Divine Encounters: The Son of Man Across Biblical and Apocalyptic Texts

The Book of Enoch is not part of the canonical Hebrew Bible but is regarded as significant in the study of Second Temple Judaism and its literature. It has influenced Christian eschatology and Christology, particularly the identification of Jesus with the “Son of Man” figure in the New Testament.

The “Son of Man” is a central figure in the “Parables of Enoch”, and these descriptions align with the text’s portrayal of this figure.

Enoch 46:2 describes the “Son of Man” accompanying the “Ancient of Days,” which is a term used for God, particularly in the context of divine judgment.

Enoch 48:4 refers to the “Son of Man” as a light to the nations, and Enoch 48:1 uses the imagery of a shepherd and a fountain of righteousness.

The concept that the name of the “Son of Man” will only be revealed to chosen individuals and that salvation is tied to his name is found in Enoch 48:6.

The pre-existence of the “Son of Man” before creation and his future role as a judge seated on a glorious throne is mentioned in Enoch 48:3 and Enoch 45:3.

Finally, Enoch 51:3 and Enoch 48:5 discuss the exaltation and worship of the “Son of Man” by all.

These themes are consistent with the text’s apocalyptic and messianic visions.

The Book of Enoch holds historical and religious significance, and its portrayal of the “Son of Man” is a complex blend of prophecy, divine judgment, and salvation themes. While it is not considered scripture in the same sense as the Bible by most Jewish and Christian groups, it remains a valuable document for understanding ancient religious perspectives on these concepts.

Now, let’s take it again slowly!

In the Book of Enoch, specifically in the Parables of Enoch (Chapters 37-71), Enoch is transported to the “heaven of heavens” and beholds a magnificent, fiery heavenly palace. There, he is greeted by God, the four archangels (Michael, Gabriel, Raphael, and Uriel), and countless other angels. Remarkably, Enoch is addressed as the Son of Man, the very figure he had seen in his visions.

However, it’s essential to understand this verse in its literal context, without preconceived notions or interpretations. A reader unfamiliar with Jesus Christ’s story would interpret this verse straightforwardly, without any influence from prior knowledge.

The narrative resembles the story of Abraham’s encounter with the three men (Genesis 18), who announced the birth of Isaac. Two of these men continued their journey to Sodom, arriving at Lot’s house (Genesis 19). The third man is not accounted for. The apparent discrepancy lies not in the text but in the author’s omission of details between Abraham’s home and Lot’s.

Similarly, the verse addressing Enoch as the Son of Man seems incomplete, with the author leaving out crucial context. Jesus Christ affirmed His existence before Abraham (John 8:58), and Enoch couldn’t have been the Son of Man he saw in his vision. Enoch was aware that he wasn’t the Son of Man; he couldn’t be introduced to himself in a vision. The Son of Man Enoch saw was present before him, but the author didn’t record it explicitly.

This nuance highlights the complexity of apocalyptic literature and the need for careful interpretation, considering the cultural, historical, and theological context in which these texts were written. By examining the text through a literal and historical lens, we can uncover deeper insights into the nature of the Son of Man and Enoch’s remarkable encounter in the heavenly realm.

The Bible, despite containing various discrepancies and apparent contradictions, remains a revered and trustworthy text. Its authenticity and truthfulness are not diminished by these minor inconsistencies, but rather, they demonstrate the complexity and richness of the biblical narrative. The Bible’s message of redemption, love, and salvation shines through, unaffected by the slight variations in accounts and details. Its enduring impact on human history and individual lives attests to its timeless truth and spiritual significance.

The resurrection of Jesus Christ is a pivotal event in Christian theology, yet the accounts of the angels’ presence and the rolling away of the stone vary across the four Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John). These discrepancies should not lead us to dismiss the biblical narrative as false, recognizing that the authors did not witness the exact moment of resurrection.

The Gospels agree that women, including Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James and John, and others, were the first to arrive at the tomb (Matthew 28:1-10, Mark 16:1-8, Luke 24:1-12, John 20:1-10). Their testimony is crucial to the resurrection account, as they were the first to witness the empty tomb and encounter the angels.

The variations in the accounts can be attributed to the different perspectives and purposes of each Gospel writer, rather than intentional contradictions. Matthew and Mark mention one angel, while Luke describes two men in dazzling clothes. John’s account mentions two angels, but only after Mary Magdalene had already seen the risen Lord.

These differences do not diminish the significance of the resurrection event. Instead, they reflect the unique experiences and emphases of each evangelist, all of whom testify to the empty tomb and Jesus’ triumphant victory over death. The exact details may be impossible to reconcile, but the core message remains unchanged: Jesus Christ is risen, and His resurrection is a cornerstone of Christian faith.

Back to the Book of Enoch. The problem passage reads:

“And the Head of Days came with Michael and Raphael and Gabriel and Phanuel, and thousands and tens of thousands of angels without number. And he came to me and greeted me with his voice and said to me, “You are that Son of Man who was born for righteousness, and righteousness dwells on you, and the righteousness of the Head of Days will not forsake you.” (1 Enoch 71:13-14).

Some think it should be, “This is the Son of Man. . .” rather than “You are the Son of Man. . .”

In the New Testament we find such discrepancies, particularly when Jesus Christ came out of the water after being baptized by John.

The biblical accounts of God’s declaration about Jesus Christ contain a fascinating nuance. In Matthew 3:17 and Matthew 17:5, God says, “This is My Son…” (emphasis added), while Mark 1:11 and Luke 3:22 quote God as saying, “You are My Son…” (emphasis added). It’s essential to recognize that God wasn’t introducing Jesus to Himself, but rather to the gathered masses. Jesus was already aware of His identity as God’s beloved Son.

