New Test. Stud. vol. 31, 1985, pp.

208-222

JANE SCHABERG

DANIEL 7, 12 AND THE NEW TESTAMENT

PASSION-RESURRECTION PREDICTIONS

i.

In this article I hope to show that a careful reading of Daniel 7, 12 and of

aspects of the midrashic1 traditions associated with that text can throw
new light on the Synoptic and Johannine passion-resurrection predictions.
It suggests that an early2 interpretation of elements of these sayings can be
recovered, an interpretation based on an implicit identification of one like
a son of man with those whom the author of Daniel considers the members
of the true Israel, in their suffering and in their triumph.
In Daniel 7, as all commentators point out, the figure of one like a son
of man (7. 13-14) bears some strong and significant relationship to 'the
holy ones of the Most High' (7. 18, 21-22, 25) and 'the people of the
holy ones of the Most High' (7. 27).3 As their transcendent symbol, as
their heavenly representative, or (less likely, in my opinion) as their
angelic leader,4 he comes with the clouds of heaven, is presented before
the Ancient of Days and is given everlasting dominion, a dominion that
the angelic interpreter speaks of as given to 'the holy ones' (7. 18, 22)
and 'people of the holy ones' (7. 27). Whether the holy ones are thought
of by the author as angels, as Israel in fellowship with the angelic world,
or as simply the human 'saints' suffering under Antiochus Epiphanes IV,
it is agreed that the vision and its interpretation offer a message of escha-
tological encouragement to those faithful Israelites persecuted under
Antiochus' policies. But whereas the holy ones are said to be at war with
the 'horn', prevailed over and worn outs by him (7. 21, 25;cf. 8. 24; 12.
7), the one like a son of man is not said to be in direct confrontation with
the beasts or 'horn', and is not said to suffer. On the basis of the relation-
ship between the one like a son of man and the holy ones, however, some
critics like Morna Hooker have seen implied in Daniel 7 the suffering as
well as the vindication of the one like a son of man.6 It will be argued here
that whether or not the author of Daniel intended his readers to draw this
implication, the framers of the NT passion-resurrection predictions did draw
it, apparently recognizing structural patterns and repetitions in Daniel 7-12
which open the figure of the one like a son of man to such an interpret-
ation as Hooker proposes. We will look first at these structural patterns,
then at the verbal agreements between certain Danielic and Synoptic texts.
This will be followed by a brief contrast with the suggestions other scholars

http://journals.cambridge.org Downloaded: 25 Apr 2015 IP address: 129.128.216.34

 NEW TESTAMENT PASSION-RESURRECTION PREDICTIONS 209
have made concerning the OT basis of the predictions, and then by an
attempt to grasp the meaning of the Synoptic predictions on the basis of
the analysis offered here. Finally, it will be shown that the three Johan-
nine predictions may also be based on the Danielic motif of suffering
and vindication, used in a distinctive fashion.

John J. Collins holds that 'the individual visions in Daniel 7-12 are variant
formulations of the same complex of events, the persecution of Antiochus
Epiphanes. As such, they complement each other and may be used to
clarify each other.'7 He finds four accounts which focus on the career
of Antiochus and share a common pattern. These four are: (1) the vision
in 7. 1-14 and its interpretation in 7. 17-18; (2) the elaboration of this
vision in 7. 19-22 and its interpretation in 7. 23-27; (3) the vision in
8. 1-12 and its interpretation in 8. 20-25; (4) the narrative account in
10. 20-12. 3. The common pattern contains: (a) a review of history prior
to the time of Antiochus (7. 1-7 and its interpretation in 7. 17; 7. 19 and
its interpretation in 7. 23-24a; 8. 1-8 and its interpretation in 8. 20-22;
and 10. 12-11. 20); (b) the career of Antiochus, presented as a revolt
against God (7. 8, 11; 7. 20-21 and its interpretation in 7. 24b-25; 8. 9-
12 and its interpretation in 8. 23-25; 11. 21-45); (c) the intervention of
a supernatural power (7. 9-12; 7. 22 and its interpretation in 7. 26; 8. 25;
12. 1); (d) the eschatological state of salvation (7. 13-14 and its interpret-
ation in 7. 18; 7. 22 and its interpretation in 7. 27; 12. 1-3).8 The com-
bination of allusions to Daniel in the NT passages to be considered here
blends aspects of the first, second and fourth accounts, and of b, c and d
of the common pattern.

in.
I find in several of the Synoptic passion-resurrection predictions some
verbal agreement with (1) Dan 7. 25; (2) 12. 2; (3) 7. 13.
(1) Dan 7. 25 reads, 'He shall speak words against the Most High, and
shall wear out the holy ones of the Most High, and shall think to change
the times and the law; and they shall be given into his hand for a time, two
times and half a time.' The MT of the last clause reads: pins? rrra prirrm
psj'PDi rrnn; LXX: -napabodrioeTai iravra eis rdq xetpa? avrov eco? KCLL-
pov /cat Kaipcbv /cat ecoc rjnioovs naipov; Theodotion: 5o0Tjaerai ev xeipi
OUTOV eox /catpot) /cat naiptiv /cai. 77/ziau Kaipov. The holy ones, that is, will
be delivered into the power of Antiochus, for three and a half times (cf.
12. 7).9 'The times' are interpreted in Dan 8. 14 as 2,300 evenings and
mornings (1,150 days, three and a half years), revised in 12. 11 (1,290
days), in 12. 12 (1,335 days), and in 9. 27 (reading Jer. 25. 11-12; 29. 10

