. En. without recognizing himself.22
Charles’ solution was to emend the text of 1Â€EnochÂ€71:14 to the third person
instead of the second person.23 Thus Charles read, “This is the Son of Man.â•›.â•›.” rather
than “You are the Son of Man.â•›.â•›.” Then he made the necessary changes in the rest of
the text to bring it into harmony with the 3rd person rendering. He also suggested that
a paragraph, which revealed the identity of the Son of Man, has been lost. But this
extensive emendation has no surviving textual basis in any of the manuscripts, and
for this reason is to be rejected.
Collins sees three possible solutions. One is that “son of man” in 1Â€EnochÂ€71:14,
by which Enoch is referred to, is a non-technical use of the term meaning simply
another human spectator (Mowinckel’s suggestion). The problem with this suggestion
is that the author has not given any indication that this “son of man,” Enoch, is
different from the term used in the rest of Par. En. A second solution is to view Abb
55 (manuscript U) as containing the original reading at 1Â€EnochÂ€70:1. The majority
of manuscripts distinguish between Enoch and the “Son of Man” at 1Â€EnochÂ€70:1:
“Enoch’s name was raised to the Son of Man and to the Lord of Spirits.” But this
contradicts 1Â€EnochÂ€71:14, which announces that Enoch is the Son of Man. Abb 55,
Abb 99 and Abb 197 (Charles’ manuscripts U, V, and W), however, do not include
the words “to the Son of Man and,” and thus would remove the contradiction between
1Â€EnochÂ€70:1 and 71:14. The problem with this solution is that, as Collins suggests,
19
Matthew Black, The Book of Enoch or I Enoch; a New English Translation with Commentary
and Textual Notes (Leiden: E. J. Brill; 1985) 207. Under 1Â€Enoch 46:2 later, see further
my discussion on the demonstrative adjective with the Son of Man and its distribution in
Table 1.
20
John J. Collins, “The Son of Man in First-Century Judaism,” NTS 38 (1992) 448–66; and
The Apocalyptic Imagination, 151–53.
21
22
John J. Collins, “The Son of Man who has Righteousness,” in SBLSP (vol. 2, ed. Paul J.
Achtemeier; Missoula: Scholars Press, 1979) 6. Casey, Solution, 91–111, argues that the
term ())#n()) rb refers to Enoch throughout, and cites the example of Levi seeing a future
self in a vision at Bethel (T.Â€LeviÂ€7.4–8.1)
23
R. H. Charles, The Book of Enoch or 1 Enoch (Oxford: Clarendon, 1912) 145.
CO25117.indb 5 11/03/2011 11:58

the omission of the words in Abb 55, 99 and 197 (manuscripts U, V, and W) may be
a scribal alteration in order to bring 1Â€EnochÂ€70:1 into harmony with 1Â€EnochÂ€71:14.24
Thus Collins holds that the majority reading is the original, in which Enoch and the
Son of Man are distinguished. The third solution, which Collins held in “The Son of
Man who has Righteousness” (1979), is to see 1Â€EnochÂ€71 as a redactional addition
at a time later than the writing of the original. This would explain the contradiction
between 1Â€EnochÂ€70:1 and 71:14. Further, the alleged pre-existence of the Son of
Man in 1Â€EnochÂ€48 makes no allusion to earthly, human existence, which might
be expected if Enoch were identiï¬†ed as the Son of Man in the original work. This
observation tends to support the view that 1Â€EnochÂ€71 was added later, and altered the
original sense. And again, some argue that repetition is usual in apocalyptic literature,
so that the repetition of the references to Enoch and to the Son of Man in 1Â€EnochÂ€70
and 71 is appropriate to add nuance to the meaning. But Collins responds that while
repetition is frequent in apocalyptic visions, it is not usual in narrative frameworks,
where it would occur here. This also militates against the originality of 1Â€EnochÂ€71.
The reason for the addition of 1Â€EnochÂ€71, according to Collins, can only be hypoth-
esized, but probably the chapter was added as a later anti-Christian polemic, which
presented Enoch rather than Christ as the model to follow.25 Thus Collins argues that
1Â€EnochÂ€71 is to be seen as a later addition.
VanderKam, on the other hand, argues that 1Â€EnochÂ€70–71 are a natural and
expected conclusion to the work, matching the introduction in 1Â€EnochÂ€37. They are
not repetitious, but “carefully crafted and tightly uniï¬†ed.”26 This judgment is based
on vocabulary used to reï¬‡ect the different levels of ascent, and coincides well with
ancient exegetical traditions which attributed a double ascent to Enoch, one during his
365 years, and the other at the end of his life.27 Further the reverse genealogy given
for Enoch at 1Â€EnochÂ€37:1 contains two hints at his later elevation to the status of
Son of Man: two of his ancestors, Adam and Enos, have names which are synonyms
for “human.” Thus the phrases “son of Enos” and “son of Adam” are tantamount to
saying “son of man” twice in Enoch’s genealogy, obliquely preparing the reader for
Enoch’s identiï¬†cation as the Son of Man in 1Â€EnochÂ€71:14.28 The conclusion then is
that the author did include 1Â€EnochÂ€70–71 as a part of the work, and did intend to
make a dramatic identiï¬†cation of Enoch as the Son of Man.
24
John J. Collins, “The Heavenly Representative: The ‘Son of Man’ in the Similitudes of
Enoch,” in Ideal Figures in Ancient Judaism, ed. George W. E. Nickelsburg and John J.
Collins, SCS12; (Chico, Ca: Scholars Press, 1980) 122. VanderKam notes in “Righteous
One,” 184, that Abb 55 (manuscript U) can also be translated as “his name was raised to that
of the son of man,” thus preserving the contradiction. Collins, in a more recent article, “The
Son of Man in First-Century Judaism,” 453–55, acknowledges the uncertainty regarding the
translation and notes that Abb 55 (manuscript U) is capricious in its omissions, citing R. H.
Charles, “The Book of Enoch,” APOT 2.166.
25
Collins, The Apocalyptic Imagination, 153.
26
VanderKam, “Righteous One,” 177, where he refers to Sjöberg’s work.
27
VanderKam, “Righteous One,” 179.
28
CO25117.indb 6 11/03/2011 11:58

Introduction 7
In his article, “The Son of Man in First-Century Judaism,” (1992)29 Collins has
adjusted his position somewhat. He no longer sees 1Â€EnochÂ€71 as necessarily a redac-
tional addition, although he does recognize redactional seams in the epilogue.30 Rather
the problem may have a different solution: Enoch’s identiï¬†cation at 1Â€EnochÂ€71:14
as the Son of Man who was born to righteousness is not meant to be an identiï¬†cation
with the Son of Man who has been seen in the visions, but rather is meant simply to
be an acknowledgment that Enoch is a righteous human being (where “son of man”
is taken to mean a human being). He has been translated into the heavenly realms to
the presence of the Lord of Spirits and that Son of Man who is seated on the throne.
So Collins now understands 1Â€EnochÂ€71 as being original, but as identifying Enoch
not with the Son of Man of the visions, but merely as a righteous human being who
has been translated to heaven and who now lives in peace forever.
This view is possible, in that the demonstrative is not used here with Son of Man,
and one could reasonably have expected it here. Further, Son of Man is a semitic
idiom for a human being, and as Collins pointed out, in 1Â€EnochÂ€71:14 Enoch is
“born” to righteousness, instead of simply having it, as at 1Â€EnochÂ€46:3. However, the
major obstacle to this view remains that there is simply too little in the text to warrant
a shift in referent. No other, more major and attention grabbing distinction is made
between the Son of Man and a son of man (i.e. human being) at this point. The whole
ï¬‡ow of the narrative points to Enoch’s dramatic identiï¬†cation as the Son of Man. The
attributes with which he is spoken of here cohere extremely well with the Son of Man
of the visions. He is bathed in righteousness: born for it, it abides with him, and God’s
righteousness will not forsake him (1Â€EnochÂ€71:14). Further, God promises him peace
and that all the righteous will be eternally present with him (1Â€EnochÂ€71:15–16).
These attributes all tend to underscore Enoch’s identiï¬†cation as the Son of Man, not
merely as one of the righteous humans who are already in heaven. For the reader,
the identiï¬†cation of Enoch and the Son of Man is dramatic, but it has been prepared
for, as VanderKam argued.31 For the reader, that Enoch is acclaimed by Michael as
just another righteous human, as Collins suggests, is anticlimactic and has not been
prepared for by the author.
The Hiddenness and Pre-existence of the Son of Man

The passages which suggest the hiddenness of the Son of Man (1Â€EnochÂ€48:3, 6, 62:7)
are claimed to imply the pre-existence of the Son of Man. But as VanderKam argues,
they may not imply that at all.32 They may rather simply refer to God’s intention
and purpose for Enoch, which God has known forever. In 1Â€EnochÂ€48:3 his name is
named; in 1Â€EnochÂ€48:6, his chosenness and hiddenness suggest that Enoch’s career
29
Collins, “The Son of Man in First-Century Judaism,” 448–66.
30
Such as between 1Â€EnochÂ€70:2 and 70:3, where there is a change from third person to ï¬†rst
person. In this article he calls chapters 70–71 an “epilogue” instead of referring to them as
“epilogues” in his previous work.
31
VanderKam, “Righteous One,” 178–79. See further my discussion of 1Â€Enoch 70–71 later.
32
CO25117.indb 7 11/03/2011 11:58

and heavenly role were foreordained; and in 1Â€EnochÂ€62:7 the word “preserved” is
simply parallel to “hidden,” while )em-qedmu, “from the beginning” can also simply
mean “before the present time” in a general way.33 These verses certainly suggest the
pre-election of but not necessarily the pre-existence of the Son of Man, and thus they
need not be impediments to the identiï¬†cation of Enoch as the Son of Man.34
The Eschatological Function of the Son of Man

John J. Collins argues that the Son of Man’s function is more than simply sharing
the qualities of righteousness and election. It is also to be a support for the earthly
righteous by being an eschatological revealer and judge to vindicate the righteous
and condemn the wicked.35 The relationship is based not on “corporate personality”
in which the psyches of the leader and the community merge, but on a “representative
unity” (Mowinckel’s term), in which the leader symbolically stands for and on behalf
of the community. Analogies may be a king, or better, patron deities, who are more
powerful than the human community they represent, and who act on their behalf,
and sometimes against them. He sees a similar concept in Daniel 10, where the
angelic princes of Persia and Greece do battle with Michael, the patron of Israel.
The difference in Par. En. is that the human community is not identiï¬†ed in national
terms, but as the “righteous and elect.” The Son of Man thus is conceived not as a
personiï¬†cation of the righteous, but as its heavenly Doppelgänger, who represents the
persecuted community, but does not participate in its suffering, and so is a symbol
of hope and eventual glory and exaltation. He is conceived to be a real being, more
real and powerful than the community, and he symbolizes the destiny of the righteous
community both in its present hiddenness and future manifestation.
The explicit role given to the Son of Man is to be judge over the kings and
the mighty ones, and to condemn them to punishment for their oppression of the
“righteous and elect.” This judge, however, is hidden until that ï¬†nal judgment day,
and is revealed only to the “righteous and elect.” By this special revelation, he aids in
drawing the boundaries for the group, both by acknowledging their present oppressed
state, and by giving hope for a future vindication and a reversal of fortunes.
1.3â•‡ The Son of Man and the Gospel of Matthew

1.3.1â•‡ Date and Provenance of Matthew
The time of the writing of Matthew has been much debated, with dates ranging from
pre–70 ce to after 100 ce.36 While Patristic evidence favors an earlier time, and some
33
VanderKam, 181, notes that )em-qedmu is the best reading, and that G. Beer, “Das Buch
Henoch.” APAT vol 2, has translated it with vorher.
34
See further my discussion on 1 Enoch 48, 62 later.
35
36
W. D. Davies and Dale C. Allison Jr., A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Gospel
CO25117.indb 8 11/03/2011 11:58

Introduction 9
modern scholars argue for a pre-70 ce date, most scholars argue that Matthew is to be
dated at the end of the ï¬†rst century. The years 80–95 for the date of Matthew seem
best to account for the literary similarities with Mark and Luke, the type of theology
exhibited in the work in terms of ecclesiology and christology,37 and the tensions with
other Judaic groups that seem to have developed.38
A variety of locations for composition have been proposed for Matthew, including
Jerusalem (by those who argue for a pre-70 date), Caesarea Maritima, Phoenicia,
Alexandria, East of the Jordan, Edessa, Syria, Antioch,39 Sepphoris and Tiberias in
Galilee.40 Conclusive evidence is lacking for all of these proposals, but the suggestion
that the Gospel was written in Antioch of Syria is most likely and has won the most
approval. Peter’s prominence in Antioch, the large population of Jews, a number
of Jewish synagogues, together with Antioch’s status as a center for the Christian
gentile mission all favor the suggestion that Antioch is the locale for Matthew. The
Gospel was written for Christian Jews, who believed in Jesus, and who were seeking
to reform Judaism under the leadership of Jesus, while at the same time welcoming
gentile God-fearers.41
1.3.2â•‡ The Son of Man in Material Special to Matthew
The use of the Son of Man in the material special to Matthew is only a part of the
ongoing modern debate about the origin and meaning of Jesus’ use of the term Son
of Man. All commentators have noted that in the Gospels the term appears only on
According to Saint Matthew (3 vols, ICC; Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1988ff) section VI, “The
Date of Matthew,” I.127–38. At the beginning of this section, they include a chart indicating
the major positions.
37
Davies and Allison, Matthew, I.131–33.
38
Davies and Allison, Matthew, I.133–38. Donald Senior, What Are They Saying About
Matthew? (New York/Mahwah, N.J.: Paulist Press; 1996) 10–20, reports on the developing
theories regarding Matthew and formative Judaism in that same period. J. Andrew Overman,
Church and Community in Crisis: The Gospel According to Matthew (Valley Forge, PA:
Trinity Press International, 1996) 16–19, argues for a Galilean setting in which the Pharisees
of formative Judaism are very near and real dialogue partners, against whom Matthew is
arguing. Overman sees the Matthean group as still within Judaism, claiming to express the
authentic and proper understanding of Torah, which is to be interpreted through the teaching
of Jesus. Anthony J. Saldarini, Matthew’s Christian–Jewish Community (Chicago/London:
University of Chicago Press, 1994) 2, 21, also argues that the Matthean group was still a vital
and integral part of the evolving Judaism of the first century ce, and that Matthew hoped “he
would prevail and make his program normative for the whole Jewish community.” Saldarini,
ch. 5, esp. 110–23, convincingly uses theories about sects and deviants to explain how the
vituperative polemic in Matthew is directed against the Jewish leadership, not because
separation has occurred between Jews and Christians, but out of the hope of winning over
the mainstream of Jews to live by Torah as nuanced through Jesus.
39
Davies and Allison, Matthew, Section VII, “The Local Origin of Matthew,” I.138–47.
40
Overman, Church and Community in Crisis, 17–19.
41
Saldarini, Matthew’s Christian–Jewish Community, 202.
CO25117.indb 9 11/03/2011 11:58

Jesus’ lips, and is not revelatory, for the audience does not seem to know anything
more about Jesus from his use of it. The history–of–religions approach argues that the
term reï¬‡ects a concept of a heavenly being, which goes back at least to Dan.Â€7:13. The
dialogue between Geza Vermes and Joseph Fitzmyer42 has opened an ongoing debate
over whether Son of Man referred to a pre-existing concept from Judaism, or whether
it was simply a modest form of self-designation. The critical issue is whether Jesus
used it only of himself in an indirect way, or whether he used it with the content of the
heavenly ï¬†gure in mind. Vermes43 was able to point to ten instances in early Rabbinic
literature where the term was used as a modest way to refer to the speaker himself.
Vermes’ views have been taken up by Barnabas Lindars44 and Maurice Casey,45 who
argue that the transformation of the term from a modest form of self-designation
to a titular use took place in the early church. It was the early church that created
the suffering and apocalyptic sayings to make sense of Jesus’ death and continued
relevance. Thus the earthly sayings of Jesus are considered to be authentic. Norman
Perrin,46 followed by William Walker,47 has suggested a possible method in the pesher
tradition for how the early church came to create the suffering and future sayings.
Douglas R. A. Hare, another voice in this chorus, essentially says that the Son of Man
tradition is really no tradition at all, that the term is simply Jesus’ favorite, modest
form of self-designation.48 Delbert Burkett examines the history of the argumentation
about the nontitular meaning of the term “son of man” and concludes that none of the
scholars who argue this position have been convincing. A generic use of “son of man”
as argued by Vermes, Casey, Lindars and Hare simply does not ï¬†t all the instances.49
However, the term seems to have been a signiï¬†cant one, for it appears only on the
42
A concise listing of the relevant articles in the debate can be found in footnote 9 on p. 486 of
John R. Donahue, S. J., “Recent Studies on the Origin of ‘Son of Man’ in the Gospels.” in A
Wise and Discerning Heart: Studies Presented to Joseph A. Fitzmyer In Celebration of His
Sixty-Fifth Birthday, CBQ 48 (1986) 484–98. Casey, Solution, 80–115, argues strenuously
against the “Son of Man Concept” ever having existed, except in modern scholars’ minds.
43
Vermes, “The Use of )#n-rb/#n-rb in Jewish Aramaic,” 310–30. Casey, Solution, 56–81,
has examined thirty examples of the use of ())#n()) rb as a generic term that sometimes
functions as a self-reference.
44
Barnabas Lindars, Jesus Son of Man: A Fresh Examination of the Son of Man sayings in the
Gospels (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1983; London: SPCK, 1983) and the articles that
preceded this book.
45
Casey, Son of Man, passim. In Solution, Casey demonstrates how the term and its use in
Greek could be the result of a translation strategy for ())#n()) rb where the expression o(
ui9o_j tou= a)nqrw&pou is used as a generic term that could be used as a self-referent, but used
only of Jesus, and not the plural.
46
Norman Perrin, “The Son of Man in Ancient Judaism and Primitive Christianity: A
Suggestion,” 23–40, and “The Son of Man in the Synoptic Tradition,” 57–83 in A Modern
Pilgrimage .
47
William O. Walker, “The Son of Man: Some Recent Developments,” CBQ 45 (1983)
584–607.
48
Hare, The Son of Man Tradition. See especially 213–82.
49
Delbert Burkett, “The Nontitular Son of Man: A History and Critique,” NTS 40 (1994)
504–21.
CO25117.indb 10 11/03/2011 11:58

Introduction 11
lips of Jesus, and even the strange Greek seems to indicate that the New Testament
authors sought to preserve something of the uniqueness of the term. Regardless of
which sayings were created by the church, the future sayings, or the earthly sayings,
the creator(s) respected the convention that the term appears only on the lips of Jesus.
This fact further indicates an awareness of a tradition and of Jesus’ unique use of the
term.
The opposing arguments are marshalled by Fitzmyer50 and Adela Yarbro Collins.51
Fitzmyer argues that Vermes’ examples of modest self-designation are not relevant to
the New Testament since they are late or non-Palestinian.52 Yarbro Collins suggests
that Jesus did use the term to refer to the ï¬†gure in Daniel’s vision, and that Jesus felt
himself to be involved in that ministry, though not identiï¬†ed with that ï¬†gure. Thus, as
Bultmann53 and Tödt54 have argued, the authentic sayings are to be discerned amongst
the future Son of Man sayings. Further, Seyoon Kim, in a brief but insightful study,
hypothesizes and argues that “Jesus may have used the self-designation with the dual
purpose of revealing his identity discreetly to those who had ears to hear and hiding
it from those who had no ears to hear .â•›.â•›. to reveal himself to be the divine ï¬†gure who
was the inclusive representative (or the head) of the eschatological people of God.”55
As to the oral nature of the origin of the term, Randall Buth, in a paper delivered
at the 1993 Annual Meeting of the SBL in Washington D.C. argued that Jesus could
have used that term in a way that immediately would have signaled to his listeners
that he was alluding to the ï¬†gure in Daniel’s vision.56 Buth accepts the argument that
the Aramaic phrase is not a title referring to a popular “son-of-man” ï¬†gure. However,
Buth argues that there was a way in which Jesus could refer to the ï¬†gure in Daniel 7,
a way that gave rise to the peculiar idiom in the New Testament. The population at the
time, Buth points out, was tri-lingual, able to use koinē Greek, Hebrew and Aramaic
interchangeably. Buth argues that Greek was the normal language for discourse
50
See Donahue’s references noted earlier.
51
Yarbro Collins, “The Origin of the Designation of Jesus as ‘Son of Man’,” 391–407.
52
E.g., Joseph A. Fitzmyer, S.J., “The New Testament Title ‘Son of Man’ Philologically
Considered,” in A Wandering Aramaean: Collected Aramaic Essays (SBLMS 25; Missoula:
Scholars Press, 1979) 143–60.
53
Rudolf Bultmann, The History of the Synoptic Tradition (tr. John Marsh; rev. ed. New York:
Harper and Row, 1968).
54
Tödt, Son of Man.
55
Seyoon Kim, “The ‘Son of Man’” as the Son of God (WUNT 30; Tübingen: J. C. B.
Mohr [Paul Siebeck], 1983) 35–36. Jack Dean Kingsbury, Matthew As Story (2nd ed.;
Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1988) 95–103, observes similarly, that the title “Son of God”
serves to identify Jesus for the informed reader and is a confession of faith, while at the same
time, “Son of Man” as a public term keeps his identity hidden from the world and its leaders
who do not accept him.
56
Randall Buth, “A More Complete Semitic Background for )#n-rb, Son of Man.” The
abstract for this paper appears in AAR-SBL Abstracts, 1993, 112. The paper itself has not
been published, but Buth, a linguist with the United Bible Societies, intends to develop it into
a monograph. Casey, Solution, 116, summarizes his position that Aramaic, not Greek, was
used by Jesus in his teaching.
CO25117.indb 11 11/03/2011 11:58

amongst the educated in Palestine, and when Jesus wanted to allude to the ï¬†gure in
Daniel 7, he simply switched to Aramaic to express the term )#n-rb, and then back
to Greek to complete his thought. Thus with complete economy and yet with absolute
clarity Jesus expressed his thoughts. The listeners, also being tri-lingual, would have
understood completely.57 According to Buth, the Church sought to preserve that
understandability with the unusual (for Greek) rendering, o( ui9o_j tou= a)nqrw&pou.
Hence the unusual turn of phrase is accounted for, and the convention to limit it to
the lips of Jesus is explained.
This study, however, will focus on Matthew’s particular understanding of the term
o( ui9o\j tou= a)nqrw&pou, an understanding which can be discerned in his unique uses
of the term. Eleven sayings appear in Matthew which are not present in the other
Gospels,58 Nine of these eleven pertain to the future, coming Son of Man. Three
sayings, which use the term “Son of Man” in the other Gospels, appear in Matthew
with personal pronouns instead of “Son of Man.”59 As many have noted, these
Matthean sayings tend to favor the view that Matthew conceived of the Son of Man
as a heavenly eschatological judge.
1.4â•‡ The Relationship between the Parables of Enoch

and Matthew
The question regarding the origin of the judicial aspect of Matthew’s concept of the
Son of Man has aroused some debate. Casey argues that Par. En., 4th Ezra, and the
Christian concept of the Son of Man are not directly related to each other in any way.
Each is an exegetical development upon the original vision in Dan 7:13, but they are
independent of one another and have been developed in differing directions.60 Hare
has also argued that Matthew does not depend upon Par. En., but that the use of the
57
There is a ring of authenticity to Buth’s suggestion, which I can attest to personally. Growing
up bilingually, speaking Neo-Melanesian (Pidgin English) and English in Papua New
Guinea, my family and I would frequently ï¬†nd that a particular concept could be expressed
better with a particular connotation in Neo-Melanesian. Similarly, and more pertinently,
English speaking scholars borrow technical terms from German or French, because English
does not have suitable terms. Again, in the medical ï¬†eld sometimes a Latin phrase bestows
the aura of a technical status on an unknown medical condition, even though a literal trans-
lation of the Latin phrase merely indicates that the condition is unknown. With each of these
examples, a foreign term is borrowed to express a particular concept, in the same way Buth
suggests the term “Son of Man” came into existence. Some, however, would question how
widespread the use of Greek was in Jesus’ day, and if he would have used Greek for his
conversations, since he was not a member of the elite stratum of society.
58
Mt. 10:23, 13:37, 13:41, 16:13, 16:27, 28, 17:12, 19:28, 24:30, 25:31, 26:2.
59
Mt. 5:11/Lk. 6:22, Mt. 10:32/Lk. 12:8 from Q, Mt. 16:21/Mk. 8:31.
60
Casey, Son of Man. David C. Sim, Apocalyptic Eschatology in the gospel of Matthew
(Cambridge: University Press, 1996), 121–23, suggests that Matthew and the author of Par.
En. had access to some common traditions.
CO25117.indb 12 11/03/2011 11:58

Introduction 13
term Son of Man developed in the early church, out of Jesus’ use of )#n-rb as a
modest self-designation.61
Other scholars argue that there is a signiï¬†cant relationship between Matthew’s
use of “Son of Man” and that in Par. En. Catchpole,62 and Theisohn63 enumerate
many themes shared between the two, while Tödt64 argues that Matthew has shaped
his concept of a judicial Son of Man quite clearly in the direction of that found in
Par. En. The Son of Man in both Matthew and Par. En. is seated on the throne of his
glory, and angels are present. The scene of enthronement in both carries within it the
theme of judgment. All the world is to be judged in both. The world is divided into
two groups, some for blessing, and the others for condemnation. Mercy is not granted
following the judgment, even though it is sought. The theme of recognition and
non-recognition is signiï¬†cant in both works, and judgment in both is dependent on
how those with whom the judge identiï¬†es were treated. These many common themes
and perspectives, these scholars argue, indicate a signiï¬†cant relationship between the
two documents.
A review of recent scholarly work on this topic indicates that much is yet to
be resolved. Two of the introductory questions on which this study hinges are the
question of the dating of Par. En, and its social setting. These topics as well as that of
the sources of Par. En. are taken up in Chapter 2. Chapter 3 is an examination of the
passages in Par. En. that utilize the term “Son of Man.” Chapter 4 examines the Son
of Man sayings in which Matthew’s perspective is clearest, and it further highlights
the numerous similarities between the conceptions of the Son of Man in the two
works. Chapter 5 investigates the similarities between Par. En’s conception of the Son
of Man with Matthew’s and draws conclusions about the nature of the relationship
between Par. En. and Matthew, suggesting further avenues of study.
61
Hare, The Son of Man Tradition, 113–82, following Vermes, Lindars, Perrin, and especially
Lievestad.
62
Catchpole, “A Re-appraisal of Matthew XXV.31–46,” 378–83.
63
Theisohn, Der auserwählte Richter, 149–201.
64
Tödt, Son of Man, 94, 223.
CO25117.indb 13 11/03/2011 11:58

2
Dating, Sources and Social Setting of the
Parables of Enoch
2.1â•‡Introduction
Three introductory questions regarding the Parables of Enoch must now be addressed.
Each is shrouded with aspects of uncertainty due to the ambiguity of the evidence.
Nonetheless some insights can be gained by reexamining that evidence.
The ï¬†rst question is the dating of Par. En., a work in which a great paucity of
historical allusions exists. Re-examining clues from four aspects of the work and
drawing out nuances can result in a fairly confident proposal for the dating of Par.
En.. The four aspects are:
1) a proï¬†le of the kings and the mighty ones, the opponents of the righteous;
2) the bloodshed for which a plea for vindication is expressed;
3) the mention of the Parthians and Medes; and
4) the reference to the healing hot springs.
The second introductory question is concerned with the sources of the work.
Traditionally three sources have been proposed, but the precise delineation of two
of those sources causes some dissatisfaction. Further, there is a certain literary
cohesiveness that calls the issue of sources into question.
The third introductory question concerns the social setting, or the milieu, in which
Par. En. was composed. Two sociological approaches will be applied to Par. En. to
elucidate the context in which the work was created. One approach is to examine
nine Arenas of the Social System as they intersect with Narrative Criticism; and
the second is to investigate which levels of Social Stratification are revealed in Par.
En. Using the insights from these approaches regarding ï¬†rst century Mediterranean
society, some conclusions regarding the social status of the author and the group for
which the work was written can be reached.
14
CO25117.indb 14 11/03/2011 11:58

Dating, Sources and Social Settings 15
2.2â•‡ Dating the Parables of Enoch

A wide variation of dates has been argued for Par. En. R. H. Charles has argued for
an early date of 94–79 bce,1 interpreting the “kings and the mighty ones” as the later
Maccabean princes. But as Jonas Greenï¬†eld and Michael Stone2 and John J. Collins3
argue, the allusions to the Parthians and Medes and the healing waters of Callirhoe
suggest a date after 40 bce.
Józef T. Milik4 argued for a date in the extreme opposite direction, around 270 bc,
noting the absence of fragments of Par. En. from Qumran. But on linguistic, logical
and theological grounds, Greenfield and Stone and Knibb5 have argued against such
a late date. Theisohn also has shown the thoroughly Jewish character of the concept
of the Son of Man,6 contradicting Milik’s hypothesis of a Christian influence, as in
the Sibylline Oracles. Milik’s argument has not been widely accepted.
Christopher L. Mearns7 argued for a date prior to 40 ce, based on allusions to the
Testament of Abraham (T. Ab.), recensions A and B, and messianic expectations in the
New Testament, but his position seems to incur far too many assumptions. Against
Mearns’ view, E. P. Sanders8 has argued for a later date for T.Â€Ab. and has suggested
that its allusions to the New Testament are the result of late redactional activity.
David Suter9 at one time dated Par. En. to the reign of Emperor Gaius (Caligula),
37–41 ce, assigning the major concern in Par. En. about bloodshed to that era. J. C.
Hindley10 argued for a date in the early second century, identifying the allusions to
the Parthians with Trajan’s Parthian campaigns in 113 ce. Knibb11 at one time favored
a late first-century or early second-century date, due to the absence of fragments
from Par. En. in Qumran, as well as for other reasons, although more recently he has
indicated openness to an earlier date. Many have pointed out that the absence of Par.
En. in Qumran is most likely purely accidental. Therefore the allusions to bloodshed,
1
R.H. Charles, The Book of Enoch or I Enoch (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1912) liv-lv, 67.
See also the summary of the positions in Christopher L. Mearns, “Dating the Similitudes of
Enoch,” NTS 25 (1978–79) 360.
2
Jonas C. Greenï¬†eld, and Michael E. Stone, “The Enochic Pentateuch and the Date of the
Similitudes,” HTR 70 (1977) 51–65.
3
John J. Collins, The Apocalyptic Imagination (New York: Crossroad, 1984) 142f referring to
Josephus, Ant. 17.6.5. §§171–73; J.W. 1.33.5 §§657–58.
4
J. T. Milik, The Books of Enoch: Aramaic Fragments of Qumrân Cave 4 (Oxford: Clarendon
Press, 1976) 89–107.
5
Michael A. Knibb, “The Date of the Parables of Enoch: A Critical Review,” NTS 25 (1978–
79), 344–59.
6
Theisohn, Der auserwählte Richter, 29–30, 99.
7
Christopher L. Mearns, “Dating the Similitudes of Enoch,” NTS 25 (1978–79), 360–69.
8
E. P. Sanders, “Testament of Abraham: A New Translation and Introduction,” 869–902 in
J. H. Charlesworth, ed., The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha. Vol. 1, Apocalyptic Literature
and Testaments. (Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1983).
9
David Winston Suter, “The Measure of Redemption: The Similitudes of Enoch, Nonviolence,
and National Integrity,” SBL 1983 Papers, 167–76.
10
J. C. Hindley, “Towards a Date for the Similitudes of Enoch,” NTS 14 (1968) 551–65.
11
Knibb, “The Date of the Parables of Enoch,” 344–59.
CO25117.indb 15 11/03/2011 11:58

the Parthians and the healing hot springs need to be more carefully examined,12 to
discover whether the earlier date for Par. En. is defensible. This must now be taken up.
2.2.1â•‡ Four Elements to be considered
In seeking to narrow the date of Par. En., four elements must be considered. These
four elements arise out of the text of the Par. En. and they bear on the context in
which the Par. En. came into existence. The four elements are:
1) the identity of the kings and the mighty ones;

2) the references to the blood of the righteous that has been shed;
3) the threat of the Parthians and the Medes; and
4) the reference to the healing hot springs.
These four elements reveal social and historical realities, in a general way, and yet
taken together are speciï¬†c enough that they can narrow the possibilities. Par. En.
cannot be dated precisely, but these four elements do point in general to a particular
period as the most likely date for Par. En.
The Kings and Mighty Ones

A proï¬†le of the kings and mighty ones can be drawn from the references to them in
Par. En. They are wealthy and powerful (1Â€EnochÂ€46:4, 7), which is to be expected in
any society. They have denied the Name of the Lord of Spirits (1Â€EnochÂ€45:2, 46:7),
and they have raised their hands against the Most High (1Â€EnochÂ€46:7). This suggests
that they have rebelled against God in the eyes of the author.13 They are described
as judging or ruling the stars of heaven, which Black suggests may be an allusion
to Antiochus IV Epiphanes, who in Dan.Â€8:10 grew as high as heaven and threw
down some of the host and some of the stars of heaven and trampled on them.14 This
allusion would tend to identify the kings and mighty ones as the Seleucids and their
successors. But the allusion may also function to cast the contemporary rulers in the
same light as Antiochus IV Epiphanes. The allusion may conjure up the mental and
emotional images of Antiochus IV and apply them to the contemporaneous kings and
mighty ones. Just as Antiochus IV was seen in an unfavorable light as a dangerous,
self-aggrandizing tyrant, so the current rulers perhaps were seen in the same way, as
dangerous, self-promoting, and insensitive to the religious concerns of the righteous.
These kings and mighty ones are also said to trust in gods which they have made with
their own hands (1Â€EnochÂ€46:7). In other words, they are, or at least they are perceived
12
See a more detailed review of these arguments in my original dissertation, The Son of Man
in Matthew and the “Similitudes of Enoch.”
13
Black, I Enoch, 208.
14
Black favors “rule,” I Enoch, 208.
CO25117.indb 16 11/03/2011 11:58

to be, idolators. Therefore, either they are not of the Jewish race, or their Jewishness is
seriously questioned. Charles, however, has boldly and decisively identiï¬†ed the kings
and mighty ones as the later Maccabeans and their followers, the Sadducees. He is able
to do this because he posits that “gods,” Mylyl) in a Hebrew Vorlage, was corrupted
from “deeds,” Myll(m. According to Charles then, the kings trust their riches and the
‘deeds’ of their own hands rather than God. Thus he is able to support his identiï¬†cation
of the kings and mighty ones as the later Maccabeans, particularly Alexander Jannaeus
(103–76 bce) or Aristobulus II (67–63 bce) and their supporters, the Sadducees.15 But
there is no deï¬†nite textual evidence for this and both Black and Knibb16 translate ‘gods.’
As idolators then, they cannot be seen as Maccabeans, but must be seen as aligned with
foreign powers, either Seleucids or Romans.17
Further, they have persecuted the faithful and the houses of the congregation of
the Lord of Spirits (1Â€EnochÂ€46:8). This most probably resulted in the bloodshed
which the righteous pray might be avenged (1Â€EnochÂ€47:2).
These kings and mighty ones, then, are powerful, wealthy rulers, who have perse-
cuted the righteous. They evidently are foreign rulers of some type who deny God and
trust in idols. This precludes the Maccabeans, which Charles argued. The Seleucids can
also be ruled out, for they are far too early.18 The Seleucids controlled Palestine in the
second century bce, and Judas Maccabeus wrested the land from them in the mid-second
century bce. That is too early for Par. En. because Par. En. knows and reinterprets
Daniel, which is from the mid-second century bce. Thus the inï¬‡uence of Daniel on Par.
En. rules out the Seleucids as ï¬†tting the proï¬†le of the kings and mighty ones.
Rather, this proï¬†le points most favorably to the Romans and their client kings as the
ones who oppressed and persecuted the righteous of Par. En. The Roman presence began
with Pompey’s conquest of Palestine and Jerusalem in 63 bce. This conquest was accom-
plished with bloodshed and social upheaval. Aristobulus II and Hyrcanus II were vying for
control. The Idumean Antipater was seeking his own ends in backing ï¬†rst one and then the
other. When Pompey was called in to settle the issue, the followers of Hyrcanus II opened
the gates to Pompey, but the followers of Aristobulus II barracaded themselves in the
palace and temple area. When Pompey ï¬†nally broke down the walls after a three-month
siege, bloodshed followed, and Hyrcanus II was installed as the High Priest, but merely as
a ï¬†gurehead for the Roman authorities.19
All was not yet settled. Antigonus, with the backing of the Parthians was able to
wrest control from Hyrcanus II, and through a tortuous series of events, Herod ï¬†nally
15
Charles, Enoch, 90. The form Mylyl), idols, worthless ones, is derived from ll) (see BDB
47b); for Myll(m see BDB 760b. Emil Schürer, The History of the Jewish People in the Age
of Jesus Christ (175 B.C.–A.D. 135) (Vol. 1, ed. Geza Vermes, Fergus Millar and Matthew
Black; Edinburgh: T&T Clark Ltd, 1973) 219–28, 233–242.
16
Michael A. Knibb, The Ethiopic Book of Enoch (2 vols.; Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1978)
II.132.
17
18
Black, I Enoch, 196, suggested either the Seleucids or the Romans.
19
Schürer, The History of the Jewish People, 233–42. Josephus, Antiquities, xiv 4, 2–4.
CO25117.indb 17 11/03/2011 11:58

claimed the kingship of Judah, even though he was only half Jewish, in Josephus’
view. His reclaiming of Judah was accomplished with much battling and bloodshed.
The ï¬†rst period of his reign was further marked by bloodshed as he consolidated
his control by wiping out family members whom he suspected of having desires to
occupy the throne.20
Josephus also provides evidence against Herod for the charge of idolatry. While
Herod was fairly sensitive to the religious concerns of Jews in Jerusalem, in the rest of
his territory he was eager to promote Hellenistic culture and literature. This included
the establishment of the Games21 in Caesarea, which were a horror to Jews for athletes
competed naked. His hellenization of Palestine also included building or rebuilding
temples in non-Jewish parts of his kingdom and adorning them with beautiful sculptures.22
He even had a large golden eagle mounted over the temple gate in Jerusalem, an act which
transgressed Jewish sensibilities about graven images. This eagle was ï¬†nally torn down
by zealous Pharisaic teachers and their students in 4 bce on the rumor of Herod’s death.
They of course were severely dealt with, being burned alive by the paranoia-racked, but
still living, Herod.23 While Herod accomplished much that was good for Judea, boosting
the economy and twice lowering taxes,24 he also greatly offended Jewish religious sensi-
tivities with his temple building activities in the non-Jewish parts of the Kingdom. This
latter fact makes it possible to understand how Herod could be charged with idolatry.
The proï¬†le of the kings and mighty ones then points to the Romans and their
client kings. Herod in particular seems to ï¬†t many of the criticisms expressed in the
Par. En. This proï¬†le then favors dating the Par. En. to the second half of the ï¬†rst
century bce.
Bloodshed
A second element for consideration in dating Par. En. is the blood of the righteous
that has been shed, and which the survivors pray might be avenged (1Â€EnochÂ€47:2, 4),
blood, which has presumably been shed by the kings and the mighty ones.
In reviewing accounts of the history of the period, it will be noted that signiï¬†cant
massacres and slaughters of citizens took place under three different rulers during the
ï¬†rst century bce. At the beginning of the century bloodshed was caused by Alexander
Jannaeus (103–76 bce), in the middle of the century Jewish citizens were killed under
Pompey (63 bce), while toward the end of the century, loss of life was caused by the
Roman client king, Herod (40–4 bce).25
The blood of the righteous shed under Alexander Jannaeus and Pompey may be
part of the cultural background operative in Par.Â€En.. Charles, however, has boldly
20
Schürer, The History of the Jewish People, 296–304. Josephus, Antiquities, xv–xvi.
21
Josephus, Antiquities, xvi 5,1.
22
Josephus, Antiquities, xv 9, 5; Wars, i 21,4
23
Josephus, Antiquities, xvii 6.
24
Schürer, The History of the Jewish People, 315; Josephus, Antiquities, xv 10, 4, xvi 2, 5.
25
These are described by Josephus, Antiquities xiii 13, 5; xiv 4, 9, 15; and Schürer, The History
of the Jewish People, 212–13, 223, 227, 236–39.
CO25117.indb 18 11/03/2011 11:58

and decisively identiï¬†ed the righteous ones as the Pharisaic faction in Palestine, and
the kings and mighty ones as the later Maccabeans and their Sadducean supporters, 26
and so would date Par. En. to the reign of Alexander Jannaeus (94–79 bce), or to the
reign of Aristobulus II (70–67 bce).27 Thus the righteous could be those slaughtered
throughout the years of strife in the early part of the ï¬†rst century bce. This is not
the best identiï¬†cation, however, for, as shown earlier, the kings were probably not
Maccabean.
A third intriguing possibility is that the blood of the righteous could have been
shed by Herod, who was guilty of bloodshed at several different times. One time
was when Herod ï¬†rst ï¬‡ed Jerusalem after Phasael’s and Hyrcanus II’s capture by
the Parthians, when he encountered hostile groups of Jews on the way to Masada.28
Another time may have been after having been conï¬†rmed by Caesar and the Roman
Senate as the king of Judea. In his reclaiming of the land and wresting it from the
grip of Antigonus (40–37Â€bce), much Jewish blood was spilled.29 On either of these
expeditions, the ï¬‡ight or the return, an Enochic conventicle might have been in the
way and suffered signiï¬†cant loss of life. The bloodshed at the hands of an ambitious
Herod together with Herod’s later activities which would have conï¬†rmed his
wickedness in their minds could be the memory which the righteous in 1 Enoch 47
are praying might avenged.
Thus, the blood that has been shed could refer to those Jews who had been killed
throughout the ï¬†rst century bce, both Pharisaic and Sadducean. Or the blood that
has been shed could refer to some speciï¬†c incident that was possibly perpetrated
by Herod. In either case, this reference to bloodshed seems to point to the late ï¬†rst
century bce. This is especially intriguing in light of the mention of the healing hot
springs, which will be taken up momentarily, and which Josephus reports were visited
by Herod toward the end of his life.
The Parthians and Medes

Linking together the Parthians and Medes is the third element that must be considered
in seeking to narrow the dating of the Par. En. The Parthians and Medes are seen as an
instrument of destruction against the land (1Â€EnochÂ€56:5). The angels of punishment
will send their chiefs to the kings of the Parthians and Medes so that they will sweep
across the ancient world like lions out of their lairs and wolves out of their dens.
They will trample over the land of the elect, but “the city of my righteous ones”
(1Â€EnochÂ€56:7) will be an obstacle to their horses. The Parthians and Medes will incite
internecine warfare and mistrust amongst family members, and will be the cause of
“corpses without number.” The author depicts this as just punishment against the
kings and mighty ones and the fallen angels with whom they are associated.
26
Charles, I Enoch, liv, 72.
27
Charles, I Enoch, 67.
28
Josephus, Antiquities, xiv 9.
29
Josephus, Antiquities, xiv 15.
CO25117.indb 19 11/03/2011 11:58

This activity of the Parthians and Medes as described in Par. En. is difï¬†cult to
locate historically. Hindley identiï¬†ed it with the conï¬‡icts with the Parthians during
the time of Trajan’s campaign (113–17 ce).30 But as Black points out, the Parthians
did not threaten Jerusalem at that time.31 Rather, the set of details associated with
1Â€EnochÂ€ 56 seems rather to point to the incursion of Palestine by the Parthians in
about 40 bce, as Herod was attempting to solidify his control of Judea.
Josephus reports that Antigonus (40–37 bce) was installed with the aid of the
Parthians, Pacorus and Barzaphanes. They had swept down into Palestine, Pacorus
taking the maritime route and Barzaphanes the midland route, at a time when
Antony was occupied in Egypt with Cleopatra and with other military concerns.
Hyrcanus II, Herod, and Herod’s brother, Phasael, had managed to retain control of
Jerusalem, until Antigonus, a cousin of Hyrcanus II, bribed the Parthians with the
promise of silver and women. Phasael and Hyrcanus II were enticed to negotiate for
peace with Barzaphanes, but then they were taken into captivity. When Herod found
out, he escaped from Jerusalem together with his family. Then, when Antigonus
could not deliver the women of Herod’s family, the Parthians plundered Jerusalem,
its temple and the surrounding countryside, which they probably intended to do
anyway. Herod meanwhile secured Caesar’s and the Roman Senate’s conï¬†rmation
as the king of Judea, and by 37 bce reconquered Jerusalem and had Antigonus killed
by the Romans.32
Josephus poignantly summarizes the Hasmonean dynasty as an illustrious, noble
family, which bore the dignity of the high priesthood, but which lost control of the
government of Judea by their dissension with one another. As a result the government
came to Herod, the son of Antipater, a man whom Josephus characterized as of a
vulgar family and subject to other kings.33
The Parthian presence in Palestine in c.40 bce seems for the most part to ï¬†t the
details alluded to in 1Â€EnochÂ€56 best. One problem is that Josephus never mentions
the Medes in connection with this Parthian campaign. Perhaps, as Black points out,34
the “Parthians and Medes” in Par. En. took the place of the “Medes and Persians” in
a formula for the major enemy from the east. Greenï¬†eld and Stone, however, note
that the inclusion of the “Medes” may be based on reality, as “the rulers of Media
Atropatene were vassals of the Parthians during this period.”35 Further, with regard
to the reception of the Parthians, they suggest that the group for whom Par. En. was
written may have considered the Parthians to be abominable, even though the rest of
the Jews welcomed them.36 A second, more signiï¬†cant problem is that Jerusalem did
not prove to be an obstacle for the Parthians. They did not even have to lay siege to
30
Hindley, “Towards a Date for the Similitudes of Enoch,” 558.
31
32
Josephus, Antiquities, xiv.
33
Josephus, Antiquities, xiv 16, 4.
34
35
Greenï¬†eld and Stone, “The Enochic Pentateuch and the Date of the Similitudes,” 58.
36
Greenï¬†eld and Stone, “The Enochic Pentateuch and the Date of the Similitudes,” 58–59.
CO25117.indb 20 11/03/2011 11:58

it as Pompey had, for they were invited in by Antigonus, on the pretext of quelling
strife, but with the purpose of installing Antigonus as ruler. The suggestion that the
hilly terrain of the city would be an obstacle or hindrance to the horses seems to
miss the point of the line in 1Â€Enoch 56:7. Rather the city is said in some way to be
a hindrance to their horses. Perhaps this is highly condensed language that means
that the political powers in the city were a hindrance to the Parthian warlords on
their horses. Or perhaps the term “obstacle” refers somehow to the intrigue and
treachery by which Hyrcanus II, Phasael and Herod were removed from Jerusalem.
The reference is quite mysterious, but at the very least it suggests quite strongly the
terminus ad quem for the work, for it probably acknowledges that Jerusalem had not
yet been destroyed by the Romans in 68 ce.37
Nonetheless, as a whole the description in 1Â€EnochÂ€56 ï¬†ts the Parthians of this
era remarkably well. They plundered the land, “trampling” over it. They incited
interfamilial warfare between Antigonus on the one side and Hyrcanus II, Herod and
Phasael on the other. They even inspired mistrust through the intrigue carried out on
Hyrcanus II and Phasael when they were tricked into a situation where they were
captured, while Herod mistrusted the Parthian emissaries, but was unable to persuade
Phasael and Hyrcanus II to refuse to accompany them to Barzaphanes. The familial
mistrust certainly continued in Herod’s reign as one after another of his sons was
accused of treason and executed. Again, much bloodshed ensued and so this third
element, the presence of the Parthians, also points to the late ï¬†rst century bce as the
time period in which Par. En. was written.
The Healing Hot Springs

In the Noachic interpolation (1Â€EnochÂ€65–68), reference is made to healing hot
springs. The kings and the mighty ones and the exalted shall be served by those
waters for the healing of the body (1Â€EnochÂ€67:8). But ironically, those same
waters are their means of punishment (1Â€EnochÂ€67:13). The way the healing and the
punishment are related for the author of Par. En. is that the author sees the valley of
punishment for the fallen angels and their followers, the kings and the mighty ones,
as the subterranean source of these springs, in which the kings and mighty ones bathe
(1Â€EnochÂ€67:4–7). Thus, for now, they enjoy them and seek healing in them, but in
time they will be punished by them. Further, the very reason for their being there, the
diseases of which they wish to be healed, is also in a sense their punishment.38
The author of Par. En. also apparently refers to volcanic activity with his reference
to “ï¬†ery molten (lit. soft) metal” and the sulphurous oders (1Â€EnochÂ€67:6), and the
rivers of ï¬†re proceeding along the ravines (1Â€EnochÂ€67:7). A change in temperature
37
Sjöberg, Der Menschensohn, 38, made this observation rather straightforwardly. Milik,
Hindley, Knibb and Mearns reexamined it and sought other interpretations, but together with
all the elements noted in this presentation, Sjöberg’s conclusion still seems most convincing.
38
CO25117.indb 21 11/03/2011 11:58

is also mentioned, as the water changes from hot to cold, and then ï¬†nally becomes a
ï¬†re which will burn forever (1Â€EnochÂ€67:13).
These references seem to point very clearly to the hot springs near the Dead Sea,
Callirhoe and Macherus, which Josephus mentions.39 Josephus reports that when
Herod was seventy years old, his body and mind racked with horrible diseases, on
his doctors’ orders, Herod sought healing at the hot springs of Callirhoe beyond
the Jordan. This took place during the last decade of the ï¬†rst century bce,40 but his
visit did not seem to help. Josephus also describes the hot springs at Macherus in
connection with a siege there by Bassus in 38Â€bce.41 Macherus is a rocky, elevated
area, where a fortress had been built. Springs existed there, and were frequented for
medicinal purposes. Some of the water was bitter, some was sweet. Some of the water
was hot, some was cold, and when they were mixed, it was very pleasant and thought
to have a healing effect for strengthening nerves. Josephus mentions that sulphur and
alum mines were also in the area.
In general, there is a remarkable conï¬‡uence of motifs in these descriptions. While
the passage in Par. En. is not speciï¬†c enough to be linked directly with Herod, the
similarities do favor a familiarity with Herod’s and perhaps other nobles’ visits to
the springs. It must be remembered that the author’s purpose in referring to these hot
springs is not to give a historical reference for this work, but rather to draw together
some appropriate images for the apocalyptic message. Those kings and mighty
ones, who now seem to enjoy the springs and seek healing there, will in the end be
punished by means of those same springs and their subterranean, volcanic sources.
This element, then, of the healing hot springs, combined with a locatable, historical
reference to Herod, also suggests a late ï¬†rst century bce or an early ï¬†rst century ce
date for the writing of the Par. En.
Even though the reference to the healing hot springs is in the Noachic material,
it serves as a terminus ab quo for the whole work. However the work was compiled,
and whatever the sources may have been for the ï¬†nal redactor, the mention of the hot
springs and its probable reference to Herod’s visit there provides a date after which
the work must have been composed.
2.2.2â•‡Results
The dating of Par. En. then, can be narrowed by a consideration of these four
elements: the kings and mighty ones, the bloodshed, the Parthians and Medes, and the
hot springs. These elements reveal social and historical realities in a general way. And
yet the realities discerned in these allusions narrow the possibilities for the dating of
39
Black, I Enoch, 242 and Greenï¬†eld and Stone, “The Enochic Pentateuch and the Date of the
Similitudes,” 60.
40
Josephus, Antiquities, xvii 6, 5.
41
Josephus, Wars, vii 6.
CO25117.indb 22 11/03/2011 11:58

Par. En. Herod perhaps even served as the model for Par. En’s depiction of the kings
and the mighty ones. Herod could be charged with idolatry, and bloodshed. He came
to power in conjunction with the Parthian invasion in the middle of the century, and
fell prey to intense, tragic, familial mistrust. He also sought relief in the hot springs,
but ironically found none, and soon afterward died of his ailments (4 bce). While
Herod might have been the model for the author, he was only a model, since the
author betrays no details that are speciï¬†c enough to link these descriptions directly
and only to Herod. Thus, these four elements are helpful in narrowing the dating of
Par. En., suggesting that Par. En. was written in the late ï¬†rst century bce or early ï¬†rst
century ce.
This dating was confirmed by a broad consensus of scholars at the Third Enoch
Seminar in Camaldoli, Italy in June of 2005.42 As Paolo Sacchi noted in his summary,
“in sum, we may observe those scholars who have directly addressed the problem
of dating the Parables all agree on a date around the time of Herod .â•›.â•›. given the
impressive amount of evidence gathered in support of a pre-Christian origin of the
document. The burden of proof has now shifted to those who disagree with the
Herodian date. It is now their responsibility to provide evidence that would reopen
the discussion.”43
2.3â•‡ Sources for the Parables of Enoch

The task of separating out the material included in Par. En. into its distinct sources at
ï¬†rst seems to be a fairly simple operation, but upon closer examination it turns out to
be a complex task that depends not only on identifying contradictions and interrup-
tions in the ï¬‡ow of the discourses, but also upon the author/redactor’s methods and
purposes. Some sources are clearly evident, but others are not. The author/redactor’s
ï¬†nal product is more meditative and associative than ï¬†nely crafted so as to remove
all illogicalities and inconsistencies.
2.3.1â•‡ The Noachic Source
One source that the author/redactor clearly drew upon was the so-called Noachic
source. A putative Book of Noah supplied 1Â€EnochÂ€39:1–2a, 54:7–55:2, 60, and
65:1–69:25.44 While it is by no means clear that all these passages come from the
42
See the essays on dating the Parables in Gabriele Boccaccini, Enoch and the Messiah Son of
Man (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 2007) 415–496.
43
Paolo Sacchi, “The 2005 Camaldoli Seminar on the Parables of Enoch: Summary and
Prospects for Future Research,” in Boccaccini, Enoch and the Messiah Son of Man,
510–511.
44
Georg Beer, “Das Buch Henoch,” in Die Apokryphen und Pseudepigraphen des Alten
Testaments (vol. 2; ed. Emil Kautsch; Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr, 1900, repr. Hildesheim:
CO25117.indb 23 11/03/2011 11:58

same source, nonetheless these passages do introduce the ï¬‡ood and related ideas to
Par. En. The incorporation of this source appears to be intrusive and has not been
seamless. An example of a deï¬†nite seam is that in the Third Parable a date of the
ï¬†ve hundredth year of Enoch is mentioned. But this is inconsistent with Gen. 5:23
in that Enoch lived on earth only 365 years. Although there is no variant for reading
Noah instead of Enoch,45 Noah is clearly the subject of this passage, as becomes even
clearer later in the passage when a reference is made to the Garden, “where my great-
grandfather was taken up, the seventh from Adam.â•›.â•›.” (1Â€EnochÂ€60:8). This could only
have been spoken accurately by Noah about Enoch, who is listed as the seventh from
Adam in Genesis 5, and who was taken up to heaven rather than having died. In the
largest body of text from the Noachic source 1Â€EnochÂ€65:1–69:25, the author/redactor
does not even attempt to conceal its foreign origin. The piece is simply taken over
and incorporated into Par. En. with the original narrator speaking in the ï¬†rst person,
naming himself as Noah (1Â€EnochÂ€65:1, 67:1) and referring by name to his great-
grandfather, Enoch (1Â€EnochÂ€65:2, 5, 68:1). These clues reveal that there was at least
one Noachic source, upon which the author/redactor drew. Further, the “clumsy”46
splicing of the Noachic material into the Enochic work suggests something about
the author/redactor’s purposes. It appears that the author/redactor was not concerned
with smoothing out the illogicalities and inconsistencies, but rather was interested in
gathering together instructive material on the theme of the punishment of the kings
and mighty ones. It was a method that presented ideas for meditation and encour-
agement, without being concerned about inconsistencies. These seams then, reveal
that a Noachic source was incorporated by the author/redactor into Par. En.
2.3.2â•‡ Other Possible Sources
While the Noachic source is widely accepted, the existence of sources beyond the
Noachic source has been widely debated. Beer and Charles conï¬†dently assert two
further sources, the “Son of Man” source and the “Elect One” source.47 Sjöberg,
however, argues for a literary unity to the work,48 while Black accepts the multiplicity of
sources, but not with nearly as much conï¬†dence or precision as Beer and Charles had.49
The seminal work by R. H. Charles50 presents the basic view that beyond the
widely accepted Noachic source, there are two other discernible sources for Par. En.
One source is characterized by the use of the “son of man” for the messianic ï¬†gure,
Georg Olms Verlagsbuchhandlung, 1962), 227; Charles, The Book of Enoch or 1 Enoch, 64;
Black, I Enoch, 33.
45
Black, I Enoch, 184, n. 4.
46
Charles, I Enoch, 64, 118–19; and Black, I Enoch, 184.
47
Beer, “Das Buch Henoch,” 227–28; Charles, I Enoch, xlix, 64–65.
48
Sjöberg, Der Menschensohn, 25–35.
49
50
Charles depends on Georg Beer, “Das Buch Henoch,” 224–30, at this point.
CO25117.indb 24 11/03/2011 11:58

and the use of “the angel who went with me” (mal)aka zayah‫ׅ‬awwer meslēya) for the
angelus interpres, while the other source is distinguished by the use of the “Elect One”
and “the angel of peace” (mal)aka salām). The “Son of Man/Angel who went with me”
(SoM/Awho) source and the “Elect One/Angel of Peace” (EO/AP) source include:
SoM/Awho EO/AP
38–39
40:3–7 40:1–2, 8–10
41:1–2, 9
45
46–48:7 48:8–10
52:3–4 50–52:1–2, 5–9
53–54:6
55:3–57
61:3–4 61:1–2, 5–13
62:2–63 62:1
69:26–29
70–7151
This view has two signiï¬†cant problems however. One is that the qualiï¬†er “who went
with me” is used not only of “the angel,” but also of “the angel of peace”! Beer
seems to have recognized that the qualifying clause, “who went with me,” is used of
both “the angel” and “the angel of peace.” But Charles does not continue to use that
qualiï¬†er in his outlining of the two sources. Instead he seems to acknowledge its use
only with “the angel.” “Who went with me” is used not only of “the angel,” but also
of “the angel of peace” at 1Â€EnochÂ€40:8, 53:4, 54:4, and 56:2. For this reason, some
doubt must be maintained regarding Charles’ delineation of the sources.
A second reason for being somewhat skeptical about Charles’ delineation of the
sources is that the persons by whom Charles distinguishes the sources do not consist-
ently appear only in their respective sources. The following is a list of some of the
inconsistencies of Charles’s delineations.
a) In 1Â€EnochÂ€40, Charles assigns 40:1–2, 8–10 to EO/AP, and 40:3–7 to SoM/

Awho. However, in reading these verses, one ï¬†nds that the “Son of Man” is not
mentioned at all, that the “Elect One” (verse 5) is in the wrong source, and that
“the angel who went with me” (verse 2) is also in the wrong source. “The Angel
of Peace” (verse 8) is mentioned in the correct source.
b) Chapters 38–39 of 1 Enoch are attributed to EO/AP by Charles, and the “Elect
One” is mentioned in 1Â€EnochÂ€39:6, but “the angel of peace” does not appear at all.
c) 1Â€EnochÂ€41:1–2, 9 is attributed to EO/AP, but these verses do not refer at all to
the “Elect one” or “the angel of peace.”
Beer sees chapters 70–71 as an independent tradition, an appendix to Par. En., 223, 228.
51
CO25117.indb 25 11/03/2011 11:58

d) 1Â€EnochÂ€45 is assigned by Charles to EO/AP,52 but it has no mention of “the angel

of peace,” although the “Elect One” does appear in 1Â€EnochÂ€45:3–4.
e) 1Â€EnochÂ€46–48:7, assigned to SoM/Awho, does include mention of the “Son of
Man” (1Â€EnochÂ€46:2,3,6, 48:2) and “the angel who went with me” (1Â€EnochÂ€46:2).
f) 1Â€EnochÂ€48:8–10 (EO/AP) does not mention either the “Elect One” or “the angel
of peace,” although the message is congruent with the message of punishment that
seems to be characteristic of “the angel of peace.”
g) 1Â€EnochÂ€49 is not assigned by Charles to either source, but it does make mention
of the “Elect One.”
h) Charles assigns 1Â€EnochÂ€50–52:1–2, 5–9 to EO/AP, and 1Â€EnochÂ€52:3–4 to SoM/
Awho. This requires a little fuller comment, especially in relation to the struc-
turing of 1Â€EnochÂ€52. In Chapter 52, Enoch sees a vision of metallic mountains,
and asks about them of the angel who is accompanying him. The angel replies
that all these things serve the power of the Anointed One (1Â€EnochÂ€52:4). Then,
immediately, “the angel of peace” answers that he should wait a while for all
the secrets to be revealed (1Â€EnochÂ€52:5). But then, in the very next verse, the
mountains are explained as melting like wax before the Elect One and becoming
powerless before his feet (1Â€EnochÂ€52:6). Neither shall the mighty and powerful
be aided by gold or silver or weaponry when the Elect One appears before the
Lord of Spirits (1Â€EnochÂ€52:7–9).
â•…1 Enoch 52:5, the answer of “the angel of peace,” appears to be intrusive and
secondary, not belonging with verses 3 and 4, which narrate the question by the
seer and the ï¬†rst part of the answer by the accompanying angel. Two factors
lead to that conclusion. First, both verse 4 and verse 5 have a narrative intro-
duction to the angel’s response . In verse 4, the narrative ï¬‡ows on from verse 3,
with a personal pronoun referring back to “the angel who went with me,” who
was mentioned in verse 3. But, in verse 5, a second narrative introduction is
given, naming “the angel of peace” as the one who gives the answer. The double
narrative introduction to the angelic words is not necessary, and in itself suggests
two sources. Second, as it stands, the sequence of verses in 1Â€EnochÂ€52:3–6 is
contradictory: the accompanying angel seems to begin an explanation, but then
“the angel of peace” urges patience until everything should be revealed. The
admonition for patience, however, is followed immediately by an explanation
about the melting mountains. The sequence of thought in the verses does not ï¬‡ow
well, nor does the answer of “the angel of peace” seem to be integrally connected
to the context of the chapter. However, if the answer of “the angel of peace,”
verse 5, is omitted, then verse 4 ï¬‡ows smoothly into verseÂ€6, and verses 4 and 6–9
can be seen as making up the answer of the accompanying angel. For these two
reasons, it is likely that the answer of “the angel of peace” (v 5) is secondary.
52
Morna Hooker, The Son of Man in Mark (Montreal: McGill University Press, 1967), 36–39,
has noticed that the ï¬†rst chapters of each of the parables are an introductory overview of the
ensuing parable.
CO25117.indb 26 11/03/2011 11:58

â•… Further, the vision of the mountains (1Â€EnochÂ€52:1–2) appears to be integrally

related to the answer of “the angel who went with me” (1Â€EnochÂ€52:3–4). The
vision of the metallic mountains (verseÂ€2) took place in the place where Enoch
had seen things “in secret” (verseÂ€1), and then Enoch asks of “the angel who went
with me” about those things he had seen “in secret” (verse 3). The repetition of
“in secret” connects verse 3 integrally with what precedes, contrary to the way
Charles has assigned these verses to separate sources. As argued above, verse 5
alone appears to be secondary here, in what is otherwise a smoothly ï¬‡owing
account that encompasses 1Â€EnochÂ€52:1–4, 6–9. If this argument is sound, then
here is an instance where the Elect One and “the angel who went with me” appear
together in the same source, not in distinct sources.
i) The EO/AP is the supposed source for both 1Â€EnochÂ€53–54:6 and 55:3–57, and
both ï¬†gures do appear in these passages.
j) 1Â€EnochÂ€60:24–25 refers to “the Angel of Peace,” but Charles does not assign
this passage to EO/AP, but rather sees it as an interpolation53 in a chapter which
otherwise appears to come from a Noachic source.
k) Charles assigns 1Â€EnochÂ€61:1–2, 5–13 to EO/AP, while 61:3–4, which appear to
him to be intrusive, he assigns to SoM/Awho. The “angel who was with me” is the
angel to whom the seer speaks in verse 2, where according to Charles one should
have expected “the Angel of Peace,”54 who does not appear at all in these passages.
l) 1Â€EnochÂ€69:26–29 and 70–71 are assigned by Charles to SoM/Awho, but in
neither of them does “the angel who was with me” appear. Instead, Michael is the
angelus interpres in 1Â€EnochÂ€ 71.
In numerous instances, then, one of the ï¬†gures by whom the source is distinguished
does not appear, and in several instances, the ï¬†gure appears in verses assigned to
the other source. Because of this problem with Charles’ delineation of the sources,
namely that the passages do not always include the ï¬†gures by which they are differ-
entiated, and that the ï¬†gures sometimes show up in the wrong source, it can be seen
that Charles’ neat schema is not so self-evident or convincing.
2.3.3â•‡ A More Nuanced Understanding
Two scholars who have dealt with this problem have reacted to Beer and Charles’s
position. Sjöberg claims that beyond the Noachic source, Par. En. betrays itself to
be the work of one hand, and that the difï¬†culties are merely a matter of stylistic
variation. Black, on the other hand, accepts the multiple sources, but not with much
conï¬†dence in the precision with which Beer and Charles had dissected the work.
Charles, I Enoch, 118–19.

53
Sjöberg, Der Menschensohn, 28.

54
CO25117.indb 27 11/03/2011 11:58

Literary Unity
Erik Sjöberg argues that basically Par. En. betrays itself to be a literary unity. On the
one hand, Sjöberg critiques Charles and Beer by examining the passages that they
believed revealed two separate sources. One example is that of the metallic mountains
(1Â€EnochÂ€52), where both types of angelus interpres are mentioned. Sjöberg suggests
that the answer of the angelus interpres here ï¬‡ows from the general to the speciï¬†c, and
he claims that the double answer and the double designation of the angelus interpres
are simply stylistic characteristics of the author.55 Another example is the image of
the angels and the cords they take for measuring the righteous (1Â€EnochÂ€61). Where
Beer and Charles had seen the answer of the angelus interpres reï¬‡ecting two sources,
Sjöberg proposes a two-part answer, each part of which is simply one aspect of the
whole. Still another example Sjöberg investigates is the apparent inconsistency of the
Son of Man being named at two times, one primordially (1Â€EnochÂ€48:3), and the other
during the vision in the presence of the Lord of Spirits (1Â€EnochÂ€48:2). This apparent
contradiction need not be seen as such, Sjöberg claims, arguing from the integrity of
the passage which follows. The argument Sjöberg attacks is that verse 3 is intrusive,
and that the original passage ï¬‡ows naturally from verse 2 through verses 4–7. Verse 2
speaks of the naming of the Son of Man, and verses 4–7, which according to Sjöberg
must be read as a unit, describe the Son of Man as a staff to the righteous, a light to
the Gentiles, the hope of those who dwell on earth and who will praise God because
of the eternally chosen deliverer, who will be revealed by the Lord of Spirits. Sjöberg
then points out that the concept of the Son of Man’s eternal chosenness, which appears
in verse 6, matches precisely the idea of his being named primordially (verse 3). This
leads Sjöberg to conclude that verse 3 no longer appears to be intrusive, but instead
coheres well with the rest of the passage, and therefore should be considered original.
Sjöberg explains that the inconsistency of being named twice is only an apparent
contradiction brought about by the temporal language. The real point of the passage is
the sovereignty of the Son of Man, both in time when judgment is to be enacted, and
before time when he was foreordained to this role. The pretemporal naming is similar
to the concept in the enthronement psalms, in which the king is spoken of as having
been designated as king primordially, or to Jeremiah’s self-perception of having been
chosen for the prophetic role before he was born. According to Sjöberg, then, it is
highly unlikely that 1Â€EnochÂ€48:3 has been interpolated.56
Sjöberg also notices that the two sources are not as distinct as Beer and Charles
claimed. Sjöberg notes, for example, that in 1Â€EnochÂ€61:1–2 it is not the Angel of
Peace but “the angel who went with me” who is linked with the Elect One in verse 5.
This points out the weakness of the double source hypothesis.
On the other hand, Sjöberg argues that the variations in the designations of the
angelus interpres are minor and cannot justify positing separate sources.57 Sjöberg
55
56
57
CO25117.indb 28 11/03/2011 11:58

claims that, aside from the cosmological sections and the Noachic material, the theme
of an eschatological judgment against sinners is a unifying theme that occurs in all
locations of Par. En. Further, there is a literary unity in that all three parables exhibit
the same structure, speak of the same fate, and each begins with a prediction which
is followed by a vision.58 Thus, both on the grounds of the weakness of the double
source proposition, and on the basis of a unifying structure and theme, Sjöberg argues
that Par. En. displays a literary unity.
Discernible Sources
Matthew Black believes that sources can be discerned in Par. En., but they are not
to be deï¬†ned with as much precision as Charles’s dissection of them. Besides Noah
apocalypses, Black accepts a Michael discourse, a “Son of Man” source-tradition and
an “Elect One” source-tradition, the last two of which are combined in the composite
messianism of the Parables.59 Further, these source-traditions are not haphazardly
compiled. The First Parable imitates the Book of the Watchers, as Milik has shown,60
since the four archangels of 1Â€EnochÂ€40 in Par. En. correspond with those of
1Â€EnochÂ€9–10 in the Book of the Watchers (updated to that which was common in the
author/redactor’s time). Black adds, that the introduction of the Flood material in the
Second Parable (1Â€EnochÂ€54:7–55:2) also follows the lead of the Book of the Watchers.
There (1Â€EnochÂ€10:2, 4) the order to imprison the watchers is given in conjunction with
the warning to Noah about the coming Flood. Similarly, in the Second Parable, the
Flood material is introduced in conjunction with the concept of imprisoning the angels.
The artiï¬†cial “joining” or “stitching” is still evident in the occasional illogicality,61 but,
nonetheless, the work possesses thematic unity because it is dominated by the theme of
the Last Judgment. Black, then, perceives Par. En. not as “a loose mixtum compositum
of disparate source traditions, but a work deliberately modeled on the First Vision and
called by its author/redactor ‘The Second Vision (of Enoch).’”62 Black has not delin-
eated the putative sources, but does recognize the uniï¬†ed themes of the ï¬†nal version.
2.3.4â•‡ Conclusions Regarding Sources
While Beer and Charles sought to deï¬†ne clearly the boundaries of the various sources
used in Par. En., succeeding scholars have not asserted the delineation of the sources
as conï¬†dently as Beer and Charles had. Several sources are acknowledged, including
the Noachic Source, a Son of Man source, and an Elect One source, but their tradition
58
59
60
Milik, Enoch, 90; Black, I Enoch, 184.
61
E.g. at 1Â€EnochÂ€60:1 and 8, as noted earlier, and by Black, I Enoch, 184 and note 5. In this
chapter the author/redactor places the speech in Enoch’s mouth, but then refers to Enoch as
“my great-grandfather .â•›.â•›. the seventh from Adam,” words more appropriate to Noah.
62
Black, I Enoch, 184–85.
CO25117.indb 29 11/03/2011 11:58

history has not been described.63 By the time of the ï¬†nal version of Par. En., the Son of
Man source and the Elect One source had been amalgamated by the author/redactor,
because the Son of Man and the Elect One are treated as the single central messianic
ï¬†gure, with both terms being characterized by the same attributes and actions. The
Noachic Source, however, was not blended into the work so neatly, since one of
the sections (1Â€EnochÂ€60) retains irregularities and inconsistencies, while the other
(1Â€EnochÂ€65:1) still retains Noah as its narrator. Part of the enigma and attractiveness
of the work is its complex compositional history. Black was probably correct in noting
several possible sources, while at the same time observing that the work is not merely
a loose mixture of materials. Rather a unifying theme and approach is apparent, the
judgment of the oppressors and the vindication of the righteous, which is based on
the Book of the Watchers and expanded with a wide-ranging use of biblical passages.
2.4â•‡ The Social Setting of the Parables of Enoch

The next area to be investigated is the question of the Social Setting of Par. En. By
Social Setting is meant the social location of the real author and the intended audience
in the period of composition and their relation to the apparent oppressors. In the past
a general impression has been elicited from the text regarding the group for whom
the work was composed and by whom it was preserved. Par. En. has been described
as having a Jewish provenance,64 and as having been possibly composed outside the
Qumran community by “a different conventicle from that of Qumran,”65 which may
be why it never found its way into their collection of texts. It has also been suggested
that “the ‘community of the righteous’ presupposed in the Parables (e.g. 38:1) was
using “a quasi-technical term or even title” for itself.66
That general impression of the provenance of the work and the characteristics
of the group for which it was written can be made more speciï¬†c by utilizing
sociological methodologies. Further light can be shed on the Social Setting of this
document by a careful examination of the social perspectives and understandings
which are revealed in the work. As Richard Rohrbaugh advises, however, it is
important not to be too simplistic in analyzing ancient cultures and the place of
particular documents within them.67 It is not enough to assume upper, middle, and
63
A note of caution is in order, that none of these supposed sources is preserved elsewhere, not
even the Noachic source, although a “Book of Noah” is mentioned in Jubilees 10:13, 21:10,
as noted by Charles, The Book of Enoch or 1 Enoch, 106.
64
For example, George W. E. Nickelsburg, “Enoch” in The Anchor Bible Dictionary:
Volume 2, edited by David Noel Freedman (New York-London-Toronto-Sydney-Auckland:
Doubleday, 1992) II.513.
65
Collins,Â€“The Son of Man in First-Century Judaism,” 452.
66
Collins, “The Heavenly Representative,” 116–17; and “The Son of Man who has
Righteousness,” 3.
67
Richard L. Rohrbaugh, “Methodological Considerations in the Debate over the Social Class
Status of Early Christians,” in JAAR LII/3 (1984), 519–46.
CO25117.indb 30 11/03/2011 11:58

lower classes for ancient societies because that structure is too simplistic for the
complexity of ancient cultures. Further the conception of the upper, middle, and
lower classes of ancient culture is one dimensional: it considers only the economic
factors, whereas ancient societies revolved around honor, shame, authority, and
power, as well as wealth.68 Instead, concepts of how people interact with one another
must be employed to recognize the importance of relationships between people, and
the power and authority those relationships entailed. For every buyer, there must be
a seller, for every debtor, a creditor, for every worker, an employer, and for every
person, a family and a host of relationships. Beyond class distinctions, a person’s or
group’s social status must also be examined, acknowledging realities such as birth,
gender, heritage, ownership, wealth, education, geographical location, occupational
prestige, relationship to the structure of authority, and so on.69 As the text is examined
for these relational clues, a more precise judgment can be made regarding the place
in society of Par. En., its author, and the group it represents and by whom it was
preserved.
The provenance and social setting of Par. En. can be further elucidated by recog-
nizing the reï¬†nements for studying a text, which have been introduced by Narrative
Criticism. On the authorial side of creating a discourse, the real author can be distin-
guished from the implied author and from the inscribed author. The implied author is
the hypothetical ï¬†gure who knows the sum total of what the characters, the narrator
and implied reader or audience know, and has all their competencies.70 This means that
the implied author is the one who can be described from noticing the whole variety
of social details regarding persons, places, technologies, and relationships depicted
in the work. The implied author then is hypothetical, but clearly, the implied author
is also a part of who the real author is. The real author knows everything the implied
author knows, but the real author knows more than is contained in the document for
the real author is the one who is actually living and interacting in the society. Thus,
discovering the implied author is partially to discover the real author. The inscribed
author is also distinct and is the one who speaks in the ï¬†rst person in the discourse.
Consequently the knowledge and competencies of the inscribed author may be more
limited than those of the implied author. For Par. En., however, the implied author
is distinguished from the inscribed author only in a few places. One example is
at the beginning of Par. En. 1Â€EnochÂ€37:1 is a statement in which the vision to be
reported is ascribed to Enoch, who is spoken of in the third person. Immediately in
verse 2, however, Enoch begins speaking, and narrates the visions in the ï¬†rst person.
Enoch, then, speaking in the ï¬†rst person, is the inscribed author. Another example in
which the implied author is distinguished from the inscribed author is in the Epilog
(1Â€EnochÂ€70–71). Again Enoch is spoken of in the third person. His ï¬†nal ascent is
68
Rohrbaugh, “Methodological Considerations,” 521–22, 529.
69
Rohrbaugh, “Methodological Considerations,” 538.
70
Vernon K. Robbins, “The Social Location of the Implied Author of Luke-Acts,” in The
Social World of Luke-Acts: A Model for Interpretation, edited by Jerome H. Neyrey
(Peabody, Massachusetts: Hendrickson Publishers, 1991), 311.
CO25117.indb 31 11/03/2011 11:58

described. Once again, Enoch, the narrator of the visions and the inscribed author, is
viewed as distinct from the implied author. Because, however, there are so few places
where the implied author and the inscribed author are distinguished, their knowledge
and their competencies appear to be virtually identical.
Discovering the social realities of the implied and inscribed authors of the text
then can reveal something of the social status of the real author and the group the real
author represents. When the details of the social realities of life are sifted out of the
text the social location of the implied author can be determined. As Robbins notes,
“a ‘social location’ is a position in a social system which reï¬‡ects a world view .â•›.â•›. a
perception of how things work.”71 This in turn elucidates a partial view of the social
location of the real author.
On the side of the audience, the real reader can be distinguished from the
implied reader. The real reader is anyone who reads the work, whether in the ï¬†rst
century or the twenty-first. It is self-evident, however, that the real reader of the ï¬†rst
century has the advantage over the real reader of the twenty-first century, since the
ï¬†rst-century reader is so close in chronological proximity and in mental and social
awareness to the situation of the author. The implied reader, however, is the one for
whom the author is writing. The implied reader has all the knowledge and compe-
tencies that the author assumes about the reader. The implied reader understands
all the allusions and references that the author makes, and understands all the
tensions and stresses that are dealt with in the text. This implied reader also grasps
all the nuances with which the author ï¬‡avors the discourse. The implied reader,
like the implied author, is a hypothetical ï¬†gure. But the implied reader can partially
disclose who the real, ï¬†rst-century readers were, since the real readers and the implied
reader exist at virtually the same time, and since the implied reader is modeled by
the real author upon the real readers of the time. Thus, again, the social realities
reï¬‡ected in the text elucidate to some extent the social location of the group for whom
Par. En. was written. Discovering this social location can help to understand Par. En.
more fully and to see its place in the development of the ideas and convictions that it
shares.
Two approaches to discovering the social location of the implied author and the
implied reader will be used. The ï¬†rst approach is to follow Robbins’ analysis of
the implied author of Luke-Acts, in which Robbins investigates the implied author’s
competencies in nine social arenas. The second is to note which of nine social classes
which Gerhard Lenski describes is known by the implied author, and in which of
those social classes the implied author places the righteous and elect ones for whom
Par. En. is written.72
71
Robbins, “The Social Location of the Implied Author of Luke-Acts,” 306.
72
Gerhard E. Lenski, Chapters 8–9, “Agrarian Societies,” in Power and Privilege: A Theory of
Social Stratification (New York: McGraw Hill, 1966).
CO25117.indb 32 11/03/2011 11:58

2.4.1â•‡ Arenas of the Social System and the Implied Author
Vernon K. Robbins in his analysis of the social location of the implied author of
Luke-Acts examined the intersection of the narrative functions of Luke-Acts with
nine arenas of the social system. Robbins is interested in four intra-textual functions
of Luke-Acts: 1) the characters and their audiences; 2) the narrator and narratee;
3) the inscribed author and inscribed reader; and 4) the implied author and implied
reader.73 The exhibited knowledge and competencies of the ï¬†rst three of these
functions make up the knowledge and competencies of the implied author.74 Further,
Robbins is interested in the intersection of these four intra-textual factors with nine
basic arenas of a social system. The nine arenas are:
a) previous events that may be mentioned or alluded to in the text;

b) natural environment and resources;
c) population structure of the society;
d) technology;
e) socialization depicting conï¬‡ict, or relationships to patrons or clients;
f) artistic, literary, historical or aesthetic allusions;75
g) awareness of foreign affairs;
h) belief system and ideology; and finally
i) the political-legal-military system of the day.
The intersection of the narrative functions with these arenas of a social system
provides a means to locate the implied author in the social structure of the time. Thus,
an examination of Par. En. in the light of these nine social arenas can reveal more
realities about the identity of the real author and the implied readers.
The implied author of Par. En. reveals little interest in previous events. Persecution
(1Â€EnochÂ€46:8), bloodshed (1Â€EnochÂ€47:2) and possibly Antiochus IV Epiphanes’
claim to rule the stars (1Â€EnochÂ€46:7)76 are a part of the implied author’s memory. The
invasion of the Parthians and Medes is known (1Â€EnochÂ€56:5). Notoriously difï¬†cult
to identify with certainty, it seems that the invasion of the mid-ï¬†rst century bce is
meant.77 The implied author also seems to know of Herod’s visit to the hot springs of
Callirhoe in the last decade of the ï¬†rst-century bce (1Â€EnochÂ€67:8–13).78
The implied author’s knowledge of previous events, however, is not very extensive.
No references are made to the Maccabees, or to Pompey’s visit, or to the succession
73
Robbins, “The Social Location of the Implied Author of Luke-Acts,” 309, has used the
comprehensive framework for investigating phenomena in the Roman Empire found in the
work of T. F. Carney and J. H. Elliot.
74
75
76
77
See the section on Dating Par. En.
78
Josephus, Antiquities, xvii.
CO25117.indb 33 11/03/2011 11:58

of kings before Herod. This paucity, however, is in keeping with his eschatological
perspective. The implied author is much more interested in the future reversal of
fortunes than in past events. Thus, those previous events play a small role in the Par. En.
Under the topic of Natural Environment and Resources, the implied author’s
awareness of geographical space, such as cities, ports or other geographical features
would be noted. In the narration, mountains have been seen on a tour of heaven
(1Â€EnochÂ€52), as well as mountains in the west (1Â€EnochÂ€67:4). Various metals are
associated with these mountains, gold, silver, iron, copper, lead, bronze and tin. This
suggests at least a passing knowledge of metallurgy, and a hint that the implied author
knew these metals came from ores. Evidently the implied author, through the voice
of the narrator, knew something of the Mediterranean Sea, as the narrator refers to
the people who dwell on the land, sea, and the islands (1Â€EnochÂ€53:1). The “land and
sea and islands” generally refers to the Mediterranean.79 The implied author evidently
knew something of volcanic activity (1Â€EnochÂ€67:5–7) and may possibly be alluding
to the Gehinnom Valley and others like it that extended down to the Dead Sea.80 More
speciï¬†cally, the implied author knows of the hot springs of Macherus and Callirhoe,
which Josephus describes, but which Par. En. does not name.81
None of the details that the implied author reveals is speciï¬†c enough to locate
particular places, except the hot springs. No mining towns are mentioned, no ports are
named, and not even the city of Jerusalem is named in connection with the Parthian
invasion (1Â€EnochÂ€56:7): it is simply alluded to as the “city of my righteous ones”
(1Â€EnochÂ€56:7). Again, this is to be expected, with the implied author’s interest in
the transcendent realm where true justice is meted out. The earthly realm is simply
not important. What little is alluded to seems to indicate the implied author was most
familiar with the territory between Jerusalem and the Dead Sea. The implied author
does know about the Mediterranean, but does not reveal any great knowledge about it.
In terms of population structure, the implied author gives no details. The
distinction between male and female is not mentioned, nor are children spoken of,
except for the paraphrase for “Son of Man,” “that child of woman,” whom the kings
and mighty ones will see and fear (1Â€EnochÂ€62:5–6). The group of the righteous and
elect seems to have been an identiï¬†able group, for they suffered persecution and
bloodshed (1Â€EnochÂ€46:8, 47:2â•‚4), and they seek vindication. But the implied author
does not reveal any details regarding their numbers or the proportion of men, women
and children in the group. Nor is any indication given of the relative size of the group
in proportion to the general population. The population of the day is not of much
interest to the implied author.
The implied author reveals some knowledge of technology. He is aware of
palatial furniture, as he acknowledges that the kings and mighty ones sit on couches
and thrones (1Â€EnochÂ€46:4). He also seems to know something of the agricultural
79
80
81
Black, I Enoch, 242. Josephus, Antiquities, xvii 6, 5; and Wars, vii 6.
CO25117.indb 34 11/03/2011 11:58

life, in that the metaphor of burning stubble is used to describe the punishment of
the kings and mighty ones (1Â€EnochÂ€48:9). Further he alludes to rams and lambs
jumping and skipping (1Â€EnochÂ€51:4). Some awareness of metallurgy and sorcery is
revealed (1Â€EnochÂ€63:10), and the occupations of iron workers, and idol makers are
mentioned (1Â€EnochÂ€53:3–4, 54:3). These allusions to technologies seem to be rather
meager, and could just as well be purely literary. No lessons are drawn from details
of animal husbandry, planting and harvesting, or even mining. The allusion to these
technologies has metaphorical value, but speciï¬†c knowledge of them seems to bear
no relevance to the particular point of the work. However, the author does know of
books (1Â€EnochÂ€68:1) and either was a scribe or had access to a scribe since this work
is written down and preserved. The fact of the text’s survival suggests a signiï¬†cant
knowledge of the scribal profession.
Socialization refers to self-perception and how one relates to others. The narrator
claims a unique wisdom given by God and limited only by human understanding
and God’s good pleasure (1Â€EnochÂ€37). The attitude the implied author has towards
the righteous and elect is very positive: they eventually will be the blessed ones
(1Â€EnochÂ€45:5, 50:2). But his attitude towards the sinners and evildoers is that they
shall be destroyed (1Â€EnochÂ€45:6, 53:2). The kings are treated in the same manner as
the sinners, for no mercy shall be shown to them (1Â€EnochÂ€63, 68:1). Nevertheless,
the implied author is well aware of proper etiquette when addressing a king or
other socially prominent person. Proskynesis and worship are the norm, as the
implied author suggests, when the condemned kings and mighty ones beg for mercy
(1Â€EnochÂ€62:9, 63:2). These awarenesses show some familiarity in the matter of inter-
acting with social superiors.
The cultural awareness of the implied author is quite extensive literarily, but
little artistic or aesthetic competency is revealed. Well acquainted with Scripture,
alluding to the creation story (1Â€EnochÂ€48:3) and the waters above and below the
earth (1Â€EnochÂ€54:8), he distinguishes between the masculine waters above the earth
and the feminine waters below the earth, seeing an eventual reuniï¬†cation of all the
waters (1Â€EnochÂ€54:8). Characterizing the waters as male and female is an allusion
to a Babylonian myth, also referred to in Jerusalem Talmud (BerachÂ€ixÂ€2).82 This
indicates quite a high level of education. The implied author also draws upon and
interprets the vision of the Head of Days in DanielÂ€7 (1Â€EnochÂ€46:1–3, 71:10), as well
as Nebuchadnezzar’s vision of the human ï¬†gure made up of the different materials
in DanielÂ€2 (1Â€EnochÂ€52). He is aware of the ï¬‡ood story, interpolating a section of
a Noachic work into the third parable (1Â€EnochÂ€65–69:25), and he is aware of the
etiological meaning of the rainbow (1Â€EnochÂ€55:1–2). The implied author shows quite
an interest in the sapiential concern with meteorological phenomena, as he lists the
storehouses for the lightning, thunder, wind, clouds, dew, hail, mist, and the sun and
the moon, which are revealed to Enoch (1Â€EnochÂ€41, 44, 59, 60, 69:20–23, 71:4).
The calendrical calculation of festivals is also a matter of concern (1Â€EnochÂ€44:5),

82
CO25117.indb 35 11/03/2011 11:58

indicating participation in religious decisions. A part of a wisdom song giving a

different interpretation from Proverbs 8 is also included (1Â€EnochÂ€42). Matching
the knowledge of meteorological phenomena is knowledge of the orders of angels
(1Â€EnochÂ€69) and gematria (1Â€EnochÂ€69:13, 71:8). Books are mentioned, indicating
education (1Â€EnochÂ€68:1), in particular a heavenly book in which all the names of the
righteous are recorded (1Â€EnochÂ€47:3). Not only is the author able to read, but he is
also able to write in a skilled manner, drawing on many different scriptural themes.
The very existence of the Par. En. indicates his ability to write.
All of these allusions indicate that the implied author was quite well versed in
Scripture, and quite well-trained as a “scribe.” He was interested in scribal, sapiential
matters as well, as indicated by his reference to the meteorological storehouses which
are revealed to Enoch. The implied author, and by implication the actual author,
was clearly of the scribal, retainer class: he had important skills and has become the
spokesÂ�person for the righteous and the elect in speaking out against the kings and
mighty ones.
In foreign affairs the implied author reveals nothing except the invasion of the
Parthians and Medes. Not even there does he refer in any speciï¬†c way to the generals
Pacorus and Barzaphanes, and only alludes in a most inconclusive way to the intrigue
in which they tried to trap Hyrcanus II, Herod, and Phasael in their support of the
rival Antigonus II. Matters relating to the Roman Empire, which was establishing its
authority over the region at the time, are ignored. The wider world of foreign affairs
is of no interest to the implied author of Par. En.
The belief system and ideology of the implied author of Par. En., on the other
hand, is quite full and complete. He believes in the Lord of Spirits, who created the
world, and imparts wisdom (1Â€EnochÂ€37:4). Sin is considered to have originated with
the fallen watchers (1Â€EnochÂ€64). At the same time, the evildoers, the kings and the
mighty ones are followers of Azazel (1Â€EnochÂ€53:5, 54:5, 56:3). He believes that there
will be a ï¬†nal judgment (1Â€EnochÂ€38:1), in which the righteous will be vindicated and
the sinners and evildoers condemned to eternal punishment. The basis of judgment
is their treatment of the righteous and elect (1Â€EnochÂ€62:11). Heaven and earth will
also be transformed (1Â€EnochÂ€45:4–5, 50:1) and those who are not powerful now will
inherit the earth. The Garden is the place for the righteous to dwell (1Â€EnochÂ€60:8,
23, 61:12). Only in Par. En. do the righteous dwell there.83 Missing is an emphasis
on temple sacriï¬†ce and on following the Law. The expressed concerns seem to ï¬†t the
scribal, sapiential concerns of the Second Temple Period.
The implied author of Sim En. seems to be quite aware of the political-legal-
military system of the late ï¬†rst-century bce. The whole work is directed against
the kings and mighty ones, the ruling class of Palestine. The implied author refers
to the kings and strong ones who occupy the land (1Â€EnochÂ€48:8), indicating an
acquaintance with the land-owning, governing stratum of society. He knows that
“gifts and presents and tokens of homage” (1Â€EnochÂ€53:1) need to be paid, to maintain
83
CO25117.indb 36 11/03/2011 11:58

the favor of patrons. Here in 1Â€EnochÂ€53, it is the patrons who are envisioned seeking
to win favor from the Elect One, but justly, in the implied author’s eyes, it is to no
avail: they will not be granted mercy. An allusion is made to government by intrigue,
where brother does not trust brother (1Â€EnochÂ€56:7). The implied author, thus is
familiar with the ways of the ruling stratum of society.
The implied author also knows something of punishment and imprisonment. He
envisions the kings and mighty ones in the end being punished and imprisoned the same
way that they no doubt had punished and imprisoned citizens of the land. Instruments
for conï¬†ning prisoners are mentioned four times. In 1Â€EnochÂ€53:3–4, when the angels
of punishment are preparing all the fetters of Satan, Enoch asks for whom the fetters
were being prepared. He receives the answer that they are being prepared for “the
kings and mighty of this earth, that they may thereby be destroyed (1Â€EnochÂ€53:3).”
The term used is a non-speciï¬†c term for iron instruments of torture and conï¬†nement.84
Again in 1Â€EnochÂ€54:3–4, in another part of the vision, Enoch sees a deep valley with
burning ï¬†re. Into this deep valley the kings and potentates are cast, and in it their
fetters are being fashioned. These fetters are iron chains of incalculable weight. Again
Enoch asks for whom the fetters are being prepared, and he is told that they are for the
host of Azazel, so that they can be cast into the depths of hell and covered with rough
stones (1Â€EnochÂ€54:5). Then a little further in the vision (1Â€EnochÂ€56:1–3), Enoch sees
scourges and fetters of iron and bronze, mašagra xasin wabert, being prepared for the
followers of the associates of Azazel, that they too might be cast into the chasm of the
abyss. Finally in the summation of the third parable (1Â€EnochÂ€69:28), Enoch reports
that the Son of Man will effect the destruction of the sinners. The sinners will be bound
84
There is a certain amount of textual confusion with regard to the term for “iron instruments.”
Charles in The Ethiopic Version of the Book of Enoch, 96–97, uses the term mabāl(eta, which
has to do with food stuffs or victuals. In the apparatus, however, Charles notes that several
manuscripts use mabā(elta, or mabā(elata, which refer to iron instruments of torture and
conï¬†nement. J. Fleming, Das Buch Henoch (Leipzig: J. C. Hinrichs’sche Buchhandlung,
1902) 57, uses mabā(elta in the text, and makes no mention of the variants in the apparatus.
The Rylands Ethiopic MS. 23, which is the basis for Knibb’s, The Ethiopic Book of Enoch,
preserves an erasure on the manuscript indicating that an erroneous second root letter had
ï¬†rst been written but then erased. The resulting word is mabā (lta. It is puzzling that, without
even commenting on it, Charles in his translation, The Book of Enoch or 1 Enoch, 105–106,
uses the variant, “instruments,” rather than “victuals,” the text he chose to print. Neither
Black, I Enoch, nor Knibb, The Ethiopic Book of Enoch, in their translations comment on the
variants; only E. Isaac, in The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha (ed. James H. Charlesworth,
Vol. 1; New York: Doubleday, 1983) 37, adds “victuals” in the footnotes.
â•… Besides the transposition from b(l to bl(, the root b(l, “Lord” (Augustus Dillmann, Lexicon
Linguae Aethiopicae, [Lipsiae: Weigel, 1865] 530) is also confused with (bl which has to do
with making things, and yields the noun ma(ebal, “iron instruments,” (Dillmann, Lexicon,
983; it can also mean “javelin” or “arrow”). This noun is used in 1 Kings 6:7, where it refers
to the iron tools that were not to be used in the building of Solomon’s temple. It is also used
at 2Â€Kings 16:17, ta_ sugklei/smata in Greek, where it refers to the border or frame of the
bases of the laver of the temple. Evidently the frame or border bound the parts of the base
together. That binding notion seems to be the sense of the passage in 1Â€EnochÂ€53:3–4 and it
is the sense followed by all the commentators.
CO25117.indb 37 11/03/2011 11:58

with chains and imprisoned in their assembling places of destruction. The seer’s ideas
have a parallel in Ps. 149:8 lzrb ylbkb, “iron fetters” in which kings and nobles will
be bound (cf. also Ps. 105:18). Perhaps the author envisions the fulfillment of that
verse for the kings and mighty ones whom he opposes. These references also indicate
that he knows something of the legal system and the public way decisions would be
enacted. The multiplicity of references to fetters, one may speculate, may indicate that
the real author either had been imprisoned by the legal system at some point, or was
close to someone who had been imprisoned.
The implied author also knows something of the military equipment of the day.
While no descriptions of armor are forthcoming, he does allude to horse-mounted
soldiers, who found Jerusalem to be an obstacle (1Â€EnochÂ€56:7). He also knows of
warriors riding in chariots (1Â€EnochÂ€57:1–2). Both these forms of attack would have
been terrifying to foot soldiers and they would have seemed to be a far superior power
to the local inhabitants. Again one may speculate that, since the implied author knows
of these forms of attack, the actual author either witnessed similar events or knew
someone who had.
This analysis of Par. En. through the use of the nine arenas of a social system
reveal that the implied author is fairly knowledgeable in some areas, but quite
uninterested in others. He seems to have a wide knowledge of cultural matters. He
knows the Hebrew scriptures, and interprets especially the Son of Man image in a
way to suit his purposes. The implied author further reveals an extensive interest in
sapiential subjects, with the revelation that the storehouses of the meteorological
phenomena are shown to Enoch, and with the listing of the angels who are to be
punished. He betrays signiï¬†cant familiarity with the political, legal, and military
aspects of the social system. He knows how to deal with superiors, and makes the
revolutionary claim that earthly kings and rulers are in fact subject to God and to
God’s judicial representative, the Son of Man, by whom they will be judged. He
knows about imprisonment, and perhaps has witnessed attacking armies, which used
horses and chariots. While the implied author does not seem to be widely traveled
in the Mediterranean, he does seem more familiar with Jerusalem and the Dead Sea
environs. He mentions a variety of metals, indicating knowledge of their existence.
The implied author does not, however, seem very interested in foreign affairs,
in the make-up of the population of the land, nor in previous events that are a part
of a society’s heritage. Except for the dealing with superiors and interpreting the
Scriptures, these descriptions of the implied author’s knowledge of the world are
by no means very detailed, and indeed they could be based on literary knowledge
rather than practical experience. However, if we may tentatively read these details for
furthering our understanding of the implied author, then we may see the real author as
a scribe, who felt deep animosity toward and rejection of the current ruling stratum.
He foresaw the eventual reversal of their fortunes, if not in this life, then certainly
in the life after death. He was not interested in or appreciative of Hellenistic innova-
tions, and would rather support the traditional ways of Scripture study and agrarian
life. The knowledge betrayed by the real author indicates that he was a member of
CO25117.indb 38 11/03/2011 11:58

the elites, although at the time of composition, he was part of the ousted group and
so opposed the current rulers.
2.4.2â•‡ Social Stratification and Par. En.
Another way to investigate the social setting of Par. En. is to notice details concerning
the social classes in which the implied author locates the characters who are a part
of the text. Lenski has described in a general way the different strata of an advanced
agrarian society. An advanced agrarian society is one of several stages of societal
development. It is preceded by the hunter-gatherer society, and the horticultural
society. With the technological developments of the plow and the wheel, an advanced
agrarian society can develop with a vastly more complex agricultural, political and
religious system. Out of this, with further technological advances, an industrial society
develops. The Roman empire and the societies it conquered fall within the description
of an advanced agrarian society. Lenski provides a macro-view of society, but it is
helpful, for this view also takes seriously the relationships between the various groups
and strata. Lenski seeks to represent the complexity of society, for he recognizes that
the relative power and privilege of any given group depends on its relationship to the
other groups in the society. So the social world within the Roman empire, in which
the author of Par. En. lives, from which he writes, and to which he bears witness, can
be investigated from the perspective of Lenski’s description. Discovering the social
location of the persons mentioned in the text reveals something of the purpose for its
having been written. First a brief outline of the social strata of an advanced agrarian
society will be presented, then a description of which of those strata are mentioned in
Par. En. will be offered, and ï¬†nally a discussion of the social location of the “kings
and mighty ones” and the “righteous and elect” will follow.
Lenski describes agrarian societies as he outlines their nine successive strata.
He notes that agrarian societies were transformed from horticultural societies by
invention of the plow, and the wheel, and by advances in metallurgy. These advances
yielded greater and more efï¬†cient productivity. Agrarian societies were characterized
by great building projects such as pyramids and cathedrals, by greater work efï¬†ciency
and by advances in military technology. Greater social stratiï¬†cation also developed as
individuals became specialized in their contributions to the social fabric. Lenski gives
the example of the manufacture of weapons. Artisans made them, while soldiers used
them.85 The development of specialized occupations led to social stratiï¬†cation and
the further reï¬†nement of the power individuals held over others. Advanced agrarian
societies also witnessed the development of widespread urban communities, and
a great growth in the volume of trade and commerce. Growth in trade resulted in
the emergence of a merchant class. The ï¬‡ow of goods generally went from villages
to urban centers, with the villages receiving services, tools and salt in return for
Lenski, “Agrarian Societies,” 194.