The Transfiguration accounts in Matthew, Mark, and John concur with the “This is My Son” version (Matthew 17:5, Mark 9:7, John 1:14). However, Mark’s earlier account (Mark 1:11) uses the “You are My Son” phrase, potentially quoting Psalm 2:7. Notably, Mark’s Transfiguration account (Mark 9:7) switches to the “This is My Son” phrase, while Luke maintains consistency with “You are My Son” (Luke 3:22, Luke 9:35).

Apostle Peter’s testimony in 2 Peter 1:17 supports the “This is My Son” version. Minor discrepancies in the Transfiguration accounts, such as the timing (Matthew and Mark: 6 days, John: 8 days), do not diminish the overall narrative’s credibility.

Similarly, in the Book of Enoch, the Head of Days introduces Enoch to the Son of Man, saying, “This is the Son of Man you saw in your visions…” (Enoch 46:2). Although the text may lack clarity or omit details, it’s essential to consider the context and purpose of the narrative rather than dismissing the entire book due to perceived discrepancies.

These examples demonstrate that minor variations in biblical accounts do not undermine their overall truth and significance. The core message of God’s love, redemption, and Jesus’ identity as the Son of God remains unwavering, despite these nuances.

After all in his visions, Enoch saw the son of man in visions of the future, not in disclosures of the present.

Once again, the biblical accounts of God’s declaration about Jesus Christ contain a fascinating nuance, even within the same author’s writings. Mark, in his Gospel, uses both “You are My Son” (Mark 1:11, potentially quoting Psalm 2:7) and “This is My Son” (Mark 9:7) phrases. Similarly, the Book of Enoch switches between “This is the Son of man” (Enoch 46:1-3) and “You are the Son of man” (Enoch 70:16-18) phrases.

In the Book of Enoch, the “This is the Son of man” phrase (Enoch 46:1-3) describes the Son of Man as the righteous one, chosen by the Lord of spirits, who will reveal hidden treasures and raise up kings and the mighty. In contrast, the “You are the Son of man” phrase (Enoch 70:16-18) addresses Enoch directly, affirming his role as the son of man born for righteousness, with the righteousness of the Ancient of days resting upon him.

These variations in language underscore the complexity of divine revelation and the multifaceted nature of the Son of Man’s identity. Just as Mark’s Gospel uses different phrases to convey distinct aspects of Jesus’ identity, the Book of Enoch employs similar variations to illuminate the Son of Man’s character and purpose.

These nuances invite us to explore the deeper meanings and contexts of these passages, rather than dismissing them as contradictions. By embracing the complexity of divine revelation, we may uncover a richer understanding of the Son of Man’s significance in both the biblical and apocalyptic traditions.

The misunderstanding of Enoch 46:2 & 70:17 matches the misunderstanding in Matthew 16:18 when Jesus said, “And I also say to you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build My Church, and the gates of Hades will not prevail against it.”

Many have interpreted as if Jesus Christ would build his Church upon Peter.

In his book “Eternal Quest: Unraveling the Mystery of Christ’s Church,” Jaison Ndlovu provides a profound analysis of Jesus’ statement, “Upon this Rock” (Matthew 16:18). Jesus’ distinction between Peter (petros, small stone) and Himself (Petra, bedrock or foundational boulder) is crucial. While the words can be used interchangeably, Jesus’ usage in one statement highlights their different meanings. By saying, “You are a stone indeed, but upon this bedrock I will build My church,” Jesus emphasizes that Peter, as a disciple, is part of the church, but the foundation is established upon Himself as the Rock.

This analogy illustrates the interconnectedness and unity of believers, with Jesus as the cornerstone (1 Corinthians 3:11, Ephesians 2:20). Peter acknowledges Jesus as the cornerstone (1 Peter 2:1-10), portraying believers as small stones within God’s larger structure. Jesus is the ultimate foundation, the Rock not made by human hands, upon which He built His Church.

The play on words “Upon This Rock” underscores the importance of revelation and faith in Jesus as the foundation of the church. Similarly, in the Parables of Enoch, “You are the Son of man…” refers to the Messiah, not Enoch. When Jesus said, “Upon this Rock,” He pointed to Himself; when He said, “You are Peter,” He pointed to Peter, the small stone, distinct from the Rock. When God said, “This is my Son…”, He pointed to Jesus Christ, addressing the gathered masses. On the Mount of Transfiguration, God pointed to Jesus, responding to Peter’s request to build three tents for the three heads of eras.

“Eternal Quest: Unraveling the Mystery of Christ’s Church,” provides a deeper understanding of these scriptures, revealing the spiritual message that the church’s foundation is built upon divine revelation and profession of faith in Christ.

Based on the biblical and apocalyptic texts, we can confidently conclude that the Son of Man refers to the Messiah, Jesus Christ, in His human form. Both the Bible and the Book of Enoch, a non-canonical text, consistently portray the Son of Man as the redeemer and savior of humanity.

Moreover, the Book of Enoch’s account can be considered a genuine and reliable scripture, as it predates Jesus Christ’s birth yet accurately describes His character and role. This text, written centuries before the New Testament, remarkably aligns with the biblical narrative, further solidifying its credibility. By acknowledging the Book of Enoch as a legitimate scripture, we can gain a deeper understanding of the Messiah’s identity and purpose, as revealed in both the biblical and apocalyptic traditions.