SON OF MAN. — A Semitic expression normally meaning "man." In Hebrew ben 'ādhām ("s. of m.") is found in parallelism with 'ādhām or 'ēnās ("man"): Job 25:6; Ps. (Heb.) 144:3; Is. 51:12; Ez. 2:1, etc. In Aramaic and Syriac bar 'ēnās ("s. of m.") or bar nāsā ("the s. of m.") is commonly used to indicate "man."
It seems, however, that the expression takes on a particular, messianic sense in Daniel and in the Gospels.
Dan. 7:13 ff., after describing the vision of the 4 beasts, adds: "I was watching in the night visions — and behold, with the clouds of heaven — one like a man was coming (in Aramaic kēbar 'ēnās, 'like a s. of m.') — and he came to the Ancient of Days — and he was brought before him. — And to him was given power — and majesty and kingdom, etc." (version by G. Rinaldi, p. 82). Daniel himself explains the vision: "These great beasts — there are 4 of them — are 4 kings, who shall arise on the earth, but then the saints of the Most High shall receive the kingdom and shall hold it from eternity to eternity" (7:17 ff.); and further on: "The kingdom... shall be given to the people of the saints of the Most High" (7:27). The passage is certainly messianic: thus Jews and Christians understood it. The question is raised whether that "s. of m." is an individual (Messiah) or a collectivity (the people of the saints, messianic). From the context it seems to follow that the prophet understood it in a collective sense (7:17 ff., 27). But such a collective sense does not exclude that "the people of the saints" is presided over by the individual Messiah: the King who, for the ancients, personified the kingdom. This individual sense (which we might call "full literal" if it was not perfectly understood by the prophet, but only by God the inspirer) is seen in the prophecy by the subsequent revelation, which interprets it authentically.
Jesus before Caiaphas cites and authentically interprets Daniel's prophecy, applying it to the individual Messiah, indeed to himself: "You will see the S. of M. seated at the right hand of the Power, coming on the clouds of heaven" (Mt. 26:64). In the Jewish tradition the expression was applied to the Messiah by the Ethiopian apocryphon of Enoch 46:2. Also IV Esd. 13:8 ff. (1st cent. A.D.) sees in it an individual sense.
In the Gospels the expression determined with two articles, "the s. of m." (ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου), occurs 32 times in Matthew, 14 in Mark, 26 in Luke, 12 in John, always on the lips of Jesus (or of persons repeating Jesus' words). The passages are examined by P. Vannutelli (pp. 1-17). In the rest of the New Testament, the formula occurs one more time on the lips of St. Stephen: "I see the S. of M. standing at the right hand of God" (Acts 7:55, an allusion to Dan. 7:13) and twice in Apoc. (1:13 and 14:14, a citation of Dan. 7:13: ὁμοίον υἱὸν ἀνθρώπου).
What does this expression mean, which only Jesus applies to himself? P. Vannutelli (p. 45) concludes that "the s. of m." on the lips of Jesus means "man," that is, "I" (ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου = ἀνθρώπος = ἐγώ).
From the grammatical point of view this interpretation of the Semitic expression can be justified; all the more so since in some parallel passages of the Synoptics the formula is replaced with "I" (cf. Mt. 5:11 with Lk. 6:22; Mt. 10:32 with Lk. 12:8; Mt. 16:31 with Mk. 8:27 and Lk. 9:18; Mt. 16:21 with Mk. 8:31 and Lk. 9:22; Mt. 19:28 with Lk. 22:29; Mt. 20:28 with Mk. 10:45 and Lk. 22:27).
Such a solution, however, does not seem satisfactory in all cases. The more common opinion among the Fathers and the ancient exegetes holds that Jesus, in using this formula, intends to emphasize his human nature, assumed in the Incarnation.
Others suppose that Jesus, in using this formula, clearly qualifies himself as the Messiah foretold by Daniel. This solution fits well for the passage of Mt. 26:61, before Caiaphas; it does not, however, seem admissible for all the other cases: all the more so since, if Jesus had clearly attributed to himself the title of glorious Messiah, he would have fostered hopes for a political Messiah, which instead he intended to correct.
The best solution holds that Jesus, in applying to himself this title which could mean, depending on the case, "man" or "I" or "Messiah," intended to graduate the light of his messianic Revelation. By calling himself with the messianic title used by Daniel, which could however take on veiled tones, he let it be understood that he was an extraordinary man, and, for those who were able to comprehend it, that "s. of m." of whom Daniel speaks. By using this term in foretelling his passion he also corrected the Jewish expectation of a glorious political Messiah.
Some rationalists, supposing that "s. of m." is a clear messianic title drawn from Daniel, deny that Jesus used it. They suppose that the primitive community put the expression of its faith on Jesus' lips. This theory, which denies the historical value of the Gospel, can be refuted also by understanding the formula as a "veiled" messianic title, chosen by Jesus to graduate the light.
Bibliography5 works
Pietro De Ambroggi