The Son of Man in Ancient Judaism

and Primitive Christianity: A Suggestion

NORMAN PERRIN
The University oj Chicago
In the past few years there has been a good deal of scholarly ac-
tivity in connection with "Son of man" in the teaching of Jesus and
in the New Testament. We have had, for example, two books de-
voted to the subject, H. E. Tödt, The Son oj Man in the Synoptic
Tradition1 and A. J. B. Higgins, Jesus and the Son oj Man2; two
books on Christology which naturally include discussions of it, F. C.
Hahn, Christologische HoheitstiteP and R. H. Fuller, The Founda-
tions oj New Testament Christology4 ; a book representing the "new
hermeneutic" which is largely a discussion of Kingdom of God and
Son of man in the teaching of Jesus, E. Jüngel, Paulus und Jesus5;
and a variety of articles by Ph. Vielhauer, Ed. Schweizer, Matthew
Black and others. 6 Then we have the "Kittel" article, ho huios tou
anthrôpou, written by Carsten Colpe and not yet published, the manu-
script of which I have been privileged to read. These* works naturally
represent a variety of differing viewpoints, yet they all agree on one
point: there existed in ancient Judaism a defined concept of the
apocalyptic Son of man, the concept of a heavenly redeemer figure
whose coming to earth as Judge would be a feature of the drama of
the End time.
In this respect Tödt is typical. He has as a heading for the first
chapter of his book, "The transcendent sovereignty of the Son of Man
1. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1965.
2. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1965.
3. Göttingen: Yandenhoeck & Ruprecht, Π 9 6 3 , 21964.
4. New York: Seribner, 1965.
5. Tübingen: J . C. B. Mohr [Paul Siebeck], U 9 6 2 , 2]964.
6. M. Black, " T h e Son of Man Problem in Recent Research and D e b a t e , ' '
Bulletin of the John EyUinâs Library, 45 ( 1 9 6 2 / 6 3 ) , 305-318; P h . Yielhauer,
"Gottesreich und Menschensohn," Festschrift für Günther Dehn, ed. W.
Schneemelcher (Neukirchen, Kreis Moers, Yerlag der Buchhandlung des
Erziehungsvererne, 1957), 51-79; " J e s u s und der Menschensohn," ZTK,
60 (1963), 133-177; " E i n Weg der neutestamentlichen Theologie? P r ü f u n g
der Thesen Ferdinand H a h n s , " E v T , 25 (1965), 24-72; Ed. Schweizer,
" D e r Menschensohn," ZNW, 50 (1959), 185-209; " S o n of M a n , " JBL,
79 (1960), 119-129; " T h e Son of Man A g a i n , " KTS, 9 (1963), 256-261;
H. Teeple, " T h e Origin of the Son of Man Christology," JBL, 84 (1965),
213-250.
17
in Jewish apocalyptic literature," and in his subsequent discussion he
assumes that there is a unified and consistent conception which reveals
itself in various ways in Dan. 7, I Enoch 37-71 (the Similitudes),
and IV Ezra 13: the conception of a transcendent bringer of salva-
tion, the Son of man. He sees that there are differences between Daniel
and I Enoch on the one hand and IV Ezra on the other, such as to
suggest that there is not in fact a unified and consistent conception
in Jewish apocalyptic, but he argues that in any case a conception
did develop in early Christianity in which consistency was achieved
and differences disappeared. This enables him to conclude his chapter
with a summary of the elements which he regards as common to the
different seers. Their vision is of a heavenly being, a savior to whom
are ascribed supernatural and even divine powers and functions. His
sovereignty and power are not those of an earthly being, as could be
the case with the Messiah, but come from the future, from the Second
Aeon. The seers' conception is characterized by a strict dualism which
radically distinguishes between the present and the coming Aeon,
and which determines the transcendental character of the conception
of the sovereignty of this redeemer figure.7
Despite the widespread acceptance of this assumption there seeing
to be a number of difficulties with it.
In the first place, neither of the two cycles of tradition using Son
of man subsequent to Dan. 7 in Jewish apocalyptic introduces Son
of man as an independent conception with a title which is in itself a
sufficient designation; rather, each cycle begins afresh with clear and
careful references to Dan. 7. Whether we regard I Enoch 70, 71 as
the climax of the Similitudes or as the earliest use of Son of man in
the Enoch saga, this remains true, for I Enoch 71 has clear references
to Dan. 7 {e.g., vss. 2, 10) and I Enoch 46, where Son of man is first
introduced in the Similitudes as they now stand, is virtually a mid-
rash on Dan. 7:13. IV Ezra 13:3 carefully identifies its "as it were
the form of a man," which comes from the sea, as the one who flies
"with the clouds of heaven," i.e., as the Son of man from Dan. 7:13.
Further, the differences between the Son of man in I Enoch and
the Man from the sea in IV Ezra are such that the reference to Dan.
7:13 is the only thing they have in common apart from the fact that
pre-existence, in the special apocalyptic sense, is ascribed to both fig-
7. H. E. Tödt, Son of Man, 22, 30f. Cf. R. H. Fuller, Foundations, 34-43;
and, in more summary form, F. Hahn, Hoheitstitel, 28f. ; Ph. Vielhauer,
Festschrift für Günther Dehn, 52; E. Jüngel, Paulus una Jesus, 246ff.;
A. J. Β. Higgins, Jesus and the Son of Man, 15.

