Who Is the Son of Man?
Michael, Raphael, Gabriel, Phanuel, and many (other) holy angels, without number, go out of that house. With them was the Beginning of Days; his head was like white and pure wool, and his garment was indescribable . . . . That Beginning of Days came with Michael, Raphael, Gabriel, Phanuel, and thousands of myriads of angels, without number. That angel came to me, greeted me with his voice and said to me: “You are the Son of Man who is born for righteousness; righteousness dwells upon you and the righteousness of the Beginning of Days will not forsake you. 1 Enoch 71:9-14
Beginning of Days – The scholarly collection of articles edited by Gabriele Boccaccini[1] deals with the relationship between the Parables of Enoch and the idea of the Son of Man. It is a fascinating dialogue. While controversy still surrounds dating of Enoch, it seems clear that Enoch had a significant effect on several New Testament writers, especially Matthew. In fact, Matthew’s description of the Son of Man seems not to be drawn from Daniel but rather from Enoch’s Book of Parables. It is Enoch that draws from Daniel, reinterpreting the Daniel text in specific ways that end up in Matthew’s account.
Without summarizing the 500 pages of articles, some points still need to be made. First, it appears likely that the concept of the Son of Man developed by Enoch describes a human figure who is elevated to a position of glory. Secondly, the Son of Man found in the gospels seems to be drawn from various sources and is not a “unified, comprehensive concept.” This idea is a construct from Enoch, Daniel, the Wisdom of Solomon, 4 Ezra and 2 Baruch. In other words, non-canonical material provides significant input in the gospel development. Thirdly, while there are aspects that lead to Trinitarian formulations of the Son of Man, there are also elements that treat the Son of Man as completely human, in fact, in some cases as Enoch himself. These elements are also found in canonical prophetic books other than Daniel. And finally, the Son of Man seems to be constructed along the same lines as the personification of Wisdom in Proverbs, a construction that in no way requires the hypothesis of a person existing alongside YHVH.
Now you’ve endured this very brief look into some heavy-duty scholarship. Aside from the theological question, what we discover is that the usual view of divine inspiration may be too simple. It seems obvious that the authors of the canonical books borrowed from material available to them in their culture, material which most of us have no idea even existed. Should we have expected anything else? When God moves men to write His words, would we expect Him not to use materials they were familiar with? Would we expect them not to borrow, change, construct and fit what they already knew into their message? Or did you think they were nothing but secretaries taking dictation?
We won’t settle the Son of Man question here, but we should notice that a much more sophisticated and complicated explanation of the development of the gospels might be needed. And if it is, would that upset your faith so much you just have to turn away and pretend none of this is real? Would it be a disaster to your trust in the Lord if you discovered that the idea of the Son of Man didn’t come only from Daniel, might not be a substitute for YHVH, and was probably viewed in more than one way when Matthew wrote his story?
Topical Index: inspiration, Son of Man, 1 Enoch 71:9-14
[1]Gabriele Boccaccini, (ed.), Enoch and the Messiah Son of Man, Eerdmans, 2007.
M.R. DeHaan was a former physician who wrote an excellent book on the blood of Jesus. The blood does not come from the woman. It comes from the father. Thus Mary “supplied” the egg but God the Father through the Holy Spirit supplied the blood.
Peter, as a nurse, I find this statement of where the blood of Yeshua HaMashiach comes from interesting. Can you point me to that book? I’d first love to see his bibliography!
The Chemistry of the Blood by M.R. DeHaan, M.D. You can find the book on Amazon.
Interesting. In the Torah, blood is forbidden in the diet, because it carried the life of the animal that was the gift of its Creator. So the Life is in the Blood here, too. Why is that not surprising?
Is the Bible not a progressive revelation of God to man? What book or chapter of the Bible should I read to know all there is to know about God?
Interesting Skip,
For a long time I have been a believer that God’s providence is mighty and all encompassing. I believe that the Word is written by Divine inspiration, but there is also the human element; God chooses who he reveals his Word to. The recipient is of a time, a culture, worldview, life experience etc, that allows he recipient to write exactly what God needs written without dictation, but providential.
I have recently come to the realisation that the “canon” is of man and not God (thanks to you), so the difficult step of accepting the use of other “inspired” texts (if that is not pushing a point), would again only speak of God’s providence.
