Jesus Remembered: Christianity in the Making, vol. 1

Jesus Remembered: Christianity in the Making, vol. 1 Jesus Remembered: Christianity in the Making, vol. 1

khazarzar.skeptik.net
from khazarzar.skeptik.net More from this publisher
09.02.2013 Views

§16.4 How Did Jesus See His Own Role ? 37 For as the days of Noah were, so will be the coming of the Son of Man. 38 For as in those days before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day Noah entered the ark. 39 and they knew nothing until the flood came and swept them all away, the coming of the Son of Man. so too will be much suffering and be rejected by this generation. 26 Just as it was in the days of Noah, so too it will be in the days of the Son of Man. 27 They were eating and drinking, and marrying and being given in marriage, until the day Noah entered the ark, and the flood came and destroyed all of them. 28 Likewise, just as it was in the days of Lot: they were eating and drinking, buying and selling, planting and building, 29 but on the day that Lot left Sodom, it rained fire and sulphur from heaven and destroyed all of them 30—it will be like that on the day that the Son of Man is revealed'. Clearly Matthew and Luke are drawing on common material. But each has so integrated the material to his own schema that it is difficult to gain a clear impression of the tradition history involved. 202 In particular, it is unclear whether Luke has introduced talk of the day(s) of the Son of Man, a phrase unique to this section, and unclear quite what was in view with the phrase. 203 It seems to envisage a period (days) during which life continues in its normal round, only to be disrupted by sudden catastrophic judgment (day). That fits well enough with Jesus' warnings of impending judgment elsewhere. 204 But is the implication that the son of man is a figure like Noah and Lot, warning of impending judgment, and/or that the son of man will be the major figure in the impending judgment? In the former case we would then have a parallel to the sign of Jonah (§ 15.6b) and could probably infer that an indefinite/self-referential bar ' e nasa lies behind it. 205 The latter however gives only weak support for the suggestion that Dan. 7.13 is being alluded to, or that the phrase would be heard by Jesus' audience 'as a well-known term for the eschatological agent of judgment'. 206 Unfortunately, the possibility of drawing confident conclusions as to Jesus' own usage is not strong. 207 202. See further below, §16.4f. 203. See further Fitzmyer, Luke 2.1168-69. 204. See above, §12.4e. Cf. Pss. Sol. 18.5: 'the appointed day at the raising up (anaxei?) of his Messiah'. 205. Cf. Hampel, Menschensohn 59-70, 79-98. 206. Pace Becker, Jesus 206; the judgment in favour of authenticity by Bultmann (History 122) and Tödt {Son of Man 48-52) depends on the assumption that reference was to a wellknown figure (challenged by Perrin, Rediscovering 195-97). 207. Higgins argued for the more complex case that Luke 17.24, 26, 30 are the only genuine utterances of Jesus (apart from Luke 11.29-32 and 12.8-9), partly on the ground that they did not speak of his 'coming' (whether in exaltation or to earth), but only warned of the imminence of the (judgment) day (Son of Man 56-72, 79, 124). See also Lindars, Jesus Son of Man 94-97. 755

§16.4 How Did <strong>Jesus</strong> See His Own Role ?<br />

37 For as <strong>the</strong> days of Noah were, so will be <strong>the</strong><br />

com<strong>in</strong>g of <strong>the</strong> Son of Man. 38 For as <strong>in</strong> those<br />

days before <strong>the</strong> flood <strong>the</strong>y were eat<strong>in</strong>g and<br />

dr<strong>in</strong>k<strong>in</strong>g, marry<strong>in</strong>g and giv<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> marriage, until<br />

<strong>the</strong> day Noah entered <strong>the</strong> ark. 39 and <strong>the</strong>y knew<br />

noth<strong>in</strong>g until <strong>the</strong> flood came and swept <strong>the</strong>m all<br />

away,<br />

<strong>the</strong> com<strong>in</strong>g of <strong>the</strong> Son of Man.<br />

so too will be<br />

much suffer<strong>in</strong>g and be rejected by this generation.<br />

26 Just as it was <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> days of Noah, so too it<br />

will be <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> days of <strong>the</strong> Son of Man. 27 They<br />

were eat<strong>in</strong>g and dr<strong>in</strong>k<strong>in</strong>g, and marry<strong>in</strong>g and be<strong>in</strong>g<br />

given <strong>in</strong> marriage, until <strong>the</strong> day Noah entered <strong>the</strong><br />

ark, and <strong>the</strong> flood came and destroyed all of <strong>the</strong>m.<br />

