Son of Man

While on the earth the first time, our Lord Jesus Christ, on a few occasions, referred to himself as the “Son of God” (John 9:35-37; 3:16; 10:36; 11:4). But more often, he called himself the “son of man.” What did he mean when he used the title “son of man” for himself?

Many theologians, who have imbibed the Trinitarian dogma, teach that the term means a different thing when made in reference to Jesus Christ than when it is made in relation to other persons. They say the phrase “son of man”  refers to his humanity, which we agree with, while the term “son of God” means he is God, which is partially wrong. This Trinitarian theology asserts that Jesus was both God and man at the same time during his first advent to this earth. It must be said that this concept about the nature of Jesus Christ during his Incarnation does not align with the teachings of the Bible. In this article, we want to briefly look at what our Lord Jesus Christ meant by calling himself the Son of man.

Son of Man

The phrase  “son of man” was used 109 times in the Hebrew Bible, including the Book of Ezekiel where it was used 94 times. In the New Testament, Jesus used this title exclusively in reference to himself. Mark recorded it 15 times, Matthew made 32 records of it, Luke recorded it 26 times, and John wrote it 12 times in his gospel, and 2 times in the Book of Revelation (1:13; 14:14). Philip and  Paul used the term once each in reference to  Jesus Christ (Acts 7:56; Heb. 2:6).

The phrase was used first in Numbers 23:19 which reads, “God is not man, that he should lie, or a son of man, that he should change his mind. Has he said, and will he not do it? Or has he spoken, and will he not fulfil it?” (Num. 23:19 ESV).

Here, Balaam used  Hebrew parallelism, which was very common in Hebrew writings. It involves the repetition, in the second part, of what has already been expressed in the first while simply varying the words. Here, the phrase “son of man” was used as a synonym  of “man,” both of which simply means a human being. It was employed in Hebrew writings for the purpose of making emphasis.

This parallelism is also used in Job 25:6; 35:8; Psalm 8:4; 80:17; 144:3; Isaiah 51:12; 56:2; Jeremiah 49:18, 33; 50:40; 51:43. These passages make us understand that the term “son of man” was used to emphasise the fact that we are human brings and that we are not God who is immortal.

Why did Jesus Christ use the term for himself?

It appears that our Lord Jesus Christ often called himself “son of man” to  emphasise the fact that he was a human being. And this was the way the apostles understood him. Peter called him “Jesus of Nazareth, a man [a human being] attested to you by God” (Acts 2:22, bold emphasis and words in square brackets are mine). Paul wrote, “For there is one God, and there is one mediator between God and men [human beings], the man [human being] Christ Jesus, (1 Timothy 2:5). He also wrote this about our Lord Jesus Christ:

“Because God’s children are human beings—made of flesh and blood—the Son also became flesh and blood. For only as a human being could he die, and only by dying could he break the power of the devil, who had the power of death. [15] Only in this way could he set free all who have lived their lives as slaves to the fear of dying. [16] We also know that the Son did not come to help angels; he came to help the descendants of Abraham. [17] Therefore, it was necessary for him to be made in every respect like us, his brothers and sisters, so that he could be our merciful and faithful High Priest before God. Then he could offer a sacrifice that would take away the sins of the people.” (Heb. 2:14-17 NLT, emphases added).

The reader should note the words in verse 17. He was in every respect like us. In other words, he was 100 percent human. He was not God putting on a human body during his first advent.

The first century believers understood our Lord Jesus Christ to be a human being. The Trinitarian formulation that our Lord Jesus Christ possessed both the human and  divine natures during his Incarnation was unknown to them. Jesus Christ himself never gave anyone the idea that he possessed two natures while he was on the earth the first time. He never said he was God and human being at the same time.

Christ’s frequent use of the title “son of man” for himself was his way of emphasising the fact that he was entirely human.

The distinction many teachers make between Jesus Christ as a “son of man” and the usage of the term for other people like Ezekiel or Daniel (Dan. 8:17) has no biblical support. Their reference to Daniel 7:13 as a different kind of “son of man” is theoretical. When Daniel saw the vision he recorded in that place, what he wrote simply was that the one who came to the Ancient of days [God] in the clouds of heaven was “one like a son of man” (Dan. 7:13). What Daniel wrote was that he looked like a human being.

Conclusion

Each time Jesus used the term “son of man” for himself, he simply emphasised the fact that he was a human being. That was the way his first disciples who walked, talked, touched, and ate with him knew him. There is no biblical record which suggest that they viewed him as God who put on human flesh while he was on the earth. The Trinitarian teaching which says our Lord Jesus Christ was perfect God and perfect man at the same time has been proved beyond all doubt to be unbiblical and untrue. Jesus Christ did not have two natures while he was on the earth. There is no false doctrine in Christendom worse than the Trinity dogma invented  in the fourth  century  CE.