Divinity United

I was sorry to hear this week that Professor Maurice Casey passed away on 10 May 2014. There have been numerous postings in honour of Professor Casey, from longer interactions with his scholarship by his former student James Crossley (parts one and two ), Mark Goodacre , Larry Hurtado , and Dominic Mattos , to a number of announcements and annecdotes shared by Jim Davila , Jim West , Peter Head ( in comment ), and Chris Keith , as well as others I have not read. I had the privilege of meeting Maurice on a few occasions while I was working on my doctoral thesis on the Son of Man in John. Like Peter Head, I met Maurice at the annual conference on the use of the OT in the NT held at St. Deneiol's library in Hawarden. My paper was scheduled for the last day of the conference, and on the preceding evening, Maurice told me that my paper on the Son of Man in Daniel 7 and John 5:27 was the paper he was most looking forward to hearing. For a doctoral student who knew he was going to be ...

"Die danielische Vision eines 'wie ein Mensch ' aussehenden Himmelwesens und der sogenannte 'apokalyptische Menschensohn' spielen bei Joh keine Rolle" (Hartwig Thyen, Johannesevangelium , 205). I should say that I couldn't disagree more. 

Mark Goodacre posted a podcast entitled "Who is this 'Son of Man'?" over at NT Pod in early April. I have finally had time to listen to it, and as usual, he has done an excellent job introducing a NT topic (which is why I continue to make use of his podcasts in class). Goodacre points out that "the Son of Man" ( ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου ) was only spoken by Jesus and it is almost non-existent outside of the Gospels. So what did the phrase mean to Jesus? what did it mean to his followers? and why did early Christians essentially not use it? Such questions are why there is no end to scholarly discussion on the topic. I recognize that Goodacre is only giving an 11 minute introduction to a complex topic, but I did want to clarify a couple points. The Jewish Second Temple text the Similitudes of Enoch does make reference to a son of man figure and there are clear indications that Daniel 7 has influenced this text (chs. 46-48). Although Goodacre states that Similitu...

My copy of  'Who Is This Son of Man?' The Latest Scholarship on a Puzzling Expression of the Historical Jesus  (LNTS 390) edited by Larry W. Hurtado and Paul L. Owen just arrived the other day. I am looking forward to making my way through the essays. Hopefully, I will have time to add some comments on them from time to time. Larry Hurtado's summary essay is of most interest to me, especially since a number of the essays come from different perspectives on the Son of Man debate and do not represent a consensus as much as the varying positions on the questions surrounding  ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου  in the Gospels. The description on the back reads: 'This volume is the first ever collection of scholarly essays in English devoted specifically to the theme of the expression "son of man". It describes the major competing theories which have addressed, among others, the following questions. What is the original Aramaic expression that lies behind the Greek phrase, and...

Rafael Rodriguez has written two posts reviewing my book T he Apocalyptic Son of Man in the Gospel of John (WUNT II/249) on his blog Verily Verily . He is writing a review for BBR.