The Re-education of Rabbi Akiva.
Rabbi Akiva, the second throne was not for King David.
Enoch is transformed into Metatron in III Enoch.
Metatron
Metatron is not a figure of the Hebrew Bible, but his name appears briefly in several passages of the Talmud. His legends are predominantly found in mystical Kabbalistic texts. He is variously identified as the Prince (or Angel) of the Presence, as Michael the archangel, or as Enoch after his bodily ascent into heaven.
– Britannica
Steefen
He is an angel of the Presence.
Image and Presence are not the same thing, but this sounds like the same archangel that is Philo’s Logos to the extent that Philo said of his archangel, he is the incorporeal being having the divine image. God’s image is his word.
Daniel Boyarin, Prof. of Talmudic Culture at UC Berkeley
Metatron is an imitation of Christ created in the Byzantine Period (395-1453). 3 Enoch was written in the fifth century.
But 1 Enoch 71 says Enoch was transformed into the Son of Man. 1 Enoch was written in the late second century BCE.
So, how can the gospels not be substituting Jesus for Enoch?
2 Enoch 22 Enoch, Son of Man, is transformed into an angel. 2 Enoch was written in the latter half of the first century CE (the time period when the gospels were written). However, 2 Enoch is written before the dating of the gospels. 2 Enoch was written before AD 70.
Now, it is at 2 Enoch that we AGAIN are specifically brought back to the Philo and Paul Logos archangel because in 2 Enoch
The last section of 2 Enoch (sometimes referred to as the Exaltation of Melchizedek) outlines the priestly succession of Enoch.
The Second Book of Enoch, also known as The Book of the Secrets of Enoch, is most noted for its description of multiple heavens and accounts of battles between angels and devils. This account is thought to have been known by and to have influenced the apostle Paul who described his experience of being taken up to the third heaven (2 Corinthians 12:2-4).
See: ** you do not have permission to see this link **
The recent discoveries of Melchisedek 11Q13 text at Qumran and of a related text at Nag Hammadi, have made possible to have an idea about the Melchisedek controversy, involving also 2EM and the Letter to the Hebrews, that developed in non-mainstream Jewish communities and in early Christians communities from the 1st century BCE to the 3rd century CE against the traditional Jewish identification of Melchisedek with Shem.
Note:
Some early authors, as Charles, have not included this section mainly because they based their edition on manuscripts P and N. The lack of this section in recent manuscripts is explained by others because of
the scandalous content (the virgin birth of Melchisedek) for Christian copyists.
Steefen, Argumentation Specialist
Ahaaaaaa, the virgin birth of Melchisedek. Jesus Christ is cosmic High Priest in the order of Melchisedek.
Like Philo’s Logos/High Priest/Archangel, Son of God, the earlier incarnated high priest Melchisedek had a virgin birth and the later incarnated high priest Jesus had a virgin birth.
In 3 Enoch, the angelic Enoch is specifically transformed into Metatron. Remember, 3 Enoch was written in the fifth century C.E.
So, is the angelic Enoch the continuation of the angel of Philo and Mark? Probably so.
This sets up the question is this Son of Man, cosmic high priest, and angel Enoch or Jesus?
Pick up at 22:42 / 55:56
1 Enoch 71, transformation of Enoch into the Son of Man
2 Enoch 22, angelic transformation
3 Enoch, transformation into Metatron
= = =
1 Enoch 71, verse 5
5. And he translated my spirit into the heaven of heavens, And I saw there as it were a structure built of crystals, And between those crystals tongues of living fire.
(Revelation 21:10-11), (Acts 2:3)
(Revelation 21:10-11) “10 And he carried me away in the Spirit to a great and high mountain, and showed me the great city, the holy Jerusalem, descending out of heaven from God, 11 having the glory of God. Her light was like a most precious stone, like a jasper stone, clear as crystal.”
(Acts 2:3) “3 Then there appeared to them divided tongues, as of fire, and one sat upon each of them.”
= = =
7. And round about were Seraphin, Cherubic, and Ophannin: And these are they who sleep not And guard the throne of His glory.
(2 Kings 19:15), (Psalm 80:1), (Psalm 99:1), (Isaiah 37:16)
8. And I saw angels who could not be counted, A thousand thousands, and ten thousand times ten thousand, Encircling that house. And Michael, and Raphael, and Gabriel, and Phanuel, And the holy angels who are above the heavens, Go in and out of that house.
(Revelation 5:11)
10. And with them the Head of Days, His head white and pure as wool, And His raiment indescribable.
(Isaiah 6:1-5), (Daniel 7:9, 13)
14. And he (i.e. the angel) came to me and greeted me with His voice, and said unto me ‘ This is the Son of Man who is born unto righteousness, And righteousness abides over him, And the righteousness of the Head of Days forsakes him not.’
(Daniel 7:13), (Jeremiah 33:15), (The Book of Enoch 62:1-2)
16. And all shall walk in his ways since righteousness never forsaketh him: With him will be their dwelling-places, and with him their heritage, And they shall not be separated from him for ever and ever and ever.
(Psalm 85:11-13)
17. And so there shall be length of days with that Son of Man, And the righteous shall have peace and an upright way In the name of the Lord of Spirits for ever and ever.’
(John 14:6), (Isaiah 35:8), (Hebrews 10:19-20), (Jeremiah 50:4-6), (Isaiah 26:3-4, 12), (Isaiah 57:2), (John 14:27), (John 16:33), (Philippians 4:7)
** you do not have permission to see this link **
= = =
Steefen, Argumentation Specialist
Revelation 21: 10-11 could not have been written without a reference to 1 Enoch, Chapter 71?
