As stated earlier, E.M Cook was one of the scholars that contributed to the “son of God” debate and argued that the “son” was a negative figure. Cook offered the most comprehensive defense to the negative interpretation in his article, “4Q246”. Cook states “the Akkadian prophecies provide the most convincing background for 4Q246” and he argues for a direct relationship with these scrolls . The Akkadian prophecies introduced by Cook are a compilation of five works that date from the twelfth-century B.C.E to the Seleucid period . In Cooks article, he highlights twelve traits that Aramaic and Akkadian texts exhibit in common; however, on further examination, Collins reveal that they are not as impressive as they initially seem . Collins unveils that the traits such as, "tribulation will come upon the land," "oppression and
…show more content…
Kuhn begins his argument by noting that there are some striking similarities between 4Q246 and Daniel 7- he even goes a step further to note that the “son of God” figure should be regarded as Daniel's “one like a son of man.” A close analysis of the text reveals an “extensive degree of verbal, thematic, and structural correspondence” that makes it clear that the author of 4Q246 intended the “son of God” figure to be reiterating Daniel's “one like a son of man.” Kuhn even lists seven similarities between the two texts: the two most prominent parallels include Daniel 7:14 and 4Q246 2:9 as well as Dan 7:27b and 4Q246 2:5b (Refer to appendix).
Apart from verbal parallels, the apocalypse unfolds in a series of three events: beginning with a distress that is soon intervened by God through the coming of his agent, the “one like a son of man,” and then the dominion of the evil beast(s) prevail until the people of God rise and gain custody of the kingdom, and the text concludes by the overthrowing of the beast(s)
Kuhn begins his argument by noting that there are some striking similarities between 4Q246 and Daniel 7- he even goes a step further to note that the “son of God” figure should be regarded as Daniel's “one like a son of man.” A close analysis of the text reveals an “extensive degree of verbal, thematic, and structural correspondence” that makes it clear that the author of 4Q246 intended the “son of God” figure to be reiterating Daniel's “one like a son of man.” Kuhn even lists seven similarities between the two texts: the two most prominent parallels include Daniel 7:14 and 4Q246 2:9 as well as Dan 7:27b and 4Q246 2:5b (Refer to appendix).
Apart from verbal parallels, the apocalypse unfolds in a series of three events: beginning with a distress that is soon intervened by God through the coming of his agent, the “one like a son of man,” and then the dominion of the evil beast(s) prevail until the people of God rise and gain custody of the kingdom, and the text concludes by the overthrowing of the beast(s)