3. christ as son of man

8/9/2019 3. Christ as Son of Man

1/5

(Published in The Greek Australian VEMA, February 2005)

JESUS CHRIST THE CENTRE OF OUR FAITH:

The Scriptural Image of Christ

SON OF MAN

Introductory Remarks

It has long been recognised that the title 'Son of Man' is one of the principal

Christological titles employed in the New Testament Scriptures. Appearing in all four Gospels,

the expression 'Son of Man' [o uios tou anthropou] represented one of Jesus' most frequently

used self-depictions. In fact it never became a way for other people to refer to Jesus but was

used only by Jesus to refer to Himself and His work.1 Unlike the titles 'Son of God', 'Messiah'

and 'Lord' which were incorporated in the Church's doctrinal statements, the phrase 'Son of

Man' remained a self-designation of Jesus. Interestingly, this appellation is not encountered in

the entire Pauline corpus or in other epistles but only occurs in the Gospel traditions (in fact

more than eighty times2) and only twice outside once in Acts 7:563 and twice in Revelation,

1:134; 14:145. Even though the sense of the term must have been understood by those who

heard it in Jesus' times since there is no explanation of its meaning in the Gospels, today its

usage must be examined6 since it is not readily clear and has in fact been misinterpreted.

Unfortunately today the phrase 'Son of Man' has been grossly misunderstood by

modern scholarship who argue that, in reference to Jesus, it simply highlighted the humanity

of Christ and nothing more. In fact in its attempt to question the traditional Christology of the

Church throughout the centuries which affirmed both the human and divine natures of Christ,

for over four centuries now biblical criticism has strongly challenged the contention that the

title 'Son of Man' may suggest the divinity as well as the humanity of Jesus. And so, it is

argued, the expression was simply a generic way that any human being could refer to himself.

That is to say, many biblical scholars fail to recognize that when Jesus used this term, in the

same way that the Old Testament Scriptures did, He did so in order to betray His divine

1 The only exception to this is found in John 12:34 where it is the people in this case who use this title in

speaking to Jesus so as to ask Him to whom Jesus was referring: " The crowd answered him, We haveheard from the law that the Messiah remains forever. How can you say that the Son of Man must belifted up? Who is this Son of Man?" (Jn 12:34).2 The term occurs 69 times in the Synoptic Gospels and 13 times in the Gospel according to St John

3 Look, he said, I see the heavens opened and the Son of Man standing at the right hand of God!

4 and in the midst of the lampstands I saw one like the Son of Man, clothed with a long robe and with a

golden sash across his chest.5 Then I looked, and there was a white cloud, and seated on the cloud was one like the Son of Man, with

a golden crown on his head, and a sharp sickle in his hand!6 Wellhausen observed that "Jesus uses [the expression] not esoterically at all, not merely in front of his

disciples, yet no one finds it strange and requires an explanation. All let it pass without beingastonished, even the quarrelsome Pharisees who were not accustomed to accept somethingunintelligible." (cited in G. Vermes, Jesus the Jew(London: SCM Press, 1986), 161).

1


2/5

attributes and not only His human. It is important therefore that this title be properly delineated

and understood otherwise we may run the risk of believing, like those modern scholars that

Jesus saw Himself merely as a human being without any divine self-understanding. And in

order to discover meaning of the title 'Son of Man', its origins from the Old Testament

Scriptures will be looked at since this was the way that Jesus understood this title when He

incorporated it for Himself. Appearing for the first time in Jewish apocalyptic literature, it came

to signify a type of redeemer figure who would appear at the end of time. The following

examination of the term will thereby affirm our contention that this title 'Son of Man' denoted

more than a merely human self-appellation.

The Son of Man in the Old Testament Books of Daniel and Ezekiel

The four most significant sources from Jewish literature which shed light on the

meaning of Son of Man are found in the Old Testament books of Daniel and Ezekiel and also

in the Book of Similitudes and 4 Enoch, two first century AD Jewish apocalyptic writings. In all

four works the title 'Son of Man' was understood as a reference to a 'super-human' figure

whose primary function centred around a final judgement and salvation. Even from this one

can easily see the reasons which prompted Jesus to use this title in order to express His own

intentions and divine mission. Firstly looking at the book of Daniel we see here a description

of the prophet Daniel's vision which is focused on 'one like a Son of Man' upon whom

wasbestowed all earthly power and glory by the Ancient of Days. From this passage alone we

come to see that the 'Son of Man' is no mere mortal:

"As I watched in the night visions, I saw one like a Son of Man (bar Enosh

in Aramaic) coming with the clouds of heaven. And he came to the

Ancient One and was presented before him. To him was given dominion

and glory and kingship, that all peoples, nations, and languages should

serve him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion that shall not pass

away, and his kingship is one that shall never be destroyed" (Dan 7:13-14).

