[ p. 187 ]
(a)
What is man that thou art mindful of him? And the son of man that thou visitest him? (Psa. 8:4).
And he said unto me, Son of man stand upon thy feet and I will speak with thee (Ezek. 2:1).
God is not a man that he should lie
Neither the son of man that he should repent (Num. 23: 19).
Foxes have holes and the birds of the air have nests, but the son of man does not have a place to lay his head (Lk. 9: 58; Matt. 8: 20).
(b)
I saw in the night visions, and behold there came with the clouds of heaven one like unto a son of man, and he came even to the Ancient of Days (Dan. 7: 13).
And I asked the angel who went with him, and showed me all the hidden things, concerning that son of man, who he was and whence he was and why he went with the Ancient of Days.
And he answered me: This is the son of man who is righteousness (I Enoch 46: 2-3).
And he sat on the throne of his glory [ p. 188 ]
And the sum of judgment was given to the son of man (I Enoch 69: 27).
And all the kings and the mighty
Shall fall down before him on their faces
And worship and set their hope upon that son of man (I Enoch 62: 9).
Just as it happened in the days of Noah, so shall it be at the coming of the son of man (Lk. 17: 26).
Be constantly on the watch, for you cannot tell at what hour the son of man may come (Lk. 12: 40).
To understand the personality and inner consciousness of Jesus is no small undertaking. Great personalities rise above their fellow men like mountains above the plain. As yet the highest mountain in the world has not been successfully climbed by any of the many who have attempted to reach its peak.
It is not difficult, however, to make a small beginning in the direction of grasping the thought of Jesus and giving some conception of his sense of relationship to his fellow men and to God. Those attempts will be most successful which endeavor to regard his personality as like other great personalities, except in its unattainable height and utter grandeur. A few simple historical facts are quite essential as equipment along the way.
The expression “Son of Man” occurs frequently throughout the Old and New Testaments and in the Jewish literature of the time of Jesus. The student who has patience to examine these many passages will have no difficulty in understanding the general meaning and usage of the term. It is clear in the Old Testament usage that the phrase does not refer to any single individual.
As Burton puts it [1] “Neither the Hebrew nor the Greek Old Testament has a phrase properly meaning ‘the son of man 7 which refers to any particular person. Both the Hebrew and the Greek phrases are poetic or emphatic expressions for ‘man. ‘”
[ p. 189 ]
In Psalm 8: 4 “Son of Man” means “mere man,” or simply “man” with emphasis on his weakness and insignificance. Numbers 23: 19 is similar. In the Book of Ezekiel that prophet is called in scores of passages, “son of man.” In Daniel 7: 13, the reference is to a humble person. Daniel was prophesying that a deliverer would come to rescue the Jews amid clouds of glory, from their subjection and slavery. Daniel states emphatically that this deliverer will be a plain simple man like any other, a “son of man.” It is clear that the expression was in effect an adjective, not a proper noun. It designates not a particular person, but a quality of human simplicity which is ascribed at one time to Ezekiel, at another time to other leaders.
In one section of the Book of Enoch, which was perhaps written in the first century B.C., the phrase is used as a designation of the expected messiah. As Burton states, “In no other Jewish work of the pre-Christian or New Testament period is the term so used.” [2] What the writer of Enoch did was to pick up the sentence in Daniel, and portray this “plain man” of Daniel as occupying a resplendent throne, receiving the adoration of the kings of the earth, inflicting judgment and exalting the righteous.
The use of the term in the sayings of Jesus is readily intelligible after a review of this background. Sometimes Jesus used the term in the accepted sense of “plain man.” In Mark 10: 17, some one came to Jesus and said, “Good teacher, what shall I do to attain the life of the age to come?” And Jesus said, “Why do you call me good?” In the same vein, another came to Jesus (Lk. 9: 57) offering his allegiance and adoration. And in a similar tone Jesus said, “The son of man has no place to lay his head.”
Sometimes again he used it with reference to that coming deliverer whom the Jews were expecting. He urged men constantly to be ready for that new and better age which God would soon inaugurate. “Jesus came into Galilee preaching . . . [ p. 190 ] the kingdom of God is at hand” (Mk. i: 14, 15). Jesus had not, of course, announced his messiahship. When he told men to be constantly watchful and at all times ready for the coming of the son of man (Lk. 17: 26; 12: 40) they would understand his words in the light of the Book of Enoch, to refer to the inauguration of the new age.
