The Never Ending Saga of the Son of Man

A while back I posted about the CEB’s decision to interpret tou huiou tou anthropou (lit. “the son of the man”) as “the Human One”. This is not entirely new.  Herman C. Waetjen in his under read but useful Mark commentary A Re-Ordering of Power: A Socio-Political Reading of Mark’s Gospel translates it as “the Human Being”.

Any way, Joel Green, NT editor for the CEB has a short video explaining the decision to translate the phrase the way that it appears.


HT: Jim West.


"Philosophy and theology have a certain characteristic in common: they produce a huge amount of ..."

Soren Kierkegaard on Biblical Scholarship
""I would suggest that Kierkegaard's attitude to biblical scholarship is a necessary over-reaction, necessary as ..."

Soren Kierkegaard on Biblical Scholarship
"I love it when you NT scholars get kicked in the shins like this. I ..."

Soren Kierkegaard on Biblical Scholarship
What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • kim fabricius

    See Walter Wink, The Human Being: Jesus and the Enigma of the Son of Man (2002).

  • Chris Hennessey

    Michael, how do you feel about this specific interpretation, and of the CEB as a whole?

  • Mike McKinniss

    It’s funny: The reasoning behind “The Human One” makes sense in terms of getting the idea across in English. Unfortunately, I think the CEB translation actually masks the connection to Daniel 7, which Dr. Green rightly highlights. Few English readers – even the most astute ones – would read “the Human One” and connect it to “one like a human being.” “Son of Man” is bizarre enough in English to be remembered.