18
u r es,as it is in Judaism to many things. In view of the fact that IV
Ezra 13 does not have a titular use of Son of man at all, we are not
justified in regarding this passage as supplementing I Enoch in refer-
ences to a Son of man concept. Having identified its Man from the
s ea with the figure from Dan. 7:13, it then goes on to refer to him
as "the same Man" (vs. 12), "a Man from the sea" (vss. 25, 51),
"a Man" (vs. 32), but never as "Son of man." As for the distinc-
tion between the sovereignty and powers of the (earthly) Messiah
and those of the (pre-existent, heavenly) Son of man, it should be
noted that although IV Ezra 33:26 has the Man from the sea being
kept "many ages" by the Most High, the description of the redemp-
tive activity of this figure in verses 9ff. is couched in language drawn
largely from Ps. Sol. 17, a description of the activity of the (earthly)
Messiah. IV Ezra 13 is, in fact, a kind of apocalyptic midrash on
the passages concerning the Davidic Messiah from Ps. Sol. 17. In the
course of this midrash the author uses imagery taken from Dan. 7:13,
but the activity and function of the redeemer figure is derived from
Ps. Sol. 17, not from any concept IV Ezra can be said to have in
common with I Enoch.
The weakness of the hypothesis of the existence in ancient Juda-
ism of an "apocalyptic Son of man concept" has not, of course, been
overlooked, even by the scholars who hold to it. Tödt, as we have
already noted, sees that the differences between I Enoch and IV
Ezra are such as to question the validity of the hypothesis but argues
that in any case a conception did develop in early Christianity in
which consistency was achieved and differences disappeared. This
enables him to describe his concept in terms taken indiscriminately
from Daniel, I Enoch, IV Ezra, and the New Testament, without
further inquiry into the differences and without investigation of special
factors which might have been operating in one tradition and not
in another. Colpe has a variation on this thesis. He freely admits
that no "apocalyptic Son of man concept" can be derived from Daniel,
I Enoch, and IV Ezra, but he argues for a fourth Jewish source, now-
represented by sayings in the earlier strata of the synoptic tradition
but otherwise lost, and derives his concept from the four sources com-
bined. Again, no further attention is paid to differences, and no in-
quiry is made into special factors at work in one tradition and not
another.
It seems to me, however, that the time has come to question the
validity of the hypothesis altogether. This I propose to do now, not
19
by laboring the difficulties connected with it—these are obvious enough
to anyone who has worked on the problem—but by proposing an al-
ternative hypothesis which, in my view, better explains the data. This
alternative hypothesis—my suggestion with regard to "Son of man"
in ancient Judaism and primitive Christianity—is that there is no
"Son of man concept" but rather a variety of uses of Son of man
imagery. Moreover, the use of this imagery is not restricted to Jewish
apocalyptic and the New Testament but continues on into the mid-
rashic traditions. Let me now outline the process which went on, as
I envisage it.
1. The Book oj Daniel
Dan. 7 takes up an existing image from ancient Canaanite my-
thology, the nearest parallels to which, in texts now available to us,
are from Ugarit and Tyre. 8 This image is to be found in Dan. 7:9,
10, 13, 14, which because of the metric structure is to be distinguished
from the remainder of the chapter. It is the account of an assembly
of gods at which authority is passed from one god, designated An-
cient of Days, to another, younger god, designated Son of man. This
existing image the author of Daniel wreaves into his vision, a pro-
cedure altogether characteristic of apocalyptic literature, and then
goes on to offer his interpretation of the Son of man figure (vs. 27).
It represents "the people of the saints of the Most High," almost certain-
ly the Maccabean martyrs. The Son of man's coming to dominion, glory,
and greatness is their coming to their reward for the sufferings they
have endured. In other words, the use of Son of man in Daniel is
a cryptic way of assuring the (Maccabean) readers of the book that
their suffering will not go unrewarded. In exactly the same way
the Christian apocalyptic seer uses a vision of white robed figures
"before the throne and before the lamb" (Rev. 7) to assure the per-
secuted Christians that their suffering will not go unrewarded. In