When Jesus faced the question of messiahship in the temptation experiences, as pointed out in Chapter VII, it is probable that Jesus himself did not in the earlier part of his ministry feel that he was the great and glorious expected deliverer of Israel. If during this time Jesus ever used the term in the fashion of the Book of Enoch, he was sharing in the prevailing expectation of his time. Modern scholars are coming more and more to agreement that when Jesus uses the term in this sense it should be assumed that he is referring to some one other than himself, unless there is something in the passage which indicates its application to Jesus.
The net result of the study of the term is to reveal a natural beauty, a human growth, and a supreme strength in the character and personality of Jesus, which would not otherwise be apparent. He began his ministry in the assurance that God had called him, but with a deep sense of the magnitude of the task before him. Pie made no pretentious claims for himself, but went about doing good. If anyone tried to worship him, he told him to offer his worship to God. Jesus called himself a man, a brother of his fellow men, a son of man.
As the weeks and the months went by, he became the revelation of God’s love and shepherding care. He became for them a representative of God. After he was gone, his followers remembered that the Book of Enoch had surrounded this phrase, “the son of man,” with poetic grandeur and magnificent imagery. They used the poetry of Enoch to express their adoration of their “son of man.” Thus the phrase gradually took on that royal and messianic atmosphere which surrounds it in some of the passages of our gospels.
[ p. 191 ]
And David said, “Jehovah forbid that I should do this thing unto my lord, Jehovah’s anointed, to put forth my hand against him, seeing he is Jehovah’s anointed” (I Sam. 24: 6).
Touch not mine anointed ones and do my prophets no harm (Psa. 105: 15).
Thus saith Jehovah of his anointed, of Cyrus, whose right hand I have holden to subdue nations before him (Is. 45: 1).
And the people were all wondering in their hearts about John, whether he was the Christ (Lk. 3: 15).
He asked them, “Who do you say that I am?” And Peter answered him “You are the Christ.” Then Jesus warned them not to say this about him to anyone (Mk. 8: 29, 30).
Again the high priest questioned him and said, “Are you the Christ?” . . . Jesus said, “I am” (Mk. 14: 61, 62).
“Christ” is a Greek term which represents an attempt to translate the Hebrew “Messiah.” “Messiah” is a part of the verb to “anoint” and is usually translated in the English Old Testament “anointed.” It was a common practice among the Hebrews to anoint a priest or a king, or sometimes a prophet, as a ceremonial token of elevation to office. In I Samuel 24: 6, the anointed one (messiah) is King Saul. In Psalm 105: 15 the anointed refers poetically to the patriarchs and prophets. In Isaiah 45: 1, Cyrus, King of Persia, is Jehovah’s “anointed.”
The key to the best understanding of Jesus’ messianic consciousness is the recognition that his personality, like that of all other leaders, was a growing one, constantly expanding with his work. It does not seem probable that before his baptism Jesus had any definite idea that he was to become king or [ p. 192 ] messiah of his people. On the other hand, the Gospels, including the earliest one, Mark, state that he declared himself to be messiah at the close of his ministry, when the high priest asked him if he were. The earlier sources of the gospels have nothing to say on the subject. The presentation in the Gospel of Mark seems a natural one.
When did Jesus first come to think of himself as God’s “anointed”? Until recently, very few scholars recognized the principle of growth in the consciousness of Jesus during his ministry. The older opinion has been that Jesus must have come to full consciousness of his messiahship immediately at baptism. But the fact that there is no mention of messiahship in the narrative of the baptism is a serious argument against this idea.
Since the temptations of Jesus seem to have corresponded to the three ideas of messiahship held by various groups in Jesus’ day, in turning away from all three, Jesus was, in fact, turning away from any deliberate messianic appeal to the Jews. As his ministry progressed he must have been confronted again and again with these possible messianic programs. Constantly, too, he rejected these popular ideas, and endeavored to spread the good news of a different kind of kingdom.
He saw the futility of the Jewish hope for the day when each man would sit under his own vine and fig tree, or would win military campaigns against the nations of the world. If Cyrus, King of Persia, was Jehovah’s “messiah” (Is. 45: 1), then Jesus could hardly be. There was no militarism in Jesus’ idea of the kingdom. He poured out his life to reveal a God of love who had chosen his people for lives of service. [3]
The statement of Mark (1: 15) that Jesus came into Galilee declaring that the kingdom of God was at hand, should not be understood as meaning that Jesus considered himself to be the “messiah.” As suggested earlier, the kingdom was often conceived without any definite idea of a special messiah. Jesus [ p. 193 ] came to proclaim the love of God and the nearness of the kingdom.
