Literature. —The relevant portions of the works on NT Theology by Weiss, Beyschlag, IT. J. Holtzmann, Stevens, Bovon ; also of Wendt's Teaching of Jesus, Dalman's Words of Jesus, Nosifen's Gesch. Jesu Christi, and Beyschlag's Chrislologie des NT. See also Graii, Das Selhstbewusstsein Jesu; Nosgen, Dor Mcnschen- unci Gnttessohn ; Gore, Bampton Lectures and Dissertations ; Stevens, The Johannine Theo- logy ; Weiss, Der Johanneische Lehrbegnff; LUtgert, Die Johanneische Chrislologie (1899) and Goties Sohn und Gottes Oeisl (190.5) ; Stalker, Cunningham Lectures, The Christology of Jesus'^ (1900) ; F.\W. Robertson, Serm. ii. 13G, 235 ; P. Brooks, Law of Groivth, ZiQ. J AMES STALKER.
SON OF MAN.— 1. Occarrences of the expres- sion in the NT. —
(a) In the Gospels it is found in the following passages — eightv-one in all : Mt 82" 96 102:) iii9 128. 32, 40 1337. 41 i6i3. 27. 28
179.12.22 KviS 2018.28 24'-^- 311 f)is. .■57. 39. 44 2.531 26" 2-» 6is. 45. 64 [30
times]; Mk o'O. as g^i. 38 99. 12. ai 1033.4.5' 1326 1421 m.?. 4i. 62_[i4
times]; Lk .524 C-''-22 7.34 922. 26. 44. .58 HSO 128. in. 40 1722.24.26.30 1.S8. 31 1910 2127. 36 2222. 48. 69 247— [25 times] ; .In l-""! .Sl3. 14 C27. 5:t. 62 828 93.5RVm I223.:f4?„s. i.331_[i2 times]. It'is obvious to remark that these eighty-one passages do not by any means represent as many different occasions on which the phrase is reported to have been used. Thus of the thirty passages cited from lit. it will be found on examination that nine have direct parallels in both Mk. and Lk. ; that four have parallels in Mk. only, and
eight in Luke only ; while the remaining nine are peculiar to Matthew (see the tables provided by Driver in Hastings' DB iv. 579, Schmidt, UBi iv. 4713, and by J. A. Robinson in The Study of the Gospels, p. 58 f .). To the parallel passages in the Synoptics, which exhibit diversity in regard to tliis particular e.xpression, attention will be directed later.
(h) Apart from the Gospels ' the Son of Man ' is found only in Ac 75« (cf. Lk 22«9). In Rev 113 and 14i-» the e.xpression used, though akin, is not the same: it is 'one [sitting] like unto a son of man,' which is a precise reproduction of the phrase in Dn 7^3.
With but one exception tJie name as found in the Gospels is used only by our Lord Himself. The exception is Jn 12^^, and even there it is presupposed that Jesus had spoken of Himself as ' the Son of Man.' 'The multitude therefore answered him. We have heard out of the law that the Christ abideth for ever ; and how sayest thou, The Son of Man must be lifted up ? Who is tliis Son of Man ? ' The multitude are familiar with the title ' the Son of Man ' ; to them it is a designation of the Messiah ; their difficulty is to reconcile Messiahship with ex- altation through death. The impression derived from this pa.ssage, that the title under discussion was by no means new upon the lips of our Lord,— however great the access of content it received from His employment of it, — is confirmed by the significant fact that througliout the Gospel narra- tives there is not a trace that disciples, or the wider public, were in any wise perplexed by the designa- tion. This fact, it may be remarked in passing, has not been allo\\ed its due weight by those who, like Westcott {Gospel of St. John, p. 33flf'., ' It was essentially a new title'), regard the designation as originating with our Lord ; or who, like B. Weiss {NT Theol. i. 73), explain the employment of it by Jesus on the supposition that, if not new, it was not one of the current Messianic titles. If new, or unfamiliar, the frequent use of such a self -designa- tion must have occasioned remark, and called for explanation, which would surely have found record in one or other of the Evangelic narratives. If then the Gospels, both by what they say and by what they leave unsaid, favour the view that ' Son of Man' was already known, prior to the ministry of Jesus, as a Messianic title, it becomes needful to trace, in so far as we may, its history. Next, we must try to ascertain at what period in His minis- try this title was assumed by our Lord, and why He used it with such marked preference ; and, finally, we must seek an explanation of the absence of the name in NT writings other than the Gospels.
2. Source of the title. — Baldensperger, writing- in 1900 {Theol. Eundschnu, p. 201 ff.), regards it as one of the ' fixed points ' gained in the course of recent discussion, that the origin of the NT phrase, and in large part its explanation, are to be sought in the OT, and especially in Dn 7'^. Previous dis- cussion had been limited too exclusively to the Gr. expression 6 vlbs rod dvOpdiirov ; and, owing to such limitation, results were obtained (such as that our Lord reiterated ' His mere humanity,' or that He was 'the ideal man,' or that 'nothing iiuman was .alien to Him ') which stood in no obvious relation to passages in which the title is jjiedominantly used — passages bearing on our Lord's Passion and Parousia. The appropriateness of the use of the title in sayings of the latter class was at once apparent wiien it was viewed in the light of Dn 7^^. Not that tiie title itself is to be found tliere. The writer of Daniel describes a vision in which four great beasts come up from the sea — a lion, a bear, a leo])ard, a beast witli ten horns. Tiiey are judged by tiie 'Ancient of L)ays,' and their dominion is taken from them. Tliereupon the prophet pro- ceeds :