Acts 2: 3 could not have been written without a reference to 1 Enoch, Chapter 71?
Remember, 1 Enoch was written before Revelation and Acts. 1 Enoch was probably written in the late 2nd century BCE.
Britannica
The older sections (mainly in the Book of the Watchers) of the text are estimated to date from about 300–200 BC, and the latest part (Book of Parables) probably to 100 BC
Wikipedia
Steefen
Dear Bart Ehrman,
Why would you say (if you would say) Jesus did not ever study 1 Enoch, Chapter 71, which discusses the Son of Man?
Prof. Bart Ehrman
Mainly because I don’t think Jesus was studying books like there. In the impoverished hamlet of Nazareth, where would he have had access to it?
In any event, the only way to know what Jesus knew is to see what he says. That in itself is massively difficult. But there is not anything recorded — let alone anything that can be established as historical — in which he indicates he had read 1 Enoch.
Steefen, Argumentation Specialist
Jesus could get to Capernaum, then Jesus could get to Sepphoris and Tiberias.
Jesus could get to John the Baptist and the Jordan River and Bethany (with Qumran on the way to Jerusalem from Bethany East in Perea, Jesus could get to a 1 Enoch scroll (Book of Parables, 100 BCE) or people talking about it, especially as he opened discussions that he was the Son of Man. “Oh, you say you’re the Son of Man? You’re picking up where Enoch left off, or something?” // Then, as Paul spoke of Jesus as an angel. Paul could easily be referring to 2 Enoch (first half of 1 century CE) where the Son of Man has ascended to heaven, to the 10th heaven and became an angel.
One of the most haunting episodes in The Book of Enoch is in Chapter 22, where the spirit of Abel, murdered by his brother Cain, waits for judgement day crying out for revenge on his killer.
From thence I proceeded to another spot, where I saw on the west a great and lofty mountain, a strong rock, and four delightful places.
Internally it was deep, capacious, and very smooth; as smooth as if it had been rolled over: it was both deep and dark to behold.
Then Raphael, one of the holy angels who were with me, answered and said, These are the delightful places where the spirits, the souls of the dead, will be collected; for them were they formed; and here will be collected all the souls of the sons of men.
These places, in which they dwell, shall they occupy until the day of judgment, and until their appointed period.
Their appointed period will be long, even until the great judgment. And I saw the spirits of the sons of men who were dead; and their voices reached to heaven, while they were accusing.
Then I inquired of Raphael, an angel who was with me, and said, Whose spirit is that, the voice of which reaches to heaven, and accuses?
He answered, saying, This is the spirit of Abel, who was slain by Cain his brother; and who will accuse that brother, until his seed be destroyed from the face of the earth;
Until his seed perish from the seed of the human race.
Robert
Be careful how much certainty you attribute to the probable date of the Book of Parables. Your Britannica source did not say 100 BCE, but “the first century BCE” which is a range between 100 BCE and 1 BCE and it also says Chapters 70-71 are a later addition.
Steefen
Remember, 1 Enoch was written before Revelation and ** you do not have permission to see this link **
Enoch was probably written in the late 2nd century BCE. – Britannica
The older sections (mainly in the Book of the Watchers) of the text are estimated to date from about 300–200 BC,
and the latest part (Book of Parables) probably to 100 BC – Wikipedia
Robert, Wikipedia is saying 100 BCE, not Britannica.
= = =
I’ll have to see if I can find my original search results.
Now, I’m finding:
** you do not have permission to see this link **
the first part of 1 Enoch is called “Apocalypse of Weeks.” Iordered the Joseph Lumpkin book (likely a mistake, but it does have 5,255 star ratings averaging 4.5)
Picking up at 32:27 / 55:56
The second divine figure is the Son of Man.
= = =
Some would reveal apocalyptic material.
Some would conceal apocalyptic material.
= = =
Son of Man / Metatron devotion does not constitute a theological assertion of two powers (which would be a grave error).
Steefen, Argumentation Specialist
Sorry, if the first divine figure wants to delegate, so be it. If the first divine figure didn’t tell Metatron to get up from sitting, so be it.
Pick up at 41:38 / 55: 56
= = =
Criticism of 1 Enoch: The Hermeneia Translation (FYI, Robert)
lindsey walsh
I read another version and what they wanted Enoch to relay was very troubling. Makes me believe the translator was bias. I could be wrong.
Robert
Don’t assume bias. Many people are critical of the earlier English translations. It is also very difficult to be certain of what the original version of the Book of Parables said. It was probably written in Hebrew or Aramaic, then translated into Greek sometime before the 3rd-century CE. There are extensive Aramaic fragments of most parts of Enoch at Qumran (but not of the Book of Parables). We also have some Greek fragments of Enoch (but not of the Book of Parables). We only have the Book of Parables in translation into Ge’ez by Ethiopic Christians in 14th-century and later manuscripts. Comparison of the earlier Aramaic and Greek fragments with much later Ethiopic versions indicates that there was quite a bit of development over the centuries. This should explain the difficulty in understanding when the Book of Parables was written and whether or not there were later additions or even Christian interpolations into the work.
Steefen
lindsey walsh is more likely saying The Hermeneia Translation is bias because it does not translate what Enoch was supposed to relay whereas she read another version that did relay a troubling message from Enoch.
BDEhrman
FreedomBen
evgendob
Robert
1 Guest(s)