April 8: Mark 10:32-34 (continued)

Mark 10:32-34, continued

As highlighted in the previous note, the third Passion-prediction is comprised of five components; these will be discussed in turn.

Component 1—the approach to Jerusalem

“See, we step up to Yerushalaim…”
i)dou\ a)nabai/nomen ei)$  (Ieroso/luma

The wording is identical in all three versions (Mk 10:33; Matt 20:17; Lk 18:31), the only exception being Luke’s use of the variant Greek transliteration for Jerusalem ( )Ierousalh/m). Because Jerusalem is located on a slightly elevated site, the common idiom referred to going up to the city. The verb here is a)nabai/nw (lit. “step up”, i.e. walk up), a common verb, though one which took on special theological meaning in the Gospel of John. In the special Johannine vocabulary, a)nabai/nw referred to Jesus’ ascent back to the Father in heaven. So, when the Johannine author uses it (as here) in the narrative context of ‘going up’ to Jerusalem, it carries an implicit allusion to the death and resurrection of Jesus (spec. his exaltation and return to the Father).

The Synoptic Gospels, however, retain the simple narrative use of the verb. Jesus essentially restates what is described in the narrative introduction (v. 32 par)—that he and his disciples are on their way to Jerusalem and are approaching the city. In terms of the development of the tradition, it is likely that the narrative introduction here arose out of the saying itself; in other words, the announcement by Jesus of the approach to Jerusalem inspired the narrative description of that approach. As mentioned in the prior note, Luke has eliminated the narrative introduction almost entirely, relying on Jesus’ own words here in the Passion-prediction to reference the disciples’ approach to the city.

Luke also adds an important element not found in the core Synoptic version (Mark-Matthew):

“See, we are step(ping) up to Yerushalaim, and all the (thing)s having been written through the Foretellers [i.e. Prophets] will be completed for the Son of Man…” (18:31)

It is only in Luke’s version that reference is made to Jesus’ Passion as having been prophesied in the Scriptures. This is an important Lukan theme, one which is essentially introduced here, but which then continues to be featured in the Passion and Resurrection narratives (22:37; 24:27, 32, 45), and is further developed in the book of Acts. It was vital for early Christians to marshal Scriptural support for the idea that the Messiah would suffer and die (and then rise again), since this ran entirely contrary to Messianic expectation at the time, and created a major barrier to Jewish acceptance of Jesus as the Messiah. The Acts speeches and narratives repeatedly emphasize the diligence with which the early missionaries sought to demonstrate and prove this aspect of Jesus’ Messiahship from the Scriptures—cf. 3:18, 21ff; 5:42; 8:28-35; 9:22; 13:27ff; 17:2-3, 11; 18:5, 28; 26:22-23ff.

If we accept the prophetic theme here as an authentic part of the Passion-prediction, it is difficult to say for certain which Scriptures Jesus himself may have had in mind. For the Gospel writer, however, like many other Christians of his time, there were a number of key passages in the Scriptures—the Prophetic oracles, but also the Psalms, Torah, and other Writings—which were understood as foretelling or prefiguring the betrayal, suffering, and death of Jesus. In an earlier article, I presented a fairly extensive list of the most likely candidates, including those which are specifically cited or alluded to in the Passion Narrative itself. I will be discussing further the Old Testament passages which most influenced the Passion narrative in the upcoming notes and articles in the series “The Old Testament in the Gospel Tradition”.

The next two components (2 & 3) of the Passion-prediction will be dealt with in the next daily note. On the significance of the title “Son of Man” in relation to the suffering and death of Jesus, cf. my discussion in an earlier note.

April 7: Mark 10:32-34

Mark 10:32-34

As discussed in a prior note, the three Passion-predictions relate specifically to Jesus’ journey to Jerusalem, and, in the Synoptic Tradition, they serve as a framing mechanism for the journey narrative (cf. my outline in the earlier note). Within this narrative setting, the final Passion-prediction effectively marks the end of the journey. After this point, the tone and focus of the Synoptic narrative changes significantly, with a sudden emphasis on Jesus’ role as the Davidic Messiah (“Son of David,” Mk 10:47 par)—a role which takes on prominence with the ‘Triumphal Entry’ scene (11:1-10 par), and continues throughout the Passion narrative.

