DOCSLIB.ORG

(Verse 13) “And No Man Hath Ascended up to Heaven, but He That Came Down from Heaven, Even the Son of Man Which Is in Heaven.”

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
(Verse 13) “And No Man Hath Ascended up to Heaven, but He That Came Down from Heaven, Even the Son of Man Which Is in Heaven.” (verse 13) “And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven.” With this statement Jesus asserts his omnipresence and preexistence to establish He alone is qualified to tell Nicodemus heavenly things. In one sense, the language of Jesus' statement is a paradox. In another, it is quite clear. Jesus is in heaven and on earth at the same time. The solution to this paradox is incarnate LORD; is omnipresence. He is everywhere present at the same time. Furthermore, since heaven is not subject to the natural laws of time and space, it follows neither is the Son of man. He pre-exists. Jesus affirmed his preexistence when he told the Jews, “Before Abraham was,“ John 8:52. 1. “And no man hath ascended up to heaven” This clause is sometimes cited as evidence of a prior private ascension of Jesus. However, this seems unlikely since it is unsupported elsewhere in scripture. The more likely meaning is to establish heaven as the eternal habitat of the Son of man. It is His rightful abode according to His eternal nature. Therefore, ascending back to heaven signifies returning to His own abode. By stating “no man” Jesus indicates there is no other like the Son of man. Therefore none but he is qualified to tell heavenly things. 2. “but he that came down from heaven” This clause establishes heaven as the dwelling place of the Son of man. It also provides context to Jesus' claim that the Son of man alone is qualified to tell heavenly things. The Son of man “came down from heaven” and now is on earth. By saying this, Jesus implies He came from heaven which qualifies him to speak of heavenly things to Nicodemus. 3. "even the Son of man which is in heaven” This clause strengthens Jesus' claim he alone is qualified to tell of heavenly things. Who better to tell Nicodemus of heaven than one who is in heaven and at the same time is sitting on earth in the presence of the Jewish ruler. Being God incarnate, who is the Son of man, gave Jesus the unique quality of knowing the things of God as God and the things of man as a man. Jesus identified the Son of man as he who ascended up to heaven, came down from heaven, and is in heaven. He uses the term “Son of man” to refer to himself more than eighty times in the four Gospels. In comparison, the term “Son of God” is found twenty-eight times; but Jesus uses it only six times. His preference for “Son of man” suggests Jesus wanted to emphasize his humanity. Assuredly, He wanted us to understand His pain of physical suffering and death at Calvary as a human experience; that as the Son of man he was the perfect sin offering to God and tasted death for all the elect family of God. Perhaps He also wanted those who grasped the wisdom of His teachings, and appreciate the significance of His miracles to understand that His human example of submissive obedience is our standard; so, in fellowship with his sufferings we might “press toward the mark for the prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus.” The eternal Sonship of Christ is inferred from Jesus affirming that the Son of man descended from Heaven and is in heaven. Jesus is the Son of man according to nature and the Son of God according to His Divine Being, as John previously states in the introduction of this gospel account. (See John 1:14, 18) The language is unambiguous. By saying the Son of man was in heaven before he descended to earth and while on earth He is also in heaven, Jesus identified the Divine quality of eternal existence based on his omnipresence and preexistence. As God's eternal Son, who is the Son of man, Jesus is uniquely qualified to instruct man (kind) about heavenly things. Who could better teach the Apostles, who teach others; and to inspire writers to record his deeds and doctrines. Jesus' omnipresence and preexistence transcends space and time. Since heavenly things exist apart from time and space, Jesus alone wholly knows and fully experiences all things heavenly. And since man exists wholly within the constraints of time and space, as the Son of man Jesus is uniquely qualified to relate heavenly things to man (kind). .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Jesus As the Son of Man in Mark Andres A
    Florida International University FIU Digital Commons FIU Electronic Theses and Dissertations University Graduate School 3-24-2014 Jesus as the Son of Man in Mark Andres A. Tejada-Lalinde [email protected] DOI: 10.25148/etd.FI14040867 Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.fiu.edu/etd Part of the Biblical Studies Commons, Christianity Commons, History of Christianity Commons, and the Jewish Studies Commons Recommended Citation Tejada-Lalinde, Andres A., "Jesus as the Son of Man in Mark" (2014). FIU Electronic Theses and Dissertations. 1175. https://digitalcommons.fiu.edu/etd/1175 This work is brought to you for free and open access by the University Graduate School at FIU Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in FIU Electronic Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of FIU Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. FLORIDA INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY Miami, Florida JESUS AS THE SON OF MAN IN MARK A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF ARTS in RELIGIOUS STUDIES by Andrés Tejada-Lalinde 2014 To: Dean Kenneth G. Furton College of Arts and Sciences This thesis, written by Andrés Tejada-Lalinde, and entitled Jesus as the Son of Man in Mark, having been approved in respect to style and intellectual content, is referred to you for judgment. We have read this thesis and recommend that it be approved. Ana María Bidegain Christine Gudorf Erik Larson, Major Professor Date of Defense: March 24, 2014. The thesis of Andrés Tejada-Lalinde is approved. Dean Kenneth G. Furton College of Arts and Sciences Dean Lakshmi N.
