Jesus as Son of Man

Good evening again. I was delighted to come this morning. Thank you very much con pastor Connolly. To teach on such an important topic. Anything that has to do with the person nature and finish work is a very important topic because it has to do with the gospel and we know that the gospel is the very means of salvation and We as Christians should have a set as I mentioned before it should have a set foundation As to the gospel as to the deity of Christ as to what the Trinity is.

We shouldn't have a mushy description when someone asks people ask questions non-believers ask questions. Christians will ask you questions About the Trinity or about the deity of Christ and many times too many Christians Just have not been adequately taught how to explain justification or the truth Or the deity of Christ.

So what you have is and I've seen this over and over. When Christians are called to explain or they have a question about the Trinity or someone asked him a question about the Trinity. Sometimes they'll give a oneness Pentecostal answer a modalistic description not because they embrace Unitarian modalism.

But they've never been taught adequately about the Trinity. They'll describe it in oneness terms or when they're asked about justification They might describe it as a Roman Catholic not because they embrace Catholicism, but they just didn't they just weren't adequately taught as to what the justification is or redemption or the Atonement it goes on and on and Unfortunately these days the Atonement is defined based on the cause of man's great decision and God cannot intrude on the mighty will of man.

You just can't do it so what you have is in most descriptions too many times in churches or with Christians you have Jesus presented as a Somewhat of a beggar on the cross who really wants you to be saved.

But he can't he just can't get over your mighty will and unfortunately, that's not the doctrine of the Atonement. That's not the doctrine of justification and justification. We don't want to define it as a Roman Catholic.

It's not an infusion. It's imputation. We're credited as righteous people through faith alone Deity of Christ we looked at the Son of God. This morning and we looked how the scripture defines Jesus as the Son of God.

Being tantamount to God the Son even those others were many many people and angels were called and Tagged as referred to as a Son of God in the Old Testament and in the New Testament.

So.

What's the deal as I made about Jesus claiming to be the Son of God? Why would that be deity? Why would that be any different everyone was called sons of God? Angels judges mighty men. Adam. We're we're called sons of God of course by adoption the Jews felt there were sons of God.

The fact of the matter is the way that Jesus claimed to be the Son of God was was equal and the Jews understood this to a claim of ontological deity meaning deity by nature not just Representing God God's mouthpiece.

No, he claimed to be Deity in an ontological way. How do we know because the Jews picked up stones and they wanted to kill him? Virtually every time the Jews wanted to kill Jesus it was not because Jesus claimed He was a just a really good moral guy or he he didn't lie or is really good or he was perfect.

No, they wanted to kill him read the text because he was making claims of ontological by nature deity or co-equality with the Father and He himself was making these claims. So same with the Son of Man Jesus made it's interesting as I pointed out the Son of Man was Jesus's favorite title of himself.

He claims to be the Son of Man including the parallels if you add those up 78 times Jesus Christ claimed that he was a son of man and not one time in the Gospels that anyone dare to refer to him as The Son of Man you know.

When you when you witness when you share your faith when you proclaim the gospel of someone and We we understand we should understand the recipient because if you're talking to Jehovah's Witness It may be a little different than talking to a Muslim.

But you should know their doctrine and their objections and most of the time there are the same objections. But the gospel never changes, you know. That's gonna be the same and as I've said before our rule as Christians It should be get to the cross as fast as possible.

Don't spend an hour on false prophecies of the Watchtower. Don't spend an hour showing how just decrepit and depraved Muhammad was because you're dialoguing and you're presenting all these things like false prophecies and Characteristic flaws and all these.

I mean Muhammad was the worst. An hour goes by and I've seen this happen and then they might get a phone call and they have to go eat dinner. And they have to go. Well, see you later, you know, you never got to the cross.

Not one that you just never got to the cross you wasted time on prophecies or something else. We don't want to do that. However, you got to do it get to the cross as fast as possible.

So.

Dealing with the Son of God and as we saw that was tantamount to God the Son as Not only Jesus affirmed that but also his Apostles. It's a centurion angels God the Father even the demons affirmed that and They affirmed it in an ontological way not just mere like Adam or we're sons of God by adoption.

No, they wanted to kill him the Jews wanted to kill him and the Apostles his friends Worshiped him. Well son of man is the same thing. 78 times Jesus claimed to be the Son of Man and.

As.

With the Son of God, they're just these are two very significant titles. There's many titles used of Christ that denote ontological deity like the I am Him his claim to be the Asian of his own resurrection.

It's a great witnessing point for Jehovah's Witnesses. Because if Jesus was just Michael the Archangel the first of Jehovah's creatures How in the world in John 2 19 does he raise himself up?

I.

Never got a sufficient answer in that. So use it well. Son of man was like these other claims that represented deity true deity ontological deity. And when you share your faith with Someone either of a different faith as I call it religious atheism or Fear or if they're just a garden variety non-believer There's no set pattern in Scripture like do it this way.

