38. G. R. Beasley-Murray, ‘John 12,31–32: The Eschatological Significance of the Lifting up of the Son of Man’, in W. Schrage (ed.), Studien zum Text und zur Ethik des Neuen Testaments. Festschrift zum 80. Geburtstag von Heinrich Greeven (BZNW, 47; Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 1986), pp. 70–81.
39. See
Schnackenburg,
Gospel, p. 2.394.
6. The Use of the Son of Man Idiom in the Gospel of John 111
soul in 12.27.40 However, in 13.1, Jesus’ hour is declared to be the time when he is to depart (metabai/nw) from this world to the Father. If, as it seems, Jesus’
hour includes his going away and returning to the Father (7.33-34; 8.21-23), this suggests that the hour includes the crucifi xion and the resurrection since Jesus does not ascend to the Father until after the resurrection (20.17).41
Likewise, the Son of Man’s glorifi cation is not merely a reference to the cross. The Son of Man is glorifi ed through his crucifi xion, resurrection and return to the Father.42 In Jn 7.39, the narrator says: ‘This he said concerning the Spirit, which those believing in him were about to receive, for the Spirit was not yet [given] because Jesus had not yet been glorifi ed.’ This statement implies that the Spirit is given following Jesus’ glorifi cation. Moloney argues that the Spirit is given at the crucifi xion: pare/dwken to pneu=ma (19.30). But this view does not fully take into account Jesus’ command to the disciples in 20.22 to receive the Spirit.43 Further, in 16.7, Jesus says that the Spirit would come only after Jesus returned to the one who sent him. This appears to suggest that the glorifi cation encompasses the crucifi xion, resurrection and return to the Father, for Jesus returns to God following his resurrection (20.17). Again, 12.16
states that the disciples remembered the things done to Jesus at the triumphal entry after he was glorifi ed. Earlier in the Gospel, the narrator informs us that 40. Moloney, Johannine, p. 177; E. Thüsing, Die Erhöhung und Verherrlichung Jesu im Johannesevangelium (NTAbh, 21; Münster: Aschendorffsche, 3rd edn, 1979), p. 81.
41. Blank,
Krisis, p. 267; M. C. de Boer, ‘Jesus’ Departure to the Father in John: Death or Resurrection?’, in G. Van Belle, J. G. van der Watt and P. Maritz (eds), Theology and Christology in the Fourth Gospel: Essays by the Members of the SNTS Johannine Writings Seminar (BETL, 184; Leuven: Leuven University Press, 2005), pp. 1–19.
42. Contra Thüsing, Erhöhung, pp. 75–86. See W. Loader, The Christology of the Fourth Gospel: Structure and Issues (BBET, 23; Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, 1989), pp. 109–10; P. Ensor, ‘The Glorifi cation of the Son of Man: An Analysis of John 13:31–32’, TynB 58.2
(2007), pp. 229–52.
43. There is no strong consensus in Johannine scholarship on the moment of the Spirit’s arrival, but most scholars see 20.22 as the giving of the Spirit or at least the completion of it.
See Brown, Gospel, pp. 1037–39; G. Burge, The Anointed Community: The Holy Spirit in the Johannine Tradition (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1987), pp. 123–31; T. R. Hatina, ‘John 20,22 in Its Eschatological Context: Promise or Fulfi llment?’ Bib 74 (1993), pp. 196–219. C. Bennema (‘The Giving of the Spirit in John’s Gospel – A New Proposal?’ EvQ 74.3 [2002], pp. 195–213) sees 19.30 as a symbolic giving and 20.22 as the realized giving. J. Swetnam (‘Bestowal of the Spirit in the Fourth Gospel’, Bib 74 [1993], pp. 556–76) argues for 19.30 and 20.22 as a two-phase giving. Loader ( Christology, p. 109) refers to Moloney’s interpretation of 19.30 as
‘doubtful exegesis’.
112
‘Who is this Son of Man?’
the disciples remembered after he was raised from the dead (2.22). Speaking of 2.22 and 12.16, Josef Blank declares that Jesus’ glorifi cation encompasses his resurrection.44 All of this evidence suggests that the hour and the glorifi cation of the Son of Man do not refer solely to the crucifi xion, but also include the resurrection and his return to the Father.
A second mention of the Son of Man’s glorifi cation is found in 13.31-32.
