When we read the Gospels, we see that Jesus always refers to himself as the Son of Man.

Its a very strange expression, the Son of Man, but he uses that expression all the time
when he speaks about himself. No one else in the entire four Gospels ever calls him by
that title. They call him Rabbi; they call him Lord; they call him Master. Some
even say, You are the Son of God. Thomas even says, My Lord and my God, but no
one calls him Son of Man.
But he always calls himself Son of Man. In fact, theres only one place in the entire
four Gospels where that term Son of Man is used where it is not Jesus using it for
himself, but even in that place, its used because Jesus has used it, because Jesus has said
it, and the person answers back, and I think we should hear that very one and only place.
Its truly an exception, where you find it, the only place in the Scripture where it is used.
Its in John 12, where Jesus is saying, Now the judgment of the world, now the prince of
this world (or the ruler of this world), will be cast outhe means the deviland I,
when I am lifted up from the earthhe means crucified and taken up into the heavens.
Its interesting in St. John: the lifting up as to do with lifting up on the Cross, and lifting
up in the heavens with God; its a double meaning. I will draw all people to myself.
And then it says, He said this to show by what death he was to die, meaning that he
was going to be crucified.
The crowd answered him, We have heard from the Law that the Christ remains forever.
How can you say that the Son of Man must be lifted up? Who is this Son of Man? And
then Jesus said to them, The light is with you for a little longer; walk while you have the
light. So its the only time you have somebody saying to him, You called yourself the
Son of Man and You say that the Son of Man must be lifted up. Who is this Son of
Man? And they say it because he said it.
We should know And I got this statistic from this author, whom I really love: Martin
Hengel, his name is. He is a very elderly man now, a German scholar, of course,
Tbingen. And I honestly believe, Id like to make a big, bigwhatever the word would
becommercial pitch here for the writings of Martin Hengel. I think Martin Hengel is
the best critical scholar of the Holy Scripture ever, practically. Certainly in our I would
say ever. Because he Well, I wont say why. He just is. But hes got wonderful books.
Hes an expert on Palestinian Judaism and Diaspora Judaism and Hellenism at the time of
Jesus. And then, of course, hes an expert on the New Testament.
Well, he tells us in a book of essays on New Testament Christology, where he speaks
about [this] title, Son of Man. He says that its used 81 times in the four Gospels. 14
times in Mark, 25 in Luke, 30 in Matthew, 12 in John, for a total of 81 times. And its not
used by anyone else but him, and he only uses it for himself.

Since that expression, Son of Man, is an Old Testamental expression, its an Aramaic
expression or Hebrew expressionin fact, Martin Hengel says that probably in Greek the
expression Son of Man is completely meaningless to people. They wouldnt know what
youre talking about. It just doesnt seem to have any explanation. It doesnt have an
obvious meaning, like the term king or judge or lord or God. Son of Man:
what can that mean?
So Martin Hengel called it a veiled codeword, a kind of Aramaic insider word for Jews.
And maybe that explains why its found 30 times in Matthew, because Matthews
considered to be the Aramaic Gospel, the one originally written for the Jewish Christians,
and also, Matthew is not only the Torah Gospel, the one identifying Jesus as the New
Moses and connecting [him] to the Law, but also Matthew is considered to be the source
of the very sayings of Jesus, that the collection of the sayings of Jesus himself is
somehow connected with the Matthew tradition and that you find them first of all through
Matthew or in a separate collection that then comes through in Mark and Luke and so on.
This is a scholarly problem or a challenge that its very hard to explain.
But one thing is not hard, at least to describeI dont know how to explain it; well try to
explain it here in a minute in some way, primitive, pathetic waystill, the fact of the
matter is, the term ho huios tou anthropou, the son of the man or ho huios anthropou
or simply huios anthropou, son of man, son of human being, and anthropos there
means human being, son of human being. And huios means son it means a male
child, a son: huios.