In this passage the vision of the heavenly figure, who appeared as a Son of Man receiving

power which is explicitly described as 'everlasting', hints not only to the similarity of this figure

to human beings but also to a dissimilarity in so far as the Son of Man is depicted as a

messianic figure, that is an agent of judgement and salvation.

The other main Old Testament work where the term 'Son of Man' is used is in thebook of Ezekiel. Here, as in Daniel, the one called 'Son of Man' is a herald of judgement

whose pronouncements are of eschatological significance (i.e. important as they relate to the

end times). In the book of Ezekiel however it is clear that the title 'Son of Man' is employed as

a form of address on the part of God to the mortal prophet. Yet it is precisely in Ezekiel that

the role of the prophet is delineated in rather super-human terms and thus Ezekiel, as the

'Son of Man' is understood to occupy an intermediary position between the human and divine

in so far as he mediated the judgements of God to the world. It is in this sense that the

formula 'Son of Man' must be seen as something other than merely human.

2


3/5

Jewish Literature

Subsequent Jewish writings began to give fuller descriptions of this manlike figure of

Daniel not only interpreting him in messianic categories but stating that he was pre-existent

and divine. Two such works dating from the first century AD were: 1) The Book of Similitudes

which formed part of the pseudoepigrahic work of 1 Enoch (ch 37-71) and 2) 4 Ezra 13 which

scholars argue was written approximately 100AD. One such example clearly outlining how the

book of Daniel was interpreted in relation to the 'Son of Man' sayings within the Book of

Similitudes is the following:

"and the Son of Man whom you have seen shall put down the kings and the

mighty from their seats(46.4) And at that hour the Son of Man was named in

the presence of the Lord of Spirits, And his name before the Head of Days. Yea,

before the sun and the signs were created, before the stars of the heaven were

made, his name was named before the Lord of Spirits (48.2) And all the elect

shall stand before him on that day. And all the kings and the mighty and exalted

ones those that rule the earth shall fall before him on their faces and worship

and set their hope upon that Son of Man and petition him and supplicate for

mercy at his hands (62.7)."

From the above passage it can clearly be seen that the Son of Man was believed to be the

'Messiah' who was pre-existent and given prerogatives which traditionally belonged to God

alone. Clearly, in using this title for Himself Jesus saw Himself as fulfilling the Scriptures in

that He was the One about whom Daniel had spoken and upon whom later Jewish literature

further elaborated. It is against such a background that Jesus would have used the 'Son of

Man' terminology which is recorded in the New Testament.

The 'Son of Man' in the New Testament

Putting aside the whole scholarly debate which is centred on examining whether the

'Son of Man' sayings found in the Gospels were actually said by Jesus ( the so called

ipsissima verba of the historical Jesus) or if they were added subsequently by the early

Church since this would in effect suggest large scale alterations (retrojections) of the Biblical

texts on the part of the early Christian community which seems highly improbable, we will now

consider the usage of the 'Son of Man' sayings in the Gospels. Firstly, it is clear that the

expression 'Son of Man' is used in similar ways in all four Gospels. Having affirmed the

similarity in connotations, one can conclude that there are at least three different ways inwhich the term is used in the Synoptic Gospels. The three distinct groups refer to [a] Jesus

during His earthly life as the Son of Man, [b] predictions of Jesus' death and resurrection as

the Son of Man, [c] the future coming of the Son of Man and the vindication of His sufferings

and authority as judge.

A survey of the group of passages referring to Jesus as the Son of Man during His

earthly ministry reveal an authority of Jesus which was beyond the human. In fact it extended

not only to His dominion over the Sabbath but referred also to His power to forgive sins. In the

Old Testament (the Hebrew Bible) the ascription of such authority remained the divineprerogatives of Jawheh (God). In using the title 'Son of Man' when referring to these divine

3


4/5

functions and others, such as judging, creating and saving, Jesus was affirming His divine-

human self-understanding. In healing the paralytic and thereby claiming the ability to heal and

save, Jesus realized that the Pharisees were questioning His authority and so He said:

"Why do you think evil in your hearts? For which is easier, to say, Your

sins are forgiven, or to say, Stand up and walk? But so that you may

know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins he

then said to the paralytic Stand up, take your bed and go to your

home (Mt 9:4-6).