85
CO25117.indb 39 11/03/2011 11:58

agricultural surplus. Generally only luxury items were transported between urban
centers due to the high cost of transportation, with the net effect being that wealth
accumulated in those centers and especially around the highest level of the society.
The invention of money and writing was made necessary in order to control and
enhance the ï¬‡ow of goods.
An agrarian society was marked by great social inequality. The ruler controlled
the most power and wealth, with lower social groups controlling ever diminishing
amounts. Since size of holdings was a visible measure of power, rulers engaged in
constant warfare in order to gain more lands. Thus, the population of an agrarian
society was generally made up of conquered peoples, which resulted in ethnic
diversity in the society.86
Generally speaking, local cults gave way to the state sponsored cult, or were
incorporated into it. Sometimes there were organized conï¬‡icts between religious
groups as one group was forced out of power and control because another was
claiming it.87
The top of the extremely steep pyramid was occupied by the ruler. All power,
privilege and honor resided in the ruler, due to the economic and military power
that the ruler controlled. The ruler was inordinately wealthy, receiving income from
conquered lands and from the classes below the ruler. The surplus wealth of the land
was all funneled towards the ruler. The ruler’s income was four to forty times the
wealth of the richest members of the governing class. This inordinate wealth was
possible due to the “proprietary theory of the state,” in which the state was considered
to be the personal property of the ruler and therefore was to be used for personal
advantage. The ruler was considered to have full rights to booty, tributes and taxation,
and could even conï¬†scate what was desired.88 The control of land, the government,
and the nation thus was highly desirable, for partisan or personal advantage, and the
wealth gained from it was not distributed equitably, but channeled into the control of
a few. Most struggles were not over principles, but “between opposing factions of the
privileged class.”89
The next stratum of the social pyramid was the governing class. The governing
class generally consisted of 2% of the population, and was made up of the aristocracy,
who constituted the bureaucracy through which the ruler governed and exploited the
land. They shared in the economic surplus of the land, and in return for their privi-
leges of wealth and control, they were responsible for providing military support for
the ruler. They realized personal ï¬†nancial gain from their administrative power and
at times were exempted from taxes. Wealth followed power in an agrarian society,
so that while they did not enjoy as much wealth as the ruler, nevertheless their
86
Lenski, “Agrarian Societies,” 195–96.
87
88
A scriptural example of the right to conï¬†scate may be found in Ahab’s coveting and eventual
conï¬†scation of Naboth’s vineyard (1 Kgs 21). The issue for Elijah, however, is that not even
kings could arbitrarily conï¬†scate a subject’s land.
89
CO25117.indb 40 11/03/2011 11:58

income level was much greater than that of the general populace. Often they were
land owners, or had been rewarded with lands, which they then felt free to exploit.
Sometimes, when they fell out of favor, their wealth and property were conï¬†scated by
the ruler, who awarded it to others. This possibility continually made the governing
class want to curtail the power of the ruler, and conversely, the ruler continually
wanted to keep the governing class in check.90
Below the governing class came the retainers, at the third level. They were skilled
in actually carrying out the tasks of governing and administering the land. The basic
function of the retainer class was to serve the elite in the administration of the land.
This stratum consisted of 5–10% of the population, and was made up of soldiers,
ofï¬†cials, scribes, servants, and personal retainers. Occasionally they themselves
shared in the privileges of the governing class, by controlling personal wealth and
power in the administration of the bureaucracy. As a class, they were very important
for maintaining the distributive system of the empire and for performing the work
of transferring wealth from the peasants to the ruler, but as individuals, they were
expendable. Only scribes, with their writing skills, were not expendable in this way,
but most members of this class could be easily replaced. Once their services were no
longer needed, they descended to one or other of the lower classes.91
The next group in the social system, according to Lenski’s description, is the
merchant class, at the fourth level. The merchant class stood in a market relationship
with the elite. They possibly arose out of the ranks of younger sons who did not stand
to inherit the family’s wealth. Entrepreneurial persons soon recognized the possibility
of turning a proï¬†t on items that were bountiful in one area but scarce in another.
Their relative independence in their own pursuit of wealth freed them up somewhat
from the strict authority of the elite, who found them difï¬†cult to control and tax fully.
Nonetheless, the elite also benefited from their activities in that commodities were
readily available.92
The class of religious leaders, or priests as Lenski terms them, is at the fifth
level. By priests, Lenski means all religious leaders. The priestly class were those
who mediated the relationship between God and humanity. Great variety was
manifested in this class in different societies. Some religious leaders were married,
others were celibate. Some functioned more as teachers, others more as controllers
of spiritual resources. In some societies, membership in this class was by heredity,
but in others, especially where celibacy was maintained, members were recruited,
and sometimes both heredity and recruitment were means for becoming a member.
At times they controlled great wealth, if they came from the governing class, and
amassed much property, especially if they were favored by the ruler. In other situa-
tions they advocated poverty, especially if they came from amongst the lower classes.
Sometimes they promoted the ideals of righteousness and justice, as can be seen in
90
91
92
CO25117.indb 41 11/03/2011 11:58

the law codes of Hammurabi and Moses. They might enjoy the respect of the ruler,
nobles and peasants, and so be able to encourage a minor redistribution of wealth
through charity. But at other times, many members of this class pursued power and
wealth in competition with the elite. If they fell out of favor, their wealth and property
might be conï¬†scated.
The priestly class and the elite coexisted in a symbiotic relationship. The religious
leaders sought inï¬‡uence and power to spread their beliefs, to build temples, and to
create art, while the elite needed the blessings of the religious establishment to legit-
imize their rule. Further, the literacy skills of the religious leaders was needed in the
society, so that they became diplomats, clerks, ofï¬†cials and educators. But because
religious leaders derived their authority from a source other than the social elite,
differences were bound to arise. The most potent weapon the priestly class possessed
was the power of bestowing or denying salvation, while a weapon used by the elite
was conï¬†scation and persecution.93
The peasant class, the sixth level, produced most of the wealth of the society
and was its largest component. These people were the ones who actually produced
the crops and other products of the land, and most of the tax burden was shifted to
them. In the ancient world, they may have been taxed at a rate of 20% or 30% or
even 50% of the produce. They might be subject to forced labor, or a time of service
to the ruler and generally they lived in miserable poverty at a mere subsistence
level. They were considered by the elite to be stupid, or lacking in intelligence, or
slaves, and therefore they were exploitable. Often they were foreigners, subjugated
during war and relocated to the control of the elite. Occasionally, peasant rebellions
occurred, especially if the peasants of a particular region had been trained for war,
but generally no lasting social change resulted. As a class they were particularly
susceptible to plagues, disasters, inï¬‡ation, and the whims of the elite. While they
were the most numerous group of the society, they were relatively powerless and
poverty-stricken.94
Artisans, unclean and degraded persons, and expendables formed the lowest
three classes of the agrarian society. The artisans, about 3–7% of the population, are
thought to have come from the dispossessed peasantry and the non-inheriting sons of
families, if they were unsuccessful in joining the merchant class. Their income level
was less than that of the peasants, and they were laborers for merchants, producing
manufactured goods. Generally, they were a despised segment of the society.
The unclean or degraded persons made up about 10% of the population. They were
porters, laborers, and prostitutes, and they barely were able to sustain themselves.
The expendables were the criminals and beggars. They also made up about 10%
of the population, but were treated as deviants. In their outcast state, they gravitated
to the urban areas.95
93
94
95
CO25117.indb 42 11/03/2011 11:58

These nine classes were not so much layers as continuous gradations. Some of
the members of one class may overlap with members of another class in their control
of wealth and power. Because the society was mostly a conquered society, with
individuals being largely replaceable, downward mobility was common. As people
fell out of favor, they fell into the lower classes. By and large, the whole government
was organized to channel wealth and power to the upper echelons of the society. In
that social dynamism, individuals and their clients and retainers could easily have
their status drastically changed in a relatively short time.96
Social Classes Reflected in Par. En.

A number of these social classes are alluded to in Par. En., but some are not. The
supreme, earthly ruler, the emperor or Caesar, is never mentioned. It seems to me,
however, that the social location of the ruler is allocated to the divine being in the
spiritual realm. The Lord of Spirits, like the supreme, earthly ruler, holds all power to
judge, to vindicate and to accord status to those who are judged. The Lord of Spirits
is worthy of worship, and all inhabitants of heaven, angels and the righteous and
holy, bow down, praise, exalt, and bless the Lord of Spirits (1Â€EnochÂ€38:4–14, 40,
61:9–12). Further, the Lord of Spirits is worthy of the worship of all peoples on earth
(1Â€EnochÂ€48:4–5). The kings and mighty ones, who are judged by God, fall down and
worship and beg for mercy (1Â€EnochÂ€62–63). God is said to be merciful, and willing
to accommodate those who repent (1Â€EnochÂ€50:3–4, 61:13), but the kings and mighty
ones are unable to obtain mercy (1Â€EnochÂ€50:5, 63). These powers indicate that for
the author of Par. En., God has taken the place of the supreme, earthly ruler.
Members of Lenski’s governing class are mentioned in Par. En. The “mighty
ones,” and the “powerful and strong ones” are differing designations for this group.
They are distinguished by being currently wealthy and powerful, and possessors of
the earth, but they are also capable of losing their power and status. They can be
destroyed and handed over to others (1Â€EnochÂ€38:5, 48:8–10, 53:5). In other words,
they can be demoted and stripped of their authority and privilege. The members of
this governing class are also called “kings!” They may be powerful for a time, but
they can be cast down from their thrones and reduced to wormy beds like the peasant
and lower classes (1Â€EnochÂ€46:4–6, 62:10, 63:11–12). For a short time they are the
possessors of the earth (1Â€EnochÂ€38:4, 62:1, 63:1),97 but they shall be handed over to
others (1Â€EnochÂ€48:9). They will bow down and praise the Son of Man, who is the
viceroy of the Lord of Spirits, and petition and supplicate before him (1Â€EnochÂ€62:9).
But when judgment is rendered, they will leave the presence of the judge with
heavy hearts and downcast faces (1Â€EnochÂ€62:10, 63:11). They will be seen to be
replaceable, for the elect of the Son of Man will exchange places with them, and exult

96
Black, I Enoch, 195, 235, identiï¬†es them with foreign oppressors of Israel. However, this
97
does not seem likely. The argument above suggests that they are local rulers and governors,
who support and who are supported by the Romans.
CO25117.indb 43 11/03/2011 11:58

over those who formerly oppressed them (1Â€EnochÂ€62:11–12). In the transformed

world order, the righteous and elect will be in the presence of the Son of Man, eat and
sleep in his presence and wear never-fading garments of glory (1Â€EnochÂ€62:14–16),
but those who are presently powerful shall be punished. The kings and mighty ones,
then, are members of the ruling elite.
The retainer class is spoken of in Par. En. also. This class is represented by those
who have the skills of using pen and ink. Those skills are decried in the list of angels
who are to be punished. Penemue is credited with instructing humanity in writing
with ink and paper (1Â€EnochÂ€69:10). It is curiously ironic, that even as this author uses
those same skills to preserve his ideas and insights, he condemns them as the work
of a fallen angel. Perhaps the reason is that he sees reading and writing as diverting
human attention from its true vocation of being righteous and pure (1Â€EnochÂ€69:11).
The religious leaders, or priestly class, are also spoken of by this author. On
the one hand, medical skills for discerning diseases are criticized along with their
instructor, Kasdeya) (1Â€EnochÂ€69:12). On the other hand, those who are thirsty
for wisdom are mentioned as dwelling amongst the righteous and holy and elect
(1Â€EnochÂ€48:1). This may be the only hint at any social structure for the group who are
designated as the righteous and elect. The conception seems to be that a few of that
group are thirsty for wisdom, and may drink their ï¬†ll at the fountain of wisdom. But
not everyone drinks from it, only some amongst them. Drinking from the fountain
of wisdom would seem to refer metaphorically to those who are religious leaders,
interested in sapiential matters.
The only other social class referred to by this author is the artisan class. The
members of this class are spoken of disdainfully, and connected with the kings and
mighty ones whom the author vehemently opposes. The members of this class are
the iron-workers who make fetters (1Â€EnochÂ€53:3–4, 54:3), and the idol-makers
(1Â€EnochÂ€53:2, 68:4–5) who supply the kings and mighty ones.
The other classes are not mentioned. No merchants are spoken of, no peasants or
their activities, nor are any of the lowest classes of unclean or expendables mentioned.
This seems to suggest that while the implied author revealed knowledge of wider
arenas of activity, such as shepherding (1Â€EnochÂ€51:4), the characters of whom he
speaks are not of those classes. Where they do ï¬†t in the society must now be examined.
The Social Location of the Kings and of the Righteous and Elect
As noted above, in the perception of the author of Par. En., the kings and mighty ones
belong to the governing class. The kings, although they bear a title which would seem
to elevate them to the ruler class, are nonetheless spoken of with the same attributes
as the governing class. The author conceives of the kings as temporary. They can be
demoted. This suggests that the author saw them as those client kings who were set
up or supported by the Romans to maximize the proceeds from Palestine to Rome.
That they are depicted as bowing down to the heavenly judge also places them in
the governing class in Palestine, for that governing class in Palestine also owed
allegiance to a higher ruler, the emperor, clients of the supreme, earthly ruler. In other
CO25117.indb 44 11/03/2011 11:58

words, they are members of the ruling aristocracy, and in the end, and most impor-
tantly in the author’s view, they will recognize their subservience to the divine ruler.98
Now the righteous and the elect must be investigated. Three terms are used to
designate this group in various combinations. The three terms are “righteous,” “elect,”
and “holy.” The most basic combination seems to be “righteous and elect,” another
combination is “holy, righteous and elect,” and a third combination is “righteous and
holy.” The three combinations occur in all three parables. The three terms are also used
individually in all three parables. Another combination, “holy and elect,” is used once
in the second parable (1Â€EnochÂ€50:1). The variety in terminology, nevertheless, desig-
nates a single group, and no distinctions are drawn between the various designations.
Several interesting features emerge from examining this group. The term “elect”
seems to be the least speciï¬†c. It can to refer to those who are chosen or who follow
a particular leader. Further it is used of both the elect of the Son of Man, and of the
followers of the kings and mighty ones who are to be punished (1Â€EnochÂ€56:1–4). The
elect and beloved of the kings and mighty ones shall be punished and cast into the
underground chambers along with their kings.
The possessive pronoun “my” is used of the righteous and elect in the second
parable. These words are put into the mouth of God, and so the possessive is used. The
land of “my elect” will be trampled on (1Â€EnochÂ€56:6) and the city of “my righteous”
shall be an obstacle (1Â€EnochÂ€56:7) to the Parthians and Medes. The kings and strong
ones shall be given over into the hands of “my elect ones” (1Â€EnochÂ€48:9). Thus the
“elect” are urban, and will be able to manage wealth when it is returned to them.
Further, light is said to shine on them. The light of the Lord of Spirits will shine
on their faces (1Â€EnochÂ€38:4) and they will be radiant, full of blessing and praise for
the Name of the Lord of Spirits (1Â€EnochÂ€39:7). The righteous shall be in the light of
the sun for the former darkness shall pass away (1Â€EnochÂ€58:3, 6), and the light of
days shall remain on the holy and elect (1Â€EnochÂ€50:1). The light seems to refer to
their future blessedness in contrast to the bleakness of their present existence.
The righteous and elect are also said to depend on God. The Righteous One will
appear before them, and their works depend on the Lord of Spirits (1Â€EnochÂ€38:2,
40:5, 46:8). The Son of Man will be like a staff for them, on which they can depend,
The designation, “kings and mighty ones,” or “mighty kings,” (1Â€EnochÂ€38:5) may come
98
from PsÂ€135:10 cf. Black, IÂ€Enoch, 196. There the psalmist rejoices that the Lord slew the
mighty kings, Mymwc( Myklm, Sihon, king of the Amorites, and Og, king of Bashan. In Pss.
136:17–20, the psalmist is thankful that great and famous kings (again Sihon and Og are
named) have been smitten and slain. Further, the psalmist is thankful that the Lord handed
over their lands and heritage to Israel (Pss. 135:12, 136:21–22). This double theme, the
destruction of kings and the handing over of their possessions to others, matches the ideas of
the author of Par. En. in regard to the kings and mighty ones. A further similarity is that both
Psalms 135 and 136 and the author of Par. En. speak of kings in the plural. In both cases the
kings are merely temporary, and will be replaced. They are not the supreme, earthly rulers,
for they can be deposed by God. It seems likely, then, that one of the sources of ideas for the
author of Par. En. for the kings of whom he speaks is the words about kings in Psalms 135
and 136.
CO25117.indb 45 11/03/2011 11:58

and be held secure so as not to fall (1Â€EnochÂ€48:4). At the judgment, the angels
will measure the righteous with cords, so that they may support themselves on God
(1Â€EnochÂ€61:3). Even the righteous who are dead will return and stay themselves on
the day of the Elect One (1Â€EnochÂ€61:5). These righteous will be dependent on God
for their continued status.
Signiï¬†cantly, there will also be a reversal of status for them. At the current time
they are oppressed (1Â€EnochÂ€53:7, 62:11), but in the future they will have rest and
peace (1Â€EnochÂ€58:4) and vengeance will be executed on their behalf. They will be
vindicated, and will be given the status of those who now possess the earth. The elect
shall stand before the heavenly judge, vindicated and honored to do so, while the
kings and mighty will fall down as supplicants (1Â€EnochÂ€62:8–9). They will exult
over the kings (1Â€EnochÂ€62:12) and the kings and strong ones shall be given over into
their hands (1Â€EnochÂ€48:9). The mighty kings shall be destroyed, and given over into
the hands of the righteous and holy (1Â€EnochÂ€38:5). While the kings and mighty ones
are banished from earth to the place of their punishment, the elect ones will be given
a place of privilege and honor in a transformed earth (1Â€EnochÂ€45:5). Thus they will
enjoy a reversal of status.
It will be the privilege of the righteous and elect to have the Son of Man revealed
to them. The Son of Man is hidden before all ages (1Â€EnochÂ€48:6), but is the future
judge, and is revealed to his elect (1Â€EnochÂ€48:7, 62:7). This is a privilege not
accorded to the kings and mighty ones (1Â€EnochÂ€62:3). Another privilege of the
righteous and elect is that the secrets of the heavens will be available to them. Enoch
saw all the storehouses of the winds and lightning and thunder and rain during his tour
of heaven. By writing it down, Enoch made it available to them (1Â€EnochÂ€40–44).
The righteous and elect will also have a special dwelling place. Their dwelling
place is actually located in three different realms. One is in heaven, where they will
join the angels in offering their petitions (1Â€EnochÂ€39:4–5, 45:6). They are even said
to dwell beneath the wings of the Lord of Spirits (1Â€EnochÂ€39:7). A second dwelling
place is the transformed and renewed earth (1Â€EnochÂ€51:5). It will be renewed, with
all the forces of oppression removed. The third dwelling place for the righteous and
elect is said to be the Garden (1Â€EnochÂ€60:8, 23, 61:12), where many meteorological
secrets are revealed. The idyllic existence is something greatly anticipated.
The social location of the righteous and elect now can be narrowed by looking at
the characteristics attributed to them. One revealing detail is that some of them are
dead, and shall be raised up to have their righteousness acknowledged (1Â€EnochÂ€61:5).
This is a fascinating detail, for three places of death are mentioned. Some have been
destroyed by the desert, wa-)ella tahagwlu )em-badw. Biblical parallels may be
instructive. One may recall the words in Dan. 12:2 about many who sleep in the dust
of the earth and who shall awake, some to everlasting life, and others to shame and
everlasting contempt. In Dan.Â€12:2, the idea of the desert is not explicit, but the idea
of being raised to everlasting life is also present in 1Â€EnochÂ€61:5. People are spoken of
as perishing in the wilderness in Num 14:29 as a result of their lack of trust in God’s
guidance during the wilderness wanderings. But they perish as punishment for their
CO25117.indb 46 11/03/2011 11:58

wickedness. That particular nuance is not contained in 1Â€EnochÂ€61:5. The idea of the
righteous being raised to eternal life from their deaths in the desert then does not have
a precise parallel in Biblical literature.
Others have been devoured by ï¬†sh in the sea, wa-ella tabal(u )em(āšāta bahir.
The only biblical reference to a person being devoured by a ï¬†sh is Jonah. He is
thrown into the sea to stop the storm and is swallowed by the ï¬†sh (Jon.Â€1:17). Then he
is spit up after three days (Jon. 2:10). Jonah, however, is not portrayed as having died.
The story depends on Jonah’s being alive in the belly of the ï¬†sh. In 1Â€EnochÂ€61:5,
the sense is that those who have died in the sea will be raised. So, there may be
some similarity between this verse in 1Â€Enoch and Jonah, but the parallel is not very
precise.
Still others have been devoured by wild beasts, wa)em)arāwit. One parallel to
this might be the report by Joseph’s brothers to their father that Joseph had perished
as the prey of wild beasts (Gen. 37:20). Another parallel idea may be the reference
in the “Animal Apocalypse” (1Â€EnochÂ€89:68–69) to the sheep who are destroyed by
wild animals because of the incompetence of the shepherds. Here the seer laments
the death of the sheep, or the people of Israel, and this may be fairly close to the idea
expressed here in Par. En. However, the mention of the sheep does not include the
idea of resurrection. Isaiah and Jeremiah often consign people to be consumed by
wild beasts (e.g. Isa. 18:6, Jer 15:3, 16:4, 19:7). However, these deaths are predicted
as judgments against them, and birds of prey are part of the horriï¬†c death. Here in
1Â€Enoch the birds of prey are not considered to have been part of the death of the
righteous, nor is death suffered as judgment. Death in this scene is either because of
the dangers of travel, or because of oppression by the kings and the mighty during
travel.99
These three types of death, while they seem to reï¬‡ect allusions to literary sources,
do not in fact have precise parallels in Biblical literature. Rather, the reference to
these three types of death would seem to indicate that some members of this group
were travelers. They have lost their lives in their dangerous travels, in the desert,
on the sea, or in the wilderness. Possibly these travelers were merchants, and yet
no merchant class activities, such as buying or selling or transporting goods are
mentioned in this connection. If they are not merchants, then perhaps they are people
with means enough to be able to travel, possibly from the governing class or their
retainers. If the reference to loss of life in the desert, on the sea, or by wild beasts is
reï¬‡ective of the real life, then the righteous and elect seem to have been a part of the
upper echelon. Another reason for travel may have been that they were exiled,100 and
perhaps met their fate on the way. If they were exiles because of their opposition to
the current regime, they would have been a kind of “shadow government,” members
of the governing class, or their retainers, such as scribes, clerks, or other adminis-
trative ofï¬†cials.

99
100
Suggested to me by Prof. J. Neyrey.
CO25117.indb 47 11/03/2011 11:58

This social location is also afï¬†rmed by the depiction of their joyously and gladly
joining in the worship of God by the angels. They know how to be supplicants. They
know how to worship and honor and praise patrons. And they know how to look with
disdain on future supplicants, the erstwhile kings and mighty ones. Thus, they appear
to be rivals to those currently in power.
Further, they will be clothed in never-fading garments of glory, which will never
grow old (1Â€EnochÂ€62:15–16). Like the kings now, they will be splendidly garbed
then.
Again, it is signiï¬†cant that they are promised a dwelling place on a transformed
earth (1Â€EnochÂ€45:5, 51:5). Not only is heaven to be transformed, but earth also will
be renewed. The righteous and elect look forward to life before God in heaven, but
they are also promised a dwelling place on the blessed, transformed, renewed earth.
They will be joyful, and move about freely upon it (1Â€EnochÂ€51:5). But sinners
and evildoers101 shall be prohibited from setting foot there (1Â€EnochÂ€45:5–6). This
may indicate a reversal of their present status. Possibly the righteous and elect now
suffer from having had their lands conï¬†scated. They may be a part of a group of
normally wealthy inhabitants of the environs of the ancient city, as David A. Fiensy
has described.102 Fiensy argues that this group of landed aristocracy were Jewish and
that they owned modest homes. These homes, however, were lavishly decorated with
ï¬†ne pottery, frescoes and mosaics. Further, they owned lands and probably slaves
to work the lands. Some of their land was nearby, but for some of their land they
were absentee landlords. This was precisely the group that could have their lands
and homes conï¬†scated on the accession of a new ruler. They could fall victim to
downward mobility,103 until a new ruler established himself and their fortunes were
reversed. If that background is a part of the social situation of the righteous and elect,
then the promise of dwelling on a transformed, renewed earth without being hindered
by sinners and evildoers would be very meaningful. This group then possibly looked
forward to having their status reversed and their lands returned, together with its
power and prestige.
Finally, they have great interest in the meteorological secrets. Enoch was shown
those secrets in the dwelling place of the righteous in the Garden (1Â€EnochÂ€60:7–25).
It was religious leaders who had such sapiential interests.
The picture emerging from these details is a picture of ousted members of the
governing class. The righteous and elect have all the skills and interests of the
governing class. They are looking forward to that great day when the covenant is
enacted, when the sinners are condemned (1Â€EnochÂ€60:6) and they are restored to
their rightful status. Currently, they are victims of downward mobility, but they
101
“Sinners” and “evildoers” seem to be pejorative, judgmental synonyms for the kings and
mighty ones.
102
David A. Fiensy, The Social History of Palestine in the Herodian Period: The Land is Mine
(Studies in the Bible and Early Christianity, Vol. 20; Lewiston/Queenston/Lampeter: The
Edwin Mellen Press, 1991) 49–55.
103
CO25117.indb 48 11/03/2011 11:58

are looking ahead to vindication and restoration. Not only are they members of the
secular governing class, but they are also religious leaders, ready and anxious to
establish the lordship of God in opposition to the current kings and mighty ones.
2.4.3â•‡ Conclusions Regarding Social Setting
These two approaches to investigating the social setting of Par. En. have produced
complementary results.
The examination of the social location of the implied author, revealed that the
author is familiar with the environs of Jerusalem and the Dead Sea. His thorough
grasp of Scripture, his interest in sapiential matters and his scribal skills place him at
least in the retainer class or amongst the class of religious leaders, as does his famili-
arity with the political, legal, and military arenas of the social system.
The social location of the implied author is consistent with the social location of
the main characters as described by the author. The kings and mighty ones are the
ruling elite, knowing how to pay homage to superiors, and how to oppress others.
But the righteous and elect are of the very same class, with the same skills and
interest. Because they are not in power at present, they look forward to a reversal of
status, if not in this life, then in the life to come. The work, then, protests against the
current state of affairs, and it encourages the righteous and elect as they await their
transformation.
CO25117.indb 49 11/03/2011 11:58

3
The Son of Man in the Parables of Enoch
3.1â•‡ Religio-Historical Background

DanielÂ€7 is the only place in existing literature chronologically prior to the Par. En.
in which a ï¬†gure called the Son of Man appears. In DanielÂ€ 7 two divine ï¬†gures
appear, the Ancient of Days, and the one like a son of man, #n) rbk, who arrives
on the clouds and is presented to the Ancient of Days. In 1Â€EnochÂ€46 the Head of
Days accompanied by the one with a human appearance is observed by the seer, who
asks his interpreting angel who that Son of Man is, where he came from and why he
accompanies the Head of Days. These are questions that occupy much of the rest of
the Par. En. and entertain the modern scholar as well. Before investigating in depth
the ï¬†gure of the Son of Man in Par. En., a comment must be made concerning the
origins of this ï¬†gure in DanielÂ€7.
Ever since Gunkel in 1895, scholars have sought an adequate explanation for the
origin and development of the extra-biblical ideas found in DanielÂ€7 in relation to the
ï¬†gure of the Son of Man. The quest has been centered on the beasts arising out of the
sea and the Son of Man accompanied by clouds. As John J. Collins says, the imagery
“alludes to a fuller narrative whose prototype must be sought outside the Hebrew
Bible.”1 Five areas have been mined for possible sources for these motifs.
1
John J. Collins, Daniel: A Commentary on the Book of Daniel (Hermeneia, Minneapolis:
Fortress Press, 1993) 280. In reaction to Arthur J. Ferch, The Son of Man in Daniel Seven
(Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews University Press, 1983) Collins helpfully discusses the
preliminary issues (pp.Â€281–82). a)Â€The search for parallels is not meant to posit that the
ï¬†gures in the Jewish texts are identical with those ï¬†gures adduced from extra-biblical texts,
but simply to elucidate the background and milieu from which particular characteristics may
have been borrowed. b)Â€The parallels do not have to correspond completely, but just enough
to make the allusion clear. An example is Mark 13:26, where the Son of Man is spoken of
as coming on the clouds: the verse does not incorporate all the details of Dan. 7:13, but
only enough to make the allusion clear. c)Â€The prototypes suggested need not be immediate,
but may have been mediated, for such suggestions are considered provisional until more
precise parallels are found. This is especially true for Daniel 7 and the proposed Canaanite
background as there are 1000 years between the Canaanite mythological texts and the
visions of Daniel. d)Â€The use of the background material need not be congenial at all with
the purposes of the author, but may have been taken over in order to assert the supremacy of
50
CO25117.indb 50 11/03/2011 11:58

The Son of Man in the Parables of Enoch 51
One possible area of inï¬‡uence has been thought to be Iranian literature, from
which the ï¬†gure of Gayomart emerges as a possible source for the idea of the Son
of Man.2 Gayomart, a primordial human being, was slain, descended to the under-
world, and was to be raised at the end of time. Some think he was to be reincarnated
as the savior, Shaoshyant. But this is unhelpful for illuminating DanielÂ€7, for the
Son of Man is not a primordial ï¬†gure, nor is he slain, nor does he descend to the
underworld.3 Confusing the issue, the ï¬†gure of Gayomart was a composite construct
based on scattered references in the Gathas and in the Bundahishn, which is a great
compendium of Zoroastrian theology that includes some ancient material but some
that is later than the ï¬†rst century ce.4 Further, as Collins points out, the ï¬†gure of the
Son of Man in the Jewish context, who is supposed to be preï¬†gured in the Gayomart/
Shaoshyant ï¬†gure, is a composite conglomerate of separate and distinct ï¬†gures from
Daniel, 4 Ezra, and Par. En., and it is highly unlikely “that the composite portrait
(had) any historical validity.”5 Added to all of this is the realization that the concept
sheds no light on the motifs of the beasts rising out of the sea and the ï¬†gure riding on
the clouds, which are contained in Daniel 7. Thus this feature of Iranian literature is
not helpful in elucidating the motifs in DanielÂ€7.
Hugo Gressmann (1929) sought to draw out similarities between the Sun god of
Egypt and the Ancient of Days of DanielÂ€7, but the similarities are too insubstantial.6
Babylonian literature has been investigated for similarities with the DanielÂ€7
material. Gunkel sought connections in the Enuma Eliš epic, but this has not stood
the test of time.7 More recently, Kvanvig (1988) in Roots of Apocalyptic has proposed
the Babylonian document, “Vision of the Netherworld” as a possiblity, for in it there
are hybrid animals, the god Nergal on a throne and a judgment scene.8 However, the
patterns of relationship in the “Vision of the Netherworld” are too different from
those of DanielÂ€7: the hybrid animals number 15, not four; the judgment is of the
Israel’s God. For example, Daniel is cast as a Babylonian wise man in the ï¬†rst chapters of
Daniel, but not in order to agree with Babylonian wisdom, but rather to claim that Daniel and
Daniel’s God are superior to Babylon’s wise men and gods. These preliminary issues put the
quest for the origin and development of Danielic ideas in their proper perspective.
2
Collins, Daniel, 282–83; Ferch, Son of Man, 49–54; Carstens Colpe, o( ui9o_j tou= a)nqrw&pou,
in Gerhard Kittel and Gerhard Friedrich, eds., Theological Dictionary of the New Testament,
Vol. VIII (trans. Geoffrey W. Bromiley; Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing
Company, 1972) 408. See also Boccaccini, Enoch and the Messiah Son of Man, 155–259,
for essays on the Son of Man from the 2005 Enoch Seminar in Camaldoli, Italy.
3
Ferch, Son of Man, 49–54.
4
Collins, Daniel, 282–83.
5
Collins, Daniel, 283.
6
Ferch, Son of Man, 48–49. Collins, Daniel, 283, rightly dismisses the possible Egyptian
connection in a single sentence. Colpe, o( ui9o\j tou= a)nqrw&pou, 409, also considers the
Egyptian connection untenable.
7
Ferch, Son of Man, 44–47. See also Colpe, o( ui9o\j tou= a)nqrw&pou, 409.
8
Collins, Daniel, 284–86; Helge S. Kvanvig, Roots of Apocalyptic: The Mesopotamian
Background of the Enoch Figure and of the Son of Man (WMANT; Neukirchen-Vluyn:
Neukirchener Verlag; 1988), 389–441.
CO25117.indb 51 11/03/2011 11:58

visionary, not the fourth beast as in DanielÂ€7; and the kingdom is not given to Nergal,
as it is to the Son of Man, for it is already his; and ï¬†nally the setting for the “Vision”
is hell, not Heaven.9 These patterns of relationship are too disparate to be of help in
elucidating the motifs in DanielÂ€7.
Ferch investigates the possibility that the source material for the ideas surrounding
the Son of Man is to be found in the Biblical parallels.10 While the concept of the Davidic
Messiah and the concept of the Son of Man share some traits, such as dominion, being
served by the people, and an everlasting kingdom, Ferch points out that the differences
are too great. Similarly, instances of the Son of Man (Md) Nb) in JobÂ€25:4–6, Ps 8:4,
and Job 15:18 are too dissimilar to be helpful in understanding the concept in DanielÂ€7.
Then Ferch examines the structure and unity of DanielÂ€7, and concludes that it has a
complex chiastic structure and is internally coherent (thus arguing against those who
posit an independent source for Dan.Â€7:9–10 and 13–14), and that it is essentially the
creation of its author.11 While this may be true, it does not explain the source and reason
for the inclusion of the ideas of the beasts arising out of the sea, and of the image of the
Son of Man arriving with the clouds. Further, the complex chiastic structure does not
preclude the possibility of the author of DanielÂ€7 borrowing ideas and concepts from
traditional materials. Thus Ferch’s hypothesis does not advance the inquiry into the
background and origin of the concept of the Son of Man.
Colpe argues against four ï¬†gures in Judaism as sources for the Son of Man
concept.12 1)Â€ Rabbinic Judaism entertains the concept of a gloriï¬†ed Adam as the
initiator of a new eon, but does not view that gloriï¬†ed Adam as a redeemer. 2)Â€Later
views of Adam Qadmōnī envision a gigantic Adam encompassing the whole earth, but
again the soteriological aspect is missing. 3)Â€The heavenly man of Philonic Judaism
has a cosmic dimension, but lacks the individuality of the Son of Man. 4)Â€Nor does
the Son of Man appear to be a manifestation of sofi/a. Thus, Colpe argues, Judaism
is not a likely source for the Son of Man concept.
The best candidate for an adequate background for the motifs of DanielÂ€7 (until
texts closer to the time of the composition of DanielÂ€7 are discovered) is the Baal cycle
of Canaanite mythology.13 Most pertinent are the similar patterns of thought. Baal is
often and clearly associated with the clouds, as is the Son of Man. El in Canaanite
mythology is called )abu šnm, or “father of years,”14 which is quite similar in
conception to Daniel’s “Ancient of Days.” Further, there is opposition between the sea,
9
10
11
12
Colpe, o( ui9o\j tou= a)nqrw&pou, 410–412; he also rejects Gnosticism and its precursors as a
suitable antecedent to the Son of Man concept, 412–15.
13
Collins, Daniel, 286–91. See also Colpe, o( ui9o\j tou= a)nqrw&pou, 415–19; Nickelsburg,
“Son of Man,” 137–38; and Norman Perrin, “Son of Man” in IDBSup (Nashville: Abingdon,
1976) 883.
14
Collins acknowledges other possibilities for translating the title, such as the “father of the
exalted ones,” or the “father of mortals,” or the “father of Shunem (supposedly one of the
gods),” but holds that none is as likely as “father of years.”
CO25117.indb 52 11/03/2011 11:58

which is the source for the chaos and conï¬‡ict, and the rider of the clouds. In Canaanite
mythology the challenge to Baal comes from the sea, while in DanielÂ€7 the four beasts,
to whom the Son of Man is opposed, arise out of the sea. In both texts, everlasting
dominion is bestowed, but both ï¬†gures remain subordinate to the high God.15 While
the multiple gods of the Canaanite myth do not appear in DanielÂ€7, and while there is
no concern for house-building in DanielÂ€7 as there is in the Canaanite myth, and while
there is no idea of the Son of Man dying and reviving as Baal does in the yearly cycle,16
nonetheless the patterns of relationship are complete enough to conclude that this is
the most adequate background for the ideas contained in DanielÂ€7.
The author of DanielÂ€7, while being creative and reinterpreting the mythic elements,
seems to have drawn on the Canaanite mythology for ideas not otherwise attested in the
Hebrew Bible.17 In turn, the author of Par. En. has been creative in reinterpreting the
Danielic vision. The portrayal of the Son of Man in Par. En. is now to be examined.
3.2â•‡ Exegesis of 1 Enoch 46:1–5

1Â€Enoch 46:1–5 is situated very near the beginning of the Second Parable, and contains
the ï¬†rst description of the Son of Man in Par. En. The Second Parable of Par. En. is
introduced by a brief chapter (45), which presents an overview of the subject-matter
of the Second Parable.18 This Second Parable, according to 1Â€EnochÂ€45, describes the
fate of sinners (45:2), the vision of the Elect One sitting on the throne of glory (45:3),
and the eventual satisfaction of the righteous ones (45:4–6). In 1Â€EnochÂ€46:1–5, then,
the vision itself begins with a description of two heavenly ï¬†gures.
3.2.1â•‡1 En. 46:119

1
Wa-baheyya re)iku za-lotu re)sa mawā(el wa-re)su kama ḍamr ṣa(ādā wa-meslēhu
kāle) 2za-gaṣṣu kama re)yata sab) wa-melu) 3ṣagā gaṣṣu kama )aḥadu em-malā)ekt
qeddusān.
And there I saw one who had a head of days, and his head was white like wool,
and with him was another, whose face had the appearance of a man, and his face
was full of grace like one of the holy angels.
15
Here Collins disagrees with Colpe, o( ui9o\j tou= a)nqrw&pou, who sees a rivalry between El
and Baal that only is resolved with the transfer of dominion from El to Baal.
16
Ferch, Son of Man, 65–77, points out these differences.
17
18
Morna D. Hooker, The Son of Man in Mark: A Study of the background of the term “Son
of Man” and its use in St Mark’s Gospel (Montreal: McGill University Press, 1967), 38.
Hooker notices that each of the three parables is introduced by a introductory chapter or
prologue.
19
Text and Translation are taken from Michael A. Knibb, The Ethiopic Book of Enoch. See also
Casey’s Aramaic reconstruction of this passage in Solution, 91–111.
CO25117.indb 53 11/03/2011 11:58

Variants
1
Wa-baheyya/and there: BMÂ€485, BMÂ€491, the uncorrected text of AbbÂ€35, AbbÂ€55
and TanaÂ€9 all omit wa-, a conjunction which helps the narrative ï¬‡ow more
smoothly.
2
za-gaṣṣu kama re)yata sab)/whose face had the appearance of a man: Berl has kama
gaṣṣa sab) gaṣṣu/like the face of a human was his face. Charles characterizes
Berl, or q in his enumeration of manuscripts, as “teeming” with errors, and yet
it “contains a larger number of unique original readings than any other used in
[his] text.”20 Neither Knibb nor Charles follows Berl at this point and in terms
of content both versions say the same thing. Instead of za-gaṣṣu, AbbÂ€35 simply
has gaṣṣu, omitting the relative pronoun. Perhaps AbbÂ€35 read wa-meslēhu kāle)
as the end of a sentence, in which case the relative pronoun was not needed
grammatically. Charles notes that AbbÂ€35 is highly corrected, and hardly ever
stands alone as preserving the original text.21 Again content is not signiï¬†cantly
altered by this variant.
3
ṣagā/grace: BMÂ€491 has ṣegā, merely a difference in orthography.
Notes
46:1â•‡ Baheyya/there:
This scene unfolds in heaven, to which the seer has been transported in his vision.
Not only does he claim that he was transported to the ends of heaven by a storm-
wind which snatched him up out of earth (1Â€EnochÂ€39:3), but also the Parables are
presented as an expansion and reiteration of Enoch’s ascent and journeys in the Book
of the Watchers, chaptersÂ€14–36. Further the presence of the interpreting angel and
the Chief of Days afï¬†rms the heavenly setting.
46:1â•‡ Re)sa mawā(el/head of days:

This name for God, re)sa mawā(el, “Head of Days,” occurs only in the Second
Parable and in the concluding chapter and it apparently depends on the nomen dei in
Dan.Â€7:9, Nymwy qyt(, Ancient of Days. It is less frequent than the more regular “Lord
of Spirits.” Its appearance in the visions seems to be generated by ideas which are
inspired by DanielÂ€7.22 The nomen dei is unique to Par. En.23
20
Charles, The Ethiopic Version of the Book of Enoch, xxiii.
21
Charles, The Ethiopic Version of the Book of Enoch, xxiii–xxiv.
22
Black, I Enoch, 193; VanderKam, “Righteous One,” 187, considers that the same is true for
the four designations of the “Son of Man” ï¬†gure, that they are conditioned by the Biblical
passages that are in the background.
23
Theisohn, Der auserwählte Richter, 16, notes that “Head of Days (re)sa mawa4(el)” as a
name for God is found only in Par. En. just as “Ancient of Days” is found only in Daniel 7.
Abraham Even-Shoshan, ed., A New Concordance of the Old Teastament (Jerusalem: “Kiryat
Sepher” Publishing House Ltd., 1983), reveals no instances of Mymyh #)r in the Hebrew
Bible.
CO25117.indb 54 11/03/2011 11:58

Re)sa/head has the bivalent meanings both of the “supreme one” or “sum total,”
and of the physical head of a person.24 R. H. Charles understands it in the sense of
“sum total,” and so translates “sum of days,” which he sees as equivalent to “the
Everlasting.”25 This he views as parallel to “the Ancient of Days” in Dan.Â€7:9.
Further, he considers that the phrase is used most appropriately in connection with
the Son of Man, for the two ï¬†gures are seen as correlative, since in 1Â€EnochÂ€46:2 the
seer wonders why the Son of Man went with the head of days. Lars Hartman thinks
that this ï¬†rst portion of the description is a quotation of Dan.Â€ 7:9, with the terms
“clearly borrowed from Daniel’s vision of God and the Son of Man.”26 Hartman fails
to comment, however, on the difference between Daniel’s “Ancient of Days” and
Enoch’s “Head of Days.” Norman Porteous concurs that the Ethiopic phrase was
“modelled” on Dan. 7:9, and meant “the Eternal,”27 as does John Collins.28
While it is generally agreed that the Ethiopic expression corresponds to Daniel’s,
it is by no means clear how Nymwy qyt(, “Ancient of Days” became re)sa mawā(el,
“Head of Days.” This nomen dei occurs in Par. En. nine times, and each time, in
differing syntactical contexts, the term is the same.29 Two Ethiopic manuscripts do
preserve the name of God altered to conform to the Danielic form at 1Â€EnochÂ€46:2
(in RylÂ€23) and 47:3 (in Ull), but, as Matthew Black points out, that simply means
scribes of these manuscripts correctly recognized the connection with DanielÂ€7, not
that an original reading has been preserved.30 The task of investigating this change
in terminology is hampered by two signiï¬†cant obstacles. One is that no Hebrew/
Aramaic or Greek version of Par. En. exists at the present time, and so there is no
earlier textual control to help in determining when or how the change might have
taken place. The second is that the text of 1Â€Enoch was not ï¬†xed in antiquity, either
24
Dillmann, Lexicon, 294–95, includes caput, summum, supremum, princeps.
25
Charles, The Book of Enoch or 1 Enoch, 85.
26
Lars Hartman, Prophecy Interpreted, Coniectanea Biblica (Upsala: Almquist & Wiksells,
1966), 119. Hartman helpfully discriminates the relative importance of the various parallel
passages, by setting out the passage in one column, and then dividing Biblical references
for the passage, or phrases within it, into ï¬†ve further columns. Italics in the passage and a
Biblical reference in the ï¬†rst column indicate a quotation. The 2nd col. of passages indicates
inï¬‡uence of the Biblical passage on the Enochic passage; the 3rd, that the motif is present in
both; the 4th, that the motif in 1 Enoch resembles the Biblical passage; and the 5th, that the
Enochic passage contains examples of phraseology similar to those in the Biblical passage.
Hartman italicizes the phrase, “head of days,” and lists Dan.Â€ 7:9 in the ï¬†rst column of
passages.
27
Norman Porteous, Daniel (2nd, rev. ed.; London: SCM Press, 1979), 107.
28
29
1Â€EnochÂ€46:2, 47:3, 48:2, 55:1, 60:2, 71:10, 12, 13, 14. The term which is more frequent
throughout the whole of Par. En., “Lord of Spirits,” also occurs in close proximity to “Head
of Days” in these chapters.
30
CO25117.indb 55 11/03/2011 11:58

in the Aramaic stage,31 or the Greek stage,32 and so subtle changes or theologically
motivated alterations could have been introduced at any time. Nevertheless, several
admittedly speculative possibilities present themselves as to how the change in termi-
nology might have happened.
Charles sees simply a semantic similarity between Daniel’s Nymwy qyt(, “Ancient of
Days” and re)sa mawā(el, “Head of Days” found in Par. En.33 The former means the
Everlasting, and similarly re)sa mawā(el, “sum of days,” or “Everlasting.” The Ethiopic
form for Charles is simply the semantic and functional equivalent of the Semitic concept.
Black investigates the difference between these two terms for God in Par. En.
and Daniel, and notes two possibilites.34 One explanation might be that in a Greek
version a)rxai=oj h9merw~n was changed to a)rxh_ tw~n h9merw~n under the inï¬‡uence
of passages such as Isa.Â€41:4, RevÂ€21:6, 22:13. 70Arxh_ tw~n h9merw~n then would
simply have been translated into re)sa mawā(el, “Head of Days,” with “head” having
the signiï¬†cance of “beginning, source.” According to this possibility, the signiï¬†cant
change came as a scribal error during the inner-Greek transmission of the text.
Black, however, prefers a second explanation, which he admits is improbable
at ï¬†rst glance, for it depends upon a “scribal blunder.” If the Greek which was
being translated into Ethiopic was o9 palaio_j tw~n h9merw~n, the scribe may have
misread—or misheard—kefa&laion tw~n h9merw~n. This, then, would have been trans-
lated re)sa mawā(el, “Head of Days.” Interestingly, there is support for this proposal
in the Septuagintal version of Dan.Â€7:9. The clause, bty Nymwyqyt(w appears as kai\
palaio_j h9merw~n e0ka&qhto. This form would ï¬†t Black’s proposal perfectly, for the
kai\ palaio&j could conceivably be misread or misheard as kefa&laioj.35 In this case
the error would have taken place either as a case of inner-Greek corruption, or during
translation into the Ethiopic language.
A fourth possibility is that the change occurred via Syriac. The translation of
the Bible into Ethiopic is thought to have taken place between the fourth and sixth
centuries ce with the help of Syriac-speaking monks.36 In Syriac, the term Nymwy qyt(w
31
J. T. Milik, The Books of Enoch: Aramic Fragments of Qumrân Cave 4 (Oxford: Clarendon,
1976), 288–89, shows that there were signiï¬†cant variations between manuscripts in the
astronomical book.
32
James C. VanderKam, “The Textual Base for the Ethiopic Translation of 1Â€Enoch” in
Working with No Data: Semitic and Egyptian Studies Presented to Thomas O. Lambdin
(David M. Golomb ed.; Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1987), 251. He points out that
signiï¬†cant variations exist between the different available Greek versions of the Book of the
Watchers. It seems likely that Greek was an intermediary language for the transmission of
the work into Ethiopic. Scholarly opinion for the most part has accepted the hypothesis that
the Ethiopic version is a tertiary translation of the original. Since no Greek Vorlage exists, or
an Aramaic Urschrift for Par. En. it is impossible to claim certainty about the base language
for the Ethiopic version of Par. En. Knibb, “The Date of the Parables of Enoch,” 351, argues
the opposite case for Par. En., that it can be traced back to a Semitic Vorlage.
33
Charles, 1 Enoch, 85.
34
Black, I Enoch, 192–93.
35
No textual evidence in the LXX exists for this proposal.
36
VanderKam, “The Textual Base for the Ethiopic Translation of 1Â€Enoch,” 251; E. Ullendorf,
CO25117.indb 56 11/03/2011 11:58

is translated (tyq ywmt). The monks presumably were aware of the Aramaic and
Greek sense of the term, but in an exegetical-interpretive move they emphasized the
idea of supremacy and so facilitated the translation to re)sa mawā(el.
At some later time in the transmission history of the Biblical material (Par. En.
was considered Scripture in the Abyssinian church) the change could have been
implemented. A revision standardizing the translation could have been done, without
regard for what appeared in the Vorlage.37
Three of these possibilities depend on some sort of scribal error or alteration in
transmission. The two possibilities Black discusses depend either on inner-Greek
corruption or on a translation error. Unfortunately, none of Par. En. has survived
in Greek, with the result that there is no textual evidence for the possibilities Black
proposes. Nor is there any textual evidence in the Septuagint at Dan.Â€7:9 for the kind
of confusion Black suggests, that kai\ palaio&j could have been misread or misheard
as kefa&laioj. So, because of the absence of textual evidence, Black’s hypothesis
remains speculative.
Further, according to Black’s view, the “scribal blunder” would have had to
extend to the other occurrences of the nomen dei. For the “blunder” to be carried
through, the combination kai\ palaio&j would have to appear in the base text each
time the name for God is used, otherwise the translator would recognize the error
and make appropriate corrections. The Name of God, re)sa mawā(el, “Head of
Days,” however, appears consistently, in various kinds of syntactic contexts.38 Thus
the “scribal blunder” could have worked only the ï¬†rst time (1Â€EnochÂ€46:2), where
the conjunction “and” (-w, kai/, wa-), appears. In the other instances, the error would
have come to light and been corrected, unless a later scribe for reasons of consistency
carried the “blunder” through. In this case, other semantic considerations are present
(see below). Black’s hypothesis of a “scribal blunder,” however, appears to be
untenable.
The consistency with which the name of God appears, then, suggests that the
change in terminology did not take place at the level of “scribal blunder.” An error
or a translation mistake would have been caught at subsequent occurrences of the
term and corrected consistently. The consistency of the nomen dei does suggest that
the change in terminology was a deliberate choice either on the part of the author
or on the part of the translator or on the part of a later revisor. If it was the author,
qty( and #)r overlapped signiï¬†cantly in meaning, as Charles suggested (the ï¬†rst
possibility noted above). If it was a translator, the change could have taken place
either at the Aramaic to Greek stage, or at the Greek to Ethiopic stage. qyt(/palai/
oj/a0rxai/oj and re)sa share a sufï¬†cient area in their ranges of meaning to warrant
Ethiopia and the Bible (The Schweich Lectures, 1967; London: Oxford for the British
Academy, 1968), 36–62; Ullendorf cites A. Rahlfs, “Die äthiopische Bibelübersetzung” in
Septuaginta-Studien I–II (2nd ed.; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1965), 659–81.
37
Suggested to me in private conversation by Eugene Ulrich.
38
1Â€Enoch 46:2, 47:3, 48:2, 55:1, 60:2, 71:10, 12, 13, 14.
CO25117.indb 57 11/03/2011 11:58

translating qyt(/palai/oj/a0rxai/oj as re)sa. The shared area of meaning would be

“sum total” in Aramaic,39 “eminent” in Hebrew,40 “time-honored, venerable” or “from
the beginning” in Greek,41 and “sum, supreme, chief” in Ethiopic.42 If, on the other
hand, it was a revisor after the translation was made, and the goal was to standardize
unevenness in that translation, the revisor could have been inï¬‡uenced by a passage
like Isa.Â€41:4, where in a context of judgment, God claims to be the ï¬†rst and the last
)wh yn) Mynrx) t)w Nw#)r hwhy yn). The God who speaks in Isa.Â€41:4 is the God who
is named in DanielÂ€7, and so the name could have been brought into conformity with
the words of God in Isaiah. The presumably Christian revisor would also have been
aware of God’s words in Rev.Â€21:6 and 22:13, where God says I am the Alpha and
Omega, the beginning and the end, h( a)rxh\ kai\ to\ telo&j. Again, in an apocalyptic
work that draws heavily on DanielÂ€7, as Par. En. did, terminology is used of God that
draws on the idea of beginning rather than antiquity (though both ideas are closely
related). This could have been further afï¬†rmation for a revisor to make the name of
God in Par. En. consistent. In all likelihood, for such a hypothetical revisor and even
for a translator, re)sa mawā(el, “Head of Days” would have been a legitimate, faithful
rendition of the name of God and would not have been considered a deliberate alter-
ation or change in God’s name. Because of the consistency with which the term is
used, the transformation from Nymwy qyt(, “Ancient of Days” to re)sa mawā(el, “Head
of Days” seems to have been deliberate, rather than in error. Thus, in the absence of
textual evidence for Black’s proposal, Charles’ suggestion of semantic and functional
equivalence is most satisfying as to how the Nymwy qyt(, “Ancient of Days” in DanÂ€7:9
became the re)sa mawā(el, “Head of Days” in 1Â€EnochÂ€46:1, with the possibility that
a later revisor further standardized the nomen dei.
46:1â•‡ Wa- re)su kama ḍamr ṣa(ādā/his head was white like wool:
This description of God conï¬‡ates two aspects of the description of God from DanielÂ€7.
In DanÂ€7:9, the divine being is depicted as wearing garments that were white as snow
(rwx gltk h#wbl), while the hair of the head of God is like pure wool ()qn rm(k h#)r
r(#w). But those two separate similes in Daniel are coalesced into one in Par. En. For
Jerome, the whiteness in appearance indicates fairness, uprightness, and maturity in
judgment;43 James A. Montgomery sees the white, hoary hair as “betokening (God’s)
venerableness, while the white vesture indicates unsullied majesty.”44 André Lacocque
39
Francis Brown, S. R. Driver and Charles A. Briggs, A Hebrew and English Lexicon of the
Old Testament (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1951), #)r head, chief, sum, 1112.
40
Brown, Driver and Briggs, Lexicon, qyt( eminent, surpassing choice, 801.
41
H. G. Liddell and R. Scott, Greek-English Lexicon (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1996) 251,
1290.
42
Dillmann, Lexicon, includes caput, summum, supremum, princeps, 294–95.
43
Gleason L. Archer Jr., tr., Jerome’s Commentary on Daniel (Grand Rapids: Baker Book
House, 1958), 78.
44
James A. Montgomery, The Book of Daniel (ICC 19; New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons,
1927), 298.
CO25117.indb 58 11/03/2011 11:58

sees the whiteness of clothing in Dan.Â€7:9 as indicating God’s innocence and purity,
while the white hair implied by the similarity to wool indicates God’s experience and
thus God’s trustworthiness.45 Collins notes that white hair is not attributed to God in
the Hebrew Bible, but that this passage in Par En. about God’s white hair is modelled
on DanielÂ€7.46 All of these qualities of fairness, uprightness, maturity in judgment,
venerableness, unsullied majesty, purity, and trustworthiness, which are conveyed in
Daniel’s two comparisons that God wears garments that were white as snow, and that
God’s hair is like pure wool, are to be attributed also to God in Par. En. through this
single metaphorical description that God has hair that is white like wool.47
46:1â•‡ Wa-meslēhu kāle)/and with him was another

za- gaṣṣu kama re)yata sab)/whose face had the appearance of a man:
The mention of another heavenly being in the scene with God matches Dan.Â€7:13,48
in which a human-like ï¬†gure (hwh ht) #n) rbk) approaches the Ancient of Days with
the clouds of heaven ()ym# ynn( M(), is presented before the Ancient of Days, and is
given dominion, glory and kingship. But here in Par. En. there is merely a concise but
clear allusion to the human-like ï¬†gure.49 The form walda sab), “son of man” is not
even used here in vsÂ€1, but only later, in vsÂ€2 is it employed for the ï¬†rst time. Because
the allusion to Dan.Â€7:13 is so concise, and yet, as the rest of the passage makes clear,
so precise, it would seem that the image from Dan.Â€7:13 was very familiar to author
and readers alike.
According to Hartman, these words are a continuation of a quotation of DanielÂ€7.
Hartman indicates this by putting the citation in his ï¬†rst column, and by italicizing
the words.50 If it is a quotation, it is an extremely truncated quotation, for missing
from 1Â€EnochÂ€46:1 are the mention of clouds, the approach and presentation to
the divine ï¬†gure, and the gift of dominion, glory and kingship. In 1Â€EnochÂ€46:1 a
second, noteworthy ï¬†gure is simply mentioned as being in the scene along with the
divine ï¬†gure. Rather than a quotation, this seems to be an extremely economical, but
absolutely clear allusion to DanÂ€7:13.
Theisohn, on the other hand, argues that Par. En. depends not on DanielÂ€7 but
upon a Vorlage, upon which DanielÂ€7 also drew.51 He points out that many similarities
exist between DanielÂ€7 and 1Â€EnochÂ€46, 47, but that signiï¬†cant differences also can
be noted. Similarities include the presence of two ï¬†gures, the terminology for “the
45
André Lacocque, The Book of Daniel (Atlanta: John Knox Press, 1979), 142.
46
47
In Rev 1:14, it is the Son of Man who is described as having head and hair that are white as
white wool and white as snow.
48
Perrin, “Son of Man,” IDBSup, 833–34; Nickelsburg, “Son of Man,” ABD VI.138–40.
49
Theisohn, Der auserwählte Richter, chapter 2, notes that DanÂ€7:13 appears to be reï¬‡ecting
an enthronement ceremony for the one like a son of man, while 1Â€EnochÂ€46 presumes the
status of the Son of Man. Missing from 1Â€EnochÂ€46 are the arrival of the Son of Man on the
clouds, and his being given dominion, glory and kingship.
50
Hartman, Prophecy Interpreted, 118.
51
CO25117.indb 59 11/03/2011 11:58

one like a son of man,” the description of the Ancient of Days/Head of Days, and
the heavenly setting. Structurally the visions are also similar, beginning with the
note that the seer saw a vision.52 The judicial role of the Ancient of Days, the open
books of judgment, a description of the throne, and the presence of the angelic host
are common to DanielÂ€7 and 1Â€EnochÂ€47.53 However, Thiesohn notes signiï¬†cant
differences.54 1Â€EnochÂ€46 seems to be much shorter, and has the appearance of a
summary,55 omitting the details of the throne (which are introduced in 1Â€EnochÂ€47),
the obvious courtroom setting, the clouds and the motion of coming to the Head of
Days. In 1Â€EnochÂ€46 the Son of Man is already present with the Head of Days, rather
than being presented. Further, 1Â€EnochÂ€46 includes a comparison to the graciousness
of the angels, which DanielÂ€7 does not. Theisohn also detects a difference in the roles
of the Son of Man in the two passages. The author of DanielÂ€7, he observes, has cast
the Son of Man as “eschatological Lord,”56 while in 1Â€Enoch his role is judicial. He
surmises that 1Â€Enoch preserves the judicial role assigned to the Son of Man in the
Vorlage, while DanielÂ€7 has reinterpreted the Son of Man by limiting the judicial role
to the Ancient of Days.
These similarities and differences observed by Theisohn, however, can be
explained in a simpler way. Theisohn himself describes the depiction of the scene in
1Â€EnochÂ€46 as being like a summary. In a summary the major details are repeated,
but not necessarily all of them. Here the two ï¬†gures are noted with some details of
description, but other details are omitted or developed. Second, the author may have
concentrated on the part of Daniel’s vision at the point after which the presentation of
the Son of Man has taken place. The two ï¬†gures are already together, so the motion of
coming is not necessary.57 Third, what role does an “eschatological Lord” have but to
participate in the judgment? The “Lord” in a courtroom is the judge. The Elect One,
an alternative term for this ï¬†gure, is clearly involved in judging (1Â€EnochÂ€45:3), and
so reducing the role of the Son of Man to “eschatological Lord” is no reduction at all.
Further, the comparison to the angels can be attributed to the creativity of this author,
who, as we shall see below, ï¬†lled out Daniel’s vision with characteristics from Isaiah
and Jeremiah. Since angels regularly populate heavenly courtrooms, it is not a big
step to envision angels in this scene. Finally, rather than positing a no-longer-existing
source, which was used by both authors, it is better to view the evidence as indicating
that Par. En. is a development of DanielÂ€7, given the differing purposes and historical
situations of each author. The points of contact are numerous enough to give the
real audience of Par. En. the necessary context, while at the same time encouraging
them to recognize a new message in a new historical setting. Thus it seems to me
52
53
54
55
Theisohn, Der auserwählte Richter, 16, “nimmt sich wie eine Zusammenfassung aus.”
56
Theisohn, Der auserwählte Richter, 30, “endzeitlichen Herrscher.”
57
Nickelsburg, “Son of Man,” ABD VI.139, also notes that in Par. En. “no mention is made,
as in Daniel, of the Son of Man coming with the clouds of heaven.”
CO25117.indb 60 11/03/2011 11:58

that the author of Par. En. precisely and concisely alludes to DanielÂ€7, but is intent
on conveying an updated apocalyptic message to his readership. Therefore it is not
necessary to posit a different Vorlage, but simply to afï¬†rm the conciseness and
precision of the author’s allusion to DanielÂ€7.
The presence of two central heavenly beings is noteworthy and seems to originate
ultimately in the Canaanite sources on which the Danielic and Enochic literature
drew.58 While the Ugaritic myths are not thoroughly reproduced, this variation from
the monotheistic view of God seems to have its roots in the Canaanite pantheon. The
conï¬‡ict between El and Baal is nowhere in view either in DanielÂ€7 or in Par. En.,
nor are any of the minor players in the Canaanite drama. Nonetheless, the presence
of two ï¬†gures, the ancient one and the human-like one, is illuminated by the ancient
Canaanite backdrop.
Further, one of the heavenly beings is described as being human-like in
appearance. This human-like appearance of a heavenly ï¬†gure, however, is not unique
to DanielÂ€7 and Par. En. In the vision of Ezekiel 1 the very ï¬†gure of God is spoken of
in a comparative and allusive way so typical of apocalyptic literature, where seated on
“the likeness of a throne” ()skh twmd) was “a likeness as it were of a human ï¬†gure”
(Md) h)rmk twmd), who is to be understood as God (Ezek.Â€1:26). In Dan.Â€8:15 and
9:21, Daniel sees a ï¬†gure with a human appearance (rbg h)rmk) who is addressed
as “Gabriel,” man of God. In Dan.Â€10:5, 18, and 12:6–7, Daniel sees human ï¬†gures
dressed in linen, that is, interpreting angels who comforted him after the fearful
visions he saw. In EzekielÂ€8–10, the prophet is accompanied by a human-like angelic
interpreter, as is Zechariah in Zech.Â€1:9–11 (the angel is standing amongst the myrtle
trees) and 2:5. Accompanying interpreting angels in human form are also spoken of
by Enoch in the Animal Apocalypse (1Â€EnochÂ€87:2, 90:14). Angels appear in human
form in other areas of the Biblical narrative as well: Gen.Â€18:2, where Abraham
welcomes three men who announce the birth of a son; JoshÂ€5:13, where Joshua is met
by a “commander of the army of the Lord” outside of Jericho; and Judg.Â€13:6, 9, 16,
where Manoah and his wife, before the birth of Samson, encounter an angel, whom
Manoah does not at ï¬†rst recognize as an angel of God. As Collins observes, habitually
in late prophetic and early apocalyptic writings, angels are represented by human
ï¬†gures.59 These representations of God and of angels in a human-like appearance
illustrate the frequency of heavenly beings described in human terms, and so the
human appearance of the heavenly ï¬†gure in Dan.Â€7:13 and 1Â€EnochÂ€46:1 is not at all
unusual.
46:1â•‡ Wa- melu) ṣagā gaṣṣu/and whose face was full of grace:
The word for grace, ṣagā, is listed by Dillmann as meaning gratia (charm, kindness,
thankfulness60), favor (favor, goodwill), benignitas (kindness, generosity), xa&rij
58
See the section on the Religio-Historical Background at the beginning of this chapter.
59
60
Translations of the Latin words are taken from D. P. Simpson, Cassell’s New Compact
CO25117.indb 61 11/03/2011 11:58

(favor, graciousness, goodwill, thankfulness), but for 1Â€EnochÂ€46:1 in particular,

suavitas (pleasantness, sweetness), and venustas (loveliness, attractiveness, charm)
are listed. Dillmann’s special entry for 1Â€EnochÂ€46:1 may seem to prejudge the
issue as to whether the description of the human-like ï¬†gure has to do merely with
appearance or whether it may indicate something of his character. A search of
biblical passages, however, for the phrase “full of grace (Nx y)lm, dsx y)lm)” yields
no comparable usage in scripture. The nearest phrase, dsx br, appears quite often
in the Psalms and the prophets, but it always describes the character of God, who
abounds in steadfast love (dsx), not God’s face.61 Thus the phrase, wa- melu) ṣagā
gaṣṣu, seems to refer to the physical appearance of the ï¬†gure, rather than to that one’s
qualities as being full of God’s favor, kindness and goodwill.
46:1â•‡ Kama )aḥadu em-malā)ekt qeddusān/like one of the holy angels:

A search of Even-Shoshan reveals that there are no parallels for this phrase in
the Hebrew Bible. Lamech, in col.Â€2 of the Genesis Apocryphon wonders if his
offspring’s conception was due to the Watchers and the Holy Ones, Ny#ydq Nmw, or
the Nephilim. The implication of his worry is that he looked like one of the angels.
But this similarity is not very precise. A partial similarity exists in ActsÂ€6:15, where
Stephen, as he is being interrogated by the council, is said to have a face like the face
of an angel (to_ pro&swpon au/tou= w(sei\ pro&swpon a)gge/lou). Here the comparison
is directly between a human face and an angelic face, while in 1Â€EnochÂ€46:1, the
comparison is between the face of a human-like, heavenly ï¬†gure and the angels.
Two other scriptural passages give a description of an angelic face. In Dan.Â€10:6,
and repeated in Joseph and AsenethÂ€14:9, the angel’s face is likened to lightning
(qrb h)rmk wynpw). A slightly different description of an angelic face is found in
RevÂ€10:1, where the seer sees an angel whose face is like the sun (to_ pro&swpon
au0tou= w(j o( h3lioj). The brightness of the angelic faces is consistent with the
brightness of the glory surrounding God in heaven.
The comparison of the face of the human-like, heavenly ï¬†gure to that of the
angels may tend to suggest that the human-like, heavenly ï¬†gure is one of the angels.
This, however, is not likely, because then the comparison would have no point: the
author simply would have identiï¬†ed the ï¬†gure as an angel. Further, this ï¬†gure, who
in the next verse is called walda sab), “Son of Man,” is ranked higher than the angels,
and distinguished from them, particularly from Michael in 1Â€EnochÂ€60:4–5, 69:14,
71:3, and from the four archangels in 71:8, 9, 13.62 Thus, even though he is compared
Latin-English English-Latin Dictionary (New York: Funk and Wagnalls, 1963), while trans-
lations of the Greek words are taken from Liddell and Scott’s Greek-English Lexicon (in one
of its several forms; Oxford: Clarendon Press).
61
Even-Shoshan lists Exod.Â€34:6, Num.Â€14:18, Neh.Â€9:17, 13:22, Pss.Â€5:8, 69:14, 86:5, 15,
103:8, JoelÂ€2:13, JonahÂ€4:2. Black, IÂ€Enoch, 206, includes some representatives of that list,
but adds John 1:14, equating melu) ṣaga4 with plh/rhj xa&ritoj.
62
Collins, Daniel, 80, referring also to Christopher Rowland, The Open Heaven (New York:
Crossroad, 1982), 94–113.
CO25117.indb 62 11/03/2011 11:58

to the angels, this human-like, heavenly ï¬†gure is not to be considered one of the
angels.
Hartman, drawing out a reference made by Charles,63 notices that David is
compared to the angels in several places, and that this adoption of the Davidic
epithet probably was deliberate in order to ascribe to the human-like, heavenly
ï¬†gure a messianic connotation.64 For example, Achish, a Philistine king, when telling
David that others mistrusted him, says, “You are blameless.â•›.â•›.as an angel of God”
(Myhl) K)lmk, 1Â€Sam.Â€29:9). Again, a woman of Tekoa, sent by Joab to David to
convince him to be merciful to Absalom, in her pleading says that David “the king
is like the angel of God” (Myhl)h K)lmk, 2Â€SamÂ€14:17, 20) in judging between
good and evil and that he has the wisdom of the angel of God (Myhl) K)lm tmkxk).
Similarly, Mephibosheth in 2Â€SamÂ€19:28, also pleading for mercy, likens David to
the angel of God (Myhl) K)lmk). Hartman points out that Zechariah, foreseeing
victory for Judah, likens the house of David to the angel of the Lord (hwhy K)lmk,
Zech.Â€12:8). This, Hartman claims, is a late text consciously adopting the Davidic
epithet. In a similar way, Hartman argues, the author of Par. En. uses this angelic
comparison deliberately to allude to Davidic messianic hopes, so that in some way
the hopes of his community might be tied to the hopes of restoration that a Davidic
messiah might bring about.
Several aspects, however, militate against Hartman’s analysis. One is that the
form of the comparison is different. Only one term, K)lmk, is common to both the
image in Par. En. and the passages in 1 and 2Â€Samuel. In Par. En., the phrase is kama
)aḥadu em-malā)ekt qeddusān/like one of the holy angels, while in the passages
from 1 and 2Â€Samuel, the phrase is Myhl) K)lmk/like an angel of God. In the phrase
in Par. En. the reference to “angels” is plural, a number is included, and there is no
reference to God, while in the passages in 1 and 2Â€Samuel, the reference to the angels
is singular, no number is used, and the divinity is mentioned. Therefore the impre-
cision of the form of this comparison is not conducive to seeing either a quotation or
in this case even an allusion.
Another factor is that the direction and nature of the comparison in each case
are different. In Par. En. the appearance of a heavenly being, the Son of Man, is
compared ï¬†rst to a human and then to the angels, while in the passages from 1 and
2Â€Samuel a human being, David, is compared to an angel. Further in Par. En. it is
the facial appearance that is compared to the angels, while in 1 and 2Â€Samuel it is the
whole person of David that is compared to an angel. Thus, the direction and nature of
the comparison are different and not conducive to seeing a quotation or an allusion.
Finally, the purpose of the comparison is different. In Par. En. the comparison
straightforwardly adds to the description of the Son of Man, while in the passages of
1 and 2Â€Samuel, the comparison is manipulative and meant to draw out a favor from
David on behalf of the one expressing David’s likeness to an angel of God. For all these
Charles, 1 Enoch, 85–86.

63

64
CO25117.indb 63 11/03/2011 11:58

reasons, Hartman’s suggestion that the angelic comparison is meant to awaken Davidic
connotations and messianic hopes can be seen to be creative but in the end unlikely.
1Â€EnochÂ€46:1, however, has the function of introducing the vision in which the
hopes of the community are tied to the human-like, heavenly ï¬†gure. In a concise but
precise allusion to DanÂ€7:9, 13, the author transports the reader to the heavenly scene
where God and God’s judicial partner are ready to pass judgment on the enemies of
the community. The brevity of the descriptions of God and the human-like ï¬†gure
are enough to emphasize the purity, innocence, venerableness, fairness and absolute
power and authority of those in charge of the judicial process, while at the same time
afï¬†rming the eventual positive out-come of the judgment for the faithful community.
Despite indications in the real world to the contrary, the message is that God is in
charge and will save and restore the righteous and faithful.
3.2.2â•‡ 1 En. 46:2
Wa-tase))elkewwo 4la)aḥadu )em-malā)ekt qeddusān za-yaḥawwer meslēya

5
wa-kwello 6xebu)āta 7za-)ar)ayani ba)enta 8zeku walda sab) mannu 9we)etu
wa-)em-)aytē yekawwen we)etu 10ba)enta ment mesla 11re)sa mawā(el yaḥawwer
And I asked one of the holy angels, who went with me, and who showed me all
the secrets, about that Son of Man who he was, and whence he was, and why he
went with the Head of Days
Variants
4
la)aḥadu )em-malā)ekt qeddusān/one of the holy angels: EthÂ€I, BodlÂ€5 and the uncor-
rected hand of Ryl omit qeddusān (the corrector of Ryl has inserted it interlinearly).
Ull reads la-mal)aka salām/to the angel of peace, but this is probably secondary.
Charles prefers la-mal)ak/to the angel, to reï¬‡ect a single angelus interpres.
5
wa-kwello/and all: Ull and BodlÂ€4 omit wa-; Charles notes that VatÂ€71 omits
wa-kwello.
6
xebụ)āta/secrets: Berl reads rā)yāta, visions.
7
za-)ar)ayani/who showed me: BMÂ€485, the uncorrected hand of AbbÂ€35 and AbbÂ€55
have za-yār)eyani/who would show me, the causative subjunctive, while the
corrected hand of AbbÂ€35 has za-)ār)eyani, an orthographic variant.
8
zeku walda sab)/that Son of Man: Tana 9 has za-tawalda )em-sab)/who was born of
man; BMÂ€491has weluda.
9
we)etu/he (is): omitted by Ull and four other manuscripts.
10
ba)enta ment mesla/why with: BMÂ€485 and AbbÂ€55 omit ment mesla, which then
might mean “concerning the Head of Days;” BMÂ€491, Berl and TanaÂ€9 omit ment
alone and the original hand of AbbÂ€35 omits ba)enta ment/why; all the variants
seem to be corruptions that make the question harder to read.
11
re)sa mawā(el/Head of Days: Ryl1 has preserved beluya mawā(el/Ancient of Days,
and as Knibb points out this is very similar to Dan.Â€7:9. It is likely to have been
CO25117.indb 64 11/03/2011 11:58

changed by a scribe who saw the connection to DanÂ€7:9 rather than preserving
an original reading.65 Ryl2 obelized the word and put re)sa in the margin in
conformity with the rest of the manuscripts; Berl omits it.
Notes
46:2â•‡ la)aḥadu )em-malā)ekt qeddusān/one of the holy angels. The accompanying
angel is a frequent and usual ï¬†gure in apocalyptic literature. The earliest representa-
tions of an angelus interpres in the Hebrew Bible are the seraphim who spoke to
Isaiah (Isa.Â€6:7) and the spirit who volunteers to entice Ahab (1Â€KgsÂ€22:21).66 The
angel of peace in Par. En. is usually traced to the envoys of peace (Mwl# yk)lm) in
Isa.Â€33:7, T.Â€DanÂ€6:5, T.Â€AsherÂ€6:6, T.Â€Benj.Â€6:1.67 The role of the interpreting angel
is very prominent in Zechariah, while in EzekielÂ€40–48 an angelic tour guide is
depicted.68 Gabriel becomes an interpreting angel in Dan.Â€9:21, and this role may be
referring back to the role of the interpreting angel in Dan.Â€7:16.69
The angelus interpres is portrayed in 1Â€Enoch as conversing with the seer and
showing the seer the sights and secrets of heaven. A variety of angels accompany
Enoch in the various parts of the book. In The Book of the Watchers, Uriel (19:1–2),
Raphael (22:3–13), Raguel (23:3–4) and Michael (24:5–25:6) explain the sights to
Enoch on his journey in heaven. Some of the sights he sees are explained as places
of punishment and conï¬†nement for the fallen angels and their followers, while
others are places of blessing, where the Lord sits on the throne (25:3) and where the
righteous will enjoy plenty (25:5, 26–32). In the Astronomical Book (72–82), only
one intrepreting angel, Uriel, is present, while in the Dream Visions (83–90) surpris-
ingly no angelus interpres is present. Similarly, chapters 91–107 make no mention of
an angelus interpres, while in the ï¬†nal chapter (108), again a vision, “one of the holy
angels who was with me,” is present to interpret the visions. In Par. En. sometimes an
unnamed angel and other times the “angel of peace” accompany the seer, while in the
Third Parable Michael also appears to interpret aspects of the visions. The unnamed
angel offers a message of hope for the righteous (see 1Â€EnochÂ€46:2, 52:6–9, 61:3–13)
while the “angel of peace” relates messages concerning the punishment which has
been prepared for the oppressors. Ironically, the message of this angelus interpres
conveys condemnation, not peace, to the kings and mighty ones, but their demise
produces peace for the righteous and elect (see 1Â€EnochÂ€53:4–5, 54:4–5, 56:2–3, 60:4).
Often meteorological and cosmological secrets are interpreted,70 but Michael in the
65
66
67
Black, I Enoch, 200; Charles 1 Enoch, 77.
68
Collins, Daniel, 311; see also Rowland, The Open Heaven, 200.
69
70
Michael J. Davidson, Angels at Qumran: A Comparative Study of 1Â€ EnochÂ€ 1–36, 72–108
and Sectarian Writings from Qumran (JSOT 11; Shefï¬†eld: JSOT Press, 1992), 93, notes
that angelic control of the meteorological and cosmological secrets implies an “orderliness
and integration of the cosmos.” See also Michael E. Stone, “Lists of Revealed Things in the
Apocalyptic Literature” in Magnalia Dei: The Mighty Acts of God; Essays on the Bible and
CO25117.indb 65 11/03/2011 11:58

concluding vision declares Enoch’s lofty status as the Son of Man (1Â€EnochÂ€71:14).
The effect of the angelus interpres is to make the seer’s message trustworthy.71
46:2â•‡ wa-kwello xebu)āta za-)ar)ayani/and who showed me all the secrets. This is
a typical qualifying clause frequently used of the angelus interpres (40:2, 8; 43:3;
46:2; 60:11). It is used of both “the angel” (40:2; 43:3; 46:2) and “the angel of peace”
(40:8), as well as of “the other angel” (60:112). The word xebu) is an adjective
but can be used as a substantive, especially in the plural. While the clause is used
of the angelus interpres, the concept of revealing secrets appears quite frequently
throughout Par. En., and seems to be one of the ways of describing the major subject
matter of the work. Comments on the revealed secrets can be divided into three areas:
personages connected with the secrets, topics related to the secrets, and secrets in the
context of other ancient literature.
Various Persons and the Secrets. Various personages are connected with the ideas
of secrets being revealed. The most obvious personages associated with the revelation
of secrets, as already noted, are the interpreting angels. They reveal the heavenly
secrets to the seer through speech, through showing, and through written material.
Mostly the interpreting angels converse with the seer, explaining the sights seen
and sharing information that relates to the vision. Once “the angel of peace,” while
encouraging the seer to be patient, also speaks of the necessity of waiting until the
secrets are revealed (52:5). Michael also reveals secrets by showing Enoch all the
secrets of mercy, the secrets of righteousness, and the secrets of the ends of heaven
and the storehouses of the stars and luminaries (71:3–4), acting as a tour guide. In
the Noachic section, Noah is instructed by Michael in the secrets that were preserved
in the book of Enoch (68:1). Here is an example of the revelation of secrets being
mediated through a book, which, of course, is also true of the Par. En. itself.72 So the
secrets are revealed through speech, through showing, and through written material,
by the agency of an angelus interpres.
Another kind of personage connected with the secrets is the fallen angels. In the
Book of the Watchers, the fallen watchers have inappropriately revealed secrets to
humanity, and so they receive God’s condemnation (16:3) This idea reappears in Par.
En., in the Noachic section, where Noah hears from Enoch that a command has gone
Archaeology in Memory of G. Ernest Wright, ed. Frank Moore Cross, Werner E. Lemke, and
Patrick D. Miller, Jr. (New York: Doubleday & Company, Inc.; 1976), 414–52, who notices
that meteorological and cosmological secrets form part of traditional materials that appear
in several different apocalypses.
71
Davidson, Angels at Qumran, 77, notes that the function of the interpreting angels is that as
they “move around the universe, conï¬†dently explaining its mysteries,” they convey to the
reader an awareness “that the world and its future are ï¬†rmly under divine control,” and that
derivatively, Enoch’s word is also trustworthy.
72
Outside of Par. En., when Enoch reassures Lamech that Noah is indeed his son, and not one
of the sons of the watchers, Enoch appeals for authority to the secrets (mešṭirāta) which the
holy ones had revealed to him (106:19). The word for “secret” is different from that used
throughout Par. En., but the concept is the same.
CO25117.indb 66 11/03/2011 11:58

out from God regarding humanity who have learned from the secrets of the angels
and perpetrated inappropriate activities such as sorcery, magical spells, and idolatry
(65:6). In the list of angels, in the Noachic section, the angels and their wrongdoings
are speciï¬†ed. Pēnēmue is accused of having taught humanity the secrets of sophistry
(or the “secrets of wisdom”) in an inappropriate manner (69:8) and of having taught
them to write with pen and ink (69:9–12),73 which was not ï¬†tting and yielded the result
of human destruction. Kasbeel is also accused of seeking to discover from Michael the
hidden Name, so that he might use it in an oath, which would cause his fellow fallen
watchers, who had revealed the secrets to humanity, to tremble before him (69:14–16).
Thus sometimes heavenly secrets can be inappropriately revealed, as the fallen watchers
had done with detrimental effects for the humans who learned those secrets.
The counterpart to the angelus interpres who reveals secrets is the seer to
whom they are revealed. In the course of the report of the visions, Enoch mentions
several times that he has seen secrets in his visions (41:1,3; 52:2; 59:1–3), and once
he queries the angel about the secrets he has seen (52:3).74 These secrets relate to
judgment, to the forces of nature, and to the vision of the metallic mountains. That
the seer sees secrets is to be expected, and is simply a corollary of the concept that
the angelus interpres reveals them.
Another personage beneï¬†ting from the revealed secrets is the divine ï¬†gure. The
secrets about the righteous and those about sinners are informative for the divine
judge in the judgment that is about to take place (38:3). The Elect One will judge
without fear of reversal because the secrets are known to him (49:2, 4), while the Son
of Man will reveal the treasures of that which is hidden for the demise of the kings
and mighty ones and for the beneï¬†t of the righteous and elect (46:3). The divine
judgment that follows from revealing the secrets resounds throughout the heavens,
and Michael claims to shudder in fear because of both the severity of it and its appro-
priateness (68:2, 5). The idea is surely not that the divine ï¬†gure did not know what
was formerly a secret and could not judge until the secret had been revealed, but
rather that those secrets about the righteous and about the sinners justify the severity
and appropriateness of it. In this sense, the secrets also beneï¬†t the divine judge.
Finally, in some instances, the secret things are appropriate for humans to know.
In contrast to the secrets revealed by the fallen watchers, which were not meant to
be known by humans, some secrets are for human beneï¬†t. The righteous will revel
in the secrets of wisdom from the mouth of the Elect One (51:3), and they are to
seek out the secrets of righteousness (58:5). Even the kings and mighty ones, as they
are being judged and as they cry out for mercy, wish that every secret thing may be
brought to light that God might be gloriï¬†ed (63:3). Indeed, Par. En. itself reveals the
knowledge that blessing is in store for the righteous and that punishment is waiting
73
Ironically, the authors of Par. En. and the Noachic source both are using the very technology
that is decried in this passage.
74
In the Dream-Vision (83:7), Enoch also reassures Methuselah by recounting for him the
vision he had seen regarding the secrets about the sins of the earth and how it would sink
into the abyss to destruction.
CO25117.indb 67 11/03/2011 11:58

for the wicked. While this may appear to be a secret to the righteous because they
are oppressed and in their oppression they have no knowledge of it, it is precisely the
message the seer brings for their hope and encouragement. The whole purpose is to
reveal this great truth, and it is an appropriate secret to be revealed as well as to be
sought out.
The Subject Matter of the Secrets. The subject matter of the secrets includes a
wide range of topics. One aspect of the revealed secrets is the cosmological and
meteorological working of the universe. Enoch sees the secrets of the thunder and
lightning, the winds and the clouds and the dew (41:3; 59:1–3; 60:11–22), and
Michael also shows him similar secrets (71:4). These forces of nature were myste-
rious to the ancient mind, and for a seer to have their secrets revealed to him was a
mark of great knowledge that authenticated his message. He had truly been privy to
heavenly workings.75
Another area of the contents of the revealed secrets is the area of the knowledge
of future events and how judgment relates to it. As already noted, part of the basis
for judgment is the secrets of the sinners and the secrets of the righteous. In these
cases the use of the genitive indicates the quality of sinfulness or of righteousness,
rather than individual actions carried out by sinners or the righteous. There is secret
knowledge in the heavens that Enoch has seen which will lead to the judgment of
the wicked (38:3). There is secret knowledge regarding righteousness which will
not be contradicted, by which the Elect One will judge (49:2, 4). There is the secret
knowledge of future events which are destined to happen on earth (52:2), of how
kingdoms will be divided and how the actions of individuals are weighed in the
balance (41:1). This knowledge is secret, because it ï¬‡ies in the face of the reality
that the community is facing, yet Enoch brings hope and encouragement through
the revelation of such secrets, since the judgment will condemn the wicked and the
oppressors and vindicate the righteous.
Sometimes these secrets are described in terms that connect them with virtues.
There are secrets of wisdom. Wisdom topics are revealed to the delight of the
righteous (51:3), and the creation of the world and its foundation are subjects of the
oath that Kasbeel would use (69:16–25). Because nature is securely bound by oath
under the control of the angels, humans may live in peace. Secrets of righteousness
(49:2) will be a blessing for the righteous, and they are to seek them out (58:5).
Michael revealed the secrets of righteousness as well as the secrets of mercy to Enoch
as he was translated (71:3).
Occasionally, the secrets of the cosmological and meteorological working of the
universe are noted in conjunction with the secrets of the judgment and future events
(41:1–9; 60:11; 71:3–4). While the revelation about judgment and the reversal of
fortunes seems to be the major emphasis of Par. En., the claim that the seer also
knows the cosmological and meteorological secrets authenticates the major emphasis.
75
Cf. again, Stone, “Lists of Revealed Things,” 414, 435, who sees these secrets as a part of
traditional lists of revealed things that were the subject matter of apocalyptic speculation.
CO25117.indb 68 11/03/2011 11:58

The relation between the two areas of secret knowledge seems to be that if the
seer knows one area, then surely his knowledge is trustworthy in the other area as
well. Thus, while sometimes only the cosmological and meteorological secrets are
mentioned, and at other times secrets about the judgment are claimed, actually the
two are conjoined with the ï¬†rst area authenticating the second area.76
When the secrets revealed by the fallen watchers are discussed, they refer
to knowledge and skills given to humans in their earthly life (16:3; 65:6; 69:8).
These secrets were not to be revealed to humanity and their revelation came about
inappropriately.
The Revelation of Secrets in early Jewish Literature. As noted above, Par. En. is
written from the perspective that some secrets have been inappropriately revealed,
while others are appropriate for dissemination. Both these views can be found in
the Hebrew Bible and related ancient literature as well, and the revelations to Enoch
are an expected feature within apocalyptic literature. The Deuteronomic view, that
secret things belonged to God, and revealed things belonged to humans for their
living under the Torah (Deut.Â€29:28), expressed a pre-apocalyptic understanding
that some knowledge was to be left uninvestigated as God’s domain, while revealed
knowledge was to be used for proper living. The prophets were seen as the mediators
of the revelation of God’s plans (AmosÂ€3:7), and, like Ezekiel, they were to declare
all they had seen to the house of Israel (EzekÂ€40:4; cf. ZechÂ€1:9; MicÂ€7:15). That
prophetic mandate to declare God’s plans to the people then became the rationale
the apocalyptic writers claimed in order to authenticate their messages: they were
revealing what God wanted them to reveal. The motif of revealed secrets occurs in
both Wisdom Literature and Apocalyptic Literature. The types of revealed secrets
include the cosmological and meteorological secrets (see SirachÂ€4:18, 45:15–21),
the interpretations of dreams (Dan.Â€2:22, 27, 29, 30), as well as the revelation
of the future course of events (2Â€Macc.Â€12:41; 2Â€EsdrasÂ€10:38, 14:5). Surprisingly,
the speciï¬†c mention of secrets being revealed occurs quite rarely. Few authors say
explicitly that secrets are being revealed. The exceptions are the dream interpretations
of DanielÂ€2 and the visions of Par. En., where as noted above, the revealing of secrets
is associated with the interpreting angels as well as with the seer. The function of
revealing secrets, however, is a major feature of apocalyptic literature in general, that
the individual seers are sharing revealed secrets, and that those secrets are appropriate
for humans to know and are beneï¬†cial for them in the crises of their lives. Thus Par.
Stone, “Lists of Revealed Things,” 414, 435, suggests the lists that include the cosmological
76
and meteorological secrets as coming either at the high point of the visionary experience or
as summaries of the subject matter revealed to the seer. In 1Â€Enoch, the cosmological and
meteorological secrets function as summaries in such a way as to authenticate the message of
the seer regarding judgment. 1Â€EnochÂ€22 can also be referred to as having a similar dynamic.
On the tours of heaven the seer is shown four hollows, in which the souls of people who have
had various types of life and death are kept until the final judgment. The hollows are a part
of the universe, as if to claim that just recompense is a certainty, especially for those who
have been oppressed or persecuted in this life.
CO25117.indb 69 11/03/2011 11:58

En. makes it explicit that secrets are being revealed to Enoch, secrets that will beneï¬†t
the community, while at the same time it recognizes that some secrets such as those
revealed by the fallen watchers ought not to have been revealed (cf. DeutÂ€29:28). For
Par. En., the revelation of the cosmological and meteorological secrets authenticates
Enoch’s revelation of the secrets regarding the judgment of the oppressors and the
reversal of fortunes for the righteous.
46:2â•‡ ba)enta zeku walda sab)/about that Son of Man:

As noted in the Introduction earlier, three terms for the Son of Man are used in Par.
En.,77 walda sab), walda be)si, and walda )egwāla )emma-ḥeyāw. As many have noted,
the terms occur in the following locations: walda sab) occurs only in the Second
Parable, at 1Â€EnochÂ€46:2, 3, 4, and 48:2; walda be)si occurs in the Third Parable and
the concluding chapters, at 1Â€EnochÂ€62:5, 69:29 (twice), and 71:14; walda )egwāla
)emma-ḥeyāw occurs most frequently (eight times), also in the Third Parable and the
concluding chapters, at 1Â€EnochÂ€62:7, 9, 14, 63:11, 69:26, 27, 70:1, 71:17.78 The three
terms appear to be synonymous, for the components of each term seem to be used in
synonymous ways in the translation into Ethiopic of the Hebrew Bible and the New
Testament.79 As VanderKam has suggested, the term used in each particular instance
may depend somewhat on the context and the passages being alluded to from the
Hebrew Bible.80 Together with the “Righteous One,” the “Anointed,” and the “Elect
One,” they refer to the messianic ï¬†gure, who is the ï¬†nal judge. Here in 1Â€EnochÂ€46:2
the term used is walda sab). It also occurs at 46:3, 4, and 48:2. The context of the
verse shows clearly that this term is derived from DanÂ€7:13, although the preposition
indicating comparison has been lost. In Dan 7:13, the ï¬†gure is referred to as #n) rbk,
“one like a son of man,” i.e. someone of human-like appearance, whereas here in
1Â€EnochÂ€46:2, the ï¬†gure is straightforwardly zeku walda sab), that Son of Man, who
had just been seen in the vision. In 46:1 the author indicated that the second ï¬†gure had
a human-like appearance, but here in this verse, with the use of the demonstrative,
that second ï¬†gure is now described as that Son of Man.
The use of a demonstrative adjective with the term “Son of Man” is a curious
oddity of Par. En., and various attempts to understand its signiï¬†cance have been
made. It is even more curious when one notes that the term “Elect One” never occurs
with a demonstrative, and that the term “Lord of Spirits” occurs occasionally but
not always with a demonstrative.81 A demonstrative adjective occurs with the term
“Son of Man” 11 out of 16 times (see Table 1). Here at 1Â€EnochÂ€42:6 the use of the
77
VanderKam, “Righteous One,” 174–5. See Colpe’s thorough article, o( ui9o\j tou= a)nqrw&pou,
TDNT VIII, 400–477, esp. 423–26, for its appearances in 1Â€Enoch.
78
For example, Charles, The Book of Enoch, 86, VanderKam, “Righteous One,” 174–75, and
79
80
81
E.g. Casey, “The Use of the Term ‘Son of Man’ in the Similtudes of Enoch,” 14–17; many
other scholars have noted and commented upon this phenomenon.
CO25117.indb 70 11/03/2011 11:58

demonstrative adjective zeku, “that,” is completely appropriate, as it functions to refer

back to the human ï¬†gure just seen in 1Â€EnochÂ€46:1.
Table 1 shows the following uses of the demonstrative adjective:
a) zeku, “that,” occurs at 46:2 and 48:2 in the Second Parable, and at 62:5, 9, 14, and
63:11 in the Third Parable;
b) zentu, “this,” occurs only once, in the Second Parable at 46:4 in the angel’s
answer to Enoch’s question regarding the “Son of Man” he had just seen.
c) we)etu, “that,” occurs at 69:26, 29 (twice), 70:1 and 71:17; and
d) and ï¬†ve times, the term “Son of Man” occurs without a demonstrative adjective,
at 46:3, 60:10, 62:7, 69:27, and 71:14.
Table 1
Distribution of Demonstrative Adjectives with the Terms for “Son of Man”
Parable 1Â€Enoch Demonstrative walda sab) walda be)si(t) walda )egwāla

or qualifier )emma ḥeyāw
2nd 46:2 zeku •

46:3 — •
46:4 zentu •
48:2 zeku •
3rd 60:10 — ()anta we)etu) • (as a Vocative)
62:5 la-zeku • (in Eth. I)
walda be)sit (in Eth. II)
62:7 — •
62:9 la-zeku •
62:14 zeku •
63:11 zeku •
69:26 we)etu •
69:27 — •
69:29 we)etu •
69:29 we)etu •

Epilogue 70:1 we)etu •
71:14 — •
71:17 we)etu •
In the latter three occurrences a demonstrative is not used because they are in close
proximity to occurrences with a demonstrative. The ï¬†rst two occurrences, however,
require comment. At 1Â€EnochÂ€46:3 a demonstrative pronoun does appear, zentu
we)etu walda sab)za-lotu kona ṣedq, “this is the Son of Man who has righteous-
ness.82 It forms the ï¬†rst part of the angel’s response to Enoch regarding the “Son of
Man” he had just seen. But this is a different use of the demonstrative from the other
The word we)etu can also function as a demonstrative, “that,” but in this instance it probably
82
is to be understood as the pronominal equivalent of the verb “to be,” since in the other
instances of the demonstrative with “Son of Man” the demonstrative is zeku.
CO25117.indb 71 11/03/2011 11:58

demonstratives used with the term “Son of Man”: here the demonstrative is used
as a pronoun rather than as an adjective. Therefore I have listed this occurrence of
the term “Son of Man” here, as an instance without the demonstrative adjective. At
1Â€EnochÂ€60:10 the term “Son of Man” is used in the vocative, )anta we)etu walda
sab), reminiscent of the usage of the term in Ezekiel.83
What does the use of the demonstrative adjective indicate about whether the term
“Son of Man” is a title? Some have seen the demonstrative as reï¬‡ecting a deï¬†nite
article in the Vorlage and thus indicating the term was a title.84 But as Sjöberg85
and Casey86 show, this is unlikely, since the demonstrative is used inconsistently,
sometimes present and sometimes not, as noted above, and its absence militates
against the view that the demonstrative reï¬‡ects a deï¬†nite article, which would
indicate titular usage. Further, while the term “Elect One” does function as a title, a
demonstrative adjective is not used in any of its occurrences. Therefore, it is unlikely
that the term “Son of Man” is a title in Par. En., but as Sjöberg suggests it may have
become a ï¬†xed term referring to the heavenly ï¬†gure by the end of the work.87 Black
argues similarly, suggesting that the few instances where the demonstrative is not used
perhaps indicate that the term “Son of Man” does function as a title in those locations.
It is unlikely however, that the author would use the term as a title in so few instances,
intermingled with non-titular uses. Black goes on to suggest that the demonstrative
we)etu in the Third Parable and Epilogue perhaps functions as a self-referring
pronoun, analogous to the self-referring usage of the pronoun au)to&j in Greek, or the
use of )wh in Aramaic or Hebrew. Black argues that this is an idiomatic usage to refer
to a special personage, and that the Vorlage may have had Md) Nb/)#n rb )wh. This
he suggests is “a solemn designation.â•›.â•›.well on the way to becoming a title.”88 This
perhaps is the best way of understanding the presence of the demonstrative adjective.
The use of the demonstrative here in 1Â€EnochÂ€46:2 seems to be a perfectly normal
usage, functioning in such a way as to refer back to the Son of Man seen in 1Â€EnochÂ€46:1,
and it helps to specify that a distinct individual is meant, not just any human being.
83
It is also generally accepted that this instance is attributable to a different author, the author
of the Noachic section.
84
Charles, 1 Enoch, 86–87. Colpe, o( ui9o\j tou= a)nqrw&pou, 423, also argues that the use of the
demonstrative, as well as “the alternation of expressions,” prove that the term was not a title.
85
86
Casey, “The Use of the Term ‘Son of Man’ in the Similtudes of Enoch,” 14.
87
Sjöberg, Der Menschensohn, 46–47. Curiously, as Sjöberg points out, the demonstrative is
used of God, we)etu )egzi)a manāfest/that Lord of Spirits,” in 1Â€EnochÂ€62:10. “Lord of Spirits”
certainly appears to function as a title, and therefore does not ever need a demonstrative, but it
appears here, indicating some sort of difference from the English usage of demonstratives.
88
Black, I Enoch, 207; T. W. Manson, “The Son of Man in Daniel, Enoch and the Gospels,”
in Studies in the Gospels and Epistles, M. Black, ed. (Philadelphia: Westminster Press;
1962), 130, depending on Sjöberg, suggests the demonstrative hints at a special use of “Son
of Man.” Nickelsburg, “Son of Man,” ABD VI.139, suggests that the demonstratives “very
likely reproduce the article in the earlier Greek form of the Parables. Thus the text refers
back to a known ‘son of man,’ the one already introduced.” He does NOT see the demon-
strative as indicating that the term was titular.
CO25117.indb 72 11/03/2011 11:58

In Hebrew and Aramaic the term Md) Nb/)#n rb is an idiomatic way of referring to
a member of the human race.89 As many have pointed out,90 the rendering of this term
into other languages has resulted in the appearance of non-idiomatic expressions,
such as o( ui9o\j tou= a)nqrw&pou in Greek, which literally means “the son of the man”
and betrays itself as being “a translation or a mistranslation of a Semitic idiom.”Â€91
Since Ethiopic is a Semitic language, the translation of the construct term carries the
same idea of a member of the human race.
In Par. En., however, there is the added dimension that this human ï¬†gure is also a
particular ï¬†gure, with a particular function in the heavenly court, as seen in the vision.
Further the term in Par. En. carries messianic overtones. Adela Yarbro Collins argues
that already in Dan.Â€7:13, which is the origin of the term in Par. En., the concept
of Md) Nb/)#n rb is an allusion to the son of man in Psalm 8 and related psalms,
where the term was interpreted messianically at the time Daniel was composed and
read.92 She goes on to point out that even though Par. En. and 4Â€EzraÂ€13 are literarily
independent, they both treat the Son of Man messianically. Further Par. En. uses
four terms for the messianic ï¬†gure, the “Righteous One,” the “Anointed,” the “Elect
One,” as well as “that Son of Man,” but these terms are used to refer to the same
ï¬†gure.93 Adela Yarbro Collins then concludes that the independent uses of Dan.Â€7:13
in 4Â€Ezra and Par. En. indicate that “a tradition had developed prior to the compo-
sition of both works that the ‘one like a son of man’ in DanielÂ€7 should be understood
as the messiah.”94 If that is true, then it must also be asserted that, not only had the
interpretive tradition developed that the ï¬†gure of Daniel 7 should be understood
messianically, but also the concept of the Son of Man as a heavenly, messianic ï¬†gure
had developed. It was no longer just a symbolic metaphor for an angelic being or for
the saints of God, but had become an individualized member of the heavenly court,
who was the subject of such interpretations. Both the Son of Man in Par. En. and the
ï¬†gure in 4Â€Ezra are manifestations of that developing concept of the Son of Man.
The function of this verse then is to narrow further the interest of the author.
Where in the ï¬†rst verse the vision presents the Head of Days as the main ï¬†gure of
the vision, with the human-like ï¬†gure in a secondary position of accompanying the
Head of Days, this verse focuses on the second ï¬†gure and refers to him as “that Son
89
In Par. En., the plural form, weluda sab), appears in 69:6, 14, for example, referring to
humanity in general. See also Casey, Solution, 55. His whole first chapter, “The State of
Play,” 1–55, proposes that translation techniques or strategies need to be taken seriously for
the solution. He argues that the term in the Parables can only be understood in the general
sense referring to a member of the human race. See especially p. 97.
90
Colpe, o( ui9o_j tou= a)nqrw&pou, 401–402; Yarbro Collins, “The Origin of the Designation of
Jesus as ‘Son of Man’,” 391–92.
91
Yarbro Collins, “The Origin of the Designation of Jesus as ‘Son of Man’,” 394.
92
Adela Yarbro Collins, “The Apocalyptic Son of Man Sayings,” in The Future of Early
Christianity, ed. Birger Pearson (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress, 1991), 221–24.
93
Yarbro Collins, “The Apocalyptic Son of Man Sayings,” 224; see also VanderKam,
“Righteous One,” 185–86.
94
Yarbro Collins, “The Apocalyptic Son of Man Sayings,” 224.
CO25117.indb 73 11/03/2011 11:58

of Man.” The focus has shifted now to the Son of Man, who takes center stage as the
seer asks questions concerned with his identity, origins and purpose.
46:2â•‡ mannu we)etu wa-)em-)aytē yekawwen we)etu ba)enta ment mesla re)sa
mawā(el yaḥawwer/who he was, and whence he was, and why he went with the Head
of Days:
As Daniel asks the interpreting angel (Dan.Â€7:16) concerning the visions he saw,
so the seer of Par. En. asks the interpreting angel concerning the Son of Man, who
he was, where he was from, and why he was accompanying the Head of Days. The
set of three questions is not found in the Hebrew Bible, and therefore can be seen
as an explanatory expansion on the subject of the query regarding the Son of Man.
While the angelus interpres begins to answer these questions in the next verse, they
are also precisely the questions that are answered throughout the rest of Par. En..
These questions set out the programmatic ï¬‡ow of the rest of the discourse, and raise
curiosity in the reader’s mind about who this heavenly human ï¬†gure really is. The
Son of Man is revealed to be the eschatalogical judge, who has been hidden in the
heavens, and who accompanies the Head of Days in order to carry out judgment.
3.2.3â•‡ 1 En. 46:3

12
Wa-)awše)ani wa-yebēlani zentu we)etu walda sab) za-lotu kona 13ṣedq wa-ṣedq
meslēhu 14xādara 15wa-kwello mazāgebta 16za-xebu) we)etu yekaššet )esma
)egzi )a 17manāfest 18kiyāhu 19xāreya 20wa-za-keflu kwello mo)a baqedma )egzi)a
manāfest ba-ret( 21la-(ālam.
And he answered me and said to me, “This is the Son of Man, who has right-
eousness, and with whom righteousness dwells;95 and he will reveal all the
treasures of that which is secret, for the Lord of Spirits has chosen him and
through uprightness his lot has surpassed all before the Lord of Spirits forever.
Variants
12
Wa-)awše)ani/And he answered me: Ull and CurzonÂ€56 omit the wa-/and.
13
ṣedq/righteousness: Berl AbbÂ€55 and TanaÂ€9 have ṣedqa.
14
xādara/dwells: Berl omits.
15
wa-kwello mazāgebta.â•›.â•›.yekaššet/he will reveal all the treasures: This is the wording
of Ryl, with kwello accusative singular and mazāgebta accusative plural. BMÂ€485
has wa-kwellomu mazāgebta.â•›.â•›.yekaššet/he will reveal all the treasures, with
the sufï¬†x of kwellomu and mazāgebta accusative plural. BMÂ€491 has wa-kwello
mazgebta.â•›.â•›.yekaššet/he will reveal all the treasures, an orthographical variant
of Ryl’s reading. Berl has wa-kwellu mazāgebt.â•›.â•›.yekaššet/he will reveal all the
treasures, with kwellu in the nominative singular and mazāgebt in the nominative
95
Literally: “to him became righteousness, and righteousness dwelt with him.”
CO25117.indb 74 11/03/2011 11:58

plural. TanaÂ€9 puts it in the passive, wa-kwello mazāgebt.â•›.â•›.yetkaššat/and all the

treasures.â•›.â•›.will be revealed, with kwello in the accusative singular and mazāgebt
in the nominative plural. The variations in case and number are examples of the
ï¬‡exibility of Ethiopic grammar, in which case and number do not appear always
to agree strictly.
16
za-xebu)/that which is secret: BMÂ€491 has za-xebu)a, which makes it agree in case,
though not in number, with mazāgebta.
17
manāfest/Spirits: BMÂ€485 has manfasāt, an orthographical variant.
18
kiyāhu.â•›.â•›.manāfest: Berl omits the whole clause due to homoioteleuton.
19
xāreya/has chosen: TanaÂ€9 has xadara/he dwelt, perhaps an aural error.
20
wa-za-keflu kwello/and his lot.â•›.â•›.all: many manuscripts omit kwello, while three
manuscripts have wa-za-kwello/and everything.
21
la-(ālam/forever: AbbÂ€5, Ull, BodlÂ€4 have za-la-(ālam/which is forever. Adding the
relative pronoun attributes eternity to ret(/uprightness, rather than to the triumph
(mo)a) of the Son of Man’s lot. TanaÂ€9 has za-lā(la/which is upon him.
Notes
46:3â•‡ Wa-)awše)ani wa-yebēlani/And he answered me and said to me:
As the interpreting angel responded to Daniel’s questions (Dan.Â€7:16), so the angelus
interpres answers Enoch’s questions.
46:3â•‡ zentu we)etu walda sab)/“This is the Son of Man

zalotu kona ṣedq/who has righteousness:
Now a series of characteristics of the Son of Man begins. Here we)etu is not a demon-
strative adjective; rather it functions as the verb “to be:” “This is.â•›.â•›.”96
The ï¬†rst of the qualities ascribed to the Son of Man is righteousness, ṣedq, a
cognate of Hebrew (h)qdc. The Son of Man is said to have righteousness, which
recalls the claim of Jeremiah, that a righteous branch (qydc xmc) will be raised up
for David, and that as king, he will deal wisely (lyk#hw) and execute justice and
righteousness (hqdcw +p#m h#(w) Jer.Â€23:5–6, cf. Jer.Â€33:15–16. Isaiah also ascribes
righteousness to the king Klm Klmy qdcl Nh (Isa. 32:1) and is conï¬†dent that the
heir apparent97 to the throne of David will rule with justice and righteousness,
hqdcbw +p#mb hd(slw ht) Nykhl (Isa.Â€9:6Â€[7]) ascribing righteousness to his
judgment, qdcb +p#w, as a belt round his waist, wyntm rwz) qdc hyhw (Isa.Â€11:4,Â€5).98
Righteousness is an important quality of the rule of the Davidic king whom both
Jeremiah and Isaiah heralded, and similarly it is the chief property of the Son
of Man.99
96
Charles, 1 Enoch, 87, and see above.
97
Many surmise that this heralds the birth of Hezekiah; see George Buchanan Gray, The Book
of Isaiah Vol.Â€1 (ICC; Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1912), 166.
98
Charles, 1 Enoch, 88; Black, I Enoch 197, 208.
99
Cf. Hartman, Prophecy Interpreted, 119, but see the discussion above in the Notes on
1Â€EnochÂ€46:1 regarding the Davidic overtones in the comment on the face of the human-like
CO25117.indb 75 11/03/2011 11:58

46:3â•‡ wa-ṣedq meslēhu xādara/and with whom righteousness dwells:

Further, righteousness is said to dwell with the Son of Man. The apparent Biblical
parallels to this idea are not very satisfying.100 In Isa.Â€32:16, justice and righteousness
are seen to dwell (Nk# and b#t) even in the wilderness or the fruitful ï¬†eld when the
Spirit is poured out, so that the people may live in peace and quietness, while in
Isa.Â€1:21, Isaiah mourns the loss of faithfulness and righteousness from the city.101 In
both those parallels, righteousness dwells in a ï¬†eld or a city, not a person as in Par.
En. Perhaps the author is also alluding to a contrast with wisdom. Wisdom was not
able to ï¬†nd a dwelling place on earth (1Â€EnochÂ€42), and so returned to heaven.102 But
righteousness does dwell with the Son of Man, insuring just judgments.103
46:3â•‡ wa-kwellomu mazāgebta za-xebu)/and.â•›.â•›.all the treasures of that which is hidden:

In Par. En., mazāgebta are generally storehouses that store up the cosmological and
meteorological forces, such as the wind,104 rain, hail, snow,105 thunder and lightning
(e.g. 1Â€EnochÂ€41:4–5, 69:23).106 Here, they store divine secrets, which it will be the
privilege of the Son of Man to reveal. Cyrus, the Lord’s anointed, is also given “the
treasures of darkness and the hoards in secret places” by God (Isa.Â€45:3).107 This
metaphor has abundant biblical precedent. And as noted above, the seer is to be
trusted regarding the revelation of the hidden treasures, since the revelation of natural
secrets authenticates the revelation of the spiritual, judicial secrets
ï¬†gure being full of grace like one of the holy angels. See also Casey, Solution, 99, where he
draws out that Enoch even surpassed Noah in the quality of righteousness.
100
Hartman, Prophecy Interpreted, 120, sees the parallels between 1Â€EnochÂ€46:3 and Isa.Â€1:21,
32:16 as tenuous, saying that “the association may only be assessed as possible.”
101
Charles, 1 Enoch, 88; Black, I Enoch, 208.
102
Manson, “The Son of Man in Daniel, Enoch and the Gospels,” 131, finds relevance in
SirÂ€24:7–12, where Wisdom is commanded by the Creator to dwell in Jacob, “an honoured
people.” Manson points out that in Sirach wisdom is identified with the Torah, and the Torah
with the righteousness of God, in which case the text is interesting. The lack of a dwelling
place in 1Â€EnochÂ€42 is more immediate, and so the contrast between the people and the Son
of Man is more striking.
103
In Scripture, righteousness is imagined in a variety of metaphors. Righteousness can kiss,
look down on and go before someone (Pss.Â€89:10, 11, 13); righteousness sometimes is an
article of clothing worn by a priest (Pss.Â€132:9), a belt (Isa.Â€11:5) a breastplate (Isa.Â€59:17), or
a robe (Isa.Â€61:10, JobÂ€29:14); the image of a ruler also is used of righteousness (Isa.Â€60:17),
as well as the image of a plant springing up (Isa.Â€61:11). While righteousness does not seem
to have been objectiï¬†ed or personiï¬†ed to the extent that Wisdom was, these passages are
examples of metaphorical images used of righteousness in a way similar to what is done here
with the image of righteousness dwelling with the Son of Man.
104
Cf. Jer. 10:13, 51:16, wytF\roc;)om xAw%r )cwOy,wA, “he brings the wind out from his storehouses” cf.
also Ps. 135:7. In Ps. 33:7 the deeps are in storehouses, twOmwOht@; twOrxcfwO)b@ NtnO. In Isa. 33:6,
the fear of the Lord is his treasure, wOrcfwO) )yhi hwFhy: t)ar:yI.
105
Cf. Job 38:22, h)e\r:t%i drfbf@ twOrc;wO)w: gle#$f twOrc;wO)-l)e tf)bfhj, “Have you entered the storehouses of
the snow or have you seen the storehouses of the hail?” Cf. Sir.Â€43:14 and Prov.Â€2:4.
106
Dillmann, Lexicon, 878, lists words that indicate different kinds of storage compartments or
units, rather than anything contained in them like treasure.
107
CO25117.indb 76 11/03/2011 11:58

46:3â•‡ we)etu yekaššet/he will reveal:

Whereas the angelus interpres was showing ()ar)aya) the seer all the secrets, now
the Son of Man is said to reveal (kašata) the treasures of that which is hidden.
Throughout Par. En., a distinction seems to be maintained regarding the knowledge
that angels show ()ar)aya) in contrast to divine information that is revealed (kašata).
Heavenly secrets revealed by the angels, whether appropriately or not, are shown
()ar)aya). The secrets appropriately revealed are those shown ()ar)aya) to Enoch
and others (e.g. 40:8, 43:3, 46:2, 60:11, 69:14, 71:3, 4), while the secrets that should
not have been revealed are shown ()ar)aya) by the fallen angels (69:1) such as the
secrets of war, evil and the gematria of the oath (69:6, 12, 13). But divine information
is revealed (kašata), such as the secrets to Enoch (38:3), the revelation through the
cord-measures (61:5), the deeds of the righteous and elect (61:13), the revelation of
the Son of Man to the elect (62:7, 69:26), and here (46:3) the revelation by the Son
of Man of the hidden things.108 This consistency suggests that the hidden things to be
revealed by the Son of Man are not simply heavenly information which the angels
also have access to and could show, but they are divine information, inaccessible to
the angels, and consciously and deliberately revealed by the divine ï¬†gure.
46:3â•‡ )esma )egzi)a manāfest kiyāhu xāreya/for the Lord of Spirits has chosen him:
)egzi)a manāfest/the Lord of Spirits is the usual name for God, appearing 104 times
in Par. En., evidently a favorite of at least the ï¬†nal redactor. It is possibly derived
from the term “Lord of Hosts,” since the hosts of heaven are the spirits,109 although
its origin has several possibilities. It may possibly depend on an expression like
r#b lkl twxwr yhl) hwhy, “The Lord, the God of the spirits of all ï¬‡esh” (Num.Â€16:22,
27:16). Or it may be taken over from an expression like o( tw~n pneuma&twn kai\
pa&shj e0cousi/aj duna&sthj, “The ruler of spirits and all powers” (2Â€Macc.Â€3:24).
Another possibility might be “The Father of Spirits” (tw~| patri\ tw~n pneuma&twn,
Heb.Â€12:9), a term which might have been current at the time of the composition of
Par. En., or its origin may lie in a description like “Lord of every Spirit” (xwr lkl Nwd),
1QHÂ€10.8) which is found in Qumran. As Black points out, it is unlikely that the author
of Par. En. created a new title for God since so much of the material is derived from
biblical and traditional sources. Most likely, “Lord of Spirits” was an acceptable trans-
lation, or even an acceptable interpretative translation, for “Lord of hosts.” As Black
also points out, conï¬†rmation of this may be present in the Trisagion of Isa.Â€6:3 quoted
in 1Â€EnochÂ€39:12, “Those who sleep not bless thee, they stand before thy glory saying
holy, holy holy is the Lord of Spirits: he ï¬†lls the earth with spirits.” The virtual equiva-
lence between “hosts” and “spirits” may be traced to the world-view of the author,
whose universe was populated with angelic beings and disembodied spirits. This was
the case in Qumran as well, where “hosts of his spirits” (wyxwr )bc) and “hosts of his
angels” (wyk)lm )bc) are parallel expressions (1QMÂ€12:7–8). )egzi)a manāfest/the
108
109
See Charles, 1Â€Enoch, 69, note on 37:2, and Black, IÂ€Enoch, 189–92.
CO25117.indb 77 11/03/2011 11:58

Lord of Spirits, then, may be an interpretative translation from Hebrew (tw)bc hwhy) or
Aramaic (twxwr )rm), or it may even reï¬‡ect an interpretative translation from a Greek
version, ku&rioj tw~n pneuma&twn, where “hosts” was understood as angelic beings.
The Son of Man is “xāreya/chosen,” which is consistent with the title “Chosen
One” or “Elect One.”110
46:3â•‡ wa-za-keflu kwello mo)a ba-qedma )egzi)a manāfest ba-ret(la-(ālam/and

through uprightness his lot has surpassed all before the Lord of Spirits forever (or
“his portion has completely triumphed before the Lord of Spirits in truth forever”):
Black considers this an unusual turn of phrase. Concretely, the land was appor-
tioned out to the tribes of Israel (qlx cf. Josh.Â€18:5–7), and metaphorically, adultery
(PsÂ€50:18) and idolatry (Isa.Â€57:6, Psa.Â€17:14), as well as God’s punishment of them
(Isa.Â€17:14, Job.Â€27:13) are also a person’s portion, or chosen course of life. The
portion (kefl) of the Son of Man seems to refer to the chosen course of action, or
purpose, or cause of the Son of Man.111 This cause is victorious before God, unlike
the cause of the righteous and elect, who are now suffering under oppression on earth,
and its victory will bring about the promised reversal of fortunes.
3.2.4â•‡ 1 En. 46:4–5
4â•‡ 22wa-zentu 23walda sab) 24za-re)ika 25yānašše)omu la-nagašt wa-la-xāyālān

)em-meskābātihomu wa-la-ṣenu(ān )em-manābertihomu 26wa-yefatteḥ legwāmāta
27
ṣenu(ān 28wa-yādaqqeq )asnāna xāṭe)ān.
5 29wa-yegafatte(omu la-nagašt 30)em-manābertihomu 31wa-)em-mangeštomu
32
)esma )i-yālē( (elewwo 33wa-)i-yesēbbeḥewwo wa-)i-yegannyu 34)em-)eytē
tawehbat lomu mangešt.
4â•‡And this Son of Man whom you have seen will rouse the kings and the
powerful from their resting-places, and the strong from their thrones, and will
loose the reins of the strong, and will break the teeth of the sinners.
5â•‡ And he will cast down the kings from their thrones and from their kingdoms,
for they do not exalt him, and do not praise him, and do not humbly acknowledge
whence (their) kingdom was given to them.
110
Charles, 1Â€Enoch, 88, see Charles’s notes on 38:2, 40:4; Black, IÂ€Enoch, 197, 208;
VanderKam, “Righteous One,” 172–74, 189. The title “Elect One” has evidently come from
the chosen servant motif of Deutero-Isaiah, cf. Isa.Â€41:8, “But you, Israel, my servant, Jacob,
whom I have chosen.â•›.â•›.”

