Posted: Jan 06, 2021 4:17 am
by RealityRules
Boyarin, Daniel. 2010. “The Sovereignty of the Son of Man: Reading Mark 2”, in 'The Interface of Orality and Writing: Speaking, Seeing, Writing in the Shaping of New Genres', Annette Weissenrieder and Robert B. Coote eds., pp.353–62. Tübingen, Mohr Siebeck:

"Gospel [was], as has been noted before, a fascinating new event in the literary world ... a very early instance of rabbinic genre which [came] to be known as midrash ... the building of a new narrative out of partially decontextualized and recombined verses from the Bible. // ... while the narratives of the Gospels have a kind of simplicity that we associate with folk narrative, the midrashic generation of these stories is by no means naive; they are the product of complicated relays and hermeneutic activities that underly the narrative consequences, whether birth, passion, or anything that comes in between." (p. 353)

" .. in my view, Jesus was entirely unnecessary for the formation of Mark’s Christology, as he is the fulfilment, not the provocation, of that Christology. Jesus in the Gospel of Mark is the precise fulfilment, I suggest, of well known and ancient pre-Jesus ideas about the Messiah as a divine human (which is not to deny a Markan contribution to the development of such ideas)

.. "the Son of Man” was [put] on Jesus’ lips, because he was a first-century Palestinian Jew, and “Son of Man” was the name that these Jews used for their expected divine-human (Christological) redeemer5 [5. "In contrast to Paul who [in Boyarin's view] occupies another corner of the Jewish traditional world in which different terminology was used ..."].

"The key to Christology is a partial reconsideration of the way that Daniel 7:13-14 works in the Gospel [of Mark] and of [the] Son of Man with respect to other messianic titles, particularly Son of God." (p.354-5)