local universal final messianic associative claims


Compare
also John 8:57-58:
"Then the Jews said to him,
'You are not yet fifty years old and you have seen Abraham?'
He said to them: 'Truly, truly I say unto you, before Abraham came into being, I Am
(EIGO EIMI)!'
They then picked up stones that they might cast them at him!"
~~

This is precisely the same as what happens here in Mark.
Jesus in both Gospels is understood as claiming divine status through naming him-self as YHWH names himself.
Since stoning is the biblically ordained punishment for blasphemy, these people seek to stone him.
Which is also precisely for which Stephen was stoned according to Acts 7:56, although there the blasphemy consisted in implying
the divine status of Jesus, not, of course [yet], his own! To my (DB's) knowledge, this is the only place in which "Son of Man"
is used of Jesus by someone other than Jesus himself; it shows how charged was that claim to be the Son of Man,
which only makes sense if it is [experienced as] a claim to divinity?

It is also the same blasphemy of which Jesus was accused (in chapter 2),
when he presumed the divine prerogative of forgiving sins! Thus, we can learn that for the Jesus of the Gospels,
this title "Son of Man" derives from Dani'el 7, is the name for the divine redeemer of a high Christology,
& so constitutes that blasphemy of which the high priest used to speak?! The high priest clearly knows these terms "MASHIACH,"
"Son of God," & "Son of Man!" He also perceives that when Jesus says "I am," he is actually declaring himself the one whose name is "I am,"
YHWH himself? Through all of these terms, Jesus is claiming some share of divinity,
hence the charge of blasphemy! See Mark 14:61:
'Are Ye the Messiah-Son-of-God?'"

Incidentally,
that comparison
between this passage
& 8:31 demonstrates that Jesus answers questions about his Messiahship by using the term "Son of Man" in these instances
because he is crucially calling up in both cases the Dani'elic context. This obvi-ates the problem see by some commentators to the effect
that Jesus does not answer Shim'on Petros aka Kefas affirmatively when he con-fesses him 'the Messiah'?!

Here it cannot be denied, of course, that there is a direct allusion to the Dani'elic source of the narrative of the Son of Man,
which is explicitly signaled by the words "coming with the clouds of heavens"; thus we suggest the parallel provides good evidence for our interpretation of the Mark 8 passage as well!? As in 14:62, he refers to the exaltation of the Son of Man; in 8:31 he refers to the suffering & humiliation of the Son of Man, which is the cited again in 9:12, "as it has been written!" Also these two verses thus complete each other
~~

The progression of the Gospel narrative runs in the following fashion:
* Yesh asks his disciples who they think he is;
* ShiPeKe answers that he is the MASHIACH;
* Yesh answers that the Son of Man must suffer many things; ShiPeKe denies this (he still is ashamed of a suffering Ma-shiach!);
* Yesh rebukes him;
* Yesh calls his disciples together to provide them with the lesson to be learned from his sharp rebuke of Pete;
* EQUALLY: ALL WHO WOULD BE FOLLOWERS OF YEHOSHUA MUST PICK UP CROSSES AND BE WILLING TO LOSE THEIR LIVES AS HE WILL!;
* BUT if any are ashamed of Yesh in his humiliation & crucifixion, the exalted Son of Man (Yesh vindicated) will be ashamed of them in the final moment, when he comes in glory with his angels (Dani'el 7)!

It is precisely under the title Son of Man that Yesh predicates his (our!) sufferings: at the end of chapter 7 of Dani'el, this symbol of the Son of Man is interpreted as "the People of the Saints of the Most High," who will be crushed for a certain amount of time under the heels of the fourth beast and then will arise &, defeating the beast, "will receive the kingdom & HOLD the kingdom 'forever & ever'!" It thus can hardly be doubted that this phrase "the Son of Man must suffer many things, & 'be rejected'" is a palpable allusion to Yeshayahu 53:3, in which we are told that the suffering servant of the Lord "is despised & rejected of men!" This, as we heave seen several times before, is very plausibly read about the MASHIACH (Messiah/Christ), & we must also, of course, be mindful of several other biblical texts in the background here, including especially the psalms of lament! We therefore don't need to posit a special Christian mode of reading that led to this idea! Once again, THE primary mode of early Jewish biblical exegesis is midrash, which is the concatenation of related
(OR EVEN SEEMINGLY UNRELATED!) passages and verses
from ALL OVER the bible scroll books in order to
DERIVE NEW LESSONS
AND NARRATIVES!

It is
midrash that we
see at work here
~~~
28 feb 2013 - bewerkt op 01 mrt 2013 - meld ongepast verhaal
Weet je zeker dat je dit verhaal wilt rapporteren? Ja | Nee
Profielfoto van Asih
Asih, man, 80 jaar
   
Log in om een reactie te plaatsen.   vorige volgende