http://journals.cambridge.org Downloaded: 25 Apr 2015 IP address: 129.128.216.34

210 JANE SCHABERG
as referring to seventy weeks of years; cf. Dan 9. 1) as half a 'week' (three
and a half 'days' or one half a year).
Three elements of the Synoptic passion-resurrection predictions may be
drawn from Dan 7. 25: (a) the future form of irapa8i8coixi corresponding
to the Hithpe'el parm11 (MT) and/or the future indicative passive irapa-
8odr)oeTai (LXX) or bodrioerai (Theodotion); 10 (b) the phrase 'into the
hands of; and (c) the statement that the vindication of the Son of Man
will occur 'after three days' (juerd rpeis rjnepac;). The account of the death
and translation of the 'two witnesses' in Rev 11. 2-12 indicates that this
last phrase may be a translation and adaptation of the Danielic 'a time,
two times and half a time'. The author of Revelation uses Dan 7. 25; 12.
7 (cf. 12. 11) to predict that the court outside the temple will be trampled
by the nations for forty-two months (three and a half years; Rev 11. 2-3;
cf. 12. 6; 13. 5 ) . n When the witnesses are killed, their dead bodies lie in
the street for three and a half days (11. 9), but 'after three and a half days
(juerd rds rpeis rjnepaq /cat tfiiiov) a breath of life from God entered them,
and they stood up on their feet. . . . And in the sight of their foes they
went up to heaven in a cloud' (w. 11-12). Here there may be an appli-
cation of the time frame in Daniel (three and a half years) to the period
between death and assumption to heaven (three and a half days), an appli-
cation that may occur with further shortening in the passion predictions.12
The three and a half days mentioned in Rev 11. 9 is the period the two
witnesses remain unburied, whereas in the Synoptic predictions the three
days seem to refer to the period during which the Son of Man is entombed.
The NT gospel narratives, however, merely claim that on the third day the
tomb of Jesus was discovered to be empty, and that on that same day the
risen Jesus appeared to certain persons.
None of the Synoptic passion-resurrection predictions contains the com-
bination of the three elements from Dan 7. 25, but the second and third
are combined in Mark 9. 31, which reads: 'The Son of Man is delivered
into the hands of men, and they will kill him and when he is killed, after
three days he will be raised' (d ut<k TOV duOpcbwov •napablborai efc xeipa?
dvdpcbnoov Kai dironTevovoLV avrdv Kai dnoKravdek iierd rpelq rj/iepaq dua-
aTTjaerai).13 Where we find the phrase 'after three days' in Mark 8. 31; 9. 31;
10. 33 (cf. Matt 27. 63), we find 'on the third day' in the Matthean and
Lukan parallels; cf. 1 Cor 15. 4. Some critics argue that there is no sig-
nificant difference in meaning between these two phrases. H. K. McArthur,
for example, cites Esth. Rab. 9, 2 (on Esth 5. 1, blending Jonah 2. 1 with
Hos 6. 2) to demonstrate that for rabbinic thought the two phrases could
be treated as 'functional if not identical equivalents'. He thinks the tension
between these two formulations would not have troubled first century
Jewish exegetes (cf. Gen. Rab. 56. 1; Midr. Pss. 22. 5; Yal. Shimeoni to
Josh 2. 16). 14 On the other hand, G. Strecker claims that the two can be

http://journals.cambridge.org Downloaded: 25 Apr 2015 IP address: 129.128.216.34

 NEW TESTAMENT PASSION-RESURRECTION PREDICTIONS 211

distinguished in Jewish literature: this is apparent in Hos 6. 2, where

'after two days' equals 'on the third day'. l s Further, 'after three days'
clearly contradicts Mark 14. 58; 15. 29, and, on the presupposition of the
Greek method of counting, also the Markan passion story, according to
which the discovery of the empty tomb occurred on the third day. Strecker
considers 'on the third day' a formula which may be understood as an
assimilation to the presentation of the passion story, and as possibly in-
fluenced by a kerygmatic formula such as 1 Cor 15. 4. 16 Most believe that
the ultimate source of the expression 'on the third day' is Hos 6. 2 ('on
the third day he will raise us up'); 17 some claim that the whole 'third day'
tradition was derived from historical tradition about the resurrection of
Jesus. The suggestion I want to make here is that 'after three days' is part
of a complex of Danielic allusions, possibly used at an earlier stage of the
prediction tradition than 'on the third day'. 18 It may be shown in 4 Ezra
5. 4 (cf. 14. 11-13) that 'after the third (period)' became for some a way
of referring to the beginning of the eschatological signs.
The first and second features found in Dan 7. 25 (the future form of
TrapaSt'Soo/ii and the phrase 'into the hands of) appear in the parallels to
Mark 9. 31, Matt 17. 22 and Luke 9. 44, which predict that 'the Son of
Man is (destined) to be delivered (/zeXXet napaSiSoodat) into the hands of
men'. Black argues that jue'XXet here reflects 'the apocalyptic Set' found in
Luke 24. 7 (cf. 8ei also in Mark 8. 31, pars.). He regards Luke 24. 7 as a
variant and further form of the logion at Mark 9 . 3 1 , and thinks it is from
a traditional non-Markan source, from an Aramaic speaking milieu.19 The
del may be an allusion to Dan 2. 28, 29 (LXX and Theodotion), 45 (Theo-
dotion), where Set 'signifies conformity with an apocalyptic eschatological
regularity'; only here in Jewish apocalyptic literature is 8ei used strictly
with this meaning.20 Mark may have changed the future tense in a pre-
Markan saying to the present in 9. 31, to emphasize that at this point in
his narrative the passion has begun.21 Matthew and Luke may have inde-
pendently used the future because they were familiar with the traditional
saying. Where 7rapa5i'5orat occurs elsewhere in the Markan passion contexts,
neither Matthew nor Luke change it to a future tense. Cf. Mark 14. 21 (par.
Matt 26. 64; Luke 22. 22) and Mark 14. 41 (par. Matt 26. 45); the be-
trayal by Judas has not yet fully taken place in either instance, but it is
imminent. 22 The change by Matthew and Luke from 'after three days' to
'on the third day' is understandable in the light of the time scheme of the
passion-resurrection narratives,23 and Christian use of texts like Hos. 6. 2.
What I am arguing is that behind Mark 9.31 lies a passion prediction which
combined all three elements from Dan 7. 25.
(2) In addition, there may be an allusion to Dan 12. 2 in the mention
in the predictions of resurrection: in Mark 8. 31; 9. 9, 31; 10. 34; Luke
18. 32; 24. 7, 46: duaoTrjoerat; in Matt 16.21; 17. 9, 22; 20. 19; 27. 63;

