The Son of Man


Before Stephen, the first of the followers of Jesus to die for his faith, was stoned to death, he had a vision. 'But Stephen, full of the Holy Spirit, looked up to heaven and saw God's glory and Jesus standing at the right hand of God. "Look!" he said. "I see the heavens opened and the Son of Man standing at the right hand of God".' (Acts 7:55-56).

In these words Stephen identifies Jesus with the 'Son of Man'. Stephen calls Jesus by a title which Jesus often used in his teaching, according the record of the gospels. The title, however, is not used by the writer of the letters of the New Testament. There are about eighty references in the four gospels to the Son of Man. Sometimes Jesus is clearly describing himself as the Son of Man but at other times he seems to referring to a mysterious figure without explicitly identifying him: with that figure. What does this title mean?

In the Old Testament we find that the Hebrew phrase ben-adam which, can be translated into English as 'son of man' and is related to the Swahili word binadamu, can mean merely 'human being' or 'mortal man'. In the book of Ezekiel the phrase is used in just that way very frequent for example, in Ezekiel 2: I we read this: 'Mortal man, stand up. I want to talk to you.' In the Aramaic dialect which was the mother tongue Jesus, the word barnasha meant exactly the same as the Hebrew phrase ben-adam.

 

A new idea appears in the book of Daniel. In Daniel 7:9-14, a terrifying" vision of God is followed by the appearance of a mysterious figure described as being like a human being. This 'Son of Man' is given authority, honor and royal power so that all people of all nations, races and languages would serve him. His authority would last forever and kingdom would never end. Later Jewish writings which are not included in the Old Testament also refer to a similar idea of what we might call a perfect heavenly man who is given authority directly by God to rule over all mankind on earth

When we look at how the title is used in the teaching of Jesus in t gospels, with particular reference to the gospel of Mark where it appear: fourteen times, we find a combination of the two ideas from the Old Testament. In Mark 10:45, Jesus says, 'For even the Son of Man did not come to be served; he came to serve and to give his life to redeem many people.' Here Jesus is clearly referring to himself as the Son Man and to human experience. He had just settled a dispute amongst the disciples who had been arguing about which one of them should be the greatest. Jesus made it clear to them that humble service to other; was what he expected of them for he was giving them his own example to follow. As a man, he is concerned to help others, even to the point o; giving his life for them. In Mark 2:27-28, Jesus teaches about doing good on the Sabbath, the holy day, and says, 'The Son of Man is Lord even of the Sabbath.' This is clearly another reference to himself in situation where he meets human needs in spite of opposition. The emphasis in these two passages is on human need and the human situation.

In 13:26 the idea of the Son of Man is linked with the final judgement day of the world and recalls the vision in Daniel 7. 'Then the Son of Man will appear, coming in the clouds with great power and glory.' Jesus does not explicitly identify himself with this mysterious figure.

In 14:62, Jesus links the idea of the Messiah, whom he affirms he is when he is questioned by the High Priest, with the idea of the heavenly Son of Man.

 

But there are other passages where Jesus links the idea of suffering with the Son of Man. There are nine references in the gospel of Mark where this occurs. In these passages Jesus does not say explicitly that he is the Son of Man, but the implication is there.

Why did Jesus use this strange title with its implication that he was the Son of Man? He did not invent the title, as we have seen; it was already in use in the ways we described, but it had a mysteriousness about it and could mean different things. It provided a new way of describing himself and his work. It implied his authority from God but it also implied the human situation of his ministry. We have seen the problem that arose over the title of Messiah. With the title 'Son of Man' there was no such problem.