    [Show full text]
  • Names of Jesus in Mark's Gospel
    Son of God • Unclean Spirits (1:24; 3:11; 5:7) — the demons themselves knew who Jesus was and were deeply afraid. They both “fell before him.” Another place a demon cries out “I know who you are Son of the Who is Jesus? Most High God” which seems to be an attempt to “gain power” over Jesus. Finally there is a place Names of Jesus in where a demon calls him “the Holy One of God” or the “Holy One fom God.” Mark’s Gospel • The Son Doesn’t Know the Hour (13:32) — here Jesus himself talks about the “Son” not knowing the hour when God will send His Son back. Jesus Mark is a story that carries us on a journey does not explicitly say “I am the Son” but this is to discover: Who is Jesus? The disciples wil the only place in Mark he uses that word. • Son of the Blessed (14:61–62) — the High Priest be asked this question throughout the book asked Jesus if he is the “Christ, the Son of the and we wil see how they come to understand Blessed” to which Jesus says yes. that Jesus is the Christ/Messiah, the Son of • Roman Centurion (15:39) — after Jesus gave him- God, who must die and be raised. self up to die, a Roman Centurion standing nearby exclaimed “surely this man was the “Son of God.” Son of God Beloved Son Jesus Christ, the Son of God (1:1) “You are my Beloved Son; with you I am wel pleased.” (1:11) • At the beginning the audience is given advance “This is my Beloved Son; listen to him!” (9:7) notice of the information that the characters will struggle with throughout the Gospel.1 • A Voice from Heaven — God himself speaks • Some old Greek Manuscripts only say “Jesus from heaven and calls Jesus his “beloved Son” at Je- Christ” and lack “Son of God.”2 But a few lines lat- sus’s baptism (1:11) and when Jesus is transfigured er (v.
    [Show full text]
  • Nathaniel Schmidt Source: Journal of Biblical Literature, Vol
    The "Son of Man" in the Book of Daniel Author(s): Nathaniel Schmidt Source: Journal of Biblical Literature, Vol. 19, No. 1 (1900), pp. 22-28 Published by: The Society of Biblical Literature Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3259068 Accessed: 12/03/2010 14:28 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=sbl. Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. The Society of Biblical Literature is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal of Biblical Literature. http://www.jstor.org 22 JOURNAL OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE. The " Son of Man" in the Book of Daniel.
    [Show full text]
  • Daniel's Vision of the Son Of
    Daniel’s Vision of the Son of Man E.J. Young, Th.M., Ph.D. [p.3] One of the most majestically conceived scenes in the entire Old Testament is that of the judgment in which a figure like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven and was brought before the Ancient of days. The vision has to do with the judgment of four beasts which represent human kings, and also with the establishment of the kingdom of God.1 At its central point is the scene of judgment and the introduction of the Son of man. Concerning this strange figure there has been much discussion, and it will be our purpose to ascertain, in so far as that is possible, his identity. A Survey of Daniel VII The seventh chapter of Daniel relates events which took place in the first year of Belshazzar king of Babylon.2 During this year a dream came to Daniel, the content of which he recorded. In this dream he saw the great sea, a figure of humanity itself.3 From the sea there arose four beasts, each diverse from the others. These beasts did not arise simultaneously, but one after another. The first is said to have been like a lion, with the wings of an eagle. In its flight to heaven it was checked, the heart of a man was given to it and it was made to stand upon its feet as a man. The second beast was compared with a bear raised up on one side. The third resembled a leopard, and the fourth was nondescript, compared to no animal.