So its in Matthew and its used by Jesus, and this leads people, certainly Professor
Hengel, to conclude that it must have been something that Jesus did himself. Its not
something that could be put upon him. Like, you could put on him the title Christ; you
could put on him the title Lord; you could put on him the title God; but why would
you put on him the title Son of Man? Certainly if youre from the Greek-speaking
world, it really wouldnt make too much sense, such an expression.
And then, the point is also made that outside the Gospels, except when the expression
Son of Man is used in a psalm, and that psalm is being quoted, like, for example, in
Hebrews you have a psalm being quoted that has the expression Son of Man in it. And
then you have Daniel quoted, and were going to see that Daniel is a very important text,
where the Ancient of Days is on the throne, and where one like unto a Son of Man is
presented to him, and he receives all dominion, power, glory, majesty, and so on from
God.
When the New Testament refers to the Old Testament places where the expression Son
of Man is used, and particularly where its used where the New Testament author wants

to show that, in fact, it has to be applied to Jesus, and thats probably why Jesus was
using that very word himself, then, of course, you can see why that term, Son of Man,
would be used. But, in St. Paul, for example, Jesus is never presented as the Messiah and
the Lord because he is the Son of Man.
And, in fact, Son of Man does not become a kind of, how can you say, homiletical or
kerygmatic or even doxological term. By using those fancy words following the scholars,
what I simply mean to say is: Jesus, by the Christians, is not preached as the Son of
Man to anybody too much, in fact, if at all. In the New Testament, its not at all. Hes
preached as Gods Son, Son of God. Hes preached as Lord. Hes preached as Christ.
Hes preached as Savior. But hes not preached as Son of Man. And yet, thats the title
that he uses for himself.
What seems to be the case Oh, also, yes, we should say that in Orthodox liturgy, in
ancient Church liturgy, there are almost no prayers addressed to Jesus as Son of Man. Its
not one of the doxological terms. When were worshiping, you say, O Lord, O Master, O
Son of God, only-begotten Son, O Logos of God, but hes not really ever prayed to as
Son of Man.
Were thinking [about] or trying to understand [the reason for this]; thats what were
doing, but I think that to me it seems pretty clear what the reason is. The reason is that
Jesus speaks about himself as the Son of Man. And he has a very particular reason for
doing that, which well get to. But what he wants from those who hear him is to confess
him as the Son of God. What he wants from those who hear him is to confess him as the
Lord, Kyrios. What he wants from those who hear him, very particularly, is to confess
him as the Christ: Who do you say that I am?
Its interesting: Peter doesnt say, You are the Son of Man. He says, You are the
Christ, the Son of the living God. And Jesus says, Right. Flesh and blood has not
revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven. So it seems that in the four
Gospels, particularly, Jesus presents himself as the Son of Man, but he expects those who
see him for who and what he really is to confess him as the Christ, the Son of God, and
the Lord.
What we will see immediately is that this expression, Son of Man, is in the Old
Testament Scriptures, but its also found outside the Old Testament Scriptures. Hengel
tells us that theres a writing called the Similitudes of Enoch, an apocryphal book which
was probably written between 40 BC, 40 years before Christ, or up to maybe 70 [years]
after Christ, but here you have the expression Son of Man being used, but it is in that
particular writing virtually a synonym with Son of God and with Wisdom of God, the
personification of sophia, and it has other meanings in that Similitudes of Enoch.

However, [it is] Martin Hengel who points that out, says theres no evidence whatsoever
that Jesus ever knew anything about the book called the Similitudes of Enoch, but what
makes it so intriguing is that maybe the Similitudes of Enoch expresses a kind of a
tradition, one of those apocryphal, hidden, secondary traditions among the people, that
does have some connection, certainly has connection with the Old Testament, with the
Prophets and the Law of Moses and so on; after all, its Enoch that is mentioned. But its
just interesting to mention that, to know that you find that there.
Were not interested in that. What we have to be interested in is that this expression, Son
of Man, is an Aramaic expression thats used in various ways in the Old Testament. And
it can be used simply as an expression meaning a man, a human being, in that sense;
simply a son of man. Meaning to say, Here is this man. But it seems that already in
the Old Testament, the expression like a son of man or the son of man is an
expression that wants to say, This is the man. When that man comes, that one who has
that title, that man that is referred to, then you know that he is the man that were looking
for, the one that we are looking for.