The use of nu=n (‘Now is the Son of Man glorifi ed’; cf. 12.23) and its connection to Judas’ exit into the night (13.30) may be seen to strengthen the connection of the glorifi cation primarily with the crucifi xion. The crucifi xion is part of the glorifi cation,45 but it is not all of it. As shown above, there is evidence for the glorifi cation encompassing the whole of Jesus’ hour: death, resurrection and return to the Father.46 In 13.33, Jesus says that he is going away, in other words, returning to the Father. The concept of his departure is an ongoing theme throughout the Farewell Discourse (chs 13–16), which begins in 13.31.47 Jesus is going/returning to the Father. Both the immediacy of the future glorifi cation (eu0qu/j: 13.32) and his going away in a little while (mikro/n: 13.33; 14.19; 16.16-18) imply that this departure is part of his glorifi cation.
If the glorifi cation and the hour include the death, resurrection and return to the Father as has been argued, and if that glorifi cation is said to have come (12.23) and is now (13.1, 31), then the realized and present aspects of the glorifi cation refer to the whole of those events. God has glorifi ed the Son of Man in these events and the Son of Man has glorifi ed God in them. The future glorifi cation – ‘and God will glorify him in himself, and he will glorify him immediately’ – then looks beyond the hour to the time after Jesus’ return to the Father. Is it any coincidence that reference to Jesus’ return to the Father follows directly after mention of the future glorifi cation (13.33, 36; 14.2-4)?
And again, although it is disputed that there is a connection between 13.31-32
44. Blank,
Krisis, p. 267. Also Ashton, Understanding, p. 494.
45. Contra G. C. Nicholson, Death as Departure: The Johannine Descent-Ascent Schema (SBLDS, 63; Chico: Scholars Press, 1983), p. 149.
46. Brown,
Gospel, p. 606; Ensor, ‘Glorifi cation’, pp. 233–34.
47. metabai/nw: 13.1; u9pa/gw: 13.33, 36-37; 14.28; 16.5, 10, 17; poreu/omai: 14.2, 28; 16.28.
6. The Use of the Son of Man Idiom in the Gospel of John 113
and 17.1-5,48 the same thought is present in both passages.49 Jesus the Son and the Son of Man is glorifi ed by God the Father.50
D. The three Johannine Son of Man themes
These three commonly discussed themes are important for understanding the Johannine Son of Man. They indicate the heavenly origin and pre-existence of the Son of Man, as evidenced by 3.13 and 6.62. The ‘lifting up’ sayings depict the beginning of the Son of Man’s exaltation in the physical lifting up on the cross, and the exaltation also extends to include his resurrection and return to the Father. Similarly, the glorifi cation of the Son of Man denotes the passion, resurrection and ascent. The Son of Man has already been glorifi ed in these events and yet will be glorifi ed again in heaven after his return to where he was before. However, there are other Son of Man sayings in John that too often play only minor roles in the debates and yet add more to our understanding of the Johannine Son of Man.
III. The ‘misfi t’ Johannine Son of Man sayings
(1.51; 5.27; 6.27, 53; 9.35)
A. An apocalyptic introduction of the Son of Man: 1.51
Too often focus is placed on the three themes of ascent/descent, ‘lifting up’, and glorifi cation. Those sayings that do not fi t nicely into these themes or any other categories for that matter commonly fall to the wayside. Jn 1.51 is one of the more frequently discussed of these ‘misfi t’ sayings. Nevertheless, it is the fi rst Son of Man saying in the Gospel, concludes ch. 1 and sets the stage for the beginning of Jesus’ signs and teaching. In the narrative context, 1.51 is directly related to Jesus’ dialogue with Nathanael.51 The connection of 48. Moloney,
Johannine, pp. 199–200.
49. Brown,
Gospel, pp. 610–11; J. Frey, Die johanneische Eschatologie. Bände 1–3
(WUNT, 96, 110, 117; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1997, 1998, 2000), vol. 2, p. 136.
50. For further detail, see Reynolds, Apocalyptic Son of Man, pp. 208–10.
>
51. Previous scholarship has seen 1.51 as an interpolation, esp. R. Bultmann, The Gospel of John: A Commentary (G. R. Beasley-Murray, R. W. N. Hoare and J. K. Riches, trans.; Philadelphia: Westminster, 1976), p. 105, n. 2.
114
‘Who is this Son of Man?’
the saying with Gen. 28.12 is almost universally recognized52 and provides further links with the Jacob allusions in the passage.53 Just as deceitful Jacob saw a vision of angels ascending and descending on a ladder so Nathaniel who is without deceit will see angels ascending and descending on the Son of Man. A cursory comparison of the two passages suggests that the Son of Man has replaced the ladder of Jacob’s vision.54 Exactly in the place where the pronoun for ‘ladder’ is in LXX Gen. 28.12, the phrase o9 ui9oj tou= a0qrw&pou is found.
Gen. 28.12 : kai oi9 a1ggeloi tou~ qeou~ a0ne/bainon kai kate/bainon e0p’
au0th=j.
