Source: John J. Collins, The Apocalyptic Imagination: An Introduction to Jewish Apocalyptic Literature, Third Edition (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2016), 220–239.
Apocalyptic Imagination, The Similitudes of Enoch.wav
This podcast explores the "Similitudes of Enoch" (1 Enoch 37–71), arguing against the idea that it's a later Christian text and asserting its origins in first-century Jewish apocalypticism, likely within a sectarian group. The text emphasizes the importance of the "Son of Man" figure, seen as a heavenly counterpart to the community of the righteous, who acts as an eschatological judge and revealer of divine secrets. Unlike other Jewish texts, the Similitudes highlight faith in the Son of Man and heavenly realities as crucial for salvation, rather than adherence to the law, and although its identification with Enoch is debated, the work served to reassure the persecuted righteous of their ultimate vindication and heavenly destiny.
1. The Dating and Provenance of the Similitudes The sources discuss a significant debate surrounding the age and origin of the Similitudes of Enoch. J. T. Milik proposed that the Similitudes were not a Jewish work from the period around the New Testament but rather a later composition from the third century CE, created by Christians. This thesis is crucial for New Testament studies and understanding ancient Judaism because the Similitudes feature the figure of the "Son of Man," which plays a central role and was thought to be the primary evidence for Jewish speculation on this figure around New Testament times. Milik's argument rested on several points: the absence of Similitudes fragments among the Aramaic texts found at Qumran, his theory that the Similitudes replaced the Book of Giants in an original collection of Enochic writings, and supposed parallels with Christian passages in the Sibylline Oracles. However, the sources indicate that none of these arguments have withstood critical scrutiny. The absence of the Similitudes from the Qumran library does not prove it didn't exist during that period, as the Essene library wasn't exhaustive and might have excluded the Similitudes for specific reasons, such as its depiction of the sun and moon having near equality. There is also no textual evidence supporting the idea of an original Enochic "pentateuch." The claimed parallels with the Sibylline Oracles are deemed superficial, particularly because the genres are different, with the oracles lacking the visionary element characteristic of the Similitudes. Furthermore, the current form of the Similitudes, which explicitly identifies Enoch as the "Son of Man" in at least one passage, is argued to be Jewish, as a Jewish author would likely not have given such prominence to a "Son of Man" figure after the expression became a well-established Christian title. The sources suggest that certain passages in the Gospel of Matthew might even depend on the Similitudes. Based on these considerations, a date prior to 70 CE is considered likely, as there's nothing in the text incompatible with this period. More specific historical allusions, such as the mention of the Parthians and Medes, which are most plausibly dated after the Parthian invasion of Palestine in 40 BCE, and a reference to hot springs used by kings that change to instruments of judgment, likely inspired by Herod's attempt to heal in the waters of Callirhoe, support a date in the early or mid-first century CE, before the Jewish revolt of 66–70 CE, which the text does not mention. Although the Ethiopic language is the only form in which the text is preserved, it is considered probable that it was originally composed in Aramaic. Consequently, the Similitudes are seen as fully belonging to the discussion of ancient Jewish apocalypticism.
2. The Genre and Structure of the Similitudes The Similitudes of Enoch are described as a work of the apocalypse genre. Structurally, they are composed of three main sections referred to as "parables" or "similitudes," found in chapters 38–44, 45–57, and 58–69. The entire composition is introduced in chapter 37 as a "vision of wisdom," hinting at the eschatological significance of this wisdom by stating that the recipient has been given "the lot of eternal life." Each of the three parables begins with an introductory chapter presenting the subject of the revelation to follow, often focusing on questions about the day of judgment and the destiny of the righteous and the wicked. The term "parables" or "similitudes" reflects the text's use of complex analogies, such as those drawn between the fate of the righteous and the wicked, the holy on earth and the holy ones in heaven, and the mysterious order of the cosmos and the ultimate lot of the righteous. As an apocalypse, the Similitudes feature Enoch receiving revelations through visions experienced during a heavenly ascent. These visions are explained and interpreted for him by an angelic guide. The content of the revelations primarily concerns the transcendent world of the heavens and the impending judgment of humanity. While there are frequent allusions to "the kings and the mighty," suggesting a political dimension, the Similitudes lack the review of history typically found in "historical" apocalypses. Similar to other Jewish apocalypses involving heavenly ascents, there is a noticeable mystical tendency characterized by an emphasis on revealed wisdom. Notably, the Similitudes present wisdom as something not found on earth but residing with the angels in heaven, accessible only through special revelation like that granted to Enoch during his ascent, contrasting with the wisdom tradition that identified wisdom with the law and its dwelling in Jerusalem.
3. The Figure of "That Son of Man" A central and distinguishing feature of the Similitudes among Jewish apocalypses is its focus on a single preeminent figure, consistently referred to as the "Chosen One," "that Son of Man," and sometimes "messiah." This figure has generated considerable historical interest due to the similar title used in early Christianity for Jesus. The figure first appears in the second parable, in chapter 46, where Enoch sees "one who had a head of days" and alongside him "another, whose face had the appearance of a man." The accompanying angel identifies this second figure as "the Son of Man who has righteousness." The sources explain that the initial introduction of this figure, described as having "the appearance of a man," makes the expression "Son of Man" a periphrastic way of referring to this figure. However, the term is not simply equivalent to "man." In apocalyptic literature, a figure with the appearance of a man can often be an angel. More significantly, the expression is an allusion to Daniel 7, especially given the context of seeing the Head of Days. Thus, the repeated use of "that Son of Man" implies eschatological associations from Daniel 7, establishing an identity that is more than just a human figure. The sources note that this "Son of Man who has righteousness" is indistinguishable from the "Righteous One" mentioned elsewhere and is also the same being as "the Chosen One," given that these terms are used interchangeably and describe the same functions. This figure is presented as a heavenly being, not a man in the ordinary sense, who was hidden from the beginning and kept in the presence of the Lord of Spirits, revealed only to the chosen ones. His identity is closely linked to the community of the righteous. He is not a personification of the community but a distinct, heavenly counterpart or Doppelgänger, analogous to the heavenly princes of nations in other apocalyptic texts like Daniel 10. The Son of Man's function is entirely defined in relation to the human righteous: he is a support for them, he has been revealed to them, and they will ultimately dwell with him. His role is primarily eschatological revealer and judge, serving to vindicate the righteous and condemn their enemies. There is a "structural homologue" or parallelism between the Son of Man and the righteous community; his manifestation entails their triumph, and his hiddenness corresponds to their suffering and the hidden nature of their destiny. He is preserved from their sufferings, embodying pure power and glory and representing the hopes of the persecuted righteous.