So when Jesus is referring to himself as Son of Man, it can be understoodand I think
in fact it must bewhat hes saying is, Im the man that youre all looking for. I am the
Son of Man. I am that man. I am the one. I am the human being. There isnt any other.
Especially when you have the definite article: the Son of Man as a title, which you have
all over the place. Practically the whole time its the Son of Man: when the Son of
Man is lifted up, that you may know that I am the Son of Man, do you believe that I am
he and all these kinds of expressions that you have in the holy Scripture.
It seems, though, however, that there is a very particular text in the Prophets that seems to
be the main reason why that title is so significant, and its the Book of Daniel. And its in
the Book of Daniel, in the seventh chapter, and this is quoted in Hebrews, and it is quoted
in the Book of Revelation, and if its not quoted directly, its quoted indirectly when you
have the most-quoted expression of the Old Covenant of Scriptures being quoted in the
New, and that would be the first line of Psalm 110: The Lord said to my Lord, Sit at my
right hand until I put all the enemies under your feed. The Lord to whom the Lord
says, Sit at my right hand, is described, at least in Daniel, as one who is like a son of
man; he is a man.
And here, I will just read to you the Daniel text that seems to be the text that we have to
be interested in the most. Daniel writes (Daniel 7:13): I beheld in the night vision, and
behold, one coming with the clouds of heaven Thats important: with the clouds of
heaven. Were going to see that thats really important. ...coming with the clouds of
heaven as and then it says in the translation I have in English: ...the son of man.

However, in the original Greek there is no definite article: hos huios anthropou
erchomenos: coming as son of man or coming as son of man. Not necessarily even
a son of man, but coming as being son of man, being man.
Then it says, He came up to the Ancient of Days, and this Ancient of Days is a title
for God. In Isaiah, hes the one who sits upon the throne, to whom the angels are singing,
Holy, holy, holy! In Daniel, certainly, the Ancient of Days, and Orthodox, in the ancient
Church, even have frescoes of this. Sometimes people think we shouldnt have them, but
it shows the Ancient of Days sitting on a throne kind of like an old man. And it describes
even how he looks and how he is vested, sitting on this judgment seat, and that same
figure appears in the Apocalypse. The one who sits upon the throne, in the Apocalypse, is
certainly the one who sits on the throne in Isaiah, and hes certainly the one whos sitting
on the throne as the Ancient of Days in Daniel. And even its depicted how he looks, and
in ancient Christian frescoes, in monasteries, they would even paint this in this way, as an
old man.
But then they would show this one coming to him, brought to him, presented to him,
brought near him, as it says, who is hos huios anthropou, as son of man. So this Son
of Man figure is presented to him. And then in the frescoes, this Son of Man figure is
painted like Jesus. He looks just like Jesus. It is Jesus, as a matter of fact.
And then it says, And to him was given the dominion and the honor and the kingdom;
and all the nations and all the tribes and all the languages shall serve him, and his
dominion is an everlasting dominion which shall never pass away, and his kingdom will
not be destroyed. So it says, To him belongs h arch. Arch means the beginning of
everything, and the Revelation Book will say hes the arch to telos. The Son of Man is
the arch to telos, the alpha and the omega, the beginning and the end, which God
himself is.
And is given to him kai [h] tim. Tim means honor. H vasilia means the
kingdom. And pantes hoi laoi: all the peoples, all the nations; and all these peoples
and all these nations and all the tongues, and all the languages and all the tribes are going
to serve him. And his dominion is going to be an everlasting dominion which will not
pass away, and his kingdom shall never be destroyed.
It seems pretty clear that thats why Jesus uses that expression for himself, because he is
that Son of Man, and he wants people to recognize him as that Son of Man. He wants
people to recognize him as the one who is presented to God himself, who is his Father,
the Ancient of Days, the one from everlasting, and that he receives, together with the
Father, all the glories and honors that belong to the Father.

