Why Did Jesus Refer To Himself As The Son Of Man?

Why does Jesus refer to himself as the ″Son of Man″ in Mark 2:10?

  • This information comes from the International Standard Bible Encyclopedia. As recorded in the Gospels, this is Jesus’ preferred method of referring to himself. This phrase appears more than 30 times in Matthew, 15 times in Mark, 25 times in Luke, and a dozen times in John. It comes almost constantly in the tongue of Jesus himself, with the exception of one instance when spectators inquire as to what He means by the term (John 12:34). Revelation uses it twice in the book of Revelation, the first time in Stephen’s speech (Acts 7:56), and once in Acts, the only other place it appears outside of the Gospels (1:13
  • 14:14). Due to the fact that this is the name Jesus favors for himself, it seems to reason that it would be used in his first self-reference as well. Before that time, all of the titles for Jesus are provided by the author or by someone else on his behalf. Because Jesus is the only one who uses this title, this characteristic is not unique to Mark, but is found throughout the gospels. The first time the phrase ″Son of Man″ is used is by Jesus in all four gospels. Refer to Matthew 8:20, Luke 5:24, and John 1:51 for examples. In Mark, Jesus used the following titles: When I was reading the ESV in red letters, I performed a quick tally of titles Jesus used (including some that he may not have been using for himself, and some that he may have been quoting from someone else), and I came up with the following totals: God the Father (Lord) (verses 5 and 19)
  • Jesus (verses 12 and 37)
  • prophet (verse 6)
  • Christ (verses 9 and 35
  • 13 and 31)
  • Son of David (verse 12 and 35)
  • Son (verse 13 and 32)
  • Teacher (verse 14).

The total number of players is ten. Son of Man (also known as ″Son of Man″ or ″Son of Man″). 2, 10, 2:28, 8:38, 9:12, 31; 10, 33, 45; 13:26, 14:21 x2, 41, 62, 10:33, 45

  1. The total number of people is 121.
  2. This demonstrates that Jesus preferred to refer to himself as ″Son of Man″ in the Gospel of Mark.
  3. As an illustration of preference, consider the following: One particularly memorable instance is when the High Priest asks Jesus whether he is the Messiah using two separate titles at the same time.

Even when he responds affirmatively, Jesus continues to refer to himself as ″Son of Man.″ 14:61 and 62 (ESV) He, on the other hand, stayed deafeningly silent and offered no response.″Are you the Christ, the Son of the Blessed?″ the high priest inquired a second time of him.In response, Jesus said, ″I am, and you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of Power, and coming with clouds of heaven.″ Furthermore, this is the key to comprehending why Jesus desires to be addressed by this title in the first place.It is an unmistakable allusion to Daniel 7:13–14: The Ancient of Days appeared to me in night visions, and behold, with the clouds of heaven there came one who seemed like a son of man, and he was placed before him.In order that all peoples, countries, and languages serve him, God gave him dominion and glory as well as a kingdom; his dominion is an everlasting dominion that will never pass away, and his kingdom is one that will never be destroyed.

  1. In all likelihood, this is the term to which Jesus is alluding when he refers to himself as ″the Son of Man.″ In this passage, a mystery person with the appearance of a man appears before the ″Ancient Of Days″ and is granted sovereignty over the whole planet by him.
  2. This is absolutely consistent with his views, as evidenced by the following passage from Mark 2:10: Because ″you must understand that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins,″ as the Bible says.
  3. 1 The reason for the disparity between my count and the ISBE is that verses 8:31 and 9:9 are not in red letters (despite the fact that Jesus is speaking indirectly in both verses), and 13:34 is not translated ″Son of Man″ in the ESV (although Jesus is speaking indirectly in both verses).

Why is Jesus Called the ″Son of Man″? — Knowing Scripture

  1. Jesus refers to himself as ″the son of man″ on several occasions, which appears to be a fairly clumsy self-reference.
  2. My observations of popular preaching and teaching have revealed that the phrase ″son of man″ is frequently used to create a vague idea, if not specifically stated, that Jesus’ humanity is being emphasized, underlining the fact that Jesus is a genuine flesh and blood human being.
  3. Rather from only being the son of ″God,″ Jesus is also the son of ″man,″ in what is known as a proto-two-nature Christology.

Well, I don’t believe that’s the purpose here, to be honest.After all, first and foremost, ″son of man″ is what Jesus referred to himself as throughout his earthly ministry, at which time no one had any difficulty accepting that he was a human being.First and foremost, it does not make much biblical sense to treat the distinction between ″son of man″ and ″son of God″ as being equal to the distinction between ″human″ and ″divine.″ This is due to the fact that many ordinary individuals (not to mention angels) have been referred to as ″sons of God″ throughout history: Adam, the kings of Judah, Christians, the Sethites or fallen angels (take your pick) of Genesis 6, and so on.How to Make Biblical Sense: Generic Applications Consider the fact that the term ″Son of God″ does not necessarily indicate a divine character when used as an ordinary title.A person’s identity as God the Son, the second person of the Trinity, entails more than merely being a member of God’s family.

  1. Furthermore, we should not assume that the phrase ″son of man″ is merely or predominantly used to refer to Jesus’ human nature or personhood.
  2. For this reason, if we want to grasp what Jesus actually meant by it, we need look at how the title ″son of man″ was used in the Old Testament, which is Jesus’ source of inspiration.
  3. Consequently, the following are some fundamental observations concerning how the title is employed: (1) The title ″son of man″ appears multiple times in the Old Testament as a means of drawing attention to a person’s frailty or weakness.
  4. It appears to have this sense in Job 16:21, Job 25:6, and Job 35:8, as well as in Isaiah 51:12 and other passages.
  5. Additionally, the God who does not lie or repent in Numbers 23:19 is contrasted with the ″son of man″ who does both in the same verse (Numbers 23:20).
  6. (2) There is one instance in Isaiah (56:2) and two instances in Jeremiah (50:40 and 51:43) where the phrase does not appear to signify special weakness, but rather appears to be a euphemism for the word ″human″ instead.

These two types are represented by a small number of applications in the Psalms.In light of these passages, it’s possible to argue that Jesus is referring to himself as ″son of man″ as a title of humility, or perhaps as a manner of drawing attention to his weakened incarnational situation.But this is a stretch.Jesus was, without a question, more humble than any other man who has ever walked the face of the globe, but I doubt that this was his intention.As previously said, during his earthly mission, Jesus did not have to contend with people’ too exalted ideas of him, as was the case with the apostles.

