{"title":"以诺一书中是否存在先人,从何而来?以赛亚书49:1-2和以先存的仆人为背景的恩前书48:3,6;62:7","authors":"M. W. Martin","doi":"10.1177/09518207221116199","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"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.","PeriodicalId":14859,"journal":{"name":"Journal for the Study of the Pseudepigrapha","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"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\",\"authors\":\"M. W. Martin\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/09518207221116199\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"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.\",\"PeriodicalId\":14859,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal for the Study of the Pseudepigrapha\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal for the Study of the Pseudepigrapha\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/09518207221116199\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"RELIGION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal for the Study of the Pseudepigrapha","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09518207221116199","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"RELIGION","Score":null,"Total":0}
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 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.
期刊介绍:
The last twenty years have witnessed some remarkable achievements in the study of early Jewish literature. Given the ever-increasing number and availability of primary sources for these writings, specialists have been producing text-critical, historical, social scientific, and theological studies which, in turn, have fuelled a growing interest among scholars, students, religious leaders, and the wider public. The only English journal of its kind, Journal for the Study of the Pseudepigrapha was founded in 1987 to provide a much-needed forum for scholars to discuss and review most recent developments in this burgeoning field in the academy.