What does it mean that Jesus is the Son of Man?

This title, "Son of man," by its terms suggests a wider sphere than is suggested by "Son of David" and "Son of Abraham." It implies universal headship, as Heb. 2. shows, and was adopted by the Lord in view of His rejection by the Jews as the Messiah. Son of a man He was not, but Son of man He was, and when on earth He could say, "The Son of man which is in heaven" (John 3:13; 1 Cor. 15:47). In Daniel His universal dominion is prophesied of under this title: "I saw in the night visions, and behold, one like unto the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him. And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom that all the peoples, nations and languages should serve him; his dominion is an everlasting dominion which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed" (Dan. 7:13-14). As Son of man He has power to execute judgment on sins as well as to forgive them (John 5:27).

In the prophetic communications to Ezekiel, the title, "Son of man," is frequently employed by Jehovah when addressing the prophet. It is also used once in addressing Daniel (Dan. 8:7), but they never apply it to themselves. Both Ezekiel and Daniel were prophets of the exile, and ministered away from Judah, which was under the power of the Gentiles. The Lord too, as the despised Servant-Prophet, ministering in "Galilee of the Gentiles," assumed this title, proving His authority to forgive sins, not as Jehovah of Psalm 103, or as the Messiah of Israel, but as the Son of man.

From these passages it is abundantly clear that the Lord adopted the title of Son of Man in view of His rejection, suffering and death; and secondly, it is as manifestly taught that it is in this character as the Son of Man that He will have universal rule throughout the world. Daniel thus says, "I saw in the night visions, and, behold, one like the Son of Man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought Him near before Him. And there was given Him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages should serve Him" (Dan. 7:13-14).

The Lord charged them that they should tell no man of Him. He had been rejected by the nation, so His position as the Messiah is for the time set aside and the Lord takes the wider title of Son of Man which leads to greater glories than earthly dominion in connection with Israel, for as Son of Man He will have universal dominion over all created things. But before He can take His place as Son of Man with all things put in subjection under Him, and exercise His grace towards all men, He must go into death, accomplish redemption and break the power of Satan, death and the grave. With the cross in view He began to teach His disciples that the Son of Man must suffer many things, be rejected and killed, and after three days rise again. Of this great truth the time had come to speak openly to the disciples, and no longer in parables.

This being so, the Lord’s constant use of this term becomes intelligible throughout. He uses it as the simplest and most intelligible one, which no one, so to speak, would deny, and yet which upon His lips conveys so much: Whom do men say that I the Son of man am?” (Matt. 16:12.) Son of man, just by its common application to men at large, He must be, of course; and yet in His application of it to Himself it becomes distinctive by its very universality: for who would dream of speaking of himself as “the Son of man,” except as implying that He was more than this meant as to other men? The Lord might address the prophet in this way, as reminding him of what he was, but no man, speaking among the sons of men, could distinguish himself by what was not distinctive. If it were distinctive of Him, then He was the Son of man in some sense that others were not; not less truly so, but more: and so He was—the One son of man upon whom the shadow of the fall had never been: Man, and of man, yet in more than all the promise of his first creation; God’s Man indeed, justifying that creation itself, as all else had dishonored it; and thus having in Himself the promise for men of a new creation, by which they too at last should fulfill the purpose of the Creator; “Lord of the sabbath,” as He who shall bring in, in such wise as to be violated no more, the rest of God.

Daniel is only once addressed as “son of man,” (chap. 8:17) but the prophecy of the Son of man—or strictly, of “One like unto a Son of man” (7:13, 14)—to whom, coming in the clouds of heaven, is given a universal and everlasting dominion, is given us by him: a prophecy which is echoed and enlarged upon in the New Testament. In the eighth psalm, though more enigmatically expressed, we have by the mouth of David what anticipates and is the foundation of this. And here we have, strikingly expressed, the thought conveyed to us by this title; Christ being the full utterance and justification of God’s delight in man.