The Psalms have one instance in which the title is employed in a context that emphasizes power rather than weakness: Psalm 73.This is what Psalm 80:16-18 says: ″They have burnt it with fire; they have chopped it down; may they perish at your hand’s rebuke!″ But place your hand on the guy at your right hand, the son of man whom you have built up to be a formidable opponent for yourself!And we will never turn away from you; give us life and we will call upon your name!

– The king of Judah is most certainly being alluded to in this passage.He is the guy who sits at the right hand of God.Even while the psalmist wonders that the God who created the skies has care for the ″son of man,″ he realizes that God has crowned the son of man with glory and honor, and has appointed him as the overseer of all God’s works in Psalm 8:4-8 as well.As a result, ″son of man″ might allude to a strong or at the very least a respected individual.It’s also worth mentioning that, when Psalm 8 is taken into consideration, the Hebrew phrase ben-adam, son of ″Adam,″ is used.Ben-adam is a general term for ″mankind″ or ″human,″ but it refers to the first man Adam, of whom every human is a descendant or descendant.

  • Of fact, when Psalm 8 sings of how the ″son of man″ is entrusted with sovereignty over creation, it is apparent that it is referring to the original Adam in the first place.
  • After considering these three types of usage, we may conclude that the term ″son of man″ as a generic title can be used to emphasize humanity’s fragility in comparison to God, but it can also be used to conjure up memories of humanity’s lofty position as God’s image and ruler of creation.
  • It’s a title that may be both humiliating and exalting, depending on the situation and circumstances.

Before crowning Prince Caspian as king of Narnia, Aslan taught him that to be born as a son of Adam is to have ″both dignity enough to elevate the head of the poorest beggar, and humiliation enough to bend the shoulders of the greatest emperor on the face of the globe.″ However, there is more!In the Old Testament, the phrase ″son of man″ is used in two more more specific contexts.To begin with, the word tons is employed in Ezekiel.In fact, Ezekiel is referred to as ″son of man″ more times in the Bible than Jesus is in all four gospels taken together (93x for Ezekiel vs.82x for Jesus).Apocalyptic visions are shown in Daniel’s second vision, in which he sees ″a son of man coming with the clouds of heaven″ and receiving a dominion that would last forever and ever.

Daniel is subsequently referred to as the ″son of man″ shortly after (8:17).Considering that Jesus’ personal usage of the phrase is frequently associated with comments about his ″coming with the clouds of heaven,″ Daniel provides the most promising immediate historical context.In Ezekiel, however, the sheer volume of occurrences suggests that we shouldn’t dismiss this possibility, especially given the fact that Ezekiel and Daniel were near contemporaries, with Daniel being a bit younger and in all likelihood perfectly aware of the fact that Ezekiel had previously been referred to as the ″son of man.″ Perhaps Daniel was referring to ″one like a son of man″ when he said he saw ″one like Ezekiel.″ It’s something to think about.

Before we move on to the gospels, there’s one more thing to consider.The moniker ″Son of Man″ is one that Jesus himself has used almost exclusively to refer to himself.It entirely vanishes once the gospels have been written.

It did not become part of the typical Christian way of life or worship.Stephen did see a vision of ″the son of man″ standing at the right hand of the Almighty God.It also occurs twice in the Book of Revelation: first, the son of man is standing in the midst of the lampstands, and then he is seated on a cloud, holding a sickle in his hand.But that’s all there is to it.

This information must be taken into consideration.Can you tell me whether there’s something about the specific setting of Jesus’ mission that makes the term especially suited to that historical period?Son of Man in the Gospels: Is There Anything to Consider?There isn’t a single gospel in which the title is the most prominent.

  1. It is mentioned 29 times in Matthew, 14 times in Mark, 26 times in Luke, and 13 times in John.
  2. More than anything, this is a reflection of the lengths of the Gospels in comparison to one another.
  3. As a side note, this is key proof that the Gospels (including the apparently late and mythologized John) accurately represent Jesus’ actual words, rather than the words of others.
  4. Liberal academics have frequently argued that Jesus’ ideas in the gospels are just early church ideology repackaged as though they were spoken by Jesus.
  5. But, if that were the case, why would they have Jesus repeatedly refer to himself in ways that he is never referred to in other Christian writing?

The only reason why the Gospels would have Jesus referring to himself as something other than what the church would later refer to him as is if he truly did refer to himself in that way.If you take the time to look over the lists of references in each of the gospels listed above, one thing that will stand out to you is that there does not appear to be any specific relationship between the label ″son of man″ and any one feature of Jesus’ career or teaching that you can identify.It’s simply what he refers to himself as.If Jesus is speaking about his miracles, preaching, approaching death, kingdom-bringing power, authority to pardon sin, or lordship over the Sabbath in any way, he will use the pronoun ″I″ or ″me.″ So, why would he refer to himself as such?

According to this context, I believe that Jesus’ self-description as ″son of man″ is due largely to two considerations: first, Jesus is the son of God, and second, Jesus is the son of man.

  1. The resemblance between his ministry and that of Ezekiel
  2. According to Daniel’s vision, Jesus is the one who receives and governs over the kingdom of God
  3. Jesus is the fulfillment of Daniel’s vision
  1. The Prophet Ezekiel and the Son of Man Ezekiel, the son of man, was selected as a prophet to Israel when he was thirty years old, beside a river, similar to how Jesus was chosen as a prophet.
  2. Here’s what he was assigned: Son of man, I am sending you to the people of Israel, to the countries of rebels, to those who have turned their backs on me and rebelled against me.
  3. They, as well as their fathers, have continued to trespass against me to this day…

The fact that a prophet has been among them will be known to them regardless of whether they listen or refuse to listen (since they are a rebellious house) (Ezekiel 2:3-5).Jesus, the Son of Man and the greater Ezekiel, was sent to the lost sheep of the house of Israel in the same way that Ezekiel and the other prophets were sent to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.It was only what he had heard from the Father that he shared with them.A abomination was seen in the temple, according to Ezekiel 8:6, and the prophet asked: ″Son of man, do you see what they are doing, the vast abominations that the house of Israel are doing here, to drive me away from my sanctuary?″ In addition, Jesus observed abominations in the temple and drove them out with a whip made of cords and thorns.Jesus used parables in order for Israel, who was rebelling against him, to not grasp what he was saying.

  1. Ezekiel, like many other prophets, was a parable-speaker (17:2).
  2. Ezekiel (9:1-11) and Jesus (in the Olivet Discourse) both foretold the fall of Jerusalem and both declared it.
  3. Symbolically, Ezekiel carried Israel’s punishment (4:4-8), just as Jesus will in actuality bear Israel’s suffering.
  4. There are many more parallels than just these.
  5. Of course, there are numerous parallels between Jesus and other biblical figures such as Jeremiah, etc.
  6. As a result, it is usually best not to stress this issue too hard.