As previously mentioned, Luke has greatly expanded his version of the journey narrative by making it the location for a wide range of traditional material—sayings, parables, and narrative episodes—that covers nearly nine full chapters (9:51-18:14). This disrupts the framing device of the Passion-predictions, but the third prediction (18:31-34) still serves to mark the end of the Jesus’ journey. Though he has only reached Jericho (18:35ff; Mk 10:46 par), he is close enough to Jerusalem that reader is able to make the transition into the Passion narrative.

Mark introduces the third Passion-prediction with a rather lengthy narrative summary that emphasizes Jesus’ approach to Jerusalem and which helps to build the dramatic suspense:

“And they were on the way, stepping up to Yerushalaim, and Yeshua was leading (the way) before them, and they wondered, and the (one)s following (him) were afraid.” (Mk 10:32)

Immediately preceding this narration we have the episode with the ‘Rich Young Ruler’ (vv. 17-22), along with the important teaching on discipleship (vv. 23-31) that follows in the Tradition. It is not clear why the disciples “wondered” as they walked behind Jesus; the idea seems to be that it was the bold way that Jesus took the lead in their journey that caused their surprise (cp. the Lukan wording in 9:51, at the beginning of the journey). At the same time, Jesus’ disciples were afraid—a fear that is meant, at the very least, to evoke memory of the previous Passion-predictions, in which Jesus’ emphasized the suffering and death he would face in Jerusalem.

Primarily, however, this narrative description is a literary device for dramatic effect, meant to build suspense leading up to the third prediction. The narration continues to this effect:

“And (hav)ing taken along the twelve again, he began to recount to them the (thing)s being [i.e. that were] about to step [i.e. come] together for him…” (v. 32b)

The wording here makes clear that Jesus is addressing the Passion-prediction specifically to the Twelve. This simply makes specific what was implied in the context of the first two predictions—namely, that Jesus was speaking to his close disciples, and that the Passion-predictions are central to what he was teaching them on the journey. A principal theme throughout this teaching was discipleship—the cost of being a disciple, etc (on this, cf. my earlier outline). The importance of this theme is brought into high relief by the Passion-predictions, as if to emphasize what the disciples, too, will face as a result of following Jesus. On this specific connection between discipleship and Jesus’ suffering/death, note the Synoptic episode that immediately follows the third prediction (Mk 10:35-44 par).

In typical fashion, Matthew follows the Synoptic/Markan narrative, but presents it in a much simpler manner (his relative freedom in this regard indicates, again, that the surrounding narrative was less well-established in the tradition than the prediction itself):

“And Yeshua, (as he was) stepping up to Yerushalaim, took the twelve [learners] alongside, down by (him)self, and on the way he said to them…” (20:17)

The main detail added by Matthew is the expression kat’ i)di/an (“down [by him]self”), i.e., close to him, privately. This emphasizes the intimacy of the moment, and that the Passion-prediction was intended for these disciples alone.

Luke’s version of the narrative introduction is even simpler:

“And, (hav)ing taken along the twelve, he said to them: ‘See, we are step(ping) up to Yerushalaim…'” (18:31a)

He has effectively eliminated the dramatic buildup and, more significantly, the approach to Jerusalem is retained only as part of the Passion-announcement itself. It is a most elegant modification of the Synoptic tradition, and it places the emphasis, not on the narration, but on the words of Jesus. Luke adds another important detail in his version of the Passion-prediction, but that is best dealt with as we begin discussing the prediction proper, in the next daily note.

The Passion-prediction may be outlined as follows, being comprised of these components:

    • The approach to Jerusalem
    • The betrayal of Jesus to the (Jewish) ruling authorities
    • The judgment by the Council, handing him to the (Roman) authorities
    • The suffering and death of Jesus (represented by a sequence of four action-verbs)
    • His resurrection after three days

This is essentially a thumbnail outline of the Passion narrative itself, and likely is not all that different from the most rudimentary form of the narrative that developed as a result of the early Gospel preaching. Indeed, the earliest core of the Passion narrative almost certainly had such kerygmatic origins, as can be glimpsed from passages in the sermon-speeches in the book of Acts—cf. 2:23-24; 3:13-15; 4:10, 27-28; 5:30-32; 10:39-41; 13:27-31.

We will begin analyzing these components in the next note.