As the weeks and months went by, an increasing number recognized in Jesus the true representative of God, and the adoration of his immediate followers deepened beyond all description. They could find no words adequate to express their sense of his nearness to God. The most appropriate word in their vocabulary was “messiah,” or “Christ.” One day Peter declared his conviction that Jesus was “anointed” of God (Lk. 9: 18; Mk. 8: 29). Jesus immediately warned his disciples not to repeat this to anyone.
But more and more Jesus’ idea of the kingdom prevailed. More and more clearly Jesus saw that he was the one who was bringing the kingdom into reality in the hearts of his countrymen. Increasingly he was convinced that he was to be God’s chosen one, “anointed” to be God’s agent in bringing to pass the kingdom of love and brotherhood and ministering service.
On the occasion of the triumphal entry into Jerusalem, Jesus openly accepted the acclaim of the people. It may be that he allowed them to proclaim him as their “anointed” or “Messiah” on this occasion. He would not and could not have done this earlier in the ministry, because he had not acquainted them with his ideal of messiahship. If he had allowed anyone to call him messiah in the earlier days, it would have meant that many would have expected a military program. But in the course of his ministry he had become known throughout Palestine as the great prophet (Matt. 21: n; Mk. 11:9, xo) of peace, humility, and service. On this basis he could proclaim himself as God’s servant.
Jesus sacrificed his life in the inauguration of the kingdom. It is easy to understand how certain Jewish leaders and the Roman governor could unite in getting rid of a man who was regarded by so many people as “messiah” or king of the Jews. He who loses his life will find it (Mk. 8: 35; Matt. 10: 39). On the other hand, it is only a negative half-truth to say that Jesus lost his life. B. W. Bacon and other scholars have clearly [ p. 194 ] pointed out that there was in antiquity a very clear idea of the positive value of sacrificing one’s life. One who lost his life in a battle for the defense of the religion of Jehovah, or who patriotically lost his life would “shine as the brightness of the firmament” (Dan. 12: 3). Jesus felt that there was in the very act of sacrificing his life a great appeal to God’s favor. He went eagerly to his death in the sure conviction that God would respond by signally blessing and prospering the cause for which Jesus had poured out his life.
In conclusion it should be noted that the term “messiah,” or “Christ,” was far too small to fit the world ministry of Jesus. It was only a national term for a national office. To the student of history, the title is only the beginning of an appreciation of Jesus. He was a messenger of God to the world, rather than to a particular people. He must himself have recognized the smallness and pettiness of the term, in comparison with the world mission which he knew God had given him to accomplish.
To be sure, as a Jew, Jesus would regard the term very highly. But many passages in the gospels show that his consciousness reached out beyond the Jews and included other nations. With him it was a question not of whether the term fitted his office, but of whether he could accept this offering from his countrymen, without endangering his teaching of fellowship and brotherhood.
It must have meant much to Washington to become the first President of his country. Yet he must also have often thought of the larger implications of his office. It had a world significance in that it gave to the world a new basis of freedom and democracy. So Jesus transcends all national lines. He is saviour of the world, he is revealer of God, he is “son of God.”
They are my people, children that will not deal falsely (Is. 63: 8). [ p. 195 ]
O Jehovah, thou art my father (Is. 64: 8).
Have we not all one father? Has not one God created us? (Mai. 2: 10.)
Ye are . . . sons of the Most High (Psa. 82: 6).
Ye are the sons of the living God (Hos. 1: 10).
Say to my servant David … I will be his father and he shall be my son (II Sam. 7: 8, 14).
I have found David my servant . . .
I will make him my firstborn,
The highest of the kings of the earth (Psa. 89: 20, 27).
Thou art my son,
This day have I begotten thee (Psa. 2:7).
If there be not anyone who is worthy to be called a son of God, nevertheless let him labor earnestly. . . . Even if we are not worthy to be called the sons of God, still we may deserve to be called the children of his eternal image (Philo (15-45 A.D.) Conj. 28).
He shall pour out the spirit of grace among you and you shall be to him sons in tmth (Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs (109-105 b . c .) Jud. 24: 3).
My son the messiah shall be revealed (IV Esdras (100-135 A.D.) 7: 28).
My son shall reprove the nations (IV Esdras 13: 37 )
Blessed are the peacemakers; for they shall be called sons of God (Matt. 5:9).
Love your enemies . . . and you will be sons of the Most High; for he is kind to the unthankful and evil (Lk. 6 : 35).
Now the centurion . . . watching Jesus . . . said, “Truly this man was a son of God” (Mk. 15: 39; Matt. 27: 54. Cf. Lk. 23: 47).
And the devil said to him, “If you are a son of God, [ p. 196 ] command this stone to turn into a piece of bread (Lk. 4: 3; Matt. 4: 3).