And its interesting that in the Book of Revelation, those honors that are given to him,
together with him who sits upon the throne, with God the Father, are even multiplied
more than in the Book of Daniel. Theres even more that is said that is given to him than
in the Book of Daniel. It says, when hes sitting on the throne and all the angels are
singing, Holy, holy! and everyone comes to him who is sitting on the throne with the
Father, and sitting on the throne with him means being at his right hand: in power. We
spoke about the power of God that he is.
And then when it says that they are singing to him, and they fall down before him, what
they say that they offer to him is glory, honor, power, blessing, thanksgiving, and
worship. All of these things are offered to him who sits upon the throne together with
God. Theyre offered to God and, in the language of the Book of Revelation, they are also
offered to the Lamb: and they give glory, honor, and thanksgiving to him who sits upon
the throne and lives forever and ever and to the Lamb. And in the Book of Revelation,
this Lamb is the one who was dead and is alive again, and he is identified in the very
first chapter of the Book of Revelation as the Son of Man by reference to Daniel.
Its just in the Book of Revelation itself that he is coming on the clouds and they shall all
see him, the one who was pierced, and he gets glory [and] dominion forever and ever
with God, his Father, and he is the one who comes and he is the alpha and the omega. He
is the faithful witnesswell talk about that, all these titles that you find in the Book of
Revelation. But it also calls him the Son of Man. Its the thirteenth verse (Revelation
1:13): And in the midst of the seven candlesticks one like unto the Son of Manho
huion anthropou, as a son of man; its similar to son of manclothed with a garment
down to his foot, girt about his breast with a golden girdle, and his head and hair
described like the Ancient of Days, but its the Son of Man. And he is the first and the
last, the one who was dead and is alive again; he is the Amen of God.
You have this identification with the Daniel Son of Man in the confession about Jesus in
the New Testament. And it seems very clear that that is why Jesus himself uses that
expression. He is that man that is talked about. He is that one that is talked about. He is
the one who appears.
I would just like to magnify this point, or to kind of stress it a little bit further, about this
Son of Man, by two other texts of the Old Testament that are very familiar to Orthodox
Christians, that Orthodox Christians would really know. They probably know, and if they
dont know, they should know these particular texts.
One of them is also from Daniel, and its the story of Shadrach, Meschach, and
Abednego, whose [Hebrew] names are Azariah andoh, heavens[Mishael] and I
forgot the third [Hebrew] name, but Ill get it. But anyway, theyre the three youths in the

Babylonian furnace. And these three young boys absolutely refused to worship the golden
idol that Nebuchadnezzar has built, the idol that Nebuchadnezzar has set up. And they
refuse to do it. And then, of course Nebuchadnezzar says, Well, if you will not worship
this idol as god, whom I have set up, then I will throw you into the fiery furnace and you
will be burned.
And, of course, the three young men absolutely refuse to bow down when the music is
played to the idols, and they are thrown into the fire, and they dance in the flames. They
dance in the flames, and they are not burned. And they praise God and bless God from
the midst of the flames.
Here is what I would like to read to you now. It says this (Daniel 3:21-23):
Then those men were bound with their coats and caps and hose and were cast into the
midst of the burning fiery furnace, for as much as the kings word prevailed. And the
furnace was made exceedingly hot. Then these three men, Shadrach, Meschach, and
Abednego, fell, bound, into the midst of the burning fire, and they walked in the midst of
the flames, singing praise to God and blessing the Lord.
And then it says (Daniel 3:24-25):
And Nebuchadnezzar heard them singing praises, and he wondered. And he rose up in
haste and said to his nobles, Did we not cast three men, bound, into the midst of the
fire? And they said to the king, Yes, O King. And the king said, But I see four men,
loose, walking in the midst of the fire, and there has no harm happened to them, and the
appearance of the fourth is like
And then it says in Greek:
A Son of God. Tetartou homoia huio theou: the fourth one is like the Son of God.