Jn 1.51 : kai touj a0ggelouj tou~ qeou~ a)nabai/nontaj kai katabainontaj e0pi ton ui9on tou~ a)nqrw&pou.
But one important piece of the saying has yet to be mentioned. The fi rst thing the disciples will see is heaven opening, an event that does not take place in Jacob’s vision. The opening of heaven refl ects a larger apocalyptic theme (cf.
Ezek. 1; T. Levi 2.6; 2 Bar. 22.1), and it introduces the Son of Man in John with heavenly and apocalyptic connotations, since it is the opening of heaven which allows this vision to be seen by the disciples. Heaven opening usually indicates that a connection is being made between heaven and earth, whether it allows for communication or travel between the heavenly realm and the earthly.55 In the case of Jn 1.51, the Son of Man is being established as the connection between heaven and earth. Douglas Hare asserts that the Son of Man as the ladder is
‘grotesque, apocalyptic imagery’ that is ‘not characteristic of the Gospel’.56
But why should this be grotesque? As the ladder connects heaven to earth in 52. For one exception, see W. Michaelis, ‘Joh. 1,51, Gen. 28,12 und das Menschensohn-Problem’, TLZ 85 (1960), pp. 561–78.
53. J. H. Neyrey, ‘The Jacob Allusions in John 1.51’, CBQ 44 (1982), pp. 586–605; D. Tovey, ‘Stone of Witness and Stone of Revelation: An Exploration of Inter-textual Resonance in John 1:35–51’, Colloquium 38 (2006), pp. 41–58.
54. A number of scholars have argued that the Son of Man replaces various aspects of Jacob’s vision, including the stone, the place and even Jacob himself. For further discussion, see Reynolds, Apocalyptic Son of Man, pp. 96–99.
55. W. C. van Unnik, ‘Die „Geöffneten Himmel“ in der Offenbarungs-Vision des Apokryphons des Johannes’, in W. Eltester and F. H. Kettler (eds), Apophoreta. Festschrift für Ernst Haenchen zu seinem Seibzigsten Geburtstag am 10. Dezember 1964 (Berlin: Alfred Töpelmann, 1964), pp. 269–80; F. Lentzen-Deis, ‘Das Motiv “Himmelsöffnung” in ver-schiedenen Gattungen der Umweltliteratur des Neuen Testaments’, Bib 50 (1969), pp. 301–27.
56. Hare,
Son of Man, p. 83.
6. The Use of the Son of Man Idiom in the Gospel of John 115
Jacob’s vision so does the Son of Man in John. We know from 3.13 that the Son of Man has descended from heaven. Thus, this connection is not made by a human reaching up to heaven but by a divine being coming down. Jesus as Son of Man is the mediator between God and humanity. He communicates the message of God to humanity and humanity’s response to God, as symbolized by the messengers/angels ascending and descending on him.
This vision is meant to be an explication of the greater things that the disciples will see (1.50). The disciples do not literally see this vision in the Gospel; angels do not appear again until the resurrection and even then none of the 12 disciples sees them (20.12-13). What the disciples will see is the link that Jesus creates between heaven and earth, not just in his signs, but in his ministry as a whole. However, they will not understand the signifi cance of Jesus’ ministry until after the resurrection (cf. 20.28).
B. The Son of Man and judgement (5.27)
John 5.27 has been used as an important support for the understanding of the Johannine Son of Man as a heavenly being because of the similarities it shares with Dan. 7.13. While J. Louis Martyn considers it the most ‘traditional’ of the NT Son of Man sayings,57 Delbert Burkett does not think 5.27 is an actual Son of Man saying because the saying lacks the articles: ui9oj a0nqrw&pou instead of o9 ui9oj tou= a0nqrw&pou.58 Two possible meanings are suggested for the anarthrous phrase in 5.27. Either it means that the Son judges because he is ‘a son of man’, in other words a human being, or he judges because he is ‘the Son of Man’, the fi gure already mentioned previously in the Gospel (1.51; 3.13, 14).59
The phrase ui9oj a0nqrw&pou can denote o9 ui9oj tou= a0nqrw&pou.60 The evidence that is usually given for this view is either grammatical or the similarity with the anarthrous phrase in Dan. 7.13. The typical grammatical argument is 57. J. L. Martyn, History and Theology in the Fourth Gospel (3rd edn; Louisville: Westminster/John Knox, 2003), p. 133.
58. Burkett,
Son of the Man, pp. 41–45.