Moreover, the more widely recognized historical context for the moniker ″son of man″ is found in Daniel 7, which we will now turn our attention to.The Book of Daniel and the Son of Man A vision of ″one like a son of man″ receiving a kingdom appears shortly after Ezekiel’s, and Daniel declares that ″all peoples, countries, and languages″ would serve him as a result.When he comes, it will be in the clouds of heaven, just as Jesus predicted he would do (and it will be in the form of a ″coming″ into heavenly glory and power, not a ″coming down to earth,″ as many end-times enthusiasts believe).As previously said, it’s probable that Daniel is making a reference to Ezekiel in this passage.Because the ″son of man″ in Daniel’s vision is later associated with ″the saints of the most high,″ if this is true, it would be given to Ezekiel as a representation of a loyal remnant of the people of God (7:27).

In addition, it’s worth noting that the ″son of man″ is given sovereignty over the kingdoms that were represented by creatures in Daniel’s vision: the kingdoms of the lion, the kingdoms of the bear, the kingdoms of the leopard, and the kingdom of the dragon.In this scenario, Adam is reminded of his original mission to rule over the creatures of the world.Daniel’s son of man is the one who is carrying out Adam’s charge to ″rule″ as the image of God, according to the book of Daniel.

See also:  Who Is Related To Jesus Today?

This is precisely what Jesus’ function is: he is the final Adam, the loyal Israelite, the main representation of the saints, the perfect image of God, and the one who will inherit and dominate all of creation.That is what it means for Jesus to be called the Son of Man, according to the Bible.He is the son of Adam in the most literal meaning of the word.Second son who obtains the inheritance in preference to first son – as with Isaac and Jacob – is known as the heir apparent.However, this post has grown in length.Hopefully, this serves as a prompt and a point of departure for additional consideration.

  • As a last word of application, it’s worth remembering that people who are in Christ partake in his inheritance and will share in Adam’s reign over creation with Jesus in the days to come.
  • If that thinking and that faith don’t inspire us to reach the level of maturity and holiness that is appropriate for kings, I don’t know what else will motivate us.
  • When Aslan argues that being a son of Adam is a source of shame, he is speaking about the sin and corruption that Adam’s descendants have inherited, not about Adam himself as a created entity, as is common practice.

All of God’s creation is excellent, and the phrase ″son of man″ in the Bible does not appear to refer to a sinner, but rather to a normal human being.However, I make it a point to incorporate as many Narnia illustrations as I possibly can.

Why “Son of Man” In the Gospels Was a Unique Reference to Daniel 7 – Samuel Whitefield

  1. The events of Daniel 7 are described in detail in the scriptures.
  2. Take note of the following passage from Son of Man: Daniel 7 is the seventh chapter of the Gospel of Daniel.
  3. When asked about his titles, Jesus used the moniker the Son of Man significantly more frequently than any other title, including well-known titles such as Messiah and Son of God, combined.

It is possible that this title is a reference to Daniel 7, for a variety of reasons.The first is the context in which the term is used.The second point to mention is the fact that Jesus spoke in a language that was completely different from any other.

The Context of the phrase Son of Man

  1. It is possible to interpret the phrase Son of Man as ″human″ because that is the primary meaning of the term.
  2. This sentence from Daniel was converted into a title by Jesus, as we will discover as we progress deeper into the pages of this book.
  3. If we take this term to imply merely ″human,″ we are missing out on a big portion of Jesus’ message.

The greatest problem Jesus faced was not demonstrating His humanity, but rather displaying His divinity.His humanity was never called into question in the Gospels; on the contrary, it was emphasized.He appeared to be so human that it was impossible to believe He was God.When the church grew primarily Gentile and had to contend with a variety of heresies, the fact of Jesus’ humanity was first raised as a concern some hundred years later.The phrase was used as a title by Jesus.

  1. Jesus identified himself as the Son of Man (or, alternatively, as the human).
  2. He was not a member of the Sons of Man.
  3. He was the one and only Son of Man.
  4. While the term ″son of man″ was an old expression, the title ″Son of Man″ was not well recognized, and Jesus’ usage of the phrase ″Son of Man″ was rare.
  5. The phrase ″Son of Man″ appears just once in the Gospels and is extremely rare.
  6. In the Gospels, Jesus was the only person who was referred to be the Son of Man.

The only other person who ever named himself the Son of Man was Him, and He did it at least seventy-eight times throughout His lifetime.More than fifty times in the Gospels, individuals referred to Jesus as a man, not as the Son of Man, while they were speaking about him.Furthermore, Jesus used the word man to refer to himself as a man in the book of John, indicating that He did not use the term Son of Man to allude to His humanity.A strong difference was drawn by the gospel authors between allusions to the Son of Man and general references to mankind.There is no interchangeability between the terms Son of Man and man or human in the Gospels.

That the writers intended us to view Son of Man as a singular title rather than as a general reference to mankind is indicated by this.Other than Jesus, no one has ventured to assume the title Son of Man.There were others who claimed the title of messiah, and there were others who claimed to be god’s sons, but no one else claimed to be the Son of Man.

It was one-of-a-kind.The title ″Son of Man″ was uncommon, yet Jesus never had to explain why he was given it.Son of Manwas a title and a claim to a position of high authority, as perceived by Jesus’ listeners and opponents.No one ever pressed Jesus to provide an explanation for His claim to be the Son of Man, despite the fact that He used the title on a constant basis.His opponents didn’t agree with it, but they understood what he was saying.Jesus utilized the Son of Man as an explanation for His elevated position on several occasions.

  • Throughout the Gospels, we shall find that Jesus frequently invoked the title Son of Man to defend His high status and the authority of His teachings, as well as to show Himself as divine.
  • He also utilized His status as the Son of Man as the foundation for the fundamental topics of His teaching.
  • Jesus spent the most of his time in Galilee, a devout region that was familiar with the Scriptures.

The observant Jewish Galileans with whom Jesus interacted were familiar with the Bible and were able to identify that Jesus was alluding to the book of Daniel when he did.As previously said, this is evidenced by the fact that Jesus utilized the title to make bold assertions and did not have to defend them.The claim of Jesus to be the Son of Man was met with accusations of blasphemy.Three of the four instances in which Jesus was accused of blasphemy were directly linked to His claim to be the Son of Man, and it is possible that the fourth incident was also a reference to the Son of Man, as we will discover in a later section of this book.Jesus’ assertion that He was the Son of Man was the basis for His execution.In light of the fact that Jesus was questioned if He was the Messiah and the Son of God, this is very relevant.

