The objective of this short study is to learn the significance of Jesus’ favorite title for himself, Son of Man. Dr. Moo provides an explanation of the meaning of this phrase in Dan 7 and the significance of Jesus’ application of that vision to Himself.
After watching this lecture and working through two short additional readings, you can experience the effect this understanding can have on your interpretation of this phrase wherever it is used in the New Testament.
This short study is an excerpt from a Redemption Seminary course. Every Redemption lesson is divided into short sensible steps. Your first step is watching a short lecture from a Logos Mobile Education course (typically less than 10 minutes).
Step 1: Watch the Lecture
Step 2: Reading
““Son of Man,” which occurs in v. 10 for the first time in Mark, is an ambiguous title, largely free of the political and military connotations associated with Messiah. In itself the title does not appear to have made any special claim in the ears of Jesus’ contemporaries. Nowhere are people amazed that Jesus calls himself the “Son of Man,” for example, nor do they take exception to his doing so. “Son of Man” thus offers the advantage of a title unencumbered by unwelcome associations, allowing Jesus the possibility of speaking of himself in public, indeed often in the face of opposition and hostility, in such a way that his hearers might discover his identity, if they would discover it at all.
“Son of Man” occurs fourteen times in Mark, and only from the mouth of Jesus. As in the other synoptic Gospels, “Son of Man” is divided into three categories in Mark. In three instances (8:38; 13:26; 14:62) it occurs in apocalyptic contexts, as in its usage in Daniel 7 and 1 Enoch 37–69, where it refers to the Son of Man coming in judgment. Twice the title refers to Jesus’ earthly authority to forgive sins (2:10) and supersede the Sabbath (2:28). Its most predominant usage, however, is with regard to Jesus’ suffering (nine times: 8:31; 9:9, 12, 31; 10:33, 45; 14:21 [twice], 41). Each of the three categories refers to a divine attribute, or, as in the case with the third, fulfilling a divinely ordained purpose. It is thus apparent that “Son of Man” is not, as is often supposed today, merely a circumlocution for “the human one.” In the present passage (2:10) “Son of Man” depicts Jesus’ authority to forgive sins, thereby alluding to the “son of man” figure in Dan 7:13–14, who likewise is empowered with God’s authority (“there before me was one like a son of man.… He was given authority, glory, and sovereign power”).
The authority of the Son of Man is predominantly exhibited, however, in humiliation, suffering, and death. Like Mark’s more important title for Jesus, “Son of God,” “Son of Man” includes suffering as its primary content. This is signified by the majority of its uses in the Gospel. In five of its nine uses related to suffering, Jesus is “betrayed” into the hands of sinners. The betrayal of the Son of Man is not arbitrary, but it is the will of God and the means by which God’s will is accomplished, for the Son of Man “must” (Gk. dei) suffer for the sake of his disciples and give his life a ransom for others (10:45).”
“Daniel 7:13 probably provides more directly relevant background. In his vision, Daniel sees “one like a son of man,” that is, one who is apparently human, yet, this individual was “coming with the clouds of heaven.” He approached the Ancient of Days and was led into his presence (v. 13). “He was given authority, glory and sovereign power; all nations and people of every language worshiped him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion that will not pass away, and his kingdom is one that will never be destroyed” (v. 14).
On the basis of verse 18 (“The holy people of the Most High will receive the kingdom and will possess it forever”), many scholars have interpreted this vision as a prophecy of the collective future and glory of Israel. But verses 13–14 seem to suggest more than this—that Israel will be led by a representative who is described as a heavenly figure worthy of universal worship (an unlikely attribute for monotheistic Jews to ascribe to themselves as a whole!). In 1 Enoch and 4 Ezra, Jewish pseudepigraphal works completed no later than the end of the first century, the Son of Man appears clearly as an individual and a messianic figure. Demonstrably pre-Christian works also point to at least a minority voice within Judaism that would have agreed. The Greek definite article may function as a demonstrative: “this ‘Son of Man’,” that is, “the one described in Daniel.”
Most scholars have grouped Jesus’ Son of Man sayings into three categories: those that refer to his earthly ministry, those that portend his coming suffering, and those that allude to his future, exalted state. Seeing a Danielic background for the title allows one to accept sayings in all three categories as authentic. The vision of a heavenly man clearly fits the exalted sayings (e.g., Matt 10:23; 19:28; Mark 8:38; 9:1). The references to oppression and war against the saints in Dan 7:21, 25 could have suggested the link with suffering (as in Mark 8:31; 14:21; or Luke 12:40). Even in the sayings that seem least dependent on a Danielic background, hints of either suffering or exaltation seem present. For example, when the Son of Man has nowhere to lay his head, the ignominy of Jesus’ itinerant ministry is highlighted. When he demonstrates authority to forgive sins on earth (Mark 2:10) or shows that he is Lord of the Sabbath (2:28), a certain transcendence seems present.
If it is difficult to see how Ezekiel’s “son of man” (a mere mortal) could have given rise to the exalted titular passages in the Gospels, it is not hard to see how a Danielic, messianic, suffering Son of Man could lurk in the background of even the less explicitly titular Gospel references.
The upshot of all of this is that, contrary to popular contemporary Christian (mis) conceptions, “Son of Man” winds up being a very exalted title for Jesus. It does not primarily focus on his true humanity but on his heavenly enthronement (cf. also the plural “thrones” of Dan 7:9). It is more of a synonym than an antonym of “Son of God.” But it remains ambiguous enough that Jesus was able to invest the term with his own meaning and clarifications. It was not susceptible to the political misunderstandings surrounding the term “Messiah” itself. The possibility of linking it with suffering was not one that pre-Christian Jews had unambiguously exploited. Whereas Daniel’s Son of Man travels on the clouds to the very throne room of God, Jesus uses this imagery to describe his return from heaven to earth in glory (Mark 14:62 pars.).”
Step 3: Reflection Activity
Try reading some New Testament passages that use the title, Son of Man, incorporating Moo’s definition of its meaning. Take some notes on passages where this interpretation illuminates your understanding of the meaning of the passage.
An easy way to find New Testament passages that use this title, is to open Factbook in Logos Bible Software. In the Lemmas section, click on the carrot icon to expand the 81 references that use the Greek phrase for “Son of Man.”