8. Endless possibilities from the history of religions and from Jewish specu-
lative theology have been proposed as the origin of the Son of man figure
in Jewish apocalyptic. Two recent articles have pointed strongly to U g a r i t
and T y r e : L. Rost, " Z u r Deutung des Menschensohiies in Daniel 7," in
Gott und die Götter: Festgabe für Erich Fascher (Berlin: Evangelische
Verlagsanstalt 1958), 41-43 ( U g a r i t ) and J . Morgenstern, " T h e 'Son of
m a n ' of Dan'. 7:13f.—A New I n t e r p r e t a t i o n , " JBL, 80 (1961), 65-77
( T y r e ) . C. Colpe, himself a Bcligionsge schichtler of real standing, has in-
vestigated thoroughly all the proposed possibilities and reached the con-
clusion t h a t this " C a n a a n i t e h y p o t h e s i s " comes nearest to meeting the
needs of the case, so far as our present knowledge goes ( " K i t t e l " article,
B. Das religwnsgeschichtliche Problem, esp. BVc Ergebnis). This investi-
gation is so thorough and convincing that its publication may be expected
to produce a general consensus of agreement.

20
a llprobability the author of Daniel was attracted to the mythological
scene he uses because it is a cryptic reference to a giving of power
and glory, and therefore will bear his message, and also because it has
in it a mysterious figure which he can set in contrast to the beasts
0f his vision. That the figure is "one like the Son of man" is
probably a pure accident ; any other cryptically designated figure would
have served his purpose equally well. His purpose was to bring to
his readers a message of assurance, of power and glory to be theirs
as a reward for their constancy, and nothing more should be read into
his use of this Son of man imagery than that. But Daniel becomes
the fountainhead of a stream of apocalyptic and, like much else in
the book, the Son of man scene is taken up and used by subsequent
seers.
2. / Enoch
The first use of the imagery from Dan. 7 in subsequent apocalyptic
is in I Enoch 70-71. I accept M. Black's contention that this is earlier
than the remainder of the Similitudes, that it is in fact the third of
three descriptions of the "call" of Enoch (14:8ff., 60, 70-71), each
of which is built upon the model of Ezek. 1 and describes Enoch's
call to a different task.9 These are not doublets but rather develop-
ments going on within an ever expanding Enoch saga.
The Enoch saga is a major development in Jewish apocalyptic,
inspired by the cryptic references to Enoch in the Old Testament,
especially Gen. 5:24: "Enoch walked with God; and he was not, for
God took him." Indeed, the "call" of Enoch in I Enoch 70-71 is an
elaboration of the second part of this verse, i.e., the reference to
Enoch's translation to heaven, with a characteristic use of existing
imagery, in this instance Ezek. 1 and Dan. 7. From Ezek. 1 come
the chariots of the spirit (70:2), the flaming cherubim (71:7), the
fire which girdles the house (71:6; in Ezekiel fire surrounds the
cherubim); and Enoch, like Ezekiel, falls to the ground when con-
fronted by the vision (71:11; Ezek. 1:28). From Dan. 7 come the
streams(s) of fire (71:2), the Head of Days (71:10) and, above all,
the use of the Son of man in connection with Enoch. It is easy
enough to see what has happened: the seer has interpreted the trans-
lation of Enoch in terms of the call of Ezekiel and of the appearance
before the Ancient of Days of the Son of man. This was no doubt the
easier because in Ezek. 2:1 Ezekiel is addressed as Son of man;
9. M. Black, « « Eschatology of the Similitudes of E n o c h , " J TS (n.s.). 4
(1953), 1-10.