When Jesus responded that He was the Son of Man, the High Priest was stirred to accuse Jesus of blasphemy and demand that He be killed.Jesus was betrayed in his capacity as the Son of Man.The following question was posed by Jesus to Judas at the moment of his arrest: ″Judas, would you betray the Son of Man with a kiss?″ (See Luke 22:48.) The world’s first Christian martyr died as a result of his belief in Jesus as the Son of Man.

Stephen was beheaded after he announced Jesus to be the Son of Man in the skies, as recorded in the Bible.Jesus frequently mixed the idea of the Son of Man with other motifs from the book of Daniel.It is quite straightforward to establish the case that the song Son of Man was a reference to Daniel based only on the language used.

Although Jesus frequently employed the moniker Son of Man with other motifs from Daniel, this indicates that He anticipated His audience to make the connection between Son of Man and Daniel.If we look at the example of Jesus referring to Himself as the Son of Man in seventy-eight verses, we can see that he made direct allusions to other themes from Daniel in fifty-three of those lines.When He claimed to be the Son of Man in seven additional lines, He made references to themes from the book of Daniel.The Son of Man is mentioned in sixty-eight references, which indicates that sixty-eight of the seventy-eight references to Son of Man also include other parts from Daniel.

That alone is sufficient to establish a strong connection with Daniel.Taking it a step further, we shall discover that when Jesus foretold that He would suffer as the Son of Man, He was most likely referencing to Daniel’s prophecy of suffering.Consider that Daniel’s subject of suffering is only one of six allusions to the Son of Man in the Gospels that do not also include a reference to a topic from Daniel 7:15–20.

  1. The use of a phrase or an extract from a chapter to create a connection between two or more passages was a frequent teaching approach at the time.
  2. A common practice among Jewish instructors during Jesus’ time was to mention a phrase or an extract from a chapter their audience was familiar with in order to allude to the complete passage.
  3. It was clear to their audience that when they utilized a crucial word, they were elaborating on the wider piece from which the phrase or quotation was taken.
  4. This teaching style can be seen throughout the New Testament, but unfortunately, our lack of knowledge with the Old Testament allows us to miss many of the deliberate allusions to the Old Testament that are present.
  5. And the Son of Man is a crucial Old Testament passage that many people are unaware of.

However, while there has been much controversy regarding the term ″Son of Man,″ we shall see that Jesus consciously referred to Daniel, that His audience was aware that He was referring to Daniel, and that the Gospels were written such that we would be able to discern Jesus’ reference to Daniel.

The Uniqueness of the Phrase Son of Man

  1. We must also study the term ″Son of Man″ in the context of the Bible’s original languages in order to fully appreciate how unique it is.
  2. There has been a great deal stated about this, but we can distill the most important elements for our needs into a few major principles.
  3. The majority of the Old Testament was written in the Hebrew language.

Daniel 2:4–Daniel 7:28 is an exception to this rule.The lyrics were composed in the ancient language of Aramaic.Throughout the New Testament, Greek was used as the primary language.Aside from that, there are other expressions in the Bible that may be translated as ″son of man″ in English, but Daniel 7:13 includes the sole instance in which the term ″son of man″ was written in Aramaic (, bar enasha), which is unique to Daniel.Every other use of the phrase ″son of man″ in the Old Testament was written in Hebrew (ben adam, son of man).

  1. Despite the fact that Hebrew and Aramaic are related languages, the terms are distinct, which implies that the phrase ″son of man″ in Daniel 7:13 is entirely unique.
  2. There is no other poem that contains bar enasha.
  3. Indeed, this is true even in the book of Daniel.
  4. Daniel 7:13 and Daniel 8:17 are two passages in which the Son of Man is mentioned in an English translation.
  5. However, due to the fact that Daniel 7 was written in Aramaic and Daniel 8 was written in Hebrew, they are not equivalent.
  6. Daniel 7 features the character bar Enasha, and Daniel 8 has the character Ben Adam.

Even while reading the chapters in English, the difference in meaning is immediately apparent.In Daniel 7, the Son of Man is shown as a heavenly figure in the skies, while in Daniel 8, the term ″son of man″ is used to refer to Daniel as an individual.There is no doubt that they are not the same individual.Despite the fact that it appears to be a little element, it is really important.Although Jesus spoke a number of languages, it is likely that the majority of His public teaching took place in Aramaic.

It when He referred to Himself as the Son of Man, He did so in Aramaic (bar enasha), which is found exclusively in Daniel 7, rather than Hebrew (ben adam), which can be found in a couple of other places.Again, there is only one bar enasha in the entire Old Testament, therefore it is unmistakably associated with Daniel.It is necessary to evaluate the manner in which Jesus’ remarks are recorded for us by the Gospel writers in this context.

Jesus taught in Aramaic, yet the Gospels were recorded in Greek, which is a common occurrence.What we want to pay attention to is the way Jesus’ remarks were translated into Greek, which underlined the connection between the Son of Man and the Book of Daniel.During Jesus’ day, the phrase ″son of man″ was used in Aramaic to refer to a human being.In chapter 7, for example, Daniel used the term in this manner.The Ancient of Days appeared to me in night visions, and behold, with the clouds of heaven there came one who seemed like a son of man, and he was placed before him.(v.

  • 13 of the ESV) ″I saw one who appeared human arriving with the clouds in the skies,″ he says in his description of Jesus, which is precisely translated as ″I saw one who looked human coming with the clouds in the heavens.″ While the term ″son of man″ in Aramaic denoted a human being, the term ″son of man″ was not used in Greek.
  • Human being (o,anthrpos) is the most straightforward translation in Greek.
  • To summarize: If Jesus used the term ″son of man″ merely to denote ″human,″ the Gospel writers might have translated His words into anthrpos without having to resort to a more complicated translation process.

They published Jesus’ Aramaic words literally in Greek rather than translating what he said into correct Greek when they recounted his claim to be the Son of Man (, ho huios ho anthrpos).This suggests that the writers sought to make certain that we understood what Jesus said in Aramaic.They also used the definite article the(, ho) so that readers would be aware that Jesus was referred to the Son of Manas in his title.He made no claim to being the Son of Man.He asserted that he was the Son of Man.As a point of reference, the phrase Son of Man was used seventy-eight times in the Gospels, and every time it was used, it referred to Jesus, and in every instance but one, Jesus was the one who coined the phrase.

