There are a few passages in 1 Enoch 37-71 (the Similitudes of Enoch) which suggest that the “son of man” and “chosen one” of God “preexists” in some way.
Given that Jesus regularly calls himself the “son of man” in the gospels and that 1 Enoch likely influenced the early Christians’ understanding of this title, one might think that this connection lends credence to the idea that Jesus himself preexisted his human life. And if one thinks that a mere human being can’t preexist his own birth and life, then one also has an argument here for the conclusion that Jesus was not simply a human being but rather something else—an angel, say, or perhaps even a god.
I’m not convinced of all this, personally. I want to address some of the evidence for the preexistence of the son of man in 1 Enoch and show that it is not as clear-cut as it seems.
I’m going to cite from Nickelsburg and VanderKam’s translation.
Before I begin the discussion, I want to distinguish between two senses of preexistence.
First, there’s personal preexistence. Personal preexistence means really existing as a distinct individual before undergoing some kind of change or process. For example, I personally preexisted my marriage and becoming a husband. I began to be a husband on my wedding day, but I did not then begin to exist as a distinct individual. That happened for me presumably when I was born or conceived.
Second, there’s preexistence by predestination. Sometimes we say that something is the case, even though it isn’t really yet, because it’s destined to happen. For example, we can say that one football team has won the game, even if the game is not officially over, because it’s not possible for the other team to beat them in time.
Preexistence by predestination is quite common in the Bible. For example, God tells Abram: “No longer shall your name be Abram, but your name shall be Abraham, for I have made you the ancestor of a multitude of nations” (Gen. 17:5). God tells Abram that he has made him the ancestor of a multitude of nations even before his son Isaac was born. God says that Abram is something now which he isn’t really yet, something which he will only really become some time into the future, because it’s guaranteed to happen. This is preexistence by predestination.
Here’s another example. Jesus prays to God before his betrayal: “I glorified you on earth by finishing the work that you gave me to do” (John 17:4). Jesus thus says that he has finished his work. But he hasn’t died yet! It’s when he’s actually on the cross and dying that he says: “It is finished” (John 19:30). He thus says that he has finished the work, even though he hasn’t really yet, because he’s guaranteed to bring the work to an end. This is preexistence by predestination.
There are other examples, too. Jesus is called “the Lamb that was slaughtered from the foundation of the world” (Rev. 13:8). He can’t really have been slaughtered before he was born. There wouldn’t be a body to be slaughtered. But he’s spoken about in this way because his death was predestined to happen. This is preexistence by predestination.
This distinction must therefore be kept in mind. There’s personal preexistence, which is a matter of really existing as a distinct individual before something happens, and then there’s preexistence by predestination, where something is spoken about as if it were actual, even though it’s not actual yet, because it will become so later.
I’m going to argue that there’s nothing in the Similitudes of Enoch (1 Enoch 37-71) which suggests that the son of man personally preexists his human life and that there’s evidence that he does not.
Turning now to 1 Enoch, here’s a first passage:
And in that hour that son of man was named in the presence of the Lord of Spirits, and his name, before the Head of Days. Even before the sun and the constellations were created, before the stars of heaven were made, his name was named before the Lord of Spirits… For this (reason) he was chosen and hidden in his presence, before the world was created and forever. And the wisdom of the Lord of Spirits has revealed him to the holy and the righteous; for he has preserved the lot of the righteous.
(1 Enoch 48:3, 6–7)
This passage very obviously does not prove anything one way or the other about the son of man’s mode of preexistence.
The passage says that the son of man is “named” in the presence of the Lord of Spirits before the material world was brought into existence. But this doesn’t mean that he was personally existent then. It only means that he was named.
Consider this analogy. I have written a few novels. Before my novels are written, I tend to name my characters and determine what their fate will be. One could say that the protagonist of my novel was “named” before any ink was put to paper. Yet this doesn’t mean that the protagonist personally preexists his being written in the novel. He’s only an idea in my mind until I sit down to write. Only then does he become “real” in the specific way he can as a character in a novel.
In a similar way, the Lord of Spirits could have been naming the son of man before the creation of the material world because he was planning to bring him about in the future. He doesn’t personally preexist. He is just being planned.
This is supported by the fact that the subsequent verses speak about the son of man in the future tense, as what he will be:
“He will be a staff for the righteous, that they may lean on him and not fall; He will be the light of the nations, and he will be a hope for those who grieve in their hearts. All who dwell on the earth will fall down and worship before him, and they will glorify and bless and sing hymns to the name of the Lord of Spirits (1 Enoch 48:4–5)
The text does not say that the son of man is these things, or that he was these things when God first named him, but that he will be these things. I therefore conclude that this passage does not prove that the son of man personally preexists his human life. It can be interpreted just fine in the other way. The son of man preexists, if he does at all, in the sense that he is predestined to exist in reality.
For in those days, my Chosen One will arise and choose the righteous and holy from among them, for the day on which they will be saved has drawn near. And the Chosen One, in those days, will sit upon my throne, and all the secrets of wisdom will go forth from the counsel of his mouth, for the Lord of Spirits has given (them) to him and glorified him. (1 Enoch 51: 5a, 2–3)
Here the Lord of Spirits asserts that the “chosen one” (i.e., the son of man) will “arise” to judge all people from God’s throne. This is going to happen when “the earth will give back what has been entrusted to it, and Sheol will give back what has been entrusted to it” (51:1), i.e. at the general resurrection.