21
 indeed, that use of Son of man may well have been the connecting
link for the seer, that which brought together for him the two scenes
he uses in connection with the translation of his hero. Because the
translation of Enoch is interpreted in terms of Dan. 7:13, Enoch be-
comes the Son of man.
Dan. 7 and the figure of the Son of man having been introduced
into the Enoch saga in this way, they come to play a major role in
that part of the saga we call the Similitudes. In Enoch 46 the scene
from Dan. 7 is taken up again and attention focused anew on the Son
of man, who now for the seer is Enoch. Significantly, the first thing
said about him is that he has "righteousness" (46:3), which is surely
an allusion to Gen. 5:22, 24 where Enoch "walked with God" ( M T ) ,
"was well pleasing to God" ( L X X ) . At this point the characteristic
concerns of apocalyptic come to the fore and Enoch-Son of man re-
veals "the treasures that are hidden," namely, the way in which
through him the wicked shall be destroyed, and the passage moves on
to concentrate upon the coming destruction of the wicked. In con-
nection with this revealing of the hidden we must remember that the
basis for the work of the apocalyptic seer is always the idea that the
things which will make up the drama of the End time already exist,
so to speak, in prototype, in "the heavens," where they await the moment
of their revealing. An apocalyptic seer is granted a vision of these
things prior to their being revealed to all the world at the End;
hence, he has a message concerning the End to bring to his audience.
In this sense all the features of the End are pre-existent, including
the New Jerusalem of IV Ezra and the Christian apocalypse, and
these are the hidden treasures wrhich are revealed to Enoch.
In I Enoch 48:2 the Son of man-Ancient of Days imagery is
taken up again, and the Son of man is further distinguished as the
one whose role had been determined (48:3). We are on the way to
an assertion that he is pre-existent in the heavens, awaiting his revela-
tion at the End. The role of the Son of man is elaborated in terms
taken from the prophetic books of the Old Testament, especially
Isaiah, and in the course of this elaboration of the role of the Son of
man, his pre-existence, in this apocalyptic sense, is affirmed (48:6),
and he is further identified with the Messiah (48:10).
The imagery from Dan. 7 is taken up for a third time in 62:5.
Here the seer depicts the distress of the kings and the mighty when
they see the Son of man "sitting on the throne of his glory." Clearly
he has in mind Dan. 7 :14, and he is expressing the idea of the dominion,
22
 glory, and kingdom of the Son of man from that verse in these terms.
With his mind set on the Son of man on his throne, the seer proceeds
to elaborate the role of the Son of man as judge of the oppressors
and as the one with whom the elect and righteous will dwell for
ever. Both of these are, of course, common apocalyptic themes. Nor­
mally in apocalyptic, God himself is the judge, but in the Similitudes
of Enoch, the Son of man assumes this function. But again the rea­
son is the scene from Dan. 7. In 47:3 God himself is the judge, but
God designated as the Head (Ancient) of Days. Precisely because
the Son of man is given the throne of the Ancient of Days in Dan.
7:13, as our seer understands it, he can assume the role of apocalyptic
judge; indeed, this becomes his major role. Having assumed the role
of judge> he can also assume that of leader of the redeemed com­
munity, which elsewhere is also the role of God himself (Isa. 60 Ί 9
20; Zeph. 3:15-17).

The seer returns to Dan. 7 for the last time in 69:26-29, which
is the close of the third parable and a kind of closing summary of the
role of Enoch as Son of man. The name of that Son of man is re­
vealed to the righteous, i.e., the (future) function of Enoch as Son
of man is revealed, and he sits on the throne of his glory and ex­
ercises his function of judgment. It is interesting that here in this
summary we should have reference only to the revealing of the name
of the Son of man to the righteous—the characteristic message of hope
to the readers of apocalyptic—and to the function of the Son of man
as judge. This latter fact, together with the sheer extent of the refer­
ences to this function in the previous Son of man passages, indicates
that the seer is concerned predominantly with the Son of man as
judge.

