What does 1 Enoch 71 say about Enoch being the Son of Man?
1 Enoch 71:14 identifies Enoch as the Son of Man using the same formula ('this is the Son of Man') that earlier chapters used to describe a distinct pre-existent figure — creating a structural contradiction that chapters 46–69 give no basis to expect.
Through most of the Parables of Enoch (chapters 46–69), the Son of Man is clearly someone other than Enoch. Enoch sees this figure, asks about him ("who is he?" — 1 Enoch 46:2), and receives angelic explanations as if being introduced to a stranger. The text says the Son of Man existed "before the sun and the signs were created" (1 Enoch 48:3) — a pre-cosmic, heavenly figure. Enoch is a human patriarch born in the seventh generation from Adam (Gen 5:18–24).
Then chapter 71 verse 14 does something unexpected:
"And he came to me and greeted me with His voice, and said unto me: 'This is the Son of Man who is born unto righteousness; and righteousness abides over him, and the righteousness of the Head of Days forsakes him not.'"
An angel identifies Enoch as the Son of Man — the same formula used at 1 Enoch 46:3 to describe the pre-existent cosmic figure. Same Ge'ez words (zentu we'etu walda sab', "this is the Son of Man"), same construction. But earlier in the text, Enoch had asked about this figure as if learning of a stranger. Now the angel tells him he is that figure.
The contradiction is real: if Enoch is the Son of Man, why did he ask "who is he?" in chapter 46? How can a figure who existed before the sun was created (48:3) also be the historically located patriarch Enoch? Three explanations have been proposed — chapter 71 is a later editorial addition; Enoch was transformed into the Son of Man at his heavenly ascent (Gen 5:24, "God took him"); or the contradiction is intentional and points beyond what the earlier chapters can resolve. None of these is clearly required by the text itself.
There's also a manuscript issue that makes this even harder to evaluate: the Parables of Enoch survive only in Ge'ez (the ancient Ethiopic language). No Aramaic, Greek, or Latin copies exist. That means 71:14 — the single most theologically loaded verse in the entire Parables — exists in the least verifiable textual form of any major Second Temple text. For the full analysis of what this means for Christology, see The Son of Man Who Wasn't There.