However, the term for man (anthrpos) appears in over one hundred and ninety verses, which is a significant number.This term was also employed by Jesus when He sought to define Himself as a human being.Other people used the term to refer to humans as well as other animals.

They even used the word ″human″ to refer to Jesus as a human being at one point.Given that we’ve covered a lot of ground, let’s recap the most important elements.The moniker ″Son of Man″ was given to Jesus by his father on purpose in the Gospels.

See also:  According To John 10:1-18, Which Of The Following Does Not Describe Jesus As The Good Shepherd

The term ″Son of Man″ came from the Aramaic language.It made sense in Aramaic, and it roughly translated to ″person.″ As a result, the gospel authors did not translate Son of Man into correct Greek since it was a strange phrase in Greek and did not correspond to the way the Greek language says human.They were definitely attempting to explain the Aramaic term that Jesus used in his teachings.Furthermore, every time Jesus referred to himself as Son of Man, the Gospels added the definite article the, establishing the phrase as a separate title for the character.

Jesus was not just a Son of Man, but He was the Son of Man, according to the Bible.As a result, while the Gospels were written in Greek, they were written in a way that emphasized the Aramaic that Jesus spoke, and the Aramaic phrase is found in one place in the Old Testament—Daniel 7—making it a unique find in the Bible.The gospel authors did not use the phrase ″son of man″ to refer to mankind in a general sense.

  1. When the gospel authors wished to allude to humanity, they constantly utilized the regular Greek term for man (humanity), regardless of the context.
  2. Jesus was referred to as a man, and he even used the word to refer to himself in several of his teachings.
  3. Consequently, Jesus intentionally used the Son of Man to speak of humanity, whereas man was repeatedly used in a general sense to speak of humanity by the apostles.
  4. Once again, this is significant since these dialogues did not take place in Greek at their inception.
  5. They are discussions that have been translated.

It’s possible that the original speaker used the term ″son of man″ to refer to mankind because it would have been valid Aramaic in that context.Nevertheless, when it was written down in the Gospels, the word man was written down in the right Greek.The general Greek term for man is frequently used in the Gospels, but the phrase ″son of man″ is never used to refer to mankind in a generic fashion in the New Testament.The Greek word for Son of Man employed by the gospel authors was the same Greek word used by the early church for the Greek translation of Daniel.

The Septuagint (LXX) was the Greek translation of the Old Testament that the apostles relied on the most frequently during their ministry.Daniel 7:13 was translated into Greek in the Septuagint as ″like a son of man,″ rather than ″like a human,″ because the Septuagint was written in Greek.Instead of turning the Aramaic sentence into a Greek counterpart, the translators chose to leave it as it was in the original language.

According to the Gospels, Jesus’ remarks were translated into Greek in the same way as the most frequent Greek version of Daniel 7:13 was translated into English.The talks in the Gospels were translated by the authors of the Gospels in a very deliberate manner, according to scholars.When Jesus referred to himself as the Son of Man, he was using an Aramaic term that had been translated into Greek.When it came to mankind, the gospel authors, on the other hand, employed the traditional Greek term.It was clear that they were attempting to misinterpret the language.They wanted us to know what Jesus said in Aramaic when He referred to Himself as the Son of Man, so they could translate it for us.

In other instances, they just conveyed the fact that someone had mentioned a guy.There was a deliberate link made by the gospel authors between Jesus’ comments and the book of Daniel 7.We must keep in mind that the books of the Bible were written as works of literature.These passages were created with the purpose of allowing readers to draw connections and reach the proper conclusions.The writers frequently employed biblical terminology from passages to assist readers in making connections between those chapters and their own lives.Despite the fact that they wrote in a language distinct from that of the Old Testament, the gospel authors were obviously attempting to express a direct relationship to Daniel in the language they choose.

  1. Consider their choice of words in the context of what we have already seen, and it becomes clear that they are connected to Daniel on a fundamental level.
  2. Matthew 13:46, 55–58, Mark 6:4–5, Luke 4:22–24, and John 12:34 are examples of biblical passages.
  3. Because Jesus most likely taught in Aramaic, some academics have questioned whether Jesus employed a definite or indefinite article and whether or not it was relevant in his teaching.

Nevertheless, the Greek version of Jesus’ teaching recorded in the Gospels always contained the definite article to make it clear that Jesus was referring to Himself as the Son of Man, which was a distinctive title that only pertained to Him.The following scriptures are found in Matthew 9; 12; 13:54, 56 and 27; Mark 2:7; 6:2; 14:44, 71; Mark 15:12 and Luke 7:39; 15:2 and 23:6, 14, 18, 41, 47.The following scriptures are found in John 1:30; 4:29; 5:11–12; 6:52; 9:16; 24; 29, 33; 10:41; 11:37, 50 and 18:14, 17, 29–30 and 40 One of Jesus’ disciples asked him, ″Who is this Son of Man?″ but it was in reaction to his teachings that he answered.Those who were present did not address Jesus in such manner (John 12:34).John 8:40 (KJV).Matthew 26:64–65, Mark 14:62–64, and Luke 5:21–24 are examples of biblical quotations.

  • Jesus said this in John 10:24-25 and 33.
  • Matthew 26:64–66 and Mark 14:62–64 are examples of this.
  • The book of Acts 7:56.
  • While many Christians have not been educated about the relationship to Daniel, experts have acknowledged the connection to Daniel for quite some time and have written extensively about it in their research..
  1. Scholars are increasingly seeing Jesus’ usage of the phrase Son of Man as a clear and intentional connection to the book of Daniel.
  2. The Bible is an inspired book that has been miraculously preserved, and God chose to preserve it in Greek as a result of this preservation.
  3. A number of scholars believe that at least a portion of the Gospels was originally written in Aramaic.
  4. We shall refer to the Gospels that have been miraculously preserved as the genuine Gospels for the sake of this discussion.

In Aramaic, there has been much discussion about the significance of the definite article, but in Greek, it is important to note that the gospel authors used the definite article because ″the Son of Man″ is not a Greek phrase, indicating they wanted their readers to connect with the underlying Aramaic.There is one exception, which is seen in John 12:34.When the multitude hears this scripture, they exclaim, ″Who is this Son of Man?″ The speaker was not Jesus, but rather a member of the audience who was repeating the words of Jesus back to Him.In the words of the author, ″the Greek phrase is not conventional monoglot Greek…″ Maurice Casey is the author of this work.

It was published by T&T Clark International in 2009 as The Solution to the ‘Son of Man’ Problem, p.61.

Why Is Jesus Called “Son of Man”?