"The Son of man" was, as we know, the title which the Lord most commonly assumed. It was that which proclaimed Him in wider sympathy than merely with the Jew, His nature truly human; and come into humanity by the lowly entrance by which other men come, though that for Him indeed implied a miracle. Thus He was fit to be also the Judge of men (John 5:27), and as such comes in the clouds of heaven to His kingdom. Here is One whom God has indeed "made strong for Himself"; and God's hand setting Him in His place is the proclamation of the hour that strikes for Israel's deliverance.

Then in Matt. 16 He asks, "Whom do men say that I the Son of man am?" He adopts this title when Israel's attitude of hostility and rejection becomes apparent. In Matt. 8 it bespeaks His lowly path — "The Son of Man hath not where to lay His head." But it is also the title of His official glory for, as such, all things are put under His feet, as stated in Psalm 8 and Hebrews 2.

The integrity of our Saviour’s manhood is marked by one title which the Lord claimed for Himself with special emphasis, and which prophecy also had in a most distinct way applied to Him,—“the Son of man.” Here “man,” in the Hebrew texts, is “Adam,” man generically; and it really settles conclusively the question (if any entertain it) as to His being personally Man. A son of man is just a man in the broadest sense, one by descent and inheritance a man. In Ps. 49 a “the low” in our version are just literally “the sons of Adam”—the commonalty, having nothing to distinguish them from others,—and are so contrasted with the “sons of ish,” (“the high”) the men of mark in any way whatever. By the use of this term the Lord comes down, therefore, in the simplest manner, as far as the truth of His humanity is concerned, to the common level. He is not simply “man,” One whom you could call that, though differing far from the race of Adam: He is “Son of man;” deriving His humanity from humanity, with nothing to separate it in kind from humanity in general,—“made in all things like unto His brethren,” as the apostle declares. The Christ of Apollinaris, or of some of the modern Kenotics, would not be a “Son of man.” He would be a divine man, perhaps; but absolutely separated from humanity in the sons of men: “brethren” among these He could not have. The force of the term is seen in the use of it as applied to the prophet Ezekiel, and once in Daniel. Both lived when things were broken up in Israel; and Ezekiel as the priest is chosen of God to be the judge, according to the law of Leviticus in its spiritual application, of the leprous condition of the people. He is taken to witness their wilful and inveterate apostasy from Jehovah. After which, as commanded in Leviticus, the demonstration being complete, the leper is put outside the camp. The glory of the Lord is seen, though lingeringly, as all unwilling, to depart from the city (chap. 11:22, 23.)

We may remark here that, in this as in the preceding chapter, He takes the title of Son of man, His title of predilection or love for us, of a much larger import than that of Christ, which, though He was the Christ, He was not come to take and never does take in Israel. He is there as Emmanuel, Jehovah to save His people, but as Son of man, a title of all importance. He who takes the kingdom in glory from heaven, who even has all things under His feet, Christ, never presents Himself as Christ. The Son of man was to be strong for God (Psalm 80:17); but at present He must suffer. But, though in the midst of His people, necessarily when here below God must take in His nature and in His work His place in respect to men above all relationship according to the law as the rejected One on the earth. The Son of man has power on earth to forgive sins; as the crowd say that God has given such power to men.

Now though it be clear from Daniel 7, that the title "Son of Man" is Messianic, yet it belongs pre-eminently to the lowly suffering One. The Son of God became Son of Man that He might suffer. John 12:23-24, 34; Luke 9:22. But is there not also a deep meaning in the fact that He was Son of Man? Indeed there is. It testifies the perfection, the reality of His Manhood. Nothing could do so more. No greater witness to His Humanity was possible than that He was in deed and truth—THE Son of Man. Was it any dishonour to His Manhood, was its real character lowered, its truth weakened, because He was Son of Man? Far be the thought. Jesus was truly Man because He was truly the Son of Man. In this Sonship the certainty of His real Humanity is assured to faith. We cannot limit the Creator in the exercise of His Sovereign right: Jesus was the Creator, and He might have become flesh another way; but He chose to come this way, even that of the weakness and blessed simplicity of a Babe. That great fact meant that He was truly the Son of Man. His Sonship as Son of Man was no mere figment; it was infinite and glorious truth.