Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

8241Re: [GTh] Son of Man

Expand Messages
  • jmgcormier
    Oct 2, 2008
    • 0 Attachment
      Thank you Steven and Jack for your thoughts on the "Son of Man". I
      hope other members will be just as forthcoming as both of you have
      been while I struggle to keep pace with your flood of "great leads"
      ….

      On Steven's points, could I perhaps ask your opinion on the effect
      you see in Thomas having dropped the "of Man" part of "Son of Man"
      in logion 44 from its likely sources in Matt 12:31 and Luke 12:10 to
      the average Aramaic / Syriac reader … in short, if "Son of Man"
      rings of "someone" or perhaps "anyone" (essentially "a" person
      largely unspecified) in these early languages, then, as logion 44
      reads from the pen of Thomas, who might "the" Son (more specifically
      designated) sound as though its referring to when read by the same
      Aramaic / Syriac raders? Thomas does not mention anyone specific
      as "a" or "the" son throughout his gospel, so we have no reason to
      believe that "son" necessarily refers to Jesus except for the
      capitalized "S" later utilized by the manuscript's translators … in
      fact, in logion 16, "Father" and "Son" are not even in agreement in
      their persuasions, which suggests even further that we might not be
      talking here of God the Father and Jesus the Son ! So what might you
      think Thomas is implying in logion 44 (if anything) when he drops
      the "of Man" part of his source material and simply refers to "the
      Son"?

      And on Jack's point about "There was a considerable influence by
      Zoroastrianism on Judaism as a result to the Babylonian Captivity
      after which they brought the Enochian traditions to Jerusalem upon
      the return." (which I think may be very closely related to Steven's
      explanation), I am left wondering if Zoroastrianism in turn might
      have had an idiomatic grammatical expression or perhaps a "son of
      deity designation" similar to that of the Aramaic / Syriac's "Son of
      Man" which was brought back to Jerusalem following the captivity,
      and which might have given a prominent rise to this expression and
      its use in the Judeo-Christian milieu ? Thoughts Jack ? (or from
      any of the other members on the list ?)

      Maurice Cormier


      PS - thank you Steven for your source material and dictionary
      references, and Jack for your Matthean incidence of "Son of Man"
      references.
    • Show all 26 messages in this topic