    [Show full text]
  • The Son of Man and the Ancient of Days Observations on the Early Christian Reception of Daniel 7
    The Son of Man and the Ancient of Days Observations on the Early Christian Reception of Daniel 7 Bogdan G. Bucur Duquesne University, Pittsburgh Abstract: The divergence between the two textual variants of Dan 7:13 (“Old Greek” and “Theodotion”) and their distinct ways of understanding the relationship between Daniel’s “Ancient of Days” and “Son of Man” is insufficiently studied by scholars of the Book of Daniel, and is neglected by translators of the LXX. This article offers a critical examination of the status quaestionis and a discussion of the exegetical, doctrinal, hymnographic, and iconographic productions illustrating the rich reception history of Daniel 7 in Late Antique and Medieval, especially Byzantine, Christianity. While one exegetical strand distinguishes between the Son of Man (identified as God the Son) and the Ancient of Days (identified as God the Father), an equally, if not more widespread and influential, interpretation views Jesus Christ as both “Son of Man” and “Ancient of Days.” The article argues against the thesis of a direct correlation between the two textual variants of Dan 7:13 and the two strands of its reception history. Introduction The Christian reception history of Daniel 7:13 is complicated by the existence of two authoritative Greek variants of this verse. The pages to follow review the state of scholarship and argue that this textual divergence actually had a minimal impact on the Wirkungsgeschichte of Dan 7:13. This article is also concerned with the best ways to describe the multi-layered reception history of Greek Daniel 7, its diverse modes of symbolisation and strategies of appropriating the sacred Scriptures of Israel as Christian Bible.
    [Show full text]
  • (THE) SON of (THE) MAN, and JESUS Part One: the Meaning
    APPENDIX II (THE) SON OF (THE) MAN, AND JESUS Part One: the Meaning and Application of the Aramaic Idiom A. Th e meaning of the Phrase An Aramaic idiom, ‘(the) son of (the) man’ (a rendering to be explained) has recently received renewed attention, as providing a possible ante- cedent of the characteristically dominical expression, ‘the son of the man’ (as a slavish translation of ho huios tou anthropou would have it). In Aramaic, the phrase essentially means ‘human being,’ and the issue which has emerged in the study of the Gospels centers on whether Jesus used the phrase with that broad, non-messianic refer- ence. Amongst recent contributors, Geza Vermes has perhaps been the most conspicuous exponent of the view that the Aramaic idiom is the only key necessary for understanding Jesus’ preaching in regard to ‘the son of man.’1 His own particular generalization, that the phrase is a circumlocution for ‘I,’ has rightly been attacked:2 the fact is that ‘(the) son of (the) man’ in Aramaic is generic, in the sense that, insofar as it is self-referential, the speaker is included in the class (or a class) of human beings, but the class normally refers to mortal humanity (or a group of people), not to one human being alone.3 1 See Vermes, Jesus the Jew. A Historian’s Reading of the Gospels (London: Collins, 1973) 160–191; ‘ “Th e Son of Man” Debate,’ JSNT 11 (1978) 19–32. 2 See J. A. Fitzmyer, ‘Another View of the “Son of Man” Debate,’ Journal for the Study of the New Testament 14 (1979) 58–68; ‘Th e New Testament Title “Son of Man” Philologically Considered,’ A Wandering Aramean.
    [Show full text]
  • Jesus's Son of Man Strategy in Mark: the Allegorical" Idiomatic Vs
    LIBERTY UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF DIVINITY Jesus’s Son of Man Strategy in Mark: The Allegorical “Idiomatic vs. Messianic” Chess Match and Lessons for Christian Apologetics A Thesis Project Submitted to the Faculty of Liberty University School of Divinity in Candidacy for the Degree of Master of Arts in Christian Apologetics by Toni Perry Lynchburg, Virginia July 31, 2020 Copyright © 2020 by Toni Perry All Rights Reserved ii LIBERTY UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF DIVINITY Thesis Project Approval Sheet ______________________________ Dr. David Stark Mentor ______________________________ Dr. Edward Martin Reader iii ABSTRACT JESUS’S SON OF MAN STRATEGY IN MARK: THE ALLEGORICAL “IDIOMATIC VS. MESSIANIC” CHESS MATCH AND LESSONS FOR CHRISTIAN APOLOGETICS. Toni Perry Liberty University School of Divinity, 2020 Mentor: Dr. David Stark Reader: Dr. Edward Martin Played out against the background of a chess game allegory, this thesis argues two key components to discovering Jesus’s self-identity in the Gospel of Mark. The first is that Mark’s depiction of Jesus’s Son of Man self-designation as a messianic interpretation is more plausible than its contemporary idiomatic interpretation. The second is that Jesus reveals His hidden Son of Man identity in Mark via a threefold strategic approach, which not only embodies His intent and mission through serving, suffering, and glorification, but also serves as a paradigm for the Christian witness and discipleship. The fourfold purpose of this study is to 1) glean information of Jesus’s self-knowledge and understanding as the Son of Man in Mark’s Gospel; 2) resolve any Second Temple Judaism interpretive issues in the text in order to determine its meaning and significance; 3) examine Jesus’s Son of Man strategy in Mark and its implications on contemporary Christian apologetics; and 4) contribute intellectually to the ongoing Son of Man debate conversations.
