EZEKIEL 2:1 THE SON OF MAN

Q: The prophet is continually called “the Son of man.” I know this title continues into the New Testament with Jesus being referred to as the Son of man as well. What is the meaning of this phrase or title?

Excellent question, and one that has been debated by generations of scholars. The original usage of this term was as a simple synonym for “human being.” Thus, NRSV translates the term in its over 90 usage in Ezekiel as “mortal.” Other renderings are “mortal man” (TEV), “man” (NEB) and “son of dust” (Living Bible). In the poetic literature it often stands in parallel to the word “man” and is used for literary variation. The most famous example is Ps. 8:4 where the Psalmist asks:

“What is man that thou art mindful of him,

and the son of man that thou dost care for him?”

In the context of Ezekiel's interactions with God, “it emphasizes man's finite dependence and insignificance before God's infinite power and glory.” (Oxford Annotated Bible, p. 1002)

A new use of the term occurs first in Daniel 7:13-14:

“I saw one like the son of man coming with the clouds of heaven. And he came to the Ancient One and was presented before him. To him was given dominion and glory and kingship that all peoples, nations, and languages should serve him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion that shall not pass away, and his kingship is one that shall never be destroyed.”

In this late Old Testament apocalyptic book, Son of Man becomes another title for the Messiah. Many of the phrases in this passage reappear in the Book of Revelation, where they clearly refer to Christ.

So when Jesus uses this term to refer to himself (over 80 times in the Gospels), the question is: Does Jesus mean (1) to stress his identification with lowly humanity or (2) to clearly identify himself as the heavenly figure described in Daniel? Liberal scholars usually opt for the first explanation and use it to explain that Jesus never considered himself as divine. Others feel that the second option is more likely. My own feeling is that Jesus used Son of Man because it was the most precise way to describe both His full humanity and full deity.

The only issue remaining is the confusing footnote in The Daily Bible on Ezekiel 2:1. It states, “The phrase son of man is retained as a form of address here and throughout Ezekiel because of its possible association with “Son of Man” in the New Testament. I personally see no association whatsoever between an address used by God to firmly designate Ezekiel as a mere human being and the self-identification of Jesus as not only human but also the divine personage that appears in the Book of Daniel.