Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-xbtfd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-02T20:35:42.156Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

‘The Son of Man’: Some of the Facts

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 February 2009

C. F. D. Moule
Affiliation:
(1 King's Houses, Pevensey, E. Sussex BN24 5JR, England)

Abstract

Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Short Studies
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1995

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 ‘Neglected Features in the Problem of “the Son of Man”’, in Gnilka, J., Hrsg., Neues Testament und Kirche (Freiburg/Basel/Wien: Herder, 1974) 413ff.Google Scholar, reprinted in Essays in New Testament Interpretation (Cambridge: CUP, 1982) 75ffGoogle Scholar. See also The Origin of Christology (Cambridge: CUP, 1977) 11ff.Google Scholar

2 See, e.g., Middleton, T. F., The Doctrine of the Greek Article (London, 1841) 36Google Scholar, summarizing a ruling of Apollonius Dyscolus. The Blaβ-Debrunner-Funk Grammar (1961) only grazes the matter (§252).

3 I owe this observation to Borsch, F. H., The Christian and Gnostic Son of Man (London: SCM, 1970) 43Google Scholar. I have not investigated other patristic writers.

4 Facsimile in Burrows, M. with Trever, J. C. and Brownlee, W. H., The Dead Sea Scrolls of St Mark's Monastery (New Haven: The American Schools of Oriental Research, 1951) 2Google Scholar, Plate 11.

5 Essays in New Testament Interpretation, 84 n. 27. Appeal is sometimes made also to targumic usages. I am not competent to judge of their date and degree of relevance.