Loren T. Stuckenbruck

Benjamin E. Reynolds

The contemporary study of Jewish apocalypticism today recognizes the wealth and diversity of ancient traditions concerned with the “unveiling” of heavenly matters‒‒understood to involve revealed wisdom, the revealed resolution of time, and revealed cosmology‒‒in marked contrast to an earlier focus on eschatology as such. The shift in focus has had a more direct impact on the study of ancient “pseudepigraphic” literature, however, than in New Testament studies, where the narrower focus on eschatological expectation remains dominant. In this Companion, an international team of scholars draws out the implications of the newest scholarship for the variety of New Testament writings. Each entry presses the boundaries of current discussion regarding the nature of apocalypticism in application to a particular New Testament author. The cumulative effect is to reveal, as never before, early Christianity, its Christology, cosmology, and eschatology, as expressions of tendencies in Second Temple Judaism.

The Jewish Apocalyptic Tradition and the Shaping of New Testament Thought

The title 'Son of Man' in the Gospel of John is an apocalyptic reference that highlights, among a number of things, that Jesus is a heavenly figure. Benjamin E. Reynolds analyzes the background of 'Son of Man' from the 'one like a son of man' in Daniel 7 and the interpretations of this figure in Jewish apocalyptic and early Christian literature. Although there is no established 'Son of Man concept', the Danielic son of man is interpreted with common characteristics that suggest there was at least some general understanding of this figure in the Second Temple period. The author shows that these common characteristics are noticeable throughout the Son of Man sayings in John's Gospel. The context and the interpretation of these sayings point to an understanding of the Johannine Son of Man similar to those in the interpretations of the Danielic figure. However, even though these similarities exist, the Johannine figure is distinct from the previous interpretations, just as they are distinct from one another. One obvious difference is the present reality of the Son of Man's role in judgment and salvation. The Johannine Son of Man is an apocalyptic figure, and thus 'Son of Man' does not function to draw attention to Jesus' humanity in the Gospel of John. Nor is the title synonymous with 'Son of God'. 'Son of Man' may overlap in meaning with other titles, particularly 'Son of God' and 'Messiah', but 'Son of Man' points to aspects of Jesus' identity that are not indicated by any other title. Along with the other titles, it helps to present a richer Christological portrait of the Johannine Jesus.

Benjamin E. Reynolds

About

Books

Join the club