What has happened in I Enoch is then, in my view, that, in the

course of the development of the Enoch saga, the translation of Enoch
has been interpreted in terms of Ezek. 1 and Dan. 7, and Dan. 7 has
then been understood as referring to the giving of the role of es-
chatological judge to the one represented by the Son of man figure
(a quite different interpretation from that given to this scene by the
author of Daniel), which in this saga is Enoch. Then the saga goes
on to elaborate on the theme of the judgment to be carried out by the
Son of man, although constantly returning to the initial scene, and in
the course of this elaboration other ideas characteristic of apocalyptic,
e.g., pre-existence in the special apocalyptic sense, are introduced. /

23
 3. IV Ezra 13
The vision of the Man from the sea in IV Ezra 13 is, as I
have already suggested, a kind of apocalyptic midrash on the Son of
David passages in Ps. Sol. 17, a kind of translation of these refer-
ences into a more fanciful style of apocalyptic. In the course of his
midrash the seer makes use of the imagery of Dan. 7 to describe
the Messiah's appearance ("as it were the form of a man") and the
mode of his movement ("this Man flew with the clouds of heaven").
It should be noted that this is the first time in the use of Dan. 7:13
that the phrase "with the clouds of heaven" is understood as refer-
ring to the movement of the Son of man figure. In IV Ezra 13, how-
ever, the movement of the figure is not from heaven to earth.
The argument that we have here a transcendent, sovereign Son
of man conception must turn entirely upon two points, that the Mes-
siah here is "kept many ages" 10 and that he functions as a redeemer,
for these are the only things in common between this figure and the
Enochic Son of man.
The latter point cannot be held to be significant. The central
concern of apocalyptic is with the coming redemption, and the fact
that two figures function as redeemers only unites them into some
such broad category as "apocalyptic redeemer figures," of which, in-
cidentally, there is a large number. This is especially the case in
this instance, since the main thrust of the redemptive activity is clearly
derived from different sources in each case. The activity of the Son
of man in Enoch has been derived largely from the concept of his
taking the throne of God, while that of "my Son" in IV Ezra comes
from the description of the redemptive work of the Son of David in
Ps. Sol. 17. Everything turns, then, upon the fact that pre-existence,
in the special apocalyptic sense, is attributed to both figures. But
pre-existence is attributed to many things in apocalyptic. If this were
not the case there could be no Jewish apocalyptic literature, for, as
I pointed out earlier, what the seer sees is always the things which
the Most High is "keeping many ages," until the time of their ap-
pearance at the End. Because of this, I remain completely uncon-
vinced that this one point will bear the weight of the whole "trans-
cendent sovereignty of the Son of man in Jewish apocalyptic," es-
pecially in view of the facts that Son of man is not used as a title in

10. R. H. Charles, Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha of the Old Testament, II,

6] 6, n. 26, finds this sufficient to identify the figure with the Son of'man
of I Enoch (G. H. Box).
24
IV Ezra and that there are no other points in common between the
two figures.

4. The AJidrashic Traditions

The use of Dan. 7:13 in connection with eschatological expecta­
tion does not end with the apocalyptic literature but continues into
the talmudic and midrashic tradition, where it is also used in con­
nection with the Messiah. Here the major use is a development of
that found in IV Ezra 13 in that the "clouds" phrase is understood
as descriptive of the figure's movement; but it goes a step further in
that the figure now moves from heaven to earth. This is the first time
that this happens in the use of imagery in the Jewish traditions. It
can be urged that I Enoch implies that the Son of man will be re­
vealed as judge from heaven to earth, but it is nowhere definitely
stated that he "comes," much less that he "comes with the clouds of
heaven." However, this now happens in b.Sanh. 98a: "R. Alexander
said; R. Joshua opposed two verses: it is written, 'and behold, with
the clouds of heaven one like a Son of man came' (Dan. 7:13) ; while
it is written, 'lowly, and riding upon an ass' (Zech. 9:9). If they are
meritorious [the Messiah will come] 'with the clouds of heaven'; if
not 'lowly, and riding upon an ass'." A similar understanding and
use of the text is found in the midrashim : Tanhuma Β 70b ; Aggadath
Bereshith 14a (Billerbeck, Kommentar, I, 9 5 7 ) ; Num. R. 13.14; and
also in Gen. R. 13.11 where, however, the reference is to the coming
rain clouds, not to the Messiah.
Finally, the midrashic tradition also maintains the original mean­
ing of the text in that Dan. 7:13 is used as descriptive of the Mes­
siah's coming to God, not of his coming to earth: Midrash on Psalms
2:9 and 21:5. 2:9 is concerned with the glory of the Messiah, and
it quotes Dan. 7:13a, interpreting it in terms of the glory and dominion
which the Messiah will be given by God ; 21 :5 is concerned with
the manner in which the Messiah will come into the presence of God,
quoting and contrasting Dan. 7:13b and Jer. 30:21 and then reconcil­
ing the two.
The above is, I believe, a complete account of the eschatological
use of Dan. 7:13 in the ancient Jewish traditions. It can be seen at
once that each use is accounted for; the developments envisaged are
reasonable and the hypothetical relationships are smooth. What we
have is not the conception of the coming of a transcendent, sovereign
figure, the heavenly redeemer, the Son of man. There is no sufficient
relationship between the use of Son of man in I Enoch and IV Ezra

