From: Jonathan Robie (Jonathan.Robie@SoftwareAG-USA.com)
Date: Wed Aug 23 2000 - 09:53:24 EDT
<html>
At 11:13 AM 8/23/00 +0000, James Crossley wrote:<br>
<blockquote type=cite cite>Apologies for continuing this thread but I felt something needed to be said concerning Casey's view of the Son of Man problem. Bearing in mind the warning about moving too far a way from the concerns of biblical Greek I will restrict the following comments to the effects on the Greek text.</blockquote><br>
Personally, I find several recent messages on this thread to be both interesting and relevant - we're actually talking about the text, which makes the messages useful.<br>
<br>
<blockquote type=cite cite>Buth wrote that Casey's view of the Aramaic 'son of man' involves a reference to 'somebody/anybody'. This is true but we should not overlook the fact that Casey's view also includes a reference to the speaker. This can help explain why some of the synoptic sayings can be read as a title in Greek but without explicit reference to Daniel 7:13, Mt. 8:20/ Lk. 9:58 for example.<br>
<br>
Taking Casey's view for the moment, when such Aramaic sayings are translated into Greek we are already on the way to a title of some sort, <br>
not least because *ho huios tw anthrwpou* does not function as a Greek idiom. With such a strange saying where better than Scripture to find the explanation! Daniel 7:13 was perfect for the early church. This can help explain why texts such as Mark 13:26 include a titular use of *ho huios tw anthrwpou* with explicit reference to Daniel 7.</blockquote><br>
I'm just beginning to think about this, so this is pure unscholarly speculation, but...<br>
<br>
In the Gospel of John, EKEINOS and hOUTOS sometimes have a clear referent to Jesus, and act almost as a Johannine idiom for Jesus. But to say that either of these words actually means Jesus would be wrong, this is a specific, cryptic usage that is played to effect in John.<br>
<br>
In the LXX, many uses of "the son of man" are in apposition to "man", and seem to be used for rhetorical effect. In fact, up to Ezekiel, this is the only use of "son of man" that I see. Excuse the English, but I didn't want to type in the Greek for all of these. I checked a little less than half of them to make sure that the relevant phrases are reflected in the LXX:<br>
<br>
<font face="Times New Roman, Times">Numb 23:19 (NASB) "God is not a man, that He should lie, Nor a son of man, that He should repent; Has He said, and will He not do it? Or has He spoken, and will He not make it good? <br>
Job 25:6 How much less man, [that] maggot, And the son of man, [that] worm!" <br>
Job 35:8 "Your wickedness is for a man like yourself, And your righteousness is for a son of man. <br>
Psal 8:4 What is man, that Thou dost take thought of him? And the son of man, that Thou dost care for him? <br>
Psal 80:17 Let Thy hand be upon the man of Thy right hand, Upon the son of man whom Thou didst make strong for Thyself. <br>
Psal 144:3 O Lord, what is man, that Thou dost take knowledge of him? Or the son of man, that Thou dost think of him? <br>
Isai 51:12 "I, even I, am He who comforts you. Who are you that you are afraid of man who dies, And of the son of man who is made like grass; <br>
Isai 56:2 "How blessed is the man who does this, And the son of man who takes hold of it; Who keeps from profaning the sabbath, And keeps his hand from doing any evil." <br>
Jere 49:18 "Like the overthrow of Sodom and Gomorrah with its neighbors," says the Lord, "no one will live there, nor will a son of man reside in it. <br>
Jere 49:33 "And Hazor will become a haunt of jackals, A desolation forever; No one will live there, Nor will a son of man reside in it." <br>
Jere 50:40 "As when God overthrew Sodom And Gomorrah with its neighbors," declares the Lord, "No man will live there, Nor will [any] son of man reside in it. <br>
Jere 51:43 "Her cities have become an object of horror, A parched land and a desert, A land in which no man lives, And through which no son of man passes. <br>
<br>
</font>Ezekiel uses the phrase quite differently - God often refers to Ezekiel as "son of man":<br>
<br>
<font face="Times New Roman, Times">Ezek 2:1 Then He said to me, "Son of man, stand on your feet that I may speak with you!" <br>
Ezek 2:3 Then He said to me, "Son of man, I am sending you to the sons of Israel, to a rebellious people who have rebelled against Me; they and their fathers have transgressed against Me to this very day. <br>
Ezek 2:6 "And you, son of man, neither fear them nor fear their words, though thistles and thorns are with you and you sit on scorpions; neither fear their words nor be dismayed at their presence, for they are a rebellious house. <br>
<br>
</font>etc.<br>
<br>
In Daniel, the phrase occurs twice. Once it might be taken as a title, but if you look at both occurrences, the titular view seems unlikely:<br>
<br>
<font face="Times New Roman, Times">Dani 7:13 "I kept looking in the night visions, And behold, with the clouds of heaven One like a Son of Man was coming, And He came up to the Ancient of Days And was presented before Him. <br>
Dani 8:17 So he came near to where I was standing, and when he came I was frightened and fell on my face; but he said to me, "Son of man, understand that the vision pertains to the time of the end." <br>
<br>
</font>In Daniel 8:17, this clearly refers to the prophet, not to the one who is said to be "like" a Son of Man in Daniel 7:13. There is also a significant difference between Jesus' usage and Daniel 7:13 - Jesus talks about "*the* Son of Man", not one who is *like* *a* Son of Man. If "Son of Man" means a human being, as it seems to in all the other LXX passages, then Daniel 7:13 does not commit itself to saying that the One who is brought before the Ancient of Days actually is a human being, it says only that he had a form like that of a human being.<br>
<br>
Jesus refers to himself as "ton huion tou anqrwpou" in all four gospels, on many occasions. This usage seems to be *none* of the usages above - Jesus adds the definite article, *the* Son of Man, and makes it clear that this refers to a specific individual.<br>
<br>
It is precisely this reference to one very specific individual, using a phrase that is quite generic, that reminds me of the use of EKEINOS / hOUTOS in John.<br>
<br>
Jonathan</html>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:36:34 EDT