  1. What is the significance of Jesus being referred to as ″Son of Man″?
  2. To begin, allow me to provide a basic knowledge, followed by a more in-depth historical understanding.
  3. ″Son of God″ suggests his divinity, which is correct; ″Son of Man″ implies his humanity, which is also correct; and ″Son of Man″ implies his humanity and deity, respectively.

He was a son of man, which means that he was a human creature.And he is the Son of God in the sense that he has always existed as the Eternally Begotten One who emanates from the Father in all time and space.He has done so in the past and will continue to do so in the future.He is the Second Person of the Trinity, and he has the entire divine nature in his person.He is the child of a virgin.

  1. Despite the fact that he was born to a human father, he did not have sexual relations with this virgin until after Jesus was created.
  2. He was conceived by the Holy Spirit in the womb of Mary, the virgin.
  3. As a result, he is human—completely human.
  4. The Bible wishes to underline that he is a fully developed human being.
  5. In other words, it is the mainstream understanding: he is both divine and human—two natures, one person—in one.
  6. The more subtle and significant historical understanding is that the phrase ″Son of Man″ does more than simply identify him as a representative of mankind.

It is most likely derived from Daniel 7.After reading that chapter, it will become clear that the Son of Man is a very elevated figure: not only a human figure, but an exalted one.It was Jesus’ preferred method of identifying himself.If you look at the use of the word ″Son of Man″ in the Gospels, you’ll see that Jesus didn’t refer to himself as the Son of God very often, but rather as the Son of Man.He stated things like, ″The Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many,″ which is found in Mark 10:45.

As a result, he refers to himself as Son of Man on a regular basis.His reasoning for doing so, I believe, is that Son of Man is a common term that means ″human being″ on the surface of the phrase.He was created in the image of a man.

In any case, there is no insult intended: after all, who isn’t a son of man?Those with ears to hear, on the other hand, could hear Daniel 7, in which he was asserting a highly lofty position in the narrative of salvation.And he had every intention of carrying it through.As far as his identity was concerned, Jesus was extremely subtle in that he was continually revealing it to those who had eyes to perceive it, but not so obviously that everyone would rush to him and crown him as king.He had to take a very limited path when it came to divulging his identity, rather than just declaring, ″I’m not who I claim I’m.″ ″I am the Messiah, and I am the ruler of the entire world.Please come and recognize me as King.″ He didn’t say anything like that.

  • He was deafeningly quiet.
  • He was deceptive.
  • In addition, he would make statements that were clear in certain contexts and implicit in others, depending on the situation.

It was only when the time was right—primarily when he was on trial for his life and the question was posed, ″Are you the Christ, the Son of the living God?″—that he responded affirmatively, ″I am, and you will see the Son of Man coming in great power and glory.″ In order to avoid being crucified for his open divinity, he confessed it exactly at the spot where he knew he would be.So I hope this has been of use.The phrase ″Son of Man″ has two meanings: it refers to a human individual as well as an elevated celestial entity, according to Daniel 7.And Jesus intends to impart both of these concepts to us.

Why did Jesus call Himself “The Son of Man”?


Why did Jesus call Himself “The Son of Man”?

Over the years, the meaning of the word that Jesus used to describe Himself, ″Son of Man,″ has been argued both for and against.What Wikipedia has to say about this term is as follows: ″Son of man is a phrase that appears in several Christian scriptures, including the Gospels, the Acts of the Apostles, and the Book of Revelation, in which Jesus speaks of himself as the Son of Man.″ However, there is some disagreement over the meaning of the term.The interpretation of the phrase ‘the Son of man’ in the New Testament has remained a difficult task, and after 150 years of debate, no consensus has arisen among experts on the subject.When it comes to the Greek text of the four Canonical gospels, the phrase ″the Son of Man″ appears 81 times, and it is exclusively used in the words of Jesus himself.″The solitary Hebrew expression’son of man’ (ben-‘adam) appears over a hundred times in the Hebrew Bible,″ says the author.″There are more than 80 instances in the gospels when Jesus refers to himself in the third person as the ‘Son of Man,’ according to one commentator on the internet: ″ His association with it is most often with one of two prophecies about himself: either that the Son of Man will suffer and be killed (Matthew 17:12, Mark 8:31, 9:12, Luke 9:22), or that the Son of Man will return in glory and final judgment (Matthew 25:31, Mark 16:15, Matthew 26:28, Mark 16:29, Luke 9:22).

  • (Matthew 16:27, 25:31; Mark 8:38; Luke 9:26, 21:27).
  • ″The two images are frequently associated with one another, and he only uses the phrase’son of man’ in this manner in a few instances.″ According to Matthew 25:31, as was previously said, ″When the Son of Man comes in His glory, and all the holy angels with Him, then He will sit on the throne of His glory.″ It is important to note that the phrase ″the Son of Man″ is a direct quotation from the lips of Jesus, indicating that He, as the second Person of the God Family, will ″sit on the throne of His glory.″ Following that, in Matthew 26:64, He is confronted with the question of whether or not He is the Messiah.
  • ″It’s just as you said,″ he explained.
  • ″However, I assure you that you will see the Son of Man sitting on the right hand of the authority and coming on the clouds of sky in the days to come.
  • Christ refers to Himself as the ″Son of Man″ in relation with His destiny as an eternal entity, not merely in reference to His human manifestation on earth approximately 2,000 years ago, as demonstrated by these two verses.
  1. However, as we shall explain, His remark in this respect should not be interpreted in the wrong way at this point.
  2. Daniel 7:13-14 tells us that he was observing in night visions when he said this: ″I was watching in the night visions, and I saw…″ And lo, there comes one who looks like the Son of Man, descending from the clouds of heaven!
  3. He arrived at the Temple of the Ancient of Days, and the priests drew Him close to Him.
  4. Then He was given authority and glory, as well as a kingdom, so that all peoples, countries, and languages would be devoted to Him and serve Him.
  5. In the same way, His dominion is an everlasting dominion that will never pass away, and His kingdom is a kingdom that will never be destroyed.″ What Daniel saw in a vision of the future is completely consistent with what Jesus declared of Himself in a future vision of the past.

This would be an excellent explanation for why Jesus used this word, as well as evidence that He was the Messiah.One online critic made the following observations: ″The individual who is delivered before the Ancient of Days here is characterized as ‘like a son of man,’″ the commentator stated.… The phrase’son of man’ was taken from this vision and utilized as a title (‘Son of Man’) to represent the supernatural savior figure whom the Jewish people were anticipating.In addition to demonstrating that he was the Savior sent by God, Jesus frequently used this title to demonstrate that he had given up his divine prerogatives and come to earth humbly, in human form, in order to connect entirely with people whom he came to save,″ says the New York Times.Following Christ’s crucifixion, we are given further examples of the Son of Man in His radiance.