25
for us to suppose that they are both reflections of a common con-
ception. What we have is the imagery of Dan. 7:13 being used
freely and creatively by subsequent seers and scribes. These uses are
independent of one another. The common dependence is upon Dan.
7:13, on the one hand, and upon the general world of apocalyptic
concepts, on the other. Similarly, the scribes of the midrashic tradi-
tions in their turn use the imagery of Dan. 7:13 in connection with
the Messiah. Although they abandon the general world of apocalyptic
concepts, nonetheless they find Dan. 7:13 every bit as useful in their
presentation of the Messiah as did the seer of IV Ezra 13 in his.
5. The Christian Tradition
How was Dan. 7:13 used in the Christian traditions? To interpret
the resurrection of Jesus! Just as the scribes of the Enoch saga in-
terpreted the translation of Enoch in terms of Ezek. 1 and Dan. 7:13,
so also, but completely independently, the scribes of earliest Chris-
tianity interpreted the resurrection of Jesus in terms of two Old Testa-
ment texts: Ps. 110:1 and Dan. 7:13. Just as Enoch became Son
of man on the basis of an interpretation of his translation, so Jesus
became Son of man on the basis of an interpretation of his resurrection.
It is no part of my purpose here to trace the developments in
the Christian traditions in any detail.11 Let me simply say that there
are, in my viewr, three Christian exegetical traditions using Dan. 7:13,
all of which have left their traces in the New Testament. They were,
of course, very much earlier than any book of the New Testament.
First, there is an exaltation tradition in which Jesus' resurrec-
tion is interpreted as his exaltation to God's right hand as Son of
man, a tradition using Ps. 110:1 and Dan. 7:13. The clearest trace
of this is now to be found in Stephen's vision (Acts 7:55-56), and it
obviously underlies the ascension concept altogether.
Then, secondly, there is a use of Dan. 7:13 in connection with
early Christian passion apologetic. As part of passion apologetic in
connection with the concept of a crucified Messiah, the crucifixion
is interpreted in terms of Zech. 12:1 Off. (as in John 19:37) and then
this passage is developed along the lines that just as "they" (the
Jews) have seen him crucified, so "they" will have occasion to mourn,
namely, at his coming as Son of man. This is exactly what we find
at Rev. 1 :7 :
11. See my forthcoming book, ^Rediscovering the Teaching of Jesus (New York:
Harper & Bow).