Then Nebuchadnezzar drew near the door of the burning fiery furnace and said,
Shadrach, Meschach, and Abednego, you servants of the most high God, proceed forth
and come hither. So Shadrach, Meschach, and Abednego came forth out of the midst of
the fire. And there were assembled the satraps and the captains and the heads of
[provinces] and the princes, and they saw the men and perceived that the fire had not
power against their bodies, and their [hair] was not burnt and their clothes were not
scorched, nor was the smell of fire upon them. And then Nebuchadnezzar answered and
said, Blessed be the God of Shadrach, Meschach, and Abednego.
Now, in the Christian tradition, certainly in the ancient Christian tradition, that fourth
person is Christ. And if you look at Christian frescoes and icons, youll see that it is. I

have one on the wall in my room and Im looking at it right now. It was painted for me by
Heather MacKean, a wonderful iconographer who is now painting a beautiful church in
the state of Washington, and it shows the three boys dancing in the furnace. And it shows
the statue, the golden idol that Nebuchadnezzar built. And it shows the Chaldeans getting
burned by the fires. And then it shows, in the flame, this angel of the great counsel. Its
Jesus. Its the one whom God sends. And, of course, that prefigures the descent of Jesus
the Christ into Hades, into Sheol, into the realm of the dead, into the fiery furnace to raise
up all those who were dead and to come to us.
But what we have to see, even though it says, the one looks similar to a son of God, it
says there are four andres in the fire, four men. So he clearly appears as a man. Its a
fourth figure of a fourth man that is said in Daniel that is in that fire. That is very
important for us, because that figure in Danieland Daniel is definitely a very important
prophecy for the Christian faith, about the kingdoms with no end and so on, and the fiery
furnace story, and the refusal to worship idols, and then how Daniel becomes the king
and so onbut thats a text that certainly can be understood of why Jesus would call
himself the Man, the one, that figure.
An interesting thing in our time about Son of Man is that, because of so-called political
correctness and because of not wanting to use male terms, like for God and so onI
think all the listeners of Ancient Faith Radio would be definitely familiar with that
tendencywe know that often, when it says Son of Man in the Biblical text, some of
the new translations of the Bible dont write Son of Man. Well, thanks be to God: the
New Revised Standard Version doesnt dare to change the expression Son of Man in
the New Testament.
If you tried to translate Son of Man which is used 81 times in the four Gospels, 30
times in Matthew alone, if you wanted to use a different word, I dont know what you
would say. Would Jesus say to the people, Unless you believe that Im the man, unless
you believe that Im the one, you will die in your sins? Well, its possible, but then the
connection is not made to the expression Son of Man in the Hebrew Scriptures, which
is a purely Hebrew, Aramaic understanding of that figure who is a divine figure, who is a
savior, who is an extraordinary man, who is the one who gets all dominion, honor, glory,
worship together with him who sits upon the throne, who is enthroned with him who sits
upon the throne. You would never get that if you didnt have the expression Son of
Man being used.
However, the New Revised Standard Version of the Bible doesnt use Son of Man in
the Old Testament. It doesnt use it. It just says, The One. And here I want to give an
example of how, well, I would say, how terrible that is. Because it doesnt allow the
reader of the Holy Scripture to understand that that expression Son of Man is being

used, so that when they hear Son of Man coming from the lips of Jesus, they would
make the connection and be able to understand what was going on. Certainly, its
mysterious; certainly, its not clear; certainly, to Greek-speaking people its a difficulty
that they would really have to enter into the Aramaic, Hebrew, Biblical mind to
understand. And Jesus himself is the Jew, and hes the Messiah of Israel, and weve got to
make that effort. The Savior of the world comes by way of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob,
Moses, and so on. Thats our faith. But it would be really wonderful if the expression
Son of Man were left in the Old Testament, too.
