Whether and whence preexistence in 1 Enoch?: Isa 49:1–2 and the preexistent servant as the background for 1 En. 48:3, 6; 62:7
The study examines the debated questions of whether and whence preexistence is affirmed of the Son of Man in the parables of Enoch. With regard to the first question, I argue an old thesis on new grounds. Augmenting Johannes Theisohn’s analysis, I highlight the parallel intertextual engagement of Is...
| Auteur principal: | |
|---|---|
| Type de support: | Électronique Article |
| Langue: | Anglais |
| Vérifier la disponibilité: | HBZ Gateway |
| Interlibrary Loan: | Interlibrary Loan for the Fachinformationsdienste (Specialized Information Services in Germany) |
| Publié: |
2023
|
| Dans: |
Journal for the study of the pseudepigrapha
Année: 2023, Volume: 32, Numéro: 3, Pages: 270-284 |
| Sujets / Chaînes de mots-clés standardisés: | B
Äthiopisches Henochbuch
/ Äthiopisches Henochbuch 37-71
/ Bibel. Jesaja 49,1-2
/ Serviteur de Dieu
/ Intertextualité
/ Préexistence
|
| Classifications IxTheo: | BH Judaïsme HB Ancien Testament |
| Sujets non-standardisés: | B
1 Enoch
B Son of Man B parables of Enoch B preexistence B Messiah B Servant |
| Accès en ligne: |
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) |
| Résumé: | The study examines the debated questions of whether and whence preexistence is affirmed of the Son of Man in the parables of Enoch. With regard to the first question, I argue an old thesis on new grounds. Augmenting Johannes Theisohn’s analysis, I highlight the parallel intertextual engagement of Isa 49:1–2 evident in 1 En. 48:3, 6; 62:7. Then on the basis of this parallel intertextuality, I demonstrate how the strong dichotomy necessary to the argument against preexistence cannot be drawn between 1 En. 48:3, 6, on one hand, as affirming preexistence in the mind of God and 1 En. 62:7, on the other hand, as affirming real existence within history, as the verses in question are parallel expressions depicting the same set of events from Isaiah. With regard to the study’s second question, whence preexistence, I argue an altogether new thesis that Isa 49:1–2—and not Prov 8—is the true source. On one hand, there are no linguistic links in 1 En. 48:3, 5; 62:7 to Prov 8 and the parables clearly distinguish the Son of Man from Wisdom in other passages. On the other hand, the spatial and temporal markers in 1 En. 48:3, 6; 62:7 designating the Son of Man’s naming/hiding as occurring, respectively, in God’s heavenly presence and before creation correspond formally to spatial and temporal markers in Isa 49:1–2 attached to the naming/hiding of the servant and, for reasons we explore, should be seen as interpretations of those markers. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1745-5286 |
| Contient: | Enthalten in: Journal for the study of the pseudepigrapha
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1177/09518207221116199 |