K1yt%ir:xab@; r#$e)j bqo(jyA yd@Ib;(a l)rF#&;yI ht@f)aw:,
Isa.Â€41:9, “You are my servant, I have chosen you.â•›.â•›.”

K1yt%ir:xab@; htf@)a-yd@Ib;(,
and Isa. 42:1, Here is my servant,.â•›.â•›.my chosen, yrIxib@;.â•›.â•›.ydi@b;(a Nh.
111
Charles, 1 Enoch, 88; Black, I Enoch, 208. Kefl could be a translation of either lrFwOg% (lot,
portion, as in Josh. 19:51; Black’s choice) or qleh (portion, tract, territory, as in Gen. 14:24).
See further, Dillmann, Lexicon, 878.
CO25117.indb 78 11/03/2011 11:58

Variants
22
wa-zentu/and this: omitted by TanaÂ€9; AbbÂ€35 and CurzonÂ€56 add we)etu.
23
walda/son: omitted by the original hand of AbbÂ€35.
24
za-re)ika/whom you have seen: the corrector of Ryl has za-re)iko (2nd masc. sing
with a 3rd masc. sing. sufï¬†x), while TanaÂ€9 has za-re)iku/whom I saw, possibly a
scribal emendation reverting to ï¬†rst person narrative; the original hand of Ryl and
all other manuscripts have za-re)ika/whom you saw, taking this as a continuation
of the comments by the angelus interpres.
25
yānašše)omu/he will rouse them: Knibb notes that TanaÂ€9 preï¬†xes za-; Charles noted
that CurzonÂ€55 and MunichÂ€30 also preï¬†x za-. Charles112 has a speculative note
about 1Â€EnochÂ€46:5 being originally a marginal correction for 1Â€EnochÂ€46:4. As
Charles himself points out, the note assumes both a Hebrew text and a manuscript
with marginal notes. Both Knibb and Black ignore the suggestion. Charles’ case
does appear to be unlikely, since the textual evidence as it now exists does not
support the hypothesis.
26
wa-yefatteḥ legwāmāta/and he will loose the reins: Berl has the singular legwāma/
rein, while AbbÂ€55 omits the verb yefatteḥ/he will loose.
27
ṣenu(ān/of the strong: TanaÂ€9 has ṣenu(āna, thus modifying “reins;” Ryl apparently
has a verse break after this word rather than three words later after xāṭe)ān.
28
wa-yādaqqeq/and will break: TanaÂ€9 has wa-yāwadeq/and will make collapse.
29
wa-yegafatte(omu/and he will cast them down: BMÂ€491 has wa-yegafte(omu, the
subjunctive,“and may he cast them down.”
30
)em-manābertihomu/from their thrones: BMÂ€485 and BMÂ€491 have manābertihomu
ba-diba manābertihomu/their thrones upon their thrones; AbbÂ€35 has
)em-manābertihomu ba-diba menbārātihomu/from their thrones upon their
foundations; TanaÂ€9 has )em-diba manābertihomu/from upon their thrones.
31
wa-)em-mangeštomu/and from their kingdoms: BMÂ€485 has the longer form before
the sufï¬†x, wa-)em-mangeštihomu.
32
)esma )i-yālē( (elewwo/for they do not exalt him (causative): BMÂ€491 and Berl
have )esma )i-yāl(elewwo/since they may not exalt him (causative subjunctive),
perhaps inï¬‡uenced by 1Â€EnochÂ€62–63 where the kings plead for more time to exalt
the Lord of Spirits, but to no avail; TanaÂ€9 has wa-)i-yāl(alewwo.
33
wa-)i-yesēbbeḥewwo/and they do not praise him: BMÂ€485 has wa-)i-yesēbbeḥ/
and he will not praise (3rd sing. masc.) without a sufï¬†x, imperfect; Berl has
wa-)i-yesēbbeḥu/and they will not praise (3rd pl. masc.) without a sufï¬†x,
imperfect; TanaÂ€9 has wa-)i-sabbeḥewwo/and they did not praise him(3rd pl.
masc.) with a sufï¬†x, in the perfect rather than the imperfect.
34
)em-)eytē/whence: BMÂ€485 adds the copula we)etu.
Notes
46:4â•‡ wa-zentu walda sab)za-re)ika/and this Son of Man whom you have seen:
112
Charles, 1 Enoch, 86–87.
CO25117.indb 79 11/03/2011 11:58

The statement refers back to the vision of 46:1, and so the use of the demonstrative
zentu/this is appropriate (see above on 46:2). For walda sab) see earlier on 46:2 also.
46:4â•‡ yānašše)omu/he will rouse them:

Several themes in the passage have similarities with Isaiah 14, the taunt against the
king of Babylon. In Isa.Â€14:9, the prophet says that even Sheol will raise the kings from
their thrones to taunt the king of Babylon, while the seer in 1Â€EnochÂ€46:4 envisions the
kings and the powerful being roused from their resting places and the strong from their
thrones by the Son of Man. The uncomfortable vision of maggots and worms covering
their beds is common to both (Isa.Â€14:11, 1Â€EnochÂ€46:6), while the Babylonian king’s
aspiration to rule above the stars (Isa.Â€14:13) is similar to the kings’ claim to rule the
stars (1Â€EnochÂ€46:5). Nonetheless, the king of Babylon is laid low (Isa.Â€14:3–23) and
similarly the kings are cast down from their thrones and kingdoms (1Â€EnochÂ€46:5).
These similarities indicate that the taunt against the king of Babylon in IsaiahÂ€14 may
have provided some of the ideas for the author of Par. En. in envisioning the Son of
Man overthrowing the kings and the mighty ones in 1Â€EnochÂ€46.
46:4â•‡ wa-yefatteḥ legwāmāta ṣenu(ān/and he will loose the reins of the strong:
The idea of releasing the reins means disarming or taking away the power and control
of the strong. A scriptural precedent for this phrase could not be found. Charles
refers to it as a “strange phrase,” while Black suggests “loosen the loins,” seeing
Mymwc( ygtm5“reins of the strong” as a possible misreading of Mymwc( yntm5“loins
of the strong.” This expression means to demoralize and probably also to disarm113
which may perhaps derive from Isa.Â€45:1, where Cyrus, the anointed (a title also
applied to the Son of Man ï¬†gure), subdues the kings and strips them of their robes.114
Without textual warrant the emendation is intriguing, but not certain.
46:4â•‡ wa-yādaqqeq )asnāna xāṭe)ān/and he will break the teeth of the sinners:
The motif of breaking the teeth of the sinners may be a desired punishment for the
wicked, similar to the plea in Pss.Â€3:8[7] and 58:7[6], where the wish is also expressed
that the teeth of the wicked may be broken.
46:5â•‡ wa-yegafatte(omu/and he will cast down:

(For the proï¬†le of the kings and mighty ones, see the section on dating Par. En. in the
previous chapter.) The power of the Son of Man to turn the current ruling elite out of
ofï¬†ce is highlighted here. The theme of overthrowing the unrighteous rulers is also
expressed in passages like Isa.Â€14:9, Sir.Â€10:14, and Dan.Â€5:20, to which Lk.Â€1:52 may
also possibly be alluding.115
113
Charles, 1 Enoch, 87; Black, 1 Enoch, 208.
114
“The Anointed” is another title applied to the Son of Man ï¬†gure in 1Â€EnochÂ€48:10 and 52:4,
as VanderKam points out in “Righteous One,” 171.
115
Charles, 1 Enoch, 88; Black, I Enoch, 208; Hartman, Prophecy Interpreted, 121–23.
CO25117.indb 80 11/03/2011 11:58

3.2.5â•‡ Summary of the Exegesis of 1 En. 46:1–5
This passage reveals that the ï¬†gure of the Son of Man is taken from a concise, but very
precise allusion to Dan.Â€7:9, 13, and to the two heavenly ï¬†gures envisioned there. The
possiblity of two heavenly ï¬†gures seems to have been prepared for by the Canaanite
mythology of Baal and El, although the conï¬‡ict between those two gods in no way is
preserved in this passage. Here the Son of Man is accompanying the Head of Days, and is
given center stage by the author. He is described as being very attractive, and like one of
the holy angels in appearance. The Son of Man is characterized by righteousness, which
is also a characteristic of the future royal ï¬†gures envisioned by Isaiah and Jeremiah. Thus
a nuance of the royal messiah is added to the conception of the Son of Man, and while
DanielÂ€7 provides the base for the vision, it is ï¬†lled out with other material, especially
from Isaiah and Jeremiah.116 Further, the Son of Man has the privilege to reveal certain
secrets, on par with the revelation of divine information. This adds the nuance of an
extremely close contact with the divinity to the conception of the Son of Man. Finally,
the power to overthrow the kings and the mighty, the current ruling elite, is ascribed to
the Son of Man. Implicit in this power is the verdict that the kings and the mighty are
corrupt, and that the Son of Man is acting with divine authority in overturning them.117
And so based on DanielÂ€ 7, and ï¬†lled out with characteristics from Isaiah and
Jeremiah, 1Â€EnochÂ€46 attributes to the Son of Man:
a) heavenly status, but without the motion of coming;

b) righteousness;
c) a revelatory function;
d) chosenness; and
e) the judicial role with full authority to overthrow the kings and mighty ones, who
deny the name of the Lord of Spirits and who persecute the righteous.
Narratologically, the questions raised by the seer about the identity, origin and
purpose of the Son of Man arouse the curiosity of the implied reader. The answer is
to be found, both in the angel’s immediate response in describing the righteousness,
revelatory privilege, and power of the Son of Man (46:3–5), and in the course of the
whole work as the judging activity of the Son of Man is more fully explored. The
questions also look forward to the climactic identiï¬†cation of the seer, Enoch, with the
very Son of Man whom Enoch now sees for the ï¬†rst time in these verses.
The function of this passage is to introduce the hope found in the interpretation of
Dan. 7:13, where the ultimate salvation of the nation is the focus. As in the time of the
Charles’s concern about the ï¬†rst line of either vs 5 or vs 6 being a dittography of the other
seems misplaced. The two ideas complement each other in a parallel manner.
116
1Â€EnochÂ€46:1–5 reveals that the author apparently knew and drew on several prophetic
passages for the development of the concept of the Son of Man: Dan.Â€7, Isa.Â€9:6[7], 11:4, 5,
14, 32:1, Jer.Â€23:5–6, 33:15–16.
117
Colpe, o( ui9o_j tou= a)nqrw&pou, 425–26.
CO25117.indb 81 11/03/2011 11:58

writing of the Book of Daniel the hope of salvation for the nation was centered in the
human-like ï¬†gure, so now again, in the time of the composition of Par. En., the hope
of salvation from corrupt rulers and the desire for the vindication of the righteous and
elect ones are pinned on this human-like ï¬†gure, who is now called the Son of Man.

1Â€Enoch 48:2–7 reveals further developments in the ï¬†gure of the Son of Man in Par.
En., and two issues are raised. One is the issue of how extensive the inï¬‡uence of
Deutero-Isaiah is, and the other is the issue of the pre-existence of the Son of Man.118
Theisohn has shown the similarities between 1Â€EnochÂ€48 and IsaiahÂ€49. He
sees signiï¬†cant parallels on two levels.119 The ï¬†rst level is speciï¬†c similarities in
terminology:
1Â€Enochâ•‡ 48:2 called by the Lord of Spirits Isaiah 49:1 the Lord called me
vs 2 named before the Chief of Days vs 1 named in the
mother’s womb
vs 4 light to the nations vs 6 light to the nations
vs 5 prostration to worship vs 7 kings and
princes prostrate
themselves
vs 6 chosen vs 7 chosen
vs 6 hidden vs 2 hidden in the hand
and in the quiver.
The second level includes thematic similarities between the two passages:
a) parallelism of thought units is used throughout both passages;

b) pre-birth selection is present in both;
c) the idea of salviï¬†c return is evident in both;
d) worship and praise are mentioned in both;
e) the order of the similarities is the same in both, except for the idea of hiddenness;
and
f) the concept of the “light to the nations” is used in the same context and with the
same meaning.
Theisohn further points out that only 1Â€EnÂ€48:3, 6b have no parallels in IsaiahÂ€49. All
these similarities indicate for Theisohn that the author of Par. En. had IsaiahÂ€49 in
mind when developing this passage.
118
119
CO25117.indb 82 11/03/2011 11:58

Grelot, however, is unconvinced.120 He dismisses Theisohn’s observations as

being more thematic than verbal. He claims that while isolated terms may be similar,
concepts are not developed and the parallelism is not precise. He points out that the
naming of the Son of Man is described in the context of creation, while the naming of
the Servant of God is put in terms of being in the mother’s womb. Further, the concept
of hiddenness is imprecise, because the metaphor of the arrow in the quiver does not
appear in 1Â€EnochÂ€48, but Theisohn himself acknowledges this. The most precise
parallel, the role of being the light to the nations, is mentioned but not commented on
by Grelot, except to say that it is not further developed. Grelot refuses to see that the
similarities Theisohn has enumerated necessarily prove dependence.
Grelot appears to be too harsh. These brief reminiscences of IsaiahÂ€49 are very
similar in style and quality to the allusions to DanielÂ€7 in 1Â€EnochÂ€46: concise and
precise. Similarly in 1Â€EnochÂ€48 the author alludes concisely and precisely to the
chosen servant passages of Deutero-Isaiah.
My study of the passages in question indicates that grounds exist for including
IsaiahÂ€42 as source material, just as surely as IsaiahÂ€49.121 As is well known, contem-
porary scholarship identiï¬†es four Servant Songs in Deutero-Isaiah: Isa.Â€ 42:1–4,
49:1–6, 50:4–9, and 52:13–53:12, in which terms like “servant” and “chosen” are
used.122 To be sure, similar language is used in connection with the nation. Deutero-
Isaiah describes Jacob, or Israel, as the “servant,” db(, and “chosen,” ryxb (Isa.Â€44:1,
120
Pierre Grelot, Les Poèmes du Serviteur (Paris: Cerf, 1981), 133–37.
121
Billerbeck and Müller had already noticed the inï¬‡uence of IsaiahÂ€42, as acknowledged by
both Theisohn, Der auserwählte Richter, 117 and Grelot, Les Poèmes du Serviteur, 133. See
also J. Jeremias, pai=j qeou=, TDNT,Â€V.687–88.
122
See e.g. James Muilenberg, Isaiah: ChapterÂ€40–66 (IB, Vol. 5; New York/Nashville:
Abingdon, 1956), 383, 406–8, presenting Bernhard Duhm’s theory, with a discussion of
subsequent adjustments. The precise boundaries of these poems have been debated, but
are roughly as delineated above. George A. F. Knight, Deutero-Isaiah: A Theological
Commentary on Isaiah 40–55 (New York/Nashville: Abingdon, 1965), 12. John L.
McKenzie, Second Isaiah (Anchor Bible 20; New York: Doubleday, 1968), xv–xvi, xxxviii–
lv; McKenzie believes the four songs do not form a literary unit, and are to be detached from
their context as well as from each other. Claus Westermann, IsaiahÂ€40–66 (London: SCM
Press, 1969), 11, 20–21. Pierre Grelot, Les Poèmes du Serviteur, 17, 21–73. R. N. Whybray,
The Second Isaiah (Shefï¬†eld: JSOT Press, 1983), 66–81. Herbert Haag, Der Gottesknecht
bei Deuterojesaja (Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 1985), 4–8. John D.
W. Watts, Isaiah 34–66 (Word, vol. 25; Waco: Word, 1987), 117, identiï¬†es the servant as
three different entities: Israel as the Servant of Yahweh, the Persian king (Cyrus, Darius or
Artaxerxes) as the Servant of Yahweh, or obedient worshippers as the servants of Yahweh.
He is able to distinguish between the different identities because he has added “stage direc-
tions,” as it were, to the corpus, imagining it to be a dramatic reading, and indicating who
the various speakers are at different points. It is difï¬†cult to evaluate his proposal, but on the
surface it appears to be subjective and overly complex. It probably is safer to distinguish
only between voice and number, because that is self-evident in the text. Paul D. Hanson,
IsaiahÂ€40–66 (Interpretation; Louisville: John Knox Press, 1995), 40–41; Hanson delights
in the “multivalence of the symbolism” (of the servant) seeing the servant as “a catalyst
for reï¬‡ection on the nature of the response demanded of those who have received a call
from God.” Hence Hanson chooses not to pin down the identity of the servant either as an
CO25117.indb 83 11/03/2011 11:58

24; 45:4; 41:8, 9).123 It appears, however, that the author of Par. En. has limited
himself, drawing particularly on IsaiahÂ€42 and 49. These two passages speak of the
servant as an individual and they use the adjective “chosen.” The passages where the
nation seems to be meant are not alluded to. Perhaps in the author’s mind the two
passages from IsaiahÂ€42 and 49 constituted a unit depicting a single chosen servant,
who has a mission of restoring the people. These two passages, then, form the basis
for this poem in 1Â€EnochÂ€48, which is about the naming of the Son of Man and his
salviï¬†c purpose. The utilization of these two passages will become evident in the
notes below.
1Â€EnochÂ€48:2–8 is a poem with seven tripartite verses. An outline of the structure of

the poem is presented below, with a summary of the thought-units of each verse. The
progression of ideas through the poem indicates that the versiï¬†cation of the text does
not quite match the structure of the poem. The importance of outlining the poem in
this way is to show that, because of the structure, certain disputable elements are
integral rather than intrusive.
Verse in text Structure Summary of thought-units

1 En. 48:2 a naming of the Son of Man
b in the presence of the Lord of Spirits
b before the Chief of Days
3 c before the sun and the constellations were created

c before the stars were made
a & b he was named before the Lord of Spirits
4 d hope for the righteous

e light to the Gentiles
d hope for the troubled
5 f worship
f glorify, bless and celebrate
6 g Son of Man chosen and hidden
7 h to be revealed to the holy and righteous

h will preserve the righteous
i because they loathe unrighteousness
individual, royal or otherwise, or as the nation, since that would be “a violation of the poetic
tenor of the servant passages.”
123
In these passages the servant is addressed in the second person singular, yet the identiï¬†cation
of the servant as the nation is clear from the context. In the so-called Servant Songs, the
servant is also addressed in the second person singular, yet an individual can be understood
from the context.
CO25117.indb 84 11/03/2011 11:58

i they loathe the ways of the unrighteous

j they will be saved
j they will be avenged
8 k the kings of the earth will be downcast

k so will the strong of the land
l they shall not be saved.
This poem, as it is preserved, further elucidates the ï¬†gure of the Son of Man,
particularly in terms of pre-existence. N. Messel, however, believes that vsÂ€3
(pre-mundane naming) and 4c (the light to the nations) are interpolations and vsÂ€6
is incomprehensible due to extensive corruption.124 This, in effect, excises the notion
of pre-existence. But Messel has simply asserted that versesÂ€3 and 4c are interpola-
tions, and has not provided careful argumentation. Such an assertion simpliï¬†es the
problems associated with the text, but does not seem to be very well founded. It is
better to retain the verses and seek to understand them in their setting. Subsequent
scholars have not accepted Messel’s assertion, and instead have focused on the nature
of the pre-existence of the Son of Man.
3.3.1â•‡ 1 En. 48:2–3
2â•‡ Wa-baye)eti 1sa(āt taṣawwe(ā 2zeku 3walda sab) ba-xaba )egzi)a manāfest
4
wa-semu 5maqdema re)sa mawā(el.
3â•‡ 6Wa-za)enbala 7yetfaṭṭar ḍaḥay 8wa-ta)amer 9za)enbala 10yetgabbaru
11
kawākebta samāy wa-semu taṣawwe(ā ba-qedma )egzi)a manāfest.
2â•‡And at that hour that Son of Man was named in the presence of the Lord of
Spirits, and his name (was named) before the Head of Days.
3â•‡ Even before the sun and the constellations were created, before the stars of
heaven were made his name was named before the Lord of Spirits.
Variants
1
sa(āt/hour: AbbÂ€35 has )elat/day.
2
zeku/that: BMÂ€485, BMÂ€491, Berl, AbbÂ€35, and TanaÂ€9 all transpose zeku to a position
after walda sab).
3
walda/son: TanaÂ€9 has welud/son, a plural form used in the singular sense (see
Lambdin, 442). TanaÂ€9, which displays variants 2 & 3, might be translated: “at that
hour that one was named as the offspring of man ( or “Son of Man”) before.â•›.â•›.”
4
wa-semu/and his name: BMÂ€485 has wa-sema (without the possessive pronoun); Berl
has )esma/because; TanaÂ€9 has semu/his name (without the conjunction). Ryl has
a verse-break before wa-semu.
124
N. Messel, Der Menschensohn in den Bilderreden Henochs (ZAWBeih. 35; Giessen, 1922), 50.
CO25117.indb 85 11/03/2011 11:58

5
maqdema/before: TanaÂ€9 has ba-qedma/before; maqdema is usually an adverb,
“beforehand,” so ba-qedma, the preposition would be expected, and TanaÂ€9 has
preserved it.
6
Wa-za)enbala/even before: Ryl has the letter “n” written interlinearly. TanaÂ€9 has
wa-)enbala, without appreciable semantic difference.
7
yetfaṭṭar/were created: the whole Eth I family of manuscripts has tetfaṭṭar, 3rd fem.
sing. or 2nd masc. sing. passive subjunctive.
8
wa-ta)amer/and the constellations: AbbÂ€55 omits; BMÂ€485 has wa-tā)amer; Berl and
TanaÂ€9 have wa-ta)amra. This clause in Berl and TanaÂ€9 then would be translated,
“Even before the sun was created and known.â•›.â•›.” or possibly, “Even before the sun
was created, it (i.e. the name) was known.”
9
za)enbala/before: BMÂ€485, BMÂ€491, Berl, and TanaÂ€9 have )enbala; AbbÂ€55, the
corrector of AbbÂ€35, Ull, and two other manuscripts have wa-za)enbala/and
before. The presence or absence of wa- or za- does not make an appreciable
difference in meaning.
10
yetgabbaru/were made: Berl and TanaÂ€9 have yetgabbar, the singular instead of the
plural, which is a frequent phenomenon in Ethiopic.
11
kawākebta/stars: Abb 55 has kawākebt, without the construct marker -a-, but seman-
tically similar.
Notes
48:2â•‡ taṣawwe(ā zeku walda sab)/that Son of Man was named;
48:3â•‡ wa-semu taṣawwe(ā/his name was named:

In the Bible the naming of a person or object establishes or develops a relationship,
sometimes of domination, sometimes of possession, and sometimes of purpose or
mission.125 Here the sense is that the Son of Man is named, called, or designated to
a purpose or mission. The outline of this mission begins in this passage.126 Just as
Cyrus was named by God and given a title (Isa.Â€45:3–4) and as the chosen servant
of the Lord was called from birth and given his name (Isa.Â€42:6; 49:1; cf. Isa.Â€43:1,
7; 44:5; 45:3; 48:12), so here the Son of Man is named, or designated, for a basic,
life-shaping purpose.127
Messel uderstands this issue differently.128 The naming of the Son of Man for
Messel is not to be understood as appointing him as the Son of Man. Rather, Messel,
125
Hans Bietenhard, o!noma, TDNT 5.252–54, 266–67; Manson, “The Son of Man in Daniel,
Enoch, and the Gospels,” 123–45, esp. 133–34; Black, IÂ€Enoch, 210. Examples illustrating
these ways of understanding naming are Adam’s naming the animals (GenesisÂ€2) in terms of
domination, God’s name being named over Israel results in their becoming his possession
(Isa.Â€63:19), and Isaiah’s children’s names (IsaiahÂ€7) in terms of purpose or mission.
126
Black, 1Â€Enoch, 210.
127
Hooker, The Son of Man in Mark, 44, also notices the suspense built into the narrative thread.
Like a good detective novel, the reader does not hear the name until it is disclosed at the end.
128
Messel, Der Menschensohn in den Bilderreden Henochs, 50–55.
CO25117.indb 86 11/03/2011 11:58

having declared verseÂ€3 to be an interpolation, emphasizes the courtroom imagery. He

suggests that the angels, who are the courtiers in this image, merely remind the king,
God, of the availability of the Son of Man, and in this sense “name” him. Narratively,
however, Messel must assume too much. The courtroom scene may be justiï¬†able
as being assumed. But for the angels to function as courtiers reminding the king of
the Son of Man, there must be a further assumption that the king has asked for a
volunteer, and that there is some mission the king needs the volunteer to accomplish.
Messel is reminded of the call of Isaiah, and so envisions this scene in similar terms.
But to do so, he must import too many assumptions for which there is no justiï¬†cation
in the text. He has sought to transform this description of a vision into a call narrative,
and it simply is not warranted. Because too much must be assumed in Messel’s under-
standing, his view must be rejected.
For notes on the term Son of Man, see notes on 46:1, 2.
48:2â•‡ baye)eti sa(āt/at that hour:

This is not the formula used by the author to mark off signiï¬†cant statements, ba-we)
etu mawā(el/in those days, as at 1Â€EnochÂ€47:1, 48:8, which is comparable to “And
on that day.â•›.â•›.” or “After this/that.â•›.â•›.” This is a different expression, baye)eti sa(āt/at
that hour. It may have an impact similar to the Aramaic phrase, )t(#$-hb, found in
Dan.Â€3:6, 15; 4:30; and 5:5. It may mean, “in that instant,” or “at that very moment.”
Thus Charles may be close to the mark when he suggests that the reference to the hour
refers to the time of the vision.129 Messel distinguishes between two possibilities: the
hour referred to is either the moment of the seer’s vision or the moment of the future
fulï¬†lment of the vision. He has already eliminated the pre-mundane moment, since
he believes versesÂ€3 and 4c are interpolations.130 Since the phrase is not used with a
verb indicating the seer’s experience (as it is in 1Â€EnochÂ€39:2, 9), Messel argues that
the hour referred to indicates the future time of the unfolding moment of salvation.
Black has justiï¬†able grounds for suggesting that the hour referred to in 1Â€EnochÂ€48:2
is before the creation of the sun and the constellations, because in 1Â€EnochÂ€48:3 the
concept is repeated, explicitly stating that the naming of the Son of Man took place
before the creation of the sun and constellations.131
However, with the pan-chronic notion of time that is apparent in apocalypticism,
it is most likely that the author envisioned the seer beholding the vision of the naming
of the Son of Man as being before creation, and yet seeing it in the present rather
than the past tense. While apocalyptic writers pay attention to the sequence of events
through time, their apprehension of time appears to be synchronic, seeing past,
present and future all as though in the present. Thus, here the author is describing a
vision during the lifetime of Enoch, but it is a vision that encompasses and reveals
129
Charles 1Â€Enoch, 93.
130
Messel, Der Menschensohn in den Bilderreden Henochs, 50, has simply asserted that verses
3 and 4c are interpolations without arguing the case. This is too drastic, and so my position
is that verses 3 and 4c must be included in the considerations.
131
Black, IÂ€Enoch, 210, also suggests that this expression is unique.
CO25117.indb 87 11/03/2011 11:58

all time, including the time before the creation of the sun and stars when the Son of
Man was named. In this case, the naming of the Son of Man, then, occurs both at the
time of Enoch’s vision and before creation, yet it is the same time, not two separate
events.
48:2â•‡ )egzi)a manāfest/Lord of Spirits.â•›.â•›.re)sa mawā(el/Head of Days:

Both nomina dei appear here. Rather than seeing the appearance of the second name
as a redactional expansion, it is probably appropriate to see it as a doubled thought
in a poetic passage, which displays a complex tripartite structure (as outlined above).
As is usual in Hebrew poetry, the verses of this passage contain two complementary
thoughts. But the format of complementary thoughts in this poem is complicated by
doubling either the ï¬†rst or the second thought. For example, in verse 2, the naming of
the Son of Man is the ï¬†rst thought, and the second thought is of being in the presence
of God; and this second thought is doubled. In verse 3, the ï¬†rst thought is the creation
of heavenly entities, and the second thought is the naming of the Son of Man. Here
the ï¬†rst thought is doubled. In verse 4, the ï¬†rst thought is hope for the righteous,
which is doubled, but in the third stich of the verse, and the second thought is of this
ï¬†gure’s role as the light to the Gentiles. Verses 5 and 6 together make up a tristich,
verseÂ€7 contains two stanzas and verse 8 a single stanza with the tripartite structure.
Hence the second appearance of God’s name, using the alternate form, ï¬†ts into the
structural pattern of the passage.
48:3â•‡ Wa-za)enbala yetfaṭṭar ḍaḥay wa-ta)amer za)enbala yetgabbaru kawākebta

samāy/Even before the sun and the constellations were created, before the stars of
heaven were made:
The eternal, transcendent purpose of the Son of Man is emphasized by proclaiming
that it was ordained even before the sun, the constellations and the stars were created.
If the sun, the constellations, and the stars are guides for arranging life’s activities,
then the forensic, revelatory purpose of the Son of Man is prior even to that. Thus
the community can be consoled, since they know the saving purpose of the Son
of Man has greater weight and authority than even the astrological powers. The
logical precedence is uppermost here, rather than the temporal (see comments on
pre-existence below). The constellations/ta)amer may refer to the signs of the zodiac,
or the constellations,132 or more likely they refer to the calendrical signs of certain
stars appearing in the sky in conjunction with certain festivals or seasons.133 This is
132
Charles, 1Â€Enoch, 93.
133
Black, IÂ€Enoch, 210; Otto Neugebauer, Ethiopic Astronomy and Computus (Vienna: Verlag
der Österreichischen Akadamie der Wissenschaften, 1979; Heft 22, Band 347), 216, does not
refer to this verse in his treatment of Ethiopic calendrical calculations, but he does note that
“Nowhere in our material can one ï¬†nd references to constellations (zodiacal or otherwise)
or to single ï¬†xed stars or planets except in texts that depend on Arabic sources.” While stars
are mentioned often and in great numbers, they are treated more as celestial decoration, and
sometimes thought of in terms of a military type of organization representing the angels. In
CO25117.indb 88 11/03/2011 11:58

slightly more speciï¬†cally related to the calendrical and purity concerns of the rest of
1Â€Enoch, and so is a more precise interpretation.134
Another close connection between this poem and the chosen servant passages of
Isaiah can be noted in the reference to creation. The naming of the Son of Man is said
to be before the creation of the sun, the constellations and the stars. References to
creation also occur in the chosen servant passage of IsaiahÂ€42. Here God is described
as the one who created the heavens and who has chosen the servant (Isa.Â€42:5 cf.
44:24; 45:7). Although Isaiah does not note the priority of the chosen servant to the
heavens, nonetheless it is interesting that creation is alluded to in the context of the
chosen servant. Similarly, the author of Par. En. places the naming of the Son of Man
in the context of creation.
3.3.2â•‡ 1 En. 48:4–5
4â•‡ 12We)etu yekawwen batra la-ṣādeqān 13wa-qeddusān kama botu 14yetmargwazu

15
wa-)i-yedaqu 16wa-we)etu 17berhāna )aḥzāb 18 19wa-we)etu yekawwen tasfā
la-)ella 20yaḥammu 21ba-lebbomu.
5â•‡ 22Yewaddequ wa-yesaggedu qedmēhu kwellomu )ella yaxādderu 23diba yabs
24 25
wa-yebārekewwo wa-yesēbeḥewwo wa-yezēmoru 26lotu la-sema )egzi)a
manāfest.
4â•‡ He will be a staff to the righteous and holy, that they may lean on him and not
fall, and he (will be) the light of the nations, and he will be the hope of those who
grieve in their hearts.
the Astronomical chapters of 1Â€Enoch, 72–82, the constellations, the zodiac and the planets
are conspicuously absent, which Neugebauer characterizes as a primitive level of astro-
nomical observation. There the material delineates “gates” through which the sun, moon
and winds proceed. However, since this material in chapterÂ€48 is translated from an original
Semitic work, ta)amer may convey an astronomical term that may have been rather myste-
rious to the Ethiopian translators.
134
Perhaps, however, Berl and TanaÂ€9 have preserved the original (see Variants above): “Before
the sun was created, it (i.e. his name) was known.” The attractive feature of this reading is
that then there are four parallel clauses:
“And at that hour that one was named as the Son of Man before the Lord of Spirits.
His name (Berl: Because he) was before the Head of Days.
Even before the sun was created, it (i.e. his name) was known;
Before the stars of heaven were made, his name was named before the Lord of
Spirits.”
Further, the idea of constellations would be eliminated by this reading, which would be
more consistent with the absence of references to constellations in Ethiopic literature (see
Neugebauer, Ethiopic Astronomy and Computus 216). The unlikely aspects of the reading
from TanaÂ€9 are that one would expect a repetition of (wa-) semu, as in 48:2b and 48:3b; and
that the clause is inordinately short compared to its context. The reading of Ryl is the lectio
difficilior, and therefore to be preferred. Nonetheless the reading of TanaÂ€9 is extremely
interesting.
CO25117.indb 89 11/03/2011 11:58

5â•‡ All those who dwell upon the dry ground will fall down and worship before him, and
they will bless, and praise, and celebrate with psalms the name of the Lord of Spirits.
Variants
12
We)etu/He: TanaÂ€9 has wa-we)etu, adding the conjunction.
13
wa-qeddusān/and holy: BMÂ€485, BMÂ€491, Berl, the original hand of AbbÂ€35,
AbbÂ€55 and TanaÂ€9 omit this word; the corrector of AbbÂ€35, Ull and two other
manuscripts have wa-la-qeddusān repeating the preposition.
14
yetmargwazu/they may lean: the whole EthÂ€I family and ï¬†ve other manuscripts have
yetmaraggwazu using the imperfect instead of the subjunctive. A purpose clause is
expressed with kama 1 subjunctive. Knibb refers the reader to 61:3, 5.
15
wa-)i-yedaqu/and not fall: BMÂ€491 and TanaÂ€9 have wa-)i-yewaddequ (cf. 48:5),
the imperfect rather than the subjunctive. One would expect both this verb and
the previous one to be subjunctive following kama in a purpose clause rather than
imperfect. In Ryl ye- is inserted supralinearly, probably by a corrector. Following
this word in Ryl there is a verse break.
16
wa-we)etu/and he: Here in contrast to note 12 above, TanaÂ€9 has we)etu.
17
berhāna )aḥzāb/the light of the nations: Berl has berhāna la-)aḥzāb, making use of
the preposition la, which can mean “to.”
18
wa-we)etu/and he: TanaÂ€9 has we)etu, omitting the conjunction (cf. notes 12 and 16).
19
wa-we)etu yekawwen/and he will be: AbbÂ€55 omits the pronoun, having wa-yekawwen.
20
yaḥammu/who grieve: BMÂ€485, BMÂ€491, the original hand of AbbÂ€35, AbbÂ€55 and
TanaÂ€9 have yaḥammemu.
21
ba-lebbomu/in their hearts: Berl has wa-ba-lebbomu, adding the conjunction.
22
Yewaddequ/they will fall down: BMÂ€485 and TanaÂ€9 have yedaqu, the subjunctive.
23
diba/upon: BMÂ€491, Berl, AbbÂ€35 (it is questionable whether a second hand inserted
a correction here), AbbÂ€ 55, BodlÂ€ 5, the original hand of Ryl and ï¬†ve other
manuscripts have westa (“in, into, to”) here.
24
wa-yebārekewwo/and they will bless: Ull omits the conjunction wa-.
25
wa-yebārekewwo wa-yesēbeḥewwo/and they will bless, and praise: The order of
these two verbs is reversed by BMÂ€485, BMÂ€491, AbbÂ€35, AbbÂ€55 and TanaÂ€9.
26
lotu la-sema )egzi)a/the name of the Lord: BMÂ€491 and TanaÂ€9 omit lotu; Berl (over
an erasure) has la-semu )egzi)a; AbbÂ€35 has lotu la-)egzi)a; BMÂ€485 and AbbÂ€55
have la-)egzi)a. Although there seems to be quite a variation with this phrase, the
different variations are really rather minor. Sometimes the indirect object in the
dative sense can be expressed through a simple prepositional phrase, such as la-)
egzi)a/to the Lord of (in AbbÂ€55), or it can be expressed in a double phrase, in
which the preposition ï¬†rst has the pronominal ending and then it is repeated with
the indirect object, as in AbbÂ€35, lotu la-)egzi)a (lit.: to him to the Lord of) or in
Ryl, lotu la-sema )egzi)a (lit.: to it to the name of the Lord of).135 The presence of
135
This is discussed by Lambdin, Introduction to Classical Ethiopic, §20.2 p 83 (cf. the qatalo
la-neguš construction, §15.3 p 64.)
CO25117.indb 90 11/03/2011 11:58

sem(a)/name used in conjunction with the nomen dei is synonymous with the use
of the nomen dei without sem(a).
Notes
48:4â•‡ berhāna )aḥzāb/the light of the nations.
This phrase is unique to 1Â€EnochÂ€48:4 and to the chosen servant passages of Isa.Â€42:6
and 49:6.136 The chosen servant is to be a beacon to the nations regarding God’s
saving and restoring of the chosen people, and similarly in 1Â€Enoch the chosen Son
of Man will be a light to the Gentiles regarding the restoration of the righteous and
holy.137
48:4â•‡ We)etu yekawwen batra/He will be a staff

la-ṣādeqān wa-qeddusān/to the righteous and holy
kama botu yetmargwazu wa-)i-yedaqu/that they may lean on him and not fall:
The image of the staff for the righteous and holy makes use of an image similar to
that used in the shepherd’s staff, tn(#m, of PsÂ€23:4,138 or the staff of life (bread and
water) that was taken from the people during the siege of Jerusalem (Isa. 3:1). The
people’s trust in Egypt as a reliable staff was misplaced, for it was nothing more than
a broken reed which would pierce the hand, as Sennacherib’s commander taunted
King Hezekiah (Isa.Â€36:6). Probably a contemporary metaphor, that same image is
taken by the author of Par. En. and applied to the trustworthiness and reliability of
the Son of Man for the righteous and holy. Just as the old or feeble are steadied by a
staff or a cane, so the holy and righteous, who are currently enfeebled and weak due
to oppression, can rely on the Son of Man for strength and stability. The strength and
support for the Son of Man, in turn, is probably the same as for the Servant, who is
136
See Theisohn, Der auserwählte Richter, 119, who graphically illustrates the dependence
upon IsaiahÂ€ 49. It appears to me, however, that IsaiahÂ€ 42 has also greatly inï¬‡uenced the
author in this poem.
137
Messel, Der Menschensohn in den Bilderreden Henochs, 54, has declared vsÂ€3 to be an
interpolation, and vsÂ€4 to refer to God, and therefore the phrase, “the light of the nations”
to be not applicable to God, but rather to be seen as a Christian gloss. Muilenberg, Isaiah:
40–66, 468–69, 568–69, identiï¬†es the servant who is to be the light to the nations as Israel
in both Isa.Â€ 42:6 and 49:6, even though the second singular sufï¬†x is used at Isa. 42:6
(Kntaw Krc)w), and despite some grammatical confusion at Isa.Â€49:6 (how can Israel restore
Israel, unless God is seen as the ultimate subject? see esp 568–69). Knight, Deutero-Isaiah,
185–86, sees light and salvation as parallel, made possible by God and manifest through the
servant. Westermann, Isaiah 40–66, 100, sees Israel as the focus here (Isa. 42:6) and Israel
is to be the covenant through which “the nations are to experience light, illumination and
salvation.” At Isa. 49:6, however, Westermann sees an individual as the Servant, possibly
connected somehow with Deutero-Isaiah, as the instrument of God to bring salvation to the
ends of the earth. Watts, Isaiah 34–66, 187, believes Darius, the Persian King, is meant to
be the restorer of Israel and the beacon to the nations, an identiï¬†cation that is not accepted
by most scholars. Hanson, Isaiah 40–66, 47, sees Israel as “the instrument through which
nations come to share the light of God’s salvation.”
138
Black, IÂ€Enoch, 210.
CO25117.indb 91 11/03/2011 11:58

strengthened, helped and upheld by God (Isa.Â€41:10). This image carries comfort and
encouragement for the readers.139
The image of being a staff to the righteous and the hope of those who are troubled
conveys the salviï¬†c purpose of the Son of Man. The salviï¬†c purpose of the chosen
servant of Isaiah is to bring forth justice (Isa.Â€42:1, 7, 16) and through his activity the
Lord’s salvation will reach to the ends of the earth (Isa.Â€49:6). Although the images
are different, the purpose is the same, to accomplish the salvation of the people.
48:4â•‡ tasfā la-)ella yaḥammu ba-lebbomu/the hope of those who grieve in their hearts:
The author extends the purpose of the Son of Man by describing the Son of Man
as the hope for those who grieve in their hearts, or are broken-hearted. This bears
a striking resemblance to the purpose of the Servant, who is to bind up the broken-
hearted, bl-yrb#nl #bxl (Isa.Â€61:1).140
48:5â•‡ Yewaddequ wa-yesaggedu qedmēhu/they will fall down and worship before
him:
Worship by the earth’s inhabitants is noted. They will fall down and worship, glorify,
bless and praise in song the Name of the Lord of Spirits. Similarly in the chosen
servant passages of Isaiah, worship and song are noted as the reaction to God’s
salviï¬†c activity through the chosen servant (Isa.Â€42:10–12; 49:13 cf. 43:23 where the
heavens and the depths praise the redeemer). Again the Isaianic inï¬‡uence is apparent.
A very similar prediction is made of the Davidic king in Qumran: the gentiles
“shall come before thee and worship thee” (1QSbÂ€5.28; cf. Isa.Â€60:10).141
48:5â•‡ kwellomu )ella yaxādderu diba yabs/all those who dwell upon the dry ground:
As the dry land will be refreshed with streams (cf. Isa.Â€44:3), and as God will renew
and make the desert productive, a place where people may dwell in peace and security
(cf. Isa.Â€32:16–18), so in 1Â€EnochÂ€48:5, those who dwell on dry land will be secure
enough to worship the Son of Man.
48:5â•‡ yebārekewwo wa-yesēbeḥewwo/they will bless and praise,

wa-yezēmoru lotu la-sema )egzi)a manāfest/and celebrate with psalms the name of
the Lord of Spirits:
Isaiah reports that the people rejoiced with song for the renewal the Lord brought
(cf. Isa.Â€41:16b), and they are urged to sing a new song in response to the new things
God is doing through the Servant (cf. Isa.Â€42:10). Similarly, the righteous and holy
for whom Par. En. is written will respond with songs and praise for the name of the
Lord of Spirits.
139
See Knight, Deutero-Isaiah, 54–55.
140
141
CO25117.indb 92 11/03/2011 11:58

As Theisohn has pointed out,142 IsaiahÂ€49 is the basis for this passage, but
IsaiahÂ€42 and nearby passages that include the idea of praise and song have also been
incorporated. Throughout Deutero-Isaiah, praise for God is a pertinent theme, and so
it is appropriate for our author to include that same theme also.143
3.3.3â•‡ 1 En. 48:6–7
6â•‡ 27Wa-ba-)enta-ze 28kona xeruya wa-xebu)a 29ba-qedmehu 30)em-qedma yetfaṭṭar

(ālam wa-)eska 31la-(ālam.
7â•‡ 32Wa-kašato 33la-qeddusān wa-ṣādeqān 34ṭebab la-)egzi)a manāfest )esma
(āqaba kefālomu la-ṣādeqān )esma ṣal)ewwo wa-mannanewwo 35la-zentu
(ālam za-(ammaḍā 36wa-kwello megbāro 37wa-fenāwihu ḍal(u 38ba-semu
la-)egzi)a manāfest 39)esma ba-sema zi)ahu yedexxenu 40wa-faqādē kona
la-ḥeywatomu.
6â•‡ And because of this he was chosen and hidden before him before the world was
created, and forever.
7â•‡ But the wisdom of the Lord of Spirits has revealed him to the holy and the
righteous, for he has kept safe the lot of the righteous, for they have hated and
rejected this world of iniquity, and all its works and its ways they have hated in
the name of the Lord of Spirits; for in his name they are saved, and he is the one
who will require their lives.
Variants
27
Wa-ba-)enta-ze/And because of this: BMÂ€485, BMÂ€491, AbbÂ€35, AbbÂ€55 and TanaÂ€9
omit the conjunction wa-.
28
kona xeruya/he was chosen: TanaÂ€9 reverses the order of these two words.
29
ba-qedmehu—la-(ālam/before him—forever: Berl has )em-qedma (ālam
ba-qedmehu/prior to the world before him.
30
)em-qedma/before: BmÂ€485, AbbÂ€35, and AbbÂ€55 have za)enbala/before; BMÂ€491
and TanaÂ€9 have )enbala/before.
31
la-(ālam/forever: BodlÂ€5 and ï¬†ve other manuscripts add ba-qedmehu/before him;
two manuscripts add qedmehu/before him.
32
Wa-kašato/but.â•›.â•›.has revealed him: BMÂ€491 has the medio-passive wa-takašta/but
he was revealed; TanaÂ€9 has wa-kašata lomu/but he revealed to them.
33
la-qeddusān wa-ṣādeqān/to the holy and the righteous: corrected Ryl and TanaÂ€9
agree as printed above; AbbÂ€35, AbbÂ€55, Ull, and BMÂ€Add.Â€24990 have
la-ṣādeqān wa-la-qeddusān; the original text of Ryl, and all other manuscripts
have la-qeddusān wa-la-ṣādeqān;
142
143
Westermann, Isaiah: 40–66, 14. Another major theme is the admonition, “Fear not!”
)ryt l), Westermann, Isaiah: 40–66, 13.
CO25117.indb 93 11/03/2011 11:58

34
ṭebab/wisdom: BMÂ€485, AbbÂ€55, and TanaÂ€9 have wa-ṭebabu, adding the possessive
personal pronoun, as is idiomatically common. Berl has wa-la-ṭebab, treating
ṭebab/wisdom as an indirect object, along with “the holy and the righteous.”
35
la-zentu/this: BMÂ€485, BMÂ€491, AbbÂ€35, AbbÂ€55, TanaÂ€9, BodlÂ€5 and nine other
manuscripts have la-ze/this, which is simply a shorter form of the demonstrative.
36
wa-kwello/and all (acc.): Berl has wa-kwellu/and all (nom.).
37
wa-fenāwihu/and its ways: AbbÂ€55 omits this phrase.
38
ba-semu la-)egzi)a/in the name of the Lord: Berl has ba-sema )egzi)a, construct
form.
39
)esma/for: BMÂ€485 omits the word. Corrected Ryl has an erasure after this word.
The erasure occurs at the beginning of the next line, where a blank space now
exists. Knibb does not comment on it. The space could accommodate a repetition
of )esma. If this is the case, this would explain the corrector’s erasing it.
40
wa-faqādē/and desire (and he is the one who will require): BMÂ€485 has wa-ba-
faqādu/and of his own accord; Berl has wa-faqād/and the desire; TanaÂ€9 and
three other manuscripts have wa-faqādu/and his desire. Black, 1Â€Enoch, 211,
connects faqādē and e0kdikhth=j, and translates “and he (i.e. the Lord of Spirits)
will become the avenger of their lives” (see Dillmann, Lexicon, 1362).
Notes
48:6â•‡ xeruya/chosen:
The “Chosen One” or “Elect One” is another of the designations for the ï¬†gure who
is also called the Son of Man, and so in this poem the chosenness of the Son of Man
is expressed through the adjective xeruy.144 This concept seems to have been a key
trigger for the author of Par. En. in choosing biblical material for the development of
the Son of Man in this poem. The concept of chosenness for the servant is used by
Isaiah to refer to the nation of Israel in 41:8–9, 44:1–2 and 45:4, but to an individual
in 42:1, 49:7.145 God upholds the chosen servant and put his spirit upon him to bring
forth justice.146 This concept informs the portrayal of the Son of Man in Par. En. to a
very deep, core level. As the Isaianic chosen servant is to reestablish justice for the
144
VanderKam, “Righteous One,” 172–74 notes the many occurrences of this designation. G.
Schrenk, e0klekto&j, TDNT vol. IV; 183–4, notes the narrowing that has occurred in apoca-
lyptic literature in the usage of this term. Traditionally it had been used of the nation of Israel
as whole to refer to their being the elect or chosen of God, but in apocalyptic literature it has
been narrowed to refer to the select in-group who are considered to be the righteous remnant,
in contrast to the outsiders who are considered to be wicked and apostate. The Elect One
as a single ï¬†gure is the representative of the elect ones, and has the same characteristics of
righteousness, hiddenness and eventual revelation to the wicked at a proper time.
145
Grelot, Les Poèmes du Serviteur, 132, argues that the concept of being chosen is spread too
broadly throughout the Old Testament to claim that the Servant Songs are the foundation
for 1Â€EnochÂ€48. However, when taken in conjunction with the other allusions to the Servant
Songs, chosenness stands out as a major similarity.
146
Muilenberg, Isaiah: 40–66, 464; Westermann, Isaiah 40–66, 94; McKenzie, Second Isaiah,
37.
CO25117.indb 94 11/03/2011 11:58

exiles, so the Enochic chosen Son of Man is to reestablish justice for the righteous
and elect and holy.
48:6â•‡ xebu)a/hidden:
Par. En. depicts the Son of Man as “hidden.”147 The nearest concept in the chosen
servant passages is the claim that God has hidden, yn)ybxh (the root of xebu) is a
cognate of )bx), the servant in the shadow of his hand, like an arrow hidden, ynrytsh,
in a quiver (Isa.Â€49:2), as noted by Theisohn.148 Both the Son of Man and the chosen
servant are hidden, but both are very real. The hiddenness of God’s activities is also
expressed in the Isa.Â€45:15, “God is hidden,” rttsm l). The idea being expressed
in IsaiahÂ€45 is that God’s actions and plans were hidden from view, both from the
exiles in Babylon and from the world at large, until the rise of Cyrus to power. Then it
became clear to the prophet and was revealed to the world. Similarly the Son of Man
is hidden until his revelation to the righteous as well as to the oppressors.
48:7â•‡ kašato/revealed him:

The hidden Son of Man is to be revealed to the righteous and holy. This idea of the
revelation of the previously hidden is also contained in Isaiah’s proclamation of God’s
salviï¬†c activities for the restoration of Israel. God announces what was previously
hidden (Isa.Â€48:6). What has been in planning (the rise of Cyrus in IsaiahÂ€45) was to
be brought out into the open. Further the prostration of kings and princes before the
chosen servant of God implies that he has been revealed to them in Isa.Â€49:7. This
hiddenness of divine activity followed by its revelation found in IsaiahÂ€45, 48 and 49
seems to have informed the concept of the hidden Son of Man who is to be revealed
to the holy and righteous.
48:7â•‡ )esma (āqaba kefālomu la-ṣādeqān/for he has kept safe the portion of the
righteous:
The Son of Man’s purpose is to restore the righteous and keep safe their portion.
This is a justice issue, an issue of the reversal of fortunes, a salviï¬†c matter. The
redemptive purpose of the Son of Man has a conceptual counterpart in the purpose
of the chosen servant of Isaiah. In Isa.Â€42:3 the prophet claims that the servant will
preserve the poor and lowly, for he will not break a bruised reed or quench a dimly
burning wick. His activity will include the release of prisoners (Isa.Â€42:7) and his
task will be to raise up the tribes of Jacob, to restore the survivors of Israel, as well
as to be a light to the nations (Isa.Â€42:6, 49:6). Thus the function of the Son of Man
is essentially the same as that of the chosen servant: the restoration of the righteous.
147
S. Mowinckel, He That Cometh (Oxford: Blackwell, 1956), 385–7.
148
Theisohn, Der auserwählte Richter 119–21. Muilenberg, Isaiah: 40–66, 567, understands
that “God protected his servant and hid him in secret until the time appointed for his
service.” Westermann, Isaiah 40–66, 208, emphasizing the parallelism of the verse, believes
that the hiddenness forms part of the servant’s equipment. Knight, Deutero-Isaiah, 180–81,
envisions the hiddenness to be for the purpose of training.
CO25117.indb 95 11/03/2011 11:58

3.3.4â•‡ The Son of Man and the Servant in Isaiah
Theisohn has graphically illustrated that 1Â€EnochÂ€ 48 is greatly inï¬‡uenced by

IsaiahÂ€49.149 But closer study has revealed that both IsaiahÂ€42 and IsaiahÂ€49 provide
many points of similarity. These extensive similarities suggest that this author has
depended on both chosen servant passages (Isa.Â€42:1–9 and Isa.Â€49:1–7) for the devel-
opment of the Son of Man in 1Â€EnochÂ€48.150
a) The Son of Man is named before the Lord of Spirits before time (1Â€EnochÂ€48:2–3),
while the servant recounts having been called and named before birth (Isa.Â€42:6;
49:1, 5; cf. Isa.Â€43:1, 7; 44:24; 45:3, 4; 48:12; Jer.Â€1:5).
b) The naming of the Son of Man is put in the context of references to creation
(1Â€En.Â€48:3) and the commissioning of the chosen servant is done in the context
of references to creation (Isa.Â€42:5; cf. Isa.Â€43:1, 7; 44:24; 45:7).
c) The Son of Man is to be the light of the Gentiles (1Â€EnochÂ€48:4), as was the
servant (Isa.Â€42:6; 49:6). This seems to be a direct quotation. It may also be
tempting to see it as an interpolation by a later hand. The tripartite structure of the
passage noted above, however, militates against that possibility. In this verse,
the idea of being a light to the Gentiles is the second, but undoubled thought of the
verse.
d) Both ï¬†gures have a salviï¬†c purpose. In 1Â€EnochÂ€48:4 the imagery used is of a staff
to lean on, while in Isa.Â€42:1, 7, 16 it is of preserving a dimly burning wick and
not breaking a bruised reed.
e) Prostration in worship by earth’s inhabitants before the Son of Man (1Â€EnochÂ€48:5)
is taken from the prostration by kings and princes before the servant
(Isa.Â€49:7).
f) Singing and celebration in praise of God’s salvation (1Â€EnochÂ€48:5) echo the
songs of joy in the heavens (Isa.Â€49:13; cf. Isa.Â€44:23; 54:1). Isaiah’s audience is
also commanded to break forth into songs of praise over the activity of the chosen
servant (Isa.Â€42:10–12).
g) The chosenness of the Son of Man (1Â€EnochÂ€48:6) mirrors the words of God
to the servant that God, the faithful Holy One of Israel, has chosen the servant
(Isa.Â€42:1; 49:7; cf. Isa. 44:1, 43:10).
149
Theisohn, Der auserwählte Richter 119–21.
150
VanderKam, “Righteous One, ” 189–90, observes seven elements taken from Deutero-
Isaiah: 1) the epithet “Righteous One,” 2) the description “Chosen One,” 3) pre-existence/
chosen from the womb, 4) judgment of the oppressors, 5) the phrase, “light to the nations,”
6) the verb tala(āla for the exaltation of the servant, 7) the occurrence of “anointed” (Cyrus
in Isa.Â€45:1) and “son of man” (in Isa.Â€51:12, where it is merely a poetic parallel to #wn)).
Frederick Houk Borsch, The Son of Man in Myth and History (Philadelphia: Westminster
Press, 1967), 154, however, does not believe dependency must be postulated. Duetero-Isaiah
can be seen as drawing on the same background. But, to allow that the author of Par. En.
may have “borrowed an expression or two” surely does not do justice to the extensive use of
Deutero-Isaiah’s concepts.
CO25117.indb 96 11/03/2011 11:58

h) And the hiddenness of the Son of Man (1Â€EnochÂ€48:6) matches the servant’s
having been hidden by God like an arrow in the quiver (Isa.Â€49:2), to be revealed
at the appropriate time (1Â€EnochÂ€48:7, Isa.Â€49:7 implies revelation).
i) Even the reaction of the earthly authorities, the kings and mighty ones, is similar
in that they offer obeisance to the chosen one (1Â€EnochÂ€48:8; Isa.Â€49:7).
It is curious to note the absence of any quotations or allusions to the suffering servant
song (Isa.Â€52:13–53:12). It has been noted that the Son of Man is not a “suffering”
servant,151 and there may be a simple reason. The servant in Isaiah suffers vicariously
and through his wounds the nation is healed and their sins forgiven. One literary
reason for this absence may be that the adjective “chosen” is not used of the suffering
servant. Perhaps this indicates that for the author of Par. En., the suffering servant
was not considered the same as the chosen servant. Since the author of Par. En. was
considering the Son of Man as the “Chosen One” the characteristics of the suffering
servant perhaps were not mined for helpful concepts and ideas. We have seen that
this author apparently distinguished between the chosen servant as the nation and
the chosen servant as an individual, and drew mainly upon the passages in which the
chosen servant is an individual. Therefore it is consistent to surmise that, since the
suffering servant was not described also as “chosen,” the suffering servant was not
considered for the development of the ï¬†gure of the Son of Man.
The characterisitics associated with the Son of Man in 1Â€EnochÂ€48, however,
are clearly drawn from both IsaiahÂ€42 and 49, passages which portray the chosen
servant as an individual. By applying these characteristics and ideas concerning the
chosen servant of God, the author is developing the purpose of the Son of Man in
terms of having the same roles and functions as the chosen servant. As salvation and
restoration accompany the chosen servant, so the Son of Man will accomplish the
salvation and restoration of the righteous community for whom Par. En. was written.
3.3.5â•‡ The Son of Man and Pre-existence
1Â€EnochÂ€48:2–7, together with 1Â€EnochÂ€62:7, has formed the basis for the debate
concerning the pre-existence of the Son of Man in the conception of the author. It has
been argued that because the Son of Man was named in the presence of the Lord of
Spirits before the sun, the constellations and the stars were created (1Â€EnochÂ€48:2–3),
and because the Son of Man had been chosen and hidden from everlasting
(1Â€EnochÂ€48:6), the author’s belief that the Son of Man enjoyed a pre-mundane
existence is implied.152 This conclusion, however, rests upon a strictly chronological
151
E.g. Sjöberg, Der Menschensohn, 128–32; Colpe, o( ui9o&j, 426; VanderKam, “Righteous
One,” 190.
152
Mowinckel, He That Cometh, 370–73; Maurice Casey, “The Use of Term ‘Son of Man’ in
the Similtudes of Enoch,” 12–13, 28 and Son of Man, 99–112; Chrys C. Caragounis, The
Son of Man (Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr [Paul Siebeck], 1986), 114–15; R. G. Hamerton-Kelly,
CO25117.indb 97 11/03/2011 11:58

arrangement of the events. According to the order of creation, the sun and the stars,
i.e. the means whereby time can be organized, were created chronologically prior to
the earth and its inhabitants. If the Son of Man is said to be named before the sun
and stars were created, then this implies a pre-mundane existence: hence the Son
of Man is pre-existent. This argument may be too literalistic. Manson, followed
by VanderKam, posits an existence for the Son of Man in the mind of God.153 This
view understands the naming to be concerned more with purpose and mission than
with ontology. The revelatory and judicial purpose of the Son of Man existed from
everlasting, rather than the actual, ontological existence of the ï¬†gure.
It may be appropriate to push the understanding even further. The apocalyptic
nature of Par. En., while it is strongly motivated by the reality in time of the
oppressed existence of the righteous community, nonetheless employs a multivalent
mode of thought154 that mixes heaven and earth, as well as the past, the present, and
the future. Hooker notes insightfully, “apocalyptic (literature) by its very nature held
together what was at once present and future, that which was already in existence,
but yet still had to take place.”155 Heavenly reality inï¬‡uences earthly events, and
“future earthly events exist already as heavenly realities.”156 This perspective holds
that the chronological order of events is of little concern, since God, who is above all
time, is in control of all time and of the earthly events that take place in time. This
view perceives that all time exists at once for God, and so in the heavenly realm,
even though words are present that sometimes indicate temporal precedence, their
temporal sense here is less important than their meaning in terms of an expression
of authority. Here the Son of Man precedes the sun and stars in regard to authority,
Pre-existence, Wisdom, and the Son of Man: A Study of the Idea of Pre-Existence in the New
Testament (Cambridge: The University Press, 1973), 17–18. Sjöberg, Der Menschensohn,
83–101 and Theisohn, Der auserwählte Richter, 128–39, also discuss the issue and favor
the ontologically pre-existent understanding. Messel, Der Menschensohn in den Bilderreden
Henochs, 52–55, however, takes the position that verse 3 is an interpolation, and that verse 6
is so corrupt that all that can be gleaned from verse 6 is that the Son of Man was hidden from
the beginning. He suggests the “beginning” is not the beginning of time (i.e. pre-mundane
existence) but the beginning of Israel’s memory. Further the naming of the Son of Man
refers not to his pre-mundane appointment but to the angels in the kingly court refreshing the
memory of the supreme king as to the Son of Man’s availability. Thus Messel, in a dubious
way, deï¬†nes pre-existence out of the passage altogether.
153
Manson, “The Son of Man in Daniel, Enoch and the Gospels,” 136, points out that the
Hebrew and Jewish mind had no qualms about believing in the pre-mundane existence of
Israel either. He cites Ber.Â€R.Â€1.Â€2b, where six things were thought to have preceded creation:
some were actually created, e.g. the Torah and the Throne of Glory, while others were only
planned, e.g. the Patriarchs and the nation of Israel, which then existed only in the mind of
God. See also VanderKam, “Righteous One,” 179–82.
154
Collins, The Apocalyptic Imagination, 39, 11–17, used the term“multivalent” in discussing
“the allusive and evocative power of apocalyptic symbolism,” and this, it seems to me, is a
very helpful way of expanding our concepts to grasp what the ancient writers were seeking
to convey.
155
Hooker, The Son of Man in Mark, 43.
156
Hooker, The Son of Man in Mark, 43.
CO25117.indb 98 11/03/2011 11:58

more so than in chronology. Furthermore, the naming of a king as God’s son was an
honoriï¬†c way of bestowing or claiming authority and was not to be understood as
literal. A similar claim is made by the Sumerian and Babylonian kings. They claimed
that they were named by God before time, but this was a means of glorifying and
solidifying their claim to the throne, rather than positing actual pre-existence.157
Here attributing pre-mundane existence to the Son of Man is a way of expressing his
authority, power, and honor. Understanding apocalyptic literature in this polyvalent
way, in which all time is perceived synchronically in the heavenly realm, removes the
difï¬†culty of literalistic limits and the necessity of positing an existence in the mind of
God. It is a poetic, honor-bestowing mode of discourse that ï¬†ts well with the apoca-
lyptic concern to show that the representative of the righteous is powerful enough to
reverse the oppression that the righteous and elect ones are suffering.
3.3.6â•‡ Summary of the Exegesis of 1 En. 48:2–7
This passage, then, adds to the picture taken from DanielÂ€7. In 1Â€EnochÂ€46 the author
took the image of the one like a son of man from DanielÂ€7. Here the author takes
another image, that of the chosen servant of God from IsaiahÂ€42 and 49, and applies
the attributes of the chosen servant to the Son of Man, while not incorporating the
Isaianic complex of the servant as the nation, or as suffering. Thus, besides accom-
panying the Head of Days, the Son of Man is further revealed to have the role and
function of the chosen servant. The ï¬†gure of the Son of Man, then, as based on the
chosen servant, is further developed in 1Â€EnochÂ€48 in the following ways:
a) named from eternity;

b) named before the Lord of Spirits;
c) a support for the righteous;
d) the light to the Gentiles;
e) source of hope;
f) worthy of worship and celebrated with great joy;
g) hidden;
h) revealed to his followers; and
i) his followers are called “righteous/elect/holy”.
The Son of Man, like the chosen servant, is named to the high purpose of saving the
community, and so is worthy of worship. Great joy accompanies his appointment,
although the chosenness of the Son of Man is hidden from the oppressors of the righteous
community. Furthermore, comments about creation refer not to ontological pre-existence,
but to the high purpose, authority and honor to which the Son of Man has been named.
157
Sjöberg, Der Menschensohn, 88–90; Manson, “The Son of Man in Daniel, Enoch and the
Gospels,” 140.
CO25117.indb 99 11/03/2011 11:58

3.4â•‡ Exegesis of 1 Enoch 62

Chapter 62 brings the reader to a more immediate investigation of the judgment of
the kings and the mighty ones. The vision describes a still future event, but in this
chapter of the Third Parable a more detailed and explicit account of the judgment of
the oppressors is described. Their acknowledgment of the Son of Man on the throne,
their plea for mercy, and their reaction are narrated.
The passage begins with a challenge to the kings to recognize the Elect One,
but then the references to this judicial ï¬†gure are made with four instances of two
different forms of the term “Son of Man.” As the passage opens, the kings and the
mighty ones are startled to see the judge on the throne, and they fall down in worship
and praise. The author announces condemnation through the image of childbirth, and
the vindication of the righteous and elect through the image of feasting at table with
the Son of Man. Because the kings and the mighty ones had oppressed the righteous
and elect, reversal of their fortunes follows. Whereas the kings and the mighty ones
had feasted sumptuously, lorded it over the righteous and elect, and been clothed in
luxurious garments, they are now described as falling down and worshipping that Son
of Man, their faces downcast, destined to become a spectacle of punishment for the
righteous and elect. In contrast, the righteous and elect shall be raised up, they shall
cease to be downcast, they shall feast with the Son of Man, and they shall be clothed
with glorious, non-aging garments, which symbolically are the gift of eternal life
from the Lord of Spirits.
The passage has ï¬†ve major themes:
62:1–3 Vision of the Judge on the Throne

62:4–5 Pain of Judgment
62:6–9 Hopes Set on that Son of Man
62:10–12 Punishment of the Mighty Kings
62:13–16 Blessedness of the Righteous and Elect.
The judicial ï¬†gure appears ï¬†ve times in this chapter, ï¬†rst as the Elect One, and then
as the Son of Man. The change from “Elect One” to “Son of Man” perhaps has been
occasioned by the use of the image of the pain of childbirth. The two terms, however,
are used synonymously, and the judicial function of the ï¬†gure is evident for both the
wicked and the righteous.158
The themes of the chapter are investigated below, with a fuller examination of the
verses in which the term “Son of Man” appears.
158
CO25117.indb 100 11/03/2011 11:58

3.4.1â•‡1 En. 62:1–3â•‡ Vision of the Judge on the Throne
In the ï¬†rst portion of this chapter, the kings, the mighty, the exalted and those
who possess the earth are commanded to acknowledge the Elect One, if they can.
Narratively, the author is presenting an irony: the ones who are accustomed to all the
power and to the authority to command others are now being commanded by the Lord
of Spirits. This prepares the reader for their imminent condemnation.
In 1Â€EnochÂ€62:2 a signiï¬†cant textual problem exists. All the manuscripts preserve
the text, wa-nabara )egzi)a manāfest diba manbara sebḥatihu/the Lord of Spirits sat
upon the throne of his glory. Scholars have suggested one of two emendations, even
though the textual evidence as it now stands does not present support for it. Charles,
following Dillmann, emends the text to read wa-)anbaro )egzi)a manāfest diba
manbara sebḥatihu/the Lord of Spirits placed him (i.e. the Elect One mentioned in
verse 1) upon the throne of his glory.159 Black, however, emends the text by following
Liber Nativitatis Tom.Â€41,59: kai ekaqise o eklektoj [o kurioj twn pneumatwn]
epi tou qron. thj doc. aut./and the Elect One sat on the throne of his glory.160
Professor James C. VanderKam has also suggested in private communication
that this may be an instance of misreading, if the original was in unpointed Hebrew.
Perhaps b#yw was in the Vorlage, intended to be read as the Hiphil, “he caused to sit,”
b#e$y,wA. But it may have been misread as the Qal, “he sat,” b#e$yw" A, since both forms use
the same consonants. This would easily explain how the received Ethiopic text could
indicate that the Lord of Spirits is sitting on the throne. If it was misread in this way,
it would further support Dillman’s emendation.
Emendation of this textual problem is also warranted since the appearance of
the Lord of Spirits on the throne drastically interrupts the ï¬‡ow of the passage. The
passage has started with a focus upon the Elect One/Son of Man, and in verseÂ€5 the
ï¬†gure (now referred to as “that Son of a Woman”) is seated upon the throne of his
glory. Further, in 1Â€EnochÂ€49:3, the fuller allusion to the indwelling of the spirit of
righteousness from Isa.Â€11:3, the spirit is said to be dwelling in the Elect One. Yet
again, the Elect One has already been depicted as sitting on his throne in the future
(1Â€EnochÂ€51:3) and as being placed on the throne of glory by the Lord of Spirits
(1Â€EnochÂ€61:8). For all these reasons, it appears that emendation is necessary at
1Â€EnochÂ€62:2. Further, the text as it has been preserved in extant manuscripts, with the
Lord of Spirits sitting on the throne, can be explained as having been corrupted due to
the theological motivation of preserving the supremacy of the Lord of Spirits. Black’s
suggestion is less satisfying, for it requires positing a scribal error in the Greek text
from which he takes his suggestion. VanderKam’s suggestion is more satisfying,
since it requires only one word, b#yw, in a Hebrew Vorlage that can be read two ways,
159
Charles, The Ethiopic Version of the Book of Enoch, 112. This is also the conclusion reached
by Sjöberg, Der Menschensohn, 166 and Theisohn, Der auserwählte Richter, 87.
160
Black, I Enoch, 235, 357, where he suggests that o kurioj twn pneumatwn is a scribal or
translator’s emendation.
CO25117.indb 101 11/03/2011 11:58

as a Hiphil, which fits the sense of the passage, or as a Qal, which disrupts the flow of
the passage. Therefore, Dillmann’s suggestion of emending nabara, “sat,” to )anbaro,
“placed him,” is preferable.
The Elect One sitting on the throne of his glory resumes the image of the heavenly
courtroom scene of Dan. 7:9, where the thrones are placed for the Ancient of Days
and the human-like one who is to be presented.161 Theisohn has noted that the occur-
rences of the glorious throne display some variations of expression. The verb can
be perfect, imperfect or causative, and the possessive pronoun may be present or
absent. These variations in terminology indicate to Theisohn that the references
to the throne have not reached a technical, ï¬†xed state. Further, he investigates the
Biblical and intertestamental background, and discovers a similar variation. The
constitutive elements of the throne include a) being within a vision, b) a venue for
depicting God, c) being seated, and d) including in the vision the hosts around the
throne. Foundational texts are 1Â€KingsÂ€22 and IsaiahÂ€6. Pss.Â€110:1, 5–6 is also critical
in that it presents an enthronement scene, in which God has set the davidic king upon
the throne next to God, and set him in judicial opposition to competing kings. Thus,
Theisohn attaches the monarchical connotation to the concept of the judicial ï¬†gure
upon the throne.162 (See further on 1Â€EnochÂ€69:27, 29.)
The power and authority of the Elect One upon the throne is ï¬†lled out by
resuming an allusion to Isa.Â€11:2–4. This Isaianic concept has been alluded to more
fully in 1Â€EnochÂ€49:3, where the Spirit of Righteousness is seen to be dwelling in the
Elect One. Here in 1Â€EnochÂ€62:2, only two ideas from Isa.Â€11:2–4 are incorporated,
but this is enough to allude concisely and precisely to the Isaianic passage. That the
Spirit of righteousness is poured out on the Elect One is an idea that is similar to the
Spirit of the Lord resting upon the shoot of the stump of Jesse.163 Further, the idea
of sinners being slain by the word of his mouth echoes the judgment rendered by
Jesse’s descendant in Isa.Â€11:4, in which he judges in righteousness (qdcb +p#w),
smites the earth with the rod of his mouth (wyp +b#b Cr) hkhw), and slays the wicked
((#r tymy). Again, the destruction of the unrighteous perhaps echoes the destruction
of the kingdom of the tenth horn in Dan.Â€7:26, and the destruction of Edom, Moab,
the Ammonites, the Egyptians and the Assyrians in Isa.Â€11:5–6. Through these
royal characteristics, the status and authority of the Elect One upon the throne are
enhanced.
161
See Collins and other commentaries on Daniel for the background to the image of the
thrones. See also Matthew Black, “The Throne-Theophany Prophetic Commission and the
‘Son of Man’: A Study in Tradition History,” in Robert Hamerton-Kelly and Robin Scroggs,
eds., Jews, Greeks and Christians: Religious Cultures in Late Antiquity; Essays in Honor of
William David Davies (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1976) 57–73, who discusses Enoch’s appearance
before the throne as a commissioning.
162
Theisohn, Der auserwählte Richter, 87–98. Matthew Black, “The Messianism of the
Parables of Enoch,” in J. H. Charlesworth, ed., The Messiah (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1992),
150–55, also discusses the thrones. See further on 1Â€EnochÂ€69:27, 29.
163
It is also a subtle carryover from the previous passage on the Son of Man, 1Â€EnochÂ€48, where
the allusions referred to the chosen servant upon whom the spirit rested in Isa.Â€42:1.
CO25117.indb 102 11/03/2011 11:58

While the Elect One sits, the kings, the mighty, the exalted and those who possess
the earth stand out of respect for the one upon the throne (1Â€EnochÂ€62:3).164 Now they
recognize him, and truthful judgment is passed.165
3.4.2â•‡ 1 En. 62:4–5â•‡ Pain of Judgment
The reaction of the kings, the mighty, the exalted and those who possess the earth is
expressed in terms of the pain of childbirth. That image also appears in Isa.Â€13:6–8, 21:3
and 26:17.166 Isa.Â€13:8 appears to be the best possibility for the source of the allusion
in 1Â€EnochÂ€62:4–5. Isa.Â€21:3, on the one hand, seems unlikely as the source, for it is
in the context of the prophet himself reacting to the horror of the message he has been
given, and on the other, Isa.Â€26:17 also appears to be unlikely as the source, since it
refers to the people of Judah themselves reeling under the punishment God has sent.
In Isa.Â€13:6–8, however, the subject of the pain is the Babylonian people, an enemy
oppressor, who is to be condemned. Further, the image of people looking aghast at each
other appears both in Isa.Â€13:8 and 1Â€EnochÂ€62:5. So in both Isa.Â€13:8 and 1Â€EnochÂ€62:5
the same image is used, and it is used in the same way: the pain is extreme, inevitable
and unstoppable.167 These similarities in image and usage suggest that the author of Par.
En is alluding to Isa.Â€13:6â•‚8. 1Â€EnochÂ€62:5 includes a reference to the judicial figure.
Wa-yerē) )eyu 1manfaqomu la-manfaqomu 2wa-yedanaggeḍu wa-yātēḥḥetu

gaṣṣomu 3wa-ye)exxezomu 4ḥemām soba 5yerē))eyewwo 6la-zeku3 7walda be)sit
8
)enza yenabber diba manbara sebḥatihu.
And one half of them will look at the other and they will be terriï¬†ed, and will
cast down their faces and pain will take hold of them when they see that Son of a
Woman sitting on the throne of his glory.
Variants
1
manfaqomu/one half of them: Berl omits. This was possibly omitted by parablepsis,
and does not change the sense. Since only one manuscript omits it, it is not very
signiï¬†cant.
164
165
Black, IÂ€Enoch, 213. No idle, deceitful speech is made. Black points out the similarity with
the expression qr rbd in Dt.Â€32:47.
166
Black, I Enoch, 235–6, also points to 1QHÂ€3.8ff and WisÂ€5:1ff as using the same image. In
1QHÂ€3.8ff the personal distress of the author is compared to the pain of childbirth, while
WisÂ€5:1ff reï¬‡ects the opposition between the righteous and the unrighteous, but not with the
metaphor of childbirth.
167
The only way in which the metaphor breaks down is in the outcome of the pain. Where the
mother giving birth will eventually experience the joy of a new child, the suffering of the
kings and the mighty ones will continue into condemnation. It is the righteous, who will
experience the joy of salvation. This breakdown also applies to the use of the image in
connection with the Babylonians in Isa.Â€13:8.
CO25117.indb 103 11/03/2011 11:58

2
wa-yedanaggeḍu/they will be terriï¬†ed: AbbÂ€55 omits, possibly by homoioarchton, as
three verbs all in close proximity begin with wa-ye- or wa-yā-.
3
wa-ye)exxezomu ḥemām soba yerē))eyewwo la-zeku/and pain will take hold of
them when they see that.â•›.â•›.: AbbÂ€55 has wa-yerē))eyewwo la-we)etu, possibly by
homoioarchton.
Taking variantsÂ€2 and 3 together, AbbÂ€55 reads: “and one half of them will look at the
other and they will cast down their faces and they will see that Son of Man.â•›.â•›.”
AbbÂ€55 omits the verb “terriï¬†ed” and the clause about pain, which suggests that
perhaps the scribal intention was merely to shorten, or perhaps to de-emphasize
the emotional aspects of the reactions of the kings and mighty ones.
4
ḥemām/pain: BMÂ€485 has ḥemāma/pain, in the accusative, which is probably a
simple scribal error.
5
yerē))eyewwo/they will see him: BMÂ€485 has yerē))eyu/they will see. The pronominal
sufï¬†x has been lost, which does not change the meaning but is less smooth.
TanaÂ€9 reads re)yewwo/they saw him, changing the tense into the past tense.
6
la-zeku/that yonder: TanaÂ€9 has zeku, omitting the resumptive preposition la-, and
probably having changed the accusative to a nominative (see next Variant).
7
walda be)sit/child of woman: BMÂ€485 has wald be)si/son (of) humanity, having
changed the gender to masculine, and not using the construct form. Berl AbbÂ€35
AbbÂ€55 have walda be)si, similar to BMÂ€485, but using the construct form.
TanaÂ€9 has weluda sab)/sons of man, having changed the whole phrase to the
plural. Charles’ edition reads walda be)si/son of humanity, though he notes other
manuscripts that agree with the reading of Ryl. The reading of Ryl, walda be)sit/
child of woman, is to be preferred as the lectio difficilior (see note below). The
other variants can be explained as conforming the term to a more familiar form.
Casey, however, in Solution, 103, argues that another translator has used his/her
favorite term, and therefore the reading should be walda sab). However, Casey
may have erroneously cited Tana 9 as having walda sab). According to Knibb’s
transcription, Tana 9 has pluralized the term, as noted.
Taking variantsÂ€5, 6, and 7 together, TanaÂ€9 seems to have changed the object into the
subject, reading “those yonder humans (sons of man, i.e. the kings and the mighty
ones) saw him (i.e. the Elect One of 62:1).”
8
)enza/when: BMÂ€491 has wa-)enza/and when, which has the effect of separating the
two “when-” clauses into parallel and equal events, rather than subordinating the
sitting on the throne to the child of woman being seen. It may heighten the pain
of the seeing, but probably is not original.
Notes
62:5â•‡ Wa-yerē))eyu manfaqomu la-manfaqomu/And one half of them will look at the
other:
Looking at each other in terror is a part of the reaction of the kings and mighty
ones. This mutual glancing at each other in panic is also mentioned in Isa.Â€13:8.
CO25117.indb 104 11/03/2011 11:58

Being downcast has also been described earlier, as the kings and mighty ones begin
to understand the condemnation against them. In 1Â€EnochÂ€46:6 and 48:8, they are
portrayed as downcast with shame. In contrast in 1Â€EnochÂ€62:15, the righteous and
elect will cease to be downcast as their fortunes are reversed.
62:5â•‡ zeku walda be)sit/that Son of a Woman:

The designation for the judicial ï¬†gure here is unusual (see Variant noteÂ€7 above) This
is the preferred reading, because it is the lectio difficilior.168 As Black notes, a similar
expression for a child of woman (h#) dwly) occurs in JobÂ€15:14, 25:4, where the
context is also the confrontation with mighty potentates who are put to shame. The
unusual term, that Son of a Woman/zeku walda be)sit, has probably been chosen in
an effective rhetorical move, by the image of the pain of childbirth. The logic of the
passage is that as a child being born to a woman causes her pain, so will this human,
judicial ï¬†gure in the heavenly court cause pain to the kings and mighty ones. One who
was deemed insigniï¬†cant as a newborn baby, even to the point of being unknown,
turns out to be the eschatological judge with the power to vindicate and to condemn.
The juxtaposition of the newborn child, that Son of a Woman/zeku walda be)sit and
the judicial throne of glory accentuates the terror of the kings and the mighty ones.
62:5â•‡ diba manbara sebḥatihu/on the throne of his glory:

For comments about the throne see above on 1Â€EnochÂ€62:2 and below on 1Â€Enoch
69:27, 29.
3.4.3â•‡ 1 En. 62:6–9â•‡ Hopes Set on that Son of Man
As the scene develops, the kings and the mighty burst into song and praise. Perhaps
the irony of this development is meant to highlight the desperate straits in which
the kings and the mighty perceive themselves to be. Perhaps their motivation is
a frantic attempt to reverse a shortcoming. Perhaps the author is afï¬†rming that
praise and exaltation is always appropriate, no matter the source. However, as in
1Â€EnochÂ€63:4–8, where the primary desire of the kings and mighty appears to be to
correct a failing, so that is probably the primary sense here also. Part of the effect
of this development is that the righteous and elect can be vindicated, for now ï¬†nally
their oppressors join them in properly praising and exalting the one on the throne.
1Â€EnochÂ€62:7 is the first of two verses in this passage that refer to the Son of Man.
)esma 1)em-qedm 2xebu)a 3kona walda )egwāla 4)emma-ḥeyāw wa-(āqabo le(ul

5
ba-qedma xāylu 6wa-kašato la-xeruyān.
For from the beginning the Son of Man was hidden, and the Most High kept him
in the presence of his power, and revealed him (only) to the chosen.
168
Black, IÂ€Enoch, 235–36.
CO25117.indb 105 11/03/2011 11:58

Variants
1
)em-qedm/from the beginning: BMÂ€485 has )em-qedmu; BMÂ€491 has )em-qadimu;
AbbÂ€55, TanaÂ€9 and the Garrett maunscript have )em-qedma, which may be
simply an assimilation to the more familiar form of the phrase; all of these
are variations of a phrase referring to the beginning of time, with overtones of
creation (the same phrase is used in 1 John 1:1).
2
xebu)a/hidden: Berl, AbbÂ€55 and TanaÂ€9 have xebu)/hidden. The reading in Ryl has
the accusative form in a predicate position after kona/become, while the variant
has the nominative form.
3
kona/become: BMÂ€485 omits, without a signiï¬†cant change in meaning.
4
)emma-ḥeyāw/mother of the living: Berl has )emm-ḥeyāw/mother of the living.
5
ba-qedma xāylu/in the presence of his power: AbbÂ€55 has ba-xāylu/in his power. The
“d ” of ba-qedma is written supralinearly in Ryl.
6
wa-kašato/and revealed him: BMÂ€491 Berl, TanaÂ€9 have wa-kašata/he revealed
(omitting the pronominal sufï¬†x). TanaÂ€9 adds la-qeddusān wa- before la-xeruyān:
“to the righteous and to the elect.” This is the fuller phrase, used frequently
elsewhere, and so here it is to be seen as a unifying addition to the original
reading. Further, BMÂ€491 has an expansion: wa-kašata la-xeruyān la-)ella westa
moqeḥ/and he revealed the chosen ones to those in prison. It seems unlikely that a
clause like this could have been accidentally dropped; therefore, it is more likely
to be a gloss in BMÂ€491, possibly inï¬‡uenced by 1Â€Peter 3:19.
Notes
62:7â•‡ xebu)a kona walda )egwāla )emma-ḥeyāw/the Son of Man was hidden:
The hiddenness of the Son of Man is consistent with 1Â€EnochÂ€48:6 (see comments
there). The term used for the Son of Man here, walda )egwāla )emma-ḥeyāw, is the
more formal term, which is used throughout the New Testament. His revelation to
the elect is also consistent with 1Â€EnochÂ€48:6–7. (See, too, my comments on the
Pre-existence of the Son of Man in the section on 1Â€EnochÂ€48.)
62:8â•‡ In contrast to the kings and mighty ones who praise the one on the throne once it
is too late, the righteous and elect are said to be sown and to stand before him. Black
suggests that the image of sowing is taken from Isa.Â€40:24.169 But in that passage,
the image is of a tender shoot that cannot withstand the tempest of destruction. Here,
the image seems to refer more to the surety of rootedness for the community of the
righteous. They are securely grounded in their relationship with the judge on the
throne. Further, they are said to stand before the Elect One on that day (of judgment),
presumably in gratefulness, joy and respect, in contrast to the kings and mighty who
bow down and are driven out of the presence of the Son of Man in fear and shame
(1Â€EnochÂ€62:9â•‚10). Therefore, the image of the root of Jesse standing as a signal to the
169
Black, IÂ€Enoch, 236. He also notes that the image of the righteous as a planting has already
appeared in 1Â€EnochÂ€10:16.
CO25117.indb 106 11/03/2011 11:58

nations (Isa.Â€11:10) is a more likely source for this image. Both ideas of rootedness
and standing appear in Isa.Â€11:10 and 1Â€EnochÂ€62:8.
1Â€Enoch 62:9 is the second verse in this passage that refers to the Son of Man.
Wa-yewaddequ 1kwellomu 2nagašt )azzizān wa-le(ulān 3wa-)ella 4yemallekewwā

la-yebs 5ba-qedmēhu 6ba-gaṣṣomu. Wa-yesaggedu 7wa-yessēfawewwo 8la-zeku
walda )egwāla 9ma-ḥeyāw wa-yāstabaqqwe(ewwo 10wa-yese))elu 11meḥrata )
em-xabēhu.
And all the mighty kings, and the exalted, and those who rule the dry ground, will
fall down before him on their faces and worship;170 and they will set their hope
upon that Son of Man, and will entreat him, and will petition for mercy from him.
Variants
k ellomu/all of them: Ull adds qedmēhu/before him in front of kwellomu, perhaps to
1 w
be more precise. AbbÂ€55 omits kwellomu possibly to de-emphasize slightly the

universality of the author’s views.
2
nagašt )azzizān wa-le(ulān/the mighty kings, and the exalted: (The translation more
accurately should be “the mighty and exalted kings.”) CurzonÂ€56 and BMÂ€484
omit nagašt, reading “the mighty and the exalted.” BodlÂ€5 and VatÂ€71 omit )
azzizan, which leaves “the kings and the exalted.” nagašt wa-(azzizān wa-le(ulān
is preserved by BMÂ€485, BMÂ€491, AbbÂ€35, Berl ()āzzizān), TanaÂ€9 and two other
manuscripts, “the kings and the mighty and the exalted,” which is the usual
phrase. nagašt )azzizān also occurs at 1Â€EnochÂ€62:6 and 63:1, where extensive
variants also exist.
3
wa-)ella/and those who: BMÂ€485 has la-)ella; TanaÂ€9 has wa-la-)ella.
4
yemallekewwā/they rule it (the dry ground): TanaÂ€9 has yemallekewwo, changing the
sufï¬†x from feminine to masculine. The sufï¬†x refers ahead to la-yebs, which is
treated as both masculine and feminine.
5
ba-qedmēhu/before him: AbbÂ€55 omits; BMÂ€485 has wadqu qedmēhomu/they fell
before them, changing the verb from imperfect to perfect and the antecedent
from singular, i.e. the Son of Man, to plural, which probably indicates prostration
before both the Son of Man and the Head of Days. Berl has ba-qedmēhomu/
before them.
6
ba-gaṣṣomu. Wa-yesaggedu/on their faces. And they will worship: Ryl preserves a
verse break between these two words. TanaÂ€9 reads ba-gaṣṣomu yesaggedu/on
their faces they will bow down; AbbÂ€55 reads wa-yesaggedu ba-gaṣṣomu/and they
will bow down on their faces.
170
In his translation, Knibb has not observed the verse break in Ryl. Black’s translation
(IÂ€Enoch, 60) and Charles’s edition (The Ethiopic Version of the Book of Enoch, 113) appear
to recognize a sense break where Ryl has a verse break. Knibb understands yesaggedu to
be in apposition to yewaddequ, while Black links yesaggedu and yessēfawewwo in the same
sense unit, and Charles presents a line break after ba-gaššomu. In the end this is a rather
minor point of translation style.
CO25117.indb 107 11/03/2011 11:58