I want to give an example that could be very familiar and should be familiar to Orthodox
Christians. In the Orthodox Church, when a bishop serves the Holy Eucharist, when the
Trisagion Hymn is sung, the Thrice-Holy Hymn, which is the Holy, holy, holy! of
Isaiah, at the Liturgy of the Word, its sung in this way: Holy God, holy Mighty, holy
Immortal, have mercy on us. Holy God, holy Mighty, holy Immortal, have mercy on us.
Then its sung the third time: Holy God, holy Mighty, holy Immortal, have mercy on
us. Then the deacon or the priest even shouts, Power! Dynamis! We spoke about
Christ as the Power of God already. And then they sing it even louder.
Then the bishop comes with his two candlesticks, or his candlestick and his cross,
actually, showing about the salvation of the people, and he faces the people in the middle
of the singing of the Holy, holy, holythe Holy God, holy Mighty, holy Immortal
he faces the people. Anyone whos ever been to a Divine Liturgy, Holy Eucharist served
by a bishop cant miss this, its so central. He looks at the people and he says a line from
Psalm 79 (80)80 in the Hebrew counting, English counting. He says, Lord, Lord, look
down from heaven and behold and visit this vine, this vineyard, which your own right
hand has planted and establish it. And he blesses the people and they sing, Holy God.
And in some traditions, he even says that three times. Hell say, Lord, Lord, look down
from heaven and behold and visit this vine, this vineyard, which your own right hand has
planted and establish it. They sing, Holy Mighty. And he does it again, and they say,
Holy Immortal. And this is a line from the psalm. Now, this psalm begins with the
words,
Attend, O Pastor of Israel (Shepherd of Israel), who guides Joseph like a flock, who sits
upon the cherubim, manifest thyself. Before Ephraim and Benjamin and Manassas, stir
up thy power and come to deliver us. Turn us, O God. Cause your face to shine upon us,
that we may be saved.
Lord God of hosts, how long art thou angry with the prayer of thy servants? Thou wilt
feed us with breads of tears and were drinking tears to full measure. Turn to us, O Lord
God of Hosts. Cause your face to shine upon us, and we shall be saved.

So the bishop comes out and he says to that same Lord God, Lord God of hosts, turn, we
pray to thee, look on us from heaven and behold and visit this vine and restore that which
thy right hand has planted. Now, what we should knowand Im absolutely certain that
most Orthodox Christians do not know thisI hope they know that that line comes from
this psalm, but what does the psalm say in its entirety? How does the psalm continue?
And thats important for our understanding of Son of Man.
This is how the psalm continues:
O Lord, Lord, God of hosts, turn, we pray to you, look down on us from heaven and
behold and visit this vine which your own right hand has planted and establish it, restore
it.
And then it continues: And look upon the Son of Man.
Look upon the Son of Man whom thou didst strengthen for thyself.
So the very same sentence says, And look on the Son of Man whom thou didst
strengthen for thyself.
For the vine is burnt with fire, dug up, it shall perish at the rebuke of thy presence, but let
thy hand be upon the man of thy right handep andra dexias souand upon the Son of
Mankai epi huion anthrpouwhom you did strengthen for yourself.
So we will not depart from you. You will give us life. We will call on your name. Turn to
us, O Lord of hosts, and make your face shine upon us, and we shall be saved.
So what the psalm says, when praying to God three times [is]:
Turn, O Lord God of hosts, we pray to you, look upon the vine and look upon the Son of
Man whom thou didst strengthen for thyself whom thou hast given powerekrataisas
seaftwho has made powerful for yourself.
Let your hand be upon this man of your right hand and upon this Son of Man whom you
have made powerful for yourself. And so we will not depart from you, you will give us
life. We will call upon your name. Turn to us, Lord God of hosts, make your face shine
upon us; we shall be saved.
The vine is saved by the Son of Man that the Lord has made powerful for himself and has
put on his right hand. Thats very important. And do you know that in the New Revised
Standard Version translation of the Bible, they dont even say Son of Man in that text?
In my opinion, its just terrible, just really awful. You know what they say? Look upon

the one whom you have strengthened. Well, its okay, because Jesus is that one.
Sometimes they just say, Look upon the man whom you have strengthened. They dont
say Son of Man.