    [Show full text]
  • The Coming of the Son of Man in Mark's Gospel1
    Tyndale Bulletin 56.1 (2005) 39-61. THE COMING OF THE SON OF MAN IN MARK’S GOSPEL1 Edward Adams Summary This article defends the view that Mark’s sayings on the coming of the Son of Man (Mark 8:38; 13:24-27; 14:62) refer to Jesus’ parousia, against claims made by R. T. France and N. T. Wright. According to France and Wright, these sayings call attention to the vision of Daniel 7:9-14, in which ‘one like a son of man’ comes into the presence of God for the purpose of enthronement, and point to Jesus’ post-mortem vindication, not his second coming. It is argued here that the Markan passages in question link Daniel 7:13 with other Old Testament texts and motifs, in particular, texts (such as Zechariah 14:3) and images about God’s future coming to earth; the selective combination of Scriptures and scriptural images and their application to Jesus generates the essential concept of his parousia – his coming as exalted Lord from heaven to earth at the end of history. 1. Introduction In Mark’s Gospel, Jesus makes three references to the future coming of the Son of Man (8:38; 13:24-27; 14:62).2 These sayings are normally 1 This article is a revised version of my Tyndale New Testament Lecture, at the Tyndale Triennial conference, Regents Park Conference Centre, Nantwich, 2003. I am grateful for comments made on that occasion. I am especially grateful to the editor and the independent reviewer for the Bulletin for their very helpful advice.
    [Show full text]
  • Bibliotheca Sacra
    680 The Tt"tle "The Son of Man." [Oct. ARTX:CLE IV. THE TITLE "THE SON OF MAN." BY PROFESSOR MILTON G. JtVANS, D.D. ACCORDING to the Gospels, Jesus selected the title "the Son of man" as appropriate to himself. Only twice is it used by another than Jesus, and both are probably quota­ tions. Outside of the Gospels it is found only in Ste­ phen's prayer, for the phrase "son of man" in John's Apocalypse does not refer to Jesus, but to the "one like un­ to a son of man" of Daniel's vision. The frequency of the Messianic name" the Son of man" in the Gospels and its absence from the Epistles have often been noticed, and the inference drawn, that Paul's silence is due to ignorance of such a title for Jesus. Assuming Paul's ignorance, the conclusion is reached, that no such Messianic title was current in the apostle's lifetime, and that therefore the representation of the evangelists is un­ historica1. Arguments drawn from the processes of his­ torical and literary criticism have of late been freely used to show that this old conjecture is the true solution of the problem. For example, it is urged that Paul could not have known the term "the Son of man" as a Messianic name; else he would have used it, rather than the terms "the last Adam," "the second man," and "the man from heaven" (I Cor. xv. 45), in order to describe the ideal hu­ manityof Jesus; and the passages in the Gospels where the title occurs are so manipulated as to exclude almost all of them from the sayings of Jesus.