28 Likewise, just as it was <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> days of Lot:<br />

<strong>the</strong>y were eat<strong>in</strong>g and dr<strong>in</strong>k<strong>in</strong>g, buy<strong>in</strong>g and sell<strong>in</strong>g,<br />

plant<strong>in</strong>g and build<strong>in</strong>g, 29 but on <strong>the</strong> day that Lot<br />

left Sodom, it ra<strong>in</strong>ed fire and sulphur from heaven<br />

and destroyed all of <strong>the</strong>m 30—it will be like that<br />

on <strong>the</strong> day that <strong>the</strong> Son of Man is revealed'.<br />

Clearly Mat<strong>the</strong>w and Luke are draw<strong>in</strong>g on common material. But each has so<br />

<strong>in</strong>tegrated <strong>the</strong> material to his own schema that it is difficult to ga<strong>in</strong> a clear impression<br />

of <strong>the</strong> tradition history <strong>in</strong><strong>vol</strong>ved. 202 In particular, it is unclear whe<strong>the</strong>r<br />

Luke has <strong>in</strong>troduced talk of <strong>the</strong> day(s) of <strong>the</strong> Son of Man, a phrase unique to this<br />

section, and unclear quite what was <strong>in</strong> view with <strong>the</strong> phrase. 203 It seems to envisage<br />

a period (days) dur<strong>in</strong>g which life cont<strong>in</strong>ues <strong>in</strong> its normal round, only to<br />

be disrupted by sudden catastrophic judgment (day). That fits well enough with<br />

<strong>Jesus</strong>' warn<strong>in</strong>gs of impend<strong>in</strong>g judgment elsewhere. 204 But is <strong>the</strong> implication<br />

that <strong>the</strong> son of man is a figure like Noah and Lot, warn<strong>in</strong>g of impend<strong>in</strong>g judgment,<br />

and/or that <strong>the</strong> son of man will be <strong>the</strong> major figure <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> impend<strong>in</strong>g judgment?<br />

In <strong>the</strong> former case we would <strong>the</strong>n have a parallel to <strong>the</strong> sign of Jonah<br />

(§ 15.6b) and could probably <strong>in</strong>fer that an <strong>in</strong>def<strong>in</strong>ite/self-referential bar ' e nasa<br />

lies beh<strong>in</strong>d it. 205 The latter however gives only weak support for <strong>the</strong> suggestion<br />

that Dan. 7.13 is be<strong>in</strong>g alluded to, or that <strong>the</strong> phrase would be heard by <strong>Jesus</strong>'<br />

audience 'as a well-known term for <strong>the</strong> eschatological agent of judgment'. 206<br />

Unfortunately, <strong>the</strong> possibility of draw<strong>in</strong>g confident conclusions as to <strong>Jesus</strong>' own<br />

usage is not strong. 207<br />

202. See fur<strong>the</strong>r below, §16.4f.<br />

203. See fur<strong>the</strong>r Fitzmyer, Luke 2.1168-69.<br />

204. See above, §12.4e. Cf. Pss. Sol. 18.5: '<strong>the</strong> appo<strong>in</strong>ted day at <strong>the</strong> rais<strong>in</strong>g up (anaxei?)<br />

of his Messiah'.<br />

205. Cf. Hampel, Menschensohn 59-70, 79-98.<br />

206. Pace Becker, <strong>Jesus</strong> 206; <strong>the</strong> judgment <strong>in</strong> favour of au<strong>the</strong>nticity by Bultmann (History<br />

122) and Tödt {Son of Man 48-52) depends on <strong>the</strong> assumption that reference was to a wellknown<br />

figure (challenged by Perr<strong>in</strong>, Rediscover<strong>in</strong>g 195-97).<br />

207. Higg<strong>in</strong>s argued for <strong>the</strong> more complex case that Luke 17.24, 26, 30 are <strong>the</strong> only genu<strong>in</strong>e<br />

utterances of <strong>Jesus</strong> (apart from Luke 11.29-32 and 12.8-9), partly on <strong>the</strong> ground that <strong>the</strong>y<br />

did not speak of his 'com<strong>in</strong>g' (whe<strong>the</strong>r <strong>in</strong> exaltation or to earth), but only warned of <strong>the</strong> imm<strong>in</strong>ence<br />

of <strong>the</strong> (judgment) day (Son of Man 56-72, 79, 124). See also L<strong>in</strong>dars, <strong>Jesus</strong> Son of Man<br />

94-97.<br />

755

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!