You are my beloved son. I am well pleased with you (Mk. 1: n).
No one knows the day or hour (of the coming of the son of man) not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father (Mk. 13: 32).
Simon Peter answered, “You are the Christ, the son of the living God” (Matt. 16: 16).
The term “son of God” has a rich and varied history in Hebrew literature. It was a favorite custom of the writers of the Psalms and other books to speak of King David as “son of God” or “son of the Most High.” In Luke 3: 38, Adam is called “son of God.” Again and again, righteous Jews are described as sons of God the Father. In some passages the idea clearly is that they are sons because God has created them. In most passages, however, the relationship centers in the thought that God has chosen them. He has adopted them as sons.
If there is any key word to an understanding of the history of this expression, it is this word “adoption.” The Apostle Paul uses it constantly in distinction from the word “slavery.” A slave, says Paul, may be adopted into a family and become a son. A child of God who has been in the bondage of sin may be adopted and become a son of God. “You are no longer a slave, but a son” (Gal. 4: 6). The contrast is between the child which has not been legally and ceremonially recognized by its father, and the child which a father recognizes and adopts as his son. All men, according to Hebrew thought, are children of God, but certain ones, the Jews, he has adopted as his sons. With the development of the ethical emphasis the distinction is no longer drawn along national lines. It is the righteous and the godly who are his adopted sons. The idea of sonship thus means spiritual kinship.
The “sons of the light” (Lk. 16: 8) are those who know the light. The “sons of this age” (Lk. 16: 8) are those who participate [ p. 197 ] in the evils of this material age as contrasted with that of the more spiritual age which is to come. James and John, the sons of Zebedee, earned the nickname “sons of thunder” (Mk. 3: 17) and it is not hard to imagine the qualities which gave them this title.
A “son” may lose the quality which entitles him to the name and so lose his position as son. The “sons of the kingdom” will in some cases be rejected and expelled from the home (Matt. 8: 12). The prodigal son on his return expected to be deposed of his sonship. “I am no longer qualified to be recognized as (“called”) your son; make me one of your hired men” (Lk. 15: 19). On the other hand, those good people who bring peace wherever they go are blessed because on account of their character they will be known as (“called”) “sons of God” (Matt. 5 : 9 ) If all righteous men are “sons of God,” it is natural to speak of certain ones as objects of God’s special love. Thus David is called “son” in II Samuel 7: 14, but in Psalms 89: 27 he is Jehovah’s “firstborn” son. At the baptism, Jesus heard the voice of God saying to him, “You are my beloved son. I am well pleased with you” (Mk. 1: n). Sometimes Jesus is called “the son” to distinguish him from all other sons. The Roman centurion who saw how Jesus died called him a son of God.
The title is used in the Gospels with all variations of content, according to the idea which the writer wishes to express. In paraphrasing the remark of the centurion just quoted Luke uses the term “a righteous man” (Lk. 23: 47). In other passages “son of God” takes on a distinctly official or even metaphysical sense. But the basis for understanding the usage as a whole is found in its ethical content. Jesus lived a life so near to God, serving God so closely, so personally, so faithfully that he became the favorite among many sons. He became God’s beloved son. Because this sonship was grounded in ethical and spiritual kinship, Jesus has become the representative of God to peoples and nations. He has become the revelation of God through the centuries to a world which is still searching and groping to find [ p. 198 ] that perfection of life which is infinite and eternal. If modern men and women believe that war is the greatest power in the world, they will be slow to recognize in Jesus a son of God, but those who have faith that love is stronger than hate, that brotherhood and fellowship will triumph, will recognize Jesus as God’s beloved son.
Abbot, The Son of Man.
Bos worth, Life and Teaching of Jesus , pp. 222-307.
Bousset, Jesus.
Burton, The Teaching of Jesus y pp. 214-256.
Case, Jesus , pp. 326-387.
Deissmann, The Religion of Jesus , pp. 69-97.
Driver, “Son of Man,” Hastings, D. B., Vol. V.
Mathews, The Messianic Hope in the New Testament.
McCown, The Genesis of the Social Gospel , pp. 292-328.
Robinson, The Gospel of John , pp. 182-187.
Schmidt, N., “Son of Man,” Journal of Biblical Literature , 19^6, pp. 326 ff.
Scott, The Kingdom and the Messiah.
Walker, Teaching of Jesus and Jewish Teaching , pp. 129-181.
Wendt, Teaching of Jesus , Vol. II, pp. 122-183.
Zenos, Plastic Age of the Gospel , pp. 65-73.