April 4: Mark 9:31-32

Mark 9:31-32

Verse 31

“for he taught his learners [i.e. disciples] and said/related to them…”

The second Passion-prediction by Jesus, as it is recorded in the Gospel of Mark (9:31), is comprised of three parts:

    • A simple narrative introduction (v. 31a)
    • Prediction of his Betrayal (v. 31b)
    • Prediction of his Death and Resurrection (v. 31c)

Before proceeding with an exegesis of these three parts, it is worth considering how this Passion-prediction fits in the structure of the Synoptic (Markan) narrative. As I discussed previously, the three Passion-predictions provide a framework for the opening section of the second half of the Gospel narrative (the Judean/Jerusalem period). This opening section is centered on the journey of Jesus to Jesus to Jerusalem (covered by chapter 10 of Mark). The Passion-predictions are rather evenly divided within the section, marking the beginning, middle, and end. The second prediction marks the mid-point of the section, dividing it into two distinct parts. We may outline this as follows:

    • First Passion-Prediction (and the disciples’ reaction)—8:30-32
    • PART 1 (Preparation: Teaching the Disciples):
      • Teaching/sayings on Discipleship, with an eschatological theme (8:33-9:1)
      • The Transfiguration: Revelation to the Disciples (9:2-8)
      • Teaching the Disciples, with an eschatological theme (9:9-13)
      • Exorcism miracle episode, in the context of teaching the Disciples (9:14-29)
    • Second Passion-Prediction (and disciples’ reaction)—9:30-32
    • PART 2 (The Journey to Jerusalem):
      • Teaching his disciples: theme of ‘entering the Kingdom of God’ (9:33-50)
      • Teaching the crowds: focus on a discussion with Pharisees on a point of Law (10:1-12)
      • Teaching his disciples: theme of ‘entering the Kingdom of God’ (10:13-31)
    • Third Passion-Prediction (and disciples’ reaction)—10:32-34

The first part of this section centers on Jesus’ teaching his close disciples, in a manner that we may say is in preparation for the journey to Jerusalem. The Transfiguration episode effectively brings his Galilean ministry period to a close, and marks an end to his primary Messianic role during this period—as an Anointed Prophet, fulfilling the type-patterns of Moses and Elijah. Following this episode, Jesus once again alludes to his coming suffering and death (9:9-13). All of the teaching in this section has a strong eschatological emphasis, indicating quite clearly that his death and resurrection also has a profound eschatological significance (something many Christians today are unable or unwilling to recognize).

At verse 30, the narrative transitions into the second Passion-prediction, with an echo of Jesus’ earlier prohibition on revealing his identity as the Messiah (8:30):

“And from that (place), going out, they traveled along through the Galîl, and he did not wish that anyone should know (it)…”

Here, however, the sense of prohibition is rather different. Jesus simply wishes to avoid the crowds, keeping his presence hidden from the surrounding populace while he travels (south) through Galilee. The reason for avoiding any crowds is made clear in the opening words of verse 31:

“…for he taught his learners [i.e. disciples]”

Again, this echoes the context of the first Passion-prediction (“And he began to teach them…”). The teaching he was doing with his (close) disciples was of such importance, that Jesus wished to avoid attracting crowds around him that might distract from his work. And what is the subject, the focus of this teaching? It is the message of his coming suffering and death in Jerusalem. That the Passion-prediction fundamentally represents the substance of his teaching here is indicated by the wording of v. 31a:

“for he taught his learners [i.e. disciples] and said to them…”

What Jesus “said to them” is the Passion-prediction proper. As noted above, the statement of the prediction can be divided into two parts. The first predicts Jesus’ betrayal (an aspect of his Passion not specified in the first prediction), while the second restates the message of his coming death and resurrection. We will examine the first part (v. 31b) in the next daily note.

March 26: Luke 9:51-56

Luke’s account of Jesus’ journey to Jerusalem begins with Lk 9:51-56. As previously noted, Luke gives more prominence to this journey than the other Gospels, using it as the setting for all of Lk 9:51-19:27 (nearly ten full chapters), during which he places considerable teaching by Jesus, including a number of famous parables found only in Luke, as well as material found in different locations in Matthew. Let us consider these introductory verses in more detail.

