Jesus Remembered: Christianity in the Making, vol. 1

§16.5 How Did Jesus See His Own Role?
16.5. Son of Man: A Hypothesis
It is no wonder that the Son of Man material in the Jesus tradition has proved so
intractable for those seeking some significant measure of consensus for the results
of the quest. The degree of complexity of the data is unparalleled in the Jesus
tradition. The parallels on which historical research so much depends, both in
linguistic and apocalyptic usage, are so disputed as to dating and relevance as to
leave any historical hypothesis vulnerable to attack from more than one angle.
Moreover, the data have manifestly been developed. That is to say, the tradition
has not simply been performed and transmitted. In the course of the transmission
the understanding of the material has developed. The core elements have probably
changed in meaning while remaining the same in words ('the son of man' has
become 'the Son of Man'). An event in heaven (seen in vision, or in some final
climactic revelation) has possibly been developed to express hope for Jesus' return
from heaven.
How then did Jesus see his own role? The difficulty of hearing Jesus and of
gaining a perception of his self-understanding in relation to 'the son of man' is
more severe than in any other case within the Synoptic tradition. Not because
'the son of man' motif was wholly retrojected into the Jesus tradition at a later
stage of the traditioning process. Nor even because the motif has been greatly
modified. But simply because what was initially heard by the first disciples in Jesus'
use of the phrase 'the son of man' grew in significance during that earliest
traditioning period. It is precisely here, the nearest Jesus came to a selfreferential
role-description, that the impact of Good Friday and Easter quickly
caused these disciples to perceive (recognize?) a greater significance in that
phrase and to express that greater significance in their early performances of the
tradition, without making much (if any!) alteration to the actual words used.
If all that is so, can any firm hypothesis, let alone conclusion, be drawn? I
believe so.
a. At least we can be confident regarding the starting point, that is, that Jesus
himself used the phrase 'the son of man' (§ 16.4a). In terms of traditionhistorical
analysis the case could hardly be clearer or stronger. 225 When so many
issues in the Jesus tradition are difficult to resolve because the evidence is so
confusing, students should be relieved to find one instance at least where the
weight of evidence tips the balance so heavily in one direction. It is disappointing
that so many have allowed less clear-cut data or less weighty considerations
to undermine one of the firmest findings available to us. If we cannot be confident
that Jesus used the phrase 'the son of man' in his speech, and quite regularly,
225. 'It is certain that Jesus used the expression "son of man"' (Theissen and Merz, Historical
Jesus 548).
759