FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > Religion (Closed) > Biblical Criticism & History
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Yesterday at 03:12 PM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 10-09-2007, 04:16 AM   #11
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Bli Bli
Posts: 3,135
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by spin View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by jules? View Post
the pre-existant christ is the son of man mentioned by Enoch,
The book of Enoch is a composite work, much of which was written by the time of the Dead Sea Scrolls (it was a favourite at Qumran). However, what is now the second part of the work wasn't found at Qumran and its interest in the son of man shows that it was a christian development. The Jews didn't take Daniel 7:13's son of man as messianic as christians did (at least in the period I'm interested in, ancient times).

This appears to be contradicted by the quote provided by Toto. Are you able to explain the basis for your assertion?
The Son of Man "first appears as pre-existent in the apocryphal First Book of Enoch, which was originally written in Hebrew or Aramaic about 150 B.C.E. From that period on, the concept of the Messiah who was created in the six days of Creation, or even prior to them or who was born at variously stated subsequent dates and was then hidden to await his time, became a standard feature of Jewish Messianic eschatology."
-Raphael Patai, The Messiah Texts
judge is offline  
Old 10-09-2007, 10:46 AM   #12
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Birmingham UK
Posts: 4,876
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by judge View Post

This appears to be contradicted by the quote provided by Toto. Are you able to explain the basis for your assertion?
The Son of Man "first appears as pre-existent in the apocryphal First Book of Enoch, which was originally written in Hebrew or Aramaic about 150 B.C.E. From that period on, the concept of the Messiah who was created in the six days of Creation, or even prior to them or who was born at variously stated subsequent dates and was then hidden to await his time, became a standard feature of Jewish Messianic eschatology."
-Raphael Patai, The Messiah Texts
The issue is that the Similitudes of Enoch unlike all the other major parts of Enoch was not found at Qumran and is probably later than the rest, which was written in stages from c 250-100 BCE.

I doubt IMHO whether the Similitudes is Christian influenced but it may be after 70 CE. There is a reference to the Son of Man in II (IV) Esdras, which in its original form is a Jewish work from shortly after the fall of Jerusalem.

Andrew Criddle
andrewcriddle is offline  
Old 10-09-2007, 09:20 PM   #13
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Mondcivitan Republic
Posts: 2,550
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by andrewcriddle View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by judge View Post

This appears to be contradicted by the quote provided by Toto. Are you able to explain the basis for your assertion?
The Son of Man "first appears as pre-existent in the apocryphal First Book of Enoch, which was originally written in Hebrew or Aramaic about 150 B.C.E. From that period on, the concept of the Messiah who was created in the six days of Creation, or even prior to them or who was born at variously stated subsequent dates and was then hidden to await his time, became a standard feature of Jewish Messianic eschatology."
-Raphael Patai, The Messiah Texts
The issue is that the Similitudes of Enoch unlike all the other major parts of Enoch was not found at Qumran and is probably later than the rest, which was written in stages from c 250-100 BCE.

I doubt IMHO whether the Similitudes is Christian influenced but it may be after 70 CE. There is a reference to the Son of Man in II (IV) Esdras, which in its original form is a Jewish work from shortly after the fall of Jerusalem.

Andrew Criddle
I recall years ago photocopying all of 1 Enoch, cutting each verse apart, then rearranging them to compare by theme the Book of Watchers (section 1 of 1 Enoch) with the Similitudes (Section 2). I found that one seems to mirror the other (Similitudes is probably the child) in many ways, such as both having passages that seem to be borrowed from some sort of book of Noah. Its also got a strong Social Justice angle (not very keen on rich folks), similar to that found in the Epistle of Enoch section of 1 Enoch. I couldn't find any smoking gun that definitively pointed to Christian authorship or editing, though.

FWIW, J C Hindley (no relationship, honest) argued for a date c. 113-117 CE for the Similitudes, claiming that the references to the Parthians at 56.5-7 refers to Trajan's dealings with them rather than their assault on Jerusalem in 40 BCE ('Toward a Date for the Similitudes of Enoch: An Historical Approach', NTS 14, 1968).

http://books.google.com/books?id=joQ...vgyXpcJKVRW6oo

Then there's that dang 4 Ezra (2 Esdras, Latin Apocalypse of Ezra, whatever) mucking things up. I've always liked it though, especially the part where he gets high on something he drinks and goes into a trance and dictates all the lost books of the bible (the OT) and a bunch of apocryphal books as his disciples desperately try to keep up with copying it as he spoke.

DCH
DCHindley is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 07:22 AM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.