Luke 9:51-56

Verse 51 provides the narrative setting, and displays several clear signs of Lukan composition. Two phrases in the first clause are particularly noteworthy:

    • “the filling together of the days”—the verb being a passive infinitive of sumplhro/w (“fill together, fill up”), with the prefixed element sun- functioning as an intensive (i.e. “fill up completely”). The expression “fill up the days (or the time)”, using the simpler verb plhro/w (or the related plh/qw/pimplhmi), is an idiom found frequently in Luke-Acts (Luke 1:23, 57; 2:6, 21, 22; 21:21, 24; Acts 2:1; 7:23, 30; 9:23; 24:27). The phrase in Acts 2:1 is nearly identical with that here in Lk 9:51. It is a temporal phrase, indicating that a specific set time is approaching—”in the filling together of the days” (i.e., as the time was approaching).
    • “of his being taken up”—the noun a)na/lhyi$ (occurring only here in the NT) is derived from the verb a)nalamba/nw (“take/receive up”), used specifically for Jesus’ departure (“ascension”) to God the Father in Acts 1:2, 11, 22 (also Mark 16:19; 1 Tim 3:16); in Lk 24:51 [MT] the similar verb a)nafe/rw (“carry up”) is used. Here in Lk 9:51 it refers to all the events which will take place in Jerusalem, up to and including the ‘ascension’. In this regard it functions similarly to e&codo$ (“way out”, i.e. departure) in 9:31.

If the first clause establishes the temporal and dramatic setting, the second clause sets the narrative in motion:

“he firmly set (his) face to travel into Jerusalem”
au)to\$ to\ pro/swpon e)sth/risen tou= poreu/esqai ei)$  )Ierousalh/m

The definite article before the infinitive specifies the travelling—i.e., “…to the journey into Jerusalem”. For the use of the verb sthri/zw in Luke-Acts, cf. Lk 16:26; 22:32; Acts 18:23. Here the expression may be derived from LXX Ezek 6:2; 13:17; 14:8.

In verse 52, we find an allusion to Malachi 3:1 as set in Gospel tradition: John the Baptist is the Messenger (Elijah, cf. Mal 4:5-6) who prepares the way for the Lord’s (i.e. Jesus’) coming. This is expressed in Mark 1:2-3 par, as well as Lk 1:17, 76ff; 7:27 par. Note the parallel:

Mal 3:1 [LXX]:
“…I set out forth [i.e. send out] from (me) [e)caposte/llw] my Messenger [a&ggelon]…before my face [pro\ prosw/pou mou]”
Luke 9:52
“and he set forth from (him) [a)pe/steilen] messengers [a)gge/lou$] before his face [pro\ prosw/pou au)tou=]”

From the standpoint of the Gospel narrative (and tradition), the disciples take over the role of “Messenger” from John the Baptist—cf. Luke 7:28 par; John 1:35-37; 3:28-30. Moreover, they go specifically “to make (things) ready” [e(toima/sai] for Jesus. Consider the development of Mal 3:1 in this respect:

    • The original Hebrew—the Messenger turns (and faces) [hn`P*] the way, the use of the causative stem perhaps carrying the sense of turning things/people out of the way (i.e. clearing the way).
    • The Greek LXX—the Messenger “looks upon” the way, using the verb e)pible/pw, with the sense of paying close attention to something, showing concern/respect for it, examining it, etc.
    • Mark 1:2; Lk 7:27 pars—the Messenger “prepares” the way, that is, equips it for use, supplies/furnishes what is necessary, etc. The verb is kataskeua/zw (an intensive form of skeua/zw).

Now the other Old Testament passage applied to John the Baptist is Isaiah 40:3ff—the voice which declares “make ready the way of the Lord”. As with Mal 3:1, the Hebrew uses the causative (piel) form of hn`P* (“turn, face”); while both the LXX and the Gospels translate with e(toima/zw (“make ready”, imperative e(toima/sate)—the same verb used in Luke 9:51. In Mark 1:2-3, both OT references are combined, bringing together the verbs kataskeua/zw and e(toima/zw (“prepare…” / “make ready…”); the same combination is found in Luke 1:17, applied to John the Baptist. All of this simply reinforces the idea that the disciples are here fulfilling John’s role, as described in Mal 3:1 / Isa 40:3ff.

The disciples “prepare the way” before Jesus also in Luke 10:1, but more notably in the preparations made prior to Jesus’ (triumphal) entry into Jerusalem, as recorded in Synoptic tradition (Lk 19:28-34 par). In some respects, this provides an even closer parallel to Malachi 3:1, since the narrative depicts Jesus entering Jerusalem and coming into the Temple (19:45-48 par).