7
wa-yessēfawewwo/and they will set their hope on him: BMÂ€485, AbbÂ€35, AbbÂ€55
and TanaÂ€9 have wa-yessēfawu, having dropped the sufï¬†x which looks ahead to
the object. Berl has wa-yesēbbeḥu wa-yessēfawu/they will praise and they will
set their hope on, an expansion which perhaps heightens the worship of the kings
and mighty ones.
8
la-zeku/that: Berl and Abb 55 omit la-.
9
ma-ḥeyāw/mother of the living: Berl has )emm-ḥeyāw, while all other manuscripts
have )emma-ḥeyāw. See Variant note 4 in 62:7.
10
wa-yese))elu/they will petition for: BMÂ€485, Berl and CurzonÂ€56 have wa-
yese))elewwo, having added the pronominal sufï¬†x, which looks ahead to the object.
11
meḥrata )em-xabēhu/mercy from him: Berl and two other manuscripts have
meḥrata ba-xabēhu; BMÂ€485, BMÂ€491, AbbÂ€35 and TanaÂ€9 have xab)hu meḥrata;
AbbÂ€55 omits )em-xab)hu.
Notes
62:9â•‡ wa-yessēfawewwo la-zeku walda )egwāla ma-ḥeyāw/and they will set their hope
upon that Son of Man
Again the more formal form of the term for the Son of Man is used (see comments on
1Â€EnochÂ€62:7). He is the focus of the urgent pleas of the mighty of this earth. Setting
their hopes on the Lord, as the mighty kings here set their hopes on the Son of Man,
is urged in passages like Isa.Â€40:31, in which those who do shall be lifted up as on
eagle’s wings, and Pss.Â€37:9, 34, in which the righteous are encouraged to wait on the
Lord. Here, however, an ironic contrast is being developed by the author of Par. En,
since the mighty kings will not receive mercy (1Â€EnochÂ€63:8).
Other scriptural passages also counsel what the mighty kings are portrayed as
doing here, repenting, pleading for mercy and setting their hope upon the divine one.
Ps.Â€42:6(5) asks, “Why are you cast down, O my soul, and why are you disquieted
within me? Hope in God; for I shall again praise him.” Ps.Â€33:18 promises the Lord’s
protection to those who hope in his steadfast love, while the psalmist claims to hope in
God alone in Ps.Â€62:5 and proclaims the Lord as “my hope, my trust” in Ps.Â€71:5. Again
in Ps.Â€130:7 Israel is admonished to hope in the Lord, for with the Lord there is steadfast
love and redemption (cf. Ps.Â€147:11). Isaiah also encourages his listeners in Isa.Â€30:18 by
proclaiming that the Lord will show mercy, for the Lord is a God of justice, and therefore
those who wait for him are blessed. Again Isaiah admonishes the wicked to forsake their
way and return to the Lord, for God will have mercy and abundantly pardon (Isa.Â€55:7).
While the mighty kings are described as pleading for mercy and setting their hope
on the divine one, precisely what scripture admonishes, the author of Par. En believes
the opposite, as far as the oppressors are concerned. The theological conviction
displayed here is similar to that in Prov.Â€10:28, that the righteous will be gladdened
but the expectation of the wicked will come to nothing. PsalmÂ€37 also expresses the
viewpoint of this author. PsalmÂ€37 as a whole expresses themes that are remarkably
similar to the themes of Par. En: it admonishes trust in God, committing one’s ways to
the Lord and avoiding evil; vindication is promised for the righteous and condemnation
CO25117.indb 108 11/03/2011 11:58

for the wicked. Possession of the earth is promised to the righteous who wait upon the
Lord (vsÂ€9, 11, 22, 29, 34), while the wicked, despite their wealth, will be destroyed and
vanish like smoke (vsÂ€9, 10, 15, 17, 20, 34, 36, 38). While PsalmÂ€37 does not appear to
form the literary basis for this chapter of Par. En, it does express very similar thoughts
and perspectives. In this case the apocalyptic motif of the condemnation of the wicked
without hope of mercy is consistent with the dichotomy between the righteous and the
wicked in Wisdom literature (e.g. Prov.Â€10:28 and PsalmÂ€37). It is also consistent with
the dichotomy present in the image of Two Spirits controlling humankind in Qumran’s
The Rule of the Community (1QSÂ€III–IV) and with the opposition between the “sons of
light” and the “sons of darkness” in The War Scroll (1QMÂ€I,Â€XIII).171
A prophecy of condemnation without hope of mercy is also contained in
Ezek.Â€28:11–19.172 One of three prophecies against Tyre in EzekielÂ€27–28, it contains
some of the same themes as 1Â€EnochÂ€62. Tyre173 was known for its wealth and economic
power, yet it was unfaithful to its treaties with Israel, preferring to offer tribute to the
invading armies of Egypt, Babylon and Assyria rather than uphold its part of the
defensive treaties signed with Israel. Ezekiel is so incensed by this faithlessness that
he foretells Tyre’s destruction in drastic, dramatic terms. Tyre, according to Ezekiel,
was haughty, wealthy and powerful according to earthly standards, but their error was
that they trusted in the power of their own wealth rather than in God. This is precisely
what the author of Par. En has charged against the kings and the mighty ones and those
who possess the earth. The haughtiness of the rulers of Tyre over against trusting in
God would lead to their destruction, they would lose their wealth, power and prestige,
and they would become a spectacle of horror (Ezek.Â€28:17–19). No possibility of
mercy is evident in Ezekiel’s outlook and he portrays their destruction as being due
to their deliberate neglect of God. These themes also occur in 1Â€EnochÂ€62–63 and
passim. The similarities are not close or precise enough to warrant an argument for
literary dependence, but they do reï¬‡ect a similar dualistic viewpoint: eventually the
wicked will be condemned and the righteous vindicated.
3.4.4â•‡ 1 En. 62:10–12â•‡ Punishment of the Mighty Kings
Brief notes may be made on these verses.174
a) “Lord of Spirits” is a frequent nomen dei used in all sections of Par. En, and
plausibly derived from the Hebrew “Lord of hosts,” tw)bc hwhy, or Aramaic
171
See also the discussion on dualism in apocalyptic literature in David C. Sim, Apocalyptic
Eschatology in the Gospel of Matthew (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1996),
35–41.
172
Suggested to me by Prof. James C. VanderKam.
173
Thomas L. McClellan, “Tyre,” in Paul J. Achtemeier, ed., The HarperCollins Bible
Dictionary (New York: HarperCollins Publishers; 1985, 1996), 1181–82.
174
CO25117.indb 109 11/03/2011 11:58

)twlyx/twxwr )rm.175 (See also the discussion on the exegesis of 1Â€EnochÂ€46:1

on the name “Head of Days” and 1Â€EnochÂ€46:3 on “Lord of Spirits.”) Here in
1Â€EnochÂ€62:10, the divine name is preceded by the demonstrative, in one of the
few instances in which a demonstrative is used with “Lord of Spirits.”
b) The mighty kings will be so pressured or frightened by the Lord of Spirits that
they will depart in fear, faces ï¬†lled with shame and darkness, as was already
suggested in 1Â€EnochÂ€46:6 and 1Â€EnochÂ€ 48:8. The image of faces ï¬†lled with
shame and darkness is reiterated in 1Â€EnochÂ€63:11 (see comments there). Several
scriptural passages reveal a similar image. For example, Ps.Â€83:17 contains
precisely the same image. In the context of a lament, the psalmist prays that the
enemies might be destroyed by God, that their faces might be ï¬†lled with shame
Nwlq Mhynp )lm, and that they might perish in disgrace. Dan.Â€12:2 also refers
to the shame on the faces of the condemned, while Jer.Â€51:51 admits to shame
covering the faces of the exiles. The Babylonians in Isaiah’s oracle are warned
that they will have feeble hands, their hearts will melt and they will be dismayed
when the day of the Lord comes (Isa.Â€13:6–10). Charles has noted a similarity
with 4Â€Ezra.Â€7:55.176 There the condemned plead for mercy, while acknowledging
their sin with faces blacker than darkness. He further suggests that Neh.Â€2:11
and JoelÂ€2:6 may serve as the source for this idea of dark faces. His suggestion
shares the understanding of the translators of the Authorized Version, who
translated rwr)p wcbq as “gather darkness.” By way of contrast, BDB suggests
“grow pale.” The meaning is unclear because the terminology is rare. But in any
case, Ps.Â€83:17, together with the author’s creativity, seems to be the more likely
source for this idea. These passages show that the reaction of the oppressors in
1Â€EnochÂ€62:10–12 is consistent with scriptural views.
â•… The reaction of faces ï¬†lled with shame and darkness is also a part of the
reversal of fortunes promised to the righteous. The righteous who till now have
been downcast will rejoice (1Â€EnochÂ€62:15). The kings and mighty ones, however,
who so far have had the power, wealth and pride of heads held high will now be
cast down and ï¬†lled with shame.
c) The angels of punishment, into whose hands the mighty kings are given over,
have been previously noticed as preparing iron fetters for the kings and the
mighty of the earth (1Â€EnochÂ€53:3–5), as well as preparing scourges and fetters
for their followers (1Â€EnochÂ€56:1–3).
d) The kings and the mighty ones will be punished for the wrong they have done
to the children and the chosen ones of the Lord of Spirits. Their treatment of the
righteous and elect will be the basis for the condemnation (cf. Mt.Â€25:41–46).
e) The wrath of God resting upon the wicked and the sword drunk with destruction
are common metaphors reï¬‡ected also in Isa.Â€13:9, 34:5,Â€7 and Jer.Â€46:10 (cf.Â€also
Isa.Â€13:15 for a sword as the instrument of God’s wrath).
175
Black, IÂ€Enoch, 189–92.
176
CO25117.indb 110 11/03/2011 11:58

3.4.5â•‡ 1 En. 62:13–16â•‡ Blessedness of the Righteous and Elect
The chapter concludes with a depiction of the state of blessedness of the righteous
on that day of judgment. Finally their fortunes will be reversed. The day of condem-
nation for the mighty kings will be a day of salvation and restoration for the righteous
and elect (1Â€EnochÂ€62:13). 1Â€Enoch 62:14 speaks of dwelling with that Son of Man.
1
Wa-)egzi)a manāfest dibēhomu 2yaxādder wa-mesla zeku walda )egwāla
3
ma-ḥeyāw 4yaxādderu wa-yeballe(u wa-yesakkebu wa-yetnašše)u la(ālama(ālam.
And the Lord of Spirits will remain over them, and with that Son of Man they will
dwell, and eat, and lie down, and rise up for ever and ever.
Variants
1
Wa-/and: omitted in BMÂ€485 and two other manuscripts.
2
yexādder/will dwell: Ryl preserves a verse break after this word.
3
ma-ḥeyāw/mother of the living: all other manuscripts have )emma-ḥeyāw, the more
normal form (see VariantÂ€4 in 62:7).
4
yaxādderu wa-/they will dwell and: omitted in BMÂ€485, BMÂ€491, Berl, AbbÂ€35,
AbbÂ€55, the original hand of BMÂ€492 and TanaÂ€9 (TanaÂ€9 retains wa-).
Notes
62:14â•‡ yaxādderu/they will dwell:
It is promised that the Lord of Spirits will remain with the righteous and elect and
that they will dwell with the Son of Man. A yearning for God to return and dwell
in Zion with the servants of the Lord is a late prophetic motif (e.g. Isa.Â€57:5, 65:9,
JoelÂ€4:17, 21, Zeph.Â€3:12–13, Zech.Â€2:10–14, 8:3, 8) and it forms part of the hopes
of the community of Par. En as well. The blessedness of the righteous and elect is
emphasized in the meal with the Son of Man, dwelling in his presence, being clothed
in garments of never-fading glory (1Â€EnochÂ€62:15–16). These images of feasting
echo the feast of salvation in Isa.Â€25:6–8, cf. Isa.Â€65:13, which is promised after the
destruction of the enemy. The garments perhaps echo the proclaimed salvation of
Isa.Â€61:10, where again the context is the reversal of fortunes brought about by the
Lord. In IsaiahÂ€61, the proclamation of liberty from prison (Isa.Â€61:1), the day of
God’s vengeance (Isa.Â€61:2), and the gladness and praise (Isa.Â€61:3) are themes shared
with 1Â€EnochÂ€62.
3.4.6â•‡ Summary of the Study of 1 Enoch 62
As noted at the beginning of the study of 1Â€EnochÂ€62, the focus of the passage has
been brought to a more immediate investigation of the judgment of the kings and
mighty ones. This shift brings with it a shift in the biblical allusions, and the source
material for the developing this passage appears to have been IsaiahÂ€10–13, in which
CO25117.indb 111 11/03/2011 11:58

several motifs are useful to the author. First, there is the opposition to the kings and
the mighty of the earth. The admonition and encouragement of Isaiah to be unafraid
of the Assyrians and Egyptians (Isa.Â€10:24, 11:15–16) as well as the Philistines,
Edom, Moab and the Ammonites (Isa.Â€11:14) are paralleled in 1Â€EnochÂ€62 in which
the kings, the mighty, the exalted and those who possess the earth are condemned and
sent away fearful, to the encouragement of the righteous and elect.
Then an allusion to the power of the spirit of God in Isa.Â€11:2, made in a fuller
way in 1Â€EnochÂ€49:3, is resumed more brieï¬‡y and concisely in 1Â€EnochÂ€62:2. Almost
all of Isa.Â€11:2 was cited in 1Â€EnochÂ€49:3, but in 1Â€EnochÂ€62:2 only two character-
istics are referred to, the pouring out of the spirit of righteousness and the slaying of
the wicked by the word of the mouth of the one on the throne. This is sufï¬†cient to
reestablish the power and the authority of the Son of Man to judge and condemn the
kings and the mighty ones.
Third, there is an interest in the Isaianic prophecies about the remnant, since
the author of Par. En is also interested in both the condemnation of the kings and
the mighty ones as well as the effect on the righteous. The remnant of Isaiah are
the righteous of Par. En, and they shall rejoice (Isa.Â€12:1–6, 1Â€EnochÂ€62:12) and be
restored (Isa.Â€11:11–12, 1Â€EnochÂ€62:13–16). Just as the root of Jesse shall stand as a
signal to the nations (Isa.Â€11:10), the congregation of the elect shall stand before the
judge while the mighty kings fall down to worship (1Â€EnochÂ€62:8).
Fourth, in both Isa.Â€13:6–22 and 1Â€EnochÂ€62:4–5 the same image is used in the
same way for the reaction of the condemned. The pain and agony of the condemned is
likened to the pain of childbirth: there is no respite from it; the outcome is inevitable;
but where the birth of a child issues in joy for the mother, the pain and anguish of the
condemned endures into eternity. It is the righteous remnant who experience the joy.
The cause of the pain, however, for the condemned in both Isaiah and 1Â€EnochÂ€62
is their condemnation and imminent destruction before the judge. The image then
functions in the same way in both passages.
The reference to childbirth apparently has generated the transformation of the
designation of the judicial ï¬†gure in 1Â€EnochÂ€62:5 to “that Son of a Woman,” zeku
walda be)sit. This is the textually preferred designation, and while it is unusual, it
functions rhetorically in a very effective way to emphasize the tremendous fall of the
erstwhile kings and mighty ones. This form may also be inï¬‡uenced by the reference
to the child playing over the hole of the asp and on the adder’s den (Isa.Â€11:8).
Further, these references to a child may have suggested to the translators the use of
the more formal term for the Son of Man in the rest of the chapter, walda )egwāla
)emma-ḥeyāw, literally, the Son of the Mother of the living (1Â€EnochÂ€62:7, 9, 14).
In this chapter, then, as Black has suggested, the author has boldly brought together
themes of the remnant and the condemnation of the oppressors in IsaiahÂ€10–13 with
the judgment themes of DanielÂ€7 and the judicial ï¬†gure of DanielÂ€7 with the Davidic
ï¬†gure of IsaiahÂ€11.177 DanielÂ€7 forms the basis of the vision, but in the Third Parable,
177
CO25117.indb 112 11/03/2011 11:58

when the focus has shifted to the punishment of the kings, the scene is further
developed through the use of ideas taken from IsaiahÂ€10–13. A judicial ï¬†gure judging
oppressors occurs in both DanielÂ€7 and IsaiahÂ€10–13. In 1Â€EnochÂ€62 the Son of Man
is described as sitting on the throne of his glory, having righteousness poured out
on him, having the power to judge the wicked and slay them, and at the same time
to vindicate the righteous and elect, so that they experience a glorious reversal of
fortunes in feasting and garments. Further, this ï¬†gure who had been hidden from the
kings and mighty ones, is now revealed to them as he had been to the righteous and
elect.
Developing the scene of judgment for the kings and the mighty ones in
1Â€EnochÂ€62, the author has revealed several more features about this Son of Man:
a) that he is seated upon the throne of his glory;

b) that he is ï¬†nally revealed to and recognized by the kings and the mighty;
c) that he has power to inï¬‡ict pain, terror and shame, so that darkness ï¬†lls the faces
of the kings and the mighty; and
d) that the righteous will enjoy salvation, which entails dwelling with that Son of
Man and feasting and receiving glorious, non-fading garments.
3.5â•‡ Exegesis of 1 Enoch 63:11

1Â€Enoch 63 completes the judgment scene depicted in the previous chapter and it
drives home conclusively that there will be no mercy for the kings and the mighty
ones, who are held in such bitter enmity by the righteous and elect. Chapters 62
and 63 appear to be a unit. At the beginning (62:1) and at the end (63:12), virtually
identical references to the mighty, the kings, the exalted and those who possess the
earth are found. Further, thematically, the two chapters are concerned with the same
subject matter, the judgment of the kings and the mighty ones and their reaction to
their condemnation. Thus 62:1 and 63:12 serve as an inclusio around the passage.
1Â€EnochÂ€ 63 is made up of two narrative verses and four speeches. The ï¬†rst
narrative verse (63:1) describes how the kings and the mighty ones will seek mercy
from the angels of punishment that they might fall down in worship and confess
their sins before the Lord of Spirits. The second narrative verse (63:11) contains the
reference to that Son of Man and describes how the faces of the kings and the mighty
ones will be ï¬†lled with darkness and shame, and how they will be driven away to
suffer the consequences of the judgment against them.
Three of the speeches are on the lips of the kings and the mighty ones, while the
fourth is a divine statement. Ironically the kings and the mighty ones seek to praise
God, acknowledging their lack of praise previously, their misplaced trust, and the
ultimate justice of God’s judgment. The ï¬†rst speech (63:2–4) begins with a six-fold
address to God and acknowledgment of God’s power, knowledge and righteousness.
They admit that they have now learned that the Lord over all kings is to be gloriï¬†ed,
CO25117.indb 113 11/03/2011 11:58

and that they must join in that gloriï¬†cation. In the second speech (63:5â•‚9), the kings
and the mighty ones acknowledge the guilt of not praising God and the guilt of
their trusting in their own scepter rather than in God’s power. They also confess the
fairness and justice of God’s judgment against them. In the third speech (63:10), they
lament that their ill-gotten gains cannot save them from the ï¬‡ames of Sheol. The
fourth speech (63:12) is uttered by the Lord of Spirits, who reafï¬†rms the judgment
and seals the fate of the kings and the exalted and those who possess the earth.
The verse under consideration here is 1Â€EnochÂ€63:11. It is a narrative verse that
occurs near the end of the passage and mentions “that Son of Man.” It echoes quite
clearly a similar verse (62:10) in the previous chapter . The two verses share the ideas
of the kings and the exalted being expelled from the presence of the Son of Man, and
having shame-ï¬†lled, darkened faces. That Son of Man is the judge before whom the
kings and the mighty have pleaded their case, to no avail.
3.5.1â•‡ 1 En. 63:11

1
Wa-)em-dexra-ze yemalle) gaṣṣomu 2ṣelmata 3wa-xāfrata ba-qedma zeku 4walda
)egwāla 5)emma-ḥeyāw 6wa-)em-qedma gaṣṣu 7yessaddadu wa-sayf 8yaxāder
qedma 9gaṣṣu mā)kalēhomu.
And after this their faces will be ï¬†lled with darkness and shame before that Son of
Man, and they will be driven from before him, and the sword will dwell amongst
them before him.
Variants
1
Wa-)em-dexra-ze/and after this: Ull has wa-)em-dexra/and afterwards.
2
ṣelmata/darkness: TanaÂ€9 omits.
3
wa-xāfrata/and shame: BmÂ€485 omits; TanaÂ€9 preserves xafrat/shame, i.e. not the
accusative form. Taking notes 2 and 3 together, TanaÂ€9 reads “after this their faces
will be full of shame.”
4
walda/son: walda is written supralinearly in Ryl.
5
)emma-ḥeyāw/mother of the living: Berl has )emm-ḥeyaw. See similar variants in
1Â€EnochÂ€62.
6
wa-)em-qedma/from before: BmÂ€485 has transposed two letters, wa-me)-qedma;
BMÂ€491 has substituted a preposition, wa-ba-qedma, with no change in meaning.
7
yessaddadu/they will be driven out: Ryl preserves a verse break after this word.
8
yaxāder/will dwell: TanaÂ€9 has la-yexder/let a sword dwell, having changed the verb
to subjunctive.
9
After gaṣṣu/his face (i.e. before him), BMÂ€485 adds yaxāder/it will dwell, presumably
to clarify the doubling of the prepositional phrases: “The sword will dwell before
him; it will dwell amongst them.”
CO25117.indb 114 11/03/2011 11:58

Notes
63:11â•‡ yemalle) gaṣṣomu ṣelmata wa-xāfrata/their faces will be ï¬†lled with darkness
and shame:
As noted above on 1Â€EnochÂ€62:10, a similar idea occurs in Ps.Â€83:14–19, esp. 17. In the
context of a lament, the psalmist prays that the enemies might be destroyed by God,
that their faces might be ï¬†lled with shame Nwlq Mhynp )lm, and that they might perish in
disgrace. Here in 1Â€EnochÂ€63:11 the author claims that the kings and the mighty ones,
who are the enemies and oppressors of the righteous and elect, are being condemned to
everlasting punishment in disgrace, and that “their faces will be ï¬†lled darkness and shame.”
There is also probably a concise yet precise allusion to Daniel’s prayer of lament and
penitence (Dan.Â€9:4–19; see later). Both Daniel in DanielÂ€9 and the kings and the mighty
ones in 1Â€EnochÂ€63 plead for mercy. Daniel acknowledges that he and the people are shame-
faced Nynph t#b wnlw), while the kings and the mighty ones will have their faces ï¬†lled with
darkness and shame (yemalle) gaṣṣomu ṣelmata wa-xāfrata/ t#bw K#x Mhynp t)lm). While
Daniel’s prayer is answered with a vision of mercy, the prayer of the kings and the mighty
ones is answered to the effect that no mercy will be forthcoming for them.
All of this acknowledges that the judgment brought about by the Son of Man is
indeed fair, just, and binding, to the consolation of the righteous and elect.
63:11â•‡ yessaddadu/driven out:

Here the kings and the mighty ones are driven out from the divine presence: in
contrast, in Dan. 9:7, Daniel prays also on behalf of all those who have been driven
out by God to the various lands of the Mediterranean. The prayer of Daniel is that
they will be brought back; but in 1Â€EnochÂ€63:11 the kings and the mighty ones will
be driven out to their eternal condemnation.
63:11â•‡ sayf/sword:
The sword, noted also in 62:12, symbolizes the eternal condemnation passed upon the
oppressors of the righteous. The combination of the noun sayf/sword, an inanimate
object, with the verb yaxāder/dwell, usually used of animate beings, is curious. Sayf/
sword here probably refers back to the phrase in 1Â€EnochÂ€62:12 maṭbāḥtu la-)egzi)a
manāfest, and therefore is a personiï¬†cation of the Lord of Spirits. As such, it is an
image of enduring condemnation. Connotations may include the sword that is drunk
with the blood of the slain enemy (Isa.Â€34:6), and the sword held by the guardian
angel after Adam and Eve had been expelled from the Garden (Gen.Â€3:24). A similar
idea is expressed in 2Â€Sam.Â€12:10, where David is warned that since he had cut down
Uriah the Hittite with the sword of the Ammonites, the sword would never depart
from his household, i.e. it would remain before him. So, the sword symbolizes the
judgment against those with whom God is displeased. These citations indicate that
the image is a fairly common biblical image,178 and while none of them may have
been alluded to by the author of Par. En., nonetheless the image was familiar to him.
178
See also multiple uses of the image of the sword of judgment in Jeremiah and Ezekiel.
CO25117.indb 115 11/03/2011 11:58

1Â€EnochÂ€63 and Daniel 9

Two allusions to the prayer of lament and penitence179 in DanielÂ€9 have been noted
above, and more are noteworthy. A comparison of 1Â€EnochÂ€63 with DanielÂ€9 yields
many fascinating, contrasting points of contact. In DanielÂ€9, the righteous Daniel
vicariously confesses the sins of the nation to God, but in 1Â€EnochÂ€63 the kings
and the mighty ones, the wicked oppressors of the righteous, plead for mercy for
themselves and confess their own sins before the Lord of Spirits. Daniel addresses
God with a three-part address (Dan.Â€9:4), but the kings and the mighty ones use a
six-fold address, followed by an acknowledgment of God’s power, glory, and unfath-
omable knowledge (1Â€EnochÂ€63:3). Both Daniel and the kings and the mighty ones
confess God’s righteousness (Dan.Â€9:7, 14, 1Â€EnochÂ€63:3), and both confess guilt.
Daniel admits the guilt of rebellion and disobedience (Dan. 9:5, 11, 14, 15, 16) and
the error of not listening to God’s servants the prophets (Dan.Â€9:6), while the kings
and the mighty ones admit the guilt of not giving thanks to God, of not glorifying
the name of the Lord of Spirits, or his works, and of trusting in their own scepter and
power. They admit that their ill-gotten gains cannot save them from their ï¬†ery destiny.
Further, while Daniel acknowledges that righteousness belongs to God, and that
they are shamefaced, Mynph t#b wnlw hqdxh ynd) Kl (Dan.Â€9:7,8), in 1Â€EnochÂ€63:11
the faces of the kings and the mighty ones will be ï¬†lled with darkness and shame
yemalle) gaṣṣomu ṣelmata wa-xāfrata/t#bw K#x Mhynp t)lm. The implication in
DanielÂ€9 is that the shame will be removed, while in Par. En., the shame and darkness
is everlasting for the kings and the mighty ones.
Similarly, while Daniel is praying on behalf of all those who have been driven
out, near or far (Dan.Â€9:7), the kings and the mighty ones will suffer the fate of being
driven out (1Â€EnochÂ€63:11). For Daniel, those driven out will be recalled, as from
Egypt (Dan.Â€9:5), but for Par. En., the kings and the mighty ones have reached the
point of no return.
These many points of contact are made the more interesting by the contrasting
outcomes of each prayer. The outcome of Daniel’s prayer of confession is that he is
given a vision of mercy (Dan.Â€9:24–27). The outcome of the plea of the kings and the
mighty ones is that no mercy is forthcoming. Even when the oppressors seek mercy
at the last, their former sins are so heinous that none is available. This again functions
to console the righteous and elect as they suffer in the present under the oppression
of the kings and the mighty ones, whose fate is being revealed. And so the promised
179
In DanielÂ€9, the prayer of lament and penitence is a traditional prayer that has a definite form
and structure. Prayed by a high priest or other intermediary, it includes an address to God,
a communal confession of wrongdoing, an “affirmation of God’s justice,” and a petition for
mercy, that is based not on “Israel’s merit but for God’s own sake.” This type of prayer is
characterized by “a strongly Deuteronomistic theology.” Other examples of such a prayer
can be found in post-exilic Jewish literature, such as Ezra.Â€9:6–15; Neh.Â€1:5–11, 9:5–37;
PsalmÂ€79; Bar.Â€1:15—3:8; the Prayer of Azariah and the Words of the Heavenly Luminaries
from Qumran. See Collins, Daniel, 349–350, 359. See also Smith-Christopher, Daniel L.,
The Book of Daniel (New Interpreters Bible, Vol. VII; Nashville: Abingdon, 1996), 122.
CO25117.indb 116 11/03/2011 11:58

reversal of fortunes also extends to the plea for mercy. The plea of the righteous and
elect will be answered with salvation, as Par. En. reveals; the plea of the kings and the
mighty ones in the end will be answered with condemnation for their past treatment
of the righteous and elect.
Two main points come through this narration of the last judgment. One is that insincere,
last-minute praise and confession are ineffective. Indeed, in 1Â€EnochÂ€62–63 it is too
late for mercy. The condemned plead for mercy (62:9) but do not receive it, and they
acknowledge that they do not deserve it (63:8). In 1Â€EnochÂ€50, mercy appears to be
available for the Gentiles before the judgment takes place (1Â€EnochÂ€50:2), but once
judgment is in process, then it is too late: none shall be forthcoming (1Â€EnochÂ€50:5).
For the righteous and elect, God’s mercy and compassion are great and God is long-
suffering (1Â€EnochÂ€61:13). But for the kings and the mighty no mercy is available,
because they have not acknowledged the Lord of Spirits (1Â€EnochÂ€46:6, 7; 48:10;
63:7; cf. 67:8) and they have oppressed the righteous and elect (1Â€EnochÂ€46:8; 62:11).
By the time the kings and the mighty acknowledge the authority of the judge in the
judgment process, it is too late for mercy (1Â€EnochÂ€62:9–10; 63:4, 11).
The other point is that God’s judgment is just, complete and fair, as will be
acknowledged even by the condemned. The function of a passage like this is to illus-
trate graphically and vividly to the righteous and elect that their oppression will end,
and they will enjoy salvation in the presence of the Son of Man. Their oppressors,
however, will be shamed in everlasting, non-reversible condemnation.
The author of Par. En., in the course of developing this scene, reveals four
additional characteristics of the Son of Man:
a) that a request is made to him;

b) that the judged will plead for mercy;
c) that no mercy will be forthcoming; and
d) that his judgment is fair, which is acknowledged even by those who are
condemned, the kings and the mighty ones.

The four verses of 1Â€EnochÂ€69:26–29 gather together many of the salient features of
the understanding of the Son of Man in Par. En. The verses refer to the great joy of
those to whom the Son of Man is revealed, for he will permanently remove sinners
and their deeds. But these verses are not in their original setting. The antecedents
of the verbs in vs 26 are uncertain, and according to the sense of the passage they
certainly do not refer back to the meteorological forces mentioned in the previous
CO25117.indb 117 11/03/2011 11:58

verses. The textual problems contained in these verses further conï¬†rm the uncer-
tainty about them in the minds of the scribes who transmitted them (see Variants).
Nevertheless, in this one passage, many key characteristics of the concept of the Son
of Man in Par. En. are gathered together.
These verses are not “at home in their present context,”180 because the antecedent
of the verbs of blessing, praising and exulting cannot be identiï¬†ed. It is not the
meteorological forces of verses 23–25.181 Those forces in verses 23–25 are the
nearest possible subject, and they are said to bless, praise and extol, however, they
bless, praise and extol the name of the Lord of Spirits. Black also points out that the
antecedent of the verbs of blessing, praising and extolling in these verses cannot be
the fallen watchers and satans of the earlier part of 1Â€EnochÂ€69, since they are the
ones falling under judgment. Finally, verse 26 indicates that the reason for the joy and
praise is that the name of the Son of Man has been revealed to the subject of the verbs
of blessing, praising and exulting. That subject can only be the righteous and elect, as
1Â€EnochÂ€48:7 and 62:7 have already indicated. Because no acceptable antecedent is
present, 1Â€EnochÂ€69:26–29 as they are presented after the Noachic section are not in
their original setting.
When one examines other possible settings, none can be found. One possibility
is the material immediately preceding the Noachic section, 1Â€EnochÂ€64:2, which is a
brief note about the fallen watchers suffering in that place of punishment. But here
again, the antecedent would be wrong. Another possibility is 1Â€EnochÂ€63:12, which
gives an apt summarizing statement by God regarding the judgment upon the kings
and mighty ones. In 1Â€EnochÂ€62–63, the judgment of the sinners and the joy of the
righteous and elect is under discussion, but 1Â€EnochÂ€ 63:12 provides a ï¬†tting and
sufï¬†cient conclusion to that section. Thus Black, following Charles and Dillmann,
is right in suggesting that the current location of these verse is not original, and
that some intervening material has been lost, or it has been replaced by the Noachic
material.182 Nevertheless, the editorial characterization of them as the “Close” of the
third parable is appropriate.183
These verses draw together many of the salient and important characteristics
of the concept of the Son of Man in Par. En. His name is said to be revealed
(1Â€EnochÂ€62:26), and he is described as sitting upon the throne of his glory
(1Â€EnochÂ€69:27, 29). He is given total authority for judgment over the wicked, and
is the cause of their destruction (1Â€EnochÂ€69:27–28). These characteristics of the Son
of Man are most pertinent to the implied readers, because it reassures them of their
eventual vindication and the punishment of their current oppressors.
180
181
Charles, 1Â€Enoch, 140, considers vsÂ€22–24 to be an interpolation. He probably is right,
because the verses appear simply to ï¬†ll out those realities that are dependent upon the oath
under discussion.
182
Black, IÂ€Enoch, 249; Charles, 1Â€Enoch, 140.
183
Black, IÂ€Enoch, 66; Charles, 1Â€Enoch, 140.
CO25117.indb 118 11/03/2011 11:58

3.6.1â•‡ 1 En. 69:26–29 (according to Ryl)
26â•‡ Wa-konomu feššeḥā 1(ābiya wa-bāraku wa-sabbeḥu 2wa-(āl(ālu ba)enta

za-takašta lomu 3semu la-we)etu 4walda )egwāla )emma-ḥeyāw.
26â•‡ And they had great joy, and they blessed and praised and exulted because the
name of that Son of Man had been revealed to them.
27â•‡ 5wa-nabara diba manbara sebḥātihu 6wa-re)su la-kwennanē 7tawehba lotu
la-walda )egwāla 8)emma- ḥeyāw59 wa-yāxālef wa-yāmāsen xāṭe)āna 10)em-gaṣṣā
la-medr.9
27â•‡ And he sat on the throne of his glory and the whole judgment was given to
the Son of Man, and he will cause the sinners to pass away and be destroyed from
the face of the earth.
28â•‡ 11wa-)ella 12)asḥatewwo la-(ālam ba-sanāsel yet)assaru 13wa-ba-māxbaromu
14
za-musenā 15yet)aḍḍawu 16wa-kwellu megbāromu yaxālef 17)em-qedma gaṣṣa
medr.
28â•‡ And those who led astray the world will be bound in chains, and will be shut
up in the assembly-place of their destruction, and all their works will pass away
from the face of the earth.
29â•‡ 18Wa-)em-ye)zē 19)i-yekawwen za-yemāsen )esma 20we)etu walda be)si tare)ya
wa-nabara diba 21manbara sebḥatihu 22wa-kwellu )ekuy )em-qedma gaṣṣu
yaxālef 23wa-yaḥawwer 24 25wa-yenaggeru la-we)etu walda 26be)si wa-yeṣanne(
24
ba-qedma )egzi)a manāfest. ze-we)etu 27messalē.â•›.â•›.za-hēnok.
29â•‡ And from then on there will be nothing corruptible for that Son of Man has
appeared and has sat on the throne of his glory, and everything evil will pass away
and go from before him; and the word of that Son of Man will be strong before
the Lord of Spirits.184 This is the third parable of Enoch.
Because TanaÂ€ 9 has some signiï¬†cant variation from Ryl in these verse, it is
appropriate to present the reading of TanaÂ€9 as well for purposes of comparison, as
reconstructed from Knibb’s apparatus.
3.6.2â•‡ 1 En. 69:26–29 (according to Tana 9)
26â•‡ Wa-konomu feššeḥā 1(ābiy wa-bāraku wa-sabbeḥu 2wa-(āl(ālu ba)enta

za-takašta lomu 3semu la-we)etu 4egwāla )emma-ḥeyāw.
26â•‡And their joy was great, and they blessed and praised and exulted because
revealed to them was the name of that Son of Man.
27â•‡ 5 (omission) 9wa-)i-yaxallef wa-)i-yemāsen 10)em-qedma gaṣṣa medr9
27â•‡ (ommission) And he will not pass away or perish from the face of the earth.
184
Ryl has “and they will speak to that Son of Man and he will be strong before the Lord of
Spirits.” See Variant noteÂ€24.
CO25117.indb 119 11/03/2011 11:58

28â•‡ 11wa-)ella 12)asḥatewwo la-(ālam ba-sanāsel yet)assaru 13wa-ba-māxbaromu

14
za-musenā 15yet(āḍḍaw 16kwellu megbāromu yaxālef 17)em-qedma gaṣṣa medr.
28â•‡ And those who led the world astray will be bound in chains and will be shut
up in their assembly-place of destruction all their works will pass away from the
face of the earth.
29â•‡ 18Wa-)em-ye)zē 19)i-yekawwen ze-musenā )esma 20we)etu walda be)si tare)ya
wa-nabara diba 21manbara sebḥatihu 22wa-kwellu )ekuy )em-qedma gaṣṣu yaxālef
23
wa-yaḥawwer 24 25wa-yenagger la-we)etu walda 26be)si wa-yeṣanne(24 ba-qedma
)egzi)a manāfest.
ze-we)etu 27messalē šāles za-hēnok.
29â•‡ And from now on there will be nothing corruptible for that Son of Man has
appeared and has sat on the throne of his glory and every evil thing will pass away
from before him and depart and speak to that Son of Man and he will be strong
before the Lord of Spirits.
This is the third parable of Enoch.
Variants
1
(ābiya/great: BMÂ€485 and TanaÂ€9 have (ābiy/great, which is nominative, not accusative.
2
wa-(āl(ālu/and they exulted: BMÂ€485 omits, perhaps because of homoioteleuton.
3
semu/his name: Berl has sem/name, dropping the pronominal ending.
4
walda/son: BMÂ€491, AbbÂ€35, AbbÂ€55 and TanaÂ€9 omit, possibly through homoio-
archton with we)etu.. There is probably no change in meaning, given the context,
nor is there any other location in which walda/son is intentionally omitted, which
suggests that its omission is accidental here.
5
wa-nabara.â•›.â•›.)emmaḥeyāw/And he sat.â•›.â•›.Son of Man: TanaÂ€9 omits the whole
sentence, probably due to homoioteleuton, as the eye of the scribe skipped from
walda egwāla )emma-ḥeyāw in vÂ€26 to the occurrence of the same term in vsÂ€27.
6
wa-re)su/and the whole: BMÂ€485 has wa-re)sa/and the whole, which is possibly a
variant of the feminine form of the possessive pronominal sufï¬†x. Berl and AbbÂ€35
have wa-re)sā, which is the more usual form of the feminine possessive sufï¬†x.
AbbÂ€55 has wa-re)s, having dropped the pronominal sufï¬†x. Gender agreement in
Ethiopic does not seem to be consistent, but these manuscripts treat kwennanē/
authority as feminine (see variantÂ€7 also).
7
tawehba/was given: EthÂ€I reads tawehbat (feminine not masculine). This family
of manuscripts, some of which are the manuscripts in noteÂ€6 above, has treated
kwennanē as feminine.
8
)emma-ḥeyāw/Mother of the living: Berl has )emm-ḥeyāw.
9
wa-yāxālef wa-yāmāsen xāṭe)āna )em-gaṣṣā la-medr/and he will cause the sinners
to pass away and perish from the face of the earth: BMÂ€485, BMÂ€491, AbbÂ€35 and
AbbÂ€55 have: wa-yaxālef wa-yemāsen (AbbÂ€35: wa-yāmāsen) )em-qedma gaṣṣa
medr. The object, xāṭe)āna/the sinners, is omitted, and the verbs are not causative.
Berl has wa-xalafu )em-qedma gaṣṣu xaṭe)ana medr: “and the sinners of the earth
passed away from before his face.”
CO25117.indb 120 11/03/2011 11:58

An explanatory comment is needed on the extensive difference between Ryl and

TanaÂ€9 in verseÂ€27. TanaÂ€9 has wa-)i-yaxallef wa-)i-yemāsen )em-qedma gaṣṣā
medr: and he will not pass away or be destroyed from the face of the earth.
TanaÂ€9, as noted in VariantsÂ€5 and 9, preserves extensive differences from Ryl.
These differences are probably a case of textual corruption in which the ï¬†rst part
of verseÂ€27 has dropped out due to homoioteleuton (see Variant noteÂ€5), along
with the loss of the object of the sentence, xāṭe)āna/the sinners. Subsequent
modiï¬†cation to make it ï¬†t the new context necessitated the alteration of the verbs
from causative to intransitive and the addition of the negative.185
10
)em-gaṣṣā la-medr/from the face of the earth: BodlÂ€5 and 5 mss have )em-gaṣṣa
medr, omitting la- and the anticipatory suffix.
11
wa-)ella/and those: AbbÂ€35 has )ella, having omitted wa-/and.
12
)asḥatewwo/they led (the world) astray: BMÂ€491, possibly the original hand of Ryl
and 4 mss have )asḥatewwomu, changing the sufï¬†x to plural.
13
wa-ba-māxbaromu/and in their assembly-place: Ull, 2 mss have wa-māxbaromu/
and their assembly-place, omitting ba-. This changes the subject from “those who
led the world astray” to “their assembly-place.” Thus, it is not the fallen watchers
who are shut up, but the place where they carried out their wickedness as well
as the watchers. This intensiï¬†cation seems to be secondary rather than original.
14
za-musenā/of destruction: BMÂ€491 has za-ba-musenā/which is in destruction.
15
yet)aḍḍawu/they will be shut up: BMÂ€491 and AbbÂ€55 have za-yet(āḍḍawu, an
orthographic alternative; AbbÂ€35, TanaÂ€9 and Ull have yet(āḍḍaw, while BMÂ€485
and Berl have za-yet(a ṣṣaw, also orthographic alternatives; the last two forms are
singular, but this is not unusual in Ethiopic.
16
wa-kwellu/and all: BMÂ€485 and Berl have wa-kwello, the accusative and adverbial
form; TanaÂ€9 has simply kwellu, omitting wa-.
17
)em-qedma gaṣṣa/from the face of: two manuscripts have )em-gaṣṣa, omitting the
preposition qedma.
18
Wa-)em-ye)zē/and from now on: BodlÂ€5 and 4 mss have wa-)em-ye)zē-sa/and from
now on, then.
19
)i-yekawwen za-yemāsen/there will be nothing corruptible: BMÂ€491 has za-yekawwen
)i-yemāsen. The negative has simply been transferred to the other word, without
a change of meaning. TanaÂ€9 has )i-yekawwen ze-musenā/there will not be this
destruction.
20
we)etu/that: BMÂ€491 and Berl omit this demonstrative.
21
manbara/throne: Berl omits.
22
wa-kwellu/and every: Berl has wa-kwello; see Variant noteÂ€16.
23
wa-yaḥawwer/and (everything evil) will go: Berl has wa-yaḥawweru/and they will
go. Berl has understood wa-yaḥawweru and wa-yenaggeru as going together,
seeing unnamed people as going and speaking to that Son of Man (cf. Variant
noteÂ€25).
185
CO25117.indb 121 11/03/2011 11:58

24
wa-yenaggeru la-we)etu walda be)si wa-yeṣanne(/and they will speak to that Son
of Man and he will be strong: BodlÂ€5 and 3 mss have wa-nagaru la-we)etu walda
(BodlÂ€5 omits walda) be)si (BMÂ€492 has be)sit) yeṣanne(/and the word of that Son
of Man (BodlÂ€5 simply has “that man”; BMÂ€492 has “that Son of a Woman”) will
be strong.â•›.â•›.AbbÂ€35 and 3 mss have wa-nagaru la-we)etu walda be)si wa-yeṣanne(
having added a conjunction to yeṣanne(. Since nagaru may be either a third
singular noun with a third singular sufï¬†x (“the word of,” as in BodlÂ€5) or the third
masculine plural of the verb nagara, AbbÂ€35 may preserve the meaning “and they
spoke to that Son of Man and he will be strong.” A marginal wa-nagaru appears
in Ryl. Knibb and Black in their translations accept the text preserved in BodlÂ€5.
25
wa-yenaggeru/and they will speak: TanaÂ€9 and BodlÂ€4 have wa-yenagger. This
reading indicates a singular subject, possibly to be translated as, “every evil one
will speak to that Son of Man” (cf. Variant noteÂ€23).
26
be)si/of man: BMÂ€485 and BMÂ€492 (see VariantÂ€24) have be)sit/of woman. The
feminine form here may have been inï¬‡uenced by the use of the more formal form
of the title that includes the feminine element )emm/mother earlier in the passage
(vvÂ€26, 27).
27
messalē.â•›.â•›./the.â•›.â•›.parable: Ryl2 and 4 manuscripts have messālē, an orthographic
correction. BMÂ€485 and TanaÂ€9 have mesla šāles/the third parable (mesla can be
the preposition “with,” or possibly an alternate form of the noun; its occurrence
here is a corruption of messālē). AbbÂ€55 has meslu šāles, which includes the 3rd
sing pronominal sufï¬†x referring to Enoch. BMÂ€491, Berl, AbbÂ€35, BodlÂ€5, Ryll(?),
Ull and other EthÂ€II mss have messālē šāles/the third parable, an appealing
reading, since Ryl has a blank (erased?) space after messalē. The whole sentence
may be a colophon added during transmission after translation, since many of the
New Testament books similarly have introductions and conclusions added to the
text (cf. ActsÂ€1:1). A similar sentence also concludes the Second Parable.
Notes
69:26â•‡ za-takašta lomu semu la-we)etu walda )egwāla )emma-ḥeyāw/The name of
that Son of Man had been revealed to them:
This is the second half of a twin characteristic of the Son of Man. The Son of Man has
been both hidden and revealed: hidden from the kings and mighty ones, but revealed
to the righteous and elect (see Notes on 48:6–7, 62:7).
The ï¬†rst aspect of this twin characteristic is that the Son of Man is hidden, hidden
from eternity (1Â€EnochÂ€48:6, 62:7) and hidden from “the kings and the mighty and
the exalted and those who possess the earth” (1Â€EnochÂ€62:3). His hiddenness from
eternity is to be understood as being in the mind of God. God’s plans and ultimate will
are to be carried out through the judicial action of the Son of Man, but that will not
be perceivable until the ï¬†nal judgment. Hence the Son of Man and his role in God’s
will is hidden, unknown to the oppressors. The dismay of the kings is that in the
end they will recognize him (1Â€EnochÂ€62:3), when he sits on his glorious, powerful
throne. They will be terriï¬†ed and overcome with pain (1Â€EnochÂ€62:5) and shame
CO25117.indb 122 11/03/2011 11:58

(1Â€EnochÂ€62:10), and they will lament that they no longer have the opportunity to
offer proper worship and respect (1Â€EnochÂ€62:2, 4). Their pleading for a respite, in
order to praise, glorify and extol the Son of Man, emphasizes how the Son of Man,
who is their ï¬†nal, omnipotent judge, has been hidden from them.
The second aspect of this twin characteristic is that the name of the Son of
Man has been revealed. His naming to a position and a purpose took place before
creation (1Â€EnochÂ€48:2–3) and from that perspective, his being revealed to the holy
and righteous as avenger and Savior (1Â€EnochÂ€48:7) was still in the future. From the
perspective of the vision of that future judgment (1Â€EnochÂ€61:2), when the vision of
the angels and the cords is explained, the name of the Son of Man has already been
revealed to the righteous and elect (1Â€EnochÂ€62:7). When the vision of that judgment is
reported (1Â€EnochÂ€62–63), then the name of the Son of Man has ï¬†nally been revealed
also to the kings and mighty ones, as the Elect One/Son of Man sits in judgment upon
them. For the righteous and elect it will be a day of salvation and therefore joy, for
their vindication will be total and their fortunes will be reversed (1Â€EnochÂ€62:13–16).
The revelation of the name of the Son of Man and the revelation of the Son of Man
himself are one and the same. This is evident because both the Son of Man and his
name are “named” in 1Â€EnochÂ€48:2–3 without distinguishing between them, and both
the Son of Man and his name are revealed in 1Â€EnochÂ€62:7 and 69:26. No distinction is
made between the Son of Man and the name of the Son of Man. Similarly, the Lord of
Spirits and the name of the Lord of Spirits are both praised (1Â€EnochÂ€61:9) and revealed
to the righteous and elect (1Â€EnochÂ€61:13) without any distinction being made between
them. The name of the person represents the power and authority of that ï¬†gure.
Another dimension of the revelation of the Son of Man and his name is that
the revelation is accomplished through Par. En. itself. Repeatedly, Enoch is shown
secrets of the heavenly world, which he in turn reveals through his reports. Even the
revelation of the Son of Man has been narrated suspensefully in Par. En. At ï¬†rst,
simply a second ï¬†gure in the heavenly court is noted (1Â€EnochÂ€46:2), then the seer
asks who he is (1Â€EnochÂ€46:3), and ï¬†nally the angel describes him as the Son of Man
who has righteousness (1Â€EnochÂ€46:4), and whose identity will continue to be revealed
throughout the rest of the work. This narrative both mirrors and leads the implied
reader in his or her own discovery about this human-like ï¬†gure, who is to become
known as the Son of Man/Elect one, the savior of the community of the righteous and
elect. In this way, the author of Par. En. actually takes on Enoch’s roles as the reporter
of revealed secrets. This revelation is meant to console and encourage the righteous
and elect, until the day comes when the change will take place, when the kings and
mighty ones are judged, and the light of salvation never fades (1Â€EnochÂ€50:1).
69:27, 29â•‡ wa-nabara diba manbara sebḥatihu/and he sat upon the throne of his glory.
Two expressions are found in Par. En. for the throne (see also Notes on 1Â€EnochÂ€62:2).
One is simply the noun, manbar/throne, with or without the possessive pronoun; while
the other is the construct phrase, manbara sebḥat/the throne of glory (without the
possessive pronoun), or manbara sebḥatihu/the throne of his glory (with the possessive
CO25117.indb 123 11/03/2011 11:58

pronoun). Three different ï¬†gures are described as being seated on the throne, with the
Son of Man figure represented by two designations (see Table 2), the Chief of Days, the
Elect One, the Son of Man, and the kings/the mighty/the strong, who are turned out of
their thrones. The distribution of the references to the throne is as follows.
No references to the throne are made in the First Parable (1Â€EnochÂ€38–44).
In the Second Parable (1Â€EnochÂ€45–57), the Elect One occupies the throne of
glory/manbara sebḥat (no possessive, 1Â€EnochÂ€45:3, 55:4186), and his throne/manbaru
(1Â€EnochÂ€51:3). But the Chief of Days occupies the throne of his glory/manbara
sebḥatihu (1Â€EnochÂ€47:3)187. By contrast, the Elect One stands/.â•›.â•›.before the Lord of
Spirits (1Â€EnochÂ€47:3), in a passage that extols the Elect One for wisdom, understanding,
knowledge and power, with which the Elect One is infused (1Â€EnochÂ€49:3) and in which
his judgment according to the wishes of the Lord of Spirits is afï¬†rmed (1Â€EnochÂ€49:4).188
Table 2
Occurrences of Manbar/Throne in the Parables of Enoch
Term used Parable Occupant:

Chief of Days Elect One Son of Man Kings/Mighty
/Strong
Manbara/Throne 1 - - - -
2 - 51:3 - 46:4, 5; 56:5
3 - - - -
Manbara sebḥat/ 1 - - - -
Throne of glory 2 - 45:3 - -
3 - - - -
Manbara sebḥatihu/ 1 - - - -
Throne of his glory 2 47:3 55:4 (my) - -
3 60:2 61:8; 62:2,* 3 62:5; 69:27, 29 -
*â•›All manuscripts read that the Lord of Spirits sat on the throne, but emendation to “the Lord
of Spirits seated him (i.e. the Elect One) on the throne of his glory” is warranted. See Note on
1Â€EnochÂ€62:2.
186
A textual problem exists with the reference to the throne in 55:4. The Lord of Spirits
challenges the mighty kings who occupy the earth to behold “my Elect One as he sits on the
throne of glory and judges Azazel” and his associates. EthÂ€I (with the exception of Berl),
the older text-type, which Knibb and Charles evaluate as being generally more trustworthy,
have this reading without the possessive pronoun, while EthÂ€II and Berl have the ï¬†rst person
singular possessive pronoun attached, sebḥateya/my glory. The EthÂ€I reading is preferable,
since the EthÂ€II reading can be explained plausibly as a scribal addition in light of the
recognition that the Lord of Spirits is speaking in this passage and would presumably be
speaking about his own throne (the opposite argument, that the possessive was original and
was dropped in order to avoid the appearance of having someone other than God sit on God’s
throne, is less persuasive).
187
188
These verses function almost as the commissioning of the Elect One, similar to the Son of
Man being named (48:2–3, 6) and being commissioned as the light of the Gentiles and the
hope of the troubled (48:4), the avenger of the righteous (48:7). See Black, “The Throne-
Theophany Prophetic Commission” for this possibility.
CO25117.indb 124 11/03/2011 11:58

The kings/mighty/strong are said to be dethroned by the Son of Man

(1Â€EnochÂ€46:4,Â€5), or aroused from their thrones to invade the territory of the
righteous and elect by the angels (1Â€EnochÂ€56:5). These, however, are earthly thrones
and do not play a part in understanding the heavenly throne. These thrones are the
only ones referred to in the plural.
In the Third Parable (1Â€EnochÂ€58–69), the Chief of Days is depicted as sitting on
the throne of his glory/manbara sebḥatihu (1Â€EnochÂ€60:2) in a recasting of the vision
in DanÂ€7:9 Here the seer experiences again that heavenly vision and is overwhelmed
(1Â€EnochÂ€60:3). Michael assures him that while God’s mercy has been in effect until
then, the judgment of the oppressors will soon be accomplished (1Â€EnochÂ€60:5–6). In
this retelling of the vision, the Chief of Days occupies the throne.
Later in the Third Parable, the seer reports that the Lord of Spirits placed/
)anbara the Elect One upon the throne of glory/manbara sebḥat (1Â€EnochÂ€61:8).189
Still later, the Lord of Spirits challenges the kings, the mighty, the exalted, and those
who possess the earth to acknowledge the one who sits upon the throne of his glory/
manbara sebḥatihu (1Â€EnochÂ€62:2), which they do (1Â€EnochÂ€62:3).190 The session
of the Elect One upon the throne (clearly in 1Â€EnochÂ€61:8 and as emended in 62:2)
functions as an indication of his authorization to judge and it will be recognized as
such by the oppressors, in the author’s point of view.
The Son of Man is envisioned as sitting upon the throne of his glory/manbara
sebḥatihu (1Â€EnochÂ€62:5, no variants).191 This reference is in close proximity to the
Elect One sitting on the throne (as emended), and is as close as the author comes
189
Here again Eth.Â€I reads sebḥat/glory, while Eth.Â€II reads sebḥatihu/his glory; see the footnote
on the textual problem at 55:4 above.
190
In these two instances no textual variants are noted by Knibb or Charles: both EthÂ€I and
EthÂ€II preserve this reading. The manuscript witnesses however are unanimous in saying
that the Lord of Spirits is sitting on the throne at 62:2, not the Elect One. Charles, 1Â€Enoch,
123, emends the text to read “The Lord of Spirits placed/)anbara him (i.e. the Elect One)
on the throne of his glory,” while Black, IÂ€Enoch, 59, 235, emends the text to read that the
Elect One was sitting on the throne, arguing that the sense of the passage demands this.
Although both suggestions are difï¬†cult to accept, since the textual evidence is unanimous,
Charles’ suggestion is more persuasive textually, for it would be easier to understand how a
scribe very early in the transmission process could omit the )alep from )anbara and change
it to nabara than to understand the change from the Elect One/xeruy to the Lord of Spirits/
)egzi)a manāfest. Knibb, 1Â€Enoch, vol. 2, 150, translates the text as it stands, in which case
a change of referent must be understood somewhere between verseÂ€2 and verseÂ€5, for in
verseÂ€5 the kings and mighty ones see “that Son of a Woman” on the throne. (See also Note
on 1Â€EnochÂ€62:2 above.)
191
Here the term Son of Man (literally Son of a Woman/walda be)sit, which is probably
original) is used because of the inï¬‡uence of the childbirth image used in 62:4. The kings and
mighty ones will suffer pain like a woman in childbirth, for as the child causes pain to its
mother, so will this Son of Man (Son of a Woman) cause pain in judgment to the kings and
mighty ones, when they see him sitting on the throne of his glory. They acknowledge his
lordship, however, through worship and praise and acknowledge the justice of his judgment
(see Notes at 62:5).
CO25117.indb 125 11/03/2011 11:58

to making an explicit identiï¬†cation between the Elect One and the Son of Man.192
Finally the Son of Man is again revealed to be sitting on the throne of his glory/
manbara sebḥatihu (1Â€EnochÂ€69:27, 29; see Variant noteÂ€21).
This evidence shows the unevenness in Par. En. with regard to the occupant of
the throne. Black is of the opinion that the reading of EthÂ€II at 1Â€EnochÂ€55:4, “my
throne,” referring to the Lord of Spirits, cannot be correct since the Elect One “sits on
his own throne and not on the throne of the Lord of Spirits,” and that the reading of
the four manuscripts “on the right hand of my glorious throne” is theologically more
correct.193 While the reading of Eth.Â€I, without the possessive, is preferable textually
(see above), Black’s suggestions that there are more than one throne is questionable.
Nowhere in Par. En. is the throne in heaven spoken of in the plural (the kings and
mighty ones on earth have plural thrones), and whenever persons are mentioned as
being in proximity to the one sitting on the throne, they are depicted as standing
(e.g. the council in 1Â€EnochÂ€47:3 and the angels and the righteous in 1Â€EnochÂ€60:2;
contrast the image of the disciples sitting on twelve thrones, Mt.Â€19:28). Nowhere
in Par. En. is the heavenly court depicted as having more than one throne. The
foundational vision in Dan.Â€7:9–14 depicts thrones in the plural set in place, but Par.
En. is vague on that question. Theisohn has argued that the references to a throne
refer to a single throne, and that the throne is God’s.194 Further he points out, there is
biblical precedent for God setting another upon the throne in Ps.Â€132:11, Dan.Â€4:37,
JobÂ€36:5–6. Most interestingly, Ps.Â€110:1, 5–6 includes not only the enthronement
of the king by God, but also includes the concepts of righteousness, a judicial role,
and opposition to enemy kings, ideas which Par. En. also connects together.195 The
major difference, which Theisohn does not note, is that in those biblical passages, an
earthly kingdom is explicitly being conï¬†rmed, while in Par. En. heaven is the locale
envisioned. This in itself is not problematic, because the concern of the author is to
show that the current oppressive regime is to be toppled. The visions of Micaiah
ben Imlah in 1Â€KingsÂ€22, Isaiah in IsaiahÂ€6 and Enoch in 1Â€EnochÂ€14 also inform
the concept in Par. En., as they share the characteristics of the throne scene being
in a vision and populated by the heavenly hosts standing in the presence of God
(1Â€KgsÂ€22:19, Isa.Â€6:2, 1Â€EnochÂ€14:22).196
This image of sitting upon the throne for righteous judgment bears many
similarities with Ps.Â€9:4–11. God is said to sit on the throne righteously judging,
qdc +pw# )skl tb#y (Ps.Â€9:5[4]). The Lord has destroyed the wicked (#r tdb)
(Ps.Â€9:6[5]). The enemy is routed and the memory of them is wiped out (Ps.Â€9:7[6]).
The throne has been established for judgment, w)sk +p#ml Nnwk (Ps.Â€9:8[7]), and the
192
As noted previously, VanderKam, “Righteous One,” 185–86, has shown that the four terms
are synonymous in the way they function.
193
Black, I Â€Enoch, 220.
194
195
196
Black, “The Throne-Theophany Prophetic Commission,” 57–73, esp. 70, suggests that the
sense in 1Â€EnochÂ€71 is a call scene, pre-dating the Parables themselves.
CO25117.indb 126 11/03/2011 11:58

Lord judges the world in righteousness qdcb lbt +p#y )whw (Ps.Â€9:9[8]). In Ps.Â€9:4–11
the concepts of the throne, judgment, and righteousness, as well as the eradication of
the wicked, come together, as they do in 1Â€EnochÂ€69:27–29. Rather than dependency,
however, the two passages probably illustrate a shared conception about the purpose
of the throne of judgment.
The introduction of the throne is an essential part of the concept of the judicial
role of the Elect One/Son of Man. The authority of the Elect One/Son of Man to judge
and the incontrovertibility of his judgment are enhanced by the depiction of the Elect
One/Son of Man seated on the judgment throne. The whole image reafï¬†rms the hope
and encouragement being communicated to the community of the righteous and elect.
69:27â•‡ wa-re)su la-kwennanē/the sum of judgment:

This is a puzzling expression, since it can be taken as the sum/whole of judgment
(Dillmann, Black, Knibb), or as the beginning of judgment.197 The phrase +p#mh #)r
does not occur in the Hebrew Bible, but the word #)r can have a fairly broad range
of meaning. It can mean the literal head of a person or animal; it can mean the top of
a crag, a tower, a stronghold, ears of grain, the head of a bed; it can refer to a chief
leader or the ï¬†rst in a series, the beginning of time, or the choicest spices or joy.198
The cognate in Ethiopic has a similarly broad range of meaning.199
Not far in the background of these words are the visions of DanielÂ€7–12, which
are concerned with the historical rise and fall of empires. Judgment against the
kings is also mentioned, as well as the outcome for “all the saints.” In the vision of
Dan.Â€7:9–10, the Ancient of Days is introduced and described as taking his seat, a
ï¬†ery throne with ï¬‡aming wheels. Myriads serve him, as the court sits in judgment
with the books open (Dan.Â€7:10). It is a scene that depicts total and absolute power
for judgment. The vision continues with the introduction of the human-like one, who
is presented to the Ancient of Days, and who is given dominion over “all peoples,
nations and languages” (Dan. 7:14). The dominion and kingship bestowed on him
also include the concept of total and absolute authority for judgment. Even though
the totality of judgment is not mentioned explicitly, the whole scene is dependent on
the reality that the Ancient of Days and the human-like one do have total and absolute
authority in this judicial setting.
This setting enables the author of Par. En. to attribute “the whole of judgment” to
that Son of Man. This author makes explicit what in DanielÂ€7 was implicit, that the
Son of Man has total authority in judgment. Dan.Â€7:10, 26 refer to the heavenly court
sitting in judgment upon the kingdoms, noting that the saints will be given dominion
over earthly events. In DanielÂ€7 the focus of the visions is upon the overthrow of the
kingdoms, and how long the demise of the kings will take. In Par. En., however, the
197
A similarly ambiguous expression using re)s is found at 1Â€EnochÂ€37:2–3 about the beginning
or sum of wisdom, wa-ze re)su la-nagara ṭebab.
198
BDB, 910–11.
199
Dillmann, Lexicon, 294–95.
CO25117.indb 127 11/03/2011 11:58

focus is not on how long it will take, but on the absolute nature of the destruction of
the sinners (1Â€EnochÂ€69:27, 29), and on the joy of the elect (1Â€EnochÂ€69:26).
The absoluteness of judgment is attributed to the Son of Man because it is an
implicit part of the vision in DanielÂ€7, upon which this exposition is based. The
absoluteness of judgment is expressed in terms of the total joy of the righteous and
the total destruction of the wicked, because the author is concerned to give hope and
encouragement to the community, and to reassure them that eventually their fortunes
will be reversed.
This phrase also could be taken in the sense of “the beginning of judgment” being
given to the Son of Man (re)s has this sense in the title for God, “Head of Days,” as
the ancient one who has existed since the beginning of time). Here, however, it cannot
be only the beginning of judgment, for this is already the conclusion to the Third
Parable. Therefore the meaning of the phrase must include not only the beginning,
but also the totality of judgment. The sense must be that all judgment, starting from
the beginning and continuing all the way into eternity, and extending to the broadest
spectrum of humanity, has been given to the Son of Man. The idea of the totality of
judgment, then, seems to be the most likely sense of this phrase.
67:27, 29: wa-yāxālef wa-yāmāsen xāṭe)āna/he will cause the sinners to pass away
and be destroyed.â•›.â•›.:
This idea must be considered in connection with PsÂ€9:4â•‚11. The psalmist proclaims
that the Lord sits on the throne judging righteously, that God has destroyed the wicked
((#r tdb) Ps.Â€9:6), and that their very memory has perished (Mrkz db) PsÂ€9:7). As
already frequently noted, the judicial picture in Par. En. is based on DanielÂ€7, with
the Ancient of Days seated upon the throne for judgment. But this image is comple-
mented by other scriptural motifs. In PsalmÂ€9, righteousness, judgment against the
kings, and the destruction of the wicked enacted from the judgment throne are all
present, as they are in 1Â€EnochÂ€69:26–29. The throne, then, possibly functioned as
the bridge for the author for incorporating the idea of the complete destruction of the
wicked in his exposition of DanielÂ€7.
62:29â•‡ according to Ryl:

wa-yenaggeru la-we)etu walda be)si wa-yeṣanne( ba-qedma )egzi)a manāfest/and
they will speak to that Son of Man and he will be strong before the Lord of Spirits;
69:29â•‡ according to BerlÂ€5 et al. (see Variant noteÂ€24 above):

wa nagaru la-we)etu walda be)si yeṣanne( ba-qedma )egzi)a manāfest The word of
that Son of Man will be strong before the Lord of Spirits:
As Knibb and Black in their translations indicate, the text is corrupt and the readings
preserved by BerlÂ€5 and three other manuscripts, as well as BMÂ€492 (which uses the
term “Son of a Woman”) should be followed.200 The reading of Ryl, “and they (i.e.
200
Contra Casey, Solution, 106, where he suggests a change of subject from the “son of man
CO25117.indb 128 11/03/2011 11:58

sinners) will speak to that Son of Man” should be rejected because it introduces a
serious break in the narrative ï¬‡ow of the scene. The Son of Man has been depicted as
sitting on the throne, passing judgment, having them shackled, led away and conï¬†ned
to their place of destruction, so that all evil is removed. But then at this point Ryl
portrays them speaking to the Son of Man, when they have already been put away—
this is disruptive. For this reason, the reading of BerlÂ€5 et al. is preferable, for it allows
the scene to be concluded with the word of the Son of Man being conï¬†rmed before
the Lord of Spirits.
Some biblical passages express a similar idea regarding the strength of the
divine word. Dan.Â€7:14 implies the eternal conï¬†rmation of the Son of Man’s word
through the concept of the abiding dominion and kingship of the human-like one, and
Isa.Â€55:11 also expresses the efï¬†cacy of the word of the Lord, which will not return
empty. If Mwq (hip(il) is proposed in the original Hebrew for yeṣanne(,201 then a verse
like Isa.Â€44:26 provides a parallel, in which God conï¬†rms the word of his servant,
wdb( rbd Myqm.
3.6.3â•‡ Summary of the Study of 1 En. 69:26–29
This closure to the Third Parable reiterates many of the characteristics of the Son of
Man. The joy and praise of those who are vindicated are reported. The revelation of
the Son of Man and his authority to judge are repeated, along with his sitting on the
throne. The wicked are to be bound in chains and they are to be conï¬†ned forever,
while their accomplishments will be wiped out. Evil will no longer exist. Three new
characteristics of the Son of Man are added from this passage:
a) that the word of the Son of Man before the Lord of Spirits is strong and
incontrovertible,
b) that the Son of Man is the means for the destruction of evil; and
c) that this judge has worldwide jurisdiction.
3.7â•‡ Exegesis of 1 Enoch 70

Chapter 70 is a short chapter of four verses, drawing the reader back to the narrative
frame of Enoch’s translation. His vehicle was the chariots of the spirit, and he is
presented to the Lord of Spirits. A brief allusion is made to cords for measuring the
righteous (cf. 1Â€EnochÂ€61:1–7) and to the holding place for the spirits of the righteous
sitting on a throne” to “God.” His suggestion is awkward and unexpected. A change of

subject here should use a name rather than just a pronoun.
201
As Black, IÂ€Enoch, 250, suggests.
CO25117.indb 129 11/03/2011 11:58

(1Â€EnochÂ€22:9). Several critical issues, textual and literary, are associated with this
chapter.
3.7.1â•‡ 1 En. 70:1–4
1â•‡Wa-kona 1)em-dexra-ze 2tala(āla semu ḥeyāw 3ba-xabēhu la-we)etu3 walda

)egwāla 4)emma-ḥeyāw 5ba-xaba )egzi)a manāfest )em-)ella yaxādderu diba yebs.
1â•‡ And it came to pass after this (that), while he was living, his name was lifted,
from those who dwell upon the dry ground to the presence of that Son of Man,
and to the presence of the Lord of Spirits.
2â•‡ 6Wa-tal(āla 7ba-saragalāta 8manfas wa-waḍ)a 9sem ba-mā(kalomu.
2â•‡ And he was lifted on the chariots of the spirit, and his name vanished among
them.
3â•‡Wa-)em-ye)eti (elat 10)i-tasḥebku ba-mā(kalomu wa-)ānbarani 11ba-mā(kala
kel)ē 12manāfest 13ba-mā(kala mas( wa-(ārab ba-xaba naš(u 14)āxbalāta malā)ekt
kama yesferu lita makāna la-xeruyān 15wa-la-ṣādeqān
3â•‡ And from that day I was not counted amongst them, and he placed me between
two winds, between the north and the west, where the angels took the cords to
measure for me the place for the chosen and the righteous.
4â•‡Wa-ba-heyya re)iku 16)abawa 17qadamta wa-ṣādeqān16 18)ella )em-(ālam ba-
we)etu makān yaxādderu.
4â•‡ And there I saw the ï¬†rst fathers and the righteous who from (the beginning of)
the world dwelt in that place.
Variants
1
)em-dexra-ze/after this: AbbÂ€55 has wa-)em-dexra/and afterwards (cf. Variant noteÂ€1
in 1Â€EnochÂ€63:1).
2
tala(āla/was lifted: AbbÂ€55 and TanaÂ€9 have talā(ala.
3
ba-xabēhu la-we)etu/to the presence of that: AbbÂ€55 omits ba-xabēhu, with the impli-
cation that it is not the name that is raised to the Son of Man, but the name of that
son of man (i.e., a human being, Enoch?) that is raised, while alive, to the Lord of
Spirits. This would prepare much more consistently for the later identiï¬†cation of
Enoch and the Son of Man in ch. 71. BMÂ€485 has ba-xaba la-we)etu/in the presence
of that; Berl has ba-xaba we)etu/in the presence of that; TanaÂ€9 has ba-qedma
ba-xaba la-we)etu/before, in the presence of that. Possibly ba-xabēhu/ba-xaba
has been inserted under the inï¬‡uence of ḥeyāw ba-xaba later in the verse,202
and AbbÂ€55 probably retains the original reading. The most natural rendering of
the sense in which the name of a human being is raised to the Son of Man, thus
distinguishing between the one raised and the Son of Man, would be Berl, ba-xaba
we)etu/in the presence of that; without the la-. (TanaÂ€9 adds a preposition
202
Casey, “The Use of the Term ‘Son of Man’ in the Similtudes of Enoch,” 26, footnote 48.
CO25117.indb 130 11/03/2011 11:58

redundantly.) The remainder of the manuscripts retain the la-, which is probably
a trace of the original reading. La- is a particle that can indicate a direct object,
an indirect object, or even possession. If AbbÂ€55 retains the original sense, then
la- functions in the possessive sense, meaning the name of that son of man was
lifted to the presence of the Lord of Spirits (see Notes below for further comment).
4
)emma-ḥeyāw/of the mother of the living (literally): Berl, as usual, has )emm-ḥeyaw
(cf. Variant noteÂ€4 in chapterÂ€63).
5
ba-xaba/to the presence of : BMÂ€485, AbbÂ€35, TanaÂ€9 have wa-ba-xaba/and to the
presence of, while Berl has wa-xaba/and to the presence of. If ba-xabēhu (see
noteÂ€3) is an insertion, then the addition of the conjunction wa- is explanatory,
clarifying the grammar, since the Son of Man and the Lord of Spirits are never
identiï¬†ed in Par. En.
6
wa-tala(āla/and he was lifted: Berl, Abb 55 and Tana 9 have wa-talā(āla (see Variant
note 2 above). Abb 35 adds semu/his name simply to clarify the subject of the
verb.
7
ba-saragalāta/on the chariots: BMÂ€485 has ba-saragalāt/on chariots, the non-construct
form; Berl and Munich 30 have ba-saragalā/on a chariot, in the singular.
8
manfas/of the spirit: AbbÂ€55 has manfasu/of his spirit. AbbÂ€55 (see Variant noteÂ€3
above) has the understanding that it is the name of a son of man ( a human being)
that is being raised, and thus here attributes to that son of man the ownership of
this supernatural means of transportation: “his chariots of the spirit.”
9
sem/name: BMÂ€491, Tana 9 and Ull have semu/his name, clarifying the grammar,
while Berl and Munich 30 have semo/his name in the accusative, obscuring the
grammatical construction of the sentence, and evidently in error.
10
)i-tasḥebku/I was not pulled, dragged: BMÂ€485 has (i-teḥasabku/I was not reckoned;
Berl, AbbÂ€35, TanaÂ€9 and BMÂ€4861 have (i-taxāsabku/I was not reckoned (where
-xa- has been substituted for -ḥa-); AbbÂ€55 has (i-tasabbāḥku/I was not praised.
Consonants have been interchanged, but of the three possibilities (i-teḥasabku/I
was not reckoned makes the most sense in the context.
11
ba-mā(kala/between: Berl, TanaÂ€9, and BodlÂ€5 have mā(kala/amongst/in the midst
of, simply another form of the same preposition.
12
manāfest/winds: TanaÂ€9 has nafāsāt/winds.
13
ba-mā(kala/between: Berl has ba-mā)la/above/on high(?); TanaÂ€9 has ba-mā)ka,
both of which are corruptions.
14
)axbalāta/the cords: EthÂ€I and 3 mss have )aḥbāla/the cords, an orthographic
alternative.
15
wa-la-ṣādeqān/and the righteous: Ull has wa-ṣādeqān/and the righteous, omitting
la-, which is a particle that can be used to indicate an object, and indirect object,
or even possession; its omission does not alter the sense of the phrase.
16
)abawa qadamta wa-ṣādeqān/the ï¬†rst fathers and the righteous: An alternate
translation is, “the ï¬†rst and righteous fathers,” if the accusative ending is on
CO25117.indb 131 11/03/2011 11:58

both adjectives.203 Berl and TanaÂ€9 )abaw qadamt wa-ṣādeqān, a reading which
omits the accusative ending, showing more clearly that qadamt and ṣādeqān both
modify )abaw. Three other manuscripts have )abaw qadamt wa-ṣādeqāna, this
reading omits the accusative ending where it had been on )abawa qadamta, but
adds it to wa-ṣādeqān, which makes it clear that the righteous are a second group.
17
qadamta/ancient: BMÂ€485, BMÂ€491, AbbÂ€55 have wa-qadamta/and the ancients, this
reading suggests a three-fold object, the fathers, the ancients, and the righteous.
This does not change the sense radically, but perhaps the scribe who introduced
this reading had three separate referents in mind.
18
)ella/who: BMÂ€491 has )ellu/these.
Given the variants noted above, it is appropriate to offer a critically sensitive version
of chapterÂ€70 that takes these conclusions into account.
Critically Sensitive Transliteration and Translation
1â•‡ Wa-kona 1)em-dexra-ze 2tala(āla semu ḥeyāw 3 la-we)etu3 walda )egwāla

4
)emma-ḥeyāw 5ba-xaba )egzi)a manāfest )em-)ella yaxādderu diba yebs.
1 And it came to pass after this the name of that Son of Man was raised, while
alive, to the presence of the Lord of Spirits from those who dwell on earth.
2â•‡ 6Wa-tal(āla 7ba-saragalāta 8manfas wa-waḍ)a 9sem ba-mā(kalomu.
2â•‡And he was raised on chariots of the spirit and the name came out from
amongst them.
3â•‡ Wa-)em-ye)eti (elat 10)i-teḥasabku ba-mā(kalomu wa-)ānbarani 11ba-mā(kala
kel)ē 12manāfest 13ba-mā(kala mas( wa-(ārab ba-xaba naš(u 14)āxbalāta malā)ekt
kama yesferu lita makāna la-xeruyān 15wa-la-ṣādeqān
3â•‡ And from that day I was not reckoned amongst them, and he seated me between
two winds, between the north and the west, where the angels took the cords to
measure for me the place of the elect and the righteous.
4â•‡ Wa-ba-heyya re)iku 16)abawa 17qadamta wa-ṣādeqān16 18)ella )em-(ālam ba-
we)etu makān yaxādderu.
4â•‡ And there I saw the ï¬†rst fathers and the righteous who from eternity were
dwelling in that place.
Notes
The major issue of 1Â€EnochÂ€70 is the signiï¬†cance of the ï¬†gure of the Son of Man.
Does the term “Son of Man” refer to a second heavenly ï¬†gure in this passage, as it
has throughout Par. En. thus far, or is it a term that refers to a human being, Enoch
speciï¬†cally? This question depends in part on the evaluation of the textual variant
3
ba-xabēhu la-we)etu/into the presence of that.â•›.â•›., noted above. While the majority
203
CO25117.indb 132 11/03/2011 11:58

of witnesses conceive of someone’s name being raised to the Son of Man and to the
Lord of Spirits, one important manuscript understands that the name of the Son of
Man is raised to the Lord of Spirits. The issue of the signiï¬†cance of the Son of Man
must also be approached from the perspective of the literary character of chapterÂ€70
within Par. En., whether it is integral to Par. En.,204 or whether it is an older tradition
from which Par. En. developed,205 or whether it is intrusive like the Noachic material
is. Thus, to discover the signiï¬†cance of the Son of Man in chapterÂ€70, the issue must
be discussed from the perspectives of both textual criticism and literary criticism.
The textual problem of 1Â€ EnochÂ€ 70:1. The major problem with this verse is a
textual one. The majority of witnesses include the prepositional phrase ba-xabēhu,
“to the presence of,” before the Son of Man, indicating that the Son of Man is in
heaven and the name of an earthly being is raised to the Son of Man and the Lord of
Spirits. AbbÂ€55, however, omits the prepositional phrase ba-xabēhu with the impli-
cation that it is the name of a son of man, i.e. a human being, that is raised to the Lord
of Spirits.206 Three considerations are important to resolving this textual problem: the
ï¬†rst is the reliability of AbbÂ€55; the second is the question of the grammatical issues
involved; and the third is the question of which reading is the lectio difficilior.
The textual question involves the reliability of AbbÂ€55, which has been described
by Charles in this way:
This MS. would form a good third to g and q but that it is so imperfect after
chapterÂ€lxxxiii, for nearly one-seventh of the entire book is omitted in the course of
lxxxiii–cviii. These omissions are made in the most capricious way, sometimes words,
sometimes phrases, sometimes whole sentences and paragraphs are excised to the entire
destruction of the sense. Notwithstanding as u is a valuable MS. I have most faithfully
recorded all its omissions and changes. In chapterÂ€i–xxxii it alone preserves the true text
in iii (noteÂ€23), iv (noteÂ€33), xxi.7 (noteÂ€40).207
According to Charles, AbbÂ€55 is capricious and extensive in its omissions, but only
after chapterÂ€83, while in chaptersÂ€3, 4, and 21, it alone preserves what Charles
considers to be original readings.208 The implication is that for 1Â€EnochÂ€37–71,
AbbÂ€55 must be seen as worthy of serious consideration and its reading here as
possibly original.
204
VanderKam, “Righteous One,” pp. 177–79.
205
206
Casey, “The Use of the Term ‘Son of Man’ in the Similtudes of Enoch,” 25, indicates that
according to Fleming and Rademacher, Abb 99 (W) and AbbÂ€197 (V) also support this
reading.
207
Charles, The Ethiopic Version of the Book of Enoch (Oxford: Clarendon, 1906), p. xxiv. In
Charles’ designations, u refers to Abb 55, g to BM 485, q to Berl. The list of manuscripts
collated by Charles is on pp.Â€xviii–xxi.
208
On the basis of part of Charles’s comment, Collins, “The Son of Man in First-Century
Judaism,” 454, suggests that the reading in Abb 55 may be a simple mechanical error, and
implies that it therefore is to be rejected. However, according to Charles’ comments, prior to
chapter 83, Abb 55 is a valuable manuscript.
CO25117.indb 133 11/03/2011 11:58

Grammatically, the prepositional phrase ba-xabēhu appears to be intrusive. Two

grammatical problems arise because of the presence of ba-xabēhu in the sentence,
and suggest that the phrase is a scribal emendation. One problem is the presence of
the particle la- before we)etu. The particle la- is often used in possessive construc-
tions or as the indicator of the indirect object. If ba-xabēhu is original, la- is not
needed,209 as is illustrated later in the sentence with ba-xaba )egzi)a manāfest/to the
presence of the Lord of Spirits. Ba-xaba/ba-xabēhu does not need la- for the clause
to make sense grammatically.210 If ba-xabēhu, then, is omitted, as in AbbÂ€55, the
clause makes perfect grammatical sense: “the name of that son of man was raised
while alive.” The other grammatical problem raised by the presence of ba-xabēhu
is that the conjunction wa- is missing from the part of the sentence referring to the
Lord of Spirits. Usually a connecting wa- is present to indicate the presence of two
beings. Without the connecting wa-, the construction would appear to place the
Lord of Spirits in apposition to the Son of Man, but that does not make sense in
the theoretical construct of the scene. The Son of Man and the Lord of Spirits have
always been clearly distinguished, and so the connecting wa- is expected. As it turns
out, BMÂ€485, AbbÂ€35, TanaÂ€9 and Berl do preserve wa-, but as noted in VariantÂ€5
above, it probably was added in an explanatory way in reaction to the presence of
ba-xabēhu. If, however, ba-xabēhu is not original, then the sentence (without wa-)
makes perfect grammatical sense in this regard also, reporting that the name of that
son of man was raised to the Lord of Spirits.
Grammatically, then, the prepositional phrase ba-xabēhu appears to be intrusive,
and with its removal, two grammatical problems are solved. This also supports the
reading of AbbÂ€55 as being original.
The third aspect of addressing the textual problem is the question of which
is the easier reading. The argument has been made that the omission in AbbÂ€55
was motivated by a desire to bring 1Â€EnochÂ€70:1 into theological conformity with
1Â€EnochÂ€71:14, where Enoch is identiï¬†ed as the Son of Man by the archangel Michael.
From a different perspective, however, the insertion of ba-xabēhu can be seen to the
easier reading, and its absence as the lectio difficilior. That perspective is to notice
the immediate context of the verse. It immediately follows 1Â€EnochÂ€69:26–29, in
which the Son of Man has been imagined to be sitting on the throne of glory in the
presence of the Lord of Spirits. With this mental construct in mind, any scribe coming
to a sentence that included the term Son of Man would certainly tend to expect that
the Son of Man referred to the heavenly ï¬†gure just described, and therefore that the
absence of the preposition was a mistake to be corrected.211 Thus, in approaching
1Â€EnochÂ€70, it is easy to understand that a scribal insertion might be made in order to
209
Berl omits la- from we)etu.
210
Occasionally, however, la- does occur with prepositions, even though it is not needed.
Thus it can not be claimed categorically that la- is either out of place in or essential to the
grammatical construction.
211
Casey, “The Use of the Term ‘Son of Man’ in the Similtudes of Enoch,” 26, footnote 48.
CO25117.indb 134 11/03/2011 11:58

maintain the presence of the Son of Man in the heavenly scene, rather than suddenly
to be confronted by an earthly son of man being raised to the heavenly arena.
Black212 has suggested that the scribal insertion of ba-xabēhu was due to a
Christian, theological concern. For a Christian scribe, the term Son of Man would
have been “theologically loaded,” referring to Christ. The insertion of the preposi-
tional phrase would be a simple way to solve the theological problem. However, as
Collins points out,213 no theological correction was made at 1Â€EnochÂ€71:14, when
Enoch is explicitly addressed as the Son of Man by Michael. The more likely expla-
nation is that the insertion of ba-xabēhu in 1Â€EnochÂ€70:1 was made on contextual
rather than theological grounds.
Given the immediate context, the lectio difficilior is the reading without the
prepositional phrase, as preserved in AbbÂ€55.
Thus for this chapter the three considerations of the textual problem weigh in
favor of the reading preserved in AbbÂ€55.214 For this passage, AbbÂ€55 is worthy of
serious consideration, as its egregious imperfections do not begin until 1Â€EnochÂ€83.
The reading without ba-xabēhu clears up the minor grammatical oddities of having
la- before we)etu walda )egwāla )emma-ḥeyāw/that Son of Man and of not having
wa- before ba-xaba )egzi)a manāfest/to the presence of the Lord of Spirits. And,
ï¬†nally, given the context of 1Â€EnochÂ€69:26–29, in which the Son of Man and the
Lord of Spirits are distinguished in the heavenly scene, the reading of AbbÂ€55, which
shifts the referent of “Son of Man” from the heavenly ï¬†gure to a human being, is
the more difï¬†cult and therefore the preferable reading. The probabilities involved in
the textual aspect of the issue, then, favor the reading of AbbÂ€55, that here, the term
walda )egwāla )emma-ḥeyāw refers to a human being (Enoch), who is raised while
still alive to the presence of the Lord of Spirits. The term, which had been used of
the heavenly ï¬†gure, is now used in its general sense of meaning a human ï¬†gure. This
change in referent is a bold but characteristic feature of the author’s skill in using and
applying his ideas for the beneï¬†t of the audience. The term, which had been used to
refer to the eschatological judge, now is used in its general sense to apply to Enoch
and this is done in preparation for the identiï¬†cation of Enoch as the Son of Man
(1Â€EnochÂ€71:14).215
Literary Integrity. The other avenue of approaching the question of the signiï¬†cance
of the Son of Man in 1Â€EnochÂ€70:1 is to examine its literary integrity. Is 1Â€EnochÂ€70
intrusive, like the Noachic material, or is it basically consistent with the rest of Par.
212
213
Collins, “The Son of Man in First Century Judaism,” 454.
214
Casey, “The Use of the Term ‘Son of Man’ in the Similtudes of Enoch,” 25–27 and Solution
107–108, argues along these same lines. Black, IÂ€Enoch, 67, 250, concludes the same thing
and translates the text this way. In a recent article, Daniel C. Olson, “Enoch and the Son of
Man in the Epilogue of the Parables,” JSP 18 (1998) 27–38, makes the same conclusion,
drawing into the evidence some new manuscript support.
215
VanderKam, “Righteous One,” p. 178–79 also notices the subtle identiï¬†cation of Enoch and
the Son of Man apparent in the genealogy of 37:1, in which Enoch is called the son of Adam
(Hebrew for ’man’), and the son of Enosh (Aramaic for ‘man’).
CO25117.indb 135 11/03/2011 11:58

En.? Three positions have been suggested. Black has suggested that chapterÂ€70 is an
older tradition, out of which the rest of Par. En. was developed. He characterizes it
as having “little in common with chapterÂ€69” and reading “like a quite independent
piece of text.”216 Others have suggested that 1Â€EnochÂ€70–71 form an epilogue to Par.
En., not closely connected, with the implication that they may be a later addition.217
VanderKam, on the other hand, views 1Â€EnochÂ€70–71 as an epilogue that contains a
narrative account of Enoch’s ï¬†nal ascent.218
Black’s position that 1Â€EnochÂ€70 has little in common with the rest of Par. En.219
does not appear to be tenable. 1Â€EnochÂ€70, because it is so brief, has no allusions to
the kings and mighty ones, the judicial role for the Son of Man, or the terms “Elect
One,” “Anointed One,” or many other major ideas, nevertheless, it does make an
allusion to a speciï¬†c part of the second parable, and it does use much of the same
language as is used in the rest of Par. En. The mention of the place where the angels
took the cords to measure the place of the elect and righteous refers directly to
1Â€EnochÂ€61:1–2 where that speciï¬†c part of the vision is narrated.
A careful study of the passage in comparison with the rest of Par. En., reveals
that there is much common terminology between 1Â€EnochÂ€70 and the rest of Par. En.
Two types of phraseology emerge from 1Â€EnochÂ€70. One is the type of wording that
connects parts of the discourse together. Phrases like )em-dexra-ze/after this, and
baheyya re)iku/there I saw, and the nomen dei, )egzi)a manāfest/the Lord of Spirits,
are present in 1Â€EnochÂ€70 and are frequent expressions used throughout Par. En. They
even appear in Noachic sections, suggesting some attempt to weave those sections
into the fabric of Par. En. Such phrases indicate the hand of the author. Other phrases
are those which are not so frequent in Par. En., but they are completely usual for the
author. The stock phrase, wa-kona/and it came to pass, occurs also at 1Â€EnochÂ€57:1,
60:4, and in the future tense at 1Â€EnochÂ€39:1, 52:7. Further the term for chariots/
saragalāta appears at 1Â€EnochÂ€57:1, 2, and the use of sem/name to stand for the
person also occurs at 1Â€EnochÂ€46:7, 48:2, 3. While this less frequent phraseology
does not seem to appear in the Noachic sections, it does reveal a common mode of
expression for 1Â€EnochÂ€70 with the rest of Par. En.
Further, the subject matter of the chapter does ï¬†t well with the rest of Par. En. The
idea of Enoch’s translation, alluding to Elijah’s translation (2Â€KingsÂ€2:11), begins to
bring the discourse to an end, with a resumption of the narrative framework. As noted
above, the cords for measuring the righteous and elect have already been a part of the
vision (1Â€EnochÂ€61:1–2). Seeing the inhabitants of heaven has also been mentioned at
1Â€EnochÂ€39:4–13 and 41:2. In terms of content, the chapter has material in common
with the rest of Par. En.
216
217
E.g. Collins, The Apocalyptic Imagination, 151–53; Daniel, 81; Colpe, o( ui9o_j tou=
a)nqrw&pou, 426; Theisohn, Der auserwählte Richter, 234, n. 80, and 211, n. 17.
218
VanderKam, “Righteous One,” 178–79. Similarly, Casey, “The Use of the Term ‘Son of
Man’ in the Similtudes of Enoch,” 26.
219
Black, IÂ€Enoch, 250
CO25117.indb 136 11/03/2011 11:58

Two other stylistic habits noticeable in chapterÂ€70 are also consistent with
those found in earlier parts of Par. En. The ï¬†rst is the manner of alluding to other
passages. The author alludes to other passages without using citations or introductory
formulae, yet the allusions are clear and concise. Examples are the allusion to God
and to the human-like heavenly ï¬†gure of DanielÂ€7 that is made in 1Â€EnochÂ€46:1–3,
and the allusion to the chosen servant of IsaiahÂ€42 and 49 made in 1Â€EnochÂ€48. In
1Â€EnochÂ€70 several allusions can be identiï¬†ed: the allusion in 1Â€EnochÂ€70:2 to Elijah’s
translation in 2Â€KingsÂ€2, the allusion to the measuring cords of 1Â€EnochÂ€61:1–7 found
in 1Â€EnochÂ€70:3, and the place of waiting for the righteous souls in 1Â€EnochÂ€22:9
found in 1Â€EnochÂ€70:4. The other stylistic habit is the unannounced switch from
third person narrative to ï¬†rst person discourse. This is found between versesÂ€2 and
3 of 1Â€EnochÂ€70. Enoch’s ascent is being described, and then, without introduction,
Enoch is reporting it in the ï¬†rst person. Theisohn has pointed out several instances
where there is a change in speaker that is not announced, such as, 1Â€EnochÂ€45:2–45:3,
48:8–48:9, and 54:6–55:3.220 This appears to be characteristic of the style of the
author, rather than evidence of redactional seams,221 and is evident in both the body
of the work and its epilogue.
These linguistic, conceptual and stylistic similarities, then, militate against the
view that 1Â€EnochÂ€70–71 are not integral to Par. En. from the literary point of view.
To the contrary, the epilogue appears to be coherent and consistent with the rest of
Par. En. VanderKam argues cogently for the literary integrity of the epilogue.222 The
visions have now ended, and the narrative frame is resumed. According to ancient
exegetes, and as JubÂ€4:17–25 makes clear, Enoch experienced two ascents: one during
his lifetime (1Â€EnochÂ€39), after which he returned and reported his visions, and the
second at the end of his life (1Â€EnochÂ€70–71), after which he did not return (see
further, below on 1Â€EnochÂ€71:10–17). VanderKam builds on Sjöberg’s earlier work,
which argued for a close parallelism between Par. En. and earlier descriptions of
Enoch’s ascent in the Book of the Watchers. As both Sjöberg and VanderKam notice,
the parallelism extends to the two stages in the ï¬†nal ascent. 1Â€EnochÂ€70, when the ï¬†rst
person narrative begins, relates the ï¬†rst ascent. 1Â€EnochÂ€71 narrates the two stages
of the second ascent. Two distinctive verbs are used in 1Â€EnochÂ€71:1, 5 to describe
Enoch’s ascent. The verb tala(āla is the same verb used of exaltation in Isa.Â€52:13,
while kabata is the verb used by the Ethiopic Bible to describe God’s taking Enoch
in Gen.Â€5:24. These verbs lend credence to the hypothesis that the epilogue is a
cohesive, coherent, integrated ending to Par. En.
The significance of the Son of Man. If it has been shown that 1Â€EnochÂ€70 is
integral to the work, and if the textual problem in 1Â€EnochÂ€70:1 has been resolved
to support the reading of AbbÂ€5, then the question of the signiï¬†cance of the Son of
Man can be concluded. In this passage, even though the formal term of we)etu walda
220
Theisohn, Der auserwählte Richter, 87.
221
Collins, “The Son of Man in First-Century Judaism,” 453.
222
CO25117.indb 137 11/03/2011 11:58

)egwāla )emma-ḥeyāw is used, it is applied to the human ï¬†gure of the seer, Enoch.
Enoch that particular human being, “son of man” in the general sense, is raised to
the Lord of Spirits while still alive (following the reading of AbbÂ€55). The use of that
term here in 1Â€EnochÂ€70:1 is rich with pregnant irony, for just a few verses later in
1Â€EnochÂ€71:14, Enoch, the translated human being (son of man) is explicitly told that
he is the Son of Man of the visions, the eschatological judicial ï¬†gure, who had been
the subject of those visions. The earthly ï¬†gure in 1Â€EnochÂ€70:1 is being described in
terms that prepare the reader for his later identiï¬†cation as the heavenly ï¬†gure. In the
narrative development, the ï¬†gures of the human seer and the heavenly judge are being
brought closer together.
70:2â•‡ ba-saragala\ta manfas/on chariots of the spirit:

This description contrasts with the other accounts of Enoch’s ascent in this work.
In Gen.Â€5:24 Enoch simply walks (Klhty) with God and God takes him (xql).
In 1Â€EnochÂ€14:8 winds bore him aloft, while in 1Â€EnochÂ€71 he is said to be
carried off (tetkabbat), going up (te(reg) to the heavens. The phrase 1Â€EnochÂ€70:2,
however, is reminiscent of the accounts of several other ancient ascents. One is
2Â€ KgsÂ€ 2:2, 11, which narrates Elijah’s ascent in a whirlwind after a chariot of ï¬†re
drawn by ï¬†ery horses separates him from Elisha. In The Lives of the Prophets 21,
however, Elijah is understood to have been taken up in the ï¬†ery chariot, not the
whirlwind, and in Joseph and Aseneth 17, a heavenly visitor also departs from
Aseneth in a ï¬†ery chariot. Job’s soul ascends in a great, gleaming chariot (Testament
of JobÂ€52), while his body is prepared for burial. The latest account chronologically is
again of Enoch’s ascent in 3Â€EnochÂ€6, in which a ï¬†ery chariot drawn by ï¬†ery horses
transports Enoch to the Shekinah. These pseudepigraphic accounts are roughly
contemporaneous with 1Â€Enoch (except for 3Â€Enoch), and they indicate that chariotry
was a meaningful and viable image for departure from earth, whether spiritual or
bodily.223
70:2â•‡ wa-waḍ)a sem ba-mā(kalomu/and his name vanished amongst them:

The name stands for the whole person. Enoch’s vanishing from earth is a further
allusion to Gen.Â€5:24, where Enoch is said to be no more (wnny)) after God took him.
His absence from earth is also noted in 1Â€EnochÂ€12:1 where no one knew where
he had been taken up, or where he was, or what happened to him. Black prefers to
understand waḍ)a in terms of )cy, in the sense of his fame being spread far and wide
amongst all people.224 This seems unlikely, however, because the next verse seems
to further the idea of disappearance, since it notes that Enoch was no longer counted
amongst mortals.
223
Enoch’s translation according to the Hebrew Bible, like Elijah’s, did not involve death, while
all the others noted were the result of death.
224
CO25117.indb 138 11/03/2011 11:58

70:3â•‡ wa-)ānbarani ba-mā(kala kel)ē manāfest/ and he placed me between two

winds:
This may be an allusion to Enoch’s journeys, in which he saw the gates of the north
winds and the gates of the west winds (1Â€EnochÂ€34–35) or it may be an allusion to
Enoch’s being transported to the west, where he saw the four storage hollows for the
souls of human beings, one of which was reserved for the righteous (1Â€EnochÂ€22).
The latter is perhaps more likely since the angels’ measuring cords for the righteous
(1Â€EnochÂ€61:1–7) are also alluded to in this same verse.
Since the term, we)etu walda )egwāla )emma-ḥeyāw, here refers to the human being,
Enoch (if AbbÂ€55 preserves the original text, as I have argued), no new characteristics
can be enumerated.225 His ascent on chariots of the spirit is reiterated and concise
allusions to previous visions are made. Narratively, as noted above, this brief chapter
suspensefully brings Enoch’s identiï¬†cation as the Son of Man one step closer.