But those who dont want to say that he is a male, just say, Look at the one. But theres
a problem even with that, because the word thats used in the psalm is huioswhich
means a male child, not a female childanthropou. And it says andres: the man,
and that word means a male human being. It doesnt mean just a human being.
Anthropos means just a human being, but huios [anthropou] is a son of a human
being. And andros means a man, a physically male man, just like the first psalm of the
Bible when it says, Blessed is the man who walks not in the counsel of the ungodly. We
sing it every Saturday night at the first psalm of our vespers and vigil service in the
Orthodox Church. It doesnt even say anthropos; it says man, andros. It says muzh
in Slavonic; thats a male human being. And we interpret it as meaning Jesus Christ.
So these sentences in the psalms refer to Jesus Christ as the Son of Man, as the male
human being that God has strengthened and seated at his right hand so that, through him,
the whole world could be saved. Thats the Christian teaching, and thats what is
contained in that expression Son of Man.
Now just one thing that we already mentioned when we were speaking about divine
power which we must, absolutely, repeat. And that is this: in the four Gospels, when
Jesus is undergoing his Passion, and hes being interrogated in front of the high priests,
and then again in front of Pilate, when hes being interrogated by the high priest who is a
Jew Pilate may have had some trouble with the expression Son of Man. In fact,
probably a Roman citizen wouldnt have known at all what the heck Son of Man would
mean. You know, filios hominis or something in Latin. He wouldnt have known what
the heck it means.
But Jesus is being questioned by the high priest, by Ananais, by Caiaphas, and this is,
again, the high priest, says to Jesus in Marks Gospel. He says, Are you the Christ, the
Son of the Blessed? Jesus said, I amand that is, of course, a powerful expression
because I am is that divine name, the [Tetragrammaton] that was given to Moses. Then
he said, You will see the Son of Manand here it definitely has a definite article: the
Son of Man, the Man, the One if you use [the] New Revised Standard Version
[translation]the Man, seated at the right hand of power and coming with the clouds of
heaven.
Now do you remember in Daniel, how it spoke about the one like unto a son of man
coming on the clouds? The clouds are mentioned there. No Jew, knowing Scripture,

could hear that sentence without thinking of Daniel: the son of man coming on the
clouds in power, in Gods power, in the power of the Ancient of Days, in the power of
him who sits upon the throne, to whom is sung, Holy, holy, holy. Holy God, holy
Mighty, holy Immortal, have mercy on us.
So Jesus said, You will see the Son of Manhe uses that expression againseated at
the right hand of power and coming with the clouds of heaven. And it says in Mark,
The high priest tore his garments and said, Why do we need anything more? He
blasphemes. Hes got to be crucified.
Now that very same happening is recorded in St. Matthews Gospel in this way:
The high priest says, Have you no answer to make? Jesus is silent. The high priest says
to him, I adjure you by the living God, tell us if you are the Christ, the Son of God.
Now, notice, he uses the expression the Christ, the Son of God, because thats what
they wanted to pin on Jesus.
Jesus answered, You have said so, but I tell you, hereafter you will see the Son of
Man...
Again, definite article: the Son of Man.
...seated at the right hand of power, coming on the clouds of heaven.
So there youve got it again: seated at the right hand, the right hand of the throne of God.
We mentioned already how this has to evoke also Psalm 110:1: The Lord said to my
Lord, the Kyrios, Sit at my right hand in power. To be at the right hand is to be in
power. Now its the Son of Man who is seated at the right hand of power, coming on the
clouds of heaven. And again in Matthew, the high priest tears his robe and said, He has
uttered blasphemy. Why do we still need anything more? Let him be crucified.
Now you have exactly the same thing in the Gospel according to St. Luke. We just heard
Mark; we just heard Matthew. Now what do we find in Luke? This is how its written in
Luke (Luke 22:66-71):
When the day came, the assembly of the elders and the people gathered together, both
chief priests and scribes.
Now these people knew the Bible, right? They knew the Prophets. They knew Daniel.