http://journals.cambridge.org Downloaded: 25 Apr 2015 IP address: 129.128.216.34

212 JANE SCHABERG
Luke 9. 22: gyepdrioeTCU.24 As has been noted in section II above, Collins
points out that in Dan 12. 1-3 (as in 7. 13-14, 18 and 7. 22, 27) Daniel
looks beyond the suffering and judgment to describe the eschatological
kingdom. This is element d of the common pattern Collins speaks of in
the four accounts which focus on the career of Antiochus. 25 In Dan 12.
1-3 we find the promise:
At that time26 shall arise Michael, the great prince who has charge of your people. And
there shall be a time of trouble, such as never has been since there was a nation till that
time, but at that time your people shall be delivered (D^D'), every one whose name
shall be found written in the book. And many (D'SI) of those who sleep in the dust of
the earth shall awake OTp*; LXX: draaTTjaoiraijTheodotion:tteyepBrioovTCii),some
to everlasting life and some to shame and everlasting contempt. And those who are
wise (D^DEDn) shall shine like the brightness of the firmament; and those who turn
many to righteousness (D'a^n yiXB), like the stars for ever and ever.
The terms D'^rwn and D"mn •'pHsn are references to the suffering Servant
song of Second Isaiah, and witness to a pluralization of the figure of the
Servant in the wise teachers of the Danielic community. 28 A special group
among the people is being referred to here, 29 those who will be elevated to
join the heavenly host, the angels, and they are described here in terms
used elsewhere to describe angels.30 The D^SBWD are spoken of in Daniel 11
as the leaders of active but non-violent resistance to the Hellenizing policies
of Antiochus. Their vindication in 12. 3 is a transcendence of death, con-
ceived of as a vertical, spatial transition from one sphere of life to another,
higher sphere where there is a lasting form of life.31 Those mentioned in
12. 2 who will wake to everlasting life are the holy ones of chapter 7, the
faithful in general. In my opinion, they are also to be identified with the
D^srca of v. 3. In contrast, DiLella argues that these are a special group
among the faithful, singled out for special honour; they do not appear in
chapter 7. But in 12.10 there is the prediction that 'Many (n-ai) will purify
themselves and make themselves white and be refined (cf. 11.35); but the
wicked shall do wickedly; and none of the wicked shall understand; but
those who are wise (o-^opnn) will understand.' DiLella himself admits that
the latter term seems to refer here not only to the leaders of the people,
but also to the faithful can. 32 Moreover, it is difficult to see what real dif-
ference the author would see in the 'everlasting life' of the resurrected and
the exalted life of the DHl?D»a. The destiny of those spoken of in 12. 1-3,
then, has bearing on an understanding of the exaltation of one like a son of
man in 7. 13-14, the heavenly representative of the holy ones. The author
of Daniel has not made this connection explicit.
(3) The third Danielic text which has some verbal agreement with the
Synoptic passion-resurrection predictions is, of course, Dan 7. 13. I find
in Mark 9. 31 and related texts an application to the figure of one like a
son of man of predictions of the suffering of the holy ones of the Most
High (7. 25) and of the resurrection of the B'bovn and their followers (12.

http://journals.cambridge.org Downloaded: 25 Apr 2015 IP address: 129.128.216.34

 NEW TESTAMENT PASSION-RESURRECTION PREDICTIONS 2J 3
2). The phrase 6 vibe; TOV dvdpdjnov is part of a tissue of Danielic allusions,
a pointer to the heavenly figure who comes on the clouds to receive glory
and the final kingdom. It need not have been understood at an early stage
of the prediction tradition as a title or concept; rather, as Hooker puts it,
it may have been a reference to a role. 33 Whether at some stage previous
to the formulation of a prediction with the Danielic allusions considered
above, there was a prediction of suffering, or of vindication, or of suffering
and vindication together, without these Danielic allusions, in which the
phrase 6 utdc TOV dvdpcbirov had merely generic significance or represented
a circumlocution for the first person, are questions which cannot be entered
into here. 34 It should be noted, however, that the strangeness of the arthrous
phrase in the Greek would seem to be already a reference to Dan 7. 13. 35
In summary, verbal agreement is found in several Synoptic passion-
resurrection predictions with
(1) Dan 7. 25: in (a) the future form of 7rapa5i'5a>jui corresponding to the
Hithpe'el p r r r r of the MT, and/or to the future indicative passive irapa-
dodrioeTai of the LXX or SodrjaeraL of Theodotion; (b) the phrase 'into
the hands of; (c) the statement that the vindication of the Son of Man
will occur 'after three days' (juerd rpelq rjjuepac), which I have argued may
be an interpretation and shortening of Daniel's 'a time, two times and half
a time'.
(2) Dan 12. 2 in the mention of resurrection; and
(3) Dan 7. 13 in the presence of the phrase 6 vio<; TOV dvdpebnov. Let me
stress that taken alone, none of these verbal similarities indicates that Dan
7-12 is being evoked. It is their constellation and combination which I find
convincingly argues for an intended link with Daniel.

IV.

Other scholars have suggested aspects of the theory presented here, but
their insights remain only suggestions unsupported by close analysis of the
texts. Lindars finds in the Synoptic passion predictions the idea of the
exaltation of Jesus as the Son of Man following the passion. He thinks it
is probable that this idea was deduced in the first place from the vision in
Dan 7. 15-27, although only the people suffer and one like a son of man
is concerned exclusively with the stage of glory in Daniel. Identification of
the one like a son of man with the holy ones could lead, he argues, to the
above interpretation; but Lindars does not show precisely how this identi-
fication can be indicated by the verbal allusions.36 Hooker remarks that
the Markan passion predictions show Jesus handed over into the power of
'Gentiles who have appropriated an authority which does not belong to
them'; but she does not link Dan 7. 13 to 7. 25. According to her, the Son
of Man must suffer because his rightful authority is being denied. She holds