Since 1Â€EnochÂ€71:10–17 is an ascent account, and before it is studied in depth, a
comparison of the ascent accounts in 1Â€Enoch will be reviewed.
3.8.1â•‡ The Ascent Accounts of 1 Enoch
Chapters 70 and 71 bear many striking similarities with chapters 12 and 14 of the
Book of the Watchers (BW),226 but they also exhibit signiï¬†cant differences. Both the
chapters from the BW and those from Par. En. narrate two ascents for Enoch and they
narrate two stages in the second ascent. The ï¬†rst ascent is narrated in chaptersÂ€12 and
225
Even if Abb 55 is not original and Enoch is lifted alive to the heavenly Son of Man and to
the Lord of Spirits, the only characteristic of the Son of Man discernible here is the heavenly
status, and that has already been noticed and incorporated into the list of characteristics in
connection with 1 Enoch 46.
226
Charles, 1Â€Enoch, 142, believes that 14:18 was used by the author of 71:5–8, while Black,
IÂ€Enoch, 251, suggests that “chapter 14 has provided a model for chapter 71.” Charles
considers that both parts of the second ascent must refer to a period before Enoch’s ï¬†nal
translation, since it would not be possible for Michael to show Enoch what the interpreting
angel had already shown. The strict logicality of Charles’ position, however, fails to
acknowledge the polyvalent nature of apocalyptic language. The genre of the work does not
require that chronological order be preserved. It seems much more appropriate to consider
the accounts of the ascents in chapters 70–71 to be a reiteration of those traditions, but not
necessarily in chronological order.
CO25117.indb 139 11/03/2011 11:58

70, and the second, in chaptersÂ€14 and 71, with the ï¬†rst stage being found in 14:8–14
and 71:1–4, and the second stage being narrated in 14:15–25 and 71:5–17.227 The
similarities and differences between these two sets of chapters raise two questions.
One question concerns how the two accounts of Enoch’s translation to the heavens
are related to each other. The second question pertains to the relationship between
chaptersÂ€70–71 and the rest of Par. En. We look first at the similarities and then the
differences. Some conclusions about the relationships of chaptersÂ€70–71 to BW and
to Par. En. will then be offered.
The First Ascent

Enoch’s ï¬†rst ascent is narrated in 1Â€EnochÂ€12 (Book of the Watchers) and in 1Â€EnochÂ€70
(Par. En.). In 1Â€EnochÂ€12, Enoch is said to have been taken up (takabta) so that none
of earth’s inhabitants knew “where he was or what happened to him” (12:1). There
he encountered the watchers, who enlisted him to take God’s word of judgment back
to the fallen watchers. This episode has its closest parallels to 1Â€EnochÂ€70, in which
Enoch is described as being raised up (here the verb is tala(āla, however) on chariots
of the spirit, so that he was no longer reckoned amongst humanity. In this account he
is placed in the region where the angels took the cords to measure out the place for
the elect and righteous, and in that region he also sees the righteous ancestors. Three
similarities between the two accounts are evident:
a) his being taken up to heaven;

b) the comments that earth’s inhabitants did not know what happened to him;
and
c) the mention of the presence of angels.
Several major differences also arise:
a) different verbs are used of his ascent (takabta in 12:1, which is also used in
Gen.Â€5:24,228 and tala(āla in 70:1, 2);229
b) Par. En. mentions the chariots of the spirit (or wind: manfas can mean either),
while BW does not mention any means of conveyance until 14:8 (in the second
account of the ascent), where winds are said to carry the seer aloft;
227
It is unclear in BW if two separate ascents are being narrated or if chapterÂ€14 is an exposition
of the sights seen in the ascent of chapterÂ€12. ChapterÂ€12 is presented as a concise report
that Enoch was taken to heaven, while chapterÂ€14 is said to be a vision that is being reported
of Enoch’s ascent. Nowhere in either 12 or 14 is it explicitly said that Enoch experienced
two ascents. But neither is it explicitly said that chapterÂ€14 is an explanation or expansion
of the ascent of chapterÂ€12. Similarly chapters 70 and 71 are not linked explicitly either as
two separate ascents, or as chapterÂ€71 being an explanation of chapterÂ€70. Although it is not
absolutely clear, I have construed each narrative as presenting two ascents, with the second
ascent having two stages.
228
Charles, 1Â€Enoch, 142; Black, IÂ€Enoch, 251.
229
CO25117.indb 140 11/03/2011 11:58

c) the purpose of the angels in the separate accounts is different. In BW the angels
enlist Enoch to take back the judgment against the fallen watchers, while in
Par. En. the mention of angels is an allusion to 61:2–4, in which the angels are
measuring out a place for the righteous and elect. These are two distinct purposes
that have opposite concerns, and reveal the distinct purposes of the respective
authors; and
d) Par. En. mentions that Enoch sees the righteous ancestors dwelling there, while
BW does not mention any detail like this.
1 Enoch 70 changes the nature of the purpose of the angels and includes the sight
of the righteous ancestors because it was written with a purpose that is different
from that of chapterÂ€12. For BW, the purpose was to announce judgment upon the
promoters of evil in the world, while for Par. En. the purpose is not only to announce
condemnation to the oppressors, but also explicitly to offer hope to the righteous
and elect. It can offer hope to the oppressed, because it can claim that the angels
have selected the place for the righteous and elect and because it can claim that the
righteous ancestors are already there. This is a development from the purpose of the
ascent account in chapterÂ€12, but does not detract from the overall similarity between
the two accounts.
The Second Ascent

The accounts of the second ascent are contained in chaptersÂ€14 and 71, and in each
chapter two stages are discernible. In chapterÂ€14, the two stages are described in terms
of the seer seeing two houses, while in chapterÂ€71 the seer is described as being trans-
lated (takabta) both in 71:1 and in 71:5, and as being taken to the heavens (samāyāt)
in 71:1 and to the heaven of heavens (samāya samāyāt) in 71:5. The pattern of
proceeding from the ï¬†rst house to the second house in chapterÂ€ 14 is matched in
chapterÂ€71 by the destination ï¬†rst being merely the heavens and then being a second
or higher level of the heaven of heavens.
Some of the similarities between the two accounts are present in the parallel stage
of the ascent. In 14:8–15 the seer is borne by the winds, sees a house of hailstones and
ï¬†re, and falls to his face in horror and trembling. In 71:1–4 the seer’s spirit is translated,
he sees the sons of the holy angels treading on ï¬‡ames of ï¬†re, wearing white garments,
with the light of their faces being like snow. The seer also falls on his face before the
divine ï¬†gure. The descriptions of ï¬†re and snow or ice are common to both accounts, but
in 14:8â•‚14 they are applied to the house, while in 71:1–5 they are applied to the angels.
The angel Michael is named in 71:3, but not in 14:8–14, and Michael’s activity of
showing the seer all the secrets of heaven is present in 71:3–4, as a summary of the three
parables or visions in Par. En., but this activity is not a part of the account in 14:8–14.
The similarities of the ï¬†rst stage are:
a) the seer’s being taken up to heaven;

b) the use of ï¬†re and ice or snow to describe the sights there;
CO25117.indb 141 11/03/2011 11:58

c) the prostration of the seer; and

d) the general impression of brightness.
The differences in the ï¬†rst stage are:
a) the winds are described as the vehicle in BW, but not in Par. En.;
b) the tesselated paving stones and snow ï¬‡oor in 14:10 are not noted in Par. En.;
c) the application of ï¬†re and ice or snow to describe the house in BW but they are
part of the description of the angels in Par. En.;
d) the emotional reaction of horror and trembling of BW is not included in Par. En.
until the second stage of the account;
e) the amazing house is the focus in BW, while in Par. En. it is the angels treading
on ï¬†re (71:1);
f) the streams of ï¬†re are described as shining like hyacinth in 71:2, but not in BW;
g) Michael is named in 71:3, but not in 14:8–14;
h) Michael’s activity of showing the seer all the secrets of heaven is present in
71:3–4, but not in 14:8–14; and
i) the storehouses are mentioned in 71:3–4 (referring back to chaptersÂ€18, 44, for
example), but not in BW.
In the second stage of each account, more similarities are noticeable. In 14:15–25 the
second house, which now is all of ï¬†re, is seen, and it has a lofty, glittering throne,
from which ï¬‡owed streams of ï¬†re and upon which the Great One sat. It is surrounded
by a circle of ï¬†re and by myriads of angels. The seer lies prostrate and trembling. In
71:5–17, an icy, ï¬†ery house is seen, encircled by ï¬†re. Innumerable angels guard the
throne of glory, on which sits the Chief of Days. The seer falls prostrate, weak with
fear.
The similarities of the second stage are:
a) a ï¬†ery house is seen;

b) a throne is present;
c) the divine ï¬†gure is seated upon the throne;
d) ï¬†re encircles the house;
e) myriads of angels are present;
f) the seer lies prostrate, with fear; and
g) again, brilliance pervades the vision.
The differences in the second stage are:
a) in BW the house is made only of ï¬†re, but in Par. En., the house is ï¬†re and ice;
b) in BW the throne is described as ï¬†ery and glittering, with streams of ï¬†re ï¬‡owing
from it, while in Par. En., the usual term for the throne, the throne of his glory, is
used, with no further description;
CO25117.indb 142 11/03/2011 11:58

c) the terms for the divine ï¬†gure are different, in BW the term “the Great One” is
used (14:20), while in Par. En., both terms for God used in Par. En. are employed,
“the Lord of Spirits” (71:7), and “the Chief of Days” (71:10, 12); and
d) varieties of angels are named in Par. En., the Cherubim, who are present in
14:11 in the upper story of the house, are mentioned along with the Seraphin and
Ophannin (71:7) as well as the four archangels (71:9,13).
Interestingly many of the similarities in the two accounts come not from the parallel
stage of the ascent, but from the opposite stage. The description of the house being
built of hailstones and tongues of ï¬†re and encircled by ï¬†re occurs in the ï¬†rst stage in
BWÂ€14:9, but that description is part of the second stage in Par. En.Â€71:5. Likewise
the fear of the seer is already present in the ï¬†rst stage in BWÂ€14:9, but not attributed
to him until the second stage in Par. En.Â€71:11, although in both accounts the seer’s
fear follows his seeing the throne. Cherubim are the only angels mentioned in BW,
and they are mentioned in the ï¬†rst stage as inhabiting the upper story of the house of
ï¬†re and hailstones (14:11), while in Par. En. they are noted in the second stage (71:7)
along with Seraphin and Ophannin guarding the throne.
The similarities and differences between the two accounts reveal something of
the methods and purposes of the author of Par. En. The similarities serve to indicate
the source of the images of the ascents, and through them the author alludes precisely
yet concisely to the original account in BW. And yet the author has signiï¬†cantly
altered that account. The use of the verbs takabata and tala(āla allude clearly back
to BWÂ€12 and 14, as well as Gen.Â€5:24. And when the author uses tala(āla together
with the chariot, the account of Elijah’s translation in 2Â€Kings is alluded to as well.
The details of the house built of hailstones and ï¬†re allude precisely and concisely to
BWÂ€14, yet in Par. En. instead of there being two houses, the structure is compressed
into one. Further, the names used for the divine ï¬†gure and the description of the
throne reï¬‡ect the preferences of the author. The mention of the classes of angels
as well as the names of the four archangels possibly reï¬‡ects the development in
angelology during the time between the composition of the two works, but their
function in the accounts reï¬‡ects the distinct purposes of the authors. In BW the angels
function merely as part of the glorious, awe-ï¬†lled scene, which is described in order
to announce judgment upon the perpetrators of evil. But in Par. En., the author’s
purpose is rather to offer hope to the righteous and elect, and to elevate Enoch to a
favored status, which reï¬‡ects the favored place of the righteous and elect in Par. En.
The angels, then, function in Par. En. to secure the place of the righteous and elect
(70:3), and the archangel Michael serves to facilitate the elevating of Enoch to the
status of being the Son of Man (71:14). This manner of precise but concise allusion
has already been noticed in the allusion to DanielÂ€7 found in 1Â€EnochÂ€46:1, as well
as in the uses of other biblical passages. Similarly, the purpose of the author of Par.
En. has been consistent throughout the work. It can be said, then, that the author’s
method of composition has been applied to 1Â€EnochÂ€14, just as it was to DanielÂ€7 and
the other biblical passages which are incorporated into the work, and the purpose has
CO25117.indb 143 11/03/2011 11:58

consistently been not only to announce judgment to the evildoers but also to proclaim
hope to the righteous and elect.
We now examine the final passage, the identification of the Son of Man in the
presence of the Head of Days and the four archangels.
3.8.2â•‡ 1 En. 71:10–17
10â•‡ 1Wa-meslēhomu 2re)sa maḥalā 3wa-re)su kama ḍamr ḍa)ādā 4wa-neṣuḥ

wa-lebsu 5za-)i-yettaraggwam.
10â•‡ And with them was the Head of the Oath, his head white and pure like wool,
and his garments were indescribable.
11â•‡ wa-wadaqqu ba-gaṣṣeya 6wa-kwellu šegāya tamaswa wa-manfaseya tawallaṭa
wa-ṣārāxku ba-qāl (ābiy ba-manfasa xāyl 7wa-bārakku 8wa-sabbāḥkewwo
wa-(āl(ālku.
11â•‡ And I fell upon my face, and my whole body melted, and my spirit was trans-
formed; and I cried out in a loud voice in the spirit of power, and I blessed and
praised him and exalted.
12â•‡ 9wa-)ellā barakatāt )ella 10waḍ)ā )em )afuya 11konā 12šemurāta 13ba-qedma
zeku re)sa mawā(el.
12â•‡And these blessings which came out from my mouth were pleasing before
that Head of Days.
13â•‡ Wa-maṣ)a we)etu re)sa mawā(el mesla mika)ēl 14wa-gabre)ēl rufā)ēl 15wa
fānu)ēl 16 17wa-)ā)lāf 18te)lefita 19)a)lāfāt 20malā)ekt )ella )albomu xwelqwa.
13â•‡ And that Head of Days came with Michael and Gabriel, Raphael and Phanuel
and thousands and ten thousands of angels without number.
14â•‡ wa-maṣ)a xabēya 21we)etu mal)ak wa-ba-qālu )ammexāni wa-yebēlani )anta
22
we)etu walda be)si za-tawaladka 23la-ṣedq 24wa-ṣedq lā(lēka xādara wa-ṣedqu
la-re)sa mawā(el )i-yaxādegaka.
14â•‡And that angel came to me and greeted me with his voice, and said to me:
“You are the Son of Man who were born to righteousness, and righteousness has
remained over you, and the righteousness of the Head of Days will not leave you.”
15â•‡ wa-yebēlani 25yeṣēwe) laka 26salāma 27ba-semu la-(ālam za-yekawwen 28)esma
)em-heyya 29waḍ)a salām )em-feṭrata (ālam wa-kama-ze yekawwen laka la(ālam
wa-la(ālama(ālam.
15â•‡ And he said to me, “He proclaims peace to you in the name of the world which
is to come, for from there peace has come out from the creation of the world; and
so you will have it forever and forever and ever.”
16â•‡ 30wa-kwellu 31yekawwen wa-yaḥawwer diba 32fenoteka 33)enza ṣedq
34
)i-yaxādegaka 35la(ālam 36meslēka yekawwen māxdarihomu 37wa-meslēka
keflomu 38wa-)emennēka )i-yetlēlayu 39la(ālam wa-la(ālama (ālam.
16â•‡ And all [this will happen and he] will walk according to your way, inasmuch
as righteousness will never leave you; their dwelling will be with you and with
CO25117.indb 144 11/03/2011 11:58

you their lot, and they will not be separated from you forever and forever and
ever.
17â•‡ 40wa-kama-ze 41yekawwen nuxā mawā(el mesla we)etu walda )egwāla
)emma-ḥeyāw wa-salām yekawwen la-ṣādeqān 42wa fenotu retu( la-ṣādeqān
43
ba-sema )egzi)a manāfest 44la-(ālama (ālam.
17 And so there will be length of days with that Son of Man, and the righteous
will have peace, and the righteous will have an upright way, in the name of the
Lord of Spirits forever and ever.”
Variants
1
Wa-meslēhomu/And with them: TanaÂ€9 omits the conjunction.
2
re)sa maḥalā/the Head of the Oath: Ryl2, CurzonÂ€56 and BMÂ€484 have this reading.
The EthÂ€I family, BodlÂ€5, Ull, and the other EthÂ€II manuscripts have re)sa
mawā(el/the Head of Days, one of the two nomina dei in Par. En.. It is likely
that a confusion of consonants had taken place in the transmission of the text
in the original language. )ymwy qyt(/ancient of days may have been misread as
)my qyt(/ancient of the oath in the Vorlage. The EthÂ€I family and the rest of EthÂ€II
corrected it back to the more usual form of the divine name. In Ryl the word
maḥalā /oath is clearly a correction, suggesting that re)sa mawā(el/the Head of
Days was written ï¬†rst, either because it was in the Vorlage or because it was the
usual form expected by the scribe, but then it was corrected either by the original
scribe in proofreading the text or by a correcting hand checking it against another
manuscript. At both levels of transmission, the confusion of Aramaic consonants
and the correction in Ryl, it is likely that re)sa maḥalā was a corruption of re)sa
mawā(el.
3
wa-re)su/and his head: BMÂ€485, BMÂ€491, Berl, AbbÂ€35, AbbÂ€55, add kona/was.
4
wa-neṣuḥ/and pure: Berl has wa-neṣuḥa.
5
za-)i-yettaraggwam/(which) were indescribable: AbbÂ€35 and AbbÂ€55 omit za-.
6
wa-kwellu šegāya/and my whole body: Berl has wa-kwello šegāya, using the
accusative form of kwellu.
7
wa-bārakku/and I blessed: Berl has wa-bārakkewwo/and I blessed him, adding the
pronominal sufï¬†x.
8
wa-sabbāḥkewwo/and I praised him: Ryl2, Berl, and BM AddÂ€24185 have this form,
which has the pronominal sufï¬†x added, in Ryl supralinearly. BMÂ€485, BMÂ€491,
AbbÂ€35, AbbÂ€55, BodlÂ€5, Ryl1, Ull and other EthÂ€II manuscripts have the form
without the sufï¬†x: wa-sabbāḥku/and I praised. Berl is consistent in presenting the
pronominal sufï¬†x on both verbs. TanaÂ€9 has a truncated corruption: wa-sabbāḥ.
9
wa-)ellā barakatāt/and these blessings: BMÂ€485, BMÂ€491, Berl, AbbÂ€55, and TanaÂ€9
(barakata) have wa-)elleku barakat/and those blessing; the plural demonstrative
)elleku/those is used instead of )ellā/these, but with the singular noun barakat.
AbbÂ€35 has wa-zeku barakat/and that blessing.
10
waḍ)ā/came out (fem. pl.): BMÂ€485, Berl, AbbÂ€35, AbbÂ€55, BodlÂ€5, Ull, and 7
other manuscripts have waḍ)a/came out (masc. sing.); all these manuscripts also
CO25117.indb 145 11/03/2011 11:58

have the singular noun barakat. BMÂ€491 and 3 other manuscripts have waḍ)u/
came out (masc. pl.). The variations are not very signiï¬†cant since barakat can be
either masc. or fem., and since it also can be understood either as a plural or as a
collective singular.
Knibb reports, “TanaÂ€9 jumped from waḍ)ā to 78.8b, but began again with 72.1
after reaching 82.20” (1Â€Enoch, I.212). This indicates that TanaÂ€9 completely
omitted 71:12b–17.
11
konā/were (fem. pl.): Berl, AbbÂ€55, BM Add.Â€24185 all read kona/were (masc.
sing.). They are consistent in changing the verb to the correct number and to the
masculine gender.
12
šemurāta/pleasing (pl.): Berl has šemura/pleasing (sing.), being most consistent
grammatically in these verses.
13
ba-qedma/before: BMÂ€485, BMÂ€491, and Berl have the alternate preposition qedma.
14
wa-gabre)ēl rufā)ēl/and Gabriel, Raphael: Berl, AbbÂ€35, AbbÂ€55, and VatÂ€71
have wa-gabre)ēl wa-rufā)ēl/and Gabriel and Raphael, adding the conjunction.
BMÂ€485, BMÂ€491 have wa-rufā)ēl wa-gabre)ēl/and Raphael and Gabriel, having
transposed these two names.
15
wa fānu)ēl/and Phanuel: BMÂ€485 and BMÂ€491 have a major addition from
71:8b–12b:
wa-malā)ekt qeddusān )ella mal(elta samāyāt wa-yebawwe)u wa-yewaḍḍe)u

)emenna we)etu bēt wa-mikā)ēl wa-rufā)ēl wa-gabre)ēl wa-fānu)el (BMÂ€485 omits
wa-fānu)el ) wa-bezuxān qeddusān )ella )albomu xwalqwa (BM 491 has xwelqwi)
wa-meslēhomu re)sa mawā(el wa-kona re)su kama ḍamr ṣa(ādā neṣuḥa (BMÂ€491
has neṣuḥ) wa-lebsu za-)i-yetaraggwamu
and holy angels who are above the heavens and they were entering and going out
of that house and Michael and Raphael and Gabriel and Phanuel (BMÂ€485 omits
“and Phanuel”) and many holy ones who are without number and with them was
the Head of Days, and his head was like wool, white and pure and his clothes were
indescribable.
wa-wadaqqu ba-gaṣṣeya wa-kwellu šegāya tamaswa wa-manfaseya tawallaṭa

wa-šarāxku ba-qāl (ābiy ba-manfasa xāyl wa-bārakku wa-sabbāḥku wa-)al(ālku
wa-)elleku barakat )ella waḍ)a )emenna )afuya
And I fell on my face, and my whole body melted and my spirit was transformed,
and I cried out in a loud voice, in the spirit of power, and I blessed and praised and
exalted, and those blessings which came from my mouth
The addition in BM 491 ends here, BM 485 continues:
konā šemurāta ba-qedma zeku re)sa mawā(el wa-maš)a we)etu re)sa mawā(el
mesla mikā)ēl wa-rufā)ēl wa-gabre)ēl wa fānu)ēl
were pleasing before that Head of Days. And that Head of Days came with Michael
and Raphael and Gabriel and Phanuel.
Berl also has an addition from 71:8b–9a:
CO25117.indb 146 11/03/2011 11:58

wa-malā)ekt qeddusān )ella mal(elta samāy wa-yewaḍḍe)u )emenna we)etu bēt

wa-mikā)ēl wa-gabre)ēl wa-fānu)el
and holy angels who are above the heaven and they were going out of that house and
Michael and Gabriel and Phanuel
Abb 35 has an addition in the upper margin from 71:8b:
wa-malā)ekt qeddusān )ella mal(elta wa-yewaḍḍe)u )emenna we)etu bēt

and holy angels who are above and they were going out of that house
The additions in BM 485, BM 491 and Berl are probably cases of homoio-
teleuton, triggered by wa-fānu)el/and Phanuel. The addition in the upper margin
of AbbÂ€35 perhaps was an attempt to correct AbbÂ€35 to another manuscript that
included the lengthy addition, but it was probably cut short once the nature of the
addition was realized.
16
wa-)a)lāf te)lefita )a)lāfāt malā)ekt )ella )albomu xwelqwa/and thousands and ten
thousands of angels without number: BMÂ€491 omits this clause.
17
wa-)a)lāf/and thousands: BMÂ€485, Berl, AbbÂ€35 and AbbÂ€55 have )a)lāf, omitting
the conjunction wa-/and.
18
te)lefita/myriads: BMÂ€485, Berl, AbbÂ€35, AbbÂ€55, and 4 other manuscripts add the
conjunction wa-/and.
19
)a)lāfāt/myriads: BMÂ€485 omits.
20
malā)ekt/angels: AbbÂ€55 and BodlÂ€4 omit.
21
we)etu mal)ak/that angel: AbbÂ€55 omits this explicit subject of the verbs of coming,
greeting, and speaking. BMÂ€485, BMÂ€491 and AbbÂ€35 omit mal)ak/angel. Both the
presence and the absence of this subject are problematic. The presence of we)etu
mal)ak/“that angel” is problematic because the demonstrative has no antecedent.
Black felt it necessary to clarify that Michael is the angel to whom the author
intended to refer by putting “Michael” in parentheses in the translation.230 Its absence
raises the interesting possibility that in these manuscripts, the subject of these verbs is
we)etu re)sa mawā(el/that Head of Days, back in verseÂ€13. In BMÂ€485, BMÂ€491, and
AbbÂ€35 where the demonstrative we)etu is preserved, the identiï¬†cation of the Head
of Days as the subject is more likely. The lectio difficilior is the reading without the
explicit angelic subject, because it is likely that in the transmission history a subject
was introduced to rectify an awkward sentence, and to correct what was considered
to be a mistaken notion that God would address a human being.
22
we)etu/are: Ull has be)si/man. This change was possibly introduced in order to make
even more explicit that Enoch, a human being, was being granted this lofty status.
23
la-ṣedq/to righteousness: BMÂ€491, Berl and 8 mss have ba-ṣedq/in righteousness.
24
wa-ṣedq/and righteousness: BMÂ€485 and CurzonÂ€55 omit, leaving a corrupt text that
is difï¬†cult to understand. Its omission is probably due to homoioteleuton with the
previous phrase, and unlikely to be original.
230
Black, I Enoch, 68.
CO25117.indb 147 11/03/2011 11:58

25
yeṣēwe) laka/He will proclaim to you: BMÂ€491 has yeṣēwe(āka/He will call to you,
expressing the direct object through a sufï¬†x, with no change in meaning.
26
salāma/peace (acc.): BMÂ€491 and Berl have salām/peace (nom.). BMÂ€491 and Berl
evidently understand “peace” to be proclaimed as a greeting, rather than as a
promise, which would ï¬†t better with the reading noted for BMÂ€491 in VariantÂ€25.
27
ba-semu la-(ālam/in the name of the world: AbbÂ€55 omits these words, so that the
remaining words might be translated: “peace that is to come.”
28
)esma )em-heyya/because from there: AbbÂ€55 has wa-)em-heyya/and from there.
29
waḍ)a salām/peace has come out: Berl has maṣ)a salāma/peace came. The -a
ending on salām is perhaps merely a mistake, rather than a change in case; the use
of a different verb is merely the use of a less speciï¬†c synonym.
30
wa-kwellu/and all: Berl has wa-kwello/and completely.
31
yekawwen wa-yaḥawwer/[this will happen and he] will walk: three manuscripts
preï¬†x za- to the clause, which confuses the grammar; BMÂ€485, BMÂ€491, AbbÂ€35,
and AbbÂ€55 have only yaḥawwer/he will walk, while Berl has only yaxadder/
he will dwell: these latter two variants omit yekawwen, which is frequent in this
passage and may have been inserted inadvertently. The original reading probably
was that of BMÂ€485, BMÂ€491, AbbÂ€35, and AbbÂ€55, as followed by Knibb and
Black.231
32
fenoteka/your way: Berl has the correct case, the accusative: fenotaka.
33
)enza ṣedq/inasmuch as righteousness: BMÂ€491 and Berl have )enta ṣedq/which
righteousness, having substituted the relative pronoun for the conjunction;
AbbÂ€55 has wa-ṣedq/and righteousness, making the clause parallel to the previous
one rather than subordinate.
34
)i-yaxādegaka/it will never leave you: BodlÂ€5 has )i-yaxādeka, having omitted a
consonant in error.
35
la-(ālam/forever: BMÂ€485 has made the phrase match the other occurrences in these
verses by doubling it: la(ālama(ālam.
36
meslēka/with you: BodlÂ€5 and three manuscripts have wa-meslēka/and with you.
37
wa-meslēka/and with you: BMÂ€491 AbbÂ€35, and BMÂ€492 add yekawwen/there will
be, making the clause parallel to the previous one, but not changing the meaning.
38
wa-)emennēka/and.â•›.â•›.from you: BodlÂ€5 has wa-)i-)emennēka/and not from you,
doubling the negative, presumably for emphasis.
39
la-(ālam wa-la-(ālama (ālam/forever and forever and ever: Ull has la-(ālama
(ālam/forever and ever.
40
wa-kama-ze/and so: Berl has wa-)i-kama-ze/and not in this way, adding the negative.
41
yekawwen/there will be: BMÂ€ 485 unnecessarily preï¬†xes the conjunction,
wa-yekawwen/and there will be.
42
wa fenotu retu( la-ṣādeqān/and the righteous will have an upright way: Berl and the
Frankfurt manuscript omit this clause due to homoioteleuton; BMÂ€485, AbbÂ€35,
AbbÂ€55 have wa-fenota retu(a la ṣādeqān/and the straight way [will be] for the
231
Knibb The Ethiopic Book of Enoch, 2.167 and Black, IÂ€Enoch, 68.
CO25117.indb 148 11/03/2011 11:58

righteous; BMÂ€491 has wa-fenota ret( la-ṣādeqān/and the way of justice [will be]
for the righteous; Ull has wa-fenot retu( yekawwen la-ṣādeqān/and a straight way
will belong to the righteous; the reading of Ryl appears most likely to be original,
with each of the others, except the omission, being attempts at improvement.
43
ba-sema )egzi)a/in the name of the Lord: Ull, making the grammar more idiomatic
with the use of the pronominal sufï¬†x and la-, has ba-semu la-)egzi)a.
44
la-(ālama (ālam/forever and ever: AbbÂ€55 adds )amēn/Amen; Berl, ï¬†lling out the
phrase to be consistent with the previous two occurrences, has la-(ālam wa-la-
(ālama (ālam.
Notes
71:10â•‡ re)sa maḥala\/Head of the Oath
As noted in the Variants above, this is probably an error (see below) for re)sa
mawā(el/Head of Days, as the majority of manuscripts have preserved. The divine
ï¬†gure is said to be a part of the vision, which is populated by myriads of angels and
by the four archangels. The Head of Days is described as having a head that was like
wool, white and pure, and as having indescribable garments. The question arises as to
the relation of this description of the divine ï¬†gure to those in 1Â€EnochÂ€46:1, Dan.Â€7:9,
and 1Â€EnochÂ€14:20 (see Notes on 46:1). Here in 71:10 the Head of Days is described:
wa-re)su kama ḍamr ḍa)ādā wa-neṣuḥ/and his head was white and pure like wool,
wa-lebsu za-)i-yetaraggwam/and his garments were indescribable. In 1Â€EnochÂ€46:1,
the divine ï¬†gure is precisely but concisely described: wa-re)su kama ḍamr ḍa)ādā/
and his head was white like wool. This is very brief, and the ideas of purity and
indescribable garments are absent. Meanwhile the description in Dan.Â€7:9 is fuller
than either 1Â€EnochÂ€71:10 or 46:1, and slightly different. In Dan.Â€7:9, the Ancient
of Days has garments that are white like snow, and hair that is like wool. The two
images of whiteness in Dan.Â€7:9 have been combined by the author of Par. En. into
one image and applied to the head of the divine ï¬†gure. Further, where the images of
1Â€EnochÂ€46:1 and Dan.Â€7:9 infer God’s purity through the use of the color white, the
author at 1Â€EnochÂ€71:10 states God’s purity explicitly.
The author has also been inï¬‡uenced by the description of the deity in 1Â€EnochÂ€14:20,
since that passage is clearly alluded to in this chapter (see the introductory comments
to this passage). In 1Â€EnochÂ€14:20, the raiment of the Great One on the throne is said
to be za-yebarreh )em-ḍaḥay wa-yeḍḍa(ādu )em-kwellu barad/h9li/ou lampro&teron
kai\ leuko&teron pa&shj xio&noj/brighter than the sun, and whiter than any snow.232
In 1Â€EnochÂ€ 14:20, the description of the raiment may have been inï¬‡uenced by
PsÂ€104:2, where God is said to be clothed in light. No angels, and certainly no
other humans, were able to view God,233 but Enoch was commanded to come into
God’s presence, and so the description of God in BW is able to surpass the previous
232
Black, I Enoch, 33, 149–50.
233
VanderKam, James C. Enoch, A Man for All Generations (Columbia, South Carolina:
University of South Carolina Press, 1995), 47–48.
CO25117.indb 149 11/03/2011 11:58

descriptions in DanÂ€7:9 and Ps.Â€104:2. This superior vision of God is emphasized in

1Â€EnochÂ€14:20 by the use of the comparative “brighter than the sun, and whiter than
any snow.” Further in 1Â€EnochÂ€14:21, no human or angel is permitted to see God’s
face, but Enoch is commanded to go into God’s presence, and hear God’s voice
(1Â€EnochÂ€14:24). He respectfully paid honor by prostrating himself before God’s
presence (1Â€EnochÂ€14:25), but then is commanded to come closer (1Â€EnochÂ€15:1), and
by implication was able to look directly into the face of God, while receiving God’s
judgment upon the fallen watchers. This close-up view of God (1Â€EnochÂ€14:20–15:1),
then, may have given the author of Par. En. the rationale for improving yet again the
previous descriptions of God from DanÂ€7:9 and Ps.Â€104:2. The description of God has
been developed by noting God’s purity explicitly, and by claiming that a description
of God’s clothing was beyond the capability of human words.
Thus the relationship between these descriptions of God can be understood
as one of progressive development and intensiï¬†cation. In 1Â€EnochÂ€14:20, the two
elements of the description in DanÂ€7:9, the garments white like wool and the hair like
snow, have been augmented with the brightness of being clothed in light claimed in
Ps.Â€104:2. In 1Â€EnochÂ€46:1, the elements are combined and intensiï¬†ed with the use of
the comparative, and ï¬†nally in 1Â€EnochÂ€71:10, the quality of purity that was implied
in the previous descriptions is made explicit, and the description of the clothing is put
outside the realm of human language. It is clear from a comparison of these passages
that the description of God has progressively developed and intensiï¬†ed.
The curious alteration of the nomen dei from re)sa mawā(el/Head of Days to re)sa
maḥala\/Head of the Oath may have taken place in an easily understandable manner.
At the translation stage, there may have been an orthographically ambiguous form
(perhaps a form of h)my/oath234 for )ymy/days) that was translated either into Greek as
kefa&laioj o#rkou, or into Ethiopic as re)sa maḥala\/Head of the Oath. In some of the
subsequent copies the nomen dei was probably corrected to its more usual form re)sa
mawā(el/Head of Days, or perhaps in another translation at this point, the more usual
form was used, accounting for the majority reading. However, the corrupted form,
re)sa maḥalā/Head of the Oath, may have survived235 because it contains a reasonable
allusion back to 1Â€EnochÂ€69:13–25. There, in a passage that is difï¬†cult to determine
textually,236 Kasbeel is depicted as guilty of having revealed the oath to the angels and
desiring to reveal it to humanity as well. Black has interestingly explained the two
cryptic renditions of the oath as instances of gematria for two names of God, AKA for
ynd) hwhy and BIQA for Myhl)h hwhy.237 The passage goes on in 1Â€EnochÂ€69:15–25 to
explain that the oath has to do with creation and its foundation.238 Thus the alteration
234
Charles-F. Jean and Jacob Hoftijzer, Dictionnaire des inscriptions sémitiques de l’ouest
(Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1965) 108, 145.
235
In Ryl, the form maḥalā/Oath is a correction of something that had been written ï¬†rst.
236
Knibb, Enoch, 2.162–3.
237
Black, I Enoch, 247–8; cf. Knibb Enoch, 2.162.
238
Contra Knibb, Enoch, 2.162, who believes that vvÂ€15–25 should be regarded as a secondary
addition.
CO25117.indb 150 11/03/2011 11:58

of the nomen dei may have been justiï¬†ed in the scribal transmitter’s mind as a way to
draw in the supreme authority of God over creation, and thus over evil and the perpe-
trators of evil as well. This kind of interpretive move is not beyond the capability of
the author, as can be seen in the author’s argument that as Enoch was privy to the
cosmological secrets of heaven, so Enoch was trustworthy with regard to the condem-
nation of the kings and mighty ones. While this may account for the survival of the
variant in part of the tradition, the more likely and simpler explanation is confusion
in the Aramaic stage or in its translation into Greek.
71:14â•‡ we)etu mal)ak/that angel:

(See Variant note 21.) If mal)ak/angel is an addition to specify a subject, where in the
previous verse there are a multitude of possible subjects, or to avoid the image of God
approaching a mortal, then the possibility that the Head of Days is the subject of this
sentence must be considered. The narrative introduction to the direct speech of this
verse is rather long, suggesting that something momentous is about to be said. While
the voice of God is heard elsewhere in Par. En.,239 no one else is said in this formal
way to greet the seer. The verb )ammexāni/“he greeted me” is quite rare in Par. En.,
and this verse is the only place that Dillmann gives as an example of its usage.240 The
verb seems to convey an idea of respect through a formal greeting. It is also used
in LkÂ€1:40 when Elizabeth greets Mary, and in RomansÂ€16 it is used repeatedly to
extend greetings to a long list of fellow workers in Rome. Where it might possibly
be expected in Par. En., such as for the pleading of the kings and mighty ones in
1Â€EnochÂ€63:1, it is not used. The verb also seems to be used for the one who initiates
an interchange, but it is not so used at 1Â€EnochÂ€60:5, when Michael addresses the
terriï¬†ed seer. While it does not seem to be used elsewhere in Par. En., it nonetheless
seems to indicate that a momentous interchange is about to take place.
71:14â•‡ )anta/You:
There are no textual variants to support Charles’ thorough-going emendations in this
passage.241 He posits that a section describing the Son of Man in the third person was
lost, and the remaining text emended to read in the second person. Without textual
support for the emendation, the sentence must be understood as being addressed to
Enoch.
239
In chapterÂ€45, it appears to be God speaking in the ï¬†rst person, although it is never said so
explicitly; in chapterÂ€55, the Chief of Days repents of destroying the inhabitants of the earth,
sets a sign in the heavens, and expresses condemnation for the host of Azazel and the mighty
kings; in chapterÂ€62, the Lord of Spirits addresses the kings and mighty ones; in 65:10–12
(Noachic section), Enoch reports God’s condemnation of the wicked and fallen angels; in
67:1–3, the Lord is speaking to Noah, warning of the imminent ï¬‡ood, but also conveying the
news that angels are building him a boat.
240
Dillmann, Lexicon, 734.
241
Charles, The Book of Enoch, 144–45; Collins, The Apocalyptic Imagination, 151, makes the
point that Charles’ emendations are unwarranted, as do many other commentators.
CO25117.indb 151 11/03/2011 11:58

71:14â•‡ )anta we)etu walda be)si/You are the Son of Man:

Here we)etu could function either as the demonstrative or as the verb “to be.”242
Another translation of this sentence is suggested by John J. Collins,243 “you are a
son of man,” i.e. a human being, understanding we)etu as a verb. This is a legitimate
translation of the words, since Ethiopic does not use articles, deï¬†nite or indeï¬†nite, nor
capital letters. This translation could also be proposed in order to keep 1Â€EnochÂ€71:14
consistent with the idea that a living human being was presented to the Son of Man
and the Head of Days at 1Â€EnochÂ€70:1. In response to this proposal, however, I have
argued that 1Â€EnochÂ€70:1 should be read according to AbbÂ€55, which preserves
a text that would suggest that Enoch is a son of man (i.e. a human being) who is
being presented to the Head of Days (see my comments at 1Â€EnochÂ€70:1). Here,
at 1Â€EnochÂ€71:14, on the other hand, to read walda be)si as a generic human being
rather than the particular heavenly ï¬†gure referred to repeatedly throughout the work,
is to set aside the rest of the verse and its context. The qualities of being born for
righteousness, of righteousness remaining with him, and of not being abandoned by
the Head of Days, are all strongly reminiscent of the introduction of the heavenly
ï¬†gure in 1Â€EnochÂ€46:3, 62:2, 14 (as further developed below). As the direct speech
continues, the content of verseÂ€16 can only be understood as applying to the heavenly
ï¬†gure, but no hint at redirecting the speech from one referent to another is made.
Seen in context, then, Collin’s suggestion does not appear to be tenable. Further,
as M. Black noticed, it is surprising that no Christian scribe (until R. H. Charles)
emended the text to remove the scandal of the Enoch—Son of Man identiï¬†cation.244
The understanding that is simplest, most direct, and most true to the narrative ï¬‡ow is
that this sentence, )anta we)etu walda be)si, is addressed to Enoch and identiï¬†es him
as the Son of Man, the heavenly ï¬†gure referred to repeatedly throughout the work.
The term used here at 1Â€En.Â€ 71:14 to refer to the heavenly ï¬†gure is walda
be)si/Son of Man. It is also used twice in 69:29, and, although the preferred reading
at 1Â€EnochÂ€62:5 is walda be)sit/Son of a Woman, walda be)si is the form witnessed
to by the majority of manuscripts at that point (see Variant and Notes at 62:5). Can
any reason be discerned for the use of this term (in one of its variations) here at
1Â€En.Â€71:14 rather than “Elect One,” “Anointed One,” or “Righteous One?”
In this verse, the walda be)si is totally and completely associated with right-
eousness. In Ethiopic, as in Hebrew and Aramaic, righteousness has both the sense
of moral uprightness and the sense of being aligned with the cause of justice and
rightness. Righteousness here is attributed to the walda be)si in three related but
distinguishable ways: 1) The Son of Man was born to righteousness; 2)Â€righteousness
242
Black, 1 Enoch, 206, claims that here is a clear case where it is not a demonstrative.
243
244
Black, “The Messianism of the Parables of Enoch,” 164–64, where he suggests that cabba-
listic perspectives may have inï¬‡uenced the development in 1Â€Enoch of Enoch being identiï¬†ed
with the Son of Man. Black, “The Throne-Theophany,” 70, holds that this is a “call” scene.
Borsch, The Son of Man in Myth and History, 151–53, suggests this identiï¬†cation is a normal
part of an enthronement perception, that the earthly king becomes a heavenly being.
CO25117.indb 152 11/03/2011 11:58

abides upon the Son of Man (ṣedq la(lēka xādara); and 3)Â€the righteousness of the
Head of Days will not forsake the Son of Man.
Further, these three ways in which righteousness is spoken of in relation to the
ï¬†gure can be matched in other parts of the work.
First, he is said here to be born to righteousness (tawaladka la-ṣedq): at
1Â€EnochÂ€46:3, it is said that righteousness belongs to the Son of Man (lotu kona ṣedq).
Righteousness is the ï¬†rst quality attributed to this ï¬†gure.
Second, righteousness remains, abides, or dwells with the Son of Man (ṣedq
lā(lēka xādara): at 1Â€EnochÂ€46:3, it is said that righteousness dwells with the Son of
Man (ṣedq meslēhu xādara). At 1Â€EnochÂ€62:2 the spirit of righteousness is said to be
poured on the one upon the throne (wa-manfasa ṣedq taka(wa dibēhu), and that one
is then called walda be)sit/Son of a Woman (1Â€EnochÂ€62:5). Righteousness is thought
of as a constantly present attribute.
Third, it is promised that the righteousness of the Head of Days will not forsake the
Son of Man (wa-ṣedqu la-re)sa mawā(el )i-yaxādegaka, repeated at 71:16). Similarly,
at 1Â€EnochÂ€39:7, it is promised that righteousness will not fail. At 1Â€EnochÂ€46:3, it is
promised that the cause of the Son of Man will triumph in uprightness (keflu kwello
mo)a.â•›.â•›.ba-ret(). In 1Â€EnochÂ€58:6, it is said that the light of uprightness will be estab-
lished forever (wa-berhāna ret( teṣanne( la-(ālam). The attribute of righteousness,
then, will not be removed.
These three attributions of righteousness are related in that they all attribute
righteousness to the Son of Man, but they are distinguishable in that righteousness is
attributed to the Son of Man at the beginning of life, throughout life, and into eternity.
The establishment of righteousness is the Son of Man’s purpose, the presence of
righteousness is the Son of Man’s sustenance and strength, and the triumph of right-
eousness is the result promised to the Son of Man. The past, the present, and the
future of the Son of Man are enveloped in righteousness.
This thorough attribution of righteousness in 1Â€EnochÂ€71:14 is most closely
related to the attribution of righteousness to the walda sab) in 46:3 and to the Elect
One/walda be)sit in 62:2, 5. These attributes are the ones associated with the Son of
Man when he is ï¬†rst introduced in 1Â€EnochÂ€46:2–3. So now, with the re-introduction
of the court-room scene, with the Head of Days on the throne with a white head, it
is appropriate to use the related term and the associated attributes.245 In effect, by
attributing righteousness to Enoch in this way, the author is emphasizing that Enoch
245
Black, I Enoch, 207, notes that sab) 5 a!nqrwpoj, that be)si 5 a!nhr, and that walda
)egwāla )emma-ḥeyāw is the traditional biblical term. He suggests that the three different
translations stem from three different translators or editors, with the traditional biblical term
being evidence of an editor who corrected the two more primitive forms in most cases, but
not all. Nevertheless, no real difference in meaning can be inferred since the Vorlage for
each of them must have been o( ui9o\j tou= a)nqrw/pou, Md)h Nb, )#n()) rb. Here, however,
the question is not so much why this particular form of the term was used, but rather why
this term, the Son of Man, was used instead of the Elect One, or the Anointed One, or the
Righteous One.
CO25117.indb 153 11/03/2011 11:58

is the same Son of Man who ï¬†gured so prominently throughout the work. So, the
context of re-introducing the court-room scene of Daniel 7 has inï¬‡uenced the author
to use walda be)si here as opposed to “Elect One,” “Anointed One,” or “Righteous
One.”
71:15â•‡ salāma ba-semu la-(ālam za-yekawwen/peace in the name of the world which
is to come:246
The hope of everlasting peace is expressed several times in Isaiah. In Isa.Â€26:1–6
peace is hoped for along with a hope for the reversal of fortunes, in Isa.Â€32:17–18
peace is seen as the effect of the reign of a righteous king, while in Isa.Â€54:9–10 the
promise of everlasting peace is compared to the rainbow in the covenant with Noah.
All three of these ideas associated with the hope for peace are important in Par. En.
as well. The hoped for reversal of fortunes is pervasive (e.g. 1Â€EnochÂ€38:5, 45:5–6,
50:2, 51:5, 58:2–6, 62:10–16); the righteousness of the eschatological judge is a
strong component of the concept of the Son of Man (e.g. 71:14, 46:3; and also of the
Elect One; further its cognate adjective is used in a titular way of this ï¬†gure); and the
presence of the Noachic material indicates the importance to the author of Par. En. of
God’s covenant with Noah with its sign of the rainbow (55:2).
Ezek.Â€37:24–28 in covenant imagery also expresses hope for everlasting peace.
David, or a descendant of David, is envisioned as king over an obedient, faithful
people, who will live in the land of their heritage, where God’s sanctuary will be set
down forever.
Aside from the notion of peace, no other motifs from Isaiah and Ezekiel
connected with peace appear in 1Â€EnochÂ€71:15. It appears, then, that while the
author of 1Â€EnochÂ€71:15 expresses the hope for everlasting peace as Isaiah and
Ezekiel do, the author is not dependent on any of the passages cited. The context
of covenant, obedience and sanctuary for that hope in Ezek.Â€37:24–28 plays no part
in 1Â€EnochÂ€71:15. The ideas of the reversal of fortunes, the righteous rule, and the
rainbow connection in Isaiah that are associated with the hope for peace are important
to the author of Par. En., but they are not expressed as an aspect of the hope for
peace in relationship with this verse. A preliminary conclusion, then, is that the hope
for everlasting peace expressed in 1Â€EnochÂ€71:15 is not couched in clear biblical
allusions.
71:16â•‡ wa-kwellu .â•›.â•›.yaḥawwer (etc.)And all.â•›.â•›.will walk.â•›.â•›.:

As in verse 14, where righteousness was ascribed to the Son of Man at the beginning
of his life, throughout his life, and for eternity, so here it is ascribed to his followers as
they walk in his way, dwell with him, and have their portion upheld by him. The idea
of dwelling with the Son of Man has been expressed in 1Â€EnochÂ€48:4, 62:14, where
they will experience the presence of the Lord of Spirits, and will eat, lie down, and
246
Charles, The Book of Enoch, 145 views this as the earliest use of the rabbinical expression
)bh Mlw(h.
CO25117.indb 154 11/03/2011 11:58

rise up with the Son of Man forever. Part of the future blessedness of the righteous is
that they will dwell in a blessed state of affairs with the Son of Man. That the portion
of the righteous will be upheld is an idea that has been expressed earlier as well (cf.
1Â€EnochÂ€39:6,7; 46:3; 47:4, and especially 48:7, where it is said that their portion
will be preserved). The encouragement for the community who are called righteous
is that their cause and their hope will be upheld and will be victorious in the end. This
verse, then, brings together in a concise, schematic way the blessings for the righteous
that have been expressed earlier, and they are expressed here in connection with the
blessed righteousness of the Son of Man. Both the Son of Man and his followers will
share eternally the blessings of righteousness.
71:17â•‡ yekawwen nuxā mawā(el mesla we)etu walda )egwāla )emma-ḥeyāw/there will
be length of days with that Son of Man:
The fortunes of the righteous in relationship with the Son of Man will be long-lasting,
peaceful and upright forever. Length of days is explicitly denied to the giants, the
offspring of the fallen watchers (1Â€EnochÂ€10:9), and implicitly denied to the kings and
mighty ones (1Â€EnochÂ€62:10–11, 63:11). This long-lasting blessedness is promised
earlier in Par. En. to the righteous. In 1Â€EnochÂ€58:3, 6, eternal life and days without
end are foreseen for the righteous and elect and holy ones. In 1Â€EnochÂ€62:13–16, it is
promised to the righteous that:
a) they shall never behold sinners again;

b) the Lord of Spirits shall abide with them;
c) they shall eat, lie down, and rise up, i.e. dwell, with that Son of Man/we)etu walda
)egwāla )emma-ḥeyāw forever;
d) they shall cease to be downcast; and
e) they shall be clothed in non-fading, never-aging garments of glory. This is all
promised in the context of never-ending blessedness.
The particular form of the term “Son of Man” may also depend somewhat on the
setting. Just one form is surmised to have existed in the original, but four appear
in the Ethiopic rendition. In 1Â€EnochÂ€69:26–27, this form of the term Son of Man,
we)etu walda )egwāla )emma-ḥeyāw, is used in the context of his sitting upon the throne
with authority to judge sinners. In 1Â€EnochÂ€62:9 and 63:11, it is used in the context
of sinners being driven out forever. It appears, then, that this form, we)etu walda
)egwāla )emma-ḥeyāw, bears the connotations of 1) authority over sinners, and 2)
never-ending blessedness for the righteous. Perhaps it is the association with the
length of days, the never-ending blessedness, that governs the use of this more formal
form of the name here.
By way of contrast, at 1Â€EnochÂ€ 71:14, where Enoch is identiï¬†ed as the Son
of Man/walda be)si, the characteristic of righteousness is uppermost (see note on
1Â€EnochÂ€71:14). The quality of righteousness is closely connected to the term Son
of Man/walda sab) in 1Â€EnochÂ€46:3 and to the Elect One/Son of a Woman/walda
CO25117.indb 155 11/03/2011 11:58

be)sit in 1Â€EnochÂ€62:2, 5.247 The form of the term used in 1Â€EnochÂ€71:14, then, may
be inï¬‡uenced by the subject matter of righteousness.
It appears, then, in the transmission of the text in Ethiopic, the use of particular
forms of the term is inï¬‡uenced by the context. In 1Â€EnochÂ€71:14, walda be)si/Son of
Man is used because of the association with righteousness, while in 1Â€EnochÂ€71:17,
we)etu walda )egwāla )emma-ḥeyāw/that Son of the Mother of Life is used because
of the association with the length of days. This ï¬‡uidity may also be dependent
to some extent on different levels of editorial revision, for as Black points out,248
the Vorlage of all the terms must have been Md)h Nb or )#n()) rb. In a sense,
the variety of terms is an inner-Ethiopic problem, that may have its solution in a
mechanical method of revision or the solution may lie in a literary understanding of
the connotations of the particular forms of the term. The solution explored here is the
latter.
3.8.3â•‡ Summary of attributes of the Son of Man in 1 Enoch 71
The ï¬†gure of the Son of Man, then, in the concluding chapter of the work, draws
together many of the pertinent themes of the work as a whole. Righteousness is
closely associated with the Son of Man and his followers, as well as the authority
to judge sinners, and long-lasting life. The blissful results of the reversal of fortunes
is portrayed for the righteous, and this portrayal offers hope and consolation to the
community which is considered righteous in this work.
Three new features are added in the Epilogue to the portrayal of the Son of Man:
a) angels are in the presence of the Son of Man;

b) those angelic attendants have bright garments; and
c) everlasting blessedness is in store for the righteous.
3.9â•‡ Characteristics of the Son of Man in the Parables

of Enoch
At this point it is appropriate to summarize the main characteristics of the ï¬†gure of
the Son of Man and attempt to synthesize the signiï¬†cance of the author’s use of the
scriptural sources. Table 3 summarizes the characteristics and features of the Son of
Man in the Parables of Enoch.
247
walda sab) occurs only in the Second Parable and walda be)si only in the Third Parable and
in the concluding chapters. walda be)sit/Son of a Woman, is the preferred reading at 62:5,
although the majority of witnesses read walda be)si/Son of Man.
248
Black, I Enoch, 207. Black suggests the different forms are due to two different translators
and a reviser who did not complete a thorough revision.
CO25117.indb 156 11/03/2011 11:58

Table 3
Characteristics of the Son of Man in the Parables of Enoch
Characteristic or feature 1Â€Enoch 46 48:2–8 62–63 69:26–29 70–71
â•⁄ 1. heavenly status* • • • •

â•⁄ 2. righteousness • (implied) • •
â•⁄ 3. revelatory function •
â•⁄ 4. chosenness • •
â•⁄ 5. judicial role • • •
â•⁄ 6. named from eternity •
â•⁄ 7. named before the Lord of Spirits •
â•⁄ 8. a support for righteous •
â•⁄ 9. a light to the Gentiles •
10. source of hope for righteous •
11. worthy of worship • •
12. hidden • •
13. revealed to followers • • •
14. followers called “righteous/holy/elect” • •
15. seated upon the throne of his glory • •
16. inï¬‡icts pain, terror and shame •
17. ï¬†nally revealed to and recognized
by Â€the kings and the mighty •
18. request by kings and mighty •
19. no mercy forthcoming •
20. righteous to enjoy salvation • •
21. fairness in judgment •
22. the Word of the Son of Man is strong
and incontrovertible •
23. means of destruction of evil •
24. worldwide jurisdiction •
25. angels in presence of Son of Man •
26. bright garments of angelic attendants •
27. everlasting blessedness for the righteous •
*â•›But without the motion of coming.
3.9.1â•‡1 Enoch 46.
In the Second Parable the Son of Man is described as having a comely, human
appearance, yet to be like one of the angels (1Â€EnochÂ€46:1). Righteousness belongs
to him and dwells with him (1Â€EnochÂ€46:3). The Son of Man will reveal what has
been hidden, and enjoys the status of having been chosen by the Lord of Spirits
(1Â€EnochÂ€46:3), so that his purpose to overthrow the kings and mighty ones is
consonant with that of the Lord of Spirits (1Â€EnochÂ€46:4–5). The main scriptural
source for this vision is Dan.Â€7:9, 13, but it is a precise, concise allusion to that
passage. Where Dan.Â€7:13 uses the comparative form #n) rbk, Par. En. speaks
directly of the heavenly ï¬†gure (zeku walda sab)). In DanielÂ€7, this ï¬†gure is presented
to the Ancient of Days and given authority, whereas in Par. En. the Son of Man’s
CO25117.indb 157 11/03/2011 11:58

presence and authority are assumed to be a part of the heavenly context. The quality
of righteousness, his revelatory function and his status of being chosen derive from
Isaiah and Jeremiah. Isaiah ascribes righteousness to the king (Isa.Â€32:1) who will rule
in righteousness (Isa.Â€9:6[7], cf. Isa.Â€11:3–5). Jeremiah echoes the idea of the justice
and righteousness of the Davidic descendant (Jer.Â€23:5–6, 33:15–16). Implicit in the
judgment scene of DanielÂ€7, but explicit in Isaiah and Jeremiah, is the authority to
depose rulers. That authority and purpose are clearly stated in Par. En. (SirÂ€10:14
states a similar function for the Lord).
So, based on DanielÂ€ 7 and ï¬†lled out with attributes from Isaiah and Jeremiah,
1Â€EnochÂ€46 attributes to the Son of Man:
1) heavenly status, but without the motion of coming;

2) righteousness;
3) a revelatory function;
4) chosenness; and
5) the judicial role with full authority to overthrow the kings and mighty ones, who
deny the name of the Lord of Spirits and who persecute the righteous.
3.9.2â•‡1 Enoch 48
In 1Â€EnochÂ€48:2–7 the Son of Man is named (or designated for a purpose,

1Â€EnochÂ€48:2–3) before the Lord of Spirits, from eternity. He is a support for
the righteous, the light of the Gentiles and the hope of those who are troubled
(1Â€EnochÂ€48:4). Worship and celebration will be offered by earth’s inhabitants
(1Â€EnochÂ€48:5). The chosenness of the Son of Man is reiterated, but attenuated by the
claim that he is also hidden (1Â€EnochÂ€48:6). Nonetheless he is to be revealed to his
followers, the holy and righteous.
This passage draws heavily on both Isa.Â€42:1–9 and Isa.Â€49:1–7, 13, in which the
chosen servant of the Lord is called and named before birth, is to be the light of the
Gentiles, and will be worshipped by kings and princes with celebration. The servant
is both “chosen” and hidden in the shadow of the Lord’s hand, like an arrow in the
quiver.
1Â€EnochÂ€48:2–7, then, drawing on IsaiahÂ€42 and 49, adds to the Son of Man the
attributes of being:
â•⁄ 6) named from eternity;

â•⁄ 7) named before the Lord of Spirits;
â•⁄ 8) a support for the righteous;
â•⁄ 9) a light to the Gentiles;
10) the source of hope for the righteous;
11) worthy of worship;
12) hidden;
CO25117.indb 158 11/03/2011 11:58

13) revealed to followers; and

14) followed by those who are called “righteous/holy/elect.”
3.9.3â•‡1 Enoch 62–63
In the Third Parable, chaptersÂ€62–63 may be summarized together. These chapters

emphasize the juridical role of the Son of Man, who will judge in righteousness,
destroy evil, and cause the pain of judgment to come upon the kings and mighty ones.
The pain of judgment is emphasized by the use of the image of childbirth, which in
turn inï¬‡uences the particular form of the designation for this ï¬†gure, Son of a Woman
(1Â€EnochÂ€62:4–5). He has been seated on the throne of his glory (1Â€EnochÂ€62:5), and
while he was hidden from the kings and mighty ones, he was revealed to the righteous
and elect (1Â€EnochÂ€62:7). In this passage, however, he is revealed to the kings, the
mighty and those who possess the earth, as the Elect One, and they recognize him
(1Â€EnochÂ€62:1–3).249 They are shocked to see that “Son of a Woman” seated on the
throne of his glory (62:5), but when they see him, they fall on their faces before him,
worship him, and plead for mercy from him who is now called “that Son of Man”
(1Â€EnochÂ€62:9). They make a request for a brief respite that they too may worship
appropriately, pay honor to the Lord of Spirits and confess their sins (1Â€EnochÂ€63:1).
Even though they plead for mercy, however, none is forthcoming (1Â€EnochÂ€62:9–10;
63:4, 11, cf. 50:5), whereas the righteous and elect enjoy the feast, the garments,
the liberty, and the joy of salvation (1Â€EnochÂ€62:14). These ideas seem to have been
drawn speciï¬†cally from various parts of Isaiah, mainly IsaiahÂ€10–13 and 61:
• the judgment with justice and the slaying of the wicked from Isa.Â€11:2–4;
• the pain of judgment likened to childbirth from Isa.Â€13:8;
• the rootedness of the community from Isa.Â€11:10;
• the proclamation of liberty from Isa.Â€61:1–3; and
• the glorious garments from Isa.Â€61:10.
Other themes, while not precise allusions, have a thoroughly scriptural perspective:
• the joyous feast (cf. Isa.Â€25:6–8, 65:13);

• placing hope in God (cf. Isa.Â€40:31; Ps 37:9, 34);
• pleading for mercy (cf. PsÂ€33:18, 42:6, 62:5, 71:5, 130:7, 147:11);
• punishment for the wicked (cf. ProvÂ€10:28, PsalmÂ€37, EzekÂ€28:11–19);
• the sword of punishment (cf. Isa.Â€13:9, 15, 34:5, 7; JerÂ€46:10); and
249
G. W. E. Nickelsburg, Resurrection, Immortality and Eternal Life in Intertestamental
Judaism (Cambridge, Mass., 1972), 72, notes the importance of recognition in the judgment
scene. Since the Son of Man was not known to them before, Nickelsburg argues, they must
have recognized him in the righteous and elect who have been aligned with him.
CO25117.indb 159 11/03/2011 11:58

• the yearning to dwell with God (cf. Isa.Â€57:5, 65:9, JoelÂ€4:17, 21, ZephÂ€3:12–13,
ZechÂ€2:10–14).
The author has melded together qualities of several savior-ï¬†gures, or ï¬†gures who
effect salvation or judgment, such as the stump of Jesse and the servant of the
Lord.250
Further the pleading on the part of the kings and mighty ones for mercy in
1Â€EnochÂ€63 bears many interesting points of contact with the intercessory prayer of
lament and penitence found in DanielÂ€9. That prayer is offered by a righteous person,
with a positive outcome, whereas in Par. En., with thorough irony, the author puts
the prayer on the lips of the wicked, and the just outcome is condemnation for the
oppressors. The reaction of the kings and mighty when they see the Son of Man on
the throne is shame ï¬†lling their faces, a concept that is very similar to Ps.Â€83:17, in
which the poet of the lament pleads that the enemies be destroyed and their faces be
ï¬†lled with shame.
1Â€EnochÂ€62–63 expand the attributes of the Son of Man by adding:
15) that he is seated upon the throne of his glory;

16) that he is ï¬†nally revealed to and recognized by the kings and the mighty;
17) that he has the power to inï¬‡ict pain, terror and shame, so that darkness ï¬†lls their
faces;
18) that a request is made to him;
19) that the judged will plead for mercy but none will be forthcoming;
20) that the righteous will enjoy salvation; and
21) his fairness in judgment, which is acknowledged even by those who are
condemned, the kings and the mighty ones.
3.9.4â•‡1 Enoch 69:26–29
The closing of the Third Parable (1Â€EnochÂ€69:26–29) reiterates some key charac-
teristics of the Son of Man. His name is to be revealed, he is to be given total and
incontrovertible authority, and his session upon the throne of glory is repeated.
The Son of Man’s word is declared strong before the Lord of Spirits, and he will
be the means of the destruction of evil. The righteous judgment of the kings from
the throne is similar to that expressed in Ps.Â€9:4–11. Total authority is attributed to
the Son of Man in this judicial setting, whereas in DanielÂ€7 dominion and kingdom
have been given to him in an honoriï¬†c way. Three new qualities are added from this
passage:
22) that the word of the Son of Man before the Lord of Spirits is strong and
incontrovertible;
250
CO25117.indb 160 11/03/2011 11:58

23) that the Son of Man is the means for the destruction of evil; and
24) that this judge has worldwide jurisdiction.
3.9.5â•‡1 Enoch 70–71
The Epilogue, chapters 70–71, completes the portrait of the Son of Man in Par. En. It
reafï¬†rms the righteousness of the Son of Man (1Â€EnochÂ€71:14) and his protection for
the righteous as their secure dwelling place. Through him they will enjoy everlasting
blessedness (1Â€EnochÂ€71:16–17). Angels also appear in myriad numbers as part of the
heavenly courtroom scene (1Â€EnochÂ€71:8, 13) and their garb is bright and luminescent
(1Â€EnochÂ€71:1). While angels have appeared throughout the work, preparing the place
of punishment (e.g. 1Â€EnochÂ€53:3, 54:6, 56:1) and gathering the elect from all over
the world (1Â€EnochÂ€61), here in the epilogue they are more closely connected with
the Son of Man, for they are part of the heavenly scene in which the Son of Man is
disclosed. Even though they are not explicitly called “his” angels, they can be under-
stood as being available at the Son of Man’s beck and call, since the Son of Man is
in a position of vicegerent in this heavenly scene. Three new features are added in
the Epilogue:
25) angels in the presence of the Son of Man;

26) the bright garments of the angelic attendants; and
27) everlasting blessedness for the righteous.
3.9.6â•‡ Other Salient Features
Other features that complement the portrait of the Son of Man must also be noted.
The descriptions of those who surround the Son of Man and the effects of his
judgment also comprise the conceptions with which the author worked.
One is the fate of the condemned. The kings and mighty ones are condemned and
their place of conï¬†nement is described. They are consigned to a ï¬†ery fate, in a deep
burning valley that had been prepared for Azael and his host (1Â€EnochÂ€54:1, 5, 63:10;
cf. also 67:7, 12–13 in the Noachic section). Fetters were also prepared to bind them.
Another feature is the radiance of the vindicated. In the heavenly realm all is
brightness and glory, and in eternity the righteous and elect will also be radiant
with the light of the Lord as of the sun (1Â€EnochÂ€38:4, 39:7, 51:5, 58:3). There
righteousness will “shine like the sun” and the darkness of evil will be destroyed
(1Â€EnochÂ€58:5–6).
Resurrection, for the purpose of facing judgment, is another interesting feature of
this depiction of the Son of Man. The earth will give back what had been entrusted
to it, and Sheol will give back what had been committed to it (1Â€EnochÂ€51:1).
The righteous and holy will then be chosen out from amongst those resurrected
CO25117.indb 161 11/03/2011 11:58

(1Â€EnochÂ€51:2) and they are promised a joyful and satisfying life with the Elect One
(1Â€EnochÂ€51:5). Later the resurrection theme appears again, focusing on the elect
who have been lost. They will be gathered from widely scattered areas, as two angels
take long cords to measure and gather up the righteous (1Â€EnochÂ€61:1–3). All that is
hidden in the depths of the earth will be revealed, a possible allusion to Sheol, where
elect ones who possibly lost their lives in ï¬‡ight from oppressors might be.251 They
have been destroyed in the desert, lost at sea (“devoured by the ï¬†sh of the sea”) and
slain by wild beasts. But they will return and ï¬†nd security in the Elect One, for “none
can be destroyed” (1Â€EnochÂ€61:5). Resurrection is envisioned for those aligned with
the Son of Man, for they will be gathered to enter into a life of satisfaction and joy,
which contrasts markedly with their current oppressed status.
Still another salient feature of this portrait is the stark contrast between the
righteous and the oppressors. A clear dichotomy exists between them throughout
the work, both before and after judgment. Before the judgment the righteous are
downcast and oppressed, while the kings and the mighty enjoy wealth, power and
prestige. After judgment, however, their fortunes are reversed, as the clear dichotomy
continues.
The basis of the judgment against the kings and mighty is worth noting. Judgment
is executed against them because of their denial of the Lord of Spirits (1Â€EnochÂ€46:7)
and, more interestingly, because of their treatment of the righteous. Those who are
aligned with the judge have been persecuted (1Â€EnochÂ€46:8), their blood has been
shed, they have suffered long at the hands of the oppressors, and therefore judgment
will be executed on their behalf (1Â€EnochÂ€47:2). While the kings and the mighty seek
mercy, to no avail (1Â€EnochÂ€62–63), nonetheless, they agree with the fairness of the
judgment (1Â€EnochÂ€63:8)!
In keeping with the apocalyptic context of this work, the author envisions a
reversal of fortunes. The kings and mighty, who possess the earth, will lose their
power and status (1Â€EnochÂ€38:4–5) and be destroyed (1Â€EnochÂ€45:6). They will be
given over into the hands of the righteous and elect, with the result that no trace of
them will survive (1Â€EnochÂ€ 48:9–10). They will be ï¬†lled with shame and handed
over to the angels of punishment (1Â€EnochÂ€62:9–12, 63:11), consigned to eternal
destruction, imprisoned (1Â€EnochÂ€69:27–28), in fetters (1Â€EnochÂ€53:4–5), in a deep,
burning valley (1Â€EnochÂ€54). On the other hand, the vindicated will be blessed. Not
only will those who are found to be righteous enjoy everlasting life with the Son
of Man, but they will also take over the earth and live on it in peace, free from the
oppression of the kings and mighty ones (1Â€EnochÂ€45:5â•‚6, 48:7–10). Glory and honor
and life shall return to them (1Â€EnochÂ€50:1–2, 62:13–16), and they are promised
fortunes, power and prestige which were formerly enjoyed by the kings and the
mighty. This promised reversal of fortunes is a signiï¬†cant and prominent feature of
the portrayal of the judicial power of the Son of Man.252
251
Black, I Enoch, 232, suggests allusions to Isa.Â€14:15, ZechÂ€11:7, 14, and PsÂ€18:6.
252
James C. VanderKam, Enoch, A Man for All Generations (Columbia, South Carolina:
CO25117.indb 162 11/03/2011 11:58

So the following salient features are added to this portrait (see TableÂ€4):
28) ï¬†ery fate of the condemned (1Â€EnochÂ€54:1, 5, 63:10; cf. also 67:7, 12–13 in the
Noachic section);
29) that fiery fate was prepared for Azazel (1Â€EnochÂ€54:1);
30) fetters for the condemned;
31) radiance of the vindicated (1Â€EnochÂ€38:4, 39:7, 51:5, 58:3, 5–6);
32) resurrection;
33) the elect will be gathered (1Â€EnochÂ€61:5);
34) and the elect will be gathered from widely scattered areas: from the depths of the
earth, from the desert, the sea, from death (1Â€EnochÂ€61:5, cf. 51:1);
35) clear dichotomy between the righteous and the oppressors passim;
36) the basis of judgment will be the treatment the righteous have received at the
hands of the kings and mighty ones (1Â€EnochÂ€62:11; cf. 46:8); and
37) reversal of fortunes (1Â€EnochÂ€38:4–5; 45:5–6; 48:7–10; 50:1–2; 62:9â•‚16; 63:11;
69:27–28).
Table 4
Other features relating to the Son of Man in the Parables of Enoch
Characteristic or feature Passages where found
28. ï¬†ery fate of the condemned 54:1, 5, 63:10; cf. also 67:7, 12–13 in the
â•… Noachic section
29. fate was prepared for Azazel 54:5
30. fetters for the condemned 53:4–5
31. radiance of the vindicated 38:4, 39:7, 51:5, 58:3, 5–6
32. resurrection 51:1
33. the elect will be gathered 61:5
34. gathered from widely scattered areas* 61:5
35. clear dichotomy between righteous and
condemned passim
36. basis of judgment** 62:11; cf. 46:8
37. reversal of fortunes 38:4–5; 45:5–6; 48:7–10; 50:1–2; 62:9–16;
â•… 63:11; 69:27–28
* â•›â•›â•›they will be gathered from the depths of the earth, the desert, and the sea.
**â•›the treatment the righteous have received at the hands of the kings and mighty ones.
3.9.7â•‡ Use of Scripture
These passages reveal the profundity of the author’s familiarity with Scripture. The
visions of Par. En., at their foundation, depend on Dan.Â€7:9, 13, but the portrait of
the Son of Man is ï¬†lled out by the incorporation of ideas like the notion of davidic
University of South Carolina Press, 1995), 134.
CO25117.indb 163 11/03/2011 11:58

roots found in IsaiahÂ€9, 10–13 and JeremiahÂ€23 and 33, the chosen servant passages in
IsaiahÂ€42 and 49, as well as the plea for mercy in DanielÂ€9. Some have been borrowed
straightforwardly, others have been drawn in ironically. Many other scriptural-
sounding motifs are incorporated into the work as well, ideas that are also expressed
in the Psalms, Proverbs, the prophecies of Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Joel, Zephaniah
and Zechariah (see especially the section on 1Â€EnochÂ€62–63 above). The power of
God, the servant of the Lord, and the davidide stump of Jesse are mined for qualities
and characteristics that will expand the salviï¬†c and judicial aspects of the concept of
the Son of Man. This new ï¬†gure is conceived of not as a metaphorical representation
of the nation, but as an individual, representing the righteous and elect in the heavenly
realm, and embodying their hope for vindication and a reversal of fortunes. He is a
savior, a judge, a chosen servant, hidden to some but revealed to others. His character
is composite, fully consonant with scripture, as shown by the variety of passages
upon which the author drew, yet integrated to be encouragement and consolation for
the righteous and elect.253
253
James C. VanderKam, Enoch and the Growth of an Apocalyptic Tradition (CBQ Monograph;
16; Washington, DC: The Catholic Biblical Association, 1984), 190; and Enoch, A Man
for All Generations, 142. Borsch, The Son of Man in Myth and History, 154, however, is
satisï¬†ed to say that Deutero-Isaiah merely drew on the same background concepts.
CO25117.indb 164 11/03/2011 11:58

4
The Son of Man in the conception of
Matthew
4.1â•‡ Introduction to Matthean Passages to be

Considered
We now turn to the Son of Man passages in the Gospel of Matthew. Matthew has
preserved thirty Son of Man sayings, most of which have been taken over from
Mark or Q.1 Using Bultmann’s categories, thirteen are sayings referring to the future,
coming Son of Man, ten refer to Jesus’ passion, and seven relate to his earthly
activity.2 Eleven sayings are unique to Matthew,3 of which nine pertain to the future,
coming Son of Man. Three sayings from Mark and Q that contain the term, “Son of
Man” are found in Matthew with personal pronouns instead of “Son of Man.”4 Of
the eleven sayings unique to Matthew, the term “Son of Man” has been added to
six Markan sayings in which “Son of Man” had not been present and one from Q.5
Further, of those eleven, four Son of Man sayings are found only in Matthew, not
having been redacted from Mark or Q.6
The nine future, coming Son of Man sayings that are unique to Matthew hold the
most promise for ï¬†nding relationships with the Enochic material. The earthly sayings
and the suffering sayings can be excluded a priori since the Enochic view of the Son
of Man is of a future, non-suffering ï¬†gure. Therefore, the nine sayings unique to
Matthew will be the core of this study. Beyond these, Matthew displays some very
interesting redactional activity and scholars have attempted to discern Matthew’s
purpose and motivation in making these changes.7 For this reason, Mt. 16:13, and
1
Mark has 14, while Luke has 25.
2
Davies and Allison, Matthew, II.50–51; Bultmann, Theology of the New Testament, 30; he is
followed by Vielhauer, “Gottesreich und Menschensohn,” 57–58; see also Caragounis, The
Son of Man, 145–47, for a slightly different organization of the sayings.
3
Mt. 10:23, 13:37, 13:41, 16:13, 16:27, 28, 17:12, 19:28, 24:30, 25:31, 26:2.
4
Mt. 5:11//Lk. 6:22, Mt. 10:32//Lk. 12:8, and Mt .16:21//Mk 8:31.
5
Mt. 16:13//Mk 8:27, Mt. 16:27//Mk 8:38, Mt. 16:28//Mk 9:1, Mt.Â€17:12//MkÂ€9:13, Mt.
24:30//Mk 13:25–26, Mt. 26:2//Mk 14:1, and from Q, Mt.Â€19:28//Lk. 18:29–30.
6
Mt. 10:23, 13:37, 41, 25:31.
7
Sim, Apocalyptic Eschatology, 15–19, acknowledges the importance of the changes Matthew
165
CO25117.indb 165 11/03/2011 11:58

21 are included in this study, because they reveal an interesting aspect of Matthew’s
reworking of the Son of Man concept, even though they do not ï¬†t the future, coming
category.
The Matthean passages to be investigated on the Son of Man are the following:
Mt. 10:23â•‡ This verse is a word of encouragement from Jesus to the disciples when
they are being sent on a mission to the towns and cities of Israel, when Jesus promises
them that the Son of Man will come before that tour is complete.
Mt. 13:37, 41â•‡ These verses are from the Interpretation of the Parable of the Wheat
and the Weeds (Mt. 13:24–30). The sower of the good seed is interpreted as the Son
of Man, who will send his angels to gather and destroy the causes of evil so that the
righteous will shine like the sun.
Mt. 16:13, 21, cf. 26:2â•‡ These verses are a part of the passion predictions. Matthew
sets the whole passion narrative under the dignity of the title of the Son of Man.8 In
Mt. 16:13, at the beginning of the passion narrative, Jesus asks the disciples about
people’s perception of the Son of Man. In the parallel synoptic passages (Mk 8:27
and Lk.Â€9:18) the personal pronoun is used, but in Matthew the term “Son of Man”
appears. In contrast, in Mt.Â€16:21, Matthew removes the term “Son of Man” from the
source passage of MkÂ€8:31//Lk.Â€9:22 and replaces it with the personal pronoun. This
redactional activity indicates his identiï¬†cation of Jesus and the Son of Man. Mt.Â€26:2
also plays an important role since it recalls the tone for the passion narrative as being
set under the dignity of the person of the Son of Man.
Mt. 16:27, 28â•‡In Mt. 16:27, the Son of Man is envisioned as coming to repay
evildoers, while in Mt.Â€16:28, he is envisioned as coming in his kingdom. These
occurrences of the term Son of Man in these two chapters of the passion narrative are
obvious alterations by Matthew of the received material from Mark, and thus they
yield signiï¬†cant insight into Matthew’s concept of the Son of Man.
Mt. 19:28â•‡ Here the Son of Man is seen as sitting on the throne and promising his
followers that they will sit on twelve thrones judging the tribes of Israel (cf. Lk.Â€22:28
for the feasting motif and the twelve thrones of judgment). This saying is appended
to the encounter of the rich young ruler with Jesus.
Mt. 24:30–31â•‡ Matthew speaks of the sign of the Son of Man, cf. MkÂ€13:26–27 and
Lk.Â€21:27. Quotations from Dan.Â€7:13 and Zech.Â€12:10–14 are included in the vision
of the Son of Man coming on or with the clouds. Signiï¬†cant redactional activity
has introduced for deducing Matthew’s views, but also argues that Matthean acceptance of
Mark or Q without change is just as pertinent to gaining a full picture of his views.
8
Colpe, o( ui(o_j tou= a)nqrw&pou, VIII.460.
CO25117.indb 166 11/03/2011 11:58

The Son of Man in the Conception of Matthew 167
in Mt.Â€24:30–31 contributes to understanding Matthew’s concept of the Son of

Man.
Mt. 25:31â•‡ In this verse the Son of Man comes in glory with the angels, sits on his
glorious throne and exercises the ï¬†nal judgment.
A preliminary, synthetic overview of these passages already yields some important
similarities to the Par. En. passages. Both Matthew and Par. En. (as well as Mark
and Luke) share the use of DanielÂ€7 for their understanding of the ï¬†gure of the Son
of Man. Both foresee an overthrow of those currently in power, and a reversal of
fortunes. For both the suffering of the righteous is a major concern, and for both part
of the function of the statements about the Son of Man is to bring consolation and
hope to the followers. These similarities in the concept, identity, role, and purpose
of the Son of Man will be more closely examined and expanded in the rest of this
chapter, as the Matthean passages are exegeted.
4.2â•‡ Exegesis of Mt. 10:23

Mt 10:23 is the word of encouragement from Jesus to the disciples when they are being
sent on a mission to the towns and cities of Israel. Jesus promises them that the Son of
Man will come before that tour is complete. A situation of rejection and persecution
also exists, since the disciples are characterized as ï¬‡eeing from one town to the next.9
4.2.1â•‡ Mt. 10:2310
o#tan de\ diw&kwsin u9ma~j e0n th|~ po&lei tau/th|, feu&gete ei0j th\n e9te/ran: a)mh_n
ga_r le/gw u(mi=n, ou) mh_ tele/shte ta\j po&leij tou= 70Israh\l e3wj a2n e1lqh| o( ui9o\j
tou= a)nqrw&pou.
When they persecute you in one town, ï¬‡ee to the next; for truly, I tell you, you
will not have gone through all the towns of Israel before the Son of Man comes.
Variants
e9te/ranâ•‡ CDLQ0171, the Majority group and other manuscripts have allhn.11
a)mh_nâ•‡ DLQ0171 and others before a)mh_n add kan (or ean de) en th allh (or ek
tauthj) diwkwsin umaj feugete eij thn allhn (or eteran). It appears
Hans-Theo Wrege, Das Sondergut des Matthäusevangelium (Zurich: Theologischer Verlag,

9
1991), 54–55.
10
The transcription is taken from Nestle-Aland, Novum Testamentum Graece (27th Edition;
Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft; 1993). The translation is taken from The New Oxford
Annotated Bible (NRSV), edited by Bruce M. Metzger and Roland E. Murphy (New York:
Oxford University Press; 1991). Variants can be consulted in the apparatus in Nestle-Aland27.
11
For a fuller listing of witnesses, see the apparatus of Nestle-Aland27.
CO25117.indb 167 11/03/2011 11:58

that this clause, rather than having dropped out because of homoioteleuton
(allhn.â•›.â•›.allhn), is an explanatory expansion, and not original.12
tou= 70Israh\lâ•‡ B and D omit tou=.
a2nâ•‡ omitted by the original hand of ) and B and a few others; ou{ is read by a corrector
of ) and a few others, but CDLWQfÂ€ 1.13 33, the Majority text and others have
preserved a2n to make the sentence more grammatically correct.
Notes
The source of this verse has been debated with widely differing conclusions. It does
not have a parallel in either Mk or Lk., and so some have seen it as an authentic
saying of Jesus,13 or as a Matthean composition,14 or perhaps a pre-Matthean tradition
from his special source which has been edited by Matthew,15 or perhaps a logion from
Q.16 The verse does have many Matthean themes and expressions, such as the theme
of persecution (diw&kwsin), the interest in the cities (po&leij) of Israel, the theme of
ï¬‡ight (feu&gete), the idea of completing the mission (tele/shte).17 But it also bears
the marks of coming from a different context, in that neither tau/th| nor e9te/ran have
an immediate antecedent. Besides that, the verb of “coming” is used, rather than the
verb of “returning.” Since Matthew identiï¬†es Jesus as the Son of Man,18 the verb of
12
Bruce Metzger, A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament (United Bible Societies;
1971) 28.
13
Albert Schweitzer, The Quest for the Historical Jesus (New York: MacMillan, 1968),
358–61, considers this verse to be authentic and it is his starting point for his understanding
of the self-conception of Jesus.
14
Robert H. Gundry, Matthew: A Commentary on His Handbook for a Mixed Church under
Persecution (2nd ed., Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1994),
194; Hare, The Son of Man Tradition, 141–45. Gundry concludes that this verse bears the
marks of being “from the pen of Matthew” since the phrase “cities of Israel” is very similar
to the phrase “cities of the Samaritans” in Mt.Â€10:5, which he has already determined to be
a Matthean composition.
15
Davies and Allison, Matthew, II.187–92. M. Eugene Boring, Matthew (New Interpreters
Bible, Vol. VIII; Nashville: Abingdon, 1995), 259, believes it to be “an oracle of an early
Christian prophet giving instructions for the conduct of Christian missionaries under
duress.” Heinz Geist, Menschensohn und Gemeinde: Eine redaktionskritische Untersuchung
zur Menschensohnprädikation im Matthäusevangelium (Würzburg: Echter Verlag, 1986),
227–30. See also Casey, Solution, 230–233.
16
Tödt, Son of Man, 60–62; Davies and Allison, Matthew, II.187–92 say that it cannot be
determined whether this saying derived originally from Special Matthean material or from
Q. Since it has no parallel in Luke, it cannot be stated for certain that it is from Q, although
Tödt treats it as a very good possibility that it came from Q, since it is consistent with the
“genuine” (i.e. future) sayings in speaking of a coming Son of Man. Tödt considers this to
be a post-Easter, prophetic saying, that was respected as the Word of Jesus himself, for it has
a very narrow range of space and time: only the cities of Israel are to be included, and only
a brief time is envisioned.
17
Gundry, Matthew, 194, has pointed this out.
18
In Mt. 16:13, Mt. replaces the “I” of Mk 8:27 with the “Son of Man,” and in Mt. 16:21, Mt
replaces the “Son of Man” of Mk 8:31 with “he,” referring to Jesus in the third person.
CO25117.indb 168 11/03/2011 11:58

“returning” would be expected,19 but instead he says that the mission would not be
completed until the Son of Man came (e3wj a2n e1lqh| o( ui(o\j tou= a)nqrw&pou). Further,
the verse does bear some similarities with the saying in Mk 9:1 about some not tasting
death until the kingdom of God has come, and so it may be a kingdom saying that
has been edited into a Son of Man saying.20 Regardless of its source, it has been
redacted by Matthew and placed in this context, and therefore it yields some insight
into Matthew’s concept of the Son of Man.
The saying is in the context of a missionary discourse.21 The purpose of the
discourse was to offer encouragement and consolation22 to the missionaries in the face
of persecution,23 and to justify the continuance of that mission alongside the mission
to the gentiles.24 It does this by drawing connections between the ministry of Jesus
and the ministry of his disciples.25
Within that context, and although the saying is brief, two characteristics of
Matthew’s view of the Son of Man can be discerned. One is that the Son of Man is
coming in the future. The mission of going throughout the cities of Israel will not be
completed until the Son of Man comes. The Son of Man is a future, coming ï¬†gure. The
second characteristic has to do with his activity. The Son of Man will come in order in
some way to counter those who are persecuting the disciples. Persecution is present
in the context also, for earlier (10:17–22) they are forewarned of opposition and
rejection, as well as trial and martyrdom. The extent and manner of the coming Son
of Man’s opposition to the persecutors are not revealed in this verse. This opposition
between the Son of Man and persecutors or oppressors is also found in a passage like
Mt. 25:31–46, the description of the Last Judgment. Matthew most clearly identiï¬†es
Jesus with the Son of Man26, but here in 10:23, more is implied than the human Jesus
who walked and talked in Galilee. The Son of Man is an eschatological ï¬†gure.27 And
further, the mention of Beelzebul (10:25) indicates that even a wider context is being
appealed to, the context of the cosmic battle between good and evil. In that context the
Son of Man is the representative of the good, and in this way can function to provide
19
Only Jn 14:3 speaks of Jesus coming again.
20
Davies and Allison, Matthew, II.187–92.
21
Dorothy Jean Weaver, Matthew’s Missionary Discourse: A Literary Critical Analysis (JSNT
38; Shefï¬†eld: JSOT; 1990) 100–102. Theisohn, Der auserwählte Richter, 262, note 84.
22
Tödt, Son of Man, 60–62.
23
Graham N. Stanton, A Gospel for a New People: Studies in Matthew (Louisville: Westminster/
John Knox Press, 1993), 126, 213.
24
Gundry, Matthew, 194.
25
Weaver, Matthew’s Missionary Discourse, 102.
26
As noted above, in Mt 16:13, Mt. replaces the “I” of Mk 8:27 with the “Son of Man,” and
in Mt.Â€16:21, Mt. replaces the “Son of Man” of Mk 8:31 with “he,” referring to Jesus in the
third person.
27
Francis Wright Beare, The Gospel According to Matthew: Translation, Introduction and
Commentary (San Francisco: Harper and Row, 1981), 245; Weaver, Matthew’s Missionary
Discourse, 202, note 139, sees the eschatological implication of the concept of the Son of
Man as further indicating that Jesus will be the chief actor at the end of the age.
CO25117.indb 169 11/03/2011 11:58

hope, encouragement and consolation to the disciples,28 for his coming will be the end
of this evil era, and the beginning of a new and blessed era.
Theisohn detects no inï¬‡uence from Par. En. on this verse.29
4.2.2â•‡ Features of the Son of Man in Mt. 10:23
These two characteristics then, are evident in this verse. One is that the Son of Man
is conceived to be a future, coming, eschatological ï¬†gure.
The other is that the Son of Man stands in opposition to those who oppose the
disciples.
4.3â•‡ Exegesis of Mt. 13:37, 41

In the chapter of parables (Matthew 13), Jesus tells the Parable of the Weeds (Mt.Â€13:24–
30), and then in response to the disciples’ query about the meaning of it, he offers an
interpretation (Mt.Â€13:36–43), in which the parable is allegorized. The sower of the
good seed is interpreted as the Son of Man (13:37), the ï¬†eld is the world, the seeds
are the righteous, and the prediction is made that the Son of Man will send his angels
to gather and destroy the causes of evil so that the righteous would shine like the sun.
4.3.1â•‡ Mt. 13:37, 41

37
o( de\ a)pokriqei\j ei\pen: o( spei/rwn to\ kalo\n spe/rma e0sti\n o( ui(o\j tou=
a)nqrw&pou,
37
He answered, “The one who sows the good seed is the Son of Man;”
41
a)postellei= o( ui(o\j tou= a)nqrw&pou tou\j a)gge/louj au)tou~, kai\ sulle/cousin
e0k th=j basilei/aj au)tou= pa/nta ta_ ska&ndala kai\ tou=j poiou=ntaj th\n
a0nomi/an.
41
The Son of Man will send his angels, and they will collect out of his kingdom
all causes of sin and all evildoers.
Variants
In verse 37, the term o( ui(o\j tou= a)nqrw&pou in an eleventh-century manuscript, 28,
is replaced with o( ui(o\j tou= qeou=, while Epiphanius simply records o( qeo/j.
No variants for Mt. 13:41 are noted in Nestle-Aland27.
28
Eduard Schweizer, The Good News According to Matthew (David E. Green, tr., Atlanta:
John Knox Press, 1975), 243. Ulrich Luz, Das Evangelium nach Matthäus (Zurich und
Braunschweig: Benziger Verlag GmbH, 1990), 113–17.
29
Theisohn, Der auserwählte Richter, 262–63, note 84.
CO25117.indb 170 11/03/2011 11:58

Notes
The Interpretation of the Parable of the Weeds (Mt. 13:36–43) is almost universally
considered to be a Matthean creation30. The language and vocabulary is Matthean31
and the point of the interpretation seems to ï¬†t Matthew’s situation, while it omits the
exhortation to patience found in the original parable.32 Matthew has recast the parable
through this interpretation into “an allegorical description of the Last Judgment, a
warning against false security.”33
The interpretation consists of three parts:34 a) the narrative introduction, with a
switch in venue from the crowds outside to the house; b) the list of equivalences for
an allegorical interpretation, in which the Sower of the good seed is identiï¬†ed as the
Son of Man; and c) the miniature apocalypse,35 in which the Son of Man is said to
send his angels to root out the causes of evil in his kingdom so that the righteous will
shine like the sun.36
30
Rudolf Bultmann, The History of the Synoptic Tradition, 187, writing in 1931 says it is
undoubtedly secondary, and similar to interpretations in Rabbinic work. J. Jeremias, The
Parables of Jesus (rev. ed., London: SCM Press; 1963), 81, also deems it to be the work of
Matthew, and is followed by Tödt, Son of Man, 69. J. D. Kingsbury, The Parables of Jesus in
Matthew 13: A Study in Redaction Criticism (London: SPCK; 1969), 10, clearly sees the inter-
pretation as Matthew applying the parable to his own time and situation, just as Jesus used the
parable originally in the time to which he belonged. Theisohn, Der auserwählte Richter, 183,
follows Jeremias, and seeks to discover the source of the few traditional items in the passage.
John P. Meier, Matthew (Wilmington, Delaware: Michael Glazier, Inc., 1980), 150, sees signs
that the interpretation is “more Matthean than traditional” in the view expressed that the Son
of Man is the risen Jesus exercising his role as world ruler until the judgment. Beare, The
Gospel According to Matthew, 311, also agrees that Mt. 13:36–43 is the work of Mt because
of the unique set of linguistic characteristics that Jeremias pointed out, and because the inter-
pretation misses the central exhortation to patience found in the original parable. Gundry,
Matthew, 271–75, views it as Matthean, as does U. Luz, Das Evangelium nach Matthäus
(Vol.Â€2; Benziger Verlag/Neukirchener Verlag; 1990), 338, who views it as a secondary and
selective interpretation of the Parable of the Weeds. Hare, Son of Man, 150, agrees that it is
widely acknowledged to be a Matthean product, and Jan Lambrecht, S.J., Out of the Treasure:
The Parables in the Gospel of Matthew (Louvain: Peeters Press/Eerdmans; 1991), 151, 169,
considers Mt 13:36–43 to be redactional due to both the themes and the vocabulary, as do
Davies and Allison, Matthew, II.426, and Boring, Matthew, 310. Casey, Solution, 234–35.
31
Jeremias, The Parables of Jesus, 81–85, is found to be convincing by Beare, Matthew, 311,
Davies and Allison, Matthew, II.426, and Tödt, Son of Man, 69. Jeremias lists a great number
of words that pervade not only this interpretation of the parable, but the whole Gospel, thus
eliminating the possibility that the interpretation is a tradition received by Matthew.
32
All the commentators acknowledge that the interpretation in 13:36–43 omits an explicit
reference to the exhortation to patience which seems to be the point of the original parable
in 13:24–30, but in Gundry’s view, Matthew, 274–75, the absence of the exhortation to
patience is automatically answered in the reference to the ï¬†nal judgment, with the implicit
recommendation to the readers to wait until then.
33
Jeremias, The Parables of Jesus, 85; Tödt, Son of Man, 70.
34
Davies and Allison, Matthew, 426–31; Daniel J. Harrington, The Gospel of Matthew
(Collegeville, MN: The Liturgical Press, 1991), 206.
35
Jeremias, The Parables of Jesus, 81, notes only these last two parts.
36
As Theisohn, Der auserwählte Richter, 184, 186, 188, points out, Mt. 13:41 bears similar-
ities with other Matthean passages: the angels being involved in judgment is also expressed
CO25117.indb 171 11/03/2011 11:58

The interpretation also seems to reveal a three-part view of the role of the Son
of Man. The Son of Man, identiï¬†ed as the sower of good seed, has a role of sowing
the word of God, or God’s kingdom, on earth. Secondly, the Son of Man has the role
of ruling over an interim kingdom before the ï¬†nal judgment when God’s kingdom
comes fully into being. And thirdly, the Son of Man has the role of judging in that
ï¬†nal judgment, and of sending out the angels to root out the causes of evil and all
evildoers. In this role, the fate of those judged is final and eternal. As the weeds are
collected and burned, so sin and evil will be rooted out and disposed of, with weeping
and gnashing of teeth.37
Hare, with his methodological approach that presumes little understanding by the
author concerning the connotations of the term Son of Man, treats 13:37 and 13:41
distinctly, erring in several regards. First, he claims that Mt.Â€13:37, the identiï¬†cation
of the sower with the Son of Man, carries no apocalyptic content.38 As an isolated
statement, it does not, but as soon as one admits that it is the ï¬†rst in a series of seven
allegorical equivalences leading up to an apocalyptic interpretation of the Parable
of the Weeds, then one can no longer deny the apocalyptic overtones in Mt.Â€13:37.
Within its context, the identiï¬†cation of the sower with the Son of Man obviously
carries the connotation that the eschatological judgment is being alluded to.
Further, Hare seems to accept Lindars’ intimation that the Gospel of ThomasÂ€57,
a version of the Parable of the Weeds, indicates that God was originally identiï¬†ed
with the Sower, and that “Son of Man” is a Matthean substitution. However, when
the Gospel of ThomasÂ€57 is consulted, it is clearly seen to be a version of the original
parable, not its interpretation, and so when it refers to the “Kingdom of the Father” it is
properly expressing h( basilei/a tw~n ou)ranw~n (Mt.Â€13:23, given Matthew’s reticence
about using the nomen dei). But because the Gospel of ThomasÂ€57 reï¬‡ects the original
parable, it cannot be called into service to make intimations about the interpretation.
Thus, Hare is improperly drawing the Gospel of ThomasÂ€57 into the argument.
Again, in commenting upon Mt.Â€13:41, Hare notes that neither Tödt nor Theisohn
has been able speciï¬†cally to identify any one passage in Par. En. that Matthew is
dependent upon for his concept of the Son of Man sending out his angels.39 He also
in Mt.Â€ 13:49; the angels being identiï¬†ed as “his” (i.e. the Son of Man’s) is also found at
Mt.Â€16:27, 24:31 (see below), the only other two places in the New Testament; the kingdom
being called “his” also appears at Mt.Â€16:28; the angels being sent (a)postellei=) appears
almost identically in Mt.Â€24:31, except that in Mt.Â€13:41 they “collect out” (sulle/cousin)
while in Mt.Â€24:31 they “gather” (e0pisuna&cousin). Further, Theisohn, Der auserwählte
Richter, 189–90, notes that in Mt.Â€13:42 h( ka&minoj tou= puro&j is one of two occurrences in
the whole New Testament, the other being at Mt.Â€13:50 (ka&minoj, in different phraseology,
also appears in Rev.Â€1:15, 9:2), and that e0kla&mpein in Mt. 13:43 is a hapax legomenon in
the New Testament (although the root verb, la&mpein, is used by Mt. to describe Jesus’
appearance in the Transï¬†guration in Mt.Â€17:2).
37
Sim, Apocalyptic Eschatology, 78–79, points out that this interpretation of the parable is
thoroughly dualistic in perspective, with no allowance for any middle ground.
38
Hare, The Son of Man Tradition, 150–51.
39
CO25117.indb 172 11/03/2011 11:58

points out that Mt.Â€13:41 seems to owe more to MkÂ€13:26–27, in which the Son of
Man is seen to come on the clouds, accompanied by angels who will gather the elect,
than to any one passage in Par. En. But Hare errs in holding them to identify any one
passage. Tödt’s point is that the pattern and conception of the Son of Man, and angels
who are his agents and entourage, are present in Par. En. in ways very similar to the
ways they are present in Matthew.40 Theisohn makes a similar point.41 He argues
that only a few ideas in the interpretation of the parable can be found in the original
parable and that therefore the other material must come from elsewhere. He accepts
Jeremias’ argument that much of the language is Matthean, but seeks to locate the
source for other motifs, and makes a case for Par. En. as the most likely candidate.42
Included in Par. En. are the themes of the radiance of the righteous, the ï¬†ery fate of
the condemned, and the angels being involved in carrying out the punishment. This
set of features is common only to Mt.Â€13:40–43 and to Par. En., and does not occur
elsewhere.43 While precise quotations may not be evident, nonetheless the pattern of
relationships is clearly the same and it points to the fact that a precise and concise
allusion is being made to Par. En. in the Interpretation of the Parable.
Therefore Hare’s criticism is off the mark. He points out that Theisohn is not able
to point to a precise passage from which Matthew is drawing his material, and that in
Par. En. the Son of Man never sends out the angels. Indeed, in 1Â€EnochÂ€54:6 it is the
Lord of Spirits who has sent them out to execute punishment. But Hare’s criticism
is based on a standard that would apply to precise quotations. What Theisohn has
made clear is that while a precise quotation may not be discernable, nonetheless an
allusion to Par. En. can be claimed on the basis of the many similarities in the pattern
of relationships that exist in the two works.
The foregoing discussion shows that the pattern of the conception of the Son of
Man surrounded by angels, who are also agents of judgment, betrays strong similarity
with Par. En. The angels being in the presence of the Head of Days and surrounding
the throne is expressed most explicitly in 1Â€EnochÂ€40:1, in which a vision of the
Lord of Spirits and the four archangels is introduced, and in the vision of the ï¬†nal
ascent in 1Â€EnochÂ€71, where myriads of angels populate the scene. The angels acting
as agents of judgment appear in 1Â€EnochÂ€56:1–5, in which angels with scourges are
foreseen to gather the wicked and cast them into the abyss of the valley where they
40
41
42
Theisohn, Der auserwählte Richter, 190–97, 266, note 119, considers Dan.Â€3:6, Mal.Â€3:19
and Ps.Â€21:10 as possible candidates because they contain the idea of a ï¬†ery furnace, but he
notes that these verses are unlikely to have inï¬‡uenced Mt. 13:41 because they contain none
of the other motifs. He also considers Dan. 12:3 and 1Â€EnochÂ€104:2 because they contain
the idea of heavenly radiance, however they do not attribute this directly to the righteous or
make the comparison with the sun. Again the similarity is not as satisfactory as that found
in the various passages of Par. En. (1Â€EnochÂ€58:3, 39:7, cf. 38:4, 50:1). 4Â€EzraÂ€7:97 is also
acknowledged as containing similar ideas, but is excluded as having been composed too late
to inï¬‡uence the Gospel of Matthew.
43
CO25117.indb 173 11/03/2011 11:58

will suffer with the kings and the mighty ones (cf. 1Â€EnochÂ€62:11–12). The angels in
1Â€EnochÂ€61:1–9 gather the righteous and elect, even from their deaths in the sea, the
desert, and the wilderness, and restore them to the presence of the Elect One and the
Lord of Spirits where they praise God forever, and are clothed in radiant garments
and feast in joy and peace (1Â€EnochÂ€62:13–16). While the sending of the angels is not
speciï¬†cally attributed to the Son of Man in Par. En., nor are they ever said speciï¬†cally
to be “his,” Hare is wrong to conclude that Matthew could not have known Par. En.
or the conception of the Son of Man contained therein. More likely is the possibility
that Matthew was aware of the whole conception of the Son of Man in the presence
of the Head of Days as a second divine ï¬†gure, who has responsibilities for judgment,
and angels at his disposal, and that Matthew took the elements and expressed them
in a way that speciï¬†cally draws out the relationship between the Son of Man and the
angels, and envisions them as being sent by the Son of Man in his juridical role.44
The characteristics of the Son of Man revealed in this interpretation of the Parable
of the Weeds seem to come from Matthew’s own understanding of that ï¬†gure. The
Son of Man in this interpretation is an eschatological ï¬†gure with a role to play in the
ï¬†nal judgment. He is surrounded by angels, who perform at his behest. In the inter-
pretation, there seems to be no chance for repentance since the weeds, the wicked and
the causes of evil simply are gathered up and destroyed. Although an exhortation to
patience is the central point of the original parable, that perspective is missing in the
interpretation: here, instead, the afï¬†rmation is made that the wicked will ï¬†nally be
destroyed as a result of the promised judgment. A striking feature of Par. En. is that a
blatant dichotomy exists between the righteous and the wicked. Their fates in the ï¬†nal
judgment are clear and opposed to each other. This is evident in 1Â€EnochÂ€63 where
the kings and the mighty ones put themselves at the mercy of the Lord of Spirits, but
no mercy is forthcoming. Similarly in Mt.Â€13:42–43, the wicked are thrown into the
furnace to perish and the righteous are promised that they will shine like the sun. The
Son of Man in Mt. 13:36–43, as he does in Par. En., executes a mercyless judgment.
4.3.2â•‡ Features of the Son of Man found in Mt. 13:36–43
The features identiï¬†able in Mt.Â€13:36–43 that are associated with the Son of Man are
as follows:
a) the implied vindication of his followers, and the reversal of their fortunes and
status;
b) a)postellei=, sends;
44
Simply to push the connection back to Mk 13:26–27, as Hare does, is not to show that there
is no connection between Mt and Par. En. The connection can still be shown, and Mt, in
saying more concisely than Mk that the Son of Man sent the angels in 13:41, also shows his
familiarity with Par. En. and the conceptions of the Son of Man there.
CO25117.indb 174 11/03/2011 11:58

c) tou\j a)gge/louj au)tou~, his angels;

d) sulle/cousin, they will collect out or gather all causes of sin and evildoers;
e) h( basilei/a au)tou=, his kingdom, i.e. royal role;
f) di/kaioi is used as a term for the followers of the Son of Man;
g) e0kla&myousin w(j o9 h#lioj, the followers will shine like the sun;
h) ei0j th\n ka&minon tou= puro&j, a ï¬†ery fate is prepared for persecutors;
i) the Son of Man has a judicial role;
j) a clear dichotomy exists between the righteous and the wicked;
k) there is no possibility of mercy for the wicked;
l) eternal punishment is decreed; and
m) bliss is promised to the righteous.
4.4â•‡ Exegesis of Mt. 16:13, 21, 27–28

In Mt. 16:13, 21, 27–28 Matthew sets the whole passion narrative under the dignity of
the title of the Son of Man.45 In Mt. 16:13, at the beginning of the passion narrative,
Jesus asks the disciples about people’s perception about the Son of Man. In the
parallel synoptic passages (Mk 8:27 and Lk. 9:18) the personal pronoun is used, but
in Mt. 16:13 the term “Son of Man” appears, a fact which indicates that for the author
Jesus and the Son of Man were clearly identiï¬†ed. Similarly, in Mt.Â€16:21, Matthew
has replaced the term “Son of Man” with the personal pronoun, where the source
passage, Mk 8:31, had used it. This again indicates Matthean identiï¬†cation of Jesus
with the Son of Man. Then in Mt.Â€16:27–28, the Son of Man is envisioned as coming
to repay evildoers and as coming in his kingdom. These occurrences of the term “Son
of Man” in MatthewÂ€16 reï¬‡ect obvious Matthean redaction of the received material
from Mark, and thus they can yield signiï¬†cant insight into Matthew’s concept of the
Son of Man.46
4.4.1â•‡ Mt. 16:13, 21

13
0Elqw_n de\ o( 70Ihsou=j ei0j ta_ me/rh Kaisarei/aj th=j Fili/ppou h0rw&ta tou\j
maqhta_j au)tou= le/gwn: ti/na le/gousin oi9 a!nqrwpoi ei]nai to\n ui9o\n tou= a)
nqrw&pou;
45
Colpe, o( ui0o_j tou= a)nqrw&pou, 8.460. Mt. 26:2 also plays an important role since it recalls
the tone for the passion narrative as being set under the dignity of the person of the Son of
Man.
46
Geist, Menschensohn und Gemeinde, 127–43, sees the Markan structure carried over
into Matthew’s Gospel, but with evidence of Matthean redaction and reï¬‡ection upon the
Christological import of the passage. Luz, Das Evangelium nach Matthäus (Mt. 8–17),
2.453, 487, also recognizes MarkÂ€8 as the source for this material.
CO25117.indb 175 11/03/2011 11:58

