What Is His Name?

The Son of Man

Harry Foster

When the Jews asked, "Who is this Son of man?" (John 12:34), they were not expressing perplexity at the title, for they knew what that involved, but they were voicing their scepticism about Christ's claim to use it, both because of His present lowly condition and because of His predictions of the death which was to come.

The phrase "Son of man" contained no allusion to our Lord's parentage, nor to any father-son relationship, but was an idiom which denoted personal characteristics. "The son of peace" (Luke 10:6) was an essentially peaceful man, just as "the sons of thunder" were exactly the opposite (Mark 3:17). Barnabas was "the son of consolation" (Acts 4:36) because he was a comforting, encouraging type. This helps us to appreciate that the title "Son of man" denoted that our Lord was true Man, the ideal and essence of all that God meant man to be.

The extraordinary feature of this particular title is that it was the one which the Lord chose when speaking of Himself. It is found in all four Gospels, and was obviously His favourite self-description. We may wonder whether He appropriated the title from Daniel 7:13, for almost always when He spoke of His return in glory He called Himself "the Son of man" (Matthew 26:64). He knew that He had become Man in order to provide the true headship of the human race. Even the unfallen Adam was never more than a shadow of the Man that was to rule God's kingdom (Romans 5:14), so all prophecy centred on this coming King.

This kind of Son of man the Jews could understand, though they were not prepared to accept Christ's claim to be he, mainly because their failure to admit their own sinfulness made them unwilling to accept the idea that hope could only come to the human race by the sacrificial death of the representative Man. How God's purpose for mankind would have been realised if humanity had never sinned we do not know, but this we do know, that He sent His Son to solve the tragic dilemma by giving His own life for sinners (Mark 10:45). Man must be on the cross before he can be on the throne. So it is that the number of references to the return of the Son of man in glory are about equalled by the number of references to His death and resurrection (Luke 24:7).

The fact is that the title can be found in Ezekiel, where it is applied to the prophet more than ninety times. In his case the emphasis seems to be on humiliation and suffering, in his ministry as a "sign" among the captive Israelites (Ezekiel 2:6). In no sense was the title messianic as in Daniel, but at least it gives a hint that in a world like ours a man of God must serve by suffering, and that the representative Man -- the Son of man -- would preeminently be God's "sign" not so much by what He said or did as by what He endured. When Christ spoke of His coming redemptive work He always called Himself the Son of man. Apart from these two main uses of the title there are a few others which describe Christ's character, so giving us some understanding of what the ideal Man is like:

(1) He has no earthly support -- He is a faith Man. Matthew 8:20.
(2) He has power to forgive -- He is a merciful Man. Matthew 9:6.
(3) He eats and drinks -- He is a fellowship Man. Matthew 11:19.
(4) He is lord of the Sabbath -- He is a free Man. Matthew 12:8.
(5) He sows the good seed -- He is a hopeful Man. Matthew 13:37.
(6) He seeks to save -- He is a compassionate Man. Matthew 18:11.
(7) He serves others -- He is a selfless Man. Matthew 20:28.

This, then, is our ideal. When confronted by this true Man we may well despair of ever being the kind of men that we should be. But we must not despair. He is our Representative. Moreover He is ready to share His humanity with us. Has He not made this plain by saying that the secret of eternal life is the eating of the flesh of the Son of man and the drinking of His blood (John 6:53)?

There is just one more use of the title which is most significant. In his dying moments Stephen was sustained by a vision of Christ for which only human names are used. We are told that it was Jesus whom he saw, and he described Him as "the Son of man" (Acts 7:55 & 56). Stephen was the only disciple ever to do this. Was it that he was proving that the secret of radiant victory is to keep one's eyes on the One who is not only almighty God but also true Man? Or was it, perhaps, that Stephen was being given a preview of the second coming? One thing is certain, and that is that when he and the rest of us wake up from that "sleep" into which he fell, our first waking sight will be the glory of God with the dear Son of man as its central figure.

Design downloaded from free website templates.