^{page 450 note 1} On the question of patterns of Christology see Fuller, R. H., The Foundations of Mew Testament Christology (London: Lutterworth, 1965) pp. 243–248.Google Scholar

^{page 450 note 2} cf. Hamerton-Kelly, R. G., Pre-exislence, Wisdom, and the Son of Man (Cambridge: CUP 1973) pp. 224–228 following Dodd. Also see below.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

^{page 451 note 1} See Bultmann, R., Theology of the New Testament (London: SCM, 1955) II, pp. 42–44Google Scholar, but also Käsemann, E., The Testament of Jesus (London: SCM, 1968), pp. 12, 17.Google Scholar

^{page 453 note 1} Käsemann, , Testament, pp. 26, 70Google Scholar; cf. 66, 73. Käsemann finds here a naïve or unreflected docetism, but this is linked with his view that the gospel was edited by a redactor subsequently. But on the question of composition see Kümmel, W. G., Introduction to the New Testament (London: SCM, rev. ed. 1975), pp. 306–317.Google Scholar

^{page 454 note 1} Higgins, A. J. B., Jesus and the Son of Man (London: Lutterworth, 1964), pp. 163–164.Google Scholar But the word play was also possible in Greek: Meeks, W. A., ‘The Man from heaven in Johannine Sectarianism’, J.B.L. 91 (1972), p. 62.Google Scholar

^{page 454 note 2} So Bultmann, , Theology II, pp. 53, 57Google Scholar, also in The Gospel of John (Oxford: Blackwell, 1971), pp. 580–586.Google Scholar

^{page 455 note 1} For the view that the explicit future eschatology is due to the redactor see Bultmann, , Theology II, pp. 37–39Google Scholar and Käsemann, , Testament, p. 14, cf. pp. 72–3.Google Scholar Against these see Brown, R. E., The Gospel according to John (London: Chapman, 1971), pp. cxvi–cxxiGoogle Scholar and Kümmel, , Introduction (1975), pp. 209–210.Google Scholar

^{page 457 note 1} On this see Barrett, C. K., The Gospel according to St. John (London: SPCK, 1956), pp. 146–147.Google Scholar

^{page 457 note 2} ‘Son of Man’ is the correct reading at 9.35. On the question of preference see Martyn, J. L., History and Theology in the Fourth Gospel (New York: Harper, 1968), pp. 120–127.Google Scholar

^{page 458 note 1} See n. 5 above.

^{page 458 note 2} Note the cautious qualification by Lindars, B. ‘The Son of Man in the Johannine Christology’ in Christ and Spirit in the New Testament ed. Lindars, B. and Smalley, S. S. (C.U.P., 1973), p. 48 n.Google Scholar

^{page 459 note 1} Hahn, Thus F., The Titles of Jesus in Christology (London: Lutterworth, 1969), P 279.Google Scholar

^{page 461 note 1} cf. Barrett, C. K., ‘The Father is greater than I …’, in News Testament und Kirche, ed. Cnilka, J. (Vienna: Herder, 1974), pp. 144–159.Google Scholar

^{page 462 note 1} Dodd, C. H., The Interpretation of the Fourth Gospel (G.U.P., 1960), 276–277 (see also 274–5).Google Scholar

^{page 463 note 1} On the more general question see Brown, R. E., ‘Does the New Testament call Jesus God?’ T.S., 26, 1965, 545–573.Google Scholar

^{page 464 note 1} On this question see Bultmann, John, 225 n. 3. On the ‘I am’ sayings in general see Brown, John, I 533–8, Conzelmann, H., An Outline of the Theology of the New Testament (London: SCM, 1969) 349–352.Google Scholar

^{page 464 note 2} Details in Barrett, John, 242, 277, Bultmann, John, 368. (One can also find an impressive range of‘I am’ sayings in Bhagavad Gita Ch. 10 passim.)