King and Messiah as Son of God: Divine, Human, and Angelic Messianic Figures in Biblical and Related Literature
.
.
With thanks to Lara Sissell at Eerdmans for this review copy!
Adela Yarbro Collins (hereafter AYC) and John J. Collins (hereafter JJC) have converted a series of lectures originally delivered at Oxford in May 2006 into the substance of this book and have been able to maintain the conversational feel that I have to imagine were inherent in the original presentations. But their lectures only make up 6 of the 8 chapters in this book, the two new chapters being chapter 2 (penned by JJC) and chapter 8 (penned by AYC). JJC’s chapters take up the first half of the book and examine the themes of Messianism, divine sonship, and kingship in the Biblical and related ANE and Hellenistic literature. AYC’s chapters take up the second half of the book and address the same themes although with a narrower focus on the NT writings.
In chapter 1 JJC examines “The King as Son of God” by looking to the concept of kingship and ’son of God’ language in ancient Egypt, Mesopotamia, Canaan (lamenting the fact that “we do not have comparable texts from ancient Canaan, the sphere that probably had the most direct influence on Israelite conceptions of the monarchy.” [p. 9]), and finally ancient Judah by way of Psalms 2 & 110, seeing the texts as presenting a derived divine kingship by way of being begotten rather than adopted.
In chapter 2 JJC examines “Kingship in the Deuteronomistic and Prophetic Literature” focusing once again on a few select texts, such as 2Samuel 7 which doesn’t take up the ‘begetting’ language of the psalms examined in the previous chapter but is “compatible with the idea in the Psalms that the king becomes son of God on his ascension to the throne.” (p. 28) From the prophetic corpus Isaiah 7 & 9 receive the most attention with JJC concluding that the passages were not originally messianic but lent themselves to messianic interpretations in the post-exilic period. Concerning the titles given to the king JJC notes in reference to אל גבור that “The divinity of the king, in whatever sense is might be understood, is not otherwise thematized in the book of Isaiah.” (p. 41)
In chapter 3 JJC examines the “Messiah and Son of God in the Hellenistic Period” beginning with a look at Hellenistic ruler cults and the way that the monarchs were associated with divinity, i.e., it was an honor conferred on the king. He turns his attention to messianism in the LXX, specifically in Psalms & Isaiah, drawing attention to the limited but still useful evidence of the king being perceived as the Son of God, as being begotten by God, and being addressed as God. JJC contends that “if there is any influence here from the royal cults, it is indirect.” (p. 62) He closes the chapter with a section on the Dead Sea Scrolls, in particular the “Son of God” text, in which he concludes that “[i]f there is any influence from the ruler cults here, it lies in the understanding of ‘Son of God’ as an honorific title and perhaps in the willingness to entertain the language of divinity in reference to a future kind.” (p. 73-4)
In chapter 4 JJC examines the “Messiah and Son of Man” concepts/traditions first in Daniel 7 where “one like a son of man” was probably not “originally meant to be identified with the messiah” (p. 79) but JJC believes should be “identified with the archangel Michael.” (p. 78) 11QMelchizedek speaks of a heavenly deliverer; a “savior figure who was divine in some sense, while clearly subordinate to the Most High.” (p. 86) Next to Daniel 7 the Similitudes of Enoch “attest to a remarkable development of messianic tradition, insofar as the word ‘messiah’ is used unambiguously with reference to a heavenly judge. . . . [This figure] differs from the traditional Davidic messiah , but he functions as king by exercising judgment.” (p. 94) The final text examined is 4Ezra 13 which evinces a developed notion of the Davidic messiah and assimilates the Son of Man into this notion. JJC concludes that “there were clear biblical precedents for speaking of the messiah as God or son of God, and there was plenty of speculation about heavenly deliverers. There was also a tendency to conflate different conceptions of future rulers, as we see especially in the development of the Son of Man tradition.” (p. 99)
To be continued…
B”H
No comments:
Post a Comment