26
 Behold, he is coming with the clouds,
and every eye will see him,
every one who pierced him ;
and all tribes of the earth will wail on account of him.
This is related to John 19:37, because there is a common variant from
the LXX text of Zech. 12:10 (opsomai for epiblepsomai).
Thirdly, we have the full-blooded apocalyptic use of Dan. 7:13
in Mk. 13:26 par. and 14:62 par. It can be shown that these latter
two texts are related to the second exegetical tradition, (i) They use
opsomai, the key variant from the epiblepsomai of Zech. 12:10, and
that this is understood as a reference to Zech. 12:10 can be seen
from Matthew who adds an explicit reference to that text in his
parallel to Mk. 13:26 (Matt. 24:30). (ii) They allude to Dan. 7:13
in exactly the same word order as that found in Rev. 1 :7, i.e., with
the "clouds" phrase brought next to the verb. This is a word order
not found in any version of Dan. 7:13 or in any allusion to it out-
side the New Testament. It is furthermore clear that Mk. 14:62 is
related to both of the Christian exegetical traditions, since it refers
to Jesus, as Son of man, "sitting at the right hand of power" (from
the tradition using Ps. 110:1 and Dan. 7:13) and "coming with the
clouds of heaven" (from the tradition using Zech. 12:10ff. and Dan.
7:13).
If the hypothesis I have advanced is correct, then it necessarily
follows that there can be no apocalyptic Son of man saying in the
teaching of Jesus. All such sayings must be products of a church
that had learned to think of and expect Jesus as Son of man on the
basis of the Christian exegetical traditions to which I have referred.
It is my claim that a form-critical and tradition-historical analysis of
the tradition bears this out.32 The so-called "judgment-sayings" (Lk.
12:8f. ; Mk. 8:38) and "comparison-sayings" (Lk. 11:30 par.; Lk.
17:23f. par.; Lk. 17:26f. ) do contain an element that goes back to
Jesus himself, but that element does not include a reference to the
Son of man. The authentic element in the first case is a saying:
"Every one who acknowledges me before men, he will be acknowledged
before the angels of God." This has a double Aramaism (homologein
en and the passive as a circumlocution for the divine activity) and is
a saying on the basis of which all other variants found in the tradi-
tion are readily explicable. In the second case the authentic element
is a saying exhibiting an Aramaic idiom, the idiom of relative nega-
li 2. See the book referred to in note 11.
27
tion, in which the apparent exception is in fact an affirmation.13 This
saying should be rendered in English: "Truly, I tell you, no sign will
be given to this generation. The sign of Jonah will be given to this
generation!" This is the basic saying from which the others have de-
veloped in the tradition, interpreting the reference to the sign of Jonah
in terms of Christian knowledge of the passion and expectation of
Jesus' coming as Son of man. I give these only as examples of the
way in which the analysis of the tradition, when it does contain an
authentic element, shows an element having no reference to the Son of
man.
A further consequence of the correctness of my hypothesis would
come in the field of the beginning of Christology. If my hypothesis
is correct, then Christology begins with the interpretation of the
resurrection as Jesus' exaltation to the right hand of God as Son of
man, i.e., with an interpretation of Christian experience in the light of
Old Testament texts, rather than with the identification of Jesus as
Son of man in dominical sayings preserved in the tradition. 14

33. This idiom is pointed out by Oolpe ( " K i t t e l " article, C l i c ) . He gives
other instances from the New Testament: Matt. 1 5 : 2 4 ; Mk. 2 : 1 7 ; J n . 1 : 1 1 ;
7 : 1 6 ; Matt. 25:29b; Lk. 19:26b.
14. F o r detailed argument for this position, see the forthcoming book mentioned
in note 11.

28
 ^ s
Copyright and Use:

As an ATLAS user, you may print, download, or send articles for individual use
according to fair use as defined by U.S. and international copyright law and as
otherwise authorized under your respective ATLAS subscriber agreement.

No content may be copied or emailed to multiple sites or publicly posted without the
copyright holder(s)' express written permission. Any use, decompiling,
reproduction, or distribution of this journal in excess of fair use provisions may be a
violation of copyright law.

This journal is made available to you through the ATLAS collection with permission
from the copyright holder(s). The copyright holder for an entire issue of a journal
typically is the journal owner, who also may own the copyright in each article. However,
for certain articles, the author of the article may maintain the copyright in the article.
Please contact the copyright holder(s) to request permission to use an article or specific
work for any use not covered by the fair use provisions of the copyright laws or covered
by your respective ATLAS subscriber agreement. For information regarding the
copyright holder(s), please refer to the copyright information in the journal, if available,
or contact ATLA to request contact information for the copyright holder(s).

About ATLAS:

The ATLA Serials (ATLAS®) collection contains electronic versions of previously

published religion and theology journals reproduced with permission. The ATLAS
collection is owned and managed by the American Theological Library Association
(ATLA) and received initial funding from Lilly Endowment Inc.

The design and final form of this electronic document is the property of the American
Theological Library Association.