"e;Borsch has not answered all the questions, of course. Who can? But his view of the Man tradition makes more sense to me than, for example, Perrin's rather cavalier dismissal of the evidence, and it not only enlightens but also enlivens the discussion. As against the extreme skeptics, Borsch is also convincing to me in arguing the case for a large measure of authenticity in the Son of man tradition in the Gospels. If the proof of the pudding is in the eating, the book constantly calls me back to its pages for insight regarding the problem, both in its historical dimension and in its bearing upon the meaning of Jesus of Nazareth for faith today. --'Theology'"e;The author is well aware of the difficulties involved in entering a field wherein so much investigation has been done. And of this, with the positive and negative conclusions, he gives an excellent survey, crisp and critical . . . . The lines opened up will engage the attention of a new and more positive chapter in the form-critical argument. --'London Quarterly and Holborn Review'

"e;Borsch has not answered all the questions, of course. Who can? But his view of the Man tradition makes more sense to me than, for example, Perrin's rather cavalier dismissal of the evidence, and it not only enlightens but also enlivens the discussion. As against the extreme skeptics, Borsch is also convincing to me in arguing the case for a large measure of authenticity in the Son of man tradition in the Gospels. If the proof of the pudding is in the eating, the book constantly calls me back to its pages for insight regarding the problem, both in its historical dimension and in its bearing upon the meaning of Jesus of Nazareth for faith today. --'Theology'"e;The author is well aware of the difficulties involved in entering a field wherein so much investigation has been done. And of this, with the positive and negative conclusions, he gives an excellent survey, crisp and critical . . . . The lines opened up will engage the attention of a new and more positive chapter in the form-critical argument. --'London Quarterly and Holborn Review'