spin

That's a book I've never seen... but the idea makes some sort of sense in the Ehrmanverse, grappling with the problems of the new testament 3rd person usage of "the son of man". Thanks for the pointer.

For those interested in Ehrman's ideas here, I append some quotes regarding the use of the son of man in the mouth of Jesus:

p.18
[T2]Some Christians have refused to take the teachings of Jesus at face value, denying that his words could mean what they say. For it is within the New Testament Gospels themselves that Jesus tells his disciples: "Truly I tell you, some of you standing here will not taste death before they have seen the Kingdom of God having come in power" (Mark 9:1); "Truly I tell you, this generation [i.e., presumably, the one he was addressing] will not pass away before all these things take place" (Mark 13:30); "Truly I tell you, You will see the Son of Man...coming on the clouds of heaven" (Mark 14:62).[/T2]
p.122
[T2]Different apocalypticists had different views concerning how God would bring about this new creation, even though they all claimed to have received the details by a revelation from God. In some apocalyptic scenarios, God was to send a human Messiah to lead the troops of the children of light into battle against the forces of evil. In others, God was to send a kind of cosmic judge of the earth, sometimes also called the Messiah or the "Son of Man" to bring about a cataclysmic overthrow of the demonic powers that oppressed the children of light.[/T2]
p.123
[T2]Some of the earliest traditions about Jesus portray him as a Jewish apocalypticist who responded to the political and social crises of his day, including the domination of his nation by a foreign power, by proclaiming that his generation was living at the end of the age, that God would soon intervene on behalf of his people, sending a cosmic judge from heaven, the Son of Man who would destroy the forces of evil and set up God's Kingdom. In preparation for his coming, the people of Israel needed to turn to God, trusting him as a kindly parent and loving one another as his special children. Those who refused to accept this message would be liable to the judgment of God, soon to arrive with the coming of the Son of Man.[/T2]
p.128
[T2]Throughout the earliest accounts of Jesus' words are found predictions of a Kingdom of God that is soon to appear, in which God will rule. This will be an actual kingdom here on earth. When it comes, the forces of evil will be overthrown, along with everyone who has sided with them, and only those who repent and follow Jesus' teachings will be allowed to enter. Judgment on all others will be brought by the Son of Man, a cosmic figure who may arrive from heaven at any time. Being a member of Israel will not be enough to escape the coming judgment. People need to heed Jesus' words, return to God, and follow his commandments before it's too late.[/T2]
p.130f
[T2]At Jesus' trial before the Sanhedrin in Mark's Gospel, Jesus boldly states to the high priest, "You will see the Son of Man seated at the right hand of power and coming with the clouds of heaven" (Mark 14:62). That is, the end would come and the high priest would see it. Luke, writing many years later, after the high priest was long dead and buried, changes the saying: "from now on the Son of Man will be seated at the right hand of the power of God" (Luke 22:69). No longer does Jesus predict that the high priest himself will be alive when the end comes.[/T2]
p.132
[T2]in the earliest edition of this nonexistent source [Q], Jesus is said to have delivered a lot of terrific one-liners, but uttered not a word about a coming Son of Man, sent from heaven in judgment.[/T2]
p.134
[T2]when Jesus talks about himself as the Son of Man in the Gospels—as he frequently does—there's no way to know,... whether that's the way he actually talked or if that's how Christians—who believed he was the Son of Man—"remembered" him talking.But in sayings like Mark 8:38, there is no indication that he is talking about himself. In fact, if you didn't know in advance the Christian idea that Jesus was the Son of Man, there'd be no way you would infer it from this saying. On the contrary, just taking the saying on its own terms, Jesus appears to be referring to someone else.[/T2]
p.144
[T2]Jesus warns of the coming judgment and the need to prepare for it. As I've already intimated in chapter 8, this judgment was to be brought by someone Jesus called the Son of Man, a cosmic judge sent from heaven who would destroy all that is opposed to God and reward those who were faithful to him.[/T2]

stephan huller

Thanks for the reference Diogenes. One point. If the son of man was someone else then Jesus is Man. What's the word for man used here? It's not Adam because the Tatianites and Marcionites - plausibly - argued that the man of earth would not be saved. So we are left with two three other words (I forgot gavra the word used for washroom signs in Israel). The answer is Ish. Jesus is the Ish. Ish is the most common word for man in the Bible.

aa5874

Ehrman's position is hopelessly flawed.

It is frightening that such a simple matter cannot be logically deduced by Ehrman.

The Jesus character merely refers to himself using the "THIRD PERSON".

The author of the earliest story of Jesus in gMark and NT established that his Jesus character was the 'Son of man'.

Also, writers for the Jesus cult referred to their Jesus as the Son of man.

In gMark and other Gospels of the NT, it is claimed the Jesus character did SPECIFICALLY identify himself as the Son of man.

Mark 2 In Mark 2. 28 the Jesus character referred to himself as the Son of Man.

Mark 2In Mark, the Markan Jesus called himself the Son of man when he predicted his Resurrection.

Mark 8

stephan huller

I was reading Clivaz's article on P69 and happened to notice or perhaps better said - paid attention to - the fact that anthropos is a nomen sacrum in many manuscripts:

Human being = Ἄνθρωπος = ΑΝΟΣ = ΑΝΟΥ

This is quite significant especially in Luke chapter 22. Yes Peter says twice - Ἄνθρωπε οὐκ εἰμί but I think there is a secondary, mystic meaning here.

Bingo the Clown-O

I think it would be a mistake to assume that the phrase “Son of Man” meant the same thing to every author who used it.

I also think it would be a mistake to try to reconstruct a single – unified evolutionary trajectory for how the expression evolved over time.

We need to consider the possibility that “Son of Man” was simply a mythological/ religious bullshit term that had no single universally understood meaning.

If one wanted to write a Jewish myth then one would certainly want to toss in the expression “Son of Man” just to conform to tradition.

Bingo the Clown-O

Regarding Daniel 7 - the “Ancient of Days = El”, “Son of Man = Baal” influence is just overwhelmingly obvious. Anyone genuinely interested in unraveling Daniel 7 should certainly investigate the Baal Epic.

I am leery of anything published before 1929 (discovery of the Ugaritic texts) just for that reason.

Bingo the Clown-O

What if it was just a literary tool?

What if the whole issue of if Jesus was “the Son of Man” was something left intentionally vague and ambiguous – just to keep the readers interested?

Tom Verenna

I did not read this whole thread (sorry, busy), but you will want to read Mogens Muller's monumental study on this:

The Expression Son of Man and the Development of Christology (Copenhagen International Seminar) (or via: amazon.co.uk)

aa5874

The "son of man" in the NT was directly related to the "son of man" in Daniel because there are other passages in the NT that were lifted from that very book which were associated with the "son of man".

Also, the authors of the Jesus story actually named the book of Daniel.

The "son of man" story in the NT is supposed to be fulfilled prophecy.

Solo

In my understanding, Mark construed his son-of-man sayings to reflect Paul's teaching of Adam as the "type of the one to come" (Rom 5:14). Hence the generic use of the son of man title. At Caesarea Philippi, with Peter confession, the Christ = Son of man equation becomes explicit. It is, I believe, on this equation that the two movements (the Paulines and the Jesuine Nazarenes) were joined. Jesus proclaims himself as the one to be raised up in 14:28. This appears to have been a designed formula to usher the annunciation by the messenger in the tomb (Mk 16:6).


Best,
Jiri