Son Of God Analysis

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 submission," and " 'the sword' as a symbol of violence," are not distinctive to the Akkadian prophecies . In fact, traits such as "his kingdom is an eternal kingdom" revealed to show more biblical parallels in common as it paralleled more closely in Daniel . The second argument Cook arises is drawn up from the last line of col.i, which reads, “[his son] will be called Great.” However, this parallel to the Akkadian prophecies about the succession of sons is only provided because Cook renewed it so as to create the parallel; the term “his son” is not in existence in the Aramaic . A final argument that Cook deduces reads, "A prince of nations [will arise]"; however, the text is very fragmentary and ambiguous with no support from other scholars . Collins goes on to conclude that Cooks attempt to view these texts as a prophecy of Antiochus III and his son fails and that the closest parallel to 4Q246 col. ii line 1 is found in Luke 1:32, 35, which reveals that the terms are “explicitly messianic” . With the most thorough work defending the negative interpretation lacking evidence, the contributions from the positive interpretations display stronger evidence. As briefly explored earlier, Collins mentions that the closest parallel to these texts is found in Luke 1:32 which reads, “He will be great, and will be called the Son of the Highest; and the Lord God will give Him the throne of His father …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)