Stephen was accused of blasphemy in Acts 7:55-56, and while delivering his address, he was filled with the Holy Spirit and saw the glory of God, as well as Jesus standing at the right hand of God, and he exclaimed, ″Look!I see the heavens opened, and the Son of Man standing at the right hand of God!″ ″…and in the midst of the seven lampstands, One like the Son of Man, clothed with a garment down to his feet and girded around the chest with a golden band,″ we read in Revelation 1:13-14.In the light of the moon, His head and hair were like a blanket of snow, and His eyes were like a blaze of fire…″ Revelation 14:14 is yet another allusion to the Son of Man, who is described as having a golden crown on His head and a sharp sickle in his hand.

  • We can see that even after His resurrection as a glorified being, He is still referred to as ″the Son of Man″ at several points in the New Testament.
  • Even in the Bible, we read that there is only one Mediator between God and man, and that person is the HUMAN JESUS CHRIST (1 Timothy 2:5).
  • Furthermore, He was constantly referred to as the ″Lamb″ or the ″Lamb of God″ while on earth, and He is continually referred to as the Lamb (Revelation 5:6) even after His resurrection, as a reminder of the immense sacrifice He made on behalf of all of mankind.

All of this demonstrates that He is still the same Person that He was when He was here on earth in the form of a Man.However, it does not demonstrate that He is still a Person made up of flesh and blood, nor does it demonstrate that He still possesses a physical body that has been ″immortalized.″ And it is for this reason that the allusion to His so-called ″bodily resurrection″ may be so misleading.(Please see our Q&A on the subject, headlined ″Do you teach the resurrection of the physical body?″ for more information.) When Christ, the Son of God, became Man and the Son of Man, He stopped to be a divine Spirit being and began to exist as a human person.

He took on the form of a human being.At the same time, this did not imply that He had lost His identity as the Person who had existed since the beginning of time.That is why we read in Matthew 1:23 that even though Jesus became a Man and lived among us, He was still ″God with us,″ referring to Him as the Person rather than as an eternal God entity.When He died and was resurrected, He also ceased to exist as a bodily entity, just as He had done before.He became entirely God, but, as previously said, this does not imply that He has lost his identity as the Person who He was while He was a Man.

As an alternative, Jesus Christ—the God being—became Man, and after His death, Jesus Christ, the Man, was transformed into God—an immortal, everlasting God being.However, even though He is a God being, He retains all of the memories of His previous life as a Man, which is why He is referred to as the Man Jesus Christ, who can suffer with us and who can serve as our gracious High Priest.In addition, He is referred to as the Lamb now, since He died on the cross for our sins, and His Sacrifice continues to have implications for us now (1 John 1:7-10).We are doomed to misinterpret the meaning of the phrases ″Son of God″ and ″Son of Man″ if we do not grasp the significance of this relationship.

  1. Christ was always the Son of God, but when He was conceived in the womb of His mother Mary, He took on the identity of the Son of Man.
  2. We will now demonstrate why this knowledge is so vital, as well as why so many people have a completely erroneous understanding of the Incarnation and the difficulties surrounding it.
  3. In the post ″How Can Jesus Be Both God and Man?″ on the website ″desiringgod,″ we find the following: ″How Can Jesus Be Both God and Man?″ Incarnation was regarded one of the most significant truths of our religion by the early church, and it remains so today.
  4. The result was the formulation of what has come to be known as the Chalcedonean Creed, a declaration that spells forth what we are to believe about the Incarnation and what we are not to believe about the Incarnation, among other things.
  5. This credo was the result of a huge council that met in the city of Chalcedon from October 8 to November 1, 451, and it ″has been accepted as the mainstream, orthodox formulation of the biblical teaching on the person of Christ by all of the major branches of Christianity since that time.″ One of the five primary ″truths″ enumerated in the Chalcedonean Creed was that Jesus was and continues to be ″wholly God and wholly man.″ The fact that the core of their religion is that God is a Trinity is scarcely unexpected, considering that this belief became a doctrine of the Worldwide Church of God a few years following the death of Mr Herbert W Armstrong, who died in 1986.
  6. This teaching, on the other hand, is completely incorrect.
See also:  What Happened After Jesus Died Timeline

Christ was never and will never be ″totally God and entirely man.″ He is neither then nor now.Let us take a few sentences from our free booklet ″Jesus Christ – A Great Mystery″ to illustrate what we mean: Page 9 of the book, under the heading ″Jesus Christ Came in the Flesh,″ we find the following statement: ″God clearly reveals who and what Christ was while He was on the earth, and He also tells us that people have been deceived by the’spirit of antichrist’ if they do not accept this clear Biblical revelation.″ ‘Who is a liar but he who denies that Jesus is the Christ?’ says the Bible’s first letter to the church, 1 John 2:22–23.He is the antichrist because he rejects both the Father and the Son.″ ″How, exactly, did Christ come to earth in the flesh?″ we read on pages 10 and 11.

  • What exactly did He mean when He said He was ″both God and entirely man″ at that very moment?
  • What did it mean for Him to be ″completely God″?
  • Or was He a ‘whole man’ in every sense of the word?
  • Take note of the straightforward revelation of this conundrum in John 1:14: We saw His glory, the glory as of the only born of the Father, full of grace and truth, as He took on flesh and lived among us.’ As God has clearly stated, Jesus Christ, who was God prior to His human birth, BECAME FLESH when He was born into this world.
  • Christ arrived in the flesh by taking on the form of a human being.
  • This implies that He became completely and completely flesh and blood, just like you and me!
  • This is really critical for you to comprehend!

When Christ took on humanity, He ceased to be a Spirit being.Due to His transformation into a totally human being, He was no longer entirely God!Take a time to consider the word ‘become,’ for example.When a poor person gets wealthy, he ceases to be a poor person.In the event that a person becomes unwell, he or she is no longer considered to be healthy.

When a woman becomes pregnant, she is no longer considered to be barren at that moment in time.In the same way, when the Word became flesh, He was no longer considered to be Spirit.The everlasting God being that He had been previously was no longer there.″ Pages 10-14 of this booklet are devoted to the Scriptures that are improperly interpreted by individuals who believe that Jesus was both completely God and totally man while He was on earth during His time here.There is a strong possibility that Jesus intended to use the phrase ″Son of Man″ in order to demonstrate to everyone that, while residing among us, He was completely human and that He was totally man.The prophet Ezekiel is referred to as ″son of man″ several times in the book of Ezekiel, yet he was simply a man who had no previous supernatural experience.