I think of Providence as God setting things up in advance, before we even know a need, why not other influences? other cultures? It doesn’t exclude God, Does it?
These last 5 no 10 years have been about changing and rearranging the way I had been formerly taught to view scripture. A lot has changed and my faithing in Him has strengthened not diminished. Am I afraid to pursue Him into deeper water? I hope not this adventure while challenging has not been boring. If I remember correctly, the life of the backslider is boring.
Oy.
the word I posted didn’t appear.
Try again please
Keep it coming. This is a topic that I THOUGHT I had a handle on but have recently begun to deconstruct and reapproach. Your resources have been a big help as I continue on this journey.
One of the most important things that has ever been said on this site, for me, was that examining and testing and even changing our IDEAS about God does not change or negate or invalidate our prior experience with God. (I’m paraphrasing!) God doesn’t interact with us because He looks down and sees that we really have some correct ideas about Him. He invites us into relationship and interacts with us and moves in our lives, based entirely on something OTHER than our correct ideas. Is it based on our heart condition? I kinda doubt that too, given that I can now look back and see how God was tenderly and patiently guiding and providing for and protecting me during the years when I was an atheist, disgusted with the very notion of God and religion. It’s something else that motivates Him to interact with us, maybe it’s something He knows about us that we can’t see or pinpoint, or more likely it isn’t based in us at all. He knows His own. And we don’t stop being His because we test the inspired utterances and put our ideas through the fire. It’s scary to question the ideas that feel sacred. It rocks our foundations. But it was never our ideas that were sacred. He is our foundation and He promises a helper that guides us into all truth. He promises to reward those who diligently seek Him, as if seeking for deeply hidden treasure. I’m leaning on those promises as I examine and re-examine everything I thought I knew. His truth will stand, it will emerge from the fire unscathed. That doesn’t mean we will figure it all out. But it has been my constant prayer, especially since I have embarked upon this path of following The Way… this lonely and narrow road, that He will not let me stumble out of the light of His Word and truth. I beg Him to remember my heart, and what I have already been through, having been raised a Jehovah’s Witness and having seen and lived the worst of what false religion can do. He has my heart in His hands through this process of learning and un-learning and re-learning. I don’t always know where He is taking me or what He wants me to do with everything I have learned, but I am sitting here in my rowboat and looking straight ahead at where he has been with me in the past. I know His truth matters to Him. And I know my heart matters to Him. So all I can do is keep my eyes on Him and keep rowing.
How very well said, Alicia. I am sure many of us here would second your statements.
Great Testimony Alicia!! I too ran from God and everything that HE stood for but even if I didn’t want HIM, HE wanted me and HE never let go.. Finally when HE had enough of my running, HE reeled me back in like a dead fish and I was so broken and dead inside that when HE touched me, HE killed who I had become and HE made me brand new. I am eternally grateful to Abba and I am ready, willing and able to go deeper and deeper in my walk with HIM. I am very new to this site and look forward to learning more and to be part of a family that truly loves Abba like I do!!
Amen! This describes much of my recent years walking on the Way…thank you!
So i have a question, as we have discussed personally and what i have read over time, it looks as though there is a question of Yeshua being an aspect of God or maybe he is just a human being messiah like Moses, not God. Are your questions leading to that separation? Don’t get me wrong, I’m not a trinitarian believer, but i am wrestling with who Yeshua is and my pursuit is to know just that. It sounds like, and i don’t want to put word in your mouth, what you are espousing is familiar with the edomites in Jerusalem. Is this a fair assesment?
Hi Matt,
Perhaps the question relating to Yeshua being an aspect of God or a human being Messiah is a question unrelated to who Yeshua is.
i don’t understand your statement.
In other words, if Yeshua is not God or a human being Messiah like Moses a new question is proposed.
im sorry that was supposed to read “Ebionites”.