If Isaiah 40:3-5 is in mind in Luke 9:51-56, as seems likely (only Luke cites vv. 4-5, cf. Lk 3:5), then the narrative may also be illustrating the obstacles (Isa 40:4-5a) in the way—embedded within the phrase “…into a village of Samaritans” (v. 52). Here the “obstacles” and barriers are expressed in terms of religious and ethnic prejudice—i.e. between Jews and Samaritans (cf. John 4:9; Matt 10:5, and the general context of Lk 10:29-37; 17:11-19; John 4:1-42; 8:48; Acts 8:4-25). The precise history of the division and animosity between Jews and Samaritans remains uncertain, but the roots of it presumably go back to the different groups which settled in Palestine following the Assyrian/Babylonian exile (cf. 2 Kings 17:5-6, 24-40; Ezra 4). This prejudice and animosity is expressed two-fold in the narrative (verses 53-56):

    • Verse 53: on the part of the Samaritans—refusal to offer hospitality
    • Verse 54: on the part of the disciples—seeking revenge for this affront

The Samaritans’ refusal is based entirely on the religious/ethnic division: “they did not receive him because his face was (set toward) traveling to Jerusalem” (v. 53 [cf. v. 51]). However, it is the disciples’ (James and John’s) behavior in response which reflects an even more serious and egregious expression of prejudice (tending toward violence), all the more extreme in they way that their vengeance is couched in grand biblical imagery (echoing Elijah, cf. 2 Kings 1:10-12). The association with Elijah is made explicit in certain manuscripts of verse 54, which add “…even as Elijah did”. It is possible to outline verses 53-56 as a chiasm:

    • The Samaritans—refusal to offer hospitality (v. 53)
      —The Disciples—seeking revenge (v. 54)
      —Jesus’ response—lays blame upon them (v. 55)
    • Jesus’ response—travels into another village (v. 56) [Lk 9:4-5 par; cf. 10:5-11]

There is an interesting two-fold variant here in v. 55-56a (D Q Koine):

    • Verse 55—Jesus’ rebuke of his disciples is enhanced with a harsh declaration to them: “and he said, ‘You do not know of what spirit you are'”. This indicates that their desire for (violent) revenge/punishment on the Samaritans does not come from the Spirit of God, but from another (evil) spirit (cf. Mark 8:33 par, also Matt 5:37; 6:13).
    • Verse 56(a)—There is added a Son of Man saying by Jesus, similar to that in Luke 19:10 (cf. John 3:17): “For the Son of Man did not come to destroy the souls of men, but to save (them)”.

If original, this saying sets the “Son of Man” (identified with Jesus himself) in the context of suffering and sacrifice (with an emphasis on salvation). This would then be contrasted with the (Anointed) Prophet who brings judgment (cf. the reference to Elijah). In the same way, the Passion predictions—announcing the coming suffering and death of the Son of Man—appear to be offered (in part, at least) as an intentional contrast to the image and expectation of a glorious Messiah-figure. In Luke, the first Passion prediction follows Peter’s declaration of Jesus as “the Anointed One” (Lk 9:20, 21); the second Passion prediction follows the Transfiguration scene, where Jesus appears in glory with the Messianic Prophet-figures of Moses and Elijah and the voice from heaven declares him to be God’s “Son” and “the Elect/Chosen One” (Lk 9:30-35, 43-45). Before the Son of Man can appear in glory, he must first experience suffering and death.

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is SonOfMan_header-small-1.png

The Son of Man Sayings: Introduction

For the remainder of Easter Season, on through Holy Week, I will be looking at selected verses and passages from the Gospel of Luke, set around the journey to Jerusalem—specifically those which involve the expression “(the) Son of Man”. Most of the references containing “the Son of Man” (o( ui(o\$ tou= a)nqrw/pou) in Luke were inherited from the wider Synoptic tradition, and parallel versions can be found in Matthew and Mark as well. They will be introduced below.

(These daily notes also serve as a complement to the Study Series currently being posted—Jesus and the Gospel Tradition—the third part of which covers the Passion Narrative.)

