The Synoptics show clear Enochic resonances, suggesting that Jesus (or the Gospel writers) were aware of this tradition and drew upon it to frame his messianic identity.

I have been referencing I Enoch, 1-36.
The correction could be reference 1 Enoch, 1-36 for Son of Man and 1 Enoch 37-71 for the parables.

Note:
The consensus today:

The Enochic Son of Man came first (as a Jewish apocalyptic figure),

Jesus’ followers then reframed the concept, applying it directly to him.

Conclusion:
It is more likely that the Son of Man figure first appeared in Enochic literature (especially the Parables of Enoch) and that the Synoptic writers (and perhaps Jesus himself, if he used the term) reinterpreted that tradition. The Synoptics are not creating “Son of Man” from scratch but engaging in a Jewish debate over who that heavenly figure really is.

Steefen:
the Son of Man figure first appeared in Enochic literature (especially the Parables of Enoch) and that the Synoptic writers (and perhaps Jesus himself, if he used the term) reinterpreted that tradition.

QUESTION: What sect was paying attention to Enochic literature?

Excellent follow-up, Steve. 👌

The sects most attentive to Enochic literature (especially 1 Enoch and related works) were on the fringes of Second Temple Judaism, but they left traces:

1. The Essenes / Qumran Community

The Dead Sea Scrolls discovered at Qumran include multiple fragments of 1 Enoch (Aramaic manuscripts of the Book of the Watchers, Astronomical Book, and Dream Visions).

This shows the Qumran sect treasured Enochic writings alongside Torah and prophetic books.

The Qumranites believed in cosmic dualism, angelic watchers, judgment, and an eschatological “Chosen One”—themes central to Enoch.

2. Apocalyptic Judaism more broadly

Outside Qumran, 1 Enoch influenced groups awaiting the end times and a messianic deliverer.

Pharisees and Sadducees did not canonize it, but popular apocalyptic movements (like those around John the Baptist) likely absorbed its ideas.

3. Proto-Christian Groups

Early Christians preserved 1 Enoch indirectly: the Epistle of Jude (vv. 14–15) quotes directly from 1 Enoch 1:9.

This proves that some strands of early Christianity saw Enoch as prophetic and authoritative.

QUESTION: Is Enoch 1 part of the Dead Sea Scrolls collection?

Yes, Steve — but only parts of 1 Enoch were found among the Dead Sea Scrolls, not the entire book.

Here’s the breakdown:

🏺 1 Enoch at Qumran

At least 11 different Aramaic manuscripts of 1 Enoch were found in Cave 4 (designated 4Q201–4Q212).

The portions preserved belong mainly to:

Book of the Watchers (1 Enoch 1–36)

Astronomical Book (1 Enoch 72–82)

Book of Dreams (1 Enoch 83–90)

Epistle of Enoch (parts of chs. 91–108)

❌ What’s missing at Qumran

Strikingly, no copies of the Parables of Enoch (1 Enoch 37–71) — the section with the strongest “Son of Man” material — were found.

🔎 Implications

This has led scholars to debate whether the Parables of Enoch (where the “Son of Man” is exalted as a preexistent heavenly judge) were:

Written later (maybe 1st century CE), after Qumran was sealed, or

Deliberately not preserved by Qumran because the sect didn’t accept its particular theology.

✅ So yes, Enoch 1 (at least the earliest sections, esp. chs. 1–36) is part of the Dead Sea Scrolls collection.
But the Parables of Enoch—the closest overlap with the Gospels’ “Son of Man” language—are not in the Scrolls.

@Stephen says the Nephilim are mentioned in chapters 6 and 7 with Rebellion.
I’m checking what he says about 8-16.

How evil were and are the Nephilim?

This is the longer version of the video from the source:

Well, the Anunnaki were not as evil as these Nephilim.

Nathan Reynolds was the name of the man who was interviewed with Nephilim blood.

Snatched from the Flames: One man’s journey to uncover The Family Secrets buried in his blood-stained past
366 ratings averaging 4.8 stars

** you do not have permission to see this link **

@Stephen Comment 84
The semi-divine heroes must vanquish the forces of chaos, the Giants, so that humankind may build civilization.

Steefen
The Watchers taught humans. The Nephilim did not.
So, the question is: the watchers helped civilization but had no good control over their offspring?

Yahweh
Jesus
Holy Spirit

In early Christianity, 1st century, Yahweh practically did not exist.
– Jesus didn’t like what he did during the Exodus.
– Jesus came up with the theology of the Heavenly Father.
– Yahweh let Jesus get killed by the Wicked Tenants
– Yahweh’s Temple was destroyed.
– The Heavenly Father’s House of Prayer (the Temple) was destroyed
– Jesus was a composite character of historical fiction, a retelling of 1 and 2 Enoch.

Did angels exist in the first century C.E.?

Angelology is in 1) the Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice (DSS) and are mentioned in the War Scroll.
Philo thought angels existed.
Josephus thought Pharisees believed in angels but Sadducees denied their existence.
Sometimes Jewish angels were interpreted by pagans as daimones, minor gods, spirits.

Is there an excellent argument that the Watchers did not exist?
Is there an excellent argument that the Watchers did not exist?

1. Textual-Critical Argument

Scholars argue the Watcher story is a mythological adaptation of older Mesopotamian tales.

The apkallu of Mesopotamia (semi-divine sages) and their corruption myths seem to have inspired the Jewish retelling in 1 Enoch 6–16.

The “giant offspring” parallels the Babylonian myths of hybrid offspring from divine–human unions.

On this view, the Watchers didn’t exist but were a Jewish mythic polemic—a way to explain the problem of evil without blaming Yahweh. Evil was introduced not by God but by rebellious angels.

2. Theological Argument (Second Temple Judaism & Christianity)

Some Jews rejected 1 Enoch entirely—e.g., the Pharisaic tradition preserved in Rabbinic Judaism. The rabbis generally allegorized or dismissed the Watchers.

Instead of angels mating with women, some said “sons of God” (Gen 6:1–4) meant noble men or judges who married women of low status.

Thus, no supernatural rebellion—just a critique of human corruption.

Early Christians were split: Jude and 2 Peter echo 1 Enoch, but later church fathers like Augustine argued the Watchers narrative was nonsense and promoted the “Sethite interpretation” (sons of Seth marrying daughters of Cain).

3. Historical-Skeptical Argument

From a historian’s standpoint, there’s no empirical evidence for fallen angels or hybrid giants.

Reports of giants (bones, myths, hybrid figures) are explained as:

Fossil misinterpretations (e.g., mammoth bones in the Mediterranean mistaken for giant humans).

Political-mythic propaganda (giant ancestors symbolizing divine kingship).

Cultural storytelling to make sense of wars, floods, and disasters.

So, the Watchers are best understood as mythic explanations of evil rather than ontological beings.