They knew the Psalms. They knew the expression Son of Man. They had heard it many
times. They knew that it could be a general term, like Ezekiel uses it: O son of man,

prophesy! but then there is this special Son of Man, the Man. You know, like youd say
about a certain person. When I was a child, Stan Musial, the baseball player, was called
Stan the Man. Theyll say, Hes the man! Well, thats what a Jew would know,
hearing that expression, reading the Bible: the Man. Gods man, so to speak. The man
who does it all. The man who sits on the throne with God. So here we have it:
The chief priests and scribes led him away to their counsel and they said, If you are the
Christ, tell us. But he said to them, If I tell you, you will not believe, and if I ask you,
you will not answer.
And how many times do we hear Jesus saying, What do you think? You look at me; you
saw me. You see what Ive done. What do you think? Why are you asking me? Why are
you asking me, the Son of Man. You tell me who the Son of Man is. And of course, he
wants them to say, You are the Son of God. You are the Lord. You are the Christ.
So he says, But from now onthat means after this Passion, after this crucifixion
which will result in the Resurrection.
From now on the Son of Man shall be seated at the right hand of the power of God.
The Lord said to my Lord, Sit at my right hand. And in Matthew, Mark, and Luke,
that is the text that gets Jesus arrested. When he asks the scribes and the elders and the
high priests, Why does David call him Lord if hes Davids son? For it is written
and David wrote, inspired by the Holy Spirit: The Lord says to my Lord, Sit at my right
hand.
So here in Lukes Gospel, Jesus says, But from now on, after this, the Son of Man shall
be seated at the right hand of the power of God. And they all said, Are you the Son of
God, then? Notice it! Its fantastic! Jesus says, You will see the Son of Man, seated at
the right hand of the power of God, and their response is, Are you the Son of God,
then? Because for them, the Son of Man was the Son of God. The Son of God was the
Son of Man. The Son of Man was the Man who is the Son of God, and therefore the
anointed, the Christ; therefore the chosen; therefore the righteous; therefore the holy one;
therefore the Lord; and therefore, God himself in human flesh, if you go all the way with
it.
So they all said, Are you the Son of God, then? And he said to them, You say that I
am. And they said, What further testimony do we need? We have heard it ourselves
from his very own lips.

So there you have it. Jesus calls himself the Son of [Man] and the scribes and the elders
and the high priests, knowing the Scripture, they know exactly what he means. They
know exactly what it means.
The Greeks later, like you and me, and the Gentiles, we had to learn what it meant. We
had to learn what it meant, but a Jew did not have to learn what it meant. He knew that
that expression, the Son of Man, was tantamount to the Messiah. It even is tantamount
to being Gods Son. Its tantamount to be the one who sits on the throne, and who
receives all honor, glory, dominion, majesty, blessing, power, and thanksgiving
evcharistia, evlogia, tim, prosknesisall these words are given to him, and, certainly,
to God, and to this Son of Man.
So the expression Son of Man is what Jesus calls himself. And its the only thing that
he calls himself. But once he is confessed Lets put it this way: Once the Son of Man
the man, the one whom God has chosen, raised up, sent, who is his own Son begotten of
God before all ages, who already in Daniel is presented with the Ancient of Days to sit
upon the throneonce that Son of Man comes, then he is to be given all glory, honor, and
worship as the Christ, the Lord, the Savior, the Man at the Fathers right hand, the one
who sits enthroned with him, Gods very own Son, and God himself in human flesh.
All of this is whats contained in the expression ho huios tou anthropou, huios
anthropou, Son of Man. Bar no in Hebrew; I think thats how you would say it. (I
dont think I said it right.) But anyway, its an Aramaic, Hebrew expression that the Jews
knew very well, what it meant. And Jesus keeps calling himself that in order that we
would confess him for who he truly is: our Lord, our Savior, our Christ, Gods Son,
Gods Logos, Gods Wisdom, Gods Power, Gods Icon, and, indeed, God from God, God
himself in human flesh. This is Jesus of Nazareth, who called himself always and without
exception Son of Man.