the-bible-and-the-dead-sea-scrolls

386 QUMRAN AND THE DATINGOFTHEPARABLES OF ENOCH
written between 40 B.C.E. and 70 C.E. Two fundamental elements stand
out, that I too accept: the Parthian invasion and the fact that the author
did not know of the destruction of Jerusalem. We can affirm that the
Christian origin of the work is excluded and its absence from Qumran is
no longer a problem. 28
As far as I know, since 1990 the only book that dedicates considerable
space to a discussion of the date of BP is the one by Chialà. Articles such as
those of Collins and Slater only draw attention to the fact that the author of
BP wrote prior to the destruction of Jerusalem. Their attention is directed
more toward the evolution of the concept of the “Son of Man” from Daniel
7 to 4 Esdras 13. Chialà’s line of reasoning is also based essentially on the
history of the concept of the “Son of Man.” 29 A similar opinion has been
rendered by J. H. Charlesworth, whereby he dates BP to Herod’s time; that
is, he confirms the dating proposed by me and Chialà in another way. 30 He
is convinced that BP belongs to Herod’s reign on the basis of a sociological
and economic analysis of Palestine of that time. G. Aranda Pérez argues for
dating in the first half of the first century C.E. 31 Now G. W. E. Nickelsburg
confirms the date he proposed in 1981; he writes: “The Parables can be
dated sometime around the turn of the era.” 32
3. MY ARGUMENTATION
Now, I would like to leave the discussion of the history of research on BP
behind, in order to advance a coherent line of thought based on the
points that I feel we have solidly ascertained: 40 B.C.E. as terminus a quo
and 70 C.E. as terminus ad quem. I would add to this some observations in
order to narrow even further the span of time in which to place BP‘s
28. The absence of BP in the Qumran Library is clearly explicated by both the
Groningen hypothesis (by Florentino García Martínez and Adam S. van der Woude),
and the Enochic Essene hypothesis (by Boccaccini).
29. John J. Collins, “The Son of Man in First-Century Judaism,” NTS 38 (1992):
448–66 (he dates the work to just prior to 70 C.E.); Thomas B. Slater, “One Like a
Son of Man in First-Century C.E. Judaism,” NTS 41 (1995): 183–98 (he dates the
work to prior to 70 C.E., but more broadly than Collins); Chialà, Parabole di Enoc (he
dates BP sometime around the turn of the era). On the interpretations of the Son of
Man in Daniel, see John J. Collins, Daniel (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1993), 308–10.
30. Charlesworth, “Date of the Parables,” 93–98.
31. The Italian version is Letterature giudaica intertestamentaria (Brescia: Paideia, 1998),
239; originally in Spanish, Gonzalo Aranda Pérez, Florentino García Martínez, and
Miguel Pérez Fernández, Literatura judía intertestamentaria (Introducción al estudio de la
Biblia 9; Estella, Navarra: Editorial Verbo Divino, 1996).
32. Nickelsburg, 1 Enoch (Hermeneia; Minneapolis: Fortress, 2004), 6.