http://journals.cambridge.org Downloaded: 25 Apr 2015 IP address: 129.128.216.34

214 JANE SCHABERG
that the idea of rejection and suffering is derived from the 'Son of Man
concept' itself.37 E. Best explains the divine necessity as preordained in
Scripture, with reference to Mark 9. 12; 14. 21. He notes the use of napa-
8i8cjHL in Mark 14. 21 and Dan 7. 25, and finds in Dan 7. 13, 21, 25, 27
(as in Ps 80. 18) a scriptural suffering Son of Man.38 Best remarks, 'Whether
this is the ultimate origin of the use of the term Son of Man in the suffering
sayings is another matter altogether.' He thinks the reference in Mark 14.
21 is vague because Mark received it from the tradition and did not know
what the precise reference was. L. Hartman sees the influence of Dan 7.
25 on the Little Apocalypse (in Mark 13. 9, 11) where it is said that 'they
will deliver up' (napadcdoovow) the disciples to councils. He has not, how-
ever, seen the influence of this verse from Daniel on the passion-resurrection
predictions. 39 In my opinion, the analysis offered here of the verbal allusions
confirms the basic insight of these scholars that Daniel is indeed being
evoked in these NT texts.
Most often, however, three texts other than Daniel have been suggested
as the OT basis of the passion predictions. (1) Isa 53. S Targ. and Isa 53.
12 LXX ('because his soul was delivered to death'). Here the passive"lonnn/
irapa8i8oodai appears, but without the prepositional phrase vTt?/el<; xeipa?
or a time reference. Jeremias goes so far as to say that there is no other
passage than Isaiah 53 with which the statement that God was giving up his
Son to death could have been connected. 40 (2) Jer 33. 24 LXX ('. . . the
hand of Achicam son of Saphan was with Jeremias, to prevent his being
delivered into the hands of the people'). 41 This text does preserve the
Semitic idiom, 'to be delivered into the hands of someone', but has no
other features in common with the Synoptic passion predictions. (3) Ps
118. 22 (the stone which the builders rejected [direSoiciixaoau] has become
the head of the corner'); cf. Mark 8. 31, par Luke 9. 22; Luke 17. 25. Fuller
thinks that in this OT passage, the earliest Palestinian church sought con-
firmation of the idea that Jesus was rejected by men yet his authority was
vindicated by God. 'This is the earliest interpretation of Christ's death and
resurrection.' 42 But the use of the allusion to Ps 118. 22 may be secondary
to the use of Dan 7. 13, 25. The Set from Dan 2. 28 in these predictions
suggests that the stone of Daniel 2 may have been the bridge between
Daniel 7 and Ps 118. 22 (by means of a wordplay: px[ stone] - p[son]). 4 3
The strong combination of allusions to Dan 7-12 which have been
pointed out here indicates that Daniel has a better claim to be the basis of
the NT predictions than the three OT texts mentioned above. I think it is
most likely that at one time it was clearly understood that the suffering
(and resurrection) of the Son of Man was 'written' (Mark 9. 12; Luke 18.
31-32; Mark 14. 21 [pars. Matt 26. 24; Luke 22. 2 2 ] ; cf. Luke 24. 46) in
Daniel. Of these NT passages, only Luke 18. 31-32 (cf. 24. 46) speaks of
resurrection being 'written' of the Son of Man. Mark 9. 12, however, pre-
dicts that the Son of Man 'should suffer many things and be treated with

http://journals.cambridge.org Downloaded: 25 Apr 2015 IP address: 129.128.216.34

 NEW TESTAMENT PASSION-RESURRECTION PREDICTIONS 215
contempt {k^ovbewqd^y in the context of a discussion about the Son of
Man rising from the dead (v. 9). Mark 9. 12 may allude to Dan 4. 17,
which states that 'the Most High rules the human kingdom, and he gives
it to whom he will, and raises up over it the lowliest C?Dtf; Theodotion:
4%ov8evrina) of human beings'.

v.
What can be said of the meaning of the Danielic allusions in Mark 9. 31
pars, and related texts? The son of man's suffering, involving death,44 will
be short,4s and end in final triumph. 'After three days' here, if it depends
on the 'time, two times and half a time' of Dan 7. 25, carries the escha-
tological associations of that text. It is the period immediately preceding
the end, the resurrection of 'many' and final reward and punishment. This
does not appear to be an ex eventu formulation, a formulation, that is,
based on knowledge of the specifics of the fate of Jesus of Nazareth. In-
deed, if Mark 9. 31 is considered the oldest gospel formulation of this tra-
dition, the vagueness of the phrase 'into the hands of men' may preclude
even the intention to identify the killers of the son of man as Gentiles
(contrast the reference to the Gentile Antiochus in Dan 7. 25). The pre-
diction can be read as a simple statement of impending doom and vindi-
cation. If, however, it is read in line with Daniel as involving Gentile
hostility, the statement may imply no more than a perception that the
Roman government or that government as it exercised power through the
house of Herod (witness the execution of John the Baptist by Herod Anti-
pas and the execution of James by Herod Agrippa I [Acts 12. 1-2]) was
on a collision course with segments of the Jewish population, with whom
the son of man is in some way identified.
The Danielic one like a son of man may have been understood by the
framer(s) of this tradition as in some sense a corporate or inclusive one
(although I recognize the inadequacy of these terms).46 It is impossible,
without a study of the full development of the passion-resurrection pre-
dictions, and of whatever relation they may have had to the teaching of
the historical Jesus, to be much more precise than this. Is the son of man
thought of as a concrete, mortal individual destined to share in the suffering
of the holy ones, to suffer in their place or on their behalf, and also to par-
ticipate in their final vindication? Is he their representative or leader who
sums up their existence and experience in himself? Or is he a corporate sym-
bol rather than a distinct individual, a way of expressing a certain belief
about the fate of any and every faithful person, and of issuing a challenge?47
If the earliest tradition is attributable to the historical Jesus, the prediction
as I have interpreted it here can be understood in any of these ways just
delineated, carrying some implication of his own self-understanding. For
those passing on the tradition after his death and the rise of belief in his

http://journals.cambridge.org Downloaded: 25 Apr 2015 IP address: 129.128.216.34

216 JANE SCHABERG
resurrection, this corporate dimension would fade as the notion of sharing
in his fate replaces the notion of his sharing in the fate of the holy ones
(see below); but not fade completely, since the early community's suffering
(at the hands of Jews and of Gentiles) was seen in the light of his. If, on
the other hand, the tradition is not traceable to the historical Jesus, the
application of Dan 7. 25; 12. 2 would appear to carry the meaning that
Jesus took on himself the sufferings of the holy ones (of all time? of his
own time?) and experienced in anticipation their vindication, and to be as
well a way of expressing belief that Jesus as son of man shares in the tribu-
lations and future victory of the early church.
A contrast with the man from the sea in 4 Ezra 13 and the son of man
in the Similitudes (two figures whose portraits also draw on Daniel 7) will
highlight the concept of the son of man in the NT passion-resurrection
predictions. In 4 Ezra 13. 5, 8-11 (cf. w. 31-38), the man conquers the
'innumerable multitude' gathered to make war against him. Afterwards he
summons to himself a peaceable multitude (13. 12; cf. w. 3 9-50). In neither
the vision nor its interpretation is there any indication that he is a heavenly
counterpart of an earthly people, sharing their sufferings and rehabilitation;
rather, he is the transcendent leader of the faithful. In the Similitudes,
Daniel's one like a son of man has been reinterpreted as an individual
heavenly messiah, God's vice-gerent at the judgment. He is revealed as the
champion of the downtrodden, his description containing words and
phrases which recall the Servant of Second Isaiah.48 But the function of
vicarious and redemptive suffering is not ascribed to him.49 In spite of the
fact that he is directly related to the community of heavenly and human
righteous ones, he does not suffer or die as they do,50 although his mani-
festation entails their triumph.S1 As Collins remarks,
The fact that he is preserved from their sufferings makes him a figure of pure power
and glory and an ideal embodiment of the hopes of the persecuted righteous. The
efficaciousness of the 'son of man1 figure requires that he be conceived as other than
the community, since he must possess the power and exaltation which they lack.52
With the identification of the son of man with the exalted Enoch in 1 Enoch
71, there is still no dimension of suffering for the son of man figure. There
is likewise 'no attempt to provide an example for human, earthly life
through the figure of the "son of man"', since no reference is made to
the earthly life of Enoch, only to his translation from earth to heaven.
Enoch is a 'model' only in that he has made the transition.53 Like Daniel 7,
then, 4 Ezra 13 and the Similitudes focus on the glory of a heavenly figure
as compensation for the present trials of the community.
Whatever be the correct reading of the intention of the one(s) who ori-
ginally made the allusions to Daniel 7-12 in the NT passion-resurrection
predictions, it is clear that the efficaciousness of this son of man figure
does not require that he be conceived as other than the community. His