4. The Righteous and the Wicked and Their Destiny A major focus of the Similitudes is the ultimate destiny of "the righteous and the chosen" and their wicked counterparts. The introductory chapters of each parable emphasize this theme. The final outcome for both groups is clearly and emphatically stated. The righteous are destined to enjoy heavenly resting places alongside the holy angels and will eventually inhabit a transformed earth. In contrast, the wicked face punishment and will be swallowed up in Sheol. The sources characterize "the righteous," used interchangeably with "chosen" and "holy," as a quasi-technical term or title likely referring to a specific community rather than just generally righteous individuals. Descriptions of the righteous include that they dwell on the dry ground, believe in the name of the Lord of Spirits, are potentially persecuted (indicated by reference to their blood), and have hated and rejected the world of iniquity, its works, and its ways, finding salvation in the name of the Lord of Spirits. The picture of the righteous is further clarified through descriptions of their opponents, identified as "those who commit sin and evil." These wicked individuals are primarily described as "the kings and the powerful." They are also characterized as those who have denied the name of the Lord of Spirits. These two characteristics are presented as related: they deny the Lord of Spirits because their power comes from their riches and their faith is in idols they have made, or their hope is placed in earthly kingdoms and glory. The fundamental issue dividing the righteous and the wicked is belief in the heavenly world of the Lord of Spirits and the Son of Man, and in the future judgment where the righteous will prevail. Those lacking this belief place their trust in earthly power. While those in power are especially susceptible to this attitude, the text doesn't suggest that powerlessness inherently constitutes righteousness. Righteousness is described as an attitude of rejecting the present world and having faith in the Lord of Spirits and the Son of Man. This faith involves believing in their existence and trusting/depending on them for salvation. The sources note that the Similitudes do not explicitly mention keeping the law or differentiate between Jew and Gentile, though the "kings and the powerful" who trust in idols might be Gentile rulers. However, the primary opposition is not framed as Jew versus Gentile, suggesting that "righteous" likely refers to a group narrower than the entire Jewish people, possibly a sectarian community.
5. The Identification of Enoch with the Son of Man A significant interpretive challenge within the Similitudes arises from two passages in the epilogues (chapters 70 and 71) that appear to identify Enoch with the Son of Man figure he has been describing throughout the preceding visions. This is problematic because, in the main body of the Similitudes ("the parables"), Enoch consistently observes "that Son of Man" as a figure distinct from himself. One passage (70:1) is textually disputed; while most manuscripts distinguish Enoch from the Son of Man, reading that Enoch was lifted up "to the presence of that Son of Man and to the presence of the Lord of Spirits," some manuscripts suggest an identification, reading something like "the name of that Son of Man was raised aloft... to the Lord of Spirits." The second passage (71:14) is more direct, where an angel tells Enoch, "You are the Son of Man who was born for righteousness." This apparent identification contradicts Enoch's role as the visionary who merely sees the Son of Man.
The sources outline three potential solutions to this problem:
◦The identification was intended throughout the work, and chapter 71 represents the culmination of the revelation, disclosing that the "name revealed to the elect" is Enoch's own name. Problems with this view include the textual evidence from 70:1 which in most manuscripts distinguishes the two figures, and the lack of parallel in apocalyptic literature for a visionary failing to recognize himself in his visions.
◦The phrase "Son of Man" in 71:14 might not carry the technical title used elsewhere ("that Son of Man") but rather be used as a common noun meaning something like "that man who." This usage would be similar to how Enoch is called "son of man" in 60:10 in the style of Ezekiel, without eschatological implications. Under this interpretation, Enoch is not identified with the technical "Son of Man" figure but is singled out as the human being most closely associated with this heavenly counterpart, whose destiny other righteous individuals will eventually share. The Son of Man would be Enoch's heavenly double but remain distinct from him.
◦ Chapter 71 is a later addition by a redactor. This view is supported by the fact that chapters 70 and 71 function as a double epilogue, both describing Enoch's ascent, which introduces redundancy typically not found in the narrative framework of such works. This argument is strengthened if the majority reading of 70:1 is accepted, which clearly distinguishes Enoch and the Son of Man, creating a contradiction with 71:14. This solution allows for recovering an earlier sense where Enoch was distinct from the Son of Man but explains why the identification was eventually made, possibly because Enoch was preeminent among the righteous, shared the Son of Man's role as a revealer, and had already attained the heavenly destiny promised to the righteous. One hypothetical reason for the identification suggested is that it might have been made in response to the Christian use of "Son of Man" as a title for Jesus, positioning Enoch as a Jewish model or answer to Christ. The sources also mention the later tradition of Metatron in 3 Enoch, a fifth or sixth-century mystical text, where Enoch, son of Jared, is identified with a powerful heavenly being called Metatron, although the specific titles used in the Similitudes for the Son of Man are largely absent from this later text.