db90b this theological innovation must have taken
place
before the
Actual Writing of
The Similitudes of Enoch
in the first century A.D./CE;
IT is of major importance for understanding
the similar development that we can observe in the Christology of the New Testament?
Just as the Son of Man in the Similitudes is a preexistent divine figure
holding the dignity of the second divine throne and afforded all privileges & sovereignty of the one
like a son of man in Dani'el,
SO TOO
the preexistent Son of Man
who lies behind
the Gospels
~~~
This divine figure became ultimately identified
with Enoch in two ways, one via his becoming Enoch when Enoch is exalted into heaven
and one in his being revealed as having been Enoch all along!
THIS
is
THE
paradox that inhabits the Gospel story of the Christ as well:
on one hand,
the Son of Man is divine person, 'part of G d', coexistent
with g d for all eternity, revealed on earth in the human Jesus/Yehoshua;
on the other hand, the human Jesus/YESHUA has been exalted
and raised to 'divine status'!
To use once more
the terms afforded us by Moshe Idel,
we have here an instance of the "Son of Man" as apotheosis, a man 'becoming g d',
& at the same time, the "Son of Man"
as theophany, the 'self-revelation
of G d in a human'!
To be sure,
the emphasis in the Enochian version is on the apotheosis,
in the Gospel on the theophany, and that will be an important part of the further story,
but I think it well-established that
BOTH
elements
ARE PRESENT in BOTH VERSIONS
of the
JEWISH
Son of Man tradition?
Further examination
of the history of the Enoch tradition
might prepare us at present
to help us understand
this better!
As was the case
in the book of Esther where 'g d'
is not 'present' in words or images, the main background,
presentation & future of The Story
ìs 'about our
evolution'
~~~
Asih, man, 80 jaar
Log in om een reactie te plaatsen.
vorige
volgende