  • On the other hand, with Jesus, who had already existed as a supernatural person from all of eternity, things were a little more complicated.
  • The phrase He used demonstrated that He, who had previously been God, had become fully human, but it also demonstrated that He, the Person who had lived in the flesh and who had died for us, would be raised from the dead and return as a glorified immortal and eternal God being–the King of kings and the Lord of lords–to rule over all of mankind.
  • Brian Gale and Norbert Link are the primary writers.

Why Did Jesus Call Himself the Son of Man?

It was ″Son of Man,″ when referring to himself, that was Jesus’ most popular moniker.The Gospels record a total of seventy-eight instances in which Jesus refers to Himself by this term.For example, when He was queried about His identity by His followers, He responded with the inquiry, ″Who do men claim that I, the Son of Man, am?″ (Matthew 16:13).Despite the fact that the Bible does not specify what the term ″Son of Man″ means, it is likely to relate to the fact that Jesus was the epitome of human perfection.He, in his divine nature, descended to earth and dwelt among us as the perfect human person.By doing so, He fulfilled the Law of Moses and accomplished something that no other human being has been able to do.

  • He is identifying with the people He has come to help by referring to them by this title.
  • It has something to do with his earthly existence.
  • The term has something to do with Jesus’ earthly time on earth.
  • Nevertheless, in order for you to be aware that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins, he explained to the paralytic (Mark 2:10).
  • ‘Jesus’ stated As a result, even on the Sabbath, the Son of Man reigns supreme (Mark 2:28).
  1. Jesus, too, had something to say.
  2. When he asked where he might sleep, Jesus replied, ″Foxes make holes on the ground, and birds of the air make nests, but the Son of Man has no place to rest his head″ (Matthew 8:20) The purpose for Jesus’s coming to earth was explained by Him.
  3. Because the Son of Man has come to seek and to rescue that which has been lost, we should be thankful (Luke 19:10).
  4. It Has Something to Do With His Sufferings It is also associated with Jesus’ sufferings on behalf of mankind, which are referred to as the ″Son of Man.″ And he proceeded to tell them that the Son of Man would have to go through many trials, be rejected by the elders, chief priests, and scribes, be crucified, and rise from the dead three days later, in order to save them (Mark 8:31).
  5. This Speaks of His Exaltation and Authority.

He is also known as the ″Son of Man,″ which refers to his exaltation and dominion over all of mankind.When the Son of Man appears in his glory, with all of the holy angels accompanying him, he will take his rightful place on the throne of his glory (Matthew 25:31).Jesus made the statement.The Son of One does indeed proceed exactly as it is written of him, but woe betide the man who betrays the Son of Man!I believe it would have been better for that man not to have been born (Matthew 26:24).

That It Is a Messianic Term The title ″Son of Man″ was given to the Messiah in order to distinguish him from other people.The Book of Daniel foretold that the Son of Man would be the heir to God’s everlasting dominion, and this prediction came true.And see, a figure resembling the Son of Man is approaching on the clouds of heaven!He arrived in the Temple of the Ancient of Days, where he was led close to the Ancient of Days.

  • When he received sovereignty and glory, he established a kingdom, and all peoples, countries, and languages were required to submit their lives to him.
  • His dominion is an immortal dominion that will never be destroyed, and his kingdom is a kingdom that will never be destroyed as long as the earth exists (Daniel 7:13,14).
  • During His Trial, Jesus made use of the designation.

The following prediction was made by Jesus while He was on trial and questioned if He was the Messiah: It is as you have said, I am the Messiah.However, I assure you that in the future, you will see the Son of Man seated at the right hand of the authority and appearing in the clouds of sky (Matthew 26:64).The religious leaders were enraged by this declaration.

They accused Him of blasphemy because He claimed to be on an equal footing with God.The fact that Jesus had made reference to Daniel’s prophesy and so claimed to be the Messiah was obvious to them at the time.The title emphasizes the fact that he was a human being.It appears that by employing the term ″Son of Man,″ Jesus was attempting to communicate the reality that He was a fully human being.Summary As the Son of Man, Jesus was the only one who addressed Himself in this manner; His followers never addressed Him in this manner.

It was used by Jesus to underline His human nature.The title is derived from the Book of Daniel, which predicts that the Son of Man would be the heir to God’s eternal dominion.It is a title given to the Messiah by the Jewish people.As part of His trial, Jesus admitted that He was, in fact, the Son of Man – the one who would usher in God’s everlasting rule on the earth.

  1. When the religious leaders learned of this, they accused Him of blasphemy, which is defined as declaring Himself to be on an equal footing with God.
  2. The term appears to be intended to draw attention to Jesus’ personal emphasis on His humanity.

What does it mean that Jesus is the Son of Man?

Answer to the question In the New Testament, Jesus is referred to be the ″Son of Man″ a total of 88 times.Throughout reality, the moniker ″Son of Man″ is the primary title that Jesus used to refer to Himself in the Bible (e.g., Matthew 12:32; 13:37; Luke 12:8; John 1:51).The only time the phrase ″Son of Man″ was used in a direct reference to Jesus, and it was by someone other than Jesus, was while Stephen was being killed, according to tradition (Acts 7:56).The term ″Son of Man″ refers to mankind.Other names for Christ, such as Son of God, are more overt in their emphasis on His divinity than the other titles.Son of Man, on the other hand, is a film that emphasizes Christ’s humanity.

  • God referred to the prophet Ezekiel as ″son of man″ a total of 93 times.
  • God was just referring to Ezekiel as a human being in this manner.
  • The phrase ″son of man″ is merely a periphrastic phrase that means ″human.″ Jesus Christ was a genuine human being in every sense of the word.
  • He arrived ″in the flesh,″ as the saying goes (1 John 4:2).
  • The term ″Son of Man″ conveys a sense of humility.
  1. It was the eternal character of the Second Person of the Trinity that caused him to leave the majesty of heaven and take on human flesh, becoming the Son of Man, who was born in a manger and ″despised and rejected by mankind″ (Isaiah 53:3).
  2. ″There was no place for the Son of Man to rest his head″ (Luke 9:58).
  3. The Son of Man ate and drank with sinners, as the Bible says (Matthew 11:19).
  4. The Son of Man was subjected to cruelty by human beings (Matthew 17:12).
  5. This deliberate lowering of His status from King of Heaven to Son of Man is the pinnacle of humility (see Philippians 2:6–8).

He did this on purpose.The term ″Son of Man″ refers to a divinity.It is true that Ezekiel was a son of man; but, Jesus i

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.