Monday, November 29, 2010

Son of Man

Ask the Pastor Question;

In the Book of Mark, Jesus refers to Himself as the Son of Man, yet forbids the evil spirits to refer to Him as the Son of God. At that time, I understand why He didn't want people to know that He was the Son of God but why was the Son of Man a more acceptable or applicable title, if you will?

Here is a sticky question but, simply put, Son of Man is used by Jesus of himself in describing his humanity. The term is used 90 some times in Ezekiel as a reference to the humanity of the prophet. I believe that this was used by Jesus to reference his incarnation. As Phil 2 says, "He humbled himself and became a man..."

You are right in recognizing that (especially in Mark) Jesus was trying to keep his identity as the Son of God a secret lest there be some form of political uprising and the gospel of the kingdom would be turned into some shallow short-lived political thing.

What makes this tricky is that the term was used in Daniel as a messianic term (7:13-14). Yet because of the number of times that Ezekiel is called son of man it is more likely that the reference would be understood by Mark's audience as a term of humility. This then makes the title in Daniel a possible reference to the incarnation.

1 comment:

Frank R. said...

I would definitely have to agree that although Jesus was the Son of God, in referring to Himself as the Son of man, is quite humbling to say the least. This continual reference throughout the book of Mark truly portrays the character of Christ. This is one of the many attributes that grips my heart and causes me to love Him even more.