Richard Bauckham. <i>“Son of Man” Volume 1: Early Jewish Literature</i>

It is no secret that the study of the reception of the Danielic “one like a son of man” (Dan 7:13–14) is a minefield, and in his latest book, Richard Bauckham expertly charts a course through hazardous terrain. In this first volume of a two-volume work (the second of which will focus on Jesus and the gospels), Bauckham examines a variety of early Jewish texts that interpret the human-like figure of Dan 7.Part 1 of Bauckham’s study is devoted to the Parables of Enoch (1 En. 37–71), as this lengthy section of the Book of 1 Enoch is frequently considered to have the greatest relevance for establishing the background of the use of Dan 7:13–14 in the New Testament, yet it is fraught with interpretive challenges. Surveying various debates, Bauckham rejects the notion of a “son of man” concept, especially the idea that “son of man” was an established messianic title. Instead, Bauckham stresses that the Semitic idiom simply means “human being” and highlights that the Parables often qualify “son of man” with a demonstrative (e.g., 1 En. 48:2; 62:5; 63:11). More precisely, “that son of man” is how the Parables refer back to the figure Enoch sees earlier in his vision, namely, the one “whose face was like the appearance of a man; and [whose] face was full of graciousness like one of the holy angels” (46:1). That the same verse mentions “one who had a head of days and [whose] head was like white wool” indicates that the Parables are interpreting the “one like a son of man” and “Ancient of Days” from the Book of Daniel. Bauckham contends that the “exegetical fusion” of Dan 7 with other key texts such as Isa 11 and Ps 2 results in the presentation of the Enochic “son of man” as a God-appointed eschatological judge.Weighing in on other disputed aspects of this figure’s identity, Bauckham concedes that he was previously mistaken to suggest that the Parables testify to an exception to the conviction that only the God of Israel could (1) sit on the divine throne and (2) be worshipped. Bauckham pivots by arguing that the Parables do not depict the “son of man” on God’s throne but on another throne, one granted to him by God for the sole purpose of his eschatological judging role; he is also persuaded that the honor God receives in the Parables (cultic worship) should be differentiated from that bestowed on the “son of man” (obeisance). These conclusions complement what becomes a key point of his research: the identification of the “son of man” not with a celestial being (preexistent or otherwise), but with Enoch himself as per the revelation of 1 En. 70–71. While these chapters are often considered interpolations, Bauckham argues that they are original, prefaced by hints that in his visions of the “son of man” Enoch is seeing his transformed future self, an interpretive choice that fills out the Enochic corpus by granting the patriarch critical eschatological responsibilities that further explicate his special treatment by God (cf. Gen 5:24).A significant aspect of the book is how Bauckham challenges the “consensus” that the Parables are pre-Christian, a view for which there is virtually no evidence. In response, Bauckham posits a post-AD 70 date of composition and draws attention to the affinities between the Parables and certain late first-century AD texts; he elaborates on these observations in the discussions that constitute Part 2 of his study. Most profound in this regard are 4 Ezra and 2 Baruch (cf. the NT Book of Revelation), which mirror the Parables not only in their exegetical fusion of Dan 7, Isa 11, and Ps 2 but also in how they assign the role of eschatological judge to a once-living man who is now exalted in heaven where he waits to undertake his future responsibilities, though in these texts, the judge is not Enoch but appears to be an unnamed descendent of David. Similar exegetical decisions are at work in the contemporaneous Sibylline Oracles, which pairs Dan 7:13 with Num 24:17 but grants the role of eschatological judge to Joshua son of Nun whose leadership during the conquest of the Promised Land likely meant he was considered the ideal candidate to mete out God’s judgment.It is important to underscore that the texts Bauckham investigates are far from identical in their outlooks. In addition to the catalog of opinions as to who precisely would serve as God’s eschatological lieutenant, Bauckham does not minimize the ways the texts fill out their portraits with different scriptures or the unique ways they utilize the same scriptures. Also, the eschatological duties of these figures vary (e.g., some are only tasked with judging whereas others judge as a function of their kingly role) and the language used to describe the honor bestowed on them does not always conform to the proposed worship/obeisance distinction of the Parables. However, a central conclusion for Bauckham is that common to these texts is the interpretation of the Danielic “one like a son of man” as a human being, something that is also operative or suggested in an assortment of other texts he examines (e.g., Old Greek Dan 7:13–14; 4Q246; Josephus; Rabbinic literature).There will undoubtedly be disagreement over some of Bauckham’s judgments (e.g., what is or is not an interpolation in a given composition); and his decision not to address the function of Dan 7 in the Book of Daniel is questionable, especially if one is sympathetic to the angelic interpretation of the “one like a son of man” in the context of Dan 7–12. In other words, if the “one like a son of man” is an angel in Daniel, how might this shed light on the later impulse to utilize Dan 7:13–14 to construct portraits of exalted human messianic figures? These minor issues aside, “Son of Man” Volume 1 is the fullest treatment of the early Jewish sources related to the interpretation of Dan 7:13–14 and henceforth should be required reading on the topic. Bauckham’s discussions are thorough and clear, and he makes a persuasive case that there was an interpretive trend in the late first century AD (and even earlier) to bring Dan 7 together with other texts to advance the idea of a God-appointed eschatological judge. Moreover, the notion of a once-living human, who is now exalted in heaven and awaiting a prominent eschatological role, cannot help but be relevant for the study of how Dan 7:13–14 is utilized in the gospels, and for that reason, “Son of Man” Volume 2 is eagerly anticipated.