The Gospel of Luke is unique among the three Synoptics in the way that the narrative is structured around the journey to Jerusalem. The common view of many New Testament scholars is that Matthew and Luke both made use of Mark as a source document. The basic hypothesis is sound, though not without certain difficulties. It may, however, safely be said that, if Luke did not use Mark, then the author clearly drew upon a document (or a developed set of traditions) which, in terms of structure and content, was very similar to Mark. For most of chapters 3-9, Luke follows Mark (chs. 1-9) in its basic narrative and arrangement of episodes, including additional material at several points. Indeed, Luke 9:1-50 corresponds with Mark 8:1-9:41, has nothing matching Mk 9:42-10:13 (except the saying in Lk 17:1-2), and then ‘picks up’ the narrative thread of Mk 10:14ff, but only at Lk 18:15. All of Lk 9:51-18:14 (nearly nine full chapters) consists, for the most part, of material not found in Mark. Lk 9:51ff contains (1) sayings and narrative sections occurring also in Matthew (so-called “Q” material), and (2) material found only in Luke among the Synoptics (so-called “L”). The “L”-material in these chapters includes many of the most famous and beloved parables of Jesus.

The fact that the “Q” sayings, etc., often occur in very different locations in Matthew strongly suggests that we are dealing with a literary, rather than historical/chronological, arrangement. The narrative setting for this material in Lk 9:51-18:14 is the journey of Jesus and his disciples to Jerusalem. The Synoptics, unlike the Gospel of John, record only one journey to Jerusalem—for the Passover of Holy Week, Jesus’ last week prior to his death. In Mark and Matthew, this journey is narrated very briefly (cf. Mark 10:1, 17, 32, 46; Matt 19:1; 20:17, 29); Luke, on the other hand, records Jesus giving a considerable amount of teaching—taking place, according to the narrative setting, on the way to Jerusalem.

“The Son of Man”

There are more than 85 occurrences of the expression [o(] ui(o\$ [tou=] a)nqrw/pou (“the son of [the] man”), in the New Testament—every occurrence in the Gospels comes either from Jesus’ own lips or in reponse to his words (for the latter, cf. Lk 24:7; Jn 12:34). Outside of the Gospels it is only found in Acts 7:56; Heb 2:8 (quoting Ps 8:4); and Rev 1:13; 14:14 (alluding to Dan 7:13, also 10:5, 16; 14:4). In an article in the series “Yeshua the Anointed”, I examine in detail the background and meaning of this expression and how it applies to Jesus. Here, by way of introduction, I would simply note that the Greek expression corresponds to the Hebrew <d*a* /B# (ben-°¹d¹m), which occurs in the Old Testament more than 100 times. In ancient Semitic idiom /B# ben (“son”) in the construct state (“son of…”) often has the meaning of belonging to a particular group or category, and of possessing such characteristics. In this instance, “son of man” simply means “a human being”, i.e. belonging to the human race. Specifically it can mean possessing human characteristics or qualities (especially mortality), contrasted with a heavenly or divine being (including God [YHWH] himself). The parallel, synonymous expression vona$ /B# (ben °§nôš), “son of (hu)mankind” occurs once (Ps 144:3); the corresponding Aramaic is vn`a$ rB^ (bar °§n¹š), only at Dan 7:13 in the OT, along with the variant forms vn rb, avn rb (as well as <da rb) attested in later Aramaic. The Biblical (and contemporary) usage can be summarized as follows:

  1. Generally (or indefinitely) of a human being (“a[ny] man”), in poetic language—with <da /b (ben °¹d¹m, “son of man”) set parallel to <da (°¹d¹m, “man”), cf. Num 23:19; Job 16:21; 25:6; 35:8; Psalm 8:4; 80:17; 144:3; 146:3; Isa 51:12; 56:2; Jer 50:40; 51:43. The dual-expression (“man…son of man…”) often is set in contrast to God [YHWH] and His nature.
  2. In divine/heavenly address to a human being (a Prophet), in Ezekiel (more than 90 times) and Daniel (Dan 8:17). The sense is something like “(as for) you, O mortal…”, again distinguishing a human being from the divine/heavenly being who addresses him.
  3. The apparently unique instance of Daniel 7:13—here “son of man” is used to describe a divine/heavenly/angelic(?) being who resembles a human. This famous passage will be discussed in more detail later on.

For a convenient summary of the topic, especially on the possible Aramaic forms of the expression which might relate to the concept and terminology in the 1st century A.D., see J. A. Fitzmyer, A Wandering Aramean: Collected Aramaic Essays, Chapter 6 (Scholars Press: 1979), pp. 143-160 (reprinted in The Semitic Background of the New Testament [Eerdmans: 1997]).

I will be beginning these notes with the Son of Man saying in Luke 9:22 (par Mark 8:31; Matt 16:21). Here is a list of prior sayings in the Gospel, along with their Synoptic parallels: