Speaking up for Qumran, Dalman and the Son of Man: was "bar enasha" a common term for "man" in the time of Jesus?
Biblical scholars have offered a number of competing theories concerning the best linguistic explanation of the expression ho hyios tu anthrōpu ('the Son of Man') which occurs on the lips of Jesus 82 times in the Gospels. This article argues that -- contrary to the claims of many scholars...
| Authors: | ; |
|---|---|
| Format: | Print Article |
| Language: | English |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Interlibrary Loan: | Interlibrary Loan for the Fachinformationsdienste (Specialized Information Services in Germany) |
| Published: |
2001
|
| In: |
Journal for the study of the New Testament
Year: 2001, Volume: 23, Issue: 81, Pages: 81-122 |
| Standardized Subjects / Keyword chains: | B
Son of Man
|
| IxTheo Classification: | HC New Testament HD Early Judaism NBF Christology |
| Further subjects: | B
Son of Man
B Dead Sea Scrolls B New Testament |
| Summary: | Biblical scholars have offered a number of competing theories concerning the best linguistic explanation of the expression ho hyios tu anthrōpu ('the Son of Man') which occurs on the lips of Jesus 82 times in the Gospels. This article argues that -- contrary to the claims of many scholars -- the Aramaic expression BR 'NŠ(') was not in fact a generic term for 'man', although this term was used on occasion in the absolute state as a way of referring to 'a man / someone' when the contextual register required it. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 0142-064X |
| Contains: | In: Journal for the study of the New Testament
|