The Ebonites misunderstood Paul. As you know, Paul did not reject Torah. Furthermore, they seem to have discounted most of the apostolic writings. I certainly am not going in that direction. But they did hold that Yeshua was (is) the Jewish Messiah. I agree. And they believed that in concert with the Tanakh, he was not divine in the Christian sense, i.e., he was not the “second person” of the Triune God. At this point I appreciate their arguments more and more, although I want to qualify what “divine” really entails in the Tanakh. I don’t see much BIBLICAL evidence for the claim that God is one in essence while at the same time being three persons. I realize that the Church developed this idea over hundreds of years and that it is central to Christian differentiation, but I just have a harder and harder time finding BIBLICAL basis for it. Does that make me an Ebonite? No, I don’t think so. But it does make me more and more cautious and curious as to how the Church developed such an anti-Semitic doctrine. It bothers me that C S Lewis wrote that the Christian god is NOT a person, but an essence. I see Lewis’ point but it doesn’t seem to match anything I read in Scripture.
There is more to be said on this. Shortly.
Does it make sense to say that God, Yeshua, and the Holy Spirit are the same substance, but have different functions? You can’t separate them like you could an egg, yoke and shell
When we’re face to face with Yah, we will see One, not three.
Like. I just fall on my face in all encounters.
The idea of “substance” or “essence” or any other philosophical concept you choose for this is based in Greek metaphysics. The overwhelming view of Scripture is that YHVH is a PERSON, not an essence or substance, and as a person He is unique. Can a person be divided into parts? Can three persons be one person? The problem is not the language of Scripture, which is quite clear and uses ordinary words. The problem is the addition of Greek philosophical categories to alter the meaning of those ordinary words.
We need to look at this some more, but time is short right now. I will post an article with some reference material soon.
I have been waiting to see this material appear. My faith is based on my experience and I have no doubt about the existence of God and his involvement in my life. I do not expect to understand, but this material adds an exciting dimension to the gospel. I have long felt that there was much missing but it seems the time is right for this input from our Jewish/Hebrew heritage. As for the Son of Man, I want to believe that Christ felt all that I feel and struggled with all that I struggle with – in the same way. How else can he be my brother? Calloused hands and bruised feet are more meaningful to me than halos and harps.
I love your statement Vivian and I totally agree. I believe that Yeshua walked among us and felt everything that we feel. How else would HE have such love and compassion not to mention empathy if HE himself did not feel it.. You can have compassion for someone but empathy has to be felt from personal experience and Yeshua did just that!!
When we finally see Him as He is,
will we have any further questions?
I certainly hope so! I don’t think personal encounter means the end of thinking.
Hi Skip
What book of Enoch did you use?? There are several in Amazon and I want to make sure I am getting the correct one. Thanks for everything that you are doing. May Abba Bless you and your family
The Book of Enoch is available on line for free. There are several translations. You don’t have to pay Amazon for it.
Thank you so very much!!!
Enoch – wow …, there are many conflicting views on this book as it proposes within itself – yet …. some love it .. and some hate it …this has been happening for 2,000+ years. I have my own speculations regarding some of it’s authorship about certain chapters … but that is for me to personally sort out. I am intrigued by this topic however and can’t wait for you to reveal further material regarding such Skip. Thanks
Michael
Enoch and The Messiah: In chapters 83-90, the coming Messiah is the head of a Messianic community, but has no special roll to fulfill from what i can see in what i read.
In contrast, chapters 37-71 are quite contrary. Now he bears several “Messianic” titles: Son of Man, the Elect One, The Righteous One, and naturally, the Messiah (meaning the Anointed One), all of which found their way into the New Testament.
Do we have different authorship going on here?
I believe there is different authorship in several places of Enoch – however .., some of the subject matter in other places are compelling. I am anxious to see further material from your insight on this subject matter Mr. Skip
of course .. not all Enoch translations read the same
First I wanted to thank you Skip as I have grown up in very conservative churches where only the Bible had any value or truth. Thank you for opening my life up! You have given me permission to read and examine so very much more from Enoch to Homer to Plato to Rabbis.
Secondly, the understanding of who Yeshua was and is has been a serious quest for myself this past year. I had to question if He was even the Messiah in order to firmly plant myself in the belief that He IS. One question we have been asking in out family that pertains to who He was is this, when He touched the unclean did He become unclean? I believe that since He was a man He became unclean where as others believe that as divine He could never become unclean. Being unclean does not equate to being sinful. We can surely see all of the issues that arise from our inability to understand who Yeshua was and is.
Keep the insights coming!
Ritual uncleanliness is not sin. You’re right. The Messiah can also be unclean, and have to go through the purification process, just like anyone else who lives under Torah. Why would “divinity” exempt him if he was Torah observant?
Keep reading and asking. We are all moving along together.