13
Now when Jesus came into the district of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his
disciples, “Who do people say that the Son of Man is?”
21
0Apo\ to/te h!rcato o9 70Ihsou=j deiknu/ein toi=j maqhtai=j au0tou~
o#ti dei= au0to\n ei0j 79Ieroso/luma a)pelqei=n kai\ polla_ paqei=n a)po\ tw~n
presbute/rwn kai\ a)rxiere/wn kai\ grammate/wn kai\ a)poktanqh=nai kai\ th~|
tri/th| h9me/ra| e0gerqh=nai.
21
From that time on, Jesus began to show his disciples that he must go to
Jerusalem and undergo great suffering at the hands of the elders and chief priests
and scribes, and be killed,and on the third day be raised.
Variants
In Mt. 16:13, between ti/na and le/gousin, me is added by DÂ€LÂ€QÂ€fÂ€1.13Â€33, the Majority
text and some of the versions and church fathers. This would appear to be due
to the inï¬‡uence of the parallel synoptic passages. The text as presented above is
witnessed to by )Â€B, others of the versions and Origen. C and W read me tina.47
Notes
In Mt.Â€16:13, Matthew has inserted to\n ui9o\n tou= a)nqrw&pou, where the parallel
passages simply have me (Mk 8:27 ti/na me le/gousin oi9 a!nqrwpoi ei]nai.â•›.â•›.and
Lk. 9:18 ti/na me oi9 o1xloi le/gousin ei]nai.â•›.â•›.),48 while in 16:21 Matthew has used
the pronoun au0to\n in place of to\n ui9o\n tou= a)nqrw&pou (Mk 8:315Lk. 9:22 o$ti
dei= to\n ui9o\n tou= a)nqrw&pou polla_ paqei/n). The insertion of the term in vsÂ€13
and its replacement in vsÂ€21 indicate that for Matthew, Jesus is identiï¬†ed as the Son
of Man.49 This identiï¬†cation must have been operative for the copyists also, since no
variants are preserved for the term or its replacement. Matthew further has added ei0j
79Ieroso/luma a)pelqei=n, but omitted kai\ a)podokimasqh=nai, which appears in
MkÂ€8:31 and Lk.Â€9:22 after polla\ paqei=n.
Again, in Mt.Â€10:32, Matthew has replaced “Son of Man” (Lk.Â€12:8) with “I”:
“every one who acknowledges me before others, I will acknowledge before my
Father who is in heaven.â•›.â•›.” In the parallel passage in Lk.Â€12:8, “the Son of Man will
also acknowledge before the angels of God” those who acknowledge Jesus before
others. Matthew may be concerned about one of two matters: either Jesus and the
Son of Man are so clearly identiï¬†ed for Matthew that a substitution of “I” for “Son of
Man” is done with ease, or Matthew is concerned to avoid presenting the Son of Man
47
See other variants for these two verses in Nestle-Aland27.
48
Davies and Allison, Matthew, II.604.
49
Jack Dean Kingsbury, Matthew: Structure, Christology, Kingdom (Minneapolis: Fortress,
1975), 115, and Matthew As Story, 95–103, where he argues that “Son of Man” is a public
title used in the context of opposition, and the personal pronoun is used with regard to
insiders such as Peter, whose ”evaluative point of view.â•›.â•›.is in accord with the evaluative
point of view of God.” Cf. Davies and Allison, Matthew, II.51, who agree with Kingsbury’s
emphasis on the “Son of Man” as a public title.
CO25117.indb 176 11/03/2011 11:58

as merely an advocate rather than the eschatological judge. In either case, Mt.Â€10:32
shows Matthew’s clear identiï¬†cation of Jesus with the Son of Man.50
Matthew’s insertion of to\n ui9o\n tou= a)nqrw&pou in Mt.Â€16:13 is problematic, as
commentators have noted.51 If the term is meaningful for Jesus and his disciples as
having any messianic content, then the question, “Who do people say the Son of Man
is?” becomes tautologous: the answer is contained in the question itself.52 But Tödt
notes that Matthew has changed the episode into an announcement of the period of
the church. Peter’s confession and Jesus’ blessing upon him are perhaps a resurrection
appearance that has been inserted into the confession narrative to function as the
inauguration of the faith as expressed in the post-Easter church.53 Thus the language
is laden with meaning for the informed reader, and the appearance of the term here in
vsÂ€13 functions as “an emphatic heading” to the Passion Narrative.54 Its appearance
again at the beginning of the actual events of the Passion in Mt.Â€ 26:2 afï¬†rms this
usage, for Matthew “understands this name to be a title of dignity.”55 Through the use
of this name, the whole passion of Christ is put under the dignity of the Son of Man
with its transcendent and judicial connotations.
Kingsbury, followed by France, sees the term here in Mt.Â€16:13 as being the prime
example of Jesus’ use of it as a self-referent in a public, non-confessional, adversarial
setting.56 It is a term which sets Jesus apart from those who would oppose and reject him,
and in this way the question is not tautologous. The term has no meaning for the narrative
audience, the general populace, although for the informed reader it has great ironic
impact. When the audience is the general public, the term is used, and it reveals nothing of
who Jesus is. But in the very next verse, Matthew preserves the personal pronoun, when
Jesus asks the disciples who they think he is, because now the narrative audience is an
intimate, close one, and they are growing in their understanding and commitment to him.
Meier sees the use of the term in Mt.Â€16:13 and its absence in Mt.Â€16:21 as very
signiï¬†cant to Matthew’s development of christology.57 In his narrative technique,
50
Cf. Tödt’s discussion of this verse in Son of Man, 89–90.
51
E.g. Davies and Allison, Matthew, II.617.
52
Beare, Matthew, 352; Hare, Son of Man Tradition, 129.
53
The blessing seems to be pre-Matthean and Semitic in origin since it contains the pun on the
name of Peter (Petroj/petra; or )pfyk@, which works more accurately), and since it uses
semiticisms such as “Simon bar Jona,” “ï¬‡esh and blood,” “binding” and “loosing,” and “the
gates of hell,” as Bultmann points out, History of the Synoptic Tradition, 138–40, 258–59;
see also Harrington, Matthew, 250; Boring Matthew, 8.345; but Gundry, Matthew, 330–33,
argues against an Aramiac substratum.
54
Tödt, Son of Man, 150. Boring, Matthew, 8.344, views the confession in Matthew as
“ecclesiological” separating “the new community he is forming from those who oppose and
reject it.”
55
Tödt, Son of Man, 150.
56
Kingsbury, Matthew: Structure, Christology, Kingdom, 114–15; Kingsbury, Matthew:As
Story, 100–102; R. T. France, Matthew: Evangelist and Teacher (Exeter: The Paternoster
Press, 1989), 289.
57
John P. Meier, The Vision of Matthew: Christ, Church, and Morality in the First Gospel
(New York: Paulist Press, 1979), 109–120.
CO25117.indb 177 11/03/2011 11:58

Matthew has established that Jesus is the Son of Man through the use of the earthly
sayings about having nowhere to lay his head (Mt.Â€8:20) and his coming as a drunkard
and glutton in contrast to the asceticism of John the Baptizer (Mt.Â€11:19), and
through the insertion of the name into the question of Mt.Â€16:13, where the source
in MkÂ€8:27 simply has the pronoun. Then in the subsequent conversation with Peter,
in Meier’s view, Matthew explores the range of meaning of the term. For the ï¬†rst
time in the gospel Matthew has brought together the two titles of Messiah and Son
of the living God in Peter’s confession (Mt.Â€16:16). Meier sees the title of Messiah
as a fulï¬†llment of Old Testament prophecy, the scion of David, and one who was
destined to sit on the throne at the last day. Similarly, the title “Son of God” is seen
as a liturgical, enthronement formula, used of one who is standing on the side of
God. These two titles, brought into close proximity in Peter’s confession, illuminate
for Matthew’s narrative the term “Son of Man,” which was used in the opening
question. The Son of Man who has been seen in the earthly sayings as deprived
and as serving others, while at the same time hiding his divine transcendence, is
illuminated by Matthew now as also being the Messiah and the Son of God. With a
“dense concentration of Christological thought” the Son of Man is conceived of as
having powerful transcendence hidden in deprivation and service, as embodying the
mystery of the dying and rising servant, and as being the judge who will come in
glory.58
That Peter should have confessed his faith in this way is seen by Matthew as
a revelation. Meier makes a connection between the revelation to Peter, who is
portrayed in the narrative as “a mere untutored child,” and the revelation of the
hidden Son of Man by the Most High to the elect and righteous ones in 1Â€EnochÂ€62:7,
46:1, 48:1–7. There the Son of Man is described as being hidden, but revealed only
to the elect and righteous for their encouragement in the present oppressive situation
in which they ï¬†nd themselves.59 The location of this confession at Caesarea Philippi
also seems to be signiï¬†cant. This location seemed to have had an ancient reputation
for being a place where revelations took place, as Nickelsburg has argued.60 Enoch
and Levi also experienced revelations there, as described in the Book of the Watchers
(1Â€EnochÂ€13:7) and in the Testament of Levi. Narratively, the author of Par. En. does
not change the location, but simply says that Enoch received a second vision, “a
vision of Wisdom” (1Â€EnochÂ€37:1). Thus the revelation in 1Â€Enoch concerning the
Son of Man is also located in the region of Caesarea Philippi.
58
Meier, The Vision of Matthew, 110; In a contrasting view, Gundry, Matthew, 329, suggests
that Matthew in moving the term up to 16:13 has shifted the emphasis in the deï¬†nition of
Christ away from the Son of Man as in Mark 8 towards the concept of the Son of God. While
the title “Son of God” is a prominent one in Matthew’s Gospel, and seems to have been a
confession of Matthew’s community, as Gundry’s understanding afï¬†rms, it seems that Meier
has the fuller comprehension of what Matthew is accomplishing through his careful use of
the terms “Son of Man,” “Messiah,” and “Son of God.”
59
Meier, The Vision of Matthew, 111, note 108.
60
G. W. E. Nickelsburg, “Enoch, Levi, and Peter: Recipients of Revelation in Upper Galilee,”
JBL 100 (1981), 575–600.
CO25117.indb 178 11/03/2011 11:58

Meier sees Mt.Â€16:21 as the “linchpin” in the development of the christological

understanding contained in the Son of Man in Matthew’s account. Although the term
“Son of Man” has been taken out, where it was present in the source text (MkÂ€8:31),
once again its replacement with a personal pronoun simply afï¬†rms that for Matthew,
the Son of Man and Jesus are identical. The concept of the Son of Man is progressing
in Matthew’s narrative technique from what is known about him, as the earthly Son of
Man in Mt.Â€16:13, to what is in the process of being revealed, that he is the glorious,
judicial Son of Man coming on the clouds with his entourage of angels in Mt.Â€16:28.
That progression includes the suffering foretold in Mt.Â€16:21, which in Meier’s view,
is the “corridor” in Matthew’s christology from lowly earthly status to eschatological
glory.61 The inclusion of Jeremiah as one of the guesses of the people in MtÂ€16:14
(Jeremiah is absent from Mark) supports the recognition that in Matthew’s view the
Son of Man comes to bring judgment, since both Jesus and Jeremiah were prophets
of judgment, who spoke against the temple and who were killed.62 As Schweizer
summarizes, “for Mark the title “Son of Man” implies Jesus’ lowliness, humility, and
suffering; for Matthew it signiï¬†es the reverse—Jesus’ universal authority and power,
for the time inhabiting ï¬‡esh.”63
Hare argues against the term Son of Man having any messianic content for
Matthew, and sees Mt.Â€16:13 as being evidence for that view.64 He argues that the
term is simply one of modest self-designation for Jesus. This view is based on the
difï¬†culty that if the term does have messianic content, then the question contains
its own answer, and so is a nonsensical question, which ought not to be attributed
to Matthew’s literary technique. Hare also criticizes Tödt for trying to explain the
question as not a genuine question within the narrative structure. He sees Tödt’s
view as ascribing to Matthew an abnormal use of language. He would rather say
that the content of the term has not yet been disclosed to the narrative audience, but
then, Hare adds, there is no other place where that content is disclosed. Given these
aspects, then, Hare agrees with Lindars, that one cannot equate the Son of Man with
the suffering Christ, and concludes that in this passage the term Son of Man is Jesus’
modest self-designation, and cannot be understood as simply synonymous with “the
Christ, the Son of the Living God” (Mt.Â€16:16).65
But Hare has misunderstood both Tödt and Matthew. Tödt has not said that the
question is not a genuine question that simply introduces the title to the passion
narrative. Tödt has gone much further to say that Matthew deliberately altered the
61
Meier, The Vision of Matthew, 115–16, and Matthew, 184–85. In contrast to that view,
Gundry, in Matthew, 337, argues that the use of the personal pronoun in 16:21 instead of the
term Son of Man has the effect of attaching the suffering, dying and rising again to the idea
of the Messiah, instead of to the concept of the Son of Man.
62
Davies and Allison, Matthew, II.618–19.
63
Schweizer, Matthew, 336. Mt.Â€13:21 is also an instance in which Matthew avoids using the
term “Son of Man” directly in the context of suffering.
64
Hare, Son of Man Tradition, 129.
65
Hare, Son of Man Tradition, 131.
CO25117.indb 179 11/03/2011 11:58

Markan account so that it is no longer simply a narration of questions leading up to

Peter’s confession. Matthew’s account has become an announcement of the faith of
the church, the post-Easter faith, in a resurrected Christ, who is the judge of the world.
That confession is contained and afï¬†rmed in Peter’s words, and it is foreshadowed
in the use of the term Son of Man in the opening words of the conversation, albeit
couched as a question. To the uninformed reader, they lead into a deeper under-
standing of Jesus as the Son of Man, as illuminated by the titles Messiah and Son
of God. For the informed reader, they foreshadow the fullness of Jesus’ redemptive
activity as Messiah, Son of God, and judicial Son of Man in glory.66 In other words,
the language is laden with meaning at several levels, not just the literal level, and this
pregnant language is observable in the rest of the Gospel of Matthew, as well as in
the other Gospels.
4.4.2â•‡ Mt. 16:27–28

27
me/llei ga\r o( ui9o\j tou= a)nqrw&pou e1rxesqai e0n th=| do&ch| tou= patro\j au)tou=
meta_ tw~n a)gge/lwn au)tou=, kai\ to/te a)podw&sei e0ka&stw| kata_ th\n pra=cin
au)tou=. 28Â€a)mh\n le/gw u(mi=n o#ti ei0si/n tinej tw~n w{de e9stw&twn oi3tinej ou) mh\
geu&swntai qana&tou e3wj a2n i1dwsin to\n ui9o\n tou= a)nqrw&pou e0rxo&menon e0n
th=| basilei=a| au)tou=.
27â•‡ “For the Son of Man is to come with his angels in the glory of his Father, and
then he will repay everyone for what has been done.
28â•‡ Truly I tell you, there are some standing here who will not taste death before
they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom.”
Variants
Mt 16:27: th\n pra=cinâ•‡ ta erga is the reading of )* fÂ€1 and some of the versions.
Mt 16:28: o#tiâ•‡ o#ti is omitted by CDW fÂ€1 and the Majority text, but is present in
)BLQ fÂ€13 and other witnesses.
tw~n w{de e9stw&twnâ•‡W G have wde estwtej; a few witnesses have twn wde
esthkotwn; but the text as presented is preserved by )BCDLQ fÂ€1.13 and others.
Notes
Verse 27 is considerably altered from the Markan source in MkÂ€8:38.67 The ideas of
shame have been removed, and the idea of judgment has been made very explicit
through the quotation of Ps.Â€62:13 (12) and Prov.Â€24:12 (in italics in the text above).
MkÂ€8:38 quotes Jesus as saying that whoever is ashamed of Jesus and his words in
66
Geist, Menschensohn und Geminde, 133–34, has further noted that the question about
the Son of Man’s identity is reminiscent of the seer’s question to the interpreting angel in
1Â€EnochÂ€46:2 concerning who that Son of Man was and why he was with the Head of Days.
67
Meier, The Vision of Matthew, 119–20; Meier, Matthew, 186–88; Beare, Matthew, 360;
Gundry, Matthew, 340, Casey, Son of Man, 164, Davies and Allison, Matthew, II.674–75.
CO25117.indb 180 11/03/2011 11:58

this age will experience a similar status of being shameful in the eyes of the Son
of Man in the age to come. The age to come is characterized in MkÂ€8:38 as when
the Son of Man comes in the glory of his Father with the holy angels. Matthew has
removed the idea of reciprocal shame, and intensiï¬†ed the picture of the coming Son
of Man by making the coming judgment explicit. Matthew has added the possessive
pronoun to the idea of the entourage of angels, intimating that they are under the
authority of the Son of Man. This has the effect of elevating the status of the Son
of Man and making his authority and power explicit, in a manner similar to that
already expressed in Mt.Â€13:41, where the Son of Man has sent his angels to gather
the elect.68 In DanielÂ€7:13–14, 4Â€Ezra 13, and Par. En. the angels have not been
noted as being under the authority of the Son of Man.69 They are simply a part of the
heavenly scene. But this is a development in Matthew, which may have come about
because of the implication that if the Son of Man is the end-time judge, then surely
the angels who gather the elect and the damned for judgment are under his authority.
Thus, the presence of the possessive pronoun may be due to Matthew’s accentuation
of the element of judgment. The emphasis on judgment is also made explicit through
the quotation of Ps.Â€62:13 (12) and Prov.Â€24:12 (cf. Sir.Â€35:22–23).70 Again, the
repayment exacted from sinners according to what they have done is not explicit
in DanielÂ€7, 4Â€Ezra, or Par. En. In Par. En., however, a huge step has been made
toward connecting the judgment of the kings and mighty ones as repayment for their
behavior. The condemnation of the kings and mighty ones is based on their denial of
the Lord of Spirits (1Â€EnochÂ€46:6–7, 63:7) and their oppression of the righteous and
elect (1Â€EnochÂ€46:8). While the idea of repayment for sins may not be explicit in so
many words in Par. En., it is implicit. Matthew has taken it a step further and made
it an explicit detail of the judgment by the Son of Man by quoting Ps.Â€62:13 (12) and
Prov.Â€24:12. Sinners are to be repaid for what they have done.
In Mt.Â€16:28, Matthew has replaced the kingdom of God coming with power,
which is found in MkÂ€9:1, with the Son of Man coming in his kingdom. This has
the effect of making the statement look forward to the Parousia and judgment by
the Son of Man.71 Meier goes further to note that the appearances of the term Son of
Man in Mt.Â€16:13 and again in Mt.Â€16:28 act as an “arch” over the whole discussion.
68
Gundry, Matthew, 340. The addition of the personal pronoun is also noted by Schweizer,
Matthew, 347, who recognizes a shift towards the Son of Man being viewed as “Judge, and
Lord of God’s Kingdom.”
69
Hare, Son of Man Tradition, 156, notes the absence of this motif in those writings but its
presence in Matthew, and agrees with Higgins that this concept is totally un-Jewish. See
Higgins, Jesus and the Son of Man, 106, note 1. Without suggesting why the personal
pronoun may have been added, Hare simply notes that it is not present in what normally is
considered to be possible predecessor concepts of the Son of Man.
70
Noted by Bultmann, History of the Synoptic Tradition, 326, and Gundry, Use of the Old
Testament, 138. Gundry notes that in the Septuagint, both passages use ta_ e1rga instead of
th\n pra~cin as Matthew has done. )* fÂ€1 and some of the versions have apparently attempted
to correct the text to the Septuagint by reading ta_ e1rga instead of th\n pra~cin.
71
Gundry, Matthew, 340; Casey, Son of Man, 187; Schweizer, Matthew, 347.
CO25117.indb 181 11/03/2011 11:58

In this conversation, the content of the name of the Son of Man has been ï¬†lled out
from being a term that signiï¬†es a mysterious ï¬†gure who has been combining glorious
power with lowly service, to a fully developed concept of the Son of Man as the
glorious judge who will come to exercise his rule.72 The earthly ministry of Jesus
is referred to in Mt.Â€16:13, his suffering servant role in Mt.Â€16:21,73 and his judicial
glory in Mt.Â€16:27–28.74
Harrington opines that the passion prediction in MtÂ€16:21–28 had the “effect of
claiming that Jesus knew what awaited him .â•›.â•›. and that he embraced his sufferings and
was even in control of the events around him.”75 Further, the alterations introduced by
Matthew, as compared to his source material in Mark, appear to emphasize the aspects
of the concept of the Son of Man that include the power and majesty of the eschato-
logical judge, who has the authority to exercise judgment upon humanity in accordance
with their actions and to command the angels. As Schweizer notes the appearance of
the term “Son of Man” at both the beginning, vs 13, and at the end, vs 28, provides a
“framework for the entire section. The question about the Son of Man (vs 13) is ï¬†nally
answered by reference to the judgment”76 which the Son of Man will carry out. This
chapter then advances the understanding of the Son of Man in Matthew’s Gospel, and
the term is seen to be full of content, and not merely a modest self-designation.
4.4.3â•‡ Features of the Son of Man in Matthew 16
From these verses then, the features of the Son of Man in Matthew’s conception can be
summarized as follows. Features previously noted are his coming, his goal of reversing
fortunes and status for his followers, having the angels and the kingdom under his
authority, and concomitantly, his judicial role. Features added to the portrait are:
a) it is implied that he is hidden to outsiders, because of the use of the term “Son of
Man,” which does not convey any content to the hostile audience;
b) on the other hand, the occurrences of the term “Son of Man” progressively reveal
to the insiders the nature of Jesus character as the Son of Man;
c) in this episode, Mt. 16:14–17, Jesus is called “Christ” (anointed) in close
proximity to the term “Son of Man;”
d) in this episode, Mt. 16:14–17, Jesus is also called “Son of the living God;”
e) Jesus begins speaking of his suffering;
f) the Son of Man is mentioned in connection with the glory of his father, e0n th=|
do&ch| tou= patro\j au)tou=; and finally
72
Meier, The Vision of Matthew, 116.
73
The designation “Son of Man” is only implicit in Mt. 16:21, since Matthew has replaced it
with the pronoun, when compared to the source text.
74
Meier, Matthew, 179; cf. Beare, Matthew, 360; Davies and Allison, Matthew, II.674.
75
Harrington, Matthew, 252.
76
Schweizer, Matthew, 347.
CO25117.indb 182 11/03/2011 11:58

g) judgment according to deeds is mentioned through the quotation of Ps.Â€62:13(12)

and Prov. 24:12.
4.5â•‡ Exegesis of Mt. 19:28

In Mt 19:28 the Son of Man is seen as sitting on the throne and promising his
followers that they will sit on twelve thrones judging the tribes of Israel (cf. LkÂ€22:28
for the feasting motif and the thrones of judgment). In Matthew this saying is
appended to the incident of the rich young ruler coming to Jesus.
4.5.1â•‡ Mt 19:28
28
o9 de\ 70Ihsou=j ei]pen au)toi=j: a)mh\n le&gw u(mi=n o3ti u9mei=j oi9 a)kolouqh/sante/j
moi e0n th=| paliggenesi/a|, o3tan kaqi/sh| o9 ui9o\j tou= a)nqrw&pou e0pi\ qro/nou
do/chj au)tou=, kaqh/sesqe kai\ u9mei=j e0pi\ dw/deka qro/nouj kri/nontej ta\j
dw&deka fula_j tou= 70Israh/l.
28â•‡ Jesus said to them, “Truly I tell you, at the renewal of all things, when the Son
of Man is seated on the throne of his glory, you who have followed me will also
sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.”
Variants
kaqh/sesqeâ•‡ is read by )BCDCLWDQ0281vidfÂ€1328 and many others; kaqisesqe is read
by D*KG and others, while kaqesqhsesqe is read by ZfÂ€1 and a few others.
kai\ u9mei=jâ•‡ is read by BCWQ0281fÂ€1333 and the Majority text, while kai autoi is read
by the earlier Nestle text and )DLZfÂ€1and a few others.
Notes
Taken from Q, Matthew’s version of this saying is considerably altered from that found in
Lk.Â€22:28–30.77 Luke has set this saying in the midst of the Last Supper Discourse, and the
notion of Jesus’ followers sitting on thrones judging the tribes of Israel is connected with
feasting at the messianic banquet in the kingdom. Matthew, however, has included this idea
in the discussion about the rewards for having left everything to follow Jesus.78 This verse
is part of the discussion with the disciples following the conversation initiated by the rich
young ruler who was seeking to know what he must to do to be saved (cf. MkÂ€10:17–31).
77
E.g. Theisohn, Der auserwählte Richter, 161–74; Gundry, Matthew, 391–94; Geist,
Menschensohn und Gemeinde, 238–41; Boring, Matthew, 8.389; Davies and Allison,
Matthew, III.54–56. See also Fred W. Burnett, “Paliggenesi/a IN MATT. 19:28: A
WINDOW ON THE MATTHEAN COMMUNITY?” JSNTÂ€17 (1983), 62–63.
78
Gundry, Matthew, 392. Boring, Matthew, 389–90 and footnote 438, points out that as
compared to MkÂ€10:17–31 Matthew has “rearranged the speaking parts to get this neat back-
and-forth of rabbinic dialogue.”
CO25117.indb 183 11/03/2011 11:58

The idea of the disciples judging Israel is connected to the image of the Son of Man sitting
on his glorious throne in the renewal of the age.79 The contrast in settings for the saying in
Matthew and Luke indicates that it was probably an independent saying, which Matthew
has adapted from Q. Some scholars hold that it was created by the early church, possibly
by second generation Christians, who had become concerned with governance in the
church,80 while others believe that the reference to judging Israel refers to the Judaism
with which they were in conï¬‡ict, and that encouragingly, “at the eschaton Jesus and his
disciples will be revealed to be the most important persons amongst the Jewish people.”81
Gundry notes that the Lukan concept of Jesus’ kingdom granted by the Father is expressed
by Matthew in terms of the glorious throne of the Son of Man, and that this is a typical
assimilation on Matthew’s part, utilizing a parallel concept.82 The Matthean incorporation
of this image into this discussion on rewards for discipleship indicates that the concepts it
conveys formed a part of the Matthean view of the Son of Man.
Several elements of this saying need to be considered.
The Throne. The ï¬†rst is the general image of sitting upon a glorious throne for the
purpose of judging. Found also at Mt.Â€25:31 (see below),83 this image has been shown
by Theisohn not to have been developed out of Christian sources.84 Rather, this image,
while rare, is present in pre-christian literature.85 The Testament of AbrahamÂ€8:5 has a
man, Adam, sitting on a throne of great glory, while at T.Â€AbÂ€12:4, a wondrous man,
Abel, is sitting on a terrifying throne between two gates. In SirÂ€47:11 a throne of glory
is mentioned with reference to the great and glorious King David.
As Theisohn has pointed out, a biblical precedent for God setting another upon
the throne can be found in Ps.Â€132:11, Dan.Â€4:37, JobÂ€36:5–6.86 In Ps.Â€110:1, 5–6 the
concepts of righteousness, a judicial role, and opposition to enemy kings are found
79
For paliggenesi/a see Theisohn, Der auserwählte Richter, 165; Tödt, Son of Man, 91;
Gundry, Matthew, 392; Schweizer, Matthew, 389–90; Geist, Menschensohn und Gemeinde,
239; Davies & Allison, Matthew, III.57–58; Burnett, “Paliggenesi/a IN MATT. 19:28,”
60–72; J. Duncan M. Derrett, “Palingensia (Matthew 19.28)” JSNT 20 (1984), 51–58; David
C. Sim, “The Meaning of paliggenesi/a in Matthew 19:28,” JSNT 50 (1993), 3–12.
80
Bultmann, History of the Synoptic Tradition, 163; Tödt, Son of Man, 63–64; Beare, Matthew,
400; Boring, Matthew, 8.391.
81
Harrington, Matthew, 281. Burnett, “Paliggenesi/a IN MATT. 19:28,” 63–64, notes that
this scene of the disciples on thrones seems to be in tension with the request for pre-eminent
positions in Mt.Â€20:20–28, especially with Jesus’ claim that he cannot grant a seat at his
right hand to anyone. Burnett believes that Mt.Â€19:28 was included to reduce tensions over
hierarchy amongst the disciples in his own community, to equalize the status of all twelve,
and to emphasize the future, eschatological nature of their function.
82
Gundry, Matthew, 392; cf. Theisohn, Der auserwählte Richter, 161–74.
83
A throne is mentioned ï¬†ve times in Matthew: at 5:34 and 23:22, it is God’s throne; at 19:28
and 25:31, the Son of Man is depicted as sitting upon a throne; at 19:28, the disciples are on
thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel.
84
Theisohn Der auserwählte Richter, 153–58.
85
See Davies and Allison, Matthew, III.54.
86
Theisohn Der auserwählte Richter, 85–89; see also 158–59 where Theisohn also refers to
1Â€Sam.Â€2:8, Jer 17:12, 14:21, and Isa.Â€22:23, none of which relate to the Son of Man tradition,
however.
CO25117.indb 184 11/03/2011 11:58

in connection with the enthronement of the king by God.87 Ps.Â€9:4–9 also connects
judgment, the throne, and judging in righteousness, although there the concepts are
attributed to God, as a model for human judgment.88
The image of the Son of Man sitting upon the throne of his glory also implies his
royal status. Although not explicitly called a king in this passage, the kingly role is
implicit.
The image of a judicial ï¬†gure on a throne is found in the Par. En. as well.89 The
Elect One is portrayed as being on the throne (45:3, 51:3, 55:4, 61:8) and the kings
and mighty ones are to recognize his authority. In 1Â€EnochÂ€62:2, the Elect One again
is envisioned to be upon the throne, but now it is described as being “the throne of his
glory” (manbara sebḥatihu), while at 1Â€EnochÂ€69:27, 29 the Son of Man is identiï¬†ed
as sitting on the throne of his glory (manbara sebḥatihu). The Elect One and the
Son of Man can be seen as differing names for the same ï¬†gure, since they share all
the same characteristics.90 Moreover the Elect One, who is depicted on the throne in
1Â€EnochÂ€62:2, later in vsÂ€9 is identiï¬†ed as the Son of Man. The major function of the
enthroned Son of Man is to carry out the judgment of the wicked and the salvation of
the righteous.91 Thus the image of the Son of Man on the throne in Mt 19:28 is very
similar to that found in Par. En.92
The use of au)tou=. A second element is the use of the possessive pronoun “his” (au)
tou=) of the glorious throne (e0pi\ qro&nou do&chj au)tou=). This is a Semitic construct
expression with the possessive pronoun.93 DanielÂ€7 is generally acknowledged to be a
source for this image of the Son of Man upon the throne; however, in DanielÂ€7, while
thrones are mentioned, and while the court is said to be sitting in judgment, neither
the one like a son of man nor the court is said explicitly to be seated on thrones. Only
the Ancient of Days takes a seat on his throne. On the other hand, 1Â€EnochÂ€69:27–29
does explicitly portray the Son of Man as sitting upon a throne, and furthermore, the
throne is said to be the throne of his glory (manbara sebḥatihu). The characterization
of the throne as the throne of his glory seems to be a development in Par. En. on
87
88
See the exegesis of 1Â€Enoch 69:26–29.
89
Sjöberg, Der Menschensohn, 62–80; Jeremias, The Parables of Jesus, 206, considers this to
be an Enochic attribute of the Son of Man.
90
See VanderKam, “Righteous One” 174–75.
91
92
Theisohn, Der auserwählte Richter, 159–61. I. H. Marshall, “The Synoptic Son of Man
Sayings in Recent Discussion,” NTSÂ€XII (1965–66), 335–36, argues against Vielhauer’s
claim in “Gottesreich und Menschensohn” that the Kingdom of God and the Son of Man
are mutually irreconcilable concepts, since they are not brought together in Jewish sources,
nor are they directly linked in Jesus’ teaching. Admitting that the Son of Man in connection
with the Kingdom of God is rare, nonetheless, Marshall shows that the linking does occur. In
DanÂ€7:13 the “one like a son of man” receives “dominion and glory and kingdom.” Whether
“son of man” is understood individually or corporately in DanÂ€7:13, the connection with the
kingdom is present. Further in 1Â€EnochÂ€69:26–28, Marshall points out, kingship is clearly
implied in the image of the Son of Man sitting on a throne, eradicating sinners from the earth.
93
F. H. Borsch, “MARK XIV.62 AND I ENOCH LXII.5,” NTSÂ€XIV (1967–68), 567, note 3.
CO25117.indb 185 11/03/2011 11:58

the passage from DanielÂ€7, in conjunction with the concepts from the other biblical
passages noted above. In Mt.Â€19:28, the same phrase is used, preserved in the Semitic
construct form, and it includes the possessive pronoun. This appears then to be a
direct quotation of that phrase.94
Thrones for the Followers of Christ. A third element to be noted is the devel-
opment that the followers of Christ are also seated on thrones and passing judgment.
In Par. En. there is no explicit mention of anyone, except the Chief of Days and the
Elect One/Son of Man sitting on the throne. Judgment is not shared with anyone, for
it is the role of the Lord of Spirits and the Elect One/Son of Man. The angels do not
share in the act of declaring judgment, although they do carry it out. The righteous
and elect enjoy the beneï¬†ts of judgment, but they do not pass judgment. Further, in
the biblical passages mentioned above, a human king is set upon the throne, but the
idea of a council sitting upon thrones, judging the people, is not present. This idea is
partially found in contemporary or later writings. Two locations may be mentioned:
RevÂ€3:21, where a place on a throne is promised to one whom the resurrected Christ
chooses, and 1Â€EnochÂ€108:12, where God is said to promise that each faithful one will
be seated upon the throne of his honor.95
Influences on the Development of Mt 19:28. Perhaps, then, the Q saying
(MtÂ€19:28) is a development of implications from two sources coming together. One
idea that may inform this image is the interpretation of the vision of DanielÂ€7 in which
the saints of the Most High are given dominion over the gentiles. This suggests that
the followers have a governing and judicial role, although it is over gentiles, not
Israel as in Mt.Â€19:28. A second inï¬‡uence may be the implications in Par. En., that
the reversal of fortunes for the righteous and elect will include judging the former
oppressors (1Â€EnochÂ€46:5), even as they lie down, rise up, and feast with the Son of
Man (1Â€EnochÂ€62:14–15). This sharing in a glorious existence with the Son of Man
may also have led to their sharing a judicial role as well, with the idea of being seated
94
Caragounis, The Son of Man, 171. Borsch, “MARK XIV.62 AND I ENOCH LXII.5,” 567,
also notices that the language of Mt.Â€19:28 and 25:31 “lies much closer to the Enochian
phraseology than anything in Mark.” He sees the Matthean phraseology as “witness to a
form of ‘tradition’ apart from what Mark has preserved.” Just as likely, in my opinion, is
that Matthew has quoted Par. En. in using this phrase due to his interest in shaping the
Son of Man concept in the mold of the Enochic Son of Man. Davies and Allison, Matthew,
III.45–55, also “wonder” whether Matthean phraseology here “betrays a knowledge of
the Similitudes of Enoch.” Again, a quotation seems more likely. Ulrich Luz, “The Son of
Man in Matthew: Heavenly Judge or Human Christ,” JSNTÂ€48 (1992), 8, however, is of
the opinion that Matthew was not familiar with Par. En. and that the references to a throne
are simply part of Matthew’s “‘biblical’ language,” similar to references to God’s throne.
He further concludes, 17–19, that Matthew gives no hint of knowing any apocalyptic
background to the term, o( ui0o\j tou= a)nqrw&pou, but rather that it was a term used to
identify Jesus with his followers, while at the same time pointing ahead to his eschatological
exaltation.
95
Davies and Allison, Matthew, III.55–56, also recall the Mosaic delegation of authority to
twelve leaders over the twelve tribes of Israel, as well as the yearning in benediction 18 of
the Shimoneh Esreh, “Restore our judges as in former times.”
CO25117.indb 186 11/03/2011 11:58

upon thrones in glory.96 The Q saying (Mt.Â€19:28), then, regarding the enthronement
of the followers of the Son of Man may be a development, inï¬‡uenced by these two
notions.
Hare’s Treatment of Mt. 19:28. Hare discusses Mt.Â€19:28 at some length and goes
to great pains to drive a wedge between Par. En. and Matthew.97 He acknowledges
that most scholars see this verse as evidence of Matthean redaction, especially with
regard to the image of the Son of Man on his glorious throne. He also admits to at
least an indirect inï¬‡uence of Par. En. on Matthew and agrees that there is a fasci-
nating coincidence in the use of apocalyptic imagery in Par. En. and Matthew. But
he continues to insist that this verse provides no evidence that Matthew had “direct
knowledge of the Similitudes.”98 He offers several cautionary comments. First, he
notes correctly that more often “the Chosen One” is described as sitting on the
throne rather than the Son of Man, intimating that the Son of Man on the throne need
not have inï¬‡uenced Matthew. But as VanderKam has shown99 the terminology and
characteristics of this ï¬†gure in Par. En. are fully interchangeable, and this would have
been obvious to ancient readers as well as modern. Besides, as Hare recognizes, Par.
En. does explicitly portray the Son of Man on the throne at 1Â€EnochÂ€69:29. Since
the precise image exists in Par. En., it is possible that Matthew was inï¬‡uenced by it.
Second, Hare cautions that the differences between Matthew and Par. En., such
as the addition of au)tou= and the linguistic function of the term (in Par. En. to refer
to the main character in the third person, in Matthew, only on the lips of Jesus as a
self-designation), ought to point elsewhere for the source of the Matthean concept
to passages such as Sir.Â€47:11, Pss.Â€Sol.Â€17:28 and 4 EzraÂ€13:31. But the point of the
interest in this verse is precisely the conjunction of the term “Son of Man” and the
image of the glorious throne. Nowhere else in ancient literature are the two conjoined
in such a way as they are in Par. En. and Matthew. Sir.Â€47:11 does mention a glorious
throne, but it is attributed to David, whose sin has been removed and whose royalty is
afï¬†rmed. Notably, the throne is not the Son of Man’s. Further, the throne is glorious,
but it is in Israel, not in the heavenly realm. Psalms of SolomonÂ€17 does speak of
the Messiah having a judicial role, but no throne is mentioned in conjunction with
judgeship. Similarly 4Â€EzraÂ€13 reveals a vision of a human ï¬†gure from the sea ï¬‡ying
on the clouds. This human ï¬†gure is the son of the Most High, all nations shall appear
before him, and vindication of the righteous and reproval of the wicked will take
place. But there is no reference to a throne. Again, the phraseology of “throne of
glory” (with or without the possessive pronoun) is not found elsewhere with such
precision. For example, T.Â€Ab.Â€8:5 (recension B) speaks of a throne of great glory, 11:6
(recension A), a throne of gold, and 12:4 (recension A) a terrifying throne. Thus, while
Hare acknowledges a possible indirect inï¬‡uence of Par. En. upon Mt.Â€19:28, he feels
96
Matthew, then, in utilizing this saying has apparently added the number twelve, to specify
that Jesus’ disciples are to be so honored.
97
98
Hare, The Son of Man Tradition, 164.
99
VanderKam, “Righteous One” 174–75.
CO25117.indb 187 11/03/2011 11:58

there may be a closer relationship elsewhere. When the alternate possible inï¬‡uences
are examined, however, his protestations that these other passages must be considered
only serves to highlight how precise the similarity is between Par. En. and Matthew.
This examination simply heightens the probability of Enochian inï¬‡uence on Matthew.
Third, and justiï¬†ably, Hare seeks to explain why Matthew altered the Q saying
(ï¬†rst person in Lk.Â€22:28–30) and chose wording that includes the Son of Man on his
glorious throne. Adhering to his minimalist convictions, he allows that the verse only
refers to Jesus’ promise that he will be associated with his disciples in the coming
judgment of Israel and that a satisfactory answer to Matthew’s editorial activity may
be impossible to provide.100 Unfortunately Hare has deï¬†ned away a very viable and
satisfactory option. Not only do Par. En. and Matthew share the same terminology
but they share the same understanding of the purpose of the image—the Son of Man
sits on his glorious throne for purpose of judgment. The evidence indeed points to an
extremely close connection between Par. En. and Matthew.
4.5.2â•‡ Characteristics of the Son of Man
The saying in Mt.Â€19:28, then, seems to arise out of biblical and pseudepigraphical
sources. Matthew has put the saying in the context of the encounter with the rich
young ruler, and made it express the rewards for discipleship, in contrast to Luke’s
image of the messianic banquet. Further, Matthew has connected those rewards with
the image of the Son of Man sitting on the throne of his glory. That image seems to be
drawn from several inï¬‡uences, but most speciï¬†cally from 1Â€EnochÂ€69:27, 29, where
the Son of Man and “the throne of his glory” are speciï¬†cally connected. The effect is
to depict the Son of Man as judge and ruler.101
Mt.Â€19:28 repeats several characteristics of the Son of Man already noted in
previous passages and presents two new features. In Mt.Â€19:28, the opposition of the
Son of Man to persecutors is implied in the image (cf Mt.Â€10:23), as well as vindi-
cation for his followers and a reversal of fortunes and status (cf MtÂ€13:36–43 and
16:27–28). A clear dichotomy between the righteous and the wicked is also implied
(cf Mt.Â€13:36â•‚43), and his judicial role is portrayed (cf Mt.Â€13:36–43 and 16:27–28).
Sitting upon a throne also implies that this ï¬†gure has a royal status (cf Mt.Â€13:36–43,
16:27–28; see also 16:19 [Jesus offering the keys of the kingdom to Peter]).
New features that Mt.Â€19:28 brings to the Matthean portrayal of the Son of Man are:
a) sitting on the throne of his glory; and

b) participation of his followers in the role of judging.
100
101
Tödt, Son of Man, 91, distinguishes between judge and “ruler” in the sense of Dan.Â€7:13, but
it appears to be better to consider that the Son of Man is both judge and ruler, since part of
the ruler’s responsibility is to judge.
CO25117.indb 188 11/03/2011 11:58

4.6â•‡ Exegesis of Mt. 24:30–31

In Mt.Â€24:23–31 it is apparent that the term Son of Man was introduced by Matthew
in the ï¬†rst part of verse 30, since it does not appear in the parallel passages of Mk
13:21–27 and Lk. 21:25–28. Jesus quotes Dan. 7:13 and envisions the Son of Man
coming on or with the clouds. Matthean additions, when compared to Mark, are the
reference to the sign of the Son of Man, to mourning by the people of earth (alluding
to Zech. 12:10–14), the mention of the trumpet, and the addition of the personal
pronoun “his.” It is appropriate, then, to expect that this passage reveals something
of Matthew’s understanding of the Son of Man.
4.6.1â•‡Mt. 24:30–31
30
kai\ to/te fanh/setai to\ shmei=on tou= ui9ou= tou= a0nqrw&pou e0n ou)ranw~|, kai\
to\te ko/yontai pa=sai ai9 fulai\ th=j gh=j kai\ o!yontai to\n ui9o\n tou=
a0nqrw&pou e0rxo&menon e0pi\ tw~n nefelw~n tou= ou0ranou= meta\ duna&mewj kai\
do&chj pollh=j: 31 kai\ a)postelei= tou\j a)gge/louj au)tou= meta\ sa&lpiggoj
mega&lhj, kai\ e0pisuna&cousin tou/j e0klektou\j au)tou= e0k tw~n tessa&rwn a)ne/
mwn a)p’ a!krwn ou0ranw~n e3wj [tw~n] a!krwn au)tw~n.102
30
Then the sign of the Son of Man. will appear in heaven, and then all the tribes
of the earth will mourn, and they will see ‘the Son of Man coming on the clouds
of heaven’ with power and great glory. 31 And he will send out his angels with a
loud trumpet call, and they will gather his elect from the four winds, from one
end of heaven to the other.
Variants
In MtÂ€24:30, e0n ou)ranw~| is represented by )Â€BÂ€LÂ€QÂ€700; en tw ouranw is read by
WÂ€fÂ€1.13Â€33 and the Majority text; while tou en ouranoij is read by D.
The word order of to\te ko/yontai is reversed by DÂ€QÂ€fÂ€1.13, while ko/yontai only is
preserved by )* and some others.
In vs 31, the words sa&lpiggoj mega&lhj are preserved in )Â€LÂ€WÂ€DÂ€QÂ€fÂ€ 1Â€700.892*
and others; salpiggoj fwnhj megalhj is read by BÂ€fÂ€ 13Â€33, the Majority text
and others; salpiggoj kai fwnhj megalhj is read by DÂ€1241 and others.
Instead of a!krwn ou0ranw~n, a!krwn twn ou0ranw~n is read by QÂ€fÂ€13Â€700 and a few
others.
102
In vs 31, Matthean additions to the Markan original are: kai\ to/te fanh/setai to\ shmei=on
tou= ui9ou= tou= a0nqrw&pou e0n ou0ranw, as well as ko/yontai pa=sai ai9 fulai\ th=j gh=j kai\,
and tou= ou0ranou=. Changes from MkÂ€13:26–27 are e0pi\ tw~n nefelw~n and the addition of
the word pollh=j to duna&mewj kai\ do/chj. An imprecise quotation of Dan.Â€7:13 is also
present: to\n ui9o\n tou= a0nqrw&pou e0rxo&menon e0pi\ tw~n nefelw~n tou= ou0ranou=. Further it
can be surmised that Matthew added the words ko/yontai pa=sai ai9 fulai\ th=j gh=j kai\ as
an allusion to Zech.Â€12:10–14.
CO25117.indb 189 11/03/2011 11:58

Again, [tw~n] is preserved by BÂ€QÂ€ fÂ€ 1.13Â€33.700.892 and a few others, while it is
omitted by the major witnesses: )Â€DÂ€LÂ€WÂ€and the Majority text.
At the end of vs 31, arxomenwn de toutwn ginesqai anableyate kai eparate
taj kefalaj umwn, dioti eggizei h apolutrwsij umwn is added by DÂ€1093
and the Old Latin witnesses under the inï¬‡uence of Lk.Â€21:28.
Notes
Presuming Matthew’s use of Mark in compiling his Gospel, several signiï¬†cant altera-
tions can be noted.103 Speciï¬†cally, Matthew has added the ï¬†rst portion regarding the
appearance of the sign of the Son of Man in the heavens and the mourning of all the
tribes of the earth. Matthew has also ampliï¬†ed the glory of the scene by noting that
the clouds are of heaven (tou= ou)ranou= ) and adding the word “great” (pollh=j) to
the notion of glory. Further Matthew has added the note concerning the trumpet call
and the possessive pronoun, au)tou=, to both the “angels” and the “elect.”104 These
Matthean differences reveal interesting aspects of Matthew’s portrayal of the Son of
Man, and so ï¬†ve signiï¬†cant differences between Matthew’s version of this passage
and the Markan version must be investigated. They are:
a) the appearance of the sign of the Son of Man;

b) the mourning of the tribes of earth;
c) the change of preposition from e0n to e0pi/ before the clouds and the addition of tou=
ou0ranou=;
d) the addition of the third person possessive pronoun au)tou= to the angels and to the
elect; and
e) the mention of the trumpet call.
Three basic questions must be asked of these changes. First, what sources have been
used, and secondly, what reasons can be deduced for such changes? Thirdly, does a
similar combination of sources exist in another location in the New Testament?
The Sign of the Son of Man to\ shmei=on tou= ui9ou= tou= a0nqrw&pou. As numerous
commentators have noticed,105 before the citation of Dan 7:13 about the Son of
103
Most would say that Matthew has followed his Markan source, but altered it in signiï¬†cant
ways, e.g. Harrington, Matthew, 336, Tödt, Son of Man, 80, and Robert Horton Gundry, The
Use of the Old Testament in St. Matthew’s Gospel (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1967), 52–54. France,
Matthew-Evangelist & Teacher, 41–49, claims to be less certain about the Two-Source
hypothesis, although the Griesbach Theory is also untenable. He believes that a more
complex process must be understood, allowing for the introduction of oral material in the
composition of the Gospel. See also Casey’s discussion in Solution, 212–217.
104
In Mk 13:27, au)tou= is also present in some witnesses after a)gge/louj, but probably not
original. After e0klektou\j, au)tou= is questionable, even though Nestle-Aland27 includes it in
the text, but in square brackets. It may have been added in both locations due to the inï¬‡uence
of this verse, Mt.Â€24:31.
105
Harrington, Matthew, 338; Tödt, Son of Man, 80; Gundry, Matthew, 488; Beare, Matthew,
471; Hare, Son of Man Tradition, 170; Boring, Matthew, NIB, VIII.444; Davies and Allison,
Matthew, III.359; Colpe, o( ui9o_j tou= a)nqrw&pou, TDNT, VIII.437.
CO25117.indb 190 11/03/2011 11:58

Man coming with the clouds, Matthew has added a reference to the sign of the Son
of Man.106 The content of the sign of the Son of Man has been hotly debated, with
some taking the view that a heavenly portent of some kind, a light, a banner, or the
cross, was envisioned,107 while most of modern scholarship views the genitive as
appositive, understanding that the sign is the Son of Man himself.108 This under-
standing is supported by the comparison with the sign of Jonah (Mt.Â€12:41, LkÂ€11:32).
Just as Jonah was himself the sign by which the people of Nineveh were brought to
repentance, so the sign of the Son of Man can be seen as the appearance the Son of
Man himself, coming to bring judgment to the nations of the world. The appearance
of a sign or signal before that gathering in of the people is also found in Isa.Â€11:12,
49:22, Deut.Â€30:4. In these passages the sign or standard is a military image that
accompanies the gathering in of the people and it is envisioned in connection with
the idea of the restoration of the scattered people of Israel. Thus, while the imagery
alludes to a military situation, with a military standard visibly present, it has also
become a metaphor for something powerful, unmistakable, and redemptive.109
Mourning by the Tribes of Earth ko/yontai pa=sai ai9 fulai\ th=j gh=j. Following
the image of the military situation, Matthew introduces another allusion ï¬†lled with
judgment. Alluding to Zech.Â€12:10–14,110 Matthew reveals that in his view, the
coming of the Son of Man will be accompanied by mourning by all the tribes of the
earth. This mourning will be generated by the judgment the Son of Man will enact.
Matthew has “considerably altered”111 the Markan version, in which the implication is
that the coming of the Son of Man will be a day of rejoicing. For Matthew, however,
that day will be accompanied by mourning in the face of judgment.112 This indicates
106
Didache 16:6 repeats this reference to the sign of the Son of Man.
107
T. F. Glasson, “The Ensign of the Son of Man (Matt. XXIV, 30),” JTS 15 (1964) 299–300;
Harrington, Matthew, 338. Colpe, o( ui9o_j tou= a)nqrw&pou, TDNT, VIII.437, argues the sign
was a banner; Davies and Allison, Matthew, III.359–60, outline the various views, and
then argue for the cross. Beare, Matthew, 471, notes that patristic interpretation favored an
appearance of the cross and that in iconography Jesus often is envisioned as arising from the
dead brandishing a cross.
108
Tödt, Son of Man, 80; Meier, Matthew, 287; Gundry, Matthew, 488; Beare, Matthew, 471;
Hare, Son of Man Tradition, 173; Lambrecht, Out of the Treasure, 258; Boring, Matthew,
NIB VIII.444.
109
Schweizer, Matthew, 455–56, reviews all the allusions and ends up suggesting that the sign
was not meant to be understood literally as a portent, the cross, or a light, but that it was
metaphorical, referring to the reality of God’s ï¬†nal victory that is beyond words.
110
Gundry, Use of the OT, 52–54; Davies and Allison, Matthew, III.360.
111
112
Lambrecht, Out of the Treasure, 259, notes that Matthew’s universality is apparent in the
reference to all the tribes being judged. This universality also appears in the description of
the Last Judgment in Mt.Â€25:31–46, as all people are to appear before the throne. See also
Meier, Matthew, 287, and Boring, Matthew, NIB VIII.444. Tödt, Son of Man, 81, also sees
that the judgment is for everyone in the omission of the use of the concept of the “pierced
one” from Zech.Â€12:10. Jesus’ enemies who pierced him are not the only ones who will be
judged, but everyone. The absence of the allusion to the “pierced one” also emphasizes the
Son of Man’s authority to judge, according to Tödt.
CO25117.indb 191 11/03/2011 11:58

that Matthew “wishes to emphasize the judgment which will be initiated by the
appearing of the Son of Man.”113
While one cannot know precisely Matthew’s motivation for adding the reference
to mourning, it appears that it reveals his interest in the judgment which the Son of
Man will initiate. Associated with this interest is the question of what inï¬‡uenced
Matthew to introduce this theme to what in Mark appears to be a day of rejoicing.
Matthew seems to have the view that the coming of the Son of Man will mean
judgment. This judgment will be vindication for some, since the metaphor of the
sign is a redemptive image for the scattered righteous who will be gathered together.
But this judgment will be condemnation for others, who will mourn as a result of it.
Matthew is concerned to show both outcomes for the sake of the currently oppressed
righteous ones.
Another ï¬†rst century work, Par.Â€En., envisions a judging Son of Man. The
righteous and elect of that Son of Man will rejoice at the judgment he enacts (e.g.
1Â€EnochÂ€62:13–16), but those who are condemned, the kings and the mighty ones,
will be dismayed, downcast in face, and ï¬†lled with shame (1Â€EnochÂ€46:6; 48:8; 62:4,
5, 10; 63:11).
Hare claims that while eschatological fear is common in Par. En., there is no
parallel in Par. En. to the verb ko/yontai “they will mourn” in MtÂ€24:30 or wdpsw
of ZechÂ€12:10.114 While in the narrow sense he is correct, in a broader sense it is an
inappropriate conclusion. Par. En., as just noted, has several ways of indicating the
reaction of the kings and the mighty ones and their followers to the judgment of the Son
of Man. All of those reactions of being ï¬†lled with shame, of being downcast, of having
their faces ï¬†lled with darkness, together with their reaction to the judgment itself, can
be neatly and concisely summarized in Zechariah’s characterization of mourning.
While it is agreed that Matthew has alluded to Zechariah, it is also apparent that in
content the allusion is highly consistent with the concept presented in Par. En. This may
be an instance, then, of Matthew’s having been inï¬‡uenced by Par. En.’s portrayal of the
Son of Man,115 and as a consequence of choosing the passage from Zechariah to illus-
trate people’s reactions. It is very possible in this way that Matthew has intentionally
shifted the concept of the Son of Man he received towards that found in Par. En.
On the Clouds of Heaven e0pi\ tw~n nefelw~n tou= ou0ranou=. The change in
Mt.Â€24:30 of preposition from e0n to e0pi/ before the clouds and the addition of tou=
ou)ranou= again seem to underline Matthew’s shift of the concept of the Son of
Man towards that in Par. En. Matthew uses e0pi/ in harmony with the Septuagint of
Dan.Â€7:13116. The addition of tou= ou)ranou= also is in harmony with the Septuagint.
113
114
Hare, Son of Man, 173–74. Further, in Matthew, it is all the tribes of earth who mourn, not
the kings and mighty ones, although the followers of the kings and mighty ones are present
in the accounts of Par. En. These followers would certainly be included in Zechariah’s “all
tribes” which Matthew envisions.
115
Contra Hare, Son of Man Tradition, 174.
116
Gundry, Use of the OT, 52–54.
CO25117.indb 192 11/03/2011 11:58

This addition may also, however, have been inï¬‡uenced conceptually on Matthew’s
part. The Markan version omits the reference to the heavens in connection with the
clouds, which in Matthew’s mind may have been misleading. Matthew may have
added the reference to heavenly clouds in order to underline the heavenly origin of
the Son of Man. While this addition paints more completely the picture of the power
and glory of the Son of Man as related to Daniel 7,117 it also matches the heavenly
origin of the Son of Man conceptualized in Par. En.
“His” Angels and “His” Elect tou\j a)gge/louj au)tou=.â•›.â•›.tou/j e0klektou\j au)tou=.
The addition of the third person possessive pronoun au)tou= qualifying the angels and
the elect is a small but signiï¬†cant change by Matthew.118 Mark has envisioned that the
angels gather in the elect, but Matthew has added the detail that the angels, as well as
the elect, belong to the Son of Man, and changes the verb to the plural to reï¬‡ect that
change.119 This has the effect of underlining the sovereignty of the Son of Man, and
attributing power and authority to him over the angels of heaven.120 That the Son of
Man is envisioned as having an entourage of angels at his behest again is consistent
with the view that a shift towards the conceptualization of the Son of Man in Par. En.
has taken place.
The Loud Trumpet Call meta\ sa&lpiggoj mega&lhj. The mention of the trumpet
call appears to be an allusion to a passage such as Isa.Â€27:13.121 The trumpet together
with the signal is also found in Isa.Â€18:3, where the people are encouraged to look
when they see it and listen when they hear it.122 Further, in the tenth benediction of
the Shemoneh Esreh the trumpet, the ensign and the gathering of the people from the
four corners of the earth are all found together.123 It appears to be an apocalyptic motif
that Matthew thought appropriate to introduce into his picture of the coming Son of
Man.
Another Similar Interpretation. Several commentators point out that a similar
combination of passages occurs with the concept of the coming Son of Man in
Rev.Â€1:7, with a similar “inexact rendering” of the verses alluded to.124 Gundry also
graphically points out that the order of the citations of Dan.Â€7:13 and Zech.Â€12:10 is
reversed. This indicates that the combination of the two passages as applied to the
117
Gundry, Use of the OT, 54.
118
119
Some witnesses to Mk 13:27 add au)tou= to both a)gge/louj and e0klektou\j, but probably
under the inï¬‡uence of Mt.Â€ 24:31. Nestle-Aland27 omits it after a)gge/louj, but includes
it in square brackets (indicating that the editors are unconvinced of its originality) after
e0klektou\j.
120
Tödt, Son of Man, 82; Meier, The Vision of Matthew, 171; Harrington, Matthew, 339; Davies
& Allison, Matthew, III.363, Sim, Apocalyptic Eschatology, 76.
121
Harrington, Matthew, 336; Gundry, Matthew, 489. A trumpet blast is also mentioned in
DidacheÂ€16:6.
122
Gundry, Matthew, 488 notes this passage, as well as Jer. 4:21, 6:1, 5:27, and 1QM 2:15–4:17.
123
Beare, Matthew, 471, Hare, Son of Man Tradition, 170, and Davies and Allison, Matthew,
III.363, point out this similarity.
124
E.g. Tödt, Son of Man, 81; Gundry, Use of the OT, 52–54; Davies and Allison, Matthew,
III.360; Meier, Matthew, 287; Hare, Son of Man Tradition, 173.
CO25117.indb 193 11/03/2011 11:58

coming Son of Man had taken place before the composition of either Revelation
or Matthew, and was known to both, but that the authors of the Gospel and the
Revelation used this combination independently of one another.125
4.6.2â•‡ Characteristics of the Son of Man in Mt. 24:30–31
Several characteristics of the Son of Man in Mt.Â€24:30–31 have already been noted,
such as his coming, his opposition to persecutors, his vindication of his followers,
his judicial role, his sending angels who are “his,” and his coming “in glory.” This
passage, however, adds several new features as well. They are:
a) the idea that all the nations of the world, pa=sai ai9 fulai\ th=j gh=j, are to be
affected by the Son of Man;
b) the image of coming on the clouds, e0pi\ tw~n nefelw~n tou= ou0ranou=;
c) the concept that the elect, as well as the angels, are “his,” au)tou=;
the notion that the elect are “gathered,” e0pisuna&cousin; and
e) the perspective that the elect are to be gathered from the whole world, “from the
four winds,” e0k tw~n tessa&rwn a)ne/mwn.
The last two features have not been discussed above, since they are taken over from
the parallel passage in MkÂ€13:27. However, they are also consistent with the concep-
tualization of the Son of Man in Par. En.126
4.7â•‡ Exegesis of Mt. 25:31–34, 41, 46

The ï¬†nal Son of Man saying that is unique to Matthew is part of the conclusion
to the Apocalyptic Discourse of chapters 24–25. The Son of Man is depicted in an
eschatological, judicial role, accompanied by angels, seated on a throne as a king.
The criterion for judgment is the way the ones being judged have treated the poor and
needy, with whom the king identiï¬†es himself.
125
See also Adela Yarbro Collins, “The ‘Son of Man’ Tradition and the Book of Revelation,”
in The Messiah: Developments in Earliest Judaism and Christianity, edited by James H.
Charlesworth (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1992), 536–68.
126
The idea of gathering the elect from the four winds is consistent with the image portrayed
in Par. En., where in 1Â€EnochÂ€61 the angels with measuring cords are sent off to “reveal all
that is hidden in the depths of the earth, Those who have been destroyed by the desert, And
those who have been devoured by the ï¬†sh of the sea and by wild beasts.” They will return
to the presence of the Elect One. The exact terminology is not repeated by Matthew, but the
concept of being gathered from the whole world is the same.
CO25117.indb 194 11/03/2011 11:58

4.7.1â•‡ Redactional and Form-critical Considerations
Redaction Criticism
This highly studied and debated pericope127 has several fascinating issues, but the one
that concerns this topic most directly is the question of its redactional status. What
is its form? What is its origin? Is it a legitimate source for elucidating Matthew’s
shaping of the concept of the Son of Man?
The ï¬†rst fact to be recognized is that this passage, as well as the whole chapter
from which it comes, is unique to Matthew.128 On that basis alone, it deserves
attention. Further, when asking the redactional-critical questions, it must be admitted
that, strictly speaking, all that can be said absolutely is that it is unique to Matthew,
and anything beyond that observation is in the realm of conjecture. The most cautious
conclusion is that it was composed by Matthew,129 but that cautious conclusion is
perhaps too simple and unsatisfying.
Beyond the observation that this passage is unique to Matthew, several details
can be observed, which possibly shed light on its redactional history. Several
discrepancies have been highlighted in an attempt to show that part of the pericope
is a Matthean composition, while the rest of it has been adapted from elsewhere and
redacted. Some of the discrepancies noted are:130
a) in verse 31, the central ï¬†gure is called the Son of Man, while in verses 34, 40,
the central ï¬†gure is termed a king;
b) in verses 32–33 the comparison of the shepherd separating the sheep from the
goats is used to describe the judgment process, but in verses 34–36 shepherding
themes do not reappear;
127
Stanton, A Gospel for a New People, 207. See also John R. Donahue, S.J., “The ‘Parable’ of
the Sheep and the Goats: A Challenge to Christian Ethics,” Theological Studies 47(1986),
3–8, for an excellent summary of the interpretational issues of the pericope. See also Davies
and Allison, Matthew, III.416–35. Cf. also Catchpole, “A Re-appraisal of Matthew XXV.31–
46,” 355–56.
128
Gundry, Matthew, 511, states that Matthew is “responsible for the description of the sheep
and goats.” He sees all of Mt. 25:31–46 as a Matthean creation, which is completely harmo-
nious with other themes in the Gospel. Schweizer, Matthew, 475, sees two options for the
origins of the pericope: either it was a Matthean invention or a direct discourse of Jesus.
He argues against seeing it as coming from the mouth of Jesus because Jesus probably did
not identify himself with the eschatological judicial king since he only looked ahead to the
coming kingdom; nor does Schweizer see Jesus identifying himself with the poor.
129
Gray, Sherman W., The Least of My Brothers: Matthew 25:31–46; A History of Interpretation,
Atlanta: Scholars Press; 1989, 351–52, 355.
130
Lambrecht, Out of the Treasure, 265–66 notes three sets of discrepancies: the transition
from shepherd and sheep to the king and people, the shift from Son of Man to king, and
the shift from a corporate to an individual perspective in the course of the passage. Like a
good teacher, Lambrecht outlines two types of explanation, one in which Matthew is seen as
redacting a prior tradition, and the other in which Matthew is seen as composing the whole,
using traditional elements. He presents the ï¬†rst fairly, but prefers the second (282). I found
myself more convinced by his presentation of the ï¬†rst than by his preference for the second.
CO25117.indb 195 11/03/2011 11:58

c) in verse 32, a gender change is noted where the ï¬†rst reference to the judged is
neuter plural, pa/nta ta\ e1qnh, while the second reference is masculine plural,
au)tou/j; this also seems to reï¬‡ect a shift from the corporate perspective to an
individualistic perspective; and
d) the content of verse 31 ï¬†ts extremely well with the portrait of the Son of Man
already developed in the Gospel, an observation which suggests that this verse
came from the pen of the evangelist; but some of the concepts in the rest of the
passage do not ï¬†t so neatly: (i) an emphasis, unusual for Matthew, on justiï¬†cation
by works, and (ii) two hapax legomena, the term kathrame/noi, “accursed,”
(vsÂ€41) and the mention of ko&lasin ai0w&nion, the “eternal punishment,” (vsÂ€46)
to which the condemned are consigned.
All these items, it is argued, suggest that there is a redactional seam somewhere
between verse 31 and verse 34.131 The suggestion is that verseÂ€31 came from
Matthew’s pen,132 but the rest of it, or most of it, came from a tradition taken over by
Matthew.133 But the crucial question is where the redactional seam lies. If it cannot be
placed precisely, then another explanation must sought.
Several locations may be possible. One possibility suggested by items a), b), and
d) is that the seam lies between verses 33 and 34. This is attractive because the scene
deï¬†nitely shifts to a courtroom presided over by a king. In vsÂ€ 34 the conversation
is between the king and the judged. The king pronounces the judgment, and both
the righteous and the condemned, who address the king as “Lord,” express surprise
at their fate. Upon closer examination, however, this location is impossible, for in
verse 34, the judged have already been separated. This separation is crucial to the
judgment scene and mention of it must have been included with verses 34–46, in
order to introduce in a meaningful way the comments by the king and the ones who
are having judgment passed on them. Therefore a line must be sought earlier in the
passage. The separation to the left and to the right has already been introduced by
a)fori/sei au)tou_j and illustrated by the shepherd comparison of verses 32–33. This
observation would make it attractive to locate the redactional seam between verse 31
and verse 32.
Item c) above, however, the observation that there is a gender change and a change
in perspective from a corporate view to an individualized point of view, supports
131
Of those who posit a pre-Matthean tradition, vs 34 is seen as the beginning of that tradition,
although certain Mattheanisms, such as to&te, deu~te, klhronomh&sai, and tou= patro&j mou,
indicate Matthew’s editing, Lambrecht, Out of the Treasure, 267–68.
132
Tödt, Son of Man, 73 agrees with Jeremias, saying, “we may infer.â•›.â•›.that Matthew himself
stylized v. 31 as an introduction.” He notes the close relation of vs 31 with Mt. 16:27, 19:28.
Lambrecht, Out of the Treasure, 267–8, also recognizes the Matthean quality of the passage,
though it was not necessarily created ex nihilo, suggesting that this passage could be a
development out of passages like Mt. 16:27, 19:28, and Mt. 13, with its judgment motif in
the Parables of the Weeds and the Fisherman’s Net.
133
Schweizer, Matthew, 475, sees the ï¬†rst half of Mt. 25:31 as coming from Mk 8:38, and the
rest being adapted from Mt. 19:28.
CO25117.indb 196 11/03/2011 11:58

locating the seam after verseÂ€32a.134 But in that case, au)tou_j needs an antecedent,
and that antecedent is aptly found precisely in pa/nta ta\ e1qnh in verseÂ€32a. It is
difï¬†cult to place much weight on item c) anyway, because the sentence as it stands is
acceptable Greek. Besides, it is unlikely that a shift from a corporate to an individual
perspective is even involved here, because the verb, sunaxqh&sontai, of which
pa/nta ta\ e1qnh is the subject, is already plural, whereas grammatically in Greek a
singular is expected with a neuter plural subject. The shift from the neuter, pa/nta
ta\ e1qnh, to the masculine, au)tou\j, thus does not reï¬‡ect a redactional shift from
corporate to individual, for it appears that many individuals are in view all along.135
This, then, necessitates considering the possibility of locating the redactional seam
after verse 31. The problem raised by this location, however, is that now au)tou=, the
one before whom the nations are gathered, needs an antecedent. This antecedent is
logically the Son of Man in vsÂ€31. Bultmann, in order to preserve the narrative integrity
of the tradition and to explain the presence of two terms, “Son of Man” and “king,” has
suggested that the Son of Man coming in glory with his angels is a redactional sub-
stitution for an original “God” or “king” in the ï¬†rst sentence of the pericope.136 This
indeed appears to be likely, and Bultmann’s point is well taken, that an original sentence
with “God” or “king” is needed to begin the pericope. Whatever the subject of that
sentence may have been, it would have provided the antecedent for au)tou= in verseÂ€32.
Therefore it is extremely unlikely that a redactional seam can be located between
versesÂ€31 and 32.
The attempt to locate the redactional seam precisely has thus proved futile. None
of the possible locations has proved feasible. Bultmann’s hypothesis that this was
originally a single, comprehensive tradition, and that Matthew has redactionally
introduced “Son of Man” into it is most likely.137 In this case, verses 31–46 must be
seen as a whole. Further, if the reference to the “Son of Man” did replace “God” or
“king” in verse 31, then it nicely serves Matthew’s purpose of further shaping the
concept of the Son of Man in royal terms.
Then what of the Mattheanisms and the two hapax legomena? There are two
134
Lambrecht, Out of the Treasure, 267–68, notes that several exegetes argue that 31–32a
“seem to be completely Matthean.”
135
Gundry, Matthew, 512 believes that the shift to au)tou_j implies that the judgment is of
individuals, not nations.
136
Bultmann, R., The History of the Synoptic Tradition, 124; Colpe, o( ui9o\j tou= a)nqrw&pou,
TDNT VIII.461. Gundry, Matthew, 513, notes that the “king” in this passage cannot refer to
God, as the king refers to God as “my father.”
137
Lambrecht, Out of the Treasure, 272–73, summarizes this position as the “common interpre-
tation,” in which it is believed that a pre-Matthean tradition can be recovered, but that it has
been radically redacted by Matthew. In the original parable, the king represented God, the
nations represented all people, and the “least of these” represented anyone without prestige
or status, while in Matthew’s reworking, the king is Jesus, the nations are the gentiles only,
and the “least of these” are Christian missionaries. Thus the original parable was about
radical love, but in Matthew’s re-working it becomes a “Parousia Discourse.”
â•… Lambrecht himself, 282, cautiously concludes that the pericope is a Matthean composition
that relies heavily on traditional material, and that it is strongly inï¬‡uenced by the memory of
Christ, “who committed himself unconditionally to his destitute brothers and sisters.”
CO25117.indb 197 11/03/2011 11:58

possibilities for explaining these details: either the passage is wholly Matthean,138 or
the passage is a prior tradition that has been heavily redacted by Matthew. The two
hapax legomena could be seen as unique instances of Matthean terminology, but it is
more likely that they should be seen as evidence of an older tradition, even though one
cannot be absolutely certain about this. The clear Mattheanisms, on the other hand,
indicate that Matthew has definitely redacted it.139 The introductory verse with the
insertion and descriptions of the Son of Man appears to be Matthean. Further, clear
Mattheanisms are the uses of “then”140, “righteous”141, “my father”142, and “Truly I tell
you.â•›.â•›.”143 Thus the evidence supports fairly conclusively that Mt.Â€25:31–46 is a prior
tradition, which Matthew has heavily redacted.144
The Nature of the Prior Tradition

Then the question arises as to whether the prior tradition was Jewish or Christian.145
In favor of seeing it as a Christian tradition is the self-identiï¬†cation of the king with
“the least of these my brothers.” This, it is argued, is a particularly Christian concept,
which is supported by the concept of the incarnation146 and by Matthew’s emphasis
on the name “Emmanuel,” “God with us.”147 Bultmann suggests that the pericope is
a Christian adaptation of a Jewish tradition, in which “the name of God was replaced
by the title Son of Man,” since the ones being judged are not speciï¬†cally Christian.148
138
Gray, The Least of My Brothers, 351–52, 355.
139
Gundry, Matthew, 511–16, notes all the Mattheanisms in detail in his study of this pericope.
Lambrecht, Out of the Treasure, 268, also notes these evidences of “Matthean redactional
intervention.”
140
Mt uses to&te 89 times, Mk 6, and Lk. 12.
141
13 times in Mt. without a synoptic parallel, nine times in Lk., once shared by Mt. and Lk.
142
Mt. uses “my father” fifteen times, Lk. two times, and they share an instance, Mt.Â€11:27 5
Lk.Â€10:22.
143
Mt. uses the clause twenty-three times without parallel, and another seven instances that are
paralleled in Mk or Lk.; Mk uses it seven times without parallel, and another seven instances
that are paralleled in Mt. or Lk.; Lk uses it five times without parallel, and shares it twice
with Mt. or Mk.
â•… Some see the presence of deu~te and klhronomh&sate as Mattheanisms, but this is not as
clear, since Mt. uses deu~te four times without parallel, but Mk uses it three times; and Mt.
uses klhronomh&sate three times without parallel, and Mk uses it once. These statistics do
not point clearly enough to these terms as Mattheanisms.
144
This is also the conclusion of Davies and Allison, Matthew, III.417–18.
145
Lambrecht, Out of the Treasure, 270, summarizes the conclusions of several scholars to the
effect that the pericope ï¬†ts well with Jesus’ teaching and could be ascribed to Jesus himself
in a Jewish or Jewish-Christian milieu, since Jesus does not speak of himself, but of God,
since he exhorts his listeners to a radical love of neighbor, and since it coheres well with
Jesus’ views on the inescapability of judgment, the absence of any awareness of reward-
righteousness, and the precedence of love over law.
146
Beare, The Gospel According to Matthew, 493.
147
Meier, Matthew, 304.
148
Bultmann, The History of the Synoptic Tradition, 123–24. Beare, The Gospel According
to Matthew, 493, also suggests that the presence of the Son of Man in verse 31 is due to a
Christian adaptation of a possibly original “king.”
CO25117.indb 198 11/03/2011 11:58

He also claims that the “speciï¬†cally Christian content of the passage does not lie in
the moral, but.â•›.â•›.in the identiï¬†cation of the person of the judge with the needy.”149
Tödt argues that the solidarity of the king with the needy is a reï¬‡ection of Jesus’
messianic activity on earth as portrayed by Matthew.150 But he rejects Bultmann’s
conjecture that it arose out of a Jewish tradition, instead agreeing with T.W. Manson
and J. Jeremias in crediting it to “the Master Himself” since it contains “features of
such startling originality.”151 The Jewish concept of a transcendent, unapproachable
God, whom humans dare not lay eyes upon, it is said, tends to militate against the
Jewishness of the tradition. Further, the list of acts of mercy excludes lament for and
the burial of the dead and care for widows and orphans, which are included in Jewish
lists of the most important acts a person can do.152
In favor of accepting this tradition as of Jewish origin, however, are several
rabbinic passages, two of which can be mentioned. Davies and Allison see a “striking
analogy” in Midr. Ps. on 118:17, in which the gate of Yahweh is open for those who
have fed the hungry, given drink to the thirsty, clothed the naked, brought up orphans,
given alms and practiced works of love.153 M.Â€Tann.Â€15:9154 even represents God as
being identiï¬†ed with the needy, “God says to Israel, ‘My children, when you have
given food to the poor, I account it as though you have given food to me.’” Here,
even though it is only a comparison, with the use of “as though,” clearly the idea of
God in some way being the recipient of acts done to the needy is present.155 Similarly,
in Par. En., the divine viceâ•‚gerent, the Elect One/Righteous One/Son of Man, acts
as avenger, vindicator, and champion for the righteous oppressed (e.g. 1Â€EnochÂ€47:2,
149
Bultmann, The History of the Synoptic Tradition, 405, in the addenda. This is surely
inaccurate, since in the Par. En. the Son of Man identiï¬†es with the oppressed to the extent
of passing judgment on the oppressors for their treatment of the righteous oppressed (e.g.
1Â€EnochÂ€47:2, 4), and no one except Milik claims Par. En. is Christian. The identiï¬†cation
extends to the epithets used: “righteous” and “elect” are used both of the Son of Man and of
the oppressed. Further, the Son of Man acts on God’s behalf and is the avenger and vindi-
cator of the oppressed, their champion both for judgment and for their blessed existence in
his presence after their vindication (1Â€EnochÂ€62:13–16).
â•…Beare, The Gospel According to Matthew, 493, notes that while in many prayers God is
addressed as king, it is unlikely that God would be conceived of as being in the poor and
needy, and that therefore it is likely that this identiï¬†cation is a Christian motif.
150
151
Tödt, Son of Man, 74; Manson, The Sayings of Jesus, 249; Jeremias, The Parables of Jesus,
145. While Jesus certainly displayed “startling originality,” that alone cannot be conclusive
evidence that this tradition originated with Jesus.
152
153
Davies and Allison, Matthew, 418.
154
Even though this midrash on Deut. 15:9 post-dates the New Testament, many concepts and
convictions in early Rabbinism do reï¬‡ect first-century thought. Tödt, Son of Man, 74, agrees
that the one standard of love for the judgment was already present in Judaism.
155
Bultmann, The History of the Synoptic Tradition, 124, has found numerous parallels in
Jewish, Mandaean, Egyptian, and Persian literature, in which God is identiï¬†ed with humans
through their behavior in which they imitate God’s merciful acts. One similar notion in
Hebrew Scripture is Prov.Â€19:17, “Whoever is kind to the poor lends to the Lord, and will be
repaid in full.”
CO25117.indb 199 11/03/2011 11:58

4, 62:13–16). Further, just as Christians can countenance both a transcendent and

immanent God, so the concept of God in Jewish thought is broad enough to counte-
nance both a transcendent God and a God who identiï¬†es with the poor. Again, the list
of merciful acts is not meant to be exhaustive,156 but representative. Therefore it is
possible that Matthew took over and redacted a prior Jewish tradition.157
Form Criticism
The form of the passage is also debated, though somewhat mildly, as compared
to its redaction. Since it does not explicitly use any words of comparison, such as
“The Kingdom of heaven is like.â•›.â•›.” or “It is as when.â•›.â•›.” one may argue that the
passage is not strictly a parable, but rather a prophetic description or a narration of
the actual expected events of the eschatological judgment.158 Further, the Son of Man
is never spoken of as a character in a parable. If the passage is understood to narrate
future events, then its interpretation is approached in a speciï¬†c way, for it becomes
important to know who is being judged: the world in general, or just a certain portion
of the world, such as Gentiles only, or non-Christian Gentiles only.159 It also becomes
important to know who “the least of these my brothers” are: the needy in general, or
Christians in particular, or Christian missionaries speciï¬†cally.160 These types of inter-
156
Stanton, A Gospel for a New People, 218–21, argues that the very make-up of the list,
as compared to other lists, narrows it to Christians, who can be assured “that the nations
would ultimately be judged on the basis of their treatment of Christians.” He believes that
the absence of “widows and orphans” in particular, indicates that Matthew has purposefully
truncated a traditional list. He does admit, though, that in the original form, this list may have
“formed the core of a pre-Matthean ‘universalist’ tradition.” If Matthew were concerned to
limit the recipients of this care to the disciples, however, it seems to me he would have used
the term oi9 mikroi/ rather than its superlative form.
157
Beare, The Gospel According to Matthew, 496, notes that there is “surprisingly little that is
speciï¬†cally Christian.” There is no forgiveness of sins, no grace of God, the invitation into
the kingdom is based on deeds, not on the forgiveness of sins, there is no trace of saving
faith, no trace of trying to serve Christ, no mercy to the accused, and while there is justice,
it is without mercy. Somewhat patronizingly he concludes that this is more likely Jewish
in origin. Perhaps more accurately it can be concluded that this reï¬‡ects an apocalyptic
viewpoint, whether Jewish or Christian!
158
Floyd V. Filson, A Commentary on the Gospel According to St. Matthew (London: A&C
Black; 2nd Edition, 1971) 266, calls it a “description of the last judgment,” while Beare,
The Gospel According to Matthew, 492, says it is an apocalyptic vision. Schweizer, Matthew,
475, considers it to be not a parable, but an account of the judgment of the world, while
Davies and Allison, Matthew, III.418, describe it as “not a parable but ‘a word-picture of the
Last Judgement’.”
159
Filson, Matthew, 267, takes the unusual position that this implies the resurrection of the
dead, so that all humanity may be judged – an extreme universalist position. Meier, Matthew,
303, and “Nations or Gentiles in Matthew 28:19,” CBQ 39 (1977), 94–102 argues that
pa&nta ta_ e1qnh refers to all the nations, including the Jewish nation, not just the Gentiles.
160
Stanton, A Gospel for a New People, 214–18, argues that for Matthew oi9 mikroi/ are the
disciples of Jesus in Mt. 18:6, 10, 14, and that e9ni\ tou/twn tw~n e0laxi/stwn in Mt. 25:
40, 45 (cf. Mt 10:42) is very similar, and therefore means the same. Lambrecht, Out of the
Treasure, 278–9, however, argues cogently and convincingly that tou/twn tw~n e0laxi/stwn
is “referring back (specifically) to the six types of needy people just mentioned; they are “the
CO25117.indb 200 11/03/2011 11:58

pretation have been categorized as “universalist” or “particularist,”161 and scholars

who view this pericope as a narration of the end-times are roughly equally divided
about its universal or particular application.162
social category of poor, needy people.” Part of his argument is that oi9 mikroi/ even varies in
meaning: in Mt. 10:42, it refers to Christian missionaries, who are “strong in faith,” while in
18:6 it refers to “vulnerable, weak and marginal Christians,” who are “not so strong in faith.”
Donahue, “The ‘Parable’ of the Sheep and the Goats,” 25–28, argues that “the least of the
brethren” should be understood as Christian missionaries, who need to be treated mercifully.
But within the evangelistic outlook of the Gospel, the challenge to the Church is to share the
Good News, and so the persecuted missionaries are precisely the means by which the world
is saved, since Christ is present in them. He goes on, then (page 30), virtually to expand that
category to all the needy, for “justice is constituted by acts of loving-kindness and mercy
to those in need;” since through proclamation God’s will is disclosed. The missionaries, it
appears, are representative of all the needy, and mercy is expected by God to be shown to
both the missionaries and the needy in general. Davies and Allison, Matthew, III.428–30, list
ï¬†ve possible options for interpreting who the “least of these my brothers” are, and conclude
that the phrase must be understood in the universalist sense of everyone who may be in need.
161
Stanton, A Gospel for a New People, 208–12, uses the terms “universalist” and “particu-
larist.” As Stanton describes the variety of positions, he sees the nub of the dispute as the
question of whether the pericope is “concerned with the attitude of the world in general to
the needy, or.â•›.â•›.the world’s attitude to the church.â•›.â•›.?” and the answer depends on the inter-
pretation of “all nations” and “the least of these my brethren,” 209. Stanton himself argues
for the particularist position. While this is a crucial question for the understanding of the
pericope, it actually lies outside the purview of my concern here, which is the redactional
character of the pericope. See also Ulrich Luz, “The Final Judgment (Matt 25:31–46):
An Exercise in ‘History of Influence’ Exegesis,” 271–310, in Treasures New and Old:
Contributions to Matthean Studies, edited by David R. Bauer and Mark Allen Powell
(Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1996).
162
Gray, The Least of My Brothers, 348–49. Gundry, Matthew, 511, 514, takes the univer-
salist approach, as does Schweizer, Matthew, 475–77. France, Matthew: Evangelist and
Teacher, 264, interprets the “least” as being synonymous with maqhth&v, and thus referring
speciï¬†cally to Christians rather than humanity in general. Meier, Matthew, 304, appreciates
the “stunning universalism” of this passage, which he believes “must not be blunted.”
Similarly, Beare, The Gospel According to Matthew, 493. Harrington, Matthew, 358–60,
takes the “particularist” view, that the nations refers only to Gentiles, and that the least of the
brethren refers to Christian missionaries, since he claims Matthew presumes two judgments.
Harrington’s arguments that two judgments were a part of ancient thought, however, do not
appear to be convincing. He cites Mt. 19:28 as an instance of Matthew envisioning a Jewish
judgment, for they will be judged by the twelve on their thrones, and in contrast, he says
Mt.Â€25:31â•‚46 illustrates the Gentile judgment under the Son of Man. However, this seems
to stretch the details too far, and to ignore the universalizing effect of using pa&nta of the
nations. His other citations supporting two judgments are not convincing either: 1Â€Cor.Â€6:2–3
refers to the saints judging the world, but this is not two judgments, and the pattern is
different from what he claims for Mt.Â€19:28 and 25:31–46, since Paul sees the saints, not
the Son of Man, judging the world. Similarly his use of 1Â€PeterÂ€4:17, in which judgment is
to begin with the household of God, does not ï¬†t his pattern either, since here the judgment
begins with Christians, not Jews, and the contrast is between Christian and non-Christian,
not Jew and Gentile. Further, the use of the word “begin” indicates not two judgments but
one, a process with a beginning and an ending. Finally the other Jewish writings he cites
all could be construed as referring only to one ï¬†nal judgment, except for T.Â€ BenÂ€ 10:8–9
which refers to judgment upon the Jews ï¬†rst, and then upon the nations in like manner. Thus
CO25117.indb 201 11/03/2011 11:58

This passage has parabolic qualities, to the extent that it is the concluding pericope163
of Matthew’s apocalyptic discourse.164 Donahue points out that it functions “as a
parable in its realism and engaging quality” while needing to be interpreted within
its apocalyptic context, and so he terms it an “apocalyptic parable.”165 Apocalyptic
discourse is highly metaphorical, whether explicit words of comparison are present
or not. The vivid imagery must be understood according to its background, and so
the interpretation of apocalyptic discourse must proceed on the basis of its literary,
metaphorical qualities. Harrington rightly notes that whether this passage is called a
parable or not depends on one’s deï¬†nition of a parable; he calls it a “judgment scene,”
and notes that it follows three parables.166 As noted above, none of the Son of Man
sayings is part of an explicit parable, but even so they must be interpreted according
to the metaphors present. The Son of Man is not literally expected to arrive on clouds,
but rather the clouds are understood metaphorically. Similarly in Mt.Â€25:31–46, the
qualities attached to the Son of Man must be interpreted metaphorically and paraboli-
cally. Although the passage is often called the “Parable of the Last Judgment,” it is
more accurately a “depiction” or a “description,” part of an apocalyptic discourse that
should be interpreted according to the allusions and metaphors present.167
Harrington’s arguments for his particularist interpretation do not appear to be convincing.

Cf. Stanton, A Gospel for a New People, 213. Lambrecht, Out of the Treasure, 273–79, even
though he sees this pericope as a revelatory discourse rather than a parable, concludes that it
is to be interpreted universalistically.
163
Donahue, “The ‘Parable’ of the Sheep and the Goats,” 11, calls it “a solemn conclusion to
the ï¬†nal of Matthew’s ï¬†ve great discourses, the “apocalyptic testament.’”
164
Meier, Matthew, 302, does not consider this passage to be a parable, but sees it as “the
unveiling of the truth which lay behind all the great parables of chaps. 24–25,” and in The
Vision of Matthew, 177, he acknowledges its parabolic elements, but prefers to see it as a
“straightforward depiction” of the last day. Beare, The Gospel According to Matthew, 492,
agrees that it is not a parable, but is an “apocalyptic vision of the Last Judgement.” Gray,
The Least of My Brothers, 351–52, accuses many modern exegetes of not taking seriously
enough the parabolic nature of 25:31–46, of forgetting that this passage is a Matthean
Sondergut, and of not taking seriously enough its similarity with 1Â€Enoch.
165
Donahue, “The ‘Parable’ of the Sheep and the Goats,” 10, 30 where he describes the apoca-
lyptic horizon as:
a view of history and human life from God’s side. It also offers a solution to the
problem of theodicy, that is, why evil people ï¬‡ourish and why the innocent suffer.
Apocalyptic afï¬†rms that the sufferings and injustice which mar this world will be
bearable because the order of justice will be restored. Sin and evil will be unmasked
and goodness rewarded. Simply put, the world will be made “right” again. Matthew
adopts this perspective, since the parable of the Sheep and the Goats reveals the
actions which should have been normative in the world.
166
167
Catchpole, “A Re-appraisal of Matthew XXV.31–46,” 379–82, deï¬†nes it more narrowly as
a “recognition scene.” This is based on Nickelsburg’s discovery of the recognition scene
in 1Â€EnochÂ€62 as argued in Resurrection, Immortality and Eternal Life in Intertestamental
Judaism, 62–66,70–75. Elements of the scene are the exaltation of formerly persecuted
people and the judgment of the persecutors.
CO25117.indb 202 11/03/2011 11:58

The form-critical and redactional considerations, then, lead to the conclusion that
this passage is a valid source for investigating Matthew’s shaping of the concept of
the Son of Man.168 While conclusions cannot be absolutely certain, we have seen
that Matthew probably took over a prior tradition and heavily redacted it. Further,
it is possible that it came out of a Jewish background rather than Christian, and its
parabolic qualities must be pursued, rather than a strictly literal interpretation. The
concept of the Son of Man, with the qualities attached to it, then, reï¬‡ects Matthew’s
authorial handiwork, and Matthew’s shaping of it.
4.7.2â•‡ Mt. 25:31–34, 41,46
73Otan de\ e1lqh| o( ui9o\j tou= a)nqrw&pou e0n th|= do&ch| au)tou= kai\ pa&ntej
31
oi9 a!ggeloi met’ au0tou=, to&te kaqi/sei e0pi\ qro&nou do&chj au0tou=:32 kai\
sunaxqh&sontai e1mprosqen au0tou= pa&nta ta_ e1qnh, kai\ a)fori/sei au)tou_j a)p’
a)llh/lwn, w#sper o( poimh\n a)fori/zei ta\ pro&bata a)po_ tw~n e0ri/fwn, 33 kai\
sth/sei ta_ me\n pro&bata e0k deciw~n au)tou=, ta_ de\ e0ri/fia e0c eu)wnu&mwn. 34Â€to/te
e0rei= o( basileu_j toi=j e0k deciw~n au)tou=: deu~te oi9 eu)loghme/noi tou= patro&j mou,
klhronomh&sate th\n h9toimasme/nhn u9mi=n basilei/an a)po_ katabolh=j ko&smou....
31
“When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, then he
will sit on the throne of his glory. 32 All the nations will be gathered before him, and
he will separate people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from
the goats,33 and he will put the sheep at his right hand and the goats at the left. 34
Then the king will say to those at his right hand, ‘Come, you that are blessed by my
Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world.â•›.â•›.’
41
to&te e0rei= kai\ toi=j e0c eu0wnu&mwn: poreu/esqe a)p’ e0mou= [oi9] kathrame/noi
ei0j to_ pu~r to\ ai0w&nion to_ h(toimasme/non tw|~ diabo&lw| kai\ toi=j a)gge/loij
au)tou~.â•›.â•›.
41
Then he will say to those at his left hand, “You that are accursed, depart from
me into the eternal ï¬†re prepared for the devil and his angels.â•›.â•›.”
46
kai\ a)peleu&sontai ou{toi ei0j ko&lasin ai0w&nion, oi9 de\ di/kaioi ei0j zwh_n
ai0w&nion.
46
“And these will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal
life.”
Variants
In vs 31, agioi is added before a!ggeloi by AÂ€WÂ€fÂ€ 13 the Majority text and some of
the versions, while 0)Â€BÂ€DÂ€LÂ€QÂ€fÂ€1 and many other important witnesses do not add
agioi. (See Nestle-Aland27 for a fuller listing.)
168
Catchpole, “A Re-appraisal of Matthew XXV.31–46,” 387, concludes that the pericope is
pre-Matthean, including the mention of the Son of Man, and that in it we ï¬†nd “echoes of the
authentic voice of Jesus himself.”
CO25117.indb 203 11/03/2011 11:58

In vs 32, instead of sunaxqh&sontai, AÂ€WÂ€GÂ€DÂ€fÂ€1 and many others read the singular,
sunaxqh&setai, in agreement with the neuter plural subject, pa&nta ta\ e1qnh.
In vs 33, in ), au)tou= is placed after eu)wnu&mwn, instead of after deciw~n, while it is
omitted by A and a few others.
In vs 41, the deï¬†nite article, [oi9] is omitted by previous editions of Nestlé, )Â€BÂ€L
and a few others, but it is present in AÂ€DÂ€WÂ€QÂ€067vidÂ€fÂ€1.13 and the Majority text.
Again in vs 41, the words, to_ h(toimasme/non, are read in the dative by F (a ninth-
century manuscript) and a few others; o htoimasen o pathr mou is read by DÂ€fÂ€1
and a few translations and commentators. The text as presented is supported by
the Papyrus manuscript #45, Â€)Â€AÂ€BÂ€LÂ€WÂ€QÂ€067.0128. fÂ€ 13Â€33, the Majority text
and others.
In vs 46, ko&lasin is rendered ignem in some old Latin manuscripts, probably under
the inï¬‡uence of vsÂ€41.
Notes
This description of the Last Judgment is the most important passage for this study. It
incorporates most of the pertinent features of the Son of Man, and as the following
analysis and conclusion will show, it bears the most similarity with the concept of the
Son of Man in the Parables of Enoch. In the following discussion, the features and
characteristics of the Son of Man displayed in this pericope will be explored and their
prior occurrences in the Gospel noted.
Mt. 25:31: Five Significant Themes

In Mt. 25:31 the conï¬‡uence of ï¬†ve signiï¬†cant themes takes place. The ï¬†gure of the
Son of Man, the motion of “coming,”169 the attribute of glory, the presence of angels,
and the session of the Son of Man upon his glorious throne all come together. The
presence of all ï¬†ve of these signiï¬†cant themes occurs nowhere else in Matthew or in
the other two synoptic gospels.
Cf. Mt 24:30–31. Four of the themes from Mt. 25:31 are present in Mt.Â€24:30–31:
the Son of Man, “coming,” “glory,” and “angels.” The latter verses are concerned
with the Son of Man being seen coming on the clouds with power and glory and
sending his angels to gather the elect from the four corners of the earth. Parallels in
the synoptics are MkÂ€13:26–27 and Lk.Â€21:27. While Luke has edited Mark’s account
by omitting various details, such as the sending of the angels to gather the elect,
Matthew has edited the Markan version by adding details. The sign of the Son of
Man, the mourning by the tribes of the earth, and the auditory image of the mighty
trumpet blast have been incorporated into this verse (see above on Mt.Â€24:30–31).
169
Beare, The Gospel According to Matthew, 492 notices that the theme of the coming of the
Son of Man “has been ringing.â•›.â•›.throughout these closing chapters,” like lightning (24:27),
on clouds (24:30), at an unknown time (24:36–42), unforeseen like a thief (24:43), as a day
of reckoning (24:45–51), and that it may be delayed (24:48, 25:5, 19).
CO25117.indb 204 11/03/2011 11:58

Signiï¬†cantly, Matthew also adds the possessive pronoun au)tou= to the mention
of the angels. Of the four times Matthew speaks of the angels in the presence of
the Son of Man, he adds the possessive pronoun in three of them (Mt.Â€24:31//
MkÂ€13:27,Â€Mt.Â€16:27//MkÂ€8:38//Lk.Â€9:26, and Mt.Â€13:41; at MtÂ€25:31 the possessive
pronoun does not appear, although the phrase met’ au0tou= does). The parallel synoptic
passages do not include the possessive pronoun.170 The addition of the possessive
pronoun is signiï¬†cant for Matthew’s conception of the scene, for it exalts the power
of the Son of Man by suggesting that the Son of Man has authority over the angels:
they are “his” angels. In Mark and Luke, on the other hand, the Son of Man is a
heavenly ï¬†gure alongside the angels, and not explicitly over the angels, since no
possessive pronoun is used. Tödt suggests that Matthew “intensiï¬†es the transcendent
sovereignty and power of the Son of Man” by characterizing the angels as “his.”171
The entourage of angels in Matthew is well understood to be the Son of Man’s.
With the setting of “glory”/do&ch| in Mt. 25:31,172 Matthew again uses the
possessive pronoun and refers to the Son of Man “in his glory”/e0n th|= do&ch| au)tou=
(where au)tou= refers to the Son of Man). In Mt.Â€24:30//MkÂ€13:26, however, Matthew
does not include the possessive pronoun with reference to “glory”/do&ca. The only
editing of Mark in this phrase is to move the adjective pollh=j to a position after
do&ch| rather than after duna&mewj, where it appears in Mark. Luke does the same as
Matthew, perhaps for stylistic reasons.
Cf. Mt 16:27. These same four themes, the Son of Man, “coming,” “glory,” and
“angels,” are also found in Mt.Â€16:27. This verse bears some striking resemblances
to MkÂ€8:38//Lk.Â€9:26, but it is evident that Matthew has edited it signiï¬†cantly, for the
juridical role of the Son of Man is made explicit. In MkÂ€8:38//Lk. 9:26 parallelism
on shame is preserved: the one who is ashamed of the Son of Man on earth will be
treated with shame in heaven. In Mt.Â€16:27, however, the ï¬†rst part of the parallelism,
“whoever is ashamed of me and my words,” (Lk.Â€9:26a, cf. MkÂ€8:38a) is omitted,
and the words about the Son of Man coming in glory with the angels are put into
an explicit judicial setting by adding the quotation of PsÂ€62:13, “and he will repay
to each according to their deeds.”173 As compared to Mark and Luke, Matthew has
elevated the status of the Son of Man from witness to judge.174 Further, Matthew
170
At MkÂ€13:27, there are some witnesses for the inclusion of the possessive pronoun, but they
probably have been inï¬‡uenced by Mt.Â€24:31.
171
Tödt, Son of Man, 94. Filson, Matthew, 267, agrees, noting that the angels “mark his (the
Son of Man’s) unique role.” Beare, The Gospel According to Matthew, 493, also comments
that whereas previously the angels were sent, here they simply accompany the Son of Man
as a “heavenly escort of honour.”
172
Davies and Allison, Matthew, III.420.
173
Tödt, Son of Man, 85, 86; cf. Prov.Â€24:12, Eccl.Â€32:24, 1Â€EnochÂ€45:3, 46
174
Tödt, Son of Man, 89–90, this elevation is clearly evident when MtÂ€10:32 is compared with
Lk.Â€12:8, where Matthew has replaced “Son of Man” with “I,” which Tödt believes is due
to Matthew’s desire not to portray Jesus in a role of advocate but rather in a role of eschato-
logical judge.
CO25117.indb 205 11/03/2011 11:58

has again attached the possessive pronoun to the angels, where Mark and Luke refer
simply to the “holy angels.”175 As noted above, this also elevates the status of the Son
of Man to a position of authority over, rather than equivalence to, the angels.
Cf. MtÂ€13:41. In the Interpretation of the Parable of the Weeds (Mt.Â€13:41), which is
unique to Matthew, two themes are present. The Son of Man and “his angels” (with the
signiï¬†cant presence of the possessive pronoun noted above) are explicitly connected
with details in the parable. The themes of glory and judgment are present implicitly in
the interpretation, since the setting seems to be a heavenly courtroom, and the outcome
of the angels’ action includes ï¬†re, weeping and gnashing of teeth, which are usual
for the condemned. Gundry and Ingo Broer note a signiï¬†cant difference between the
picture of the Son of Man in Mt.Â€25:31 and Mt.Â€13:41. In Mt.Â€25:31, the Son of Man
actively separates, while in Mt.Â€13:41, 49, 24:31 the angels are sent out to gather and
separate.176 This again indicates Matthew’s intensiï¬†cation and elevation of the ï¬†gure of
the Son of Man. Matthew gives explicit expression to the authority of the Son of Man.
Cf. Mt. 19:28. The ï¬†fth theme of Mt. 25:31, qro&nou do&chj au0tou=, is paralleled
only at Mt.Â€19:28 in the synoptics (see above on Mt.Â€19:28). The closest parallel to
Mt.Â€19:28 is Lk.Â€22:30, which refers only to the idea of the Twelve sitting on thrones
judging Israel, for Luke has omitted the idea of the Son of Man sitting on his glorious
throne. Aside from the Twelve sitting on thrones, God’s throne is referred to at
Mt.Â€5:34, 23:22 and the throne of David in Lk.Â€1:32. Thus Matthew is unique in the
Gospels in picturing the Son of Man on a throne.177
It is apparent, then, that Matthew, even in the introduction to this climactic
parable, where the scene is set for the judicial activity, has shaped the concept of the
Son of Man in the direction of his role as a judge. Using themes that have occurred
previously in the Gospel, he brings these ï¬†ve themes, the Son of Man, “coming,” the
attribute of glory, the presence of angels, and the session of the Son of Man upon his
glorious throne, together into a coherent picture of the Son of Man as the eschato-
logical judge.
175
At Mt.Â€16:27, Matthew’s phrase, “his angels,” it must be recognized, is ambiguous. The
antecedent of the possessive pronoun may be “the Son of Man” or “his father,” to whom
the glory is attributed. But if that were the case, then the awkward circumstance would
exist where two instances of au)tou= occur in close proximity and refer to two different
antecedents. The au)tou= of tou= patro&j would refer to the Son of Man, while the au)tou= of
tw~n a)gge/lwn would refer to tou= patro/j. It is better to think of both instances of au)tou=
as referring to the Son of Man, so that here also the angels are under the direct authority of
the Son of Man, as at Mt.Â€25:31, and Mt.Â€24:30–31.
176
Gundry, Matthew, 512; Ingo Broer, “Das Gericht des MS über die Völker Auslegung von
Mt.Â€25, 31–46” in Bibel und Leben 11 (1970), 278; Lambrecht, Out of the Treasure, 269.
177
Jeremias, The Parables of Jesus, 206; Revelation has a clear reference to the “one like a Son
of Man” (Rev.Â€1:13) being given a place on God’s throne (Rev.Â€3:21) amongst the numerous
references to the throne of God. Schweizer, Matthew, 475, also notes Matthew’s uniqueness
in this regard. See exegesis of Mt.Â€19:28 above and Davies and Allison, Matthew, III.420–21.
CO25117.indb 206 11/03/2011 11:58

Mt. 25:32–33: Four Significant Themes

In Mt. 25:32–33 four signiï¬†cant themes for this study emerge.
pa&nta ta_ e1qnh. This phrase also appears at Mt.Â€24:9, 14, and 28:19, for a total of
four times. These occurrences refer to all humanity, and it is likely that each reference
is inclusive of the Jews either as perpetrators of persecution (24:9, cf. 10:22) or
as people worthy of receiving the Good News (24:14, 28:19). The noun, ta_ e1qnh
without pa&nta, appears in the plural eight times, three of which are in quotations
from Isaiah, which Matthew alone uses (4:15, 12:18, 12:21).178 From the context of
each of the eight passages, it is likely the noun refers only to Gentiles. Three times
the noun appears in the singular (21:43, and twice in 24:7), referring to an individual,
unspeciï¬†ed nation, which could be Jewish or non-Jewish or even a new creation of
all peoples, both Jew and Gentile.179 Here in 25:32 pa&nta ta_ e1qnh is interpreted
basically in three ways by commentators.180
a) It is interpreted as Gentiles only, based on the eleven uses of the noun without
pa&nta.181 It is argued that since the noun refers to Gentiles in those cases it also
must mean the same when pa&nta is added. The expansion to “all Gentiles” merely
is explicitly stating that there will be no exceptions in this judgment. In effect this
makes the use of pa&nta virtually meaningless. As noted above, however, most of
the plural uses of the noun are from other sources, Isaiah, Q, or Mark, and only two
are unique to Matthew. Further, the singular uses of the noun by no means refer to
Gentiles only, but could include Jews. Particularly in MtÂ€21:43 the noun seems more
likely to refer to Jews since it is their leaders who are being criticized in that passage.
Therefore, Harrington’s narrow interpretation of the parable is unsatisfactory.
b) According to Gray, about half the scholars interpret pa&nta ta_ e1qnh as all
humanity.182 They recognize that ta_ e1qnh in Matthew refers for the most part to
178
The other ï¬†ve times are 6:32 (paralleled in Lk.Â€12:30), 10:5, 18 (both in Matthew alone, as
part of the mission charge to the disciples), 20:19, 25 (paralleled in MkÂ€10:33//Lk.Â€18:32 and
MkÂ€10:42//Lk.Â€22:25).
179
Mt.Â€21:43 is a part of Matthew’s explanation of the Parable of the Wicked Tenants (21:33–
41), and so the nation referred to here is not necessarily a non-Jewish one. Since the current
leadership of Israel is being criticized in the explanation, it is more likely that the Jewish
nation is to be understood as the nation which should bear fruits beï¬†tting the kingdom or that
it will be a new nation, composed of both Jew and Gentile.
180
Davies and Allison, Matthew, III.422–23, discern six options.
181
Harrington, Matthew, 355. Harrington also believes that Matthew envisioned two judgments,
one for the Jews and one for the Gentiles, to which 25:31–46 refers, but as noted above his
evidence is unconvincing. Cf. Douglas R. A. Hare, Matthew (Louisville: John Knox Press,
1993), 288–91.
182
Gray, The Least of My Brothers, 356–57; cf. also Filson, Matthew, 266; Tödt, Son of
Man, 76; Gundry, Matthew, 511; Meier, “Nations or Gentiles in Matthew 28:19,” 94–102,
Meier, Vision of Matthew, 177, Meier, Matthew, 303; Beare, The Gospel of Matthew, 493;
Lambrecht, Out of the Treasure, 275–76; Davies and Allison, Matthew, III.422, out of the
six options they present, prefer to understand “all nations” as all humanity, and list many
commentators, ancient, medieval and modern, as agreeing.
CO25117.indb 207 11/03/2011 11:58

Gentiles, but that the addition of pa&nta includes the Jews, so that all humanity
is meant. Those who see a prior tradition that has been redacted by Matthew see
pa&nta ta_ e1qnh as having a universal sense in the tradition, while in the Matthean
redaction it is narrowed to the Gentiles.183 The widest interpretation of the text,
however, is the plain sense of the text, both in the original tradition and in the
Matthean redaction. Arguing for a narrower interpretation is splitting hairs, and
Matthew can be expected to have been more explicit.
c) Stanton narrows the interpretation even further. He agrees that pa&nta ta_ e1qnh
refers to both Jews and Gentiles, but he excludes Christians from the judgment,
since e1qnh is never used to refer to Christians in Matthew.184 But as noted above,
MtÂ€21:43 refers to a nation that produces fruits beï¬†tting the kingdom. This may
be the Jewish nation, since it is the Jewish leadership that is being criticized, but
the kind of nation is not speciï¬†ed, and so it could include Christians. Stanton’s
interpretation, then, is also a special reading of the text that is unwarranted.
Both positions a) and c), that narrow the interpretation plead for a special reading
of the words, and Matthew can be expected to have been more explicit if he meant a)
or c). In a) pa/nta is rendered virtually meaningless, and in c) excluding the Christians
from judgment may be comforting for Christians, but then who are the righteous who
are rewarded? Harrington suggests that Matthew here is acknowledging the existence
of non-Jews who were also non-Christians, and explaining that they can be saved by
acts of mercy towards Christians, even though they themselves are not Christians.185
Harrington acknowledges that the salvation of the Gentiles or non-believers is a
20th-century concern, but that does not mean it was a problem Matthew encountered
or attempted to resolve.186 Thus the interpretation of pa&nta ta_ e1qnh as referring to
all people, including both Jews and Christians, is most plausible.187 As Meier points
out, “the cleavage between good and bad thus goes through the whole of humanity;
it does not run neatly between the church and unbelievers.”188
Sunaxqh&sontai. This verb is used in parables and in descriptions of gathering
events, such as gathering ï¬†sh (Mt.Â€ 13:30, 47) and gathering in the harvest (e.g.
Mt.Â€3:12, 6:26)189, or people gathering together (Mt.Â€13:2, 18:20, 26:3, 57, 27:17, 27,
62). It is also used in parables that have an eschatological perspective and in apoca-
lyptic passages in which sinners and righteous are gathered from afar (Mt.Â€22:1–14,
183
See Lambrecht’s summary in Out of the Treasure, 272–3. See also Donahue’s helpful
argument in “The ‘Parable’ of the Sheep and the Goats,” 14–16, in which he draws in Lukan
and Pauline support for evangelism to all nations, not just the “Gentiles.” He also sees a
universalist thrust in Mt.Â€13:38, 16:27, 24:9–14, 30, and 28:16–20.
184
Stanton, A Gospel for a New People, 212–14.
185
Harrington, Matthew, 359–60.
186
Donahue, “The ‘Parable’ of the Sheep and the Goats,” 14.
187
Catchpole, “A Re-appraisal of Matthew XXV.31–46,” 389, arrives at this conclusion based
on the variety of occurrences of e[qnoi.
188
Meier, The Vision of Matthew, 177.
189
Cf. Jer.Â€40:10, 12, Mic.Â€4:12.
CO25117.indb 208 11/03/2011 11:58

25:14–30).190 Here in Mt.Â€25:32 the term is used again in an eschatological, judicial

setting.
Kai\ a)fori/sei au)tou_j a)p’ a)llh/lwn. In this pericope the Son of Man carries out the
separation of judgment from one another, in contrast to Mt.Â€13:41–43, 49–50, where it
is carried out by the angels.191 As noted above, Matthew’s perspective here enhances
and elevates the status of the Son of Man in Matthew’s depiction.
79O poimh\n. The comparison in Mt.Â€ 25:33–34 of the shepherd separating his ï¬‡ock
to the right and to the left is illustrative of the ï¬†nal judgment. The right is the place
of honor, and the left, the place of dishonor.192 Schweizer suggests that the model
for this comparison may be Ezek.Â€34:17–30, where the prince separates the weak
and strong sheep. The point of Ezekiel’s parable is that incompetent shepherds will
be replaced.193 But as Schweizer points out, two major differences exist between
Matthew’s and Ezekiel’s parables. Matthew speaks of the king, where Ezekiel speaks
of the prince. More importantly the purposes of the parables are different. In Ezekiel
incompetent shepherds are to be replaced, while for Matthew, the shepherd is the
unassailable authority whose responsibility is to separate the ï¬‡ock. For Ezekiel, the
parable is judgment upon the leaders of the nation, while for Matthew, the judgment
is the eschatological, divine judgment of all the people.
The shepherd image is used again at Ezek.Â€34:12. The prophet uses the
comparison of God, “As shepherds seek out their ï¬‡ocks when they are amongst their
scattered ï¬‡ocks, so I will seek out my sheep.” But here the image is of the shepherd
gathering in the scattered ï¬‡ock. It is an image of salvation and renewal, not of passing
out judgment. Similarly at Ezek.Â€34:17, the image of God judging between sheep and
sheep, rams and goats is within the context of the image being used to denounce the
leadership, not to describe a general judgment upon the people.
Thus it is unlikely that Ezekiel’s parable was a model for Matthew, since the
intent and thrust of the parables in each are so fundamentally different. While there
is an extensive use of this imagery in Ezek.Â€34, there are no close parallels with
Mt.Â€25:31–46. It is more likely that the shepherd and ï¬‡ock imagery in Matthew is
drawn from common observations of pastoral practice.194
190
Cf. a similar concept with the use of Cbq in Pss.Â€102:22, 106:47, 107:3, 147:2, Isa.Â€43:5, 9,
56:8, 66:18, Jer.Â€31:8, 10, 32:37, Ezek.Â€11:17, 20:34, 41, 28:25, Hos.Â€1:11, Mic.Â€2:12, 4:6,
12, Zeph.Â€3:19.
191
Gundry, Matthew, 512; Broer, “Das Gerecht des MS,” 278.
192
Filson, Matthew, 267. See also J. M. Court, “Right and Left: The Implications for
Mt.Â€25.31â•‚46,” NTS 31 (1985), 223–33, who sees the “least” as Christian missionaries, and
that the possibility of persecution gives rise to the stark dichotomy between the righteous
and the condemned, with no possibility of crossover.
193
194
Beare, The Gospel According to Matthew, 493–94; Beare also notes the similarity in Plato,
Republic X.614C, which describes souls bound for the Elysian Fields taking the road to the
right, while those bound for Tartarus go to the left. Harrington, Matthew, 356, also notes
CO25117.indb 209 11/03/2011 11:58

Mt. 25:34: Four Significant Themes

In Mt:Â€25:34 four details further develop Matthew’s portrait of the Son of Man.
79O basileu_j. Here for the ï¬†rst time in this parable, the judge is called the king,
to/te e0rei= o( basileu_j, making the Son of Man’s royal role explicit. The switch in
terminology from “Son of Man” to “king” is usually taken as evidence for a redac-
tional seam being present here. But as shown above, the integrity of the pericope
argues against any seam, so that the redactional evidence supports Matthean editorial
activity rather than the splicing together of two traditions. Jesus, identiï¬†ed in
Matthew’s Gospel as the Son of Man, is here portrayed as king, pronouncing judgment,
and this “shows the Father’s association with him in ruling the kingdom.”195 The king
is not identiï¬†ed with God, since the king calls God “my Father,”196 but the motif of
kingship continues a motif begun in infancy, when the Christ child was sought as the
king of the Jews (Mt.Â€1:1, 20, 2:2, 13–14). Christ’s kingship is now brought to full
glory as he is portrayed as the eschatological judge.197
The Son of Man’s stature as “king” has already been hinted at in the Gospel.
A kingdom was ascribed to the Son of Man in Mt.Â€13:41 (no synoptic parallels), in
which the angels of the Son of Man are said to be sent to gather up and take out all
causes of evil from his kingdom. The kingdom is speciï¬†cally ascribed to the Son
of Man. Further in Mt.Â€16:28 some of those present are promised that they will not
taste death until they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom.198 Since Matthew
has signiï¬†cantly redacted the verse, when it is compared to the source text in
MkÂ€8:38–9:1//Lk.Â€9:26–27, it can be seen as having advanced the concept of the Son
of Man in Matthew to include the judicial role. Here also, the kingdom is ascribed
speciï¬†cally to the Son of Man. Finally, also worthy of consideration is Mt.Â€ 20:21,
in which Jesus is addressed by the mother of the sons of Zebedee. She ascribes to
him a kingdom, by asking that her sons may have a place of honor in it. Matthew
has speciï¬†ed that it is a “kingdom” here, for in the source text, MkÂ€10:37, Zebedee’s
wife asks for a place for her sons in regard to Jesus’ future glory, e0n th=| do&ch| sou.199
the common shepherding practice; cf. also Schweizer, Matthew, 476. Davies and Allison,
Matthew, III.423–24, note the commercial value of sheep over goats, but that the goats
probably were not a pre-Christian symbol of evil. That they symbolize the wicked in this
passage reiterates the surprises to be encountered at the final judgment.
195
Gundry, Matthew, 512. Catchpole, ”A Re-appraisal of Matthew XXV.31–46,” makes
the important observation that kingship necessarily involves judging, and therefore the
enthronement and judging mentioned earlier likewise imply the kingly status of the judge.
196
197
Harrington, Matthew, 356. Schweizer, Matthew, 475, points out that God is called “king”
in eschatological contexts in the Old Testament, in passages such as Isa.Â€24:23, 33:22,
Zeph.Â€3:15, Obad.Â€2, ZechÂ€14:16–17, cf. Pss.Â€47, 96, 96–97, 99. Donahue, “The ‘Parable’ of
the Sheep and the Goats,” 20–22, points out that of the synoptics Matthew makes the most
of Jesus’ kingship.
198
See the section above on Mt.Â€16:28.
199
Even though the terminology of the “Son of Man” is not present in Mt.Â€20:21, Matthew has
deï¬†nitely identiï¬†ed Jesus and the Son of Man, so that the passage is pertinent.
CO25117.indb 210 11/03/2011 11:58

But Matthew portrays her asking for a place for her sons in his kingdom, e0n th=|
basilei/a| sou. So in Mt.Â€20:21 also, Matthew has elevated the role of Jesus to being
the ruler of a kingdom. These three passages, then, Mt.Â€13:41, 16:28, and 20:21, have
prepared the reader for the Son of Man being identiï¬†ed as a “king” in this description
of the Last Judgment.
Oi9 eu)loghme/noi. The king pronounces the blessing for those on the right and
invites them in, deu~te oi9 eu)loghme/noi tou= patro&j mou.200 The passive participle
of eu)loge/w is also used at Jesus’ triumphal entry (Mt.Â€21:9//MkÂ€11:10//Lk.Â€12:13)
quoting PsÂ€118:26, and the same verse is quoted again in the Lament over Jerusalem
(Mt.Â€23:39//Lk.Â€13:35). A similar invitation, in which the one addressed is called
blessed, is issued by Rebekah to Abraham’s servant, “Come, O blessed of the Lord!”
hwhy Kwrb )wb (Gen.Â€24:31). When Abimelech settles a quarrel with Isaac, he also
calls Isaac one blessed of the Lord, hwhy Kwrb ht( ht) (Gen.Â€26:29). The phrase
appears to be fairly rare in Scripture, but is completely appropriate in this context.
Klhronomh&sate. Since the kingdom is the destiny of the righteous, they are invited
to inherit it, klhronomh&sate th\n h9toimasme/nhn u9mi=n basilei/an.201 Matthew
envisages the righteous as shining in the kingdom of their father (Mt.Â€13:43). He
also proclaims that it is the meek who are to inherit the earth (Mt.Â€5:5), and the
faithful disciple, who follows at the expense of family, who will inherit eternal life
(Mt.Â€19:29). Here it is the righteous who are invited into the kingdom prepared for
them, while the accursed are to be consigned to a ï¬†ery torment.
1Â€EnochÂ€62 also displays the pattern of the wicked being cursed and the righteous
being blessed. The righteous will rejoice when the judgment takes place and they will
enjoy life in the presence of the Son of Man (1Â€EnochÂ€62:13–16, cf. 1Â€EnochÂ€58). In
Par. En. the idea of inheriting is not explicit, but the blessed life in the presence of
the Son of Man is deï¬†nitely destined. Further, while his domain may not be termed
a kingdom that has been prepared, the judge in Par. En. does have royal qualities,
and his existence has been hidden since the creation (1Â€EnochÂ€48:3). Thus the
royal, everlasting and blessed qualities are found to be shared by Par. En. and in
Mt.Â€25:31–46.
70Apo_ katabolh=j ko&smou. The kingdom has been prepared for the righteous since
the beginning of time, a)po_ katabolh=j ko&smou. This promise indicates to those who
are suffering that the promised kingdom is a present reality, not simply an uncertain
hope.202 It underlines the certainty of the promise, and is typically Jewish.203 Wisdom
200
deu~te and patro&j are favorite Matthean terms; Gundry, Matthew, 512.
201
klhronomh&sate and h(toimasme/non are favorite Matthean terms, according to Gundry,
Matthew, 512. h(toimasme/non echoes Mt.Â€20:23, in which Jesus says that the seats at his
right and at his left are promised to those for whom they have been prepared.
202
203
Schweizer, Matthew, 477; see also Davies and Allison, Matthew, III.425.
CO25117.indb 211 11/03/2011 11:58

also is claimed to have been created at the beginning of the world (Prov. 8:22–31),
and such a beginning was also attributed to the Torah (m. )Abot 5:6).204
The phrase a)po_ katabolh=j ko&smou is found elsewhere only at Mt.Â€13:35, where
it is in a quotation from Ps 78:2. Its occurrence here may also be a sign that this
pericope rests on a prior tradition, since the phrase appears nowhere else, except in
that quotation.
A similar idea does occur in other apocalyptic settings, however. It occurs in
RevÂ€13:8 and 17:8, where it is said that the names of the righteous have been written
in the Book of Life since the foundation of the world. A similar phrase is found in
1Â€EnochÂ€69:16, where it is claimed that “the heavens were suspended before the world
was created,” and again that waters come from springs in the mountains “from the
creation of the world unto eternity” (1Â€EnochÂ€69:17). In an apocalyptic framework,
the phrase indicates certainty and reliability in the face of overwhelming uncertainty.
Mt 25:41, 46: Five Significant Themes

In Mt. 25:41, 46 ï¬†ve themes indicate the power and authority exercised by Matthew’s
Son of Man.
Kathrame/noi. As a vocative plural, kathrame/noi/accursed is a hapax legomenon

in the New Testament, although the concept does occur. Its appearance in Matthew’s
Gospel in this location supports the contention that Matthew here has redacted a
prior tradition.205 In the New Testament, the concept occurs infrequently, but both
the verbal and the noun forms appear. The verb, katara&omai, is used by Peter to
describe the words Jesus uttered against the ï¬†g tree (MkÂ€11:21) and by Jesus and Paul
to urge blessing rather than cursing upon one’s enemies (Lk.Â€6:28, Rom.Â€12:14). The
Letter of James, however, acknowledges that the untamable tongue does sometimes
curse (Jas. 3:9–10). The noun, kata&ra (and cognates), is used by Paul to proclaim
that Christ has freed humanity from the curse of the law (Gal.Â€3:10–13) while the
author of the Letter to the Hebrews uses it in a metaphor comparing those who do
not produce expected fruits with ground that produces weeds and thistles and is in
danger of coming under a curse (Heb.Â€6:8). In the Hebrew Scriptures, the concept
is more frequent. For example, in DeuteronomyÂ€27–30, the people are warned of
being cursed if they do not obey the law, and speciï¬†c acts are explicitly cursed
(Deut.Â€27:15–26). They are also warned that they will be cursed by being overrun
by enemies, who will consume all their goods, with the result that they will be left
desolate (Deut.Â€28:15–46, 47–68). Included amongst the many horrors they will suffer
is serving their conquering enemies “in hunger and thirst, in nakedness and lack of
everything” (Deut.Â€28:48). Jeremiah resumes the Deuteronomist’s warning and
warns Jerusalem that it will be made desolate and it will become an object of cursing
(Jer.Â€24:9, 25:18, 26:6, 42:18, 44:22). The concept of being cursed clearly has Biblical
204
205
See the notes above in the introductory material to this pericope.
CO25117.indb 212 11/03/2011 11:58

precedent, and being cursed is even linked with hunger, thirst and nakedness, as it is
in Mt.Â€25:41–46. But the nature of the relationship is different. In the Deuteronomic
passages mentioned, the state of being cursed is a consequence of not obeying Torah,
and hunger, thirst, nakedness, desolation, being conquered and humiliated are the
means by which the curse is effected. In Matthew, by way of contrast, the state of
being cursed is a consequence of not showing mercy and kindness to those who are
hungry, thirsty or naked, and torment in eternal ï¬†re is the means by which the curse
is effected. Because the relationship between being cursed and being hungry, thirsty
and naked is not at all similar, Deuteronomy cannot be seen as having inï¬‡uenced the
motif of being cursed in Matthew. All that can be said is that being cursed does have
Biblical precedent.
Gundry notes that those who are addressed as “accursed” in Mt.Â€25:41 stand in
sharp contrast to those who are called “blessed” in verseÂ€34.206 In a similar way, the
righteous and elect in Par. En. stand in sharp contrast to the kings and mighty ones
who are under condemnation. The condemned will be bound, shamed and punished,
while the blessed will enjoy a sumptuous life in the presence of the Son of Man and
the Lord of Spirits for eternity (1Â€EnochÂ€62:9–16). Beare notes that the curse is by
no means arbitrary, for they have brought doom upon themselves by their failure to
respond to those in need.207 Similarly in Par. En., the condemned kings and mighty
ones, even while they plead for mercy, acknowledge that they have brought their
doom upon themselves (1Â€EnochÂ€63:8). They had not gloriï¬†ed the Name of the Lord
of Spirits, nor had they acknowledged the Lord’s authority (1Â€EnochÂ€63:7). They had
also persecuted the faithful and shed their blood (1Â€EnochÂ€46:8, 47:2). Gundry further
notes that the confession by the condemned of calling the judge “Lord” (Mt.Â€25:44)
does not reï¬‡ect any allegiance in their previous lives.208 It is a ï¬†nal but ineffective and
desperate appeal, enhanced with the hollow use of a term of respect. A similar plea
for mercy is uttered by the kings and mighty ones at their condemnation, when they
realize, “We have now learned that we should glorify and bless the Lord of kings and
him who rules over all kings” (1Â€EnochÂ€63:4). Their respectful plea is hollow, just as
the plea of the accursed in Mt.Â€25:44 is devoid of respect. These details, then, show
that the similarities are greater between Mt.Â€25:31–46 and Par. En. than between Mt.
25:31–46 and Deuteronomy and Jeremiah.
To_ pu~r to\ ai0w&nion. This is probably a concept that derived ultimately from Persian
and Greek inï¬‡uence.209 Fire is frequently envisaged as punishment in Matthew (3:12,
206
207
208
209
Beare, The Gospel According to Matthew, 495 notes that the imagery of ï¬†re is frequently
used by Matthew of “the future punishment for sin,” although “it has no background in
ancient Hebrew thought.” Its usage may have resulted from Iranian inï¬‡uence; by the ï¬†rst
century bce the valley of Hinnom typiï¬†ed “a place of ï¬†ery torment.” Punishment by ï¬†re also
occurs frequently in other judgment narrations as noted in the concluding chapter below.
CO25117.indb 213 11/03/2011 11:58

5:22, 18:8, 9). In Par. En., eternal ï¬†re is also a part of the punishment in store for the
condemned. The kings and mighty ones will be cast into a deep valley with burning
ï¬†re (1Â€EnochÂ€54:1–2, 6). They also acknowledge that their ill-gotten gains would not
prevent them “from going down to the grave (or) from the ï¬‡ames of the pit of Sheol”
(1Â€EnochÂ€63:10). This detail also indicates a similarity with the view of Par. En.
79Htoimasme/non tw|~ diabo&lw|. The eternal ï¬†re, according to this pericope, is

prepared for the Devil and his angels, to_ h(toimasme/non tw|~ diabo&lw| kai\ toi=j
a)gge/loij au)tou~. While the righteous go to the kingdom that has been prepared for
them, the accursed depart for the punishment prepared not for them, but for the Devil
and his angels.210 A similar idea is found in RevelationÂ€20, where the Devil is cast
into a lake of ï¬†re (20:10), and where even death, Hades and those whose names are
not written in the Book of Life are thrown into that lake of ï¬†re (Rev.Â€20:14–15). As
just noted in Par. En., the kings and potentates are to be cast into a deep valley of ï¬†re
in 1Â€EnochÂ€54:1–2, but that deep valley of ï¬†re and eternal punishment were prepared
for Azazel, one of the leading fallen watchers, and his host (1Â€EnochÂ€54:3–5). Again,
this detail, of the one for whom the eternal ï¬†re has been prepared, bears a striking
resemblance to the vision in Par. En.
Ei0j ko&lasin ai0w&nion. The condemned are delivered into eternal punishment, ei0j
ko&lasin ai0w&nion. The term ko&lasin is used only at 1Â€JohnÂ€4:18 and Mt.Â€25:46 in
the New Testament. Since the term appears nowhere else in Matthew, it can be seen
as support for the hypothesis that Matthew has redacted a prior tradition. The eternity
of the punishment again is similar to the eternal punishment awaiting the kings and
mighty ones in Par. En. There is to be no one to raise them up again (1Â€EnochÂ€48:10),
and their being bound and destroyed will in effect be eternal (1Â€EnochÂ€53:5, 54:5–6).211
Oi9 di/kaioi. While the king calls the ones on his right, “blessed of my father,” oi9
eu)loghme/noi tou= patro&j mou, the narrator of the parable calls them “righteous,” oi9
di/kaioi (Mt.Â€25:37, 46). The righteous are the ones with whom the protagonist of the
parable identiï¬†es, for they are also called “the least of these my brethren, tou&twn
tw~n a)delfw~n tw~n e0laxi/stwn, and he judges in their favor based on the treatment
they have received. The followers of the Son of Man are also called “righteous,”
oi9 di/kaioi in the Interpretation of the Parable of the Weeds (Mt.Â€13:36–43). The
righteous are promised that they will shine like the sun in the kingdom of their Father
(Mt.Â€13:43; cf. Mt.Â€13:49). In the wider context of Matthew’s Gospel, in Jesus’
pronouncements, the term is used both pejoratively and positively. Jesus says he did
not come to call the righteous, but sinners (Mt.Â€9:13//MkÂ€2:17), while in comments
about receiving him (Mt.Â€10:40; cf. Mt.Â€18:5//MkÂ€9:37//Lk.Â€9:48), he adds that those
who receive a righteous person because he/she is righteous will receive a righteous
210
211
Davies and Allison, Matthew, III.432, note the absence of any delight in the punishment of
others that is found in other apocalyptic works.
CO25117.indb 214 11/03/2011 11:58

person’s reward (Mt.Â€10:41). He criticizes the religious leaders for merely appearing
to be righteous (Mt.Â€23:28), but he also criticizes them for spilling righteous blood
(Mt.Â€23:35). Interestingly, in the two parabolic passages describing the Son of Man
and judgment, the followers of the Son of Man are called righteous (Mt.Â€13:43, 25:37,
46), otherwise Jesus’ followers are not called righteous. Jesus himself, however, seeks
to fulï¬†l righteousness in seeking baptism (Mt.Â€3:15) and blesses those who hunger
and thirst after righteousness as well as those who are persecuted for righteousness’
sake (Mt.Â€5:6, 10). This indicates that an important attribute of Jesus’ followers
will be their righteous endeavors. In the Psalms, Proverbs and prophetic writings,
righteousness is an important attribute of God as well as those who seek to do God’s
will. In Par. En. (passim), the ones with whom the Son of Man identiï¬†es are called
“righteous,” “holy” and “elect/chosen.”
4.7.3â•‡ Conclusion to the Exegesis of Matthew 25:31–46
Redactional and Form-critical Results

Gray argues for the most cautious approach, pointing out that since no synoptic
parallels exist, the only certain conclusion is that the pericope is Matthew’s composi-
tion.212 Other scholars argue that the pericope is Matthew’s creation, but that Matthew
has incorporated a prior tradition, and that it coheres well with themes expressed in
other passages.213 Others see the pericope as a prior tradition that Matthew has heavily
redacted.214 Because a redactional seam between Matthew’s composition and the prior
tradition cannot be precisely discerned, the best view is that the pericope is a prior
tradition that Matthew has extensively edited. In this case, verse 31 is to be understood
as the original introductory verse to the pericope, but redacted by Matthew to include the
ï¬†gure of the “Son of Man.” The pericope is also to be understood and interpreted as a
parable, even though no speciï¬†c term of comparison is present, and it is best understood
as coming from an originally Jewish tradition, rather than arising out of a speciï¬†cally
and exclusively Christian context. With the use of this parable Matthew has dramatically
conï¬†rmed the portrayal of the Son of Man as being an eschatological judge.
Characteristics of the Son of Man

Mt.Â€25:31–46 draws together some important themes and characteristics of Matthew’s
portrayal of the Son of Man. Verse 31 brings together in one place ï¬†ve important themes
that do not appear together in one pericope in any other Matthean or Synoptic passage:
the term “Son of Man,” the motion of “coming,” the attribute of “glory,” his being
accompanied by “his angels,” and his being seated upon the “throne of his glory.” The
“coming,” the “glory,” and the “angels” have already been connected with a judicial
212
Gray, The Least of My Brothers, 351–52, 355.
213
E.g. Gundry, Matthew, 515.
214
E.g. Bultmann, The History of the Synoptic Tradition, 124.
CO25117.indb 215 11/03/2011 11:58

Son of Man in 16:27, where it is said that the Son of Man will repay humanity for
their deeds, quoting Ps.Â€62:13. That judgment is being portrayed here in this parable in
Mt.Â€25:31–46. With the addition of the possessive pronoun to the angels, Matthew has
elevated the status of the Son of Man from equivalence to the angels to authority over
them. In this context it is also noted that the Devil has authority over angels, illustrating
the apocalyptic dualism of the parable. Again, the presence of the angels conï¬†rms the
juridical setting, since the angels are also the ones to carry out the judgment in the
Interpretation of the Parable of the Weeds (Mt.Â€13:37–43) by casting the wicked out into
torment where there is weeping and gnashing of teeth. Matthew’s unique contribution
to the ï¬†gure of the Son of Man, however, is to portray him as sitting upon his glorious
throne, another judicial attribute, which also elevates him to the level of the deity.
Verses 32–33 contain more themes that afï¬†rm the judicial role of the Son of Man.
It is best to interpret “all nations” that are gathered before him in its universal sense,
since the evidence for Matthew’s presuming two judgments, one for the Jews and one
for Gentiles, is scanty and unconvincing. The verbs sunaxqh&sontai and a)fori/sei
also carry bold judicial connotations, and of course the shepherd comparison, drawn
from observed life, illustrates eschatological judgment.
In verse 34, the judicial ï¬†gure is called o9 basileu_j, bringing the royal dimension
to the fore, with its judicial overtones. First the righteous are invited into the blessings
prepared for them, and then (vsÂ€41–46) the condemned are consigned to the fate
prepared for the Devil and his angels since the creation.215 In each case, it is an eternal
fate to which the judged are being consigned.
These distinctive characteristics of the Son of Man and the actions attributed to
him clearly deï¬†ne the Son of Man as the eschatological judge in Matthew’s view.
Similarities between Mt. 25:31–46 and Par. En.

The similarities between Mt. 25:31–46 and Par. En. are also striking.216
Sitting on the Throne of his Glory. The image of the Son of Man sitting in judgment on
the throne of his glory is common to both works. In 1Â€EnochÂ€69:27, 29, the Son of Man
is depicted as sitting on the throne of his glory, with the authority to judge, which will
result in the destruction of sinners. In 1Â€EnochÂ€61:8 the Lord of Spirits placed the Elect
One, which is one of the designations for the Son of Man, on the throne of glory in order
to judge all the works of those above, who bless and praise the Lord of Spirits. The Elect
One also sits on the throne of his glory in judgment upon the kings and mighty ones of the
earth (1Â€EnochÂ€62:1–2), who shall be pained and terriï¬†ed to see him (1Â€EnochÂ€62:5, cf.
215
Davies and Allison, Matthew, III.432, point out that the last line of the passage, in which the
condemned are sent to their fate and the righteous invited to theirs, is an editorial comment,
and is “antithetical parallelism” based on LXX Dan.Â€12:2–3, in which some of those who
sleep in the dust shall rise to everlasting life, but others to reproach, dispersion or eternal
shame.
216
Catchpole, “A Re-appraisal of Matthew XXV.31–46,” 380–81, outlines 12 parallels between
MtÂ€25:31–46 and 1Â€EnochÂ€62â•‚63.
CO25117.indb 216 11/03/2011 11:58

1Â€EnochÂ€55:4) for they are to be consigned to everlasting punishment (1Â€EnochÂ€62:11).

This powerful image of the Son of Man upon the throne is common to both works.
Judgment for All. In both works the concept of a general judgment is common. In
Matthew “all nations” are gathered before the Son of Man to be judged, while in Par.
En. all who dwell on earth shall fall down and worship before him (1Â€EnochÂ€48:5).
The Son of Man will be revealed to the righteous as their avenger (1Â€EnochÂ€48:7)
but the kings and the mighty ones shall be judged because they have persecuted
and oppressed the righteous (1Â€EnochÂ€46:8, 62:11). They are also to be punished for
having led astray those who dwell on earth (1Â€EnochÂ€54:6) and for having wrought
unrighteousness in the earth (1Â€EnochÂ€54:10). Further, 1Â€EnochÂ€62:3 claims that all
the kings and mighty ones who possess the earth shall stand before the Elect One to
be judged. In both works, then, the idea of an all-inclusive judgment is present.
Clear Dichotomy. A third notion that is common to both is the concept of separation to
eternal reward and to eternal condemnation. In Mt.Â€25:34 the righteous go to the kingdom
prepared for them, while the cursed go to the torment prepared for the Devil and his
angels (vsÂ€41). Throughout the parable there is a clear dichotomy between the righteous
and the wicked. They are separated to right and the left, and there is no possibility of
changing the verdict. There is no possibility of crossover from one group to the other, for
they are as different as sheep and goats. In Par. En., the righteous and elect are welcomed
into the presence of the Lord of Spirits where they enjoy the bliss of life with the Son of
Man (1Â€EnochÂ€62:13â•‚16), while the kings and mighty ones are consigned to eternal ï¬†ery
torment (1Â€EnochÂ€62:9â•‚12, 69:27). Here too a clear dichotomy exists between righteous
and wicked, with no possibility of crossover from one category to the other.217
Hidden, Revealed, Lack of Mercy. The ignorance of the judged with respect to the
judge is another common feature of the accounts. In Mt.Â€25:31–46, both the blessed
and the cursed are surprised that the Son of Man (king/judge) is identiï¬†ed with the
poor and needy.218 They inquire of the Son of Man (king/judge), “When, Lord, did
we see you.â•›.â•›.?” In the symmetry of the narrative, both the ones on the right and the
ones on the left, both the vindicated and the condemned, request clariï¬†cation. The
condemned make their request in the sense that had they known, they surely would
have served him. They plead ignorance, and in their pleading, implicitly plead for
217
Sim, Apocalyptic Eschatology, 64–66, notes that one of the functions of apocalyptic
literature is Identification and Legitimization. As distinctions are made and clear boundaries
drawn, the group for whom the work was written becomes more clear in its identity and feels
that it is legitimate. In both Par. En. and Matthew the clear dichotomy between the righteous
and the wicked functions in this way.
218
Donahue, “The ‘Parable’ of the Sheep and the Goats,” 20, makes the powerful observation that
in the telling of this parable Matthew is disclosing to his Church, which is a mixed body of good
and evil, “that the exalted Son of Man was hidden in the least of the brethren, who are both poor
and powerless. Here Matthew not only crowns the picture throughout the Gospel of Jesus as the
humble servant, but also instructs the Church in what sense the risen Lord is ‘God with us.’”
CO25117.indb 217 11/03/2011 11:58

mercy, for another chance. But to both the condemned and the vindicated, the Son of
Man (king/judge) is revealed in “the least of these my brethren.” Reward is promised
to those who served the Son of Man through the least ones, and condemnation
without hope of mercy is passed on those who did not. In Par. En. the righteous and
elect also have the Son of Man revealed to them (1Â€EnochÂ€48:6–7, 62:7), but the kings
and mighty are terriï¬†ed to recognize the Son of Man (“that child of woman”) as their
judge (1Â€EnochÂ€62:5). The hollowness of the respect paid by the condemned rings
out in both. In Mt.Â€25:44 the condemned address the judge as “Lord,” even though
nothing in their previous lives indicated they exhibited that respect,219 and the kings
and mighty ones plead respectfully for mercy that they might honor and glorify the
judge, acknowledging the judge’s authority over them, even though it is now too
late (1Â€EnochÂ€63:4). But mercy is not forthcoming in either Matthew or Par. En. The
condemned are simply consigned to punishment (1Â€EnochÂ€68:4, cf. 62:9–11, 63:11).
Criterion for Judgment. The criterion by which judgment is made is also very similar
in the two works. In Mt.Â€25:31–46, both the blessed and the cursed are judged on the
basis of their treatment of the poor and needy, with whom the Son of Man identiï¬†es
himself. In Par. En. the righteous are invited to their eternal reward because of their
loyalty, while the kings and mighty ones are condemned for their persecution and
oppression of the righteous and elect (1Â€EnochÂ€46:8, 62:11), with whom the Son of
Man has identiï¬†ed himself as champion. The identiï¬†cation of the Son of Man with
the oppressed is expressed through the qualities of righteousness and election. The
oppressed are called the “righteous and elect” and righteousness is said to belong to the
Son of Man (1Â€EnochÂ€46:3). The Son of Man is also known as the “Righteous One” and
the “Elect One.” When the Elect One rules, the elect shall be blessed (1Â€EnochÂ€51:5).
Further, the Lord of Spirits, for whom the Son of Man is a judiciary agent, takes up the
cause of the oppressed (1Â€EnochÂ€47, 48:7). Hence the Son of Man clearly identiï¬†es
himself with the oppressed and disenfranchised, who call themselves the “righteous
and elect,” and so the basis for the judgment of the condemned is the way in which they
have treated the ones with whom the Son of Man identiï¬†es himself.220
Fiery Fate. The characterization of punishment as taking place in ï¬†ery torment is an

image that is common to both. In Mt.Â€25:41 the cursed are sent to ï¬†ery torment, while
in Par. En. several passages describe their ï¬†ery punishment. In 1Â€EnochÂ€48:9 the holy
219
220
The position of Harrington, Hare, and others, that “the least of these my brethren” refers
to Christian missionaries, who are intimately associated with the judge, would make for
an even tighter similarity with Par. En. But Hare fails to recognize this similarity since
he does not believe that Matthew’s conception of the Son of Man depends on Par. En. at
all. However, as I argued above, “the least of these my brethren” probably should not be
interpreted so narrowly. Nonetheless, the criterion for judgment in MatthewÂ€25 remains
remarkably similar to that in Par. En., since the way the condemned have treated those with
whom the Son of Man identiï¬†es himself is the basis for their being condemned.
CO25117.indb 218 11/03/2011 11:58

are promised that they shall see the kings of the earth burn like stubble in a ï¬†eld.
Further, in 1Â€EnochÂ€ 54:1, 6 the seer envisions a deep valley with burning ï¬†re, into
which the kings and potentates are cast. Besides the torment of ï¬†re they are fettered
with iron chains (1Â€EnochÂ€53:3, 54:3) and covered with stones (1Â€EnochÂ€54:5). The hot
springs also become an image for the destruction of the fallen angels and for the kings,
for the seer foresees that the springs will change and burn forever (1Â€EnochÂ€67:7, 13).
Punishment Prepared for Satan and his Angels. Finally, the perception that the
place of punishment was prepared for Satan and his angels is common to both. The
condemned are consigned to a place that was not prepared for them, but because of
their allegiance they are sent there, to a place prepared for the forces of evil.221 In Par.
En. the punishment of the burning valley and the fetters has been prepared for Azazel
and his host (1Â€EnochÂ€54:5). The burning sulphurous, molten springs are punishment
for the fallen angels, of which Azazel is one, who have revealed iniquity to humanity
(1Â€EnochÂ€67:4–7). Those springs will also be waters of punishment for the kings and
the mighty (1Â€EnochÂ€67:12–13). The kings and mighty ones are to be punished in ï¬†ery
torment because they have become subject to Satan and have led humanity astray
(1Â€EnochÂ€54:6). Thus while the ï¬†ery valley was prepared for the fallen angels, the
kings and the mighty shall be consigned to them as well because of their allegiance.
The similarity between the two texts extends not only to the idea that the place of
torment was prepared for another, but also to the idea of the multitude of the ones for
whom it was prepared, the Devil and his angels. In 1Â€EnochÂ€54:5, “the host of Azazel”
is plural. At 1Â€EnochÂ€55:4 the Elect One will sit in judgment upon “Azazel and all his
associates and all his host.”. The “Devil and all his angels” (Mt.Â€25:41) bears a striking
resemblance to “Azazel and all his associates and all his host” (1Â€EnochÂ€55:4).
These similarities are striking and extensive. They indicate at the least a shared
conception of the fate of the wicked before the enthroned Son of Man. Both authors
express a very similar conception of the eschatological, judicial Son of Man.
Summary of Characteristics
The description of the Last Judgment (Mt.Â€25:31–46) is a very important passage for
elucidating Matthew’s conception of the Son of Man. Many characteristics and features
of the Son of Man, both previously exhibited in the Gospel and new ones in this passage,
are evident. First the characteristics noted in previous parts of the Gospel will be summa-
rized, and then the new features revealed in this passage will be presented.
Characteristics Previously Noted. Many features are included in this Parable that
have been noted in previous Son of Man passages.
a) the attribute of coming (e1lqh|), cf. Mt.Â€10:23, 16:27–28, 24:30–31;

b) the attribute of glory (e0n th|= do&ch| au)tou=), cf. MtÂ€16:27–28, 24:30–31;
221
Gundry, Matthew, 515, notes this distinction in his comment on Mt.Â€25:41.
CO25117.indb 219 11/03/2011 11:58

c) the presence of angels (pa&ntej oi9 a!ggeloi met’ au0tou=), cf. Mt.Â€13:36–43,
16:27–28, 24:30–31;
d) sitting on his glorious throne (kaqi/sei e0pi\ qro&nou do&chj au0tou=), cf. Mt.Â€19:28;
e) judging all nations (pa&nta ta_ e1qnh), cf. Mt.Â€24:30–31;
f) action of gathering (sunaxqh&sontai), cf. Mt.Â€13:36–43, 24:30–31;
g) his judicial role in separating wicked from righteous (a)fori/sei), cf. Mt.Â€13:36–43,
16:27–28, 19:28, 24:30–31;
h) his royal role made explicit in his being termed a king (o( basileu_j), cf.
Mt.Â€13:36–43, 16:19 (Jesus promises the keys of the kingdom to Peter), 16:27–28,
and implied in 19:28;
i) eternal bliss is promised for his followers, cf. Mt.Â€13:36–43;
j) a ï¬†ery fate is in store for the condemned (to_ pu~r to\ ai0w&nion), cf. Mt.Â€13:36–43;
k) eternal punishment is decreed (ei0j ko&lasin ai0w&nion), cf. Mt.Â€13:36–43;
l) the judgment will be based on the deeds of the judged, cf. Mt.Â€16:27–28;
m) the followers of the Son of Man are called “righteous” (oi9 di/kaioi), cf.
Mt.Â€13:36–43.
The parable further depicts the following patterns of relationship between the judge
and the judged:
n) opposition to persecutors;
o) vindication for his followers with a reversal of fortunes and status;
p) a clear dichotomy between the righteous and the wicked; and
q) no possibility for mercy exists for the wicked;
r) hidden to outsiders: the condemned do not recognize him, until he reveals himself
to them in judgment; and
s) revealed to insiders: in this parable the vindicated do not recognize him either,
until he reveals himself to them.
Characteristics Newly Revealed. Several characteristics consonant with the portrayal

of the Son of Man are also revealed in this parable. They are:
a) the Son of Man is compared to the shepherd (o( poimh\n);

b) the vindicated are termed “blessed” (oi9 eu)loghme/noi);
c) the righteous are invited to “inherit” (klhronomh&sate) the kingdom;
d) the kingdom was prepared since the beginning of time (a)po_ katabolh=j ko&smou);
e) the wicked are cursed (kathrame/noi);
f) the punishment of the wicked was prepared for the Devil and his angels
(h(toimasme/non tw|~ diabo&lw| kai\ toi=j a)gge/loij au)tou~);
g) a question is posed to the Son of Man/judge/king by both the vindicated and the
condemned; and
h) the Son of Man is ï¬†nally revealed to and recognized by both the vindicated and
the condemned.
CO25117.indb 220 11/03/2011 11:58

This ï¬†nal passage presents the fullest picture of the Son of Man and his activities.
Twenty-seven characteristics have been noted in it altogether, nineteen characteristics
had been noted in previously studied passages, while eight fresh characteristics are
revealed in this pericope. The passage with the next most numerous characteristics
is the Interpretation of the Parable of the Weeds, with thirteen that have been noted,
eleven of which also occur in the Parable of the Last Judgment. Interestingly, both
these passages are unique to Matthew, and bear clear ï¬†ngerprints of his editorial and
authorial activity. Together they reveal an almost complete portrait of Matthew’s Son
of Man.
4.8â•‡ Matthew’s Portrait of the Son of Man

After having studied the unique Matthean Son of Man sayings, it becomes possible to
discern the portrait of the Son of Man with which Matthew the author worked as he
wrote his story of the life and ministry of Jesus. The nuances and connotations that
Matthew expressed become identiï¬†able from the Matthean sayings. Table 5 indicates
the major traits of the Matthean portrait of the Son of Man.
Matthew’s portrait envisions the Son of Man coming on the clouds, accompanied
by angels, whom he sends out to gather the elect from the four corners of the earth. He
comes to fulï¬†ll a judicial role,222 and will be seen by all the world. He is predisposed
to judge against the persecutors and to vindicate those with whom he identiï¬†es. The
judgment is based on a clear opposition between the oppressed righteous and the
persecutors, and the treatment the righteous receive at the hands of the persecutors,
with the result being a reversal of fortunes and status. The kingdom belongs to the
Son of Man,223 as do the angels224 and the elect, and the judgment he executes is
ï¬†nal, with no possibility of mercy for the condemned. As royal judge, the Son of
Man is characterized by glory, and is seated upon a glorious throne; his followers
will also share in the judicial role. The Son of Man is unknown by the condemned,
until they are judged, and then they are surprised that the Son of Man was not known
to them, but was hidden amongst the lowly of the earth. On the other hand, the
Son of Man is revealed to the followers, not only in the judgment event, but also
in the narrative itself, in which the term Son of Man is used by Jesus as a public,
non-revelatory self-description, but with his intimate associates, the disciples who
are insiders, the term is replaced by the ï¬†rst person personal pronoun (see especially
Mt.Â€16:13, 15). The followers are called both “his elect” and “the righteous,” and they
are promised that they will shine like the sun, while the condemned are consigned
to a ï¬†ery fate.
222
Tödt, Son of Man, 69–80, has shown that the Matthean emphasis is on the judicial role of the
coming Son of Man
223
Tödt, Son of Man, 69–73, 86, 90.
224
CO25117.indb 221 11/03/2011 11:58

Table 5
The Matthean Portrait of the Son of Man
Matthean Trait, Mt. 10: 13: 16: 16: 19: 24: 25: Synoptic
Characteristic or Feature 23 36–43 13, 21 27–28 28 30–31 31–46 parallel
â•⁄1.â•‡e1lqh| comes/coming • - - • - • • •a
â•⁄ 2.â•‡ in opposition to
â•…â•‡ persecutors • - - - implied
• • -
â•⁄3.â•‡vindication of
â•…â•‡ followers, and reversal
â•…â•‡ of fortunes and status implied
• - • implied • -
implied
â•⁄4.â•‡a)postelei= sending - • - - - • - • b
â•⁄5.â•‡tou\j a)gge/louj=
â•…â•‡ au0tou his angels - • - • - • • w/o pronoun • c
â•⁄6.â•‡h9 basilei/a au)tou=
â•…â•‡ his kingdom, i.e. royal
â•…â•‡ role - • • w/o pron • implied
- • w/o pronoun -
â•⁄7.â•‡sulle/cousin/
â•…â•‡ e0pisuna/cousin/
â•…â•‡ sunaxqh&sontai
â•…â•‡ gathering - • - - - • • •d
â•⁄8.â•‡di/kaioi as term for the
â•…â•‡ followers of the Son
â•…â•‡ of Man - • - - - - • -
â•⁄9.â•‡e0kla/myousin w(j
â•…â•‡ o9 h#lioj shine like the
â•…â•‡ sun - • - - - - - -
10.â•‡ ei0j th\n ka&minon tou=
â•…â•‡ puro/j ï¬†ery fate for
â•…â•‡ persecutors - • - - - - • -
11.â•‡ judicial role - • - • • • • -
12.â•‡ clear dichotomy
â•…â•‡ between righteous and
â•…â•‡ wicked - • - - implied
- • -
13.â•‡ no possibility of mercy
â•…â•‡ for the wicked - • - - - - • -
14.â•‡ eternal punishment is
â•…â•‡ decreed - • - - - - • -
15.â•‡ bliss promised to the
â•…â•‡ righteous - • - - - - • -
16.â•‡ hidden to outsiders - - - - - • -
implied
17.â•‡ revealed to insiders - - • - - - • -

18.â•‡ Son of Man called
â•…â•‡ Christ - - • - - - - •e
19.â•‡ Son of Man called the
â•…â•‡ Son of the living God - - • - - - - -
20.â•‡ paqei=n suffer - - • - - - - •f
21.â•‡ e0n th|= do/ch| in glory - - - • - • • •g
22.â•‡ qro/noj do/chj au)tou=
â•…â•‡ throne of his glory - - - - • - • -
23.â•‡ judgment according to
â•…â•‡ deeds - - - • - - • -
CO25117.indb 222 11/03/2011 11:58

Table 5 (contd.)
Matthean Trait, Mt. 10: 13: 16: 16: 19: 24: 25: Synoptic
Characteristic or Feature 23 36–43 13, 21 27–28 28 30–31 31–46 parallel
24.â•‡ judicial role for

â•…â•‡ followers - - - - • - - •h
25.â•‡ pa~sai ai9 fulai\ th=j
â•…â•‡ gh=j/pa&nta ta_ e1qnh - - - - - • • -
â•…â•‡ all nations of earth
26.â•‡ e0pi\ tw~n nefelw~n tou=
â•…â•‡ ou)ranou= on the clouds - - - - - • - • i
27.â•‡ tou\j e0klektou\j
â•…â•‡ au)tou= his elect - - - - - • - • j
28.â•‡ e0k tw~n tessa/rwn
â•…â•‡ a0ne/mwn from the four
â•…â•‡ winds - - - - - • - • k
29.â•‡ w#sper o( poimh\n
â•…â•‡ like the shepherd - - - - - - • -
30.â•‡ oi9 eu)loghme/noi
â•…â•‡ blessed - - - - - - • -
31.â•‡ klhronomh&sate
â•…â•‡ inherit - - - - - - • -
32.â•‡ a)po_ katabolh=j
â•…â•‡ ko&smou kingdom
â•…â•‡ prepared since - - - - - - • -
â•…â•‡ beginning of time
33.â•‡ kathrame/noi cursed - - - - - - • -
34.â•‡ h(toimasme/non tw|~
â•…â•‡ diabo&lw| ï¬†ery fate
â•…â•‡ prepared for Satan - - - - - - • -
35.â•‡ request by the
â•…â•‡ condemned - - - - - - • -
36.â•‡ï¬†nally revealed and
â•…â•‡ recognized - - - - - - • -
a
â•›cf. Mt.Â€20:28//MkÂ€10:45; MkÂ€8:38//Lk.Â€9:26; MkÂ€13:26; Mt.Â€24:44//Lk.Â€12:40; Lk.Â€18:8, 19:10.
b
â•›cf. MkÂ€13:27.
c
â•›cf. Mk 8:38//Lk. 9:26.
d
â•›cf. Mk 13:27.
e
â•›cf. Mk 8:29//Lk. 9:20. In neither Mk or Lk, however, does Jesus refer to himself as the Son of
Man.
f
â•›cf. Mk 8:31//Lk. 9:22; but in Mt. 16:21 “Son of Man” is replaced with the personal pronoun
au0to/n.
g
â•›cf. Mk 13:26//Lk. 21:27; Mk 8:38//Lk. 9:26.
h
â•›cf. Lk. 18:30
i
â•›cf. Mk 13:26//Lk. 21:27; Mt 26:64//Mk 14:62//Lk. 22:69.
j
â•›cf. Mk 13:27, where the possessive pronoun, au0tou=, is not used, although some manuscripts insert
it.
k
â•›cf. Mk 13:27.
CO25117.indb 223 11/03/2011 11:58

In none of the coming Son of Man sayings does the Son of Man play a role of
advocate. In Matthew the Son of Man does not appear before a judge on behalf of the
righteous. In Mark and Luke, the role of advocate is given to the Son of Man, but in
Matthew the role of the Son of Man has been elevated to that of judge and king. This
is most clear when Mt.Â€16:27 is compared with MkÂ€8:38//Lk.Â€9:27. Mark and Luke
preserve the comment about the Son of Man being ashamed at the final judgment of
those who had been ashamed of him (e0paisxunh=| me/ e0paisxunqh/setai au0to&n). In
that scenario, the Son of Man evidently will appear before a judge and advocate for or
against those who on earth have allied themselves with or against him. But in Mt.Â€16:27
there is no longer any hint of advocacy. It has been redacted out, for Matthew only
admits to the Son of Man coming with his angels in the glory of the Father to enact
judgment.225 The Son of Man is depicted as having authority in the kingdom over the
angels, as well as over those who are brought before him in judgment.
As can be seen from Table 5, many of the characteristics of the Son of Man are
present also in one of the other synoptic Gospels. The ideas of coming on the clouds
with angels is present in the Markan and Lukan Son of Man, as is the image of
sending the angels to collect the elect. But the development apparent in Matthew’s
portrait is that the angels are under the authority of the Son of Man: they are “his!”226
Similarly the concept of the Kingdom of God is present in synoptic sayings, but
calling it the Son of Man’s is a Matthean development. Further, those gathered from
the four winds are called the “elect” in MkÂ€13:27, but they are “his elect,” i.e. the Son
of Man’s, in Mt.Â€24:31.227 The attribute of glory is also found in Mark and Luke, but
the picture of the Son of Man sitting upon the glorious throne is uniquely Matthean,
and is a development supporting Matthew’s elevation of the Son of Man to the role
of eschatological judge.228 The reference to the throne of his glory is in all likelihood
a quotation of the Enochic description.229
Table 5 helps to identify which traits have been uniquely developed by Matthew.
The angels are put under the authority of the Son of Man, the kingdom and the
elect are called “his,” and he is envisioned as seated upon a glorious throne. The
additions Matthew has made to the synoptic portrait are that his followers are called
“righteous”230 and they will shine like the sun, while a ï¬†ery fate awaits the perse-
225
At Mt. 10:32–33//Lk. 12:8–9 advocacy is preserved with the use of o(mologw~ and a)rnw~mai,
acknowledging and denying. Q apparently had “Son of Man” at this point, but Matthew has
dropped “Son of Man” in favor of the ï¬†rst person pronoun. It is apparent that Matthew has
redacted both Mt.Â€16:27 and Mt.Â€10:32–33 to avoid casting the Son of Man as an advocate.
Cf. Tödt, Son of Man, 90.
226
227
The textual variant of adding au)tou= in MkÂ€13:27 does not have a very secure basis: au)tou=
was more than likely added under the inï¬‡uence of Mt.Â€24:31.
228
229
See the exegesis of MtÂ€19:28 above. Theisohn, Der auserwählte Richter, 158–61; Caragounis,
The Son of Man, 171.
230
In MkÂ€2:17 and Lk.Â€5:32 (followed by Mt.Â€9:13) the “righteous” are clearly NOT followers
of Jesus.
CO25117.indb 224 11/03/2011 11:58

cutors. In Matthew’s portrayal the Son of Man has been elevated to a judicial role,231
and his close associates even participate in the judgment.232 A clear dichotomy exists
between the righteous and the wicked, with no hope of mercy. The Son of Man is
hidden to outsiders, but revealed to insiders, and judgment will be based upon the
deeds of those judged.
Table 5 also shows a signiï¬†cant concentration of these unique Matthean traits
in the pericopes that are unique to Matthew. The Interpretation of the Parable of the
Weeds (Mt.Â€13:36–43) and the Parable of the Last Judgment (Mt.Â€25:31–46) are found
only in Matthew, and they display twenty-nine of the thirty-six traits I have noted
in the Matthean portrait. Of those twenty-nine, five are shared with the synoptics,
leaving twenty-four unique to Matthew. Of the seven traits not appearing in these two
passages, six are shared with Mark and/or Luke (albeit altered), and so only one is
unique to Matthew. Thus the preponderance of unique Matthean traits in the portrayal
of the Son of Man is found in Mt.Â€13:36–43 and Mt.Â€25:31–46.
While not all the traits identiï¬†ed in this study are uniquely Matthean, the unique
Matthean traits are quite impressive. The elevation of the Son of Man to the judicial
role is afï¬†rmed by his session on the throne, as is his authority over the angels, as well
as the ï¬†nality of the sentence he passes. The clear dichotomy between righteous and
wicked, with no hope of compromise, and even their characterization as “righteous”
or “wicked” is noteworthy, as is the view that the outsiders are not cognizant of his
identity, while the insiders have this privileged information revealed to them. The
blessed will inherit the kingdom prepared for them from the foundation of the world,
while the cursed will enter a ï¬†ery fate prepared for the Devil and his angels. The
question of clariï¬†cation reveals that no mercy will be forthcoming for the condemned
and that the Son of man has been hidden in the lowly. These characteristics are a
coherent development of the portrait of the Son of Man that is found in Mark and Q.
They emphasize Matthew’s shaping of the concept to that of being an eschatological
judge. It is likely that Matthew was inï¬‡uenced rather signiï¬†cantly in this portrayal of
the Son of Man. Examining in greater detail the parallels with the portrait found in the
Parables of Enoch, which were treated in Chapter 3, will be the subject of Chapter 5,
the concluding chapter.
231
Cf. Lk. 21:36, where a possible judgment theme arises, as some are expected to “stand
before” the Son of Man; this passage, however, is a warning to the disciples, the insiders,
not to the oppressors.
232
Luke has twelve thrones also, but the context is the messianic banquet, not judgment.
CO25117.indb 225 11/03/2011 11:58

5
Conclusion
5.1â•‡Similarities
In this chapter we compare the results of the detailed examination of the Son of
Man passages in the Parables of Enoch and the pertinent passages in the Gospel of
Matthew. From Chapter 3, Tables 3 and 4 summarize the characteristics and features
of the portrait of the Son of Man in Par. En., while Table 5 in Chapter 4 outlines the
characteristics and features operating in the Matthean portrait.
At this point, the task is to work from the Enochic portrait and to notice which
features also appear in Matthew’s Gospel. Since the characteristics and features of
the two portrayals fall into two types of similarities, they will be presented in two
Tables. The ï¬†rst type of similarity is the strong verbal similarities in details, noted
in TableÂ€6; the second type, the similarities in presuppositions, implications and the
pattern of relationships, and these comprise TableÂ€7. While all the similarities noted in
TableÂ€7 are explicit in the Enochic passages that have been presented, in the Matthean
material many are found in the passages studied in detail in the previous chapter, and
Table 6
Specific and Detailed Characteristics of the Son of Man
Shared by Par. En. and Matthew
Characteristic or Feature 1 Enoch Matthew
1.â•‡ heavenly status 46, 48:2–8, 62–63, 70–71 13:36–43, 16:24–28,

â•… 19:28, 24:30,
â•…25:31–46
2.â•‡ judicial role 46, 62–63, 69:26–29 13:36–43, 16:27,
â•… 19:28, 24:30
â•…25:31
3.â•‡ followers called “righteous” 48:2–8, 62–63 13:36–43, 25:31–46
4.â•‡ followers called “elect” 48:2–8, 62–63 et passim 24:30–31
5.â•‡ seated upon throne of his glory 62:5, 69:27, 29 19:28, 25:31
6.â•‡ no mercy for condemned 62–63 13:36–43, 25:31–46
7.â•‡ promise of eternal bliss for 62:13–16, 71:16–17 13:43, 25:34, 46
â•… the righteous
8.â•‡ worldwide jurisdiction 69:27 (cf. 46:1–3, 48:2–8 24:30, 25:32
â•… 62:3, 5, 9)
9.â•‡ brightness of inhabitants of heaven 71:1, cf. 58:1,4,6 13:43
226
CO25117.indb 226 11/03/2011 11:58

Conclusion 227
some in the wider context of the Gospel as a whole.1 Through the exploration of these
similarities, the literary relationship of Matthew to Par. En. will become clearer.
5.1.1â•‡ 1 Enoch 46
In 1 Enoch 46, ï¬†ve features have been highlighted as signiï¬†cant to the portrait of the
Son of Man.
5.1.1.1â•‡ Heavenly Status

The heavenly status of the Son of Man is evident in 1Â€EnochÂ€46. The scene is set in
the heavenly realms, and the Chief of Days is seen as well as another with a human
Table 7
Patterns of Relationships of the Son of Man
â•⁄ 1.â•‡ righteousness 46:3, 48:2–8 (implied) 13:41–43, 16:27,

62:2–3, 71:14, 16 25:37, 46
â•⁄ 2.â•‡ revelatory role 46:3 13:36, 25:31–46
â•⁄ 3.â•‡ chosenness 46:3, 48:6 c.f. 12:18,
â•… quoting Isa. 42:1
â•⁄ 4.â•‡ named from eternity 48:2–8 25:34
â•…â•‡ (i.e. purpose and pre-existence) c.f. 1:18–25,
â•… 12:18–21 quoting
â•… Isa.Â€42:1–4
â•⁄ 5.â•‡ support for the righteous 48:4 c.f. 11:28–29
â•⁄ 6.â•‡ light for the Gentiles 48:4 c.f. 5:14, 16
â•⁄ 7.â•‡ worthy of worship 48:5, 62:6 c.f. 2:2, 11, 8:2, 9:18,
â•… 14:33, 15:25, 20:20,
â•…28:9
â•⁄ 8.â•‡ hiddenness 48:6, 62:7 16:13–15 (implied),
â•…25:31–46
â•⁄ 9.â•‡ revealed to insiders 48:7, 62:7, 69:26 16:13–15, 25:31–46
1
Since Matthew identiï¬†es the Son of Man and Jesus quite closely, features relating to the
Son of Man may appear in passages not explicitly associated with the term “Son of Man.”
The identiï¬†cation of Jesus and the Son of Man by Matthew has been argued above in the
previous chapter in the section on Matthew 16. The identiï¬†cation between Jesus and the
Son of Man appears most clearly in 16:13, 15, where Jesus ï¬†rst asks his disciples, “Who do
people say the Son of Man is?” and then asks the disciples again, “Who do you say that I
am?” Further, when this passage is compared to its synoptic parallel in MkÂ€8:27–33, it is also
evident that Matthew identiï¬†ed Jesus and the Son of Man, for Matthew inserts the term in
Mt. 16:13 in place of the personal pronoun which is found in Mk 8:27, but then replaces it
with the personal pronoun in Mt. 16:21 as compared to Mk 8:31. This is clear evidence that
for Matthew Jesus and the Son of Man are one and the same.
CO25117.indb 227 11/03/2011 11:58

Table 7 (contd.)
10.â•‡ inï¬‡icts pain, terror and shame 62:4–5, 10 8:12, 13:42, 50, 22:13,
â•… 24:51, 25:30; 24:30
â•… (c.f. Zech. 12:10–14)
11.â•‡ï¬†nally revealed and recognized
â•…â•‡ by the kings and the mighty 62:3, 63:4 25:31–46
12.â•‡ request by the condemned 62:9, 63:5 25:44
13.â•‡ fairness of judgment 63:8–9 25:31–46
14.â•‡ word is strong and incontrovertible 69:26–29 13:36–43, 24:30–31,
â•…25:31–46
15.â•‡ causes the destruction of evil 69:26–29, cf. 48:8, 63, 13:36–43, 25:31–46,
53:3–5, 54:1–5 cf. 13:47–50
16.â•‡ angels in presence of Son of Man
â•…â•‡ “his” in Matthew 71:8–14 13:41, 16:27, 24:31, 25:31
countenance. This feature is explicit in 1Â€EnochÂ€48:2–8, 62–63, 70–71 also, as may

be expected, since the visions are set in heaven.
In the Son of Man passages unique to Matthew, the heavenly status is present in
some, and can only be assumed in others. In Mt.Â€10:23, the Son of Man is said to
come, e3wj e3lqh| o( ui9o\j tou= a)nqrw&pou, but it is not explained from where he comes.
Here then, the heavenly status of the Son of Man is not evident.
In Mt. 13:36–43, however, the heavenly status of the Son of Man is clear. In
versesÂ€41â•‚43, the Son of Man has divine authority to judge, and dispatches his angels
to cast out all causes of sin and evildoers so that the righteous may shine in the
kingdom of their Father. The setting is the eschatological judgment and the Son of
Man’s heavenly status is clear.
In Mt. 16:13–23, the setting is the earthly location where Jesus asks his disciples
what they think of him. The ï¬†rst question regarding others’ thoughts about him
utilizes the term “Son of Man,” but the second, more direct question to the disciples
themselves is cast with a personal pronoun. With both questions, the earthly setting
of the narrative is explicit. In the continuation of the discussion, however, as Jesus
explains the implications of following to Jerusalem, the Son of Man reappears in
Jesus’ words as coming from the glory of his Father with his angels (16:24–28). The
divine glory and the presence of the angels indicate that for Matthew, the Son of Man
has a heavenly status and origin.
In Mt. 19:28 Jesus speaks of the Son of Man sitting upon his glorious throne. This
reference makes clear the heavenly status of the Son of Man.
In Mt. 24:30, the sign of the Son of Man is said to be in the heavens, and he is
said to be coming on the clouds of heaven with glory and power. These attributes
emphasize the heavenly status of the Son of Man.
Finally in Mt.Â€25:31–46 the heavenly status of the Son of Man is clear. He is
said to be sitting on his glorious throne accompanied by angels in verseÂ€31. Since
all nations are to be brought to him for judgment, an earthly setting cannot be in the
CO25117.indb 228 11/03/2011 11:58

Conclusion 229
mind of the author, since no earthly setting could be large enough. A heavenly scene
is in mind, in which size and space are plastic and modiï¬†able. Further, the kingdom
to be inherited by the righteous is pre-mundane. As vice-gerent to God, dispensing
this eternal vindication, the Son of Man has heavenly status.
In four of the six scenes under scrutiny, the heavenly status of the Son of Man
is plain. This qualiï¬†es heavenly status as a precise similarity between Par. En. and
Matthew, so it appears in Table 6.2
5.1.1.2â•‡ Righteousness of the Son of Man

Righteousness is also an explicit feature in the Enochic portrait of the Son of Man.
Righteousness belongs to him and dwells with him, and is the qualiï¬†cation for his
being able to judge the kings and the mighty (1Â€EnochÂ€46:3). His righteousness is
also implied in 1Â€EnochÂ€48:2–8, since he is with the Chief of Days and is the support
for the righteous of earth whose portion he will preserve. The spirit of righteousness
is poured over the Elect One, later called the Son of Man, as he sits on the throne
of his glory (1Â€EnochÂ€62:2), and he is acknowledged by the condemned kings and
mighty ones as having a righteousness beyond reckoning (1Â€EnochÂ€63:3). Again in the
concluding vision, the Son of Man is characterized by righteousness: he is born for it,
it abides upon him, and it will not forsake him (1Â€EnochÂ€71:14, 16).
Righteousness is not attributed explicitly to the Son of Man in Matthew’s Gospel,
but the Son of Man can be seen to have righteousness based upon the pattern of
relationships that holds true for this author. The Son of Man cannot abide evil and
has it cast out (Mt.Â€13:41–42). He will repay human beings for what they have done
(Mt.Â€16:27), and this is carried out on the basis of righteousness. The heavenly status
of the Son of Man (see above) and his being in the presence of the Godhead also
indicate his righteousness. Most importantly, the ones with whom the Son of Man
identiï¬†es are called “righteous” (Mt.Â€13:43, 25:37, 46). This pattern of relationships
supports the conclusion that the Son of Man in Matthew’s Gospel is conceived of
as having righteousness, just as the Son of Man in Par. En. has righteousness. This
similarity between the concept of the Son of Man in the two works then is included
in TableÂ€7, as a quality that is part of the pattern of relationships in which the Son of
Man is portrayed.
5.1.1.3â•‡ Revelatory Role

Further a revelatory role is explicitly attributed to the Son of Man in 1Â€EnochÂ€46:3,
where the author envisions the Son of Man revealing all the treasures of what is
hidden. The balance of the work, then, is devoted to revealing various kinds of infor-
mation, from meteorological secrets to the outcome of the eschatological judgment.3
2
Of itself, however, this precise similarity is insufï¬†cient to establish a link between Par. En.
and Matthew, for this same feature appears in Mark and Luke.
3
This revelatory function appears explicitly only in the ï¬†rst Son of Man passage, but since the
rest of the work indeed functions to reveal heavenly secrets, and since Enoch is supposedly
the one who reveals this information through this work, the mention of the revelatory
CO25117.indb 229 11/03/2011 11:58

While a revelatory role is not explicitly attributed to the Son of Man in the
passages under consideration from Matthew’s Gospel, Jesus, as the Son of Man in
Matthew’s mind, functions in such a way as to reveal heavenly truth. Speciï¬†cally,
in Mt.Â€13:36, the disciples ask Jesus to explain or make clear to them, diasa&fhson,
the meaning of the Parable of the Weeds, which Jesus proceeds to do, functioning
in a way that reveals heavenly truth. Similarly, in Mt.Â€25:31–46, in the process of
separating the righteous from the unrighteous, the Son of Man reveals to the judged
their fate and to the world the outcome of the ï¬†nal judgment. In terms of making the
outcome of judgment known, the Parable of the Last Judgment functions in the same
way as the visions of Par. En. do. Both reveal to the interested readership the outcome
of the heavenly judgment and its effect on them. Since for Matthew, Jesus is in effect
identiï¬†ed as the Son of Man,4 a revelatory role can be assigned to the Son of Man, at
the level of the presuppositions of the author and in the way the author has presented
the pattern of relationships. Both Par. En. and Matthew have the purpose of revealing
heavenly truths and they both present the primary character functioning as a revealer
of heavenly truths. This attribute of having a revelatory role, then, appears in TableÂ€7.
5.1.1.4â•‡ Chosenness
The chosenness of the Son of Man is stated explicitly in 1Â€EnochÂ€46:3. The Son
of Man has been chosen by the Lord of Spirits. He is also described as “chosen”
in 1Â€EnochÂ€ 48:6. “Chosenness” is related to another designation for this ï¬†gure in
this work, the “Elect One.”5 In the latter passage the Son of Man’s chosenness is
mentioned in connection with his hiddenness. The chosenness and hiddenness of the
Son of Man have to do with God’s eternal purposes for him, which comprise, in part,
being authorized to carry out the ï¬†nal judgment upon the kings and the mighty.
While chosenness is not explicitly attributed to the Son of Man in Matthew, it is part of
the pattern of relationships which Matthew presumes concerning the ï¬†gure. The concept
of being chosen is applied to Jesus by Matthew in Mt.Â€12:18 by way of quoting Isa.Â€42:1,
“Behold my servant, whom I have chosen.â•›.â•›.” And since, for Matthew, Jesus and the Son
of Man are identiï¬†ed,6 chosenness can also be understood of the Son of Man. As a part of
the pattern of relationships, then, the Son of Man’s chosenness is listed in Table 7.
5.1.1.5â•‡ Judicial Role

The judicial role of the Son of Man is quite evident in these works. In 1Â€EnochÂ€46,
62–63 and 69:26–29, the scene is judicial. In 1Â€EnochÂ€62–63 the role is especially
evident, as the condemned kings and mighty ones plead for mercy (1Â€EnochÂ€62:9).
In 1Â€EnochÂ€69:27, sitting upon the throne and receiving the sum of judgment bear
witness to the judicial responsibility of the Son of Man.
function then becomes a hint or a foreshadowing of the concluding scene in which Enoch,
the seer, is proclaimed to be and identiï¬†ed as the Son of Man.
4
See the ï¬†rst footnote of this chapter.
5
6
See the ï¬†rst footnote of this chapter.
CO25117.indb 230 11/03/2011 11:58

Conclusion 231
The judicial role of the Son of Man is also a prominent feature of Matthew’s
portrayal. It appears in Mt.Â€13:36–43, as the Son of Man consigns the wicked to a
ï¬†ery fate. This role is also apparent in Mt.Â€16:27 in which the Son of Man will repay
persons for what they have done, and in Mt.Â€19:28 in the image of sitting upon the
glorious throne. In the apocalyptic material in Mt.Â€24:30, the mourning of the tribes
of earth entails the judicial aspect of the coming of the Son of Man, and in Mt.Â€25:31
the content of the parable is explicitly judicial. These judicial features are clear
in Matthew’s portrayal of the Son of Man, and as compared to the other synoptic
Gospels, they appear to be a deliberate shaping by the author of the concept of the
Son of Man in this direction.7 The judicial role of the Son of Man, then, is a close and
precise parallel between the two works and is listed in TableÂ€6.
5.1.2â•‡ 1 Enoch 48:2–8
1Â€EnochÂ€48:2–8 presents twelve features of the portrait of the Son of Man. Three
have been noted already in 1Â€EnochÂ€46: his heavenly status, his righteousness and his
chosenness. Similarities in Matthew’s portrait of the Son of Man must now be sought
for the nine new features, some of which can be considered together.
5.1.2.1â•‡ Named
In 1Â€EnochÂ€48:2–8, the Son of Man is said to be “named from eternity,” and to
be “named before the Lord of Spirits.” This naming has to do with the eternal
and divine purpose and mission of the Son of Man, which is to save the righteous
community and to be a light to the Gentiles (cf. IsaiahÂ€49). It is precisely what
Harnack describes as everything of real value existing in heaven perpetually, having
an actual existence in the mind of God that precedes earthly, physical existence;
it is an “ideal pre-existence,” or an existence in the “noetic cosmos” of Philo.8 As
Hamerton-Kelly recognizes, the idea of pre-existence thus must be sensitive to the
context of each particular text.9 Having examined pertinent texts, Hamerton-Kelly
reï¬†nes the idea of pre-existence to signify that an entity “had a real existence before
its manifestation on earth, either in the mind of God or in heaven.”10 As he further
notes, Par. En. has perhaps the most signiï¬†cant discourse on the pre-existence of the
Son of Man,11 with the result that subsequent literary reference to the Son of Man
entails pre-existence.
In Matthew’s Gospel, while the naming of the Son of Man is not mentioned, the
naming of Jesus is, in Matthew’s birth narrative, and his salviï¬†c mission and purpose

7
Adolf Harnack, Lehrbuch der Dogmengeschichte, 2nd ed. (Freiburg i. B. 1888) I, 710–711,
8
as followed by Hamerton-Kelly, Pre-existence, Wisdom, and the Son of Man, 1–3, 20–21.
9
Hamerton-Kelly, Pre-existence, Wisdom, and the Son of Man, 5.
10
11
Hamerton-Kelly, Pre-existence, Wisdom, and the Son of Man, 17–18.
CO25117.indb 231 11/03/2011 11:58

are made clear, both in the name “Jesus” and in the name “Emmanuel” (Mt. 1:18–25).
This child is to be the one through whom God saves, and through whom God is with
humanity. Further Jesus’ divine purpose is expressed in the quotation of Isa.Â€42:1–4 in
MtÂ€12:18–21, where Matthew acknowledges Jesus to be the one chosen to proclaim
justice and lift up the weak and downtrodden. Matthew has also included from Mark
the salviï¬†c purpose of being a ransom for many (Mt.Â€20:28/MkÂ€10:45).
The idea of pre-existence is also embedded in the presuppositions of Matthew’s
narrative. Hamerton-Kelly calls attention to several texts which seem to assume the
“ideal pre-existence” of the Son of Man. He suggests that the Son of Man portrayed
as sitting on a throne in heaven surrounded by the twelve on their thrones in
Mt.Â€19:28 implies pre-existence in heaven. But in Mt.Â€19:28 the vision is clearly of a
future scene, not a pre-existent one, and so this passage does not help with Hamerton-
Kelly’s case.12 That the kingdom prepared for the elect (Mt.Â€25:34) has been prepared
from the foundation of the world, however, does imply pre-existence in heaven before
earthly manifestation. Further, simply the notion of the “coming” of the Son of Man
in these sayings implies an existence somewhere before his earthly manifestation.13
Likewise, the Matthean concept of the fulï¬†llment of scripture presumes a pre-existent
plan, at least in the mind of God, and since the Son of Man was envisioned as
essential to that plan of salvation, the pre-existence of the Son of Man is also a part
of that world view, even though it may not be explicitly stated.14
Thus the salviï¬†c purpose of the Son of Man, the naming, and the notion of
pre-existence are common to both Par. En. and Matthew. The naming of the Son of
Man is not narrated in Matthew, but the naming of Jesus is, and further, connota-
tions of pre-existence can be found in the Matthean world view and in the pattern of
relationships. This feature, then, appears in TableÂ€7.
5.1.2.2â•‡ Support and Source of Hope

The Son of Man is portrayed as a staff upon which the righteous may lean and a
source of hope for those who are troubled in 1Â€EnochÂ€48:4. These precise concepts
do not appear in the Son of Man passages that have been examined in the previous
chapter, but in Mt.Â€11:28–29, Jesus does invite all who are weary and heavy-laden
to come to him for rest. Hamerton-Kelly points out the inï¬‡uence of the Wisdom
tradition on this saying, recognizing that Matthew is presenting Christ as Wisdom15
12
Pointed out to me by Prof. James C. VanderKam.
13
14
Hamerton-Kelly, Pre-existence, Wisdom, and the Son of Man, 76–77. Tödt, Son of Man,
284–85, is surely wrong then to claim that pre-existence is not a part of the concept of the
Son of Man. As noted above, the concept is not explicit in the sayings themselves, but that
does not rule it out as being a part of the concept. By association with other passages in the
Gospel, as noted above, and by simply noting that the Son of Man, when he comes, comes
from somewhere, pre-existence can be seen to be presumed about the Son of Man.
15
Hamerton-Kelly, Pre-existence, Wisdom, and the Son of Man, 68. This identiï¬†cation of Jesus
with pre-existent Wisdom provides another example of Matthew’s view that Jesus, the Son
of Man, is pre-existent.
CO25117.indb 232 11/03/2011 11:58

Conclusion 233
inviting all to take on his yoke; c.f. Sir.Â€51:23ff and 24:19ff, Prov.Â€1:20 ff and 8:1 ff.
This quality then, occuring in both works as a feature of the pattern of relationships,
appears in TableÂ€7.
5.1.2.3â•‡ A Light for the Gentiles

This concept, taken over from Isa.Â€49:6, also appears in the portrait of the Son of Man
in 1Â€EnochÂ€48:4. Being the light to the Gentiles is not connected directly by Matthew
to Jesus/Son of Man, but in the birth narrative, Matthew illustrates that Jesus is a light
to the Gentiles, by telling the story of the Sages following the star. The heavenly light
guides them to Jesus, the source of spiritual illumination.16 Further, in Mt.Â€5:14, 16,
the hearers of the Sermon on the Mount are told that they are the light of the world
and that they are to let their light shine. Since the Gentiles are included in “the world,”
the followers of the Son of Man are a light for the Gentiles, and by extension so is
the Son of Man whom they emulate. This feature, then, is also listed in TableÂ€7, in
the pattern of relationships.
5.1.2.4â•‡ Worthy of Worship

That the Son of Man is worthy of worship by both the righteous and the oppressors
is acknowledged in 1Â€EnochÂ€48:5 and 1Â€EnochÂ€62:6. This feature elevates the Son of
Man to divine status, although having a human countenance.
In Matthew’s Gospel, several people are described as worshipping Jesus. While
in the literal sense prosekune/w means to kneel or bow down, Matthew seems to
have intentionally chosen to use this word instead of the terminology found in the
synoptic parallels in order to emphasize the connotation of worshipping. The magi
worship, proseku/nhsan, Jesus/Son of Man (Mt.Â€2:2, 11; this incident is unique to
Matthew). A leper (Mt.Â€8:2) and the ruler (Mt.Â€9:18, named Jairus in MkÂ€5:21–43 and
Lk.Â€8:40–56) worship, prosekunei=, Jesus.17 Again, the disciples in the boat worship
(proseku/nhsan) Jesus as the Son of God after witnessing him walk on the water
16
17
Mt seems to have intentionally introduced the idea of worship, prosekunei= (MtÂ€8:2) by the
leper, for MkÂ€1:40 has gonupetw~n and LkÂ€5:12 has pesw_n e0pi\ pro&swpon. Similarly Mt
emphasizes the ruler’s worship, prosekunei= (MtÂ€9:18), where MkÂ€5:22 has pi/ptei pro_j
tou\j po&daj au)tou= and LkÂ€8:41 has pesw_n para_ tou\j po&daj 70Ihsou=. In the literal
sense, prosekunei= is of course a synonym for the terminology found in Mark and Luke,
but the strong connotation of worship is apparent in Matthew’s deliberate choice of the verb
proskune/w. It is interesting to note some of the varying ways this verb is translated into
English. Below is a chart of the passages being discussed showing the differences:
KJV RSV NRSV NAB
Mt 2:2, 11 worship worship pay homage pay homage
Mt 8:2 worshipped knelt knelt did homage
Mt 9:18 worshipped knelt knelt knelt down
Mt 14:33 worshipped worshiped worshiped did homage
Mt 15:25 worshipped knelt knelt did homage
Mt 20:20 worshipping kneeling kneeling did homage
Mt 28:9, 17 worshipped worshiped worshiped did homage, worshiped
CO25117.indb 233 11/03/2011 11:58

(Mt.Â€14:33),18 and the Syro-phoenician woman also worships him, prosekunei=, while
begging for help for her daughter (Mt.Â€15:25).19 The mother of the sons of Zebedee
worships him, proskunou=sa, asking for a favor (Mt.Â€20:20),20 while the women at
the empty tomb worship (proseku/nhsan) the risen Christ, as do the disciples on the
mountain (MtÂ€28:9,Â€17).21 While Matthew never says that the Son of Man is worthy
of worship, nonetheless he illustrates Jesus/Son of Man being worshipped, and so this
feature also is an implicit, subtle part of Matthew’s depiction of the Son of Man, part
of the pattern of relationships, and therefore it appears in Table 7.
5.1.2.5â•‡ Hiddenness
Another signiï¬†cant feature of the Son of Man in Par. En. is his hiddenness, an apoca-
lyptic feature explaining why the Son of Man has not been hitherto known. The Son
of Man is described as having been hidden in 1Â€EnochÂ€48:6 and 62:7.
The hiddenness of the Son of Man is implied in Matthew’s portrayal. In
Mt.Â€16:13–15 the Son of Man is hidden from the general populace and from those
who are potentially or actually hostile to Christ, as argued by Kingsbury.22 Further
in Mt.Â€25:31–46, the Son of Man/King as the eschatological judge is known neither
to the condemned nor the righteous at the time of judgment. His identity had been
hidden from them. In the discourse between the Son of Man/King and the judged,
however, it does become clear by whom they are being judged.
The hiddenness of the Son of Man, then, is explicit in Par. En., but a part of the
pattern of relationships in Matthew. Therefore this feature appears in TableÂ€7.
5.1.2.6â•‡ Revealed
The complementary feature to the hiddenness of the Son of Man is the declaration
that he is revealed to the righteous, who are those with whom the Son of Man
identiï¬†es. In 1Â€EnochÂ€48:7, the holy and righteous are promised that the Son of Man
will be revealed to them by the wisdom of the Lord of Spirits, while in 1Â€EnochÂ€62:7
the Son of Man, though hidden, is revealed by the Most High to the elect, who will be
vindicated when they stand before him at the judgment. 1Â€EnochÂ€69:26 indicates that
the vindicated rejoiced, blessed, gloriï¬†ed and extolled [the deity] because the name of
the Son of Man had been revealed to them. Their joy is due to their vindication, the
18
Mk 6:51 simply reports that they were astonished, kai\ li/an e0k perissou= e0n
e9autoi=j e0ci/stanto.
19
Mk 7:25 has prose/pesen pro_j tou\j po&daj au0tou=.
20
Mk 10:35 does not even have the idea of falling down before the feet of him, indicating
Matthew’s deliberate addition of proskynesis, or worship.
21
These scenes are unique to Mt.
22
Kingsbury, Matthew: Structure, Christology, Kingdom, 114–15. This hiddenness is clearest
in Mt.Â€16:13–15, where Jesus ï¬†rst asks who the people think the Son of Man is (potentially
hostile audience) and then who the disciples (intimate, inner-circle audience) think he (the
ï¬†rst singular accusative pronoun) is. The Son of Man is hidden to the people in general but
revealed to the inner circle.
CO25117.indb 234 11/03/2011 11:58

Conclusion 235
condemnation of the sinners and the ultimate ascent of the Son of Man to a position
of authority and power on the throne of his glory (1Â€EnochÂ€69:27–29).
In Matthew the same feature, i.e. the Son of Man being revealed to the righteous,
is discernible. In Mt.Â€16:13–15, the implication is that while the Son of Man is not
known to the people in general, he is known to his own inner circle, the disciples,
and that is why the term Son of Man is replaced with the personal pronoun in Jesus’
second question about his identity. As Kingsbury has argued,23 the term “Son of
Man” occurs on Jesus’ lips only when a hostile audience is present, but in the same
context a personal pronoun is used when the inner circle alone is in focus. This narra-
tological observation indicates that the revelation of the Son of Man to the righteous
is an operative principle in Matthew’s portrayal of the Son of Man. Similarly in the
Parable of the Last Judgment (Mt.Â€25:31–46), the Son of Man/King is revealed to the
vindicated in “the least of these my brothers.” He is also revealed to the condemned
at the same time in the context of their judgment.
In neither passage, Mt.Â€16:13–15 nor Mt.Â€25:31–46, is joy a feature that accom-
panies the revealing of the Son of Man. Joy was quite obvious in the Enochic
passages but is not incorporated into the Matthean passages.
In both works, some confusion is present about the timing of the revelation of the
Son of Man. In 1Â€EnochÂ€48, the revelation appears to be before the ï¬†nal judgment,
in order to give his own courage and hope. Revelation before the ï¬†nal judgment is
also apparent in Matthew’s choice of the pronoun in Mt.Â€16:15. But the revelation of
the Son of Man to the righteous appears to be at the ï¬†nal judgment in 1Â€EnochÂ€62,
when the judicial Son of Man is also revealed to the kings and the mighty. And in
Mt.Â€25:31–46, because of the surprise of both condemned and blessed, this is the case
there as well.
Since the revealing of the Son of Man is not explicit in Matthew but observed, as
a matter of the pattern of relationships, this feature is listed in TableÂ€7.
5.1.2.7â•‡ Terms Describing Followers

Those with whom the Son of Man is identiï¬†ed in Par.Â€En. are pointedly called
“the righteous,” or “the elect,” or “the holy.” This occurs throughout the work to
emphasize the alignment between them and the Son of Man, in whom righteousness
dwells, who is holy, and who is also called “the Elect One.” It can be observed
quite plainly that the followers of the Son of Man are called “the righteous” in both
1Â€EnochÂ€48 and 62–63, as well as throughout the work.
Those with whom the Son of Man is identiï¬†ed are also called “the righteous,”
and “his elect” in Matthew’s Gospel.24 Both in the Interpretation of the Parable of the
Weeds (Mt.Â€13:36–43) and in the description of the Last Judgment (Mt.Â€25:31–46)
23
Kingsbury, Matthew: Structure, Christology, Kingdom, 114–15.
24
Mt. 24:31 has “his elect” tou\j e0klektou\j au)tou=, while the parallel passage at Mk 13:27
has “the elect” tou\j e0klektou/j, although signiï¬†cant witnesses add the possessive pronoun,
and Nestle-Aland27 has included it in the text in square brackets. As argued above, I consider
the addition of the possessive pronoun to be an assimilation to Matthew’s version.
CO25117.indb 235 11/03/2011 11:58

those whom the Son of Man favors are called di/kaioi/the righteous. In Mt.Â€24:31,
the ones who are gathered on the day of the Son of Man are called “his elect.” While
the use of the term di/kaioi ï¬†ts well with Matthew’s concern for h( dikaiosu&nh, it
also matches the usage of the term in Par. En. Further, the use of the term tou\j
e0klektou/j, taken over from the Markan parallel (MkÂ€13:27), is more than a coinci-
dental similarity with the usage in Par. En.
The followers’ being called “righteous” and “elect” are quite striking verbal
similarities between the two works, and so they are listed in TableÂ€6.
5.1.3â•‡ 1 Enoch 62–63
Several characteristics and features of the Son of Man from previous passages are
repeated in 1 EnochÂ€62–63 (see Table 3), but I have noted seven further characteristics
that this passage introduces.
5.1.3.1â•‡ The Throne of his Glory

The Son of Man is depicted as sitting upon the throne of his glory (manbara sebḥatihu)
in the second and third parables.25 The Chief of Days and the Elect One/Son of Man26
are depicted on the throne in a judicial role. In 1Â€EnochÂ€62–63 the oppressors, who have
been turned out of their thrones, acknowledge their judge, the Elect One/Son of Man,
on the throne of his glory. This image of the throne emphasizes the judicial authority
the Son of Man has over them, and the appropriateness of the divine judgment against
them. Session upon the throne is a visual image that effectively attributes honor, glory,
and authority second only to the Chief of Days. It indicates that the Son of Man is
acting on behalf of and with the full authority of the Chief of Days.
In the Matthean material, “the throne of his glory” appears in connection with
the Son of Man in Mt.Â€19:28 and 25:31. In both instances the judicial role is being
emphasized. The full authority of the Son of Man to judge on behalf of the divinity
is illustrated, and the judgment is passed down on behalf of God. When compared
with the other Synoptics, it can be seen that the qualiï¬†er “of glory” is unique to
Matthew, as is the use of the possessive pronoun. As noted in the previous chapter
in the sections on Mt.Â€19:28 and 25:31, this phrase, “the throne of his glory,” is a
semiticism. Other occurrences of the image of a ï¬†gure other than God sitting on the
divine throne can be found in early Jewish literature (see above), but not in precisely
this form. This phrase then, qro&noj do&chj au)tou=, appears convincingly to be a
quotation of manbara sebḥatihu from Par. En.27
Since the similarity is so close and precise, this feature appears in TableÂ€6.
25
For the distribution of these passages and a discussion of the origins and signiï¬†cance of this
image, see the sections above on 1Â€EnochÂ€69:26–29 and MtÂ€19:28.
26
That the terms “Son of Man,” “Elect One” and “Anointed One” refer to the same being has
been shown by VanderKam in “Righteous One,” 169–91.
27
So also Caragounis, The Son of Man, 171 and my discussion of Mt.Â€19:28, 25:31.
CO25117.indb 236 11/03/2011 11:58

Conclusion 237
5.1.3.2â•‡ Inflicting Pain, Terror and Shame

The Son of Man as eschatological judge inï¬‡icts pain, terror and shame upon the kings
and the mighty in 1Â€EnochÂ€62:4–5, 10 owing to the judgment against them. This
issues ultimately in their being consigned to a ï¬†ery fate (see below).
The pain, terror and shame inï¬‡icted on the oppressors appears in Matthew in
two ways. One is through the refrain e0kei= e1stai o( klauqmo_j kai\ o( brugmo_j tw~n
o(do&ntwn (there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth; Mt.Â€8:12, 13:42, 50, 22:13,
24:51, 25:30). The pain, terror and shame of the oppressors also appear in Matthew’s
claim that all the tribes of earth shall mourn at the sign of the Son of Man (ko&yontai
pa=sai ai9 fulai\ th=j gh=j, Mt.Â€24:30, cf. also ZechÂ€12:10–14). It was argued above
that this note on the mourning of the tribes is part of the way in which Matthew
shapes the description of the coming of the Son of Man on the clouds in the direction
of Par. En. This similarity, while not precise and explicit, is nonetheless strong and
ï¬†ts in the category of the pattern of the relationships (see TableÂ€7).
5.1.3.3â•‡ Recognized at the Last

That the Son of Man is ï¬†nally revealed to and recognized by the kings and the mighty
ones is a feature of the portrait that appears in 1 EnochÂ€62–63 as well. At their ï¬†nal
judgment, the Son of Man as eschatological judge is at last revealed to them in this
scene. They are asked to see and recognize him, and in response they glorify, bless
and extol him (1Â€EnochÂ€62:3, 6, 63:4). This feature appears to function narratively in
that the judged need to know by whom they are being judged, and it functions as a
consolation to the righteous, who can be satisï¬†ed that justice will be served and those
who receive it will know full well why and by whom.
The revelation of the Son of Man also appears in Matthew’s description of the
Last Judgment (Mt.Â€25:31â•‚46). All nations are gathered before the Son of Man/King,
and his identity is revealed to them. Not only is the judge revealed to the wicked in
the description through their being gathered before him, but his identity is further
explicated to them in his identiï¬†cation with the poor and downtrodden whom the
wicked have mistreated. The necessity of the condemned having to ask when they
had mistreated him indicates that he had been hidden from them, but was now being
revealed to them. Since this is a description of the last judgment, the revelation in
Matthew’s schema is a final revelation. Because the description does not explicitly
state it, their recognition of him is only implicit.
This feature fits as a similarity in patterns of relationship between the two works,
and so it appears in TableÂ€7.
5.1.3.4â•‡ Request by the Condemned

In the judgment scene in 1Â€EnochÂ€62–63, the kings and the mighty ones make a
request, not only for mercy but also for more time in which to honor the Son of
Man. Narratively, this request is part of their acknowledging the appropriateness of
the judgment against them, and it functions to conï¬†rm the correctness of it. It also
functions to afï¬†rm for the righteous the propriety of their yearning for justice.
CO25117.indb 237 11/03/2011 11:58

A request on the part of the condemned is also a feature of Matthew’s description

of the Last Judgment (Mt.Â€25:31–46). The condemned ask for clariï¬†cation, and the
implication is that they too desire mercy from the hand of the judge, hoping to rely
on their own ignorance as a mitigating factor.
That a request is made in both works is signiï¬†cant, even though it is not for
precisely the same thing. This feature, then, since it is not close and precise, is listed
in TableÂ€7.
5.1.3.5â•‡ No Mercy Forthcoming

The next detail of the judgment scene is also shared by both works. In the scene in
which the kings and the mighty plead for mercy and acknowledge the authority of
the Son of Man to pass judgment in 1Â€EnochÂ€62–63, no mercy is forthcoming. As
they had not had mercy on the righteous and elect, so mercy will not be shown to
them. Vengeance will be executed upon them since they had oppressed the righteous
(1Â€EnochÂ€ 62:11), and since they had not gloriï¬†ed the Lord of Spirits but trusted
in their own scepters, so their condemnation was justiï¬†ed, even in their own eyes
(1Â€EnochÂ€63:7–9). No mercy is forthcoming for them.
Similarly in Mt.Â€13:36–43, the Interpretation of the Parable of the Weeds, it is
clear that no mercy is possible for the wicked. They will simply be gathered up
and thrown into the ï¬†ery furnace. Again in the description of the Last Judgment
(Mt.Â€25:31â•‚46), it is a foregone conclusion that the ones on the left are there because
of their treatment of the poor and downtrodden. Because they have not acted with
compassion, mercy is not available for them, and they are simply commanded to enter
into their fate.
The unavailability of mercy in the portrait of the Son of Man is a very close and
precise functional similarity between the two works, and so it appears in TableÂ€6.
5.1.3.6â•‡ Salvation for the Righteous

Again, the salvation to be enjoyed by the righteous is a feature common to both
portraits. In 1Â€EnochÂ€62:13–16, the righteous are promised that they shall be saved,
and shall dwell with the Son of Man, share in heavenly feasting and be garbed in
glorious and permanent heavenly garments. The salvation to be enjoyed by them
will last for ever and is described in terms of a banquet. In 1Â€EnochÂ€71:16–17 the
righteous are promised an eternal dwelling with the Son of Man, as well as peace and
righteousness.
Eternal, heavenly bliss is also promised to the righteous in Matthew’s depiction
of the Son of Man. In the Interpretation of the Parable of the Weeds, the righteous
will shine like the sun (Mt.Â€13:43), while in the description of the Last Judgment,
they are invited to inherit the kingdom prepared for them and to enter into eternal life
(Mt.Â€25:34, 46). Dwelling in eternal bliss is promised to them.
This bright, blissful promise is a feature, then, that is a close and precise similarity
between the two portraits of the Son of Man, and therefore it appears in TableÂ€6.
CO25117.indb 238 11/03/2011 11:58

Conclusion 239
5.1.3.7â•‡ Fairness of Judgment

The fairness of the judgment against them is explicitly acknowledged by the kings
and the mighty ones in Par. En. In 1Â€EnochÂ€63:8–9 they say, “.â•›.â•›.our Lord is true in all
his works, and in his judgments and his justice.â•›.â•›.and all our sins are justly reckoned
up.” This is explicit acknowledgment that the judgment is fair.
In Matthew this acknowledgment is not explicit, but in the narrative framework of
the Parable (or description) of the Last Judgment (Mt.Â€25:31–46) the fairness of the
judge is implicit, not only because he is the eschatological judge, but also because the
condemned do not protest their fate. For the narrator, the fairness of the judgment is
assumed.
Since this feature is apparent in the pattern of relationships in Matthew, but
explicit in Par. En., it appears in TableÂ€7.
5.1.4â•‡ 1 Enoch 69:26–29
Six features of the Enochic Son of Man were highlighted in 1Â€EnochÂ€69:26–29, three
of which have already been compared to the Matthean portrait, and three of which
must now be compared. Already included in previous passages are the features of the
Son of Man having a judicial role, of being revealed to his followers, and of being
seated on his throne of glory. Three further features from this passage can now be
compared with the Matthean depiction.
5.1.4.1â•‡ A Strong and Incontrovertible Word

The word of the Son of Man is strong in the sense that it is effective, incontrovertible,
trustworthy and reliable. The plea of the condemned kings in 1Â€EnochÂ€63 conï¬†rms
the irreversible nature of the Son of Man’s judgment. Further the conï¬†rmation by the
Lord of Spirits in 1Â€EnochÂ€63:12 veriï¬†es that the word of the Son of Man stands and
is to stand without possibility of appeal. The irreversibility of the judicial word of
the Son of Man further functions to provide great consolation, hope and trust on the
part of the vindicated.
The Son of Man’s word is not described as being strong and incontrovertible in
Matthew; however in the description of the Last Judgment (Mt.Â€25:31–46) the ruling
of the Son of Man/King functions in this strong and incontrovertible manner. Neither
the condemned nor the righteous sway the judgment either way. They ask a question
of clariï¬†cation, but when the answer is given there is no suggestion that the ruling
does not stand. The judge’s word is ï¬†nal and irreversible. A similar ï¬†nality holds
true for the judgment of the Son of Man in the Interpretation of the Parable of the
Weeds (Mt.Â€13:36–43). The weeds are simply gathered up and thrown into the ï¬†ery
furnace. The irreversibility of the Son of Man’s word is also implied in the mourning
of the tribes of the earth at the coming of the Son of Man (Mt.Â€24:30–31). There is no
question but that the word of this Son of Man will be absolutely effective and that it
will be obeyed.
CO25117.indb 239 11/03/2011 11:58

The incontrovertibility of the Son of Man’s word, then, is a feature that is

common to both the portrait of the Son of Man in Par. En. and in Matthew. It is a
parallel feature at the level of the pattern of relationships, and so is listed in TableÂ€7.
5.1.4.2â•‡ The Destruction of Evil

In this passage the Son of Man is displayed as the one by whom the destruction of evil
will be accomplished. In 1Â€EnochÂ€69:27, the totality of judicial authority is assigned
to the Son of Man, and this leads to his being the cause of the destruction and eradi-
cation of sinners. It is promised that the oppressors will be completely destroyed and
all evil will be eradicated (1Â€EnochÂ€69:28–29). The theme is explicit in this passage,
but it has been broached in earlier passages. The aura of total authority appeared in
the ï¬†rst passage to mention the Son of Man (1Â€EnochÂ€46), simply in his accompa-
nying the Chief of Days. The anguish on the faces of the oppressors (1Â€EnochÂ€48:8)
hints at their ï¬†nal condemnation, and their unsuccessful plea for mercy, as well as
their acknowledgment of the justice of his judgment (1Â€EnochÂ€63) afï¬†rms the ï¬†nality
of their fate. The ï¬†ery fate that awaits them (see below) and the deep valley in which
they will be incarcerated for eternity (1Â€EnochÂ€53:3–5, 54:1–5) also presume the
eradication of the evil they have perpetrated from the earth. This theme of the eradi-
cation of evil through the judicial authority of the Son of Man pervades the whole
work, and is meant to bring hope to the oppressed.
The destruction of evil is not expressed so explicitly in Matthew, although hints
of it are present. In the two unique Matthean passages already noted in this study, the
Interpretation of the Parable of the Weeds (Mt.Â€13:36–43) and the description of the
Last Judgment (Mt.Â€25:31–46), the utter separation of the wicked from the righteous
presumes the absolute authority of the Son of Man over the wicked. The irreversibility
of the judgment against them and their consignment to eternal condemnation also
supports the notion of the ï¬†nal eradication of evil. This motif is also present in the
Parable of the Net (MtÂ€13:47–50), in which an irreversible separation takes place and
the evil are thrown into a ï¬†ery furnace. The image depicts the utter destruction of evil.
Although the motif is not stated in Matthew as explicitly as it is in Par. En.,
the ï¬†nal and complete destruction of evil appears to be presumed, especially in the
Interpretation of the Parable of the Weeds (Mt.Â€13:36–43) and the description of
the Last Judgment (Mt.Â€25:31–46). Therefore it is appropriate to list this feature in
TableÂ€7.
5.1.4.3â•‡ Worldwide Jurisdiction

The worldwide jurisdiction of the Son of Man becomes explicit in this passage as well.
In 1Â€EnochÂ€69:27 the author has included four indications that the authority of the
Son of Man stretches across the earth. First, it is said that “the sum of judgment” or
the totality of judgment is given to him, indicating that he has complete and absolute
authority. Second, the author promises that sinners will be “destroyed from off the face
of the earth.” Again the view is worldwide. Third, the vision of being bound in chains is
applied to those “who have led the world astray.” If the oppression has been worldwide,
CO25117.indb 240 11/03/2011 11:58

Conclusion 241
then the authority to imprison is worldwide. And fourthly, the promise is repeated that
the oppressive deeds of the condemned will “vanish from the face of the earth.” While
these expressions are all ï¬†gurative, the authority of the Son of Man in the author’s view
is absolute, complete and worldwide. This kind of complete, worldwide authority has
the effect of bolstering the conï¬†dence, hope and perseverance of the oppressed.
The cosmic authority of the Son of Man has already been hinted at in earlier
passages describing the Son of Man. The heavenly setting evident in the appearance
(1Â€EnochÂ€46:1â•‚3), naming (1Â€EnochÂ€48:2–7) and enthronement (1Â€EnochÂ€62:3, 5) of
the Son of Man suggest his worldwide authority implicitly. Further, the kings are
not speciï¬†cally identiï¬†ed with a particular country, but are described in a generic
manner as “the kings of the earth” (1Â€EnochÂ€48:8), “those who possess the earth”
(1Â€EnochÂ€62:3) or “those who rule the earth” (1Â€EnochÂ€62:9). This generic description
of the oppressors also implies the worldwide jurisdiction of the Son of Man. Both the
setting of the scenes as well as the general way in which the oppressors are described
imply the worldwide dominion of the Son of Man in the author’s view.
The worldwide jurisdiction of the Son of Man is explicit in Matthew’s Gospel.
One passage in which this is evident is the note about all the tribes of earth mourning
(ko&yontai pa=sai ai9 fulai\ th=j gh=j, Mt.Â€24:30) at the sign of the Son of Man (cf.
ZechÂ€12:10–14). This is an addition to the Markan description of the Son of Man coming
on the clouds (MkÂ€13:26). As argued previously, the addition of this note indicates that
the scene has been shaped by Matthew under Enochic inï¬‡uence. In the description of
the Last Judgment also it is explicitly stated that all nations will be gathered before the
Son of Man/King (kai\ sunaxqh&sontai e1mprosqen au)tou= pa&nta ta_ e1qnh, MtÂ€25:32).
Again the worldwide dominion of the Son of Man is explicit. Both references here in
Matthew, like those in Par. En., are ï¬†gurative and are intended to show the complete
and absolute authority of the Son of Man. Further, the cosmic authority of the Son of
Man is also implicitly supported by the Matthean characterization of his heavenly status.
Because this similarity is so close and precise, it is listed in TableÂ€6.
5.1.5â•‡ 1 Enoch 70–71
5.1.5.1â•‡ The Presence of Angels

The role of the angels as attendants in the presence of the Son of Man ï¬†nally becomes
explicit in 1Â€EnochÂ€70–71. The interpreting angel had accompanied Enoch on his
tours, and angels had been described as carrying out divine decisions, but now ï¬†nally
they become a part of the entourage of the Son of Man. Myriads of angels surround
the glorious throne and the Head of Days (1Â€EnochÂ€71:7–10), and ï¬†nally as Enoch is
identiï¬†ed as that Son of Man (1Â€EnochÂ€71:14), they become his.
In Matthew, the angels are explicitly “his” (i.e. the Son of Man’s).28 Three times
the possessive pronoun referring to the Son of Man is used of the angels: Mt.Â€13:41,
28
CO25117.indb 241 11/03/2011 11:58

16:27, and 24:31; in the latter two occurrences, Matthew has added the possessive
pronoun as compared to Mark and Luke. The addition of the possessive pronoun
referring to the Son of Man may appear to be a simple matter, but in comparison with
Mark and Luke, who never use the possessive pronoun of the angels, it is striking
indeed. While in Mt.Â€25:31 the angels are not called “his,” they do accompany him
as an entourage. It appears here that Matthew has understood that in the vision of
1Â€EnochÂ€71 the divine entourage is also the Son of Man’s, and Matthew has made that
understanding explicit with the addition of the possessive pronoun.
Since, however, this is not explicit in both works, but is a development in
Matthew based upon the scene in Par. En., it must be listed in TableÂ€7, as a feature of
the pattern of relationships.
5.1.5.2â•‡ Heavenly Brightness

In this ï¬†nal vision of Par. En., the inhabitants of heaven are gloriously bright, as the
divine ï¬†gure is bathed in light. Not only are the sons of the holy angels treading on
ï¬‡ames, but their garments are white and their appearance like snow. Similarly, in the
First Parable, the vision of the Elect One in heaven includes innumerable righteous
and elect who are “radiant like the brightness of ï¬†re” (1Â€EnochÂ€39:7) Again, in the
opening words of the Third Parable, the righteous are described as being in the light
of the sun, having found light and righteousness, which shall shine like the sun
(1Â€EnochÂ€58:1, 4). Light shall be inexhaustible (1Â€EnochÂ€58:6). This opening chapter
of the Third Parable29 focuses on the expected outcome of the fate of the righteous.
Taken with the vision of the heavenly palace, the whole scene in the author’s mind
is ï¬†lled with brightness and light, as the comparisons to the sun and snow indicate.
The inhabitants of heaven are bathed in glorious brightness (c.f. also 1Â€EnochÂ€38:4,
39:7, 51:5). While in 1Â€EnochÂ€71, it is clearly angels who are referred to as bright
like snow, in 1Â€EnochÂ€39 and 58, it is the human righteous who are promised this
gloriously bright existence. When their reward comes to fruition, they will join the
watchers in their glorious brightness.
This perception of brightness for the heavenly occupants also occurs in Matthew’s
description of the righteous. In the Interpretation of the Parable of the Weeds, the
righteous are promised that they shall shine like the sun (e0kla&myousin w(j o9 h3lioj,
Mt.Â€13:43). Here the expectation of brightness is the same as that found in Par. En.,
and even the simile with the sun is the same.30 This is a close and precise similarity
between the two works, and so it is listed in TableÂ€6.
29
Hooker, Morna D., The Son of Man in Mark, 38. Hooker sees the opening chapter of each
Parable as a prologue providing a broad outline of the contents of the following vision.
30
Matthew’s description has some similarity also with Dan.Â€12:3, where the wise will shine
like the brightness of the sky and those who lead others to righteousness will shine like the
stars forever. This similarity is not as close as that with 1Â€EnochÂ€71, 39, and 58. There are
also other references to the brightness of the inhabitants of heaven. 4thÂ€EzraÂ€7:97, a late
first-century ce work, is very similar to Mt.Â€13:43. Examples of later works that envision the
brightness of the heavenly realms and its inhabitants are the following: 2Â€EnochÂ€1 describes
CO25117.indb 242 11/03/2011 11:58

Conclusion 243
5.2â•‡ Two Levels of Similarity

Tables 6 and 7 reveal two levels of similarity between the two works. The detailed
characteristics of the Son of Man listed in TableÂ€6 are shared by both works and
are close and precise. The heavenly status and judicial role of the Son of Man are
presented explicitly in both works. Those with whom the Son of Man identiï¬†es are
called “righteous” and “elect” in both works, although “elect” is also found in the
synoptic parallel. Very intriguing is the description of the throne as the “throne of his
glory.” As noted above, this phrase is common only to Par. En. and Matthew. Other
references to a throne do occur in Scripture and in the pseudepigrapha, but rarely, and
never with the qualiï¬†cation, do&chj au)tou=, “of his glory.”31 So this phrase, manbara
sebḥatihu, is the clearest, precise example of a concept shared by the two works.
Further, the relationship between the condemned and the Son of Man is the same in
both works. The Son of Man had not been known or recognized by the condemned,
but ï¬†nally at their judgment he is revealed to them and his authority is worldwide.
They make a ï¬†nal request, but no mercy is forthcoming. Eternal bliss, however,
is promised to the righteous, who will enter into the brightly lit realms of the Son
of Man.
Just as evident as well is the pattern of relationships that exists, as noted in
TableÂ€7. Even though not explicitly stated, the same pattern of relationships does exist
in both works. The righteousness of the Son of Man is stated in Par. En. but implicit
in Matthew, as is his revelatory role. Again, his chosenness is explicit in the Son of
Man passages in Par. En., but is found in Matthew by way of quoting IsaiahÂ€42. His
pre-existence, which is combined with his being named before the Lord of Spirits for
a salviï¬†c purpose is explicit in Par. En., but presumed in Matthew. The features of
being a support for the righteous, a light for the Gentiles, and worthy of worship are
all explicit in the Son of Man passages in Par. En., but are to be found in the wider
context of the Gospel of Matthew as a whole. His hiddenness, as well as his being
revealed to the righteous, are explicitly stated in Par. En., but illustrated in Matthew.
His effect on the condemned, inï¬‡icting pain, terror and shame, and yet being acknowl-
edged as fair and right in his judgment, are also explicit in Par. En., but implicit in
Matthew. The incontrovertibility of the judicial decision is stated in Par. En., but
illustrated in Matthew, as is the Son of Man being the cause of the destruction of evil.
One difference between Par. En. and Matthew, which could be seen as a devel-
opment by Matthew of an Enochic motif is the use of the possessive pronoun in the
references to the angels. Neither Mark nor Luke ascribed ownership of the angels
to the Son of Man, while Matthew does, in effect elevating the status of the Son of
Man to that of authority over the angels. This corroborates his divine status, which
two huge ï¬†gures with faces shining like the sun; 2Â€EnochÂ€19 portrays the angels in the 6th
heaven as having faces more radiant than the sun; 2Â€EnochÂ€20 speaks of the immeasurable
light in the 7th heaven; and 3Â€EnochÂ€12 expands on the brightness of Metatron/Enoch’s
garments.
31
Sir. 47:11 does tell of David’s throne as qro&non do&chj.
CO25117.indb 243 11/03/2011 11:58

is conveyed through the image of the Son of Man seated on his glorious throne with
judicial authority.
These two levels of similarity, the close and precise verbal similarities and the
similarities in the pattern of relationships, are extensive and impressive. Combining
these two Tables, twenty five features are shared by the two works. The use of the terms
“righteous” and “elect” and the appearance of “the throne of his glory” are striking. The
heavenly status, the judicial role, the revelation to and the recognition by the kings and
the mighty ones, the request by the condemned and the denial of mercy, as well as the
worldwide jurisdiction all indicate a similarity in the way the characters function.
5.3â•‡ Other Similarities

There are other similarities from other parts of Par. En. that are worth noting, for they
are also expressed in the Matthean Son of Man passages. These further similarities
are tabulated in Table 8.
Table 8
Other Similarities relating to the Son of Man
Characteristic or Feature Par. En. Matthew
1.â•‡ï¬†ery fate of the condemned 54:1, 5, 53:4–5, 63:10, 13:42, cf also 13:50,
â•… cf also 67:7, 12–13 25:41
â•… in the Noachic section
2.â•‡ fate prepared for Azazel/the Devil 54:5 25:41, c.f. Rev 4:10
3.â•‡ clear dichotomy between righteous passim 13:36–43, 25:31–46,
â•… and condemned â•… c.f. 19:28
4.â•‡ basis of judgment: 62:11, cf 46:8 25:31–46
â•… treatment of righteous by oppressors
5.â•‡ anticipated reversal of fortunes 38:4–5; 45:5–6; 48:7–10; 13:36–43, 16:27–28,
50:1–2; 62:9–16; 63:11; â•… 25:31–46, implied
â•… 69:27–28 â•… in 10:23, 19:28,
â•…â•…â•…â•…â•…24:30–31
5.3.1â•‡ Other Similarities between Par. En. and Matthew
5.3.1.1â•‡ Fiery Fate

One feature found in Par. En. is the ï¬†ery fate of the condemned. They are to be
consigned to a deep ï¬†ery valley, bound in fetters. Four angels will cast them into this
ï¬†ery furnace, a punishment that was prepared for Azazel, one of the fallen watchers,
and his hosts (see 1Â€EnochÂ€54:1, 5, 53:4–5, 63:10, cf also 67:7, 12–13 in the Noachic
section). This expected punishment for the oppressors would have given the righteous
great hope and strength to endure the oppressive measures perpetrated against them.
Interestingly Matthew also speaks of a ï¬†ery fate for the condemned in MtÂ€13:36–43
CO25117.indb 244 11/03/2011 11:58

Conclusion 245
and 25:31–46.32 Matthew foresees that the angels of the Son of Man will cast the
wicked into a furnace of ï¬†re (ei0j th\n ka&minon tou= puro&j, 13:42, cf also MtÂ€13:50),
while in the description of the Last Judgment, the wicked will be sent into eternal ï¬†re
(ei0j to_ pu=r to_ ai0w~nion, 25:41). The ï¬†ery fate of the condemned indicates a shared
perception by these two authors.
5.3.1.2â•‡ Fate Prepared for Azazel/Devil

While the ï¬†ery fate of the wicked may also depend on contemporaneous ideas about
Gehenna, the more surprising similarity is that this fate was prepared for evil trans-
cendent beings, the host of Azazel in 1Â€EnochÂ€54:5 and the Devil and his angels in
Mt.Â€25:41 (h(toimasme/non tw| diabo&lw| kai\ toi=j a)gge/loij au)tou=). These are
striking similarities.
5.3.1.3â•‡ A Clear Dichotomy

Throughout Par. En. a clear dichotomy exists between the righteous and the wicked:
on the social level, on the spiritual level, and on the level of their fate following
judgment. Socially the wicked are high-ranking, while the righteous are oppressed.
Spiritually the wicked are aligned with Azazel, and the righteous with the Son of
Man. And eschatologically, the wicked are bound for punishment, the righteous for
bliss. A similar dichotomy exists in the Matthean judgment parables, where a clear
distinction exists narratively between the righteous and the wicked and where no
hope of mercy for the wicked is expressed. Further, the punishment of the wicked
and the bliss that is promised for the righteous are sharply distinguished. This clear
dichotomy between the two groups is a very striking similarity in the two works.33
5.3.1.4â•‡ Basis of Judgment

Further, the basis of judgment hinges on the same dynamic in both works. For
Mt.Â€25:31–46, the basis of judgment is explicitly and concisely stated: the wicked
are condemned on the basis of their treatment of those with whom the Son of Man
identiï¬†es. They refused meat, drink, clothing and visitation to “the least of these my
brethren,” those identiï¬†ed with the Son of Man, and therefore they are condemned.
While never so concisely stated in Par. En., the same principle functions as the basis
for judgment. The wicked will be delivered to the punishing angels because they have
oppressed the Son of Man’s elect (1Â€EnochÂ€62:11, cf 46:8). They will be consigned
to eternal punishment, on the basis of how they have treated the righteous and elect,
while the righteous and elect are destined for eternal bliss with the Son of Man. Thus,
the same basis for judgment is operative in both works.
32
See Theisohn’s discussion in Der auserwählte Richter, 192–95.
33
The group of Jesus’ followers whom Matthew addresses seems to be a mixed group of
righteous and sinners, as can be seen in the instructions on how to deal with unrepentant
sinners in MatthewÂ€18 and in the parable about the wedding garment in MatthewÂ€22. The
absence of even the possibility of mercy is therefore all the more striking in Mt.Â€13:36–43
and 25:31–46.
CO25117.indb 245 11/03/2011 11:58

5.3.1.5â•‡ Reversal of Fortunes

All this leads to the anticipated reversal of fortunes. In both works the oppressed are
vindicated and rewarded with eternal life and with the restoration of their fortunes on
earth, while the oppressors, formerly powerful, are humbled and punished.
5.4â•‡ Other Judgment Scenes

When judgment scenes in other, roughly contemporary or later works are reviewed,
the distinctiveness of the Par. En. and Matthew is highlighted. Reviewing other
judgment scenes from the ï¬†rst and second centuries ce may reveal the usual motifs
and ideas that were shared by the culture of Hellenistic Judaism and early Christianity
in distinction from those exhibited in Par. En. and Matthew.
A judgment scene that has already been acknowledged to have inï¬‡uenced Par. En. is
Dan. 7:9–14, where a throne with ï¬†ery ï¬‡ames and burning wheels is seen, along with the
Ancient of Days on that throne, surrounded by multitudes of angels. Books are opened,
one of the beasts is destroyed and its body burned in ï¬†re, and then the human-like one is
presented and given dominion, honor, glory and kingship. In Ezek.Â€1:26–28, the glorious
sight of the throne is seen, but not in context of judgment. Similarly in RevelationÂ€4–5,
elders on twenty four thrones are seen, surrounded by singing angels. Glory and honor
abound, but judgment is not the setting, rather the revelation of the contents of the sealed
scroll is in focus. RevelationÂ€20 includes a judgment scene in which thrones are present
and the authority to judge is bestowed on the occupants of those thrones. The devil is
ï¬†rst thrown into a pit for a thousand years, and later after a thousand years of freedom, is
consumed by ï¬†re from heaven and thrown into a lake of ï¬†re. The sea, Death and Hades
give up their dead for judgment, and books are open in which the deeds of the judged
are written. Those not written in the Book of Life are thrown into the lake of ï¬†re along
with Satan, the beast, the false prophet, Death and Hades. The fate of the righteous is not
explained explicitly, nor is the basis of judgment clariï¬†ed.34
The Testament of AbrahamÂ€12–13 (1st–2nd c.ce) also reports on a judgment
scene. This account includes a three part judgment, ï¬†rst by Abel (introduced as a Son
of God) seated on a terrifying throne, then by the twelve tribes of Israel, and ï¬†nally
by God. Included here also are ï¬†ery looking angels, and a huge book for judgment,
measuring six cubits by ten cubits. Scribal angels are present to record the deeds of
those who are judged and weigh them against the righteousness of God. Fire will
test the judged: the righteous will be shown to be impervious to ï¬†re and so will be
saved, while the wicked will be consumed by ï¬†re and consigned to punishment in
34
G.K. Beale, The Book of Revelation: A Commentary on the Greek Text (NIGTC; Grand
Rapids: William B. Eerdmans, 1999), 1037, points out, however, that one may discern
the implied basis of judgment for the righteous. They are written in the Book of Life, and
so are saved, because they have identified with the Lamb’s purpose, activities and death,
which presumably, in Beale’s mind, includes kindness and compassion toward the poor and
oppressed. But this is only implicit, not explicit.
CO25117.indb 246 11/03/2011 11:58

Conclusion 247
ï¬†re. Another work, the Apocalypse of Zephanaiah (1st c.bce–1st c.ce) appears to
envision each individual having two manuscripts, one with shortcomings and failings,
and the other presumably ï¬†lled with good deeds (chapterÂ€7). There follows a lacuna
in the text, but presumably the two manuscripts are then weighed to determine the
individual’s fate. In the Greek Apocalypse of EzraÂ€4:9 (2nd–9th c.ce) Herod suffers
on a ï¬†ery throne. The Sibylline OraclesÂ€2:196–338 (150 ce) report an extensive and
vivid judgment scene. Here a blazing river of ï¬†re consumes everything, the stars fall,
the souls of humans gnash their teeth, brimstone, ï¬†re and ash cover everything and
there is a cessation of birds ï¬‡ying, sea creatures swimming, ships sailing and oxen
plowing. Then the four archangels lead the souls to judgment. God, the universal
ruler, is the judge seated on the heavenly throne, with Christ on his right hand and
Moses, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Joshua, Daniel, Elijah, Habakkuk and Jonah all in
attendance. When they pass through the river of ï¬†re, the righteous are saved, and
the impious, who are guilty of a long list of impieties, are destroyed. The angels are
equipped with whips of ï¬‡ame and ï¬†ery chains, and even though the condemned plead
for mercy, God turns away, so that no mercy is available. Again, God is conceived of
as the judge and the basis of judgment is the impiety of the judged.
When these other, roughly contemporary judgment scenes35 are reviewed, the
uniqueness and similarity to each other of Par. En. and Matthew are highlighted. In
these other judgment scenes, God is most often the judge (DanielÂ€7, RevelationÂ€20,
T. Ab.Â€13, Sib. Or.Â€2:196–338, 4:40–45). Fire is very frequently associated with
the scene, as well as with the punishment (Daniel 7, RevelationÂ€20, T.Â€Ab.Â€13,
Apoc.Â€ElijahÂ€5:22–39, Grk Apoc. of Ezra, Sib.Â€Or.Â€4:40–45), while Sib.Â€Or.Â€2:196–338
describes the great assize in volcanic imagery. Angels often are involved (DanielÂ€7,
RevelationÂ€20, 4–5) to record people’s deeds (T.Â€Ab.Â€ 13), or they have ï¬†ery whips
and chains to herd people through the river of ï¬†re to judgment (Sib.Â€Or.Â€2:196–338).
A book or manuscript (sometimes more than one) is often associated with judgment
to determine the fate of the individual. Satan is usually cast into a pit or lake of ï¬†re
(RevelationÂ€20, Apoc. ElijahÂ€5:22–39). And Sib.Â€Or.Â€2:196–338 reports a request
by the judged for mercy, but none is forthcoming. These are the more common and
expected motifs that accompany judgment scenes. TableÂ€9 shows all the character-
istics which were identiï¬†ed in Par. En. and Matthew (TablesÂ€6, 7, and 8), as well as
those occuring in the other judgment scenes just described.
A review and comparison of these characteristics, then, further points out the
distinctiveness of the scenes from Par. En. and Matthew. Many features are shared
with Par. En. and Matthew, but some are not and they are quite signiï¬†cant. Most
arresting is the ï¬†gure doing the judging: in all the other scenes God is the judge,
although in T.Â€Ab.Â€ 12–13 ï¬†rst Abel and then the twelve tribes of Israel are also
35
See further M. Rist, “Eschatology of Apoc. and Pseudep.,” IDB 2.133–35 and Richard H.
Hiers, “Day of Judgment,” ABD 2.79–82. See also Nickelsburg, Resurrection, Immortality,
and Eternal Life In Intertestamental Judaism, 28–42, especially 38, Table 1, where several
judgment scenes are analyzed and found to include witnesses, a book, post-mortem
judgment and certain consequences of judgment.
CO25117.indb 247 11/03/2011 11:58

involved. In Par. En. and Matthew, however, it is the Son of Man/Elect One who is
on the throne executing judgment by the authority of God. Further, while thrones are
frequent (but not ubiquitous), nowhere else is it termed a “throne of his glory.” The
dynamic of being hidden and then revealed is not a part of the other judgment scenes,
while it is an important dynamic in Par. En. and Matthew. The motifs of being named
from eternity, being a support for the righteous and a light to the Gentiles do not occur
in other judgment scenes. The fact that the punishment had been prepared beforehand
for the forces of evil is not highlighted in the other judgment scenes. The ï¬†nal motif
that is quite signiï¬†cant and distinctive about Par. En.’s and Matthew’s presentation is
the basis for judgment. In the other scenes, the criterion for judgment is always the
deeds of the person being judged, whether the good outweigh the bad. But in Par.
En. and Matthew, the criterion for judgment is the treatment of the righteous, with
whom the judge identiï¬†es in a redemptive way. These motifs apparently are not very
common in ancient judgment scenes, but they are distinctive to the conception of the
last judgment in Par. En. and Matthew.
Table 9
Features of Judgment Scenes in Parables of Enoch, Matthew and others
Characteristic or Feature 1Â€Enoch Dan. 7 Rev. 20 T.Ab. Apoc. Apoc. G.Apoc. Sib.
and Mt. 12–13 Elijah Zeph. Ezra Or. 2
â•⁄1.â•‡heavenly status • • • • • • • •
â•⁄2.â•‡judicial role • • • • • • • •
â•⁄ 3.â•‡ followers called “righteous” • • • • •
â•⁄ 4.â•‡ followers called “elect” •
â•⁄ 5.â•‡ seated upon throne of his •
â•…â•‡ glory
â•⁄ 6.â•‡ï¬†nally revealed and •
â•…â•‡ recognized by the kings and
â•…â•‡ the mighty
â•⁄ 7.â•‡ request by the condemned • •
â•⁄ 8.â•‡ no mercy for condemned • • • • •
â•⁄ 9.â•‡ promise of eternal bliss for • •
â•…â•‡ the righteous
10.â•‡ worldwide jurisdiction •
11.â•‡ brightness of inhabitants of • • • •
â•…â•‡ heaven
12.â•‡righteousness • • • • •
13.â•‡ revelatory role •
14.â•‡chosenness •
15.â•‡ named from eternity •
â•…â•‡ (i.e. purpose and
â•…â•‡ pre-existence)
16.â•‡ support for the righteous •
17.â•‡ light for the Gentiles •
18.â•‡ worthy of worship • • •
19.â•‡hiddenness •
20.â•‡ revealed to insiders •
CO25117.indb 248 11/03/2011 11:58

Conclusion 249
Table 9 (contd.)
Characteristic or Feature 1Â€Enoch Dan. 7 Rev. 20 T.Ab. Apoc. Apoc. G.Apoc. Sib.
and Mt. 12–13 Elijah Zeph. Ezra Or. 2
21.â•‡ inï¬‡icts pain, terror and • •

â•…â•‡ shame
22.â•‡ fairness of judgment • • • •
23.â•‡ word is strong and • • • •
â•…â•‡ incontrovertible
24.â•‡ causes the destruction of • • • • • •
â•…â•‡ evil
25.â•‡ angels present • • • • • • •
26.â•‡ï¬†ery fate of the condemned • • • • • • • •
27.â•‡ fate prepared for Azazel/the •
â•…â•‡ Devil
28.â•‡ clear dichotomy between • • • • •
â•…â•‡ righteousand condemned
29.â•‡ basis of judgment: treatment •
â•…â•‡ of righteous by oppressors
30.â•‡ anticipated reversal of •
â•…â•‡ fortunes
5.5â•‡Conclusion
This study has revealed several types of similarities between the ï¬†gure of the Son of
Man as portrayed in Par. En. and the ï¬†gure portrayed in Matthew, especially in the
figure of the eschatological judge, the Son of Man. A comparison of Matthew, 1Â€Enoch
and a number of other judgment-scene depictions of roughly the same time period has
also shown several important distinctions that set Matthew and 1Â€Enoch apart from
the others. These similarities and distinctions, while not rising to the level of proof
that Matthew was literarily dependent upon Par. En., nonetheless are extensive and
intriguing. Is it possible that Matthew knew of and was familiar with Par. En.? One
can observe Matthew’s shaping of the ï¬†gure of the Son of Man in that direction in
the passages he received from the traditions of Mark and Q, as Tödt observed. The
comparison with the synoptics has also revealed Matthew’s deliberate molding of
the ï¬†gure of the Son of Man further in the direction of an eschatological judge. Two
passages in Matthew, the Interpretation of the Parable of the Weeds (Mt.Â€13:36–43)
and the description of the Last Judgment (Mt.Â€25:31–46), clearly reveal Matthew’s
hand, and his conception of the Son of Man. In these two passages the greatest concen-
tration of Enoch-like characteristics and features is found. While literary dependence
may not be claimed, it has been shown that Par. En. and Matthew do share a common
conception of the last judgment, especially in comparison with the other judgment
scenes from roughly the same time period. The extent of the similar features that do
not appear elsewhere makes it tantalizingly possible that Matthew knew Par. En. with
its conception of the final judgment. Further, even though Matthew did not borrow
CO25117.indb 249 11/03/2011 11:58

vocabulary from or quote Par. En., aside from the probable quotation of “throne of his
glory,” it is very possible that Matthew allowed the Parables to shape his portrayal of
the Son of Man. Because so many features Matthew has incorporated do not appear in
other contemporary literature, it is likely that he knew and used Par. En. in particular,
along with his other sources for the story of Jesus.
This study has also shown that the hypothesis put forward by Douglas R. A. Hare
is untenable. Following Lievestad and others, Hare argues that the term “Son of Man”
was merely a modest, circumlocutionary self-designation, and that Matthew was
unaware of any meaning other than that. But at precisely those points where Matthew
has unique material (i.e. Mt.Â€13:36–43 and 25:31–46), the similarities with Par. En.
are the greatest, and the shaping of Jesus in the direction of Par. En. the clearest. At
these points Matthew has incorporated Enoch-like characterizations of the Son of
Man into his narrative. Because they are like another work’s characterization of the
Son of Man, Matthew is shown to have deliberately shaped his conception of the
Son of Man in that direction. At precisely these points, Hare is the weakest. He can
claim only that Matthew had no in-depth understanding of the content of the self-
designation. His claims are unconvincing.
Part of Hare’s argument is that the term is meaningless. Aside from being a modest
self-designation, Hare notes that the audience in the narrative does not seem to under-
stand what is meant by it. And yet that very feature, that the narrative audience is
unaware, is precisely a narrative technique to illustrate the hiddenness of the Son of
Man! And even the disciples, when the term was used in the narrative, apparently did
not understand either, but that is precisely the narrative purpose, to reveal the hitherto
hidden Son of Man. Matthew’s goal is to reveal to the real audience, the readers and
hearers of the text, the identity of Christ, not only as prophet, teacher, Son of God,
and son of David, but also as the eschatological Son of Man in whose hands is the
judgment of the world. Thus the ignorance of the narrative audience, the crowds and
the disciples, is actually a technique used by the author to reveal convincingly the
completeness of the characterization of Jesus.
Hare’s approach was to work backwards, unpeeling the layers of tradition. He
used the image of peeling away the layers of an onion. Just as when one peels away
the layers of an onion one ends up with nothing, so, it seems, Hare has peeled away
and ended up with nothing except many bits and pieces of tradition that may even
produce tears of frustration. Hare’s approach has virtually pre-determined his results.
A more apt image for this study would be an apple. When an apple is cut crossways
through the middle, several layers or rings are distinguishable, from the skin, through
the ï¬‡esh of the apple to the seeds in the core. Those seeds, however, indicate that
the apple had a prehistory, that it developed out of a blossom, which was attached to
a twig, on a tree, with roots. This image of the apple, with its connectedness to the
ground is a more apt image for Matthew’s portrayal of the Son of Man. He was very
aware of the content of the term; otherwise the two unique Matthean passages under
discussion here would not have been presented the way they are. The similarities and
distinctions presented above may not prove conclusively that Matthew was literarily
CO25117.indb 250 11/03/2011 11:58

Conclusion 251
dependent upon Par. En., but in a dynamic, creative manner Matthew has incorpo-
rated Enoch-like characteristics into his presentation of the Son of Man, and these
characteristics have been shown to exist distinctively in Par. En. and Matthew.
5.6â•‡ Prospects for Future Study

Enochic studies certainly have enjoyed a renaissance in the last couple of decades,
as evidenced by the bi-annual Enoch Seminars, organized by Gabrielle Boccaccini
and others. A significant consensus seems to have developed about certain matters
regarding the Book of Parables. Particularly, the matter of dating seems to have
settled for many scholars as being somewhere at the end of or soon after Herod the
Great’s reign. As James H. Charlesworth says, “dating the Parables of Enoch to the
time of Herod the Great and the Herodians has become conclusive.”36 This widely
accepted consensus means that the Parables of Enoch are pre-Christian and need to be
considered for possible influence on the writings of the New Testament.
My work, I believe, has shown that the writer of Matthew’s Gospel almost
certainly knew of it and shaped the “Son of Man” statements of Jesus in that direction.
This conclusion in turn raises the question of whether the other Gospel writers were
also aware of it. Is that knowledge confined to the later evangelists, or can it also be
discerned in Q, Mark and the Gospel of Thomas?37 The field will benefit from further
in-depth study of these questions.
The study of the influence of the Parables of Enoch on the Gospel of Matthew,
and the on the Gospels generally, then naturally leads to questions about Jesus’ own
knowledge of those ideas. Was Jesus the one to combine the end-time judicial concept
of the Son of Man from the Parables with the suffering servant themes of Isaiah? Is
Maurice Casey, The Solution to the ‘Son of man’ Problem, despite his sometimes
overly self-assured style, on to something with his argument that Jesus did use bar
(a)nash(a) as a modest means of self-reference in oppositional situations? Did this
use then evolve, with Jesus’ growing self-awareness and rising opposition, into an
understanding of his future role as end-time judge, or was this evolution due to Jesus’
early, post-Easter followers?38 And what does this reveal about the influences on Jesus
himself? John the Baptist with his Essene-like perspective is acknowledged in the
Gospels. Isaiah’s prophecies are another. Did he also converse with scholars in the
Enochic Movement in Galilee?39 Does this mean that the proposals of R. H. Charles
36
James H. Charlesworth, “Can We Discern the Composition Date of the Parables of Enoch?”
in Boccaccini, Enoch and the Messiah Son of Man, 467. See also Paolo Sacchi’s summary,
“The 2005 Camaldoli Seminar on the Parables of Enoch: Summary and Prospects for Future
Research,” 505, 510–511.
37
Charlesworth, “Composition Date,” 466.
38
J. Harold Ellens, Jesus as the Son of Man, the Literary Character: A Progression of Images
(Claremont, CA: Institute for Antiquity and Christianity, 2003).
39
Charlesworth, “Composition Date,” 466–467.
CO25117.indb 251 11/03/2011 11:58

that the Parables most certainly influenced early Christian writings and theology, a
century later, are seen not to be jumping to easy conclusions, but as accurate insights?
This renaissance of interest in Enochic studies, I believe, opens up these exciting
areas for future research.
CO25117.indb 252 11/03/2011 11:58

BIBLIOGRAPHY
The Bible
Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia. Edited by K. Elliger and W. Rudolph. Stuttgart:
Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 1983.
Novum Testamentum Graece. Edited by Eberhard and Erwin Nestle, Barbara and Kurt
Aland, Johannes Karavidopoulos, Carlo M. Martini, Bruce Metzger. 27th Edition;
Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 1993.
The New Oxford Annotated Bible (NRSV). Edited by Bruce M. Metzger and Roland
E. Murphy. New York: Oxford University Press, 1991.
Reference Works
Brown, Francis, S. R. Driver and Charles A. Briggs. A Hebrew and English Lexicon
of the Old Testament. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1951.
Dillmann, Augustus. Lexicon Linguae Aethiopicae. Lipsiae: Weigel, 1865.
Even-Shoshan, Abraham, ed. A New Concordance of the Old Testament. Jerusalem:
“Kiryat Sepher” Publishing House Ltd., 1983.
Jean, Charles-F., and Jacob Hoftijzer. Dictionnaire des inscriptions sémitiques de
l’ouest. Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1965.
Liddell, H. G., and R. Scott. Greek-English Lexicon. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1996.
Metzger, Bruce. A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament. United Bible
Societies, 1971.
Simpson, D. P. Cassell’s New Compact Latin-English English-Latin Dictionary. New
York: Funk and Wagnalls, 1963.
Secondary Literature
Archer, Gleason L., Jr., translator. Jerome’s Commentary on Daniel. Grand Rapids:
Baker Book House, 1958.
Beale, G. K. The Book of Revelation: A Commentary on the Greek Text. Grand
Rapids: William B. Eerdmans, 1999.
Beare, Francis Wright. The Gospel According to Matthew: Translation, Introduction
and Commentary. San Francisco: Harper and Row, 1981.
253
CO25117.indb 253 11/03/2011 11:58

254 Bibliography
Beer, Georg. “Das Buch Henoch.” In Die Apokryphen und Pseudepigraphen des
Alten Testaments, vol. 2, edited by Emil Kautsch. Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr, 1900,
reprinted by Hildesheim: Georg Olms Verlagsbuchhandlung, 1962.
Bietenhard, Hans. o!noma. In Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, vol. 5,
edited by Gerhard Friedrich, translated by Geoffrey W. Bromiley, 242–83. Grand
Rapids, MI: Wm.Â€B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1967.
Black, Matthew. The Book of Enoch or I Enoch; a New English Translation with
Commentary and Textual Notes. Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1985.
——. “The Messianism of the Parables of Enoch.” In The Messiah, edited by J. H.
Charlesworth, 150–55. Minneapolis: Fortress, 1992.
——. “The Throne-Theophany Prophetic Commission and the ‘Son of Man’: A Study
in Tradition History.” In Jews, Greeks and Christians: Religious Cultures in Late
Antiquity; Essays in Honor of William David Davies, edited by Robert Hamerton-
Kelly and Robin Scroggs, 57–73. Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1976.
Boccaccini, Gabriele, ed., Enoch and the Messiah Son of Man: Revisiting the Book
of Parables. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 2007.
Boring, M. Eugene. Matthew. New Interpreters Bible, Vol. VIII. Nashville: Abingdon,
1995.
Borsch, F. H. “MARK XIV.62 AND I ENOCH LXII.5.” NTS XIV (1967–68),
565–67.
Borsch, Frederick Houk. The Son of Man in Myth and History. Philadelphia:
Westminster Press, 1967.
Broer, Ingo. “Das Gericht des MS über die Völker Auslegung von Mt. 25, 31–46” in
Bibel und Leben 11 (1970), 273–95.
Bultmann, Rudolf. The History of the Synoptic Tradition. Rev. ed. New York: Harper
and Row, 1968.
——. Theology of the New Testament. London: SCM, 1952.
Burkett, Delbert. “The Nontitular Son of Man: A History and Critique.” NTS 40
(1994), 504–21.
Burnett, Fred W. “Paliggenesi/a IN MATT. 19:28: A WINDOW ON THE
MATTHEAN COMMUNITY?” JSNT 17 (1983), 60–72.
Buth, Randall. “A More Complete Semitic Background for )#n) rb, Son of Man.” In
AAR-SBL Abstracts, 1993, 112.
Caragounis, Chrys C. The Son of Man. Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck), 1986.
Casey, Maurice. Son of Man: The Interpretation and Influence of Daniel 7. London:
SPCK, 1979.
–––––. The Solution to the “Son of Man” Problem. London & New York: T&T Clark
International, 2007.
——. “The Use of Term ‘Son of Man’ in the Similitudes of Enoch.” JSJ 7 (1976),
11–29.
Catchpole, David R. “The Poor on Earth and the Son of Man in Heaven: A
Re-appraisal of Matthew XXV.31–46.” BJRL 61 (1979), 355–97.
CO25117.indb 254 11/03/2011 11:58

Bibliography 255
Charles, R. H. Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha of the Old Testament. 2 vols. Oxford:

Clarendon, 1913.
——. The Book of Enoch or 1 Enoch. Oxford: Clarendon, 1912.
——. The Ethiopic Version of the Book of Enoch. Oxford: Clarendon, 1906.
Charlesworth, James H., editor. The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha. 2 volumes. New
York: Doubleday, 1983.
Collins, John J. The Apocalyptic Imagination. New York: Crossroad, 1984.
——. The Apocalyptic Vision of the Book of Daniel. HSM 16. Missoula: Scholars
Press, 1977.
——. Daniel: A Commentary on the Book of Daniel. Hermeneia; Minneapolis:
Fortress Press, 1993.
——. “The Heavenly Representative: The ‘Son of Man’ in the Similitudes of Enoch.”
In Ideal Figures in Ancient Judaism, edited by George W. E. Nickelsburg and John
J. Collins, 111–33. Chico, Ca: Scholars Press, 1980.
——. “Introduction: Towards the Morphology of a Genre,” Semeia 14 (1979).
——. “The Son of Man in First-Century Judaism.” NTS 38 (1992), 448–66.
——. “The Son of Man who has Righteousness.” In Society of Biblical Literaure
Seminar Papers. vol. 2, edited by Paul J. Achtemeier; 1–13. Missoula: Scholars
Press, 1979.
Colpe, Carstens. o( ui9oj\ tou= a)nqrw&pou. In Theological Dictionary of the New
Testament, vol. 8, edited by Gerhard Friedrich, translated by Geoffrey W. Bromiley,
400–477. Grand Rapids, MI: Wm.Â€B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1972.
Court, J. M. “Right and Left: The Implications for MtÂ€25.31–46.” NTS 31 (1985),
223–33.
Davidson, Michael J. Angels at Qumran: A Comparative Study of 1 Enoch 1–36,
72–108 and Sectarian Writings from Qumran. Shefï¬†eld: JSOT Press, 1992.
Davies, W. D., and Dale C. Allison Jr. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the
Gospel According to Saint Matthew. 3 vols. ICC; Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1988,
1991 & 1997.
Derrett, J. Duncan M. “Palingensia (Matthew 19.28).” JSNT 20 (1984), 51–58.
Donahue, John R., S. J., “The ‘Parable’ of the Sheep and the Goats: A Challenge to
Christian Ethics.” Theological Studies 47 (1986), 3–31.
——.“Recent Studies on the Origin of ‘Son of Man’ in the Gospels.” In A Wise and
Discerning Heart: Studies Presented to Joseph A. Fitzmyer In Celebration of His
Sixty-Fifth Birthday. CBQ 48 (1986), 484–98.
Ellens, J. Harold. Jesus as the Son of Man, The Literary Character: A Progression of
Images. Claremont, CA: Institute for Antiquity and Christianity, 2003.
Ferch, Arthur J. The Son of Man in Daniel Seven. Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews
University Press, 1983.
Fiensy, David A. The Social History of Palestine in the Herodian Period: The Land
is Mine. Studies in the Bible and Early Christianity, vol. 20. Lewiston/Queenston/
Lampeter: The Edwin Mellen Press, 1991.
CO25117.indb 255 11/03/2011 11:58

256 Bibliography
Filson, Floyd V. A Commentary on the Gospel According to St. Matthew. London:

A&C Black; 2nd Edition, 1971.
Fitzmyer, Joseph A. The Gospel According to Luke (I–IX). AB 28; New York:
Doubleday, 1979.
——. “The New Testament Title ‘Son of Man’ Philologically Considered.” In A
Wandering Aramaean: Collected Aramaic Essays, 143–60. Missoula: Scholars
Press, 1979.
Fleming, J. Das Buch Henoch. Leipzig: J. C. Hinrichs’sche Buchhandlung, 1902.
France, R. T. Matthew: Evangelist and Teacher. Exeter: The Paternoster Press, 1989.
Geist, Heinz. Menschensohn und Gemeinde: Eine redaktionskritische Untersuchung
zur Menschensohnprädikation im Matthäusevangelium. Würzburg: Echter Verlag,
1986.
Glasson, T. F. “The Ensign of the Son of Man (Matt. XXIV, 30).” JTS 15 (1964),
299–300.
Gray, George Buchanan. The Book of Isaiah. Vol.Â€1. ICC; Edinburgh: T&T Clark,
1912.
Gray, Sherman W. The Least of My Brothers: Matthew 25:31–46; A History of
Interpretation. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1989.
Greenfield, Jonas C., and Michael E. Stone. “The Enochic Pentateuch and the Date
of the Similitudes.” HTR 70 (1977), 51–65.
Grelot, Pierre. Les Poèmes du Serviteur. Paris: Cerf, 1981.
Gundry, Robert H. Matthew: A Commentary on His Handbook for a Mixed Church
under Persecution. Second edition. Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans
Publishing Company, 1994.
——. The Use of the Old Testament in St. Matthew’s Gospel. Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1967.
Haag, Herbert. Der Gottesknecht bei Deuterojesaja. Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche
Buchgesellschaft, 1985.
Hamerton-Kelly, R. G. Pre-existence, Wisdom, and the Son of Man: A Study of the
Idea of Pre-Existence in the New Testament. Cambridge: The University Press,
1973.
Hanson, Paul D. Isaiah 40–66. Interpretation. Louisville: John Knox Press, 1995.
Hare, Douglas R. A. Matthew. Louisville: John Knox Press, 1993.
——. The Son of Man Tradition. Minneapolis: Fortress, 1991.
Harrington, Daniel J. The Gospel of Matthew. Collegeville, MN: The Liturgical Press,
1991.
Hartman, Lars. Prophecy Interpreted, Coniectanea Biblica. Uppsala: Almquist &
Wiksells, 1966.
Hiers, Richard H. “Day of Judgment.” In The Anchor Bible Dictionary, Vol. 2, edited
by David Noel Freedman, 79–82. New York-London-Toronto-Sydney-Auckland:
Doubleday, 1992.
Higgins, A. J. B. The Son of Man in the Teaching of Jesus. SNTSMS 39.
Cambridge-New York: Cambridge University Press, 1980.
Hindley, J. C. “Towards a Date for the Similitudes of Enoch.” NTS 14 (1968), 551–65.
CO25117.indb 256 11/03/2011 11:58

Bibliography 257
Hooker, Morna D. The Son of Man in Mark: A Study of the background of the term
“Son of Man” and its use in St Mark’s Gospel. Montreal: McGill University Press,
1967.
Jeremias, Joachim. pai=j qeou~. In Theological Dictionary of the New Testament,
vol. 6, edited by Gerhard Kittel and Gerhard Friedrich, translated by Geoffrey W.
Bromiley, 655–717. Grand Rapids, MI: Wm.Â€B. Eerdmans Publishing Company,
1972.
——. The Parables of Jesus. Rev. ed., London: SCM Press; 1963.
Kim, Seyoon. “The ‘Son of Man’” as the Son of God. Tübingen: J.C.B.Mohr [Paul
Siebeck], 1983.
Kingsbury, Jack Dean. Matthew As Story. 2nd ed. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1988.
——. Matthew: Structure, Christology, Kingdom. Minneapolis: Fortress, 1975.
——. The Parables of Jesus in Matthew 13: A Study in Redaction Criticism. London:
SPCK; 1969.
Knibb, Michael A. “The Date of the Parables of Enoch: A Critical Review.” NTS 25
(1978–79), 344–59.
——. The Ethiopic Book of Enoch. 2 vols.; Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1978.
Knight, George A. F. Deutero-Isaiah: A Theological Commentary on Isaiah 40–55.
New York/Nashville: Abingdon, 1965.
Kvanvig, Helge S. Roots of Apocalyptic: The Mesopotamian Background of the
Enoch Figure and of the Son of Man. WMANT; Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener
Verlag, 1988.
Lacocque, André. The Book of Daniel. Atlanta: John Knox Press, 1979.
Lambrecht, Jan, S. J. Out of the Treasure: The Parables in the Gospel of Matthew.
Louvain: Peeters Press/Eerdmans; 1991.
Lenski, Gerhard E. Power and Privilege: A Theory of Social Stratification. New
York: McGraw Hill, 1966.
Lindars, Barnabas. Jesus Son of Man: A Fresh Examination of the Son of Man
Sayings in the Gospels and in the Light of Recent Research. Grand Rapids:
Eerdmanns, 1983.
Luz, Ulrich. Das Evangelium nach Matthäus. Zurich und Braunschweig: Benziger
Verlag GmbH, 1990.
——. “The Final Judgment (Mt. 25:31–46): An Exercise in ‘History of Influence’
Exegesis.” In Treasures New and Old: Contributions to Matthean Studies, edited
by David R. Bauer and Mark Allen Powell, 271–310. Atlanta: Scholars Press,
1996.
——. “The Son of Man in Matthew: Heavenly Judge or Human Christ,” JSNT 48
(1992), 3–21.
Manson, T. W. “The Son of Man in Daniel, Enoch and the Gospels.” In Studies in
the Gospels and Epistles, edited by M. Black, 121–45. Philadelphia: Westminster
Press, 1962.
Marshall, I. H. “The Synoptic Son of Man Sayings in Recent Discussion.” NTS XII
1965–66. 327–51.
CO25117.indb 257 11/03/2011 11:58

258 Bibliography
McClellan, Thomas L. “Tyre.” In The HarperCollins Bible Dictionary, edited by Paul

J. Achtemeier, 1181–82. New York: HarperCollins Publishers, 1985, 1996.
McKenzie, John L. Second Isaiah. Anchor Bible 20. New York: Doubleday, 1968.
Mearns, Christopher L. “Dating the Similitudes of Enoch.” NTS 25 (1978–79),
360–369.
Meier, John P. Matthew. Wilmington, Delaware: Michael Glazier, Inc., 1980.
——. “Nations or Gentiles in Matthew 28:19.” CBQ 39 (1977), 94–102.
——. The Vision of Matthew: Christ, Church, and Morality in the First Gospel. New
York: Paulist Press, 1979.
Messel, N. Der Menschensohn in den Bilderreden Henochs. ZAWBeih. 35; Giessen, 1922.
Milik, Józef T. The Books of Enoch: Aramaic Fragments of Qumrân Cave 4. Oxford:
Clarendon Press, 1976.
Montgomery, James A. The Book of Daniel. International Critical Commentaries 19.
New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1927.
Mowinckel, S. He That Cometh. Oxford: Blackwell, 1956.
Muilenberg, James. Isaiah: Chapter 40–66. Interpreters Bible, vol. 5. New York/
Nashville: Abingdon, 1956.
Neugebauer, Otto. Ethiopic Astronomy and Computus. Vienna: Verlag der
Österreichischen Akadamie der Wissenschaften, 1979; Heft 22, Band 347.
Nickelsburg, George W. E. “Enoch.” In The Anchor Bible Dictionary, vol. 2, edited
by David Noel Freedman, 508–16. New York-London-Toronto-Sydney-Auckland:
Doubleday, 1992.
——. “Enoch, Levi, and Peter: Recipients of Revelation in Upper Galilee.” JBL 100
(1981), 575–600.
——. Jewish Literature Between the Bible and the Mishnah. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1981.
——. Resurrection, Immortality and Eternal Life in Intertestamental Judaism.
Cambridge, Mass., 1972.
——. “Son of Man.” In The Anchor Bible Dictionary, Vol. 6, edited by David Noel
Freedman, 137–50. New York-London-Toronto-Sydney-Auckland: Doubleday, 1992.
Olson, Daniel C. “Enoch and the Son of Man in the Epilogue of the Parables.” JSP
18 (1998), 27–38.
Overman, J. Andrew. Church and Community in Crisis: The Gospel According to
Matthew. Valley Forge, PA: Trinity Press International, 1996.
Perrin, Norman. A Modern Pilgrimage in New Testament Christology. Philadelphia:
Fortress, 1974.
——. “Son of Man.” In The Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible, supplemental
volume, edited by Keith Crim, 833–36. Nashville: Abingdon, 1976.
——. “The Son of Man in Ancient Judaism and Primitive Christianity: A Suggestion.”
In A Modern Pilgrimage in New Testament Christology, 23–40. Philadelphia:
Fortress, 1974.
——. “The Son of Man in the Synoptic Tradition.” In A Modern Pilgrimage in New
Testament Christology, 57–83. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1974.
Porteous, Norman. Daniel, 2nd, rev. ed. London: SCM Press, 1979.
CO25117.indb 258 11/03/2011 11:58

Bibliography 259
Porton, Gary G. “Midrash.” In The Anchor Bible Dictionary, vol. 4, edited by

David Noel Freedman, 818–22. New York-London-Toronto-Sydney-Auckland:
Doubleday, 1992.
Rahlfs, A. “Die äthiopische Bibelübersetzung.” In Septuaginta-Studien I-II, 2nd ed.,
659–81. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1965.
Rist, M. “Eschatology of Apoc. and Pseudep.” In The Interpreters’ Dictionary of the
Bible, vol. 2, edited by George Arthur Buttrick, 133–35. New York/Nashville:
Abingdon Press, 1962.
Robbins, Vernon K. “The Social Location of the Implied Author of Luke-Acts.” In
The Social World of Luke-Acts: A Model for Interpretation, edited by Jerome H.
Neyrey, 305–332. Peabody, Massachusetts: Hendrickson Publishers, 1991.
Rohrbaugh, Richard L. “Methodological Considerations in the Debate over the Social
Class Status of Early Christians.” In JAAR LII/3 (1984), 519–46.
Rowland, Christopher. The Open Heaven. New York: Crossroad, 1982.
Saldarini, Anthony J. Matthew’s Christian-Jewish Community. Chicago/London:
University of Chicago Press, 1994.
Sanders, E. P. “Testament of Abraham: A New Translation and Introduction.” In The
Old Testament Pseudepigrapha. Vol. 1, Apocalyptic Literature and Testaments,
edited by J. H. Charlesworth, 869–902. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1983.
Schrenk, G. e)klekto/j. In Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, vol. 4, edited
by Gerhard Kittel, translated by Geoffrey W. Bromiley, 181–92. Grand Rapids,
MI: Wm.Â€B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1967.
Schürer, Emil. The History of the Jewish People in the Age of Jesus Christ (175
B.C.–A.D. 135). Vol. 1, edited by Geza Vermes, Fergus Millar and Matthew Black.
Edinburgh: T&T Clark Ltd, 1973.
Schweitzer, Albert. The Quest for the Historical Jesus. New York: MacMillan, 1968.
Schweizer, Eduard. The Good News According to Matthew, translated by David E.
Green. Atlanta: John Knox Press, 1975.
Senior, Donald. What Are They Saying About Matthew?. New York/Mahwah, N.J.:
Paulist Press, 1996.
Sim, David C. Apocalyptic Eschatology in the Gospel of Matthew. Cambridge,
Cambridge University Press, 1996.
——. “The Meaning of paliggenesi/a in Matthew 19:28.” JSNT 50 (1993), 3–12.
Sjöberg, Erik. Der Menschensohn in Äthiopischen Henochbuch. Skrifter Utgivna av
kungl. Humanistiska Vetenskapssamfundet in Lund 41. Lund: C.W.K. Gleerup, 1946.
Smith-Christopher, Daniel L., The Book of Daniel. New Interpreters Bible, Vol.Â€VII.
Nashville: Abingdon, 1996.
Stanton, Graham N. A Gospel for a New People: Studies in Matthew. Louisville:
Westminster/John Knox Press, 1993.
Stone, Michael E. “Lists of Revealed Things in the Apocalyptic Literature.” In
Magnalia Dei: The Mighty Acts of God; Essays on the Bible and Archaeology in
Memory of G. Ernest Wright, edited by Frank Moore Cross, Werner E. Lemke, and
Patrick D. Miller, Jr., 414–452. New York: Doubleday & Company, Inc., 1976.
CO25117.indb 259 11/03/2011 11:58

260 Bibliography
Suter, David W. “The Measure of Redemption: The Similtudes of Enoch, Nonviolence,

and National Integrity.” In SBL 1983 Papers, 167–76. Missoula, Montana:
Scholars Press, 1983.
——. “Weighed in the Balance: The Similitudes of Enoch in Recent Discussion.” In
Religious Studies Review 7 (1981), 217–21.
Theisohn, Johannes. Der auserwählte Richter. SUNT 12. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck
& Ruprecht, 1975.
Tödt, Heinz Eduard. The Son of Man in the Synoptic Tradition. London: SCM, 1965.
Ullendorf, E. Ethiopia and the Bible. The Schweich Lectures, 1967. London: Oxford
for the British Academy, 1968. 36–62.
VanderKam, James C. Enoch, A Man for All Generations. Columbia, South Carolina:
University of South Carolina Press, 1995.
——. Enoch and the Growth of an Apocalyptic Tradition. CBQ Monograph; 16.
Washington, DC: The Catholic Biblical Association, 1984.
——. “Righteous One, Messiah, Chosen One, and Son of Man in 1Â€EnochÂ€37–71.”
In The Messiah, edited by J. H. Charlesworth, 169–191. Minneapolis: Augsburg
Fortress, 1992.
——. “The Textual Base for the Ethiopic Translation of 1 Enoch.” In Working with
No Data: Semitic and Egyptian Studies Presented to Thomas O. Lambdin, edited
by David M. Golomb, 247–62. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1987.
Vermes, Geza. “The Use of #n rb/)#n rb in Jewish Aramaic.” Appendix E in Matthew
Black, An Aramaic Approach to the Gospels and Acts, 310–30. Oxford: Clarendon
Press, 1967.
Vielhauer, Philipp. “Gottesreich und Menschensohn in der Verkündigung Jesu.” In
Aufsätze zum Neuen Testament, Munich: Kaiser, 1965.
Walker, William O. “The Son of Man: Some Recent Developments.” CBQ 45 (1983),
584–607.
Watts, John D. W. Isaiah 34–66. Word, Vol. 25. Waco: Word, 1987.
Weaver, Dorothy Jean. Matthew’s Missionary Discourse: A Literary Critical Analysis.
JSNT 38; Shefï¬†eld: JSOT, 1990.
Westermann, Claus. Isaiah 40–66. London: SCM Press, 1969.
Whybray, R. N. The Second Isaiah. Shefï¬†eld: JSOT Press, 1983.
Wrege, Hans-Theo. Das Sondergut des Matthäusevangelium. Zurich: Theologischer
Verlag, 1991.
Yarbro Collins, Adela. “The Apocalyptic Son of Man Sayings.” In The Future of
Early Christianity, edited by Birger Pearson, 220–28. Minneapolis, MN: Fortress,
1991.
——. “Introduction,” Semeia 36 (1986).
——. “The Origin of the Designation of Jesus as ‘Son of Man’.” HTR 80:4 (1987),
391–407.
——. “The ‘Son of Man’ Tradition and the Book of Revelation.” In The Messiah:
Developments in Earliest Judaism and Christianity, edited by James H.
Charlesworth, 536–68. Minneapolis: Fortress, 1992.
CO25117.indb 260 11/03/2011 11:58

Index
Abelâ•‡â•‰184, 246, 247 ascentâ•‡â•‰3, 6, 31, 54, 136, 137, 138, 139, 140, 141, 143,
Adamâ•‡â•‰6, 24, 29, 52, 86, 115, 184 173, 235
advanced agrarian societyâ•‡â•‰39 Assyriaâ•‡â•‰109
Alexander Jannaeusâ•‡â•‰17, 18, 19 astrologicalâ•‡â•‰88
allusionsâ•‡â•‰14, 15, 22, 32, 33, 35, 36, 47, 83, 94, 97, Astronomical Bookâ•‡â•‰65
102, 111, 116, 136, 137, 139, 154, 159, 162, author/redactorâ•‡â•‰23, 24, 29, 30
191, 202 authorityâ•‡â•‰31, 36, 41, 42, 43, 64, 66, 81, 88, 98, 99,
Ammonite(s) 101, 102, 112, 117, 118, 120, 123, 127, 129, 151,
Ammonâ•‡â•‰102, 112, 115 155, 156, 157, 158, 160, 179, 181, 182, 185,
Ancient of Daysâ•‡â•‰50, 51, 52, 54, 55, 56, 58, 59, 60, 64, 186, 191, 193, 205, 206, 209, 212, 213, 216, 218,
102, 127, 128, 149, 157, 185, 246 224, 225, 228, 235, 236, 238, 240, 241, 243, 244,
angel(s)â•‡â•‰2, 3, 13, 19, 21, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 36, 37, 246, 248
38, 43, 44, 46, 48, 50, 54, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, Azazelâ•‡â•‰36, 37, 124, 151, 163, 214, 219, 244, 245,
66, 67, 68, 69, 71, 74, 75, 77, 81, 87, 88, 97, 110, 249
113, 115, 123, 125, 126, 130, 132, 136, 139, 140,
141, 142, 143, 144, 146, 147, 149, 150, 151, 156, Baalâ•‡â•‰52, 53, 61, 81
157, 161, 162, 166, 167, 170, 171, 172, 173, 174, Babylonâ•‡â•‰50, 80, 95, 109
175, 176, 179, 180, 181, 182, 186, 189, 190, 193, Babylonianâ•‡â•‰35, 50, 51, 80, 99, 103
194, 197, 203, 204, 205, 206, 209, 210, 214, 215, Barzaphanesâ•‡â•‰20, 21, 36
216, 217, 219, 220, 221, 222, 224, 225, 228, 241, beastsâ•‡â•‰47, 50, 51, 52, 53, 246
242, 243, 244, 245, 246, 247, 249 Beelzebulâ•‡â•‰169
angelus interpresâ•‡â•‰25, 27, 28, 64, 65, 66, 67, 74, 75, blessednessâ•‡â•‰45, 111, 155, 156, 157, 161
77, 79 blessingâ•‡â•‰13, 45, 65, 67, 68, 118, 145, 177, 211, 212
Animal Apocalypseâ•‡â•‰47, 61 bloodâ•‡â•‰16, 18, 19, 115, 162, 177, 213, 215
Anointedâ•‡â•‰4, 26, 70, 73, 80, 136, 152, 153, 154, 236 bloodshedâ•‡â•‰14, 15, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 33, 34
anti-Christian polemicâ•‡â•‰6 Book of Lifeâ•‡â•‰212, 214, 246
Antigonusâ•‡â•‰17, 19, 20, 21, 36 Book of the Watchers
Antiochus IV Epiphanesâ•‡â•‰16, 33 BWâ•‡â•‰3, 29, 30, 54, 56, 65, 66, 137, 139, 140, 178
Antonyâ•‡â•‰20 bootyâ•‡â•‰40
apocalypseâ•‡â•‰2 brightnessâ•‡â•‰62, 142, 150, 161, 226, 242, 248
apocalypticâ•‡â•‰171 bronzeâ•‡â•‰34, 37
Apocalypse of Zephanaiahâ•‡â•‰247 bureaucracyâ•‡â•‰40, 41
apocalypticâ•‡â•‰2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 10, 22, 58, 61, 65, 68, 69,
87, 94, 98, 99, 109, 139, 162, 172, 186, 187, Caesarâ•‡â•‰19, 20, 43
193, 200, 201, 202, 208, 212, 214, 216, 217, Caesarea Philippiâ•‡â•‰176, 178
231, 234 Caligulaâ•‡â•‰15
appearanceâ•‡â•‰50, 54, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 70, 73, 81, callâ•‡â•‰83, 87, 126, 148, 152, 161, 189, 190, 193, 214,
88, 101, 102, 124, 157, 171, 177, 182, 190, 191, 218
212, 241, 242, 244 Callirhoeâ•‡â•‰15, 22, 33, 34
archangel(s)â•‡â•‰3, 29, 62, 143, 144, 149, 173, 247 Canaaniteâ•‡â•‰50, 52, 53, 61, 81
Arenasâ•‡â•‰14, 33 Canaanite mythologyâ•‡â•‰52, 53, 81
Aristobulus IIâ•‡â•‰17, 19 cast downâ•‡â•‰43, 78, 80, 103, 104, 108, 110
aristocracyâ•‡â•‰40, 45, 48 celibacyâ•‡â•‰41
artisan(s)â•‡â•‰39, 42 chariotsâ•‡â•‰38, 129, 130, 131, 132, 136, 138, 139, 140
261
CO25117.indb 261 11/03/2011 11:58

262 Index
Cherubimâ•‡â•‰143 Egyptâ•‡â•‰20, 51, 91, 109, 116

Chief of Daysâ•‡â•‰54, 82, 84, 124, 125, 142, 143, 151, Elâ•‡â•‰52, 53, 61, 81
186, 227, 229, 236, 240 electâ•‡â•‰2, 8, 19, 32, 34, 35, 36, 39, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47,
chosenâ•‡â•‰28, 45, 74, 75, 77, 78, 82, 83, 84, 86, 89, 91, 48, 49, 65, 67, 77, 78, 82, 94, 95, 99, 100, 105,
92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 99, 102, 105, 106, 110, 106, 110, 111, 112, 113, 115, 116, 117, 118, 122,
130, 137, 157, 158, 161, 164, 215, 230, 232, 233 123, 125, 127, 128, 132, 136, 140, 141, 143, 144,
chosennessâ•‡â•‰7, 28, 81, 94, 96, 99, 157, 158, 227, 230, 155, 157, 159, 161, 162, 163, 164, 173, 174, 178,
231, 243, 248 181, 186, 189, 190, 192, 193, 194, 199, 204, 213,
christologyâ•‡â•‰9, 177, 179 215, 217, 218, 221, 223, 224, 226, 232, 234, 235,
Cleopatraâ•‡â•‰20 236, 238, 242, 243, 244, 245, 248
cloudsâ•‡â•‰35, 50, 51, 52, 53, 59, 60, 68, 166, 173, 179, Elect Oneâ•‡â•‰3, 4, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 37, 46, 53,
187, 189, 190, 191, 192, 193, 194, 202, 204, 221, 60, 67, 68, 70, 72, 73, 78, 94, 100, 101, 102, 103,
223, 224, 228, 237, 241 104, 106, 123, 124, 125, 126, 127, 136, 152, 153,
comingâ•‡â•‰12, 29, 50, 60, 69, 81, 134, 147, 157, 158, 154, 155, 159, 162, 174, 185, 186, 194, 199, 216,
165, 166, 168, 169, 170, 175, 178, 179, 180, 181, 217, 218, 219, 229, 230, 235, 236, 242, 248
182, 186, 188, 189, 191, 192, 193, 194, 195, 196, elitesâ•‡â•‰39
197, 204, 205, 206, 210, 212, 215, 219, 221, 222, emendationâ•‡â•‰5, 79, 80, 101, 124, 134, 151
224, 228, 231, 232, 237, 239, 241 emperorâ•‡â•‰43, 44
condemnationâ•‡â•‰13, 65, 66, 100, 101, 103, 105, 108, Emperor Gaiusâ•‡â•‰15
109, 110, 111, 112, 113, 115, 117, 141, 151, 160, Enochic conventicleâ•‡â•‰19
181, 192, 213, 217, 218, 235, 238, 240 enthronementâ•‡â•‰13, 28, 59, 102, 126, 152, 178, 185,
consolationâ•‡â•‰3, 115, 156, 164, 167, 169, 170, 237, 187, 210, 241
239 enthronement psalmsâ•‡â•‰28
constellationsâ•‡â•‰84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 97 Enuma Elišâ•‡â•‰51
copperâ•‡â•‰34 Epilogueâ•‡â•‰71, 72, 135, 156, 161
cosmologicalâ•‡â•‰3, 29, 65, 68, 69, 70, 76, 151 eschatologicalâ•‡â•‰2, 3, 4, 8, 11, 12, 29, 34, 60, 105, 135,
cosmological mysteriesâ•‡â•‰3 138, 154, 169, 170, 172, 174, 177, 179, 182, 184,
cosmological secretsâ•‡â•‰3 186, 192, 194, 195, 200, 205, 206, 208, 209, 210,
courtroomâ•‡â•‰60, 87, 102, 161, 196, 206 215, 216, 219, 224, 225, 228, 229, 234, 237, 239,
covenantâ•‡â•‰48, 91, 154 249, 250
Cyrusâ•‡â•‰76, 80, 83, 86, 95, 96 eternal lifeâ•‡â•‰47, 100, 155, 203, 211, 238, 246
eternityâ•‡â•‰75, 99, 112, 122, 128, 132, 153, 154, 157,
Daniel’s prayerâ•‡â•‰115, 116 158, 161, 212, 213, 214, 227, 231, 240, 248
dating of Par. Enâ•‡â•‰2, 13, 14, 23 etiquetteâ•‡â•‰35
Davidic Messiahâ•‡â•‰52 everlasting lifeâ•‡â•‰46, 162, 216
Dead Seaâ•‡â•‰22, 34, 38, 49 evildoersâ•‡â•‰35, 36, 48, 144, 166, 170, 172, 175, 228
deep valleyâ•‡â•‰37, 214, 219, 240 expendablesâ•‡â•‰42, 44
degradedâ•‡â•‰42 Ezekielâ•‡â•‰61, 65, 69, 72, 109, 115, 154, 164, 209
demonstrativeâ•‡â•‰4, 5, 7, 70, 71, 72, 75, 80, 94, 110, 121,
145, 147, 152 faceâ•‡â•‰54, 59, 61, 62, 68, 75, 114, 119, 120, 121, 141,
desertâ•‡â•‰46, 47, 92, 162, 163, 174, 194 144, 146, 150, 169, 191, 192, 212, 240, 241
devilâ•‡â•‰203, 246 familiarity with Scriptureâ•‡â•‰163
dewâ•‡â•‰35, 68 fate of the condemnedâ•‡â•‰161, 163, 173, 244, 245, 249
dichotomyâ•‡â•‰109, 162, 163, 174, 175, 188, 209, 217, feasting, feastedâ•‡â•‰100, 111, 113, 166, 182, 183, 238
220, 222, 225, 244, 245, 249 festivalsâ•‡â•‰35, 88
dominionâ•‡â•‰52, 53, 59, 127, 129, 160, 185, 186, 241, fettersâ•‡â•‰37, 38, 44, 110, 162, 163, 219, 244
246 ï¬†ery fateâ•‡â•‰161, 163, 173, 175, 220, 221, 222, 223, 224,
downcastâ•‡â•‰43, 85, 100, 105, 110, 155, 162, 192 225, 231, 237, 240, 244, 245, 249
downward mobilityâ•‡â•‰43, 48 ï¬†reâ•‡â•‰21, 22, 37, 138, 141, 142, 143, 203, 206, 213,
Dream Visionsâ•‡â•‰65 214, 219, 242, 245, 246, 247
dry landâ•‡â•‰92 Floodâ•‡â•‰29
dwellingâ•‡â•‰44, 46, 48, 76, 101, 102, 111, 113, 132, 141, forced laborâ•‡â•‰42
144, 154, 161, 238 fortunesâ•‡â•‰38, 48, 100, 105, 111, 123, 128, 154, 155,
162, 174, 182, 246
eagleâ•‡â•‰18, 108 frame storyâ•‡â•‰3
earthlyâ•‡â•‰6 futureâ•‡â•‰1, 3, 5, 8, 10, 11, 12, 34, 45, 46, 48, 66, 68, 69,
earthly sayingsâ•‡â•‰10, 11, 165, 178 81, 87, 98, 100, 101, 123, 136, 153, 155, 165,
economic factorsâ•‡â•‰31 166, 168, 169, 170, 184, 200, 210, 213, 232,
Edomâ•‡â•‰102, 112 251, 252
CO25117.indb 262 11/03/2011 11:58

Index 263
future sayingsâ•‡â•‰1, 10, 11 idol makersâ•‡â•‰35

idolatorsâ•‡â•‰17
Gabrielâ•‡â•‰61, 65, 144, 146, 147 idolatryâ•‡â•‰18, 23, 67, 78
Gardenâ•‡â•‰24 Idumean Antipaterâ•‡â•‰17
garmentsâ•‡â•‰44, 48, 58, 59, 100, 111, 113, 141, 144, 149, implied authorâ•‡â•‰31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 44,
150, 155, 156, 157, 159, 161, 174, 238, 242 49
Gayomartâ•‡â•‰51 implied readerâ•‡â•‰31, 32, 33, 81, 123
Gehinnom Valleyâ•‡â•‰34 imprisonmentâ•‡â•‰37, 38
gematriaâ•‡â•‰36, 77, 150 inï¬‡uence of Deutero-Isaiahâ•‡â•‰82
gloryâ•‡â•‰8, 44, 48, 59, 62, 77, 101, 111, 116, 124, 125, inherit, inheritanceâ•‡â•‰36, 41, 203, 211, 220, 223, 225,
155, 159, 161, 167, 178, 179, 180, 181, 182, 184, 238
185, 187, 188, 189, 190, 193, 194, 197, 203, 204, inscribed authorâ•‡â•‰31, 32, 33
205, 206, 210, 215, 216, 219, 221, 222, 224, 228, intended audienceâ•‡â•‰30
236, 243, 246 ironâ•‡â•‰34, 35, 37, 38, 44, 110, 219
gnashing of teethâ•‡â•‰172, 206, 216, 237 ironyâ•‡â•‰101, 105, 138, 160
goatsâ•‡â•‰195, 203, 209, 217
goldâ•‡â•‰26, 34, 187 Jerusalemâ•‡â•‰9, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 34, 35, 38, 49, 54, 91,
governing classâ•‡â•‰40, 41, 43, 44, 47, 48, 49 176, 211, 212, 228
governmentâ•‡â•‰20, 37, 40, 43, 47 John the Baptizerâ•‡â•‰178
grammaticalâ•‡â•‰91, 131, 133, 134, 135 Jonahâ•‡â•‰47, 62, 191, 247
guiltâ•‡â•‰114, 116 Joseph and Asenethâ•‡â•‰62, 138
Judas Maccabeusâ•‡â•‰17
Hadesâ•‡â•‰214, 246 judgeâ•‡â•‰2, 8, 13, 43, 60, 67, 100, 103, 221, 236, 237,
hailstonesâ•‡â•‰141, 143 239, 247, 248
hapax legomenaâ•‡â•‰196, 197, 198 judicial, juridicalâ•‡â•‰4, 8, 12, 43, 44, 46, 68, 70, 74,
Hasmoneanâ•‡â•‰20 105, 106, 112, 113, 114, 117, 123, 125, 127, 129,
Head of Daysâ•‡â•‰3, 35, 50, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 60, 64, 135, 138, 154, 155, 156, 159, 161, 162, 164, 177,
73, 74, 81, 85, 88, 89, 99, 107, 110, 128, 144, 178, 180, 181, 182, 188, 191, 199, 205, 206, 209,
145, 146, 147, 149, 150, 151, 152, 153, 173, 174, 210, 211, 213, 215, 216, 217, 218, 220, 224, 225,
180, 241 228, 229, 234, 236, 237, 238, 239, 246, 247,
Head of the Oathâ•‡â•‰144, 145, 149, 150 249, 251
healing hot springsâ•‡â•‰14, 16, 19, 21, 22 judgmentâ•‡â•‰2, 3, 6, 13, 28, 30, 43, 47, 51, 58, 67, 68,
Heavenâ•‡â•‰2, 36, 52, 62, 65, 192 69, 70, 74, 75, 76, 100, 102, 103, 112, 113, 114,
heavenly bookâ•‡â•‰36 115, 117, 118, 123, 124, 125, 126, 127, 128, 129,
heavenly realmsâ•‡â•‰7, 227, 242 140, 141, 143, 144, 150, 157, 158, 159, 160, 161,
heavenly statusâ•‡â•‰81, 139, 157, 158, 226, 227, 228, 229, 162, 173, 174, 179, 180, 181, 182, 185, 186, 188,
231, 241, 243, 244, 248 191, 192, 195, 196, 206, 207, 208, 209, 210,
Hebrew poetryâ•‡â•‰88 215, 216, 217, 219, 220, 221, 224, 225, 228, 230,
hellâ•‡â•‰37, 52, 177 235, 236, 237, 238, 239, 240, 243, 245, 247, 248,
Hellenisticâ•‡â•‰18, 38, 246 249, 250
hellenizationâ•‡â•‰18 basis for judgment 2, 36, 68, 162, 163, 194, 218,
Herodâ•‡â•‰17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 33, 34, 36, 247, 220, 221, 222, 225, 244, 245, 246, 247, 248,
251 249
Hezekiahâ•‡â•‰75, 91 judgment dayâ•‡â•‰2, 29, 36, 46, 51, 60, 64, 67, 68, 69,
hiddenâ•‡â•‰8, 11, 46, 67, 74, 76, 77, 82, 84, 93, 95, 97, 99, 96, 100, 106, 111, 113, 114, 115, 117, 118, 123,
105, 106, 113, 122, 123, 157, 158, 159, 162, 164, 125, 126, 127, 128, 159, 161, 162, 166, 171, 172,
178, 182, 194, 211, 217, 220, 221, 222, 225, 229, 173, 174, 181, 182, 191, 196, 197, 198, 199, 200,
234, 237, 248, 250 201, 202, 209, 211, 213, 216, 218, 221, 224, 225,
hiddennessâ•‡â•‰4, 7, 8, 82, 83, 94, 95, 97, 106, 122, 227, 228, 229, 230, 234, 235, 237, 238, 239, 243, 246,
230, 234, 243, 248, 250 247, 248, 249, 250
homoioarchtonâ•‡â•‰104, 120 Judgment, Lastâ•‡â•‰2, 8, 29, 117, 122, 167, 169, 171, 191,
homoioteleutonâ•‡â•‰75, 120, 121, 147, 148, 168 202, 204, 211, 219, 221, 225, 230, 235, 237, 238,
honorâ•‡â•‰31, 40, 46, 48, 99, 150, 159, 162, 186, 209, 239, 240, 241, 245, 249, 250
210, 218, 236, 237, 246 judicialâ•‡â•‰2, 12, 13, 38, 60, 64, 76, 81, 98, 100, 102,
horticulturalâ•‡â•‰39 103, 105, 112, 113, 122, 126, 127, 128, 136, 138,
hunter-gathererâ•‡â•‰39 157, 158, 160, 162, 164, 175, 177, 179, 180, 182,
Hyrcanus IIâ•‡â•‰17, 19, 20, 21, 36 184, 185, 186, 187, 188, 194, 195, 205, 206, 209,
210, 215, 216, 219, 220, 221, 222, 223, 225, 226,
iceâ•‡â•‰141, 142 230, 231, 235, 236, 239, 240, 243, 244, 248, 251
CO25117.indb 263 11/03/2011 11:58

264 Index
justiceâ•‡â•‰34, 41, 75, 76, 92, 94, 95, 96, 108, 113, 114, 221, 222, 225, 226, 230, 237, 238, 240, 243, 244,
116, 125, 149, 152, 158, 159, 200, 202, 232, 237, 245, 247, 248
239, 240 Messiahâ•‡â•‰2, 3, 23, 51, 102, 178, 179, 180, 187, 194, 251
messianicâ•‡â•‰4, 15, 24, 30, 63, 64, 70, 73, 177, 179, 183,
Kasbeelâ•‡â•‰67, 68, 150 188, 199, 225
Kasdeyaâ•‡â•‰44 metallic mountainsâ•‡â•‰26, 27, 28, 67
kingâ•‡â•‰8, 18, 19, 20, 28, 35, 45, 63, 75, 80, 83, 87, 92, meteorologicalâ•‡â•‰35, 36, 38, 46, 48, 65, 68, 69, 70, 76,
97, 99, 102, 126, 152, 154, 158, 185, 186, 194, 117, 118, 229
195, 196, 197, 198, 199, 203, 209, 210, 211, 214, Michaelâ•‡â•‰7, 8, 15, 17, 27, 29, 53, 62, 65, 66, 67, 68,
217, 218, 220, 224 125, 134, 135, 139, 141, 142, 143, 144, 146, 147,
kingdomsâ•‡â•‰68, 78, 79, 80, 127 151, 171
kingsâ•‡â•‰2, 8, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, mighty and powerfulâ•‡â•‰2, 4, 26
34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, military equipmentâ•‡â•‰38
49, 65, 67, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 85, 95, 96, 97, 99, Moabâ•‡â•‰102, 112
100, 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, Most Highâ•‡â•‰16, 105, 178, 186, 187, 234
110, 111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116, 117, 118, 122, mourningâ•‡â•‰189, 190, 191, 192, 204, 231, 237, 239, 241
123, 124, 125, 126, 127, 128, 136, 151, 155, 157, multivalentâ•‡â•‰98
158, 159, 160, 161, 162, 163, 174, 181, 184, 185, myriadsâ•‡â•‰3, 142, 147, 149, 173
192, 213, 214, 216, 217, 218, 219, 228, 229, 230,
235, 237, 238, 239, 241, 244, 248 Nameâ•‡â•‰3, 16, 45, 57, 67, 92, 213
kings and mighty onesâ•‡â•‰8, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, namedâ•‡â•‰7, 28, 34, 45, 58, 82, 84, 85, 86, 88, 89, 96, 97,
22, 23, 24, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 43, 44, 45, 46, 99, 123, 124, 141, 142, 143, 157, 158, 227, 231,
48, 49, 65, 67, 80, 81, 97, 100, 103, 104, 105, 233, 243, 248
106, 108, 109, 110, 111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116, narrativeâ•‡â•‰1, 6, 7, 26, 33, 50, 54, 61, 79, 86, 87, 113,
117, 118, 122, 123, 125, 126, 136, 151, 155, 157, 114, 123, 129, 136, 137, 138, 140, 151, 152, 166,
158, 159, 160, 161, 162, 163, 174, 181, 185, 192, 171, 175, 177, 178, 179, 197, 217, 221, 228, 231,
213, 214, 216, 217, 218, 219, 229, 230, 237, 232, 233, 239, 250
239, 244 Narrative Criticismâ•‡â•‰14, 31
narratorâ•‡â•‰24
lake of ï¬†reâ•‡â•‰214, 246, 247 Nebuchadnezzarâ•‡â•‰35
lamentâ•‡â•‰110, 114, 115, 116, 123, 199 Nergalâ•‡â•‰51, 52
landlordsâ•‡â•‰48 no mercyâ•‡â•‰115, 116, 117, 174, 238, 247
leadâ•‡â•‰26, 29, 34, 68, 109, 180, 203, 242, 247 Noachicâ•‡â•‰3, 21, 22, 23, 24, 27, 29, 30, 35, 66, 67, 72,
lectio difficiliorâ•‡â•‰89, 104, 105, 133, 134, 135, 147 118, 133, 135, 136, 151, 154, 161, 163, 244
legal systemâ•‡â•‰38 Noahâ•‡â•‰23, 24, 29, 30, 66, 75, 151, 154
light of the nationsâ•‡â•‰89, 90, 91 noblesâ•‡â•‰22, 38, 42
light to the Gentilesâ•‡â•‰28, 84, 88, 91, 96, 99, 157, 158, nomen deiâ•‡â•‰54, 55, 57, 58, 91, 109, 136, 150, 151, 172
231, 233, 248
lightningâ•‡â•‰35, 46, 62, 68, 76, 204 ofï¬†cialsâ•‡â•‰41, 42, 47
literary integrityâ•‡â•‰135, 137 one like a son of manâ•‡â•‰4, 50, 59, 60, 70, 73, 99, 185
literary unityâ•‡â•‰24, 28, 29 Ophanninâ•‡â•‰143
locationsâ•‡â•‰9, 70, 72, 186, 190, 196, 197 oppressedâ•‡â•‰3, 8, 17, 44, 46, 68, 69, 98, 100, 117, 141,
Lord of Spiritsâ•‡â•‰3, 5, 7, 16, 17, 26, 28, 36, 43, 45, 46, 162, 192, 199, 217, 218, 221, 238, 240, 241,
54, 55, 70, 72, 74, 77, 78, 79, 81, 82, 84, 85, 88, 245, 246
89, 90, 92, 93, 94, 96, 97, 99, 100, 101, 109, 110, oppressorsâ•‡â•‰3, 30, 43, 65, 68, 70, 95, 96, 99, 100, 105,
111, 113, 114, 115, 116, 117, 118, 119, 120, 123, 108, 110, 112, 113, 115, 116, 117, 118, 122, 125,
124, 125, 126, 128, 129, 130, 131, 132, 133, 134, 141, 160, 162, 163, 169, 186, 199, 225, 233, 236,
135, 136, 138, 139, 143, 145, 151, 154, 155, 157, 237, 240, 241, 244, 246, 249
158, 159, 160, 162, 173, 174, 181, 186, 213, 216,
217, 218, 230, 231, 234, 238, 239, 243 Pacorusâ•‡â•‰20, 36
luxuryâ•‡â•‰40 pain of childbirthâ•‡â•‰100, 103, 105, 112
Palestineâ•‡â•‰12, 17, 18, 19, 20, 36, 44, 48
Maccabeansâ•‡â•‰17, 19 pan-chronic notion of timeâ•‡â•‰87
Macherusâ•‡â•‰22, 34 Parthiansâ•‡â•‰14, 15, 16, 17, 19, 20, 21, 22, 33, 36, 45
Mediterraneanâ•‡â•‰14, 34, 38, 115 Parthians and Medesâ•‡â•‰14, 15, 19, 20, 22, 33, 36, 45
merchant classâ•‡â•‰39, 41, 42, 47 passion predictionâ•‡â•‰182
mercyâ•‡â•‰2, 35, 37, 43, 63, 66, 67, 68, 100, 107, 108, patronsâ•‡â•‰33, 37, 48
109, 110, 113, 115, 116, 117, 125, 157, 159, 160, pattern of relationshipsâ•‡â•‰173, 226, 229, 230, 232, 233,
162, 164, 174, 175, 199, 200, 208, 213, 218, 220, 234, 235, 239, 240, 242, 243, 244
CO25117.indb 264 11/03/2011 11:58

Index 265
peaceâ•‡â•‰7, 20, 25, 26, 46, 64, 65, 66, 68, 76, 92, 144, 105, 106, 113, 116, 117, 118, 119, 122, 123, 126,
145, 148, 154, 162, 174, 238 150, 157, 158, 159, 160, 162, 164, 169, 174, 178,
Penemueâ•‡â•‰44 179, 184, 217, 218, 219, 220, 221, 222, 223, 225,
persecutionâ•‡â•‰34, 42, 167, 168, 169, 207, 209, 218 227, 228, 234, 235, 237, 239, 243, 248, 249
personal retainersâ•‡â•‰41 revelationâ•‡â•‰3, 8, 38, 66, 68, 69, 70, 76, 77, 81, 94, 95,
Peter’s confessionâ•‡â•‰177, 178, 180 97, 106, 123, 129, 178, 235, 237, 244, 246
Phanuelâ•‡â•‰144, 146, 147 revelatory roleâ•‡â•‰227, 229, 230, 243, 248
Phasaelâ•‡â•‰19, 20, 21, 36 reversal of fortunesâ•‡â•‰2, 3, 8, 34, 68, 70, 78, 95, 110,
Philistines 111, 113, 117, 154, 156, 162, 163, 164, 167, 186,
Philistineâ•‡â•‰112 188, 220, 221, 222, 244, 246, 249
Pompeyâ•‡â•‰17, 18, 21, 33 review of historyâ•‡â•‰3
post-Easter faithâ•‡â•‰180 Re)saâ•‡â•‰54, 55
potentatesâ•‡â•‰37, 105, 214, 219 righteousâ•‡â•‰2, 7
povertyâ•‡â•‰41, 42 righteous and holyâ•‡â•‰3, 7, 8, 14, 16, 17, 18, 19, 28,
powerâ•‡â•‰23, 26, 31, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 48, 49, 64, 30, 32, 34, 35, 36, 39, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49,
80, 81, 95, 98, 99, 101, 102, 105, 106, 109, 110, 53, 64, 65, 67, 68, 70, 75, 77, 78, 81, 82, 84, 88,
112, 113, 114, 116, 123, 124, 127, 144, 146, 160, 89, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 97, 98, 99, 100, 103, 105,
162, 164, 167, 179, 181, 182, 189, 193, 204, 205, 106, 108, 109, 110, 111, 112, 113, 115, 116, 117,
212, 228, 235 118, 122, 123, 124, 125, 126, 127, 128, 129, 130,
praiseâ•‡â•‰28, 43, 45, 48, 78, 79, 82, 90, 92, 93, 96, 100, 131, 132, 136, 137, 139, 140, 141, 143, 144, 145,
105, 106, 108, 111, 113, 117, 118, 123, 125, 129, 148, 149, 154, 155, 156, 157, 158, 159, 160, 161,
174, 216 162, 163, 164, 166, 167, 170, 171, 173, 174, 175,
prayer of lament and penitenceâ•‡â•‰116, 160 178, 181, 185, 186, 187, 188, 192, 196, 198, 199,
pre-existenceâ•‡â•‰4, 6, 7, 8, 82, 85, 88, 96, 97, 99, 227, 203, 208, 209, 211, 212, 213, 214, 215, 216, 217,
231, 232, 243, 248 218, 220, 221, 222, 224, 225, 226, 227, 228, 229,
Pre-existenceâ•‡â•‰7, 97, 106, 231, 232 230, 231, 232, 233, 234, 235, 236, 237, 238, 239,
priestsâ•‡â•‰41, 176 240, 242, 243, 244, 245, 246, 247, 248, 249
privilegeâ•‡â•‰39, 40, 43, 46, 76, 81 Righteous Oneâ•‡â•‰2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 45, 54, 70, 73, 78, 80, 82,
proskynesisâ•‡â•‰35 94, 96, 97, 98, 100, 126, 133, 135, 136, 137, 140,
prostrationâ•‡â•‰82, 95, 96, 107, 142 152, 153, 154, 185, 187, 199, 218, 236
provenanceâ•‡â•‰30, 31 righteousnessâ•‡â•‰7, 8, 41, 46, 66, 67, 68, 71, 74, 75, 76,
punishmentâ•‡â•‰2, 3, 8, 19, 21, 24, 26, 35, 36, 37, 46, 65, 81, 94, 101, 102, 112, 113, 116, 123, 126, 127,
67, 78, 80, 100, 103, 110, 113, 115, 118, 159, 128, 144, 147, 148, 152, 153, 154, 155, 156, 157,
161, 162, 173, 175, 196, 203, 213, 214, 217, 218, 158, 159, 161, 184, 185, 198, 215, 218, 227, 229,
219, 220, 222, 244, 245, 246, 247, 248 231, 235, 238, 242, 243, 246, 248
purposeâ•‡â•‰7, 11, 21, 22, 39, 63, 68, 74, 78, 81, 84, 86, Romanâ•‡â•‰17, 18, 19, 20, 33, 36, 39
88, 90, 92, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 123, 127, 141, 143, Romansâ•‡â•‰17, 18, 20, 21, 43, 44, 151
153, 157, 158, 161, 165, 167, 169, 184, 188, 197, rulersâ•‡â•‰3, 16, 17, 18, 20, 38, 39, 40, 43, 45, 80, 82,
227, 230, 231, 232, 243, 246, 248, 250 109, 158
ruling classâ•‡â•‰36
Rabbinic Judaismâ•‡â•‰52
radiance of the vindicatedâ•‡â•‰161, 163 Sadduceesâ•‡â•‰17
Raguelâ•‡â•‰65 salvationâ•‡â•‰42, 81, 82, 87, 91, 92, 96, 97, 103, 111,
Raphaelâ•‡â•‰65, 144, 146 113, 117, 123, 157, 159, 160, 185, 208, 209,
real authorâ•‡â•‰30, 31, 32, 33, 38 232, 238
real readerâ•‡â•‰32 salviï¬†câ•‡â•‰82, 84, 92, 95, 96, 164, 231, 232, 243
recognitionâ•‡â•‰13, 124, 159, 179, 202, 237, 244 sapientialâ•‡â•‰35, 36, 38, 44, 48, 49
redactionalâ•‡â•‰6, 7, 15, 88, 137, 165, 166, 171, 195, 196, Satanâ•‡â•‰37, 219, 223, 246, 247
197, 198, 201, 203, 209, 215 sayingsâ•‡â•‰1, 2, 10, 11, 12, 13, 165, 168, 178, 202, 221,
redemptiveâ•‡â•‰95, 180, 191, 192, 248 224, 232
religious leadersâ•‡â•‰41, 42, 44, 48, 49, 215 scepterâ•‡â•‰114, 116
remnantâ•‡â•‰94, 112 scourgesâ•‡â•‰37, 110, 173
requestâ•‡â•‰117, 157, 159, 160, 184, 217, 223, 228, 237, scribalâ•‡â•‰6, 35, 36, 49, 56, 57, 79, 101, 104, 124, 134,
238, 243, 244, 247, 248 135, 151
restorationâ•‡â•‰49, 63, 91, 95, 97, 111, 191, 246 scribeâ•‡â•‰35, 36, 38, 56, 57, 65, 120, 125, 132, 134, 135,
Resurrection, resurrectedâ•‡â•‰159, 161, 162, 202, 247 145, 152
retainersâ•‡â•‰41, 43, 47 scribesâ•‡â•‰41, 47, 55, 118, 176
revealedâ•‡â•‰2, 3, 5, 8, 14, 26, 28, 30, 35, 36, 44, 46, 49, seaâ•‡â•‰34, 47, 50, 51, 52, 53, 162, 163, 174, 187, 194,
66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 74, 77, 84, 93, 95, 96, 97, 99, 246, 247
CO25117.indb 265 11/03/2011 11:58

266 Index
seamâ•‡â•‰24, 196, 197, 209, 215 210, 211, 212, 213, 214, 215, 216, 217, 218, 219,
secretsâ•‡â•‰3, 26, 46, 48, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 76, 220, 221, 222, 223, 224, 225, 226, 227, 228, 229,
77, 81, 123, 141, 142, 151, 229 230, 231, 232, 233, 234, 235, 236, 237, 238, 239,
Seleucidsâ•‡â•‰16, 17 240, 241, 242, 243, 244, 245, 248, 249, 250, 251
self-designationâ•‡â•‰10, 11, 13, 179, 182, 187, 250 Son of the Mother of Lifeâ•‡â•‰156
self-referrentâ•‡â•‰177 sorceryâ•‡â•‰35, 67
Sennacheribâ•‡â•‰91 sourcesâ•‡â•‰2, 13, 14, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30,
Septuagintâ•‡â•‰57, 181, 192 45, 47, 50, 52, 61, 77, 88, 156, 184, 185, 186,
Seraphinâ•‡â•‰143 188, 190, 207, 250
servantâ•‡â•‰78, 83, 84, 86, 89, 91, 92, 94, 95, 96, 97, 99, source-traditionsâ•‡â•‰29
102, 129, 137, 158, 160, 164, 178, 182, 211, 217, sovereigntyâ•‡â•‰28, 193, 205
230, 251 sowerâ•‡â•‰166, 170, 171, 172
Servant Songsâ•‡â•‰83, 84, 94 staffâ•‡â•‰28, 45, 89, 91, 92, 96, 232
servantsâ•‡â•‰41, 83, 111, 116 starsâ•‡â•‰16, 33, 66, 80, 84, 85, 86, 88, 89, 97, 98, 242,
shameâ•‡â•‰31, 46, 105, 106, 110, 113, 114, 115, 116, 122, 247
157, 160, 162, 180, 181, 192, 205, 216, 228, 237, stars of heavenâ•‡â•‰16, 85, 88, 89
243, 249 storehousesâ•‡â•‰35, 36, 38, 46, 66, 76, 142
Shaoshyantâ•‡â•‰51 stylistic habitsâ•‡â•‰137
sheepâ•‡â•‰47, 195, 203, 209, 217 suffering sayingsâ•‡â•‰165
shepherdâ•‡â•‰91, 195, 196, 203, 209, 216, 220, 223 suffering servantâ•‡â•‰97
Sibylline Oraclesâ•‡â•‰15, 247 Sumerianâ•‡â•‰99
sign of the Son of Manâ•‡â•‰189, 191, 204, 241 sunâ•‡â•‰35, 45, 62, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 97, 98, 149,
silverâ•‡â•‰20, 26, 34 150, 161, 166, 170, 171, 173, 174, 175, 214, 221,
similaritiesâ•‡â•‰2, 9, 13, 22, 51, 59, 60, 80, 82, 83, 96, 222, 224, 238, 242
103, 109, 126, 137, 139, 140, 141, 142, 143, 167, supplicantsâ•‡â•‰46, 48
169, 171, 173, 213, 216, 219, 225, 226, 227, 236, swordâ•‡â•‰110, 114, 115, 159
244, 245, 249, 250, 251
sinnersâ•‡â•‰29, 35, 36, 37, 48, 53, 67, 68, 78, 80, 102, Talmudâ•‡â•‰35
117, 118, 119, 120, 121, 128, 129, 155, 156, 181, taxationâ•‡â•‰40
185, 208, 214, 216, 235, 240, 245 technologyâ•‡â•‰33, 34, 39, 67
snowâ•‡â•‰58, 59, 76, 141, 142, 149, 150, 242 templeâ•‡â•‰18, 42
social arenasâ•‡â•‰32, 33 Testament of Abrahamâ•‡â•‰15, 184, 246
social locationâ•‡â•‰30, 32, 33, 39, 43, 46, 48, 49 Testament of Jobâ•‡â•‰138
social settingâ•‡â•‰2, 13, 14, 30, 31, 39, 49 textualâ•‡â•‰5, 17, 33, 37, 55, 56, 57, 58, 79, 80, 101, 118,
social statusâ•‡â•‰14, 31, 32 121, 124, 125, 130, 132, 133, 134, 135, 137,
social stratificationâ•‡â•‰14 151, 224
social systemâ•‡â•‰14, 33 The Lives of the Prophetsâ•‡â•‰138
Socializationâ•‡â•‰35 The Rule of the Communityâ•‡â•‰109
soldiersâ•‡â•‰38, 39, 41 The War Scrollâ•‡â•‰109
Son of a Womanâ•‡â•‰101, 103, 105, 112, 122, 125, 128, throne of gloryâ•‡â•‰3, 13, 53, 101, 102, 103, 105, 123,
152, 153, 155, 156, 159 124, 125, 113, 118, 119, 120, 126, 134, 142, 157,
son of Adamâ•‡â•‰6, 135 159, 160, 183, 184, 185, 187, 188, 203, 215,
son of Enosâ•‡â•‰6 216, 222, 224, 226, 229, 235, 236, 239, 243, 244,
Son of Godâ•‡â•‰11, 178, 180, 234, 246, 250 248, 250
Son of Manâ•‡â•‰1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 15, thronesâ•‡â•‰34, 43, 78, 79, 80, 102, 124, 125, 126, 166,
16, 23, 24, 25, 26, 28, 29, 30, 34, 37, 38, 43, 44, 182, 183, 184, 185, 186, 187, 201, 206, 225, 232,
45, 46, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 59, 60, 62, 63, 64, 236, 246, 248
66, 67, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, thunderâ•‡â•‰35, 46, 68, 76
81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 91, 92, 94, 95, tinâ•‡â•‰34
96, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101, 102, 104, 105, 106, 107, titleâ•‡â•‰4
108, 111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 117, 118, 119, 120, tortureâ•‡â•‰37
121, 122, 123, 124, 125, 126, 127, 128, 129, 130, Trajanâ•‡â•‰15, 20
131, 132, 133, 134, 135, 136, 137, 138, 139, 143, tributesâ•‡â•‰40
144, 145, 151, 152, 153, 154, 155, 156, 157, 158, trumpetâ•‡â•‰189, 190, 193, 204
159, 160, 161, 162, 163, 164, 165, 166, 167, 168, Tyreâ•‡â•‰109
169, 170, 171, 172, 173, 174, 175, 176, 177, 178,
179, 180, 181, 182, 183, 184, 185, 186, 187, 188, Ugariticâ•‡â•‰61
189, 190, 191, 192, 193, 194, 195, 196, 197, 198, uncleanâ•‡â•‰42, 44
199, 200, 201, 202, 203, 204, 205, 206, 207, 209, Urielâ•‡â•‰65
CO25117.indb 266 11/03/2011 11:58

Index 267
valley of punishmentâ•‡â•‰21 wickedâ•‡â•‰3, 8, 68, 80, 94, 100, 102, 108, 109, 110, 112,
vindicationâ•‡â•‰8, 14, 30, 34, 49, 82, 100, 108, 118, 123, 113, 116, 118, 126, 127, 128, 129, 151, 159, 160,
164, 174, 187, 188, 192, 194, 199, 220, 222, 173, 174, 175, 185, 187, 188, 209, 211, 216, 217,
229, 234 219, 220, 222, 225, 231, 237, 238, 240, 245,
vision(s)â•‡â•‰2, 3, 6, 7, 31, 32, 50, 54, 60, 61, 64, 65, 67, 246
69, 74, 126, 127, 137, 138, 139, 141, 163, 228, wild beastsâ•‡â•‰47, 162, 194
230 windsâ•‡â•‰46, 68, 88, 130, 131, 132, 138, 139, 140, 141,
voiceâ•‡â•‰10, 34, 83, 144, 146, 150, 151, 203 142, 189, 194, 223, 224
volcanic activityâ•‡â•‰21, 34 Wisdomâ•‡â•‰3, 68, 69, 76, 97, 109, 178, 211, 231, 232
woolâ•‡â•‰54, 58, 59, 144, 146, 149, 150
waldaâ•‡â•‰4, 59, 62, 64, 70, 71, 74, 75, 79, 80, 85, 86, worldwideâ•‡â•‰129, 157, 161, 226, 240, 241, 243, 244,
104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 111, 112, 114, 119, 120, 248
122, 125, 128, 130, 132, 135, 137, 139, 144, 145, worshipâ•‡â•‰35, 43, 48, 82, 84, 90, 92, 96, 99, 100, 107,
152, 153, 154, 155, 156, 157 108, 112, 113, 123, 125, 157, 158, 159, 217, 227,
watchersâ•‡â•‰3, 29, 36, 66, 67, 69, 70, 118, 121, 140, 141, 233, 234, 243, 248
150, 155, 214, 242, 244 writingâ•‡â•‰6, 8, 22, 32, 40, 41, 44, 46, 82, 171
wealthâ•‡â•‰31, 40, 41, 42, 43, 45, 109, 110, 162
weaponsâ•‡â•‰26, 39 zodiacâ•‡â•‰88
whiteâ•‡â•‰54, 58, 59, 141, 144, 146, 149, 150, 153, 242 Zoroastrian theologyâ•‡â•‰51
CO25117.indb 267 11/03/2011 11:58

Walck - The Son of Man in The Parables of Enoch and in Matthew (2011) PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Walck - The Son of Man in The Parables of Enoch and in Matthew (2011) PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Jewish and Christian Texts in Contexts

and Related Studies

Editorial Board of Advisors

CO25117.indb 1 11/03/2011 11:58

CO25117.indb 3 11/03/2011 11:58

Published by T&T Clark International

British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data

ISBN: HB: 978-0-567-02729-0

Typeset by Fakenham Prepress Solutions, Fakenham, Norfolk NR21 8NN

CO25117.indb 4 11/03/2011 11:58

CO25117.indb 5 11/03/2011 11:58

CO25117.indb 7 11/03/2011 11:58

4.6 Exegesis of Mt. 24:30–31.................................................................... 189

CO25117.indb 8 11/03/2011 11:58

CO25117.indb 9 11/03/2011 11:58

CO25117.indb 10 11/03/2011 11:58

1. Distribution of Demonstrative Adjectives with the terms for “Son

CO25117.indb 11 11/03/2011 11:58

Eth I one family of Ethiopic manuscripts, so

CO25117.indb 12 11/03/2011 11:58

BM Add. 24990 British Museum Add. 24990 18th cent.

CO25117.indb 13 11/03/2011 11:58

CO25117.indb 14 11/03/2011 11:58

1.1â•‡ Subject and Anticipated Results

CO25117.indb 1 11/03/2011 11:58

1.2â•‡ The Son of Man in the Parables of Enoch

CO25117.indb 2 11/03/2011 11:58

CO25117.indb 3 11/03/2011 11:58

1.2.2â•‡ The Son of Man in Par. En.

Is “Son of Man” a Title?

CO25117.indb 4 11/03/2011 11:58

The Identiﬁcation of Enoch as the Son of Man

CO25117.indb 5 11/03/2011 11:58

CO25117.indb 6 11/03/2011 11:58

The Hiddenness and Pre-existence of the Son of Man

CO25117.indb 7 11/03/2011 11:58

The Eschatological Function of the Son of Man

1.3â•‡ The Son of Man and the Gospel of Matthew

CO25117.indb 8 11/03/2011 11:58

1.3.2â•‡ The Son of Man in Material Special to Matthew

CO25117.indb 9 11/03/2011 11:58

CO25117.indb 10 11/03/2011 11:58

CO25117.indb 11 11/03/2011 11:58

1.4â•‡ The Relationship between the Parables of Enoch

CO25117.indb 12 11/03/2011 11:58

CO25117.indb 13 11/03/2011 11:58

CO25117.indb 14 11/03/2011 11:58

2.2â•‡ Dating the Parables of Enoch

CO25117.indb 15 11/03/2011 11:58

2.2.1â•‡ Four Elements to be considered

1) the identity of the kings and the mighty ones;

The Kings and Mighty Ones

CO25117.indb 16 11/03/2011 11:58

CO25117.indb 17 11/03/2011 11:58

CO25117.indb 18 11/03/2011 11:58

The Parthians and Medes

CO25117.indb 19 11/03/2011 11:58

CO25117.indb 20 11/03/2011 11:58

The Healing Hot Springs

CO25117.indb 21 11/03/2011 11:58

CO25117.indb 22 11/03/2011 11:58

2.3â•‡ Sources for the Parables of Enoch

2.3.1â•‡ The Noachic Source