http://journals.cambridge.org Downloaded: 25 Apr 2015 IP address: 129.128.216.34

 NEW TESTAMENT PASSION-RESURRECTION PREDICTIONS 217
efficaciousness rather lies in his complete identification.54 The presence in
some of the predictions of specific references to the course of events in
the life of Jesus of Nazareth as depicted in the passion narratives (rejection
by elders and chief priests and scribes [Mark 8. 31 pars.; Mark 10. 33-34,
par. Matt 20. 18-19]; deliverance to the Gentiles to be mocked, spit on,
scourged [Mark 10. 33-34, pars.]; crucifixion (Matt 20. 19; 22. 6; Luke
24. 7 ] ; betrayal [Mark 14. 21, pars.]) is evidence that at some stage the
son of man was understood as a self-reference made by Jesus and as a title
referring mainly or even only to him. ss There are some indications, how-
ever, that for the evangelists the title retained some sort of corporate dimen-
sion. In Mark, for example, all three passion-resurrection predictions are
followed by teaching on the subject of discipleship, as though the term Son
of Man has been associated with the disciples 'and could even be interpreted
as including them; the destiny of the Son of Man extends beyond Jesus
himself to those who follow him' S6 - as model. This is not to argue that
the kind of corporate understanding of the figure in Mark is identical with
that which is found in Daniel. Nor is it really identical with that which may
underlie the attribution of the Danielic texts concerning the holy ones of
the Most High and the D^DWD to one like a son of man: in this underlying
insight, it seems to me, it is their sufferings and triumphs which he shares.

VI.

Finally, I wish to consider the connection made along somewhat similar

lines in the Johannine 'passion predictions' between Dan 7. 13 and 12. 1.
Again, these are two texts which belong to element d of Collins' common
pattern, the description of the eschatological state of salvation. The Fourth
Gospel has three sayings about the Son of Man being 'lifted up' (v4ju)6rjuai):
John 3. 13-14: 'As Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, so must
(Set) the Son of Man be lifted up, that whoever believes in him may have
eternal life.'
8. 28: 'When you have lifted up the Son of Man, then you will know that
I am he, and that I do nothing on my own authority but speak thus as the
Father taught me.'
12. 31-34: '"Now is the judgment of this world, now shall the ruler of
this world be cast out; and I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw
all to myself", He said this to show by what death he was to die (rjfieXkev
dmodvQOKew). The crowd answered him, "We have heard from the law that
the Christ remains forever. How can you say that the Son of Man must
(Set) be lifted up? Who is this Son of Man?" ' 57
These are comparable to the Synoptic passion-resurrection predictions,
in that they refer to future death and vindication. The fact that there are
three may indicate that the pattern of three predictions is pre-Markan. The

http://journals.cambridge.org Downloaded: 25 Apr 2015 IP address: 129.128.216.34

218 JANE SCHABERG
Aramaic equivalent of i>\pcodr)vai is fypitx, which means both 'to be exalted'
and 'to be crucified or hanged'. 58 Being lifted up in death and being lifted
up to God are comprehended as a single act; exaltation is not a separate
consequence but an integral part of the passion in the Fourth Gospel.59
All three of these sayings seem to be interpretations of the movement of
the one like a son of man in Dan 7. 13 as an upward one. John 3. 13 and
12. 31-34 use t\l/(jodr\vai as a divine passive, so the meaning of exaltation is
primary. 'The Jews' (8. 22) will do the lifting up in 8. 28, so the meaning
of crucifixion is primary.
It has often been suggested that the verb v^ccdrjuai is drawn from Isa.
52. 13 LXX, where it is said of the Servant that he 'will be exalted (yi/zco-
flrjaerai and glorified exceedingly'.60 It is more likely, however, that this
verb is an allusion to Dan 12. 1, which speaks of the time when 'your
people shall be delivered (o^a11), every one whose name shall be found
written in the book'. The LXX translates or interprets zhi? by O\l/co0r?ae-
rat. The possibility of a link between these Johannine sayings and Dan 12.
1 is supported by the mention in John 3. 14 (cf. 12. 25) and Dan 12. 2 of
eternal life for some. Also we find in John 3. 14 and 12. 34 the 'apocalyp-
tic Set' which, it has been argued, is drawn from Dan 2. 28. That Daniel 7
is in the mind of the author of John 3. 1-21; 8. 21-30 and 12. 20-36 is
indicated by the fact that the Danielic motifs of the kingdom, of judgment
and of the effect of the exaltation upon 'all' appear in these passages. John
3. 14-15 occurs in the context of a discussion about the kingdom of God.
John 12. 31 (cf. 3. 19; 8. 13-18, 26, 50) relate the 'lifting up' of the Son
of Man to judgment. In John 12. 32 we have the statement that 'all' will
be drawn to Jesus when he is lifted up. John, according to Lindars, uses
the title Son of Man 'with full awareness of its relation to the Danielic
vision and to current apocalyptic speculations'. 61
As in the Synoptic passion-resurrection predictions, then, there may be
in the Johannine predictions an interpretation of the fate of one like a son
of man by means of a text which originally referred to the faithful people
of Israel. In both cases the interpretation of one like a son of man is in line
with and further develops what can be read as the implications of Daniel
itself; these implications, however, were not seen in Daniel by the authors
of 4 Ezra 13 and the Similitudes. In the NT texts considered, the suffering
and exaltation of the people is the suffering and exaltation of this figure.
We cannot enter here into lengthy discussion of the question of a pre-
Johannine tradition behind these predictions, or of the question of their
relation to the Synoptic predictions. M. Black argues that a stratum of the
tradition earlier than the Synoptic predictions spoke not of the resurrection
but of the triumph and vindication, the exaltation of the Son of Man, along
with his rejection. He links John 3. 14; 8. 28; 12. 32, 34 with the exal-
tation of the 'one born in the likeness of men' in Phil 2. 6-11, and con-