    [Show full text]
  • Hebrews 1:4-14 “Christ, Superior to Angels” It Is True That Belief In
    Hebrews 1:4-14 “Christ, Superior to Angels” It is true that belief in angels is a part of our modern culture, but it is not the intent of the author of Hebrews to speak to our modern culture about angels. Learning about angels can be a lot of fun and helpful, but we will not spend our time this evening studying angels outside of their relevance to our text. I have included a portion of John MacArthur’s sermon notes on this text that delves into Angelology for your own entertainment. Before we can understand the relevance angels have to our author’s intent, we need to first remind ourselves of that intent. The author of Hebrews is writing to a Jewish audience that consist of mostly believers, some non-believers, and a group that is perhaps on the fence, yet they have been exposed adequately to the gospel. Many within this group have been returning to their Jewish roots of Judaism, while many others are being tempted to do the same. The author is seeking to dissuade their return to the Old Covenant religion because Christ has come and fulfilled it, making it obsolete. The author uses arguments of comparison to accomplish this throughout the letter. He compares the covenants and their mediators to prove that the New Covenant mediated by Jesus is the superior and therefore the only one that offers true salvation. Here is a list of the things we do need to know regarding angels insofar as they relate to the author’s purpose for writing this passage.
    [Show full text]
  • I SAW the HOLY CITY, NEW JERUSALEM”— the VISION of the NEW JERUSALEM AS a CORPORATE GOD-MAN by Ron Kangas
    “I SAW THE HOLY CITY, NEW JERUSALEM”— THE VISION OF THE NEW JERUSALEM AS A CORPORATE GOD-MAN by Ron Kangas t is an extremely serious matter for preachers, Bible teach- everyone who ever lived was saved—which is not the Iers, and theologians to misrepresent God, to under- case—that would still allow each person 200 square miles stand wrongly His eternal will, desire, and purpose, and to on the ground alone.…There will be plenty of room for teach erroneously concerning the consummation of the everyone who makes it to Heaven. (395) divine revelation and the ultimate fulfillment of the divine economy—the New Jerusalem in the new heaven t is amazing that such a view is actually presented as a and new earth. Nevertheless, absurd notions and bizarre Iserious possibility! Alcorn also quotes from one of his concepts concerning the New Jerusalem are widely own books on heaven. Describing his understanding of promulgated both in print and online, as teachers of the daily life in the New Jerusalem, he asserts, Scriptures present strange and often highly imaginative ideas of the holy city, the New Jerusalem. One writer has It’s likely that our tastes will differ enough that some of us suggested that the city of God, the wife of the redeem- will prefer to gather in the main streets and auditoriums ing God, is a vast space city hurtling toward earth from for the great cultural events, while others will want to its alleged origin in the third heaven. Another view, pro- withdraw to feed ducks on a lake or to leave the city with pounded by an erstwhile leading spokesman for dispensa- their companions to pursue adventures in some undevel- tionialism, is that the New Jerusalem might be a satellite oped place.
    [Show full text]
  • The Dead Sea Scrolls and the Son of Man in Daniel, 1Enoch, and the New Testament Gospels: an Assessment of 11Qmelch (11Q13) J. H
    THEDEADSEASCROLLSANDTHESONOF MAN IN DANIEL, 1ENOCH, AND THE NEW TESTAMENT GOSPELS: AN ASSESSMENT OF 11QMELCH (11Q13) J. Harold Ellens University of Michigan The Dead Sea Scrolls do not use the term “Son of Man.” Nevertheless, two factors indicate that the concept is worth exploring in the scrolls. First, there is some reason to believe that a Son-of-Man-like-figure is present in QMelch (Q). Presumably, such a figure would have roots in the prophecy of Ezekiel, in the book of Daniel (–), in the Similitudes (Parables)ofEnoch(–), and in Gen :; Pss ; ; and .1 These texts form the mainstream of the Jewish Son of Man tradition. Second, the figure in QMelch may be associated with the royal and priestly messiahs in the War Scroll and in the Hodayot (Thanksgiving Hymns). This paper explores the possibility that QMelch contains or implies a figure like those in the Son of Man tradition of the Hebrew Bible and Enoch. It also examines whether the figure in QMelch is associated with the messiahs of the Hodayot and the War Scroll.Sincethoseare suffering messiahs, this paper examines the possible presence of aSon- of-Man-like-figure (a virtual Son of Man?) in the Dead Sea Scrolls. If such a figure is present, this would seem to be the first instance in Second Temple Judaism in which a suffering servant (Isa ) is associated with the promised Messiah (Isa :–). It would also be the first time in 1 K. Koch asserts unequivocally that QMelch “clearly refers to Daniel. The subject of its preserved fragments is the tenth jubilee as the age of redemption, during which Isa :’s promise of Jerusalem’s final salvation and the realization of the God’s kingdom will be fulfilled.
    [Show full text]