scholarly journals “Son of man” and exegetical myths

2003 ◽  
Vol 59 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jean-Claude Loba-Mkole
Keyword(s):  
New Testament ◽  
Early Church ◽  
Son Of Man ◽  
Critical Scholarship ◽  
Historical Figure ◽  
The New Testament ◽  
History Of Religions ◽  
History Of

This article aims to show that some of the New Testament interpretations of the "son of man" phrase appear to be, according to B Lindars “a myth, created, not by the thinkers of the New Testament times, but by modern critical scholarship.” This view is substantiated in two ways: the first deals with an exegesis of the expression "son of man", while the second highlights some exegetical myths about "son of man". The first part includes sections on the linguistic origin of "son of man", "son of man" in the history of religions, and "son of man" as a historical figure according to Mark and Q. The second part comprises the sections dealing with the understanding of myth, and the myth of the "son of man" as a messianic title adopted by Jesus and by the early Church.

A Straussian Question to ‘New Testament Theology’

1977 ◽  
Vol 23 (3) ◽  
pp. 243-265 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert C. Morgan
Keyword(s):  
New Testament ◽  
Historical Research ◽  
Critical Study ◽  
Critical Research ◽  
The New Testament ◽  
History Of Religions ◽  
History Of

David Friedrich Strauss died on 8 February 1874. HisLeben Jesuof 1835 was said by Albert Schweitzer to be ‘no mere destroyer of untenable solutions, but also the prophet of a coming advance in knowledge’, namely eschatology. The claims that it ‘has a different significance for modern theology from that which it had for his contemporaries’ and that it ‘marked out the ground which is now occupied by modern critical study’ appear even more true in the light of subsequent history of religions and form-critical research than Schweitzer himself realized. But as well as marking an epoch in the historical critical study of the New Testament, this book, and with it the fate of its author, remains a symbol of something else: the tension between historical research and the formation of a systematic or doctrinal theological position. Ecclesiastical authorities have in the meantime learned to live with theological pluralism and become more tolerant, but the problem itself has not disappeared. The investigation and development of Strauss' generally unappreciated contribution is perhaps an appropriate centenary celebration.

A Sidelight on the ‘Son of Man’

1969 ◽  
Vol 22 (2) ◽  
pp. 189-196 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. Gelston
Keyword(s):  
New Testament ◽  
Previous History ◽  
First Century ◽  
Small Contribution ◽  
The Third ◽  
Son Of Man ◽  
The New Testament ◽  
History Of

The term ‘Son of Man’ is one of the enigmas of the Gospels. G. Vermes has re-examined the Aramaic background of the phrase in Appendix E of the third edition of M. BlacK's Aramaic Approach to the Gospels and Acts. Even if his argument that barnāsh (ā) is in some passages a mere circumlocution for ‘I’ is not wholly convincing,page 2 he has demonstrated beyond doubt that the phrase was not in New Testament times a title with a clear and recognised meaning, whether messianic or other. The phrase in itself merely signifies ‘man’, whether mankind in general, or a particular man. Only the context can determine its meaning more precisely. Apart from Act 7.56 it is used virtually exclusively in the New Testament by Jesus, and the question of the crowd in John 12.34—‘who is this Son of Man?’ —shows clearly that the expression was not immediately intelligible to the first century,page 3 and that we are not at liberty to dismiss it as no more than an elaborate way of saying ‘man’ or ‘I’. This is the justification of the immense activity that has gone into the exploration of the previous history of the expression, and to which this article is a small contribution.page 4

Frühchristliche Religion als Wahrnehmungsobjekt und Erkenntnisprozess

2014 ◽  
Vol 74 (1) ◽  
pp. 6-21
Author(s):  
Michael Tilly
Keyword(s):  
New Testament ◽  
Historical Jesus ◽  
Early Christian ◽  
The New Testament ◽  
History Of Religions ◽  
History Of ◽  
Christian Literature ◽  
The Relationship

AbstractThis essay explores the exegetical possibilities and boundaries of the history of religions approach to the New Testament. In part 1 it offers an overview of the history of historical critical exegesis of the New Testament from the magisterial research of the history of religions school to the newest approaches of historical Jesus research. In part 2, three hermeneutical problems for the exegete are outlined: the relationship between text and tradition, the relationship between early Christian literature and its surroundings and the relationship between the New Testament as an ancient collection and its reception today.