http://journals.cambridge.org Downloaded: 25 Apr 2015 IP address: 129.128.216.34

 NEW TESTAMENT PASSION-RESURRECTION PREDICTIONS 219
siders John 3. 14 the Johannine version of this 'oldest stratum of the Son
of Man tradition'. The resurrection prediction would then be secondary,
yet at the same time a legitimate inference from the exaltation of the Son
of Man.62 If there is an allusion to Dan 12. 1 in the Johannine tradition,
however, the inference may be already present: the reader of Daniel knows
that the exaltation in 12. 1 is resurrection in 12. 2. As Brown remarks,
compared to many of the Synoptic sayings, the Johannine ones are far less
detailed and could be more ancient.63 Moule, on the other hand, sees the
Johannine use of the Son of Man with reference to suffering (at least by
implication) and glory as an extension of the Synoptic use.64 In my opinion,
it is not the mention of resurrection but of crucifixion which may be an
indication of later strata. The allusions to Dan 12. 1 in the Johannine
sayings (read at some point without an intended hint of crucifixion) are
as vague as the allusions to Dan 7. 25; 12. 2 in the Synoptic sayings. Exal-
tation or resurrection in both types of predictions may have originally been
no more than expressions of faith in the eschatological vindication of the
son of man who is all Israel.
Let me simply conclude here that the similarities between the two pre-
diction types, the Synoptic and the Johannine, are striking in their allusions
to Daniel. These similarities argue, to my mind, for a related exegetical
tradition. They also raise questions about the meaning and distinctiveness
of an early understanding of the destiny of Jesus of Nazareth and his identi-
fication with the suffering and triumphant Israel, questions I hope to ex-
plore at a later time.

NOTES
[1 ] This term is used here to refer to a method involving the interpretation or application of scrip-
ture (see D. W. Suter, Tradition and Composition in the Parables of Enoch [SBLDS 47; Missoula:
Scholars, 1979] 39).
[2] No attempt is made here to answer definitively the question of a hypothetical original passion-
resurrection prediction.
[3] Whether or not w. 18, 21-22, 25 and v. 27 refer to the same group is irrelevant to the present
discussion.
[4] Compare the interpretations of John J. Collins ('The Son of Man and the Saints of the Most
High in the Book of Daniel', JBL 93 [1974] 50-66; the Apocalyptic Vision of the Book of Daniel
[Missoula: Scholars, 1977] and A. A. DiLella ('The One in Human Likeness and the Holy Ones of
the Most High in Daniel 7', CBQ 39 [1977] 1-19; with L. F. Hartman, The Book of Daniel [AB
23; Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1978]), in regard to the identity of this figure.
[5] Hartman (Daniel, 207) translates H*?y in 7. 25 as 'he will devastate', on the basis of the use
of the cognate Hebrew n"73 in 1 Chron 17.9 with the sense of oppressing people.
[6] M. Hooker, 'Is the Son of Man problem really insoluble?' Text and Interpretation (ed. E. Best
and R. McL. Wilson; Cambridge: Cambridge University, 1979) 166.
[7] Collins,Apocalyptic Vision, 132.
[8] Ibid., 133. The fourth element is missing in the third parallel. Dan 9. 24-27 is a similar formu-
lation, but it contains no mythological elements.
[9] Even though the calamity of three and a half years, for the author, 'is specifically expressed in

http://journals.cambridge.org Downloaded: 25 Apr 2015 IP address: 129.128.216.34

220 JANE SCHABERG
the debasement of the Law and the liturgical periods of the festivals' (A. Lacocque, The Book of
Daniel [Atlanta: John Knox, 1979] 154), it is the holy ones (and not the times or the law) who
are the they' of the last clause (Lacocque, Daniel, 149; DiLella, Daniel, 207). In 1 Enoch 38. 5
where the kings and mighty are 'given into the hands of the righteous and holy' (cf. 48. 9), there
may be a reversal of the theme of Dan 7. 25.
[10] N. Perrin notes that one cannot distinguish between St66vai and irapaSiSovai in the Koine
(Towards an Interpretation of the Gospel of Mark', Christology and a Modern Pilgrimage [ed.
H. D. Betz;SBL, 1971] 73, n. 26).
[11] There is a further Danielic allusion to Dan 7. 21 (see Theodotion and Dan 7. 8 LXX) in
Rev 11. 7b (cf. 12.7a).
[12] An allusion to Dan 7. 25 in Rev 11. 9, 11 is recognized by J. M. Ford (Revelation [AB 38;
Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1975] 170). She suggests that the computation of the epoch in
Daniel is an interpretation of Hos 6. 2 (177).
[13] J. Jeremias thinks that Mark 9. 31 is the earliest passion prediction because of its brevity,
indefiniteness and terminology, but he does not connect it to Daniel (New Testament Theology
[New York: Scribner's, 1971] 281). See below, n. 22.
[14] H. K. McArthur, '"On the Third Day'", NTS 18 (1971/2) 81-6;Cf. Delling, 'foepa', TDNT
2(1964)949-50.
[15] G. Strecker, 'The Passion- and Resurrection Predictions in Mark's Gospel', Int 22 (1968),
429, n. 19. See also N. Walker, 'After Three Days',NovT4 (1960) 261-2.
[16] Strecker, 'The Passion- and Resurrection Predictions', 429.
[17] N. Perrin, 'Towards an Interpretation', 27; H. Todt, The Son of Man in the Synoptic Tra-
dition (London: SCM, 1965) 185; M. Black, The "Son of Man" Passion Sayings in the Gospel
Tradition', ZNW 60 (1969) 5; Delling, ^nepa\ 949. McArthur (' "On the Third Day"', 86) thinks
that Hos 6. 2 is 'the outstanding, single scriptural passage behind the "on the third day" tradition,
although the phrase "according to the Scriptures" in 1 Cor. xv.4 may have been based on the
general "third day" motif which the Rabbis found in numerous passages [such as Gen. 22. 4; 42.
17;Exod. 19. 16; Jonah 2. l;Esth. 5. 1] and not exclusively on Hos. vi.2'.
[18] Contrast Strecker, who argues that 'after three days' may show the influence of Jonah 2. 1,
but in the light of 1 Cor 15. 4 'this notice can hardly claim priority' ('Passion- and Resurrection
Predictions', 429, n. 20).
[19] M. Black, 'The "Son of Man" Passion Sayings', 3.
[20] Todt, Son of Man, 188.
[21] M. Hooker, The Son of Man in Mark (Montreal: McGill University, 1967) 135. E. P. Gould
(The Gospel according to St. Mark [ICC; Edinburgh: Clark, 1896] 172) remarks that the present
is used here to denote the certainty of the future event.
[22] Jeremias, on the other hand, thinks that Mark 9. 31a, with the present tense in contrast to
the future in the second part of the verse, goes back to Aramaic tradition and was current indepen-
dently (cf. Mark 14. 41). It points to an underlying Aramaic participle ODOriO) denoting the near
future and wrongly rendered as present. He argues that 9. 31a could have been received from Jesus
as a mashal (mysterious saying or riddle: God will [soon] deliver up the man to men) forming the
basis or ancient nucleus for the (para)didonai tradition and hence ultimately the passion predictions
(New Testament Theology, 281, 295-6). Perrin agrees that 9. 31a is pre-Markan (Towards an
Interpretation', 71, n. 10).
[23] Jeremias,New Testament Theology, 281.
[24] Some of the Synoptic passion sayings have no allusion to resurrection (Mark 9. 12; 10. 45,
par.; 14. 21, 41, pars.; Matt 26. 2, 45; Luke 9. 44; 13. 32-33; 17. 25). These are regarded by some
as earlier than those which mention passion-resurrection (see Black, 'The "Son of Man" Passion
Sayings', 7; 'The Son of Man Problem in Recent Research and Debate', BJRL 45 [1963] 317;
N. Perrin, Towards an Interpretation', 23-4). However, see below, pp. 216-17.
[25] Collins, Apocalyptic Vision, 162; see above, n. 8.
[26] If Dan 12. 1-3 is understood as continuing the prediction of 11. 40-45, the time intended
by the author is the period after Antiochus' death (DeLella, Daniel, 305).
[27] A universal resurrection is probably not envisioned (G. W. E. Nickelsburg, Resurrection,
Immortality and Eternal Life in Intertestamental Judaism [HTS 26; Cambridge, MA: Harvard,
1972] 19, 23; DiLella, Daniel, 307-9).

http://journals.cambridge.org Downloaded: 25 Apr 2015 IP address: 129.128.216.34

 NEW TESTAMENT PASSION-RESURRECTION PREDICTIONS 221

(28] See Nickelsburg, Resurrection, 24-6; H.L.Ginsberg, 'The Oldest Interpretation of the
Suffering Servant', VT 3 (1953) 400-4;Collins, Apocalyptic Vision, 170.
[29] DiLella, Daniel, 101; J. A. Montgomery, The Book of Daniel (ICC: Edinburgh: Clark, 1950)
471; Nickelsburg, Resurrection, 24.
[30] Collins, Apocalyptic Vision, 136-8.
[31] Ibid., 195, 208; 'Apocalyptic Eschatology as the Transcendence of Death', CBQ 36 (1974)
30, 34, 37. Collins stresses that eschatological formulations are essentially projections of hopes
experienced in depth in the present (41).
[32] See DiLella, Daniel, 100-2, 313. [33] Hooker,'Insoluble?', 167.
[34] G. Vermes contends that the association between 6 vlbs TOU dvepwirov and Dan 7. 13 con-
stitutes a secondary midrashic stage of development (Jesus the Jew [NY: Macmillan, 1974] 177-
86, 260-1; 'The "Son of Man" Debate', JSNT 1 [1978] 28.
[35] C. F. D. Moule, 'Neglected Features in the Problem of "the Son of Man" \Neues Testament
undKirche (ed. J. Gnilka; Freiburg: Herder, 1974) 421.
[36] B. Lindars, 'The Son of Man in the Johannine Christology', Christ and the Spirit in the New
Testament (ed. B. Lindars and S. Smalley; Cambridge, Cambridge University, 1973) 57, n. 32.
[37] Hooker, Son of Man, 163, 108-9, 111, 113, 115.
[38] E. Best, The Temptation and the Passion: the Markan Soteriology (Cambridge: Cambridge
University, 1965) 164, following W. D. Davies and C. H. Dodd.
[39] L. Hartman, Prophecy Interpreted (Uppsala: Almquist and Wiksells, 1966) 150, 168.
[40] Jeremias, New Testament Theologv, p. 296; cf. Black, 'The "Son of Man" Passion Sayings',
4.
[41] Todt, Son of Man, 161.
[42] R. H. Fuller, The Foundations of New Testament Christology (NY: Scribner's, 1965) 152-3.
[43] See M. Black, 'The Christological Use of the Old Testament in the New Testament', ATS 18
(1971/2) 12. There are indications in several later texts that Daniel 2 and 7 were linked by means
of this wordplay (see / Enoch 52. \-6;4Ezra 13. 6-7, 36; Josephus, Ant. 10. 2l0;PirqeR. El. 11;
Tanhuma B Terumah 6 [46b]).
[44] Jeremias points out that -napaSiSoodai used without further explanation means to deliver up
to death (New Testament Theology, 296). In the Danielic context, some of the faithful 'fall'(11.
32-33).
[45] See Jeremias (ibid., 285) for discussion of 'three days' meaning 'soon', an indefinite but not
particularly long period of time (also Hooker, Son of Man, 115).
[46] The expression 'corporate personality' as used by H. Wheeler Robinson and others is applied
to an aspect of 'ancient Hebrew thought' said to involve the ideas of corporate responsibility and
representation, and of 'psychic community' or 'psychical unity'. But see criticisms of J. W. Roger-
son, 'The Hebrew Conception of Corporate Personality: a Reexamination', JTS 21 (1970) 1-16.
Moule (The Origin of Christology [Cambridge: Cambridge University, 1977] 47-96), wrestling
with what 'the understanding and experience of Christ as corporate' might mean in the intellectual
context of the twentieth century, speaks of Christ as an inclusive person, more than individual,
more than representative; in short, like the omnipresent God.
[47] The famous theory of T. W. Manson, that the Son of Man in the gospels is an embodiment
of the Remnant idea, is based in part on Manson's understanding of the Danielic one like a son of
man as a corporate 'ideal' or 'idea', actualized in history by groups and individuals. Manson sees
Jesus' ministry as the attempt to create the Son of Man, the kingdom of the holy ones, 'to realize
in Israel the ideal contained in the term'. He thinks that what was in the mind of Jesus was that he
and his followers together should share the destiny of the Son of Man, should together be the Son
of Man. That he suffered alone was due to the failure of the people and then of the disciples to rise
to the demands of the'idea'of the Son of Man; Jesus becomes the Son of Man (the ideal incarnated)
by a process of elimination. But in Paul's writings the idea is carried to further realization by a pro-
cess of inclusion (The Teaching of Jesus [Cambridge: Cambridge University, 1963; reprint of 1935
edition] 35, 227-8, 232-5). Manson unfortunately presented his theory only in broad outline,
and did not apply it in sufficient detail to individual texts, enmeshing it with his presentation of
the thinking of the historical Jesus. See also John J. Collins' discussion of 'idea' as a Hellenistic

http://journals.cambridge.org Downloaded: 25 Apr 2015 IP address: 129.128.216.34

222 JANE SCHABERG

category which 'fails to do justice to the concrete vitality of mythological thinking' (The Heavenly
Representative: The "Son of Man" in the Similitudes of Enoch', Ideal Figures in Ancient Judaism
[ed. G. W. E. Nickelsburg and John J. Collins; SBLSCS 12; Chico: Scholars, 1980] 129, n. 28).
But something of what Manson calls the 'challenge' may be present at some stage of the NT passion-
resurrection tradition.
[48] Compare 1 Enoch 48 with Isa 49. 1-8; 1 Enoch 49. 4 with Isa 42. 1; and perhaps / Enoch
38. 2 with Isa 53. 11 (G. W. E. Nickelsburg, 'Enoch, Book of, IDBSup, p. 266). Nickelsburg also
considers that the principal judgment scene in 1 Enoch 62-3 is a variation of a traditional expan-
sion of Isaiah 52-3, in which the exalted one executes judgment on his former persecutors.
[49 ] See D. S. Russell, The Method and Message of Jewish Apocalyptic (Philadelphia: Westminster,
1964) 328, 339; Nickelsburg, Resurrection, 71.
[50] As far as I can see, the only text which might imply that he does die, linking him as the
Righteous One with the community of righteous ones, is / Enoch 47. 1-4. 'And in those days shall
have ascended the prayer of the righteous (ones), and the blood of the righteous (one) from the
earth before the Lord of Spirits. In those days the holy ones who dwell above in the heavens shall
unite with one voice and supplicate and pray [and praise, and give thanks and bless the name of the
Lord of Spirits] on behalf of the blood of the righteous (ones) which has been shed .. . And the
hearts of the holy were filled with joy because the number of the righteous had been offered, and
the prayer of the righteous (ones) had been heard, and the blood of the righteous (one) had been
required before the Lord of Spirits.' But R. H. Charles (The Book of Enoch [Oxford: Clarendon,
1912] 90) takes the singular 'righteous' in these verses as collective (so also M. A. Knibb, The
Ethiopic Book of Enoch [2 vols.; Oxford: Clarendon, 1978] 132).
[51] Collins, 'The Heavenly Representative', 113-15. Collins comments that 'the hiddenness of
the "son of man" corresponds to the sufferings of the righteous community and the hidden charac-
ter of their destiny' (115).
[52] Ibid., 116. [53] Ibid., 123-4.
[54] Where a corporate interpretation of the Oanielic one like a son of man appears in the Rab-
binic literature, as far as I know there is no reference to that figure's suffering. SeeMidr. Pss. 2. 9
(Yalqut); 21. 5 (S. Buber edition); 47. 1-2 (implied?); Rashi; Ibn Ezra.
[55] In other NT Son of Man sayings which also, in my opinion, make use of Daniel (e.g. Mark
13. 26-27, par. Matt 24. 30-31; Matt 13. 36-43; 19. 28), the Son of Man is obviously distinguished
from his followers. These sayings appear to come from a stage of development of the Son of Man
tradition within the early community different from that which I have proposed for the tradition
behind Mark 9.31, and perhaps closer to that of these more specific passion-resurrection predic-
tions. See the proposal made by J. D. G. Dunn (Unity and Diversity in the New Testament [Phila-
delphia: Westminster, 1977] 39-40) concerning general lines of development of the tradition.
[56] Hooker, Son of Man, 139; contrast Best, Temptation and Passion, 122, 155. In Matt 25.
31-46 the identity between the Son of Man and the 'least' is conceived realistically (E. Schweizer,
The Good News According to Matthew [Atlanta: John Knox, 1975] 476).
[57] For suggestions concerning an earlier form or position of this passage, see Verities, Jesus the
Jew, 162 and R. E. Brown, The Gospel According to John (2 vols.; Garden City, NY: Doubleday,
1966, 1970), 1.478.
[58] Acts 5. 30-31 also seems to play with the double meaning in an earlier Semitic saying. Black
(The "Son of Man" Passion Sayings', 7), C. Colpe ('6 in6<r TOV dvdpwnov, TDNT 8 [1972] 466)
and Brown (Gospel According to John, 1. 146) point out that other verbs in Hebrew and Greek
have a similar twofold use. Since the Greek is not obvious as a pun, it is clearly explained in 12. 33
(cf. 18. 31-32) that the reference is to crucifixion.
[59] A. J. B. Higgins, Jesus and the Son of Man (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1964) 156; Brown,
Gospel According to John, 1. 146.
[60] On 3. 14 and 12. 32 see R. Schnackenburg, 'Der Menschensohn im Johannesevangelium',
NTS 11 (1964/5) 130-1, summarized and agreed with by Black, The "Son of Man" Passion
Sayings', 5-6. Also Lindars, The Son of Man in the Johannine Christology', 59; Brown, Gospel
According to John, 1.146, 478.
[61 ] B. Lindars, 'Re-enter the Apocalyptic Son of Man', NTS 22 (1975) 64.
[62] M. Black, The Son of Man Problem', 305-18.
[63] Brown, Gospel According to John, 1. 146.
[64] Moule, 'Neglected Features', 422-3.

http://journals.cambridge.org Downloaded: 25 Apr 2015 IP address: 129.128.216.34