59. The former view is essentially non-existent in German scholarship.
60. In this debate, the phrase with the article is usually referred to as defi nite and the anarthrous phrase as indefi nite. However, it should be noted that the language of ‘defi nite’
and ‘indefi nite’ is not entirely helpful since something can be indefi nite even if it has articles.
See C. Lyons, Defi niteness (Cambridge Textbooks in Linguistics; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999), esp. pp. 1–46.
116
‘Who is this Son of Man?’
founded on E. C. Colwell’s Rule: ‘defi nite predicate nouns that precede the verb usually lack the article’. Colwell found this rule to be true almost 90 per cent of the time. The only catch, which proponents and opponents alike tend to miss, is that Colwell began his study by examining predicate nouns that he already found to be defi nite. Thus, since the point in question is whether or not ui9oj a0nqrw&pou denotes ‘the Son of Man’ or ‘a son of man’, Colwell’s rule is unhelpful.61
Context must be the determining factor. Strikingly, there is no indication in the Gospel of John of Jesus’ humanity being the basis for his authority to judge, even though T. Ab. A 13.3 is often used as an example of a human being in the act of judging (see also the use of Hebrews 2.17-18 and 4.15).62 In fact, Jesus’ judgement in John is specifi cally not according to the fl esh like that of his opponents (Jn 8.15-17). In contrast, the expression ‘the Son of Man’ is continually found in the context of judgement throughout John (8.28; 9.35-41; 12.30-36). Not only that but the similarities with Daniel – anarthrous phrase (Dan. 7.13), theme of judgement (Daniel 7), and the double resurrection of the righteous and the wicked (Dan. 12.2; Jn 5.28-29) – further suggest that the authority to execute judgement belongs to the Son because he is the Son of Man. This also indicates that ‘Son’ and ‘Son of Man’ function with separate and distinct meanings, a point we will return to later.
C. Sealing, eating and drinking (6.27, 53)
The saying in Jn 6.27 can sometimes slip through the cracks of Johannine Son of Man studies. Jesus tells the crowd: ‘Do not work for food that perishes but for food that remains to eternal life, which the Son of Man will give you. For God the Father has sealed this one.’ This verse highlights a distinctive feature of the Johannine Son of Man – his obvious role in salvation. The Son of Man is the one who gives the food that remains to eternal life. Later in ch. 6 it becomes clear that this food that will be given is the bread from heaven, the bread of life coming down from heaven, which is Jesus himself (6.32-35). The food that 61. See D. B. Wallace, Greek Grammar beyond the Basics: An Exegetical Syntax of the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1996), pp. 260–61; D. A. Carson, Exegetical Fallacies (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1984), p. 87.
62. M.
Casey,
Son of Man: The Interpretation and Infl uence of Daniel 7 (London: SPCK, 1979), p. 199; Burkett, Son of the Man
, p. 44.
6. The Use of the Son of Man Idiom in the Gospel of John 117
remains to eternal life that the Son of Man will give is himself. The Son of Man has this salvifi c role because God the Father has sealed him. The sealing of the Son of Man appears to indicate that God has authorized or verifi ed the Son of Man to give this life-giving food.63 Just as the Son of Man has the authority to judge, so he has the authority to save or give life (cf. 5.24-26).
In 6.51, Jesus clarifi es that the food that he will give is his fl esh for the life of the world. When ‘the Jews’ become upset about this, wondering how he can give his fl esh, Jesus says to them: ‘Amen, amen I say to you, if you do not eat the fl esh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you do not have life in yourselves’ (6.53). As the bread of life coming down from heaven, attention is again drawn to the Son of Man’s heavenly origin (6.32, 33, 38, 41, 42, 50, 51, 58). The Son of Man’s fl esh does not point to an equation of ‘Son of Man’
and humanity. Rather it only highlights what we have previously seen, namely, that the Son of Man has descended from heaven and become human. The eating and drinking of the Son of Man’s fl esh and blood are not meant to be taken literally any more than Nicodemus was to be born again in a physical sense.64
Eating the fl esh and drinking the blood is a metaphor for belief, believing in the Son of Man.65 The language of ‘remaining/abiding’ highlights this emphasis on belief (6.56; cf. 15.4-5). Also, the result of both believing (6.40) and eating (6.54) is eternal life and being raised on the last day. ‘The Spirit gives life; the fl esh is of no value’ (6.63).
D. Belief in the Son of Man: the neglected saying (9.35)
I fi nd it extremely interesting that 9.35 silently disappears from a number of studies on the Johannine Son of Man. Siegfried Schulz relegated it to a footnote, and E. M. Sidebottom did not mention the saying at all.66 The mysterious disappearance of this saying is most likely due in large part to the diffi culty of placing 63. Brown,
Who Is This Son of Man Page 17