The verb “arise” is used to describe things’ beginning to exist in reality. This passage could seem to refer to the son of man’s being born at some time in history. If the son of man personally preexisted this moment, e.g. in heaven next to God, then he wouldn’t have “arisen” but rather “come down.” This implies that the son of man doesn’t personally preexist his appearance to judge the world.
Alternatively, one might think that, in context, the son of man’s “arising” refers to his being resurrected by God alongside everyone else. Suppose that’s true. Even in that case, the son of man doesn’t personally preexist his human life in any special sense. At best, he preexists his resurrected life, which is also true of everyone else who will be resurrected. The only difference is that he is being raised to judge everyone else because he is God’s chosen one.
The next chapter speaks of mountains of various kinds of metals. These metals represent the various kinds of metals the kings of the earth might use to fashion weapons and shields for defending themselves against God’s chosen one, the son of man. But Enoch is told the interpretation of the mountains:
All these will be rejected and be destroyed from the face of the earth, when the Chosen One appears before the Lord of Spirits (52:9).
If the son of man personally preexists his human life, then it would make no sense to speak of him appearing before the Lord of Spirits at some future time. He would rather always have been in the Lord’s presence from the very beginning. But this text makes it seem as if the son of man’s appearance before the Lord of Spirits takes place then, when he comes on the earth to judge kings and rulers. Thus, this text seems to imply that the son of man doesn’t personally preexist his human life.
For from the beginning the Son of Man was hidden, and the Most High preserved him in the presence of his might, and he revealed him to the chosen. And the congregation of the chosen and holy will be sown; and all the chosen will stand in his presence on that day. (1 Enoch 62:7–8)
I think this passage, as the earlier one from ch. 48, proves nothing. It can be consistently read consistently with what was proposed above.
The son of man was “hidden” in the sense that his eventual appearance was kept a secret of God’s providence, something the kings and rulers he would eventually judge did not themselves know, so that they will have no hope but to be punished (cf. 62:1–2, 4–6, 10–12). The son of man was “preserved” because God’s power guarantees that his providence will not fail. And he was “revealed” to the chosen in order to give them something to look forward to in their sufferings.
Thus, one can read this passage consistently with the thesis that the son of man’s preexistence is not personal preexistence but rather a matter of his being predestined.
And after this, while [Enoch] was living, his name was lifted up into the presence of that Son of Man and into the presence of the Lord of Spirits from among those who dwell on the earth. He was lifted up on the chariots of the wind, and his name departed <from> among them. (1 Enoch 70:1–2)
This passage makes it sound as if the son of man personally preexists. He hasn’t come to judge the world yet, but Enoch is raised up to his presence. But then this is complicated by what comes after, which is narrated from the point of view of Enoch himself:
And that Head of Days came with Michael and Raphael and Gabriel and Phanuel, and thousands and tens of thousands of angels without number. And he came to me and greeted me with his voice and said to me, “You (are) that Son of Man who was born for righteousness, and righteousness dwells on you, and the righteousness of the Head of Days will not forsake
you.” (1 Enoch 71:13–14)
Here Enoch is told that he is himself that son of man and God’s chosen one. Yet this was plainly not something known to him already, because it takes him by surprise. Until this point, the son of man is spoken of as though he were someone else. Now Enoch is told that he is that son of man.
To say that 1 Enoch presents the son of man as personally preexisting his human life complicates things considerably, because it would imply that the son of man forgot that he had preexisted. If Enoch were himself that preexistent son of man, why wouldn’t Enoch already know all these things? Why are they being revealed to him as if he didn’t already know them?
A more coherent reading is possible. Enoch’s identity as the son of man is a matter of predestination. This means that the son of man’s preexistence is a preexistence by predestination. It is his destiny, as a matter of God’s providence, to stand in judgment over the kings and rulers of the earth, though he doesn’t know this until God specifically tells him. It is only after God tells him that he can now assume the role he’s been called to.
For these reasons, I do not think that the Similitudes of Enoch present the son of man as personally preexisting his human life. Not only is this idea not unambiguously endorsed in the text, the book even arguably contradicts it.
I think some people are inclined to read the text that way only because they’re (consciously, unconsciously) using catholic Christian categories: a preexistent divine son of God who comes down to earth to judge everyone. The assumpion is that if many Christians later thought this of the son of man, then Jesus must have thought this about himself, and if Jesus thought this about himself, he must have got the idea from this text and others like it. But I find that fanciful. I don’t start from the assumption that catholic Christianity traces back to Jesus. In fact, I deny it on the basis of the evidence. And if one doesn’t simply take those categories for granted when reading the Similitudes of Enoch, if one doesn’t simply assume them a priori, it becomes easy to see that the question of the son of man’s “preexistence” is not so clear.
I think the more coherent reading is that the son of man’s preexistence is a matter of his being predestined. The son of man has been named by God and hidden with and preserved by him from ages past, not in the sense that he was personally existent then, but in the sense that it’s always been God’s plan for the son of man to judge the kings and rulers of the earth on behalf of God’s chosen righteous ones.
This reading makes sense of the son of man’s “arising” at the end time of judgment, rather than his “descending.” It likewise makes sense of the son of man’s “appearing” before the Lord of Spirits at the judgment, as though he weren’t already in the Lord’s presence before then. It also makes better sense of the fact that Enoch does not already know that he is himself the son of man, which God must tell him.