Furthermore Jesus revealed even His authority even over the Sabbath when He pronounced

that the Sabbath was made for humanity:

The Sabbath was made for humankind, and not humankind for the

Sabbath; so the Son of Man is lord even of the Sabbath (Mk 2:27-28).

Such authority not only to forgive sins but also over the Sabbath which Jesus claimed for

Himself as the 'Son of Man' would normally belong to God alone in the Scriptures or One

whom God would send to the world with the same authority as God. This goes to show that

the phrase 'Son of Man' betrayed a self-understanding on Jesus' part as the One sent by God

who had come to fulfil the Old Testament Scriptures.

During His trial, Jesus spoke to the High Priests and to the Sanhedrin of the

impending death of the Son of Man in a series of predictions emphasising that this was to

happen so as to fulfil what was written in the Scriptures:

"Then he began to teach them that the Son of Man must undergo great

suffering, and be rejected by the elders, the chief priests, and the scribes,

and be killed, and after three days rise again. (Mk 8:31) See, we are

going up to Jerusalem, and the Son of Man will be handed over to the

chief priests and the scribes, and they will condemn him to death; then

they will hand him over to the Gentiles" (Mk 10:33).

Whilst these two biblical passages make it clear that as the Son of Man, Jesus had to suffer,

they also betray that He would be victorious over death, thereby betraying His divine

attributes as One able to conquer death by death. This second use of the title 'Son of Man' by

Jesus clearly showed a divine element in His understanding of the expression.

The third meaning associated with the Son of Man sayings has to do with Jesus asthe final judge at the Second Coming. The most striking passage illustrating the connection

between the expression 'Son of Man' and the theme of judgement is found in the gospel

according to Luke which describes Jesus speaking to His disciples that one amongst them

would betray Him:

"For the Son of Man is going as it has been determined, but woe to that

one by whom he is betrayed! Then they began to ask one another, which

one of them it could be who would do this" (Lk 22:22-23).

Other biblical references relating to the future coming of Jesus in judgement as the Son of

Man "in clouds and with great power and glory" to assemble His scattered people and toreject those who were ashamed of Him are the following two biblical verses:

4


5/5

"Those who are ashamed of me and of my words in this adulterous and

sinful generation, of them the Son of Man will also be ashamed when he

comes in the glory of his Father with the holy angels. . Then they will

see the Son of Man coming in clouds with great power and glory " (Mk

8:38; 13:26).

These passages are clearly reminiscent of the Danielic tradition which described the One who

would descend from the clouds 'like a Son of Man' in order to judge the world and then be

given everlasting power and dominion in the Kingdom of Heaven. As the Son of Man, the

Scriptures claim that Jesus would confront all nations, both Jews and Gentiles in order to

judge them, bestowing eternal life upon the righteous and consigning the accursed to eternal

punishment. One could therefore easily conclude that Jesus used of the title 'Son of Man' in

order to describe His unique person and mission, having in mind the figure prophesised by

Daniel who would come as God's agent to gather and judge His people. Clearly such an

understanding goes contrary to the contention put forward by modern scholarship which

understands this title purely as a description of Jesus' human self-understanding.

Concluding Remarks

In using the term 'Son of Man' it has been shown that Jesus did in fact refer to

Himself in this way being fully aware of the way the term was used in the Scriptures. Since

the Scriptural Christ was interpreted as the One who came to fulfil the Old Testament, truly

divine with the same divinity as His Father, it is not unreasonable to postulate that the title

'Son of Man' represented something more than a purely human category. In fact, knowing the

Scriptures (that is the Old Testament) Jesus would have been familiar with Daniel 7 and

therefore used this phrase to teach the people that it was He who was the 'human-like' figure

that Daniel had foretold and which 1 Enoch and 4 Ezra had identified as the Messiah, God's

Son, the Elect One. The title betrayed the divine aspect of His person and work and this was

precisely the reason why Jesus appropriated the title 'Son of Man' for Himself. Besides

contextually speaking, such an interpretation of 'Son of Man' betraying Christ's divinity fits in

with the occasion of the writings of the New Testament, whose authors had to explain and

justify not the fact that Jesus was a man, as this was taken for granted, but the position that

He was also God. Therefore the title 'Son of Man' is best understood as an authentic

reference to the divinity of Jesus over and against His humanity since it is clearly attributedwith transcendent features far surpassing any purely human features.

Dr Philip Kariatlis

Academic Secretary

Associate Lecturer

St Andrews Greek Orthodox Theological College

5

3. christ as son of man

Documents