The New Testament as Canon

1975 ◽  
Vol 28 (6) ◽  
pp. 551-571 ◽  
Author(s):  
Geoffrey Wainwright
Keyword(s):  
Academic Question ◽  
New Testament ◽  
Early Church ◽  
Critical Scholarship ◽  
Actual Content ◽  
The New Testament ◽  
Practical Ministry ◽  
Historical Origins

My title, which is stolen from a collection of learned German essays edited by Ernst Käsemann (Das Neue Testament als Kanon, 1970), may sound remote from the concerns of the practical ministry. But the academic question here raised has profound implications for all our understanding, proclamation and practice of the gospel. My exposition will fall into three parts. First I shall make clear what, historically, were the theological motives governing the establishment of a fixed canon of New Testament scripture, and I shall discuss the question of how far the aims of the early Church in this matter may be considered, in the light of modern critical scholarship, to have been achieved. Next I shall show that today also we are faced by problems similar to those which the principle of a New Testament canon was designed to meet, and I shall try to indicate what part the canonical New Testament may still play in helping us to meet them. Thirdly, I shall draw some consequences for worship, preaching, evangelism, ecumenism, and ethics from the principle of a New Testament canon and from the actual content of the canonical New Testament. In conclusion, I shall briefly consider the place of the canonical New Testament in the problem posed by the particularity of Christianity's historical origins and the universality of its claims. Space will obviously forbid anything more than the giving of hints on all these questions.

Retelling the History of the Early Church: Erasmus's Paraphrase on Acts

2000 ◽  
Vol 69 (1) ◽  
pp. 63-85 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hilmar M. Pabel
Keyword(s):  
New Testament ◽  
Literary Analysis ◽  
Early Church ◽  
Historical Scholarship ◽  
The New Testament ◽  
History Of

Scholars have paid relatively little attention to Erasmus's concept of history. This is understandable since Erasmus is not usually considered a historian and is certainly not ranked with humanist historians such as Leonardo Bruni and Francesco Guicciardini. Nevertheless, Erasmus's contribution to Renaissance historical scholarship is considerable.As an editor of texts he constantly busied himself with establishing the most accurate readings and separating genuine from spurious works. His patristic editions as well as his five editions of the New Testament are monuments not only to a highly refined literary analysis but also to a sophisticated historical erudition.

Quomodo historia conscribenda sit

1982 ◽  
Vol 28 (3) ◽  
pp. 303-320
Author(s):  
C. K. Barrett
Keyword(s):  
Title I ◽  
19Th Century ◽  
New Testament ◽  
Early Church ◽  
Early Christian ◽  
Historical Method ◽  
The New Testament ◽  
History Of ◽  
The 19Th Century ◽  
Latin Version

Of those who in the 19th Century applied the historical method to the study of the New Testament and the early church none were more important than Ferdinand Christian Baur and Joseph Barber Lightfoot. My intention in this paper is to compare them and the outstanding contributions they made to our knowledge of the period with which they dealt. I do this in the hope of recalling for our profit some of the history of New Testament study and of making the point that New Testament study is, or ought to be, a field for international cooperation rather than international rivalry. At first I hoped that my method, of considering what each of these great men made of a particularly obscure piece of New Testament history, might lead not only to deeper understanding of how historians work but also to a fresh consideration and evaluation of the piece in question; it has proved impossible to go so far within the space available. My underlying concern is, however, with the problem of early Christian history. My title I borrow from the Latin version of a tract by Lucian, Πως δείἱστορίαν συγγρ⋯φειν. Lucian will, to my regret, occupy a smaller part of the paper than I originally intended, but having borrowed the title I cannot omit him altogether.

scholarly journals The son of man: “Is it constructive theology and history of Jesus for the New Testament writing?”

2020 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 94-102
Author(s):  
Halim Wiryadinata
Keyword(s):  
New Testament ◽  
Critical Analysis ◽  
Qualitative Methodology ◽  
High Priest ◽  
Constructive Theology ◽  
Son Of Man ◽  
Library Research ◽  
The World ◽  
The New Testament ◽  
History Of

Many scholars and lay people try to figure out the reasons why the Lord JesusChrist uses the title of the son of man to designate Himself. He uses the title ofthe son of man throughout the Gospels, but there are some incidents only appear outside of the Gospels. This appearance is impressing to find out the reasons why the term occurrences in the Gospel. However, the term also appears in few passages outside the Gospels. Therefore, using the method of critical analysis through the library research as the qualitative methodology in order to seek the development of the argument from beginning up today and to see how the New Testament scholars clear up the message of Jesus in using that title. Few scholars comment that term has significant for the Christological development of the New Testament due to the messianic proclamation as thesaviour of the world. Furthermore, the idea of representative between man andGod apparently introduces the idea of the high priest in the New Testamentwriting for Jesus’ Christology. This idea will bring the consumption for BiblicalTheology when scholars seek this terminology in the New Testament writing.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document