But there is the affirmation that the gospel is the power of God for salvation. So we always want to get to that as no matter how you do it get to that as fast as possible the crosswork. Because we don't want to end underestimate the power of God in his gospel.

Because.

Using going outside the scripture or using unbiblical concept is doing just that you just don't think God's Powerful enough you don't think the gospel is sufficient enough. It doesn't feel sufficient enough.

So you go to evidence you go to and Time or everything else or you say horrible things like hey, God is a great plan for you. This is your best life now. I mean things that are totally Radically against have nothing to do with the gospel because you just don't think the gospel is sufficient in and of itself.

Never never underestimate the power of God in the gospel. That's the means. So when you're Proclaiming the gospel when you're getting to that point where you're speaking to non-believers or someone in a different.

That that's in some kind of atheistic religion, whether it's a Muslim Jehovah's Witness one is Pentecostal. We have this weird group. I don't know if you guys have it called church. It's called Church of God not to be confused with the charismatic group Church of God in Christ Church of God, they're they're young people that go to the malls and their first line is hey.

Do you know the Father has a wife in heaven? That's their first line. Yeah, you know, they're everywhere. They're modalists first of all, and they believe you got to celebrate the Passover to be saved and all these other things but It's just very interesting that they they can motivate young people to make that their opening line.

Why can't we motivate our young people to go out to the malls the park and say hey, did you know God is triune? Hey, did you know Jesus Christ is God in the flesh unless you believe in him? You'll die in your sins.

Did you did you know that why can't we be that bold? We're trying to stimulate by the heart and all these other things and friendship and let's have a sandwich for We never get to the gospel. We can't be ashamed.

We can't be afraid. It's God's ordinary means. So there's no set pattern. So sometimes when I'm Sharing my faith or when I'm proclaiming when I see an opportunity. You know, I always pray. What's the best way?

What's the best opener? You know Sometimes I like as we'll see I I really use this too. I use this with Jehovah's Witnesses a lot and Muslims. What Jesus said to the blind man, hey, do you believe in the Son of Man is that an excellent question?

A.

Lot of these people have no idea or they're not really sure what the Son of Man in it. It just opens the door to explain. The Son of Man was God in the flesh who was worshipped. Hey, do you believe in the Son of Man the blind man said?

Show me who he is. Who is he that I may believe in him. And Jesus said this is in John 9 37 and 38 the one talking to you is the Son of Man. I'm the Son of Man and. The blind man said Lord, I believe and he worshipped the Son of Man.

He recognized that the Son of Man was deity. Do you believe in the Son of Man? Excellent question. Or I'll use. What do you think of the Christ? Jesus asked that question too. In the Old Testament this phrase Son of Man is used about.

In.

Hebrew about a hundred seven times in the Septuagint the Greek translation. It's used about a hundred and Depends what edition hundred eleven hundred and twelve times. In some places the Son of Man Was used generically to denote humanity.

We're talking the Old Testament at other times. It was it was used once of Daniel by the way. But about 93 or 94 times its use of Ezekiel God addresses him as the Son of Man. No, it's likely denoting the contrast between Ezekiel's lowly existence as man as we should have the same attitude and God.

But in the New Testament it referred. And in Daniel, but let's look at the New Testament it referred primarily To either his his divine nature. His hapostatic union or his pre-existence sometimes his humanity, but not primarily.

Many. I've heard many sermons on this and They'll quote some references and I'll explain why the Son of Man because it denotes his humanity and all these things. Well. At a couple places it does denote his humanity, but not primarily.

In fact you can't make that claim in Daniel chapter 7. There's no argument. I mean it's not argued. It's readily accepted. The general consent of scholarship sees the origin of the Son of Man. Daniel 7.

From 9 to 14 you have two objects of divine worship. Two distinct persons. I always use this with oneness. Pentecostals. You have two distinct persons the ancient of days and the Son of Man. Obviously, it's not referring to his flesh.

Rather the person of the Son of Man. It's interesting in the New Testament of all the places that Jesus refers to his pre-existence his eternal pre-existence and all the places that the Apostles also refer to as his pre-existing.

With the Father pre-existing in heaven his pre-existence. Virtually every time the reference is something about the Son or the Son of Man or the Son of God the Son. Not Christ not Jesus though. Jesus was his given name.

But normally almost every time there's only two places that I found where Jesus or Christ Is in the context of pre-existence and that's 1st Corinthians 10. You know the rock that they followed. Was Christ.

Paul says was Christ but also in Jude chapter 1 verse 5 I would say I'm I'm used to saying chapter 1 because if you say Jude 4. Sometimes people don't know that there's one chapter in Jude. So they're looking for chapter 4.

1 4 1 5 1 5. Most translations will say the Lord. Let's look at Greek most Greek editions most Greek manuscripts. There's a few variant readings. Most Greek manuscripts say the Lord deliver the people out of Egypt.

What does comport to 1st Corinthians chapter 10? I think in verse 4 about the rock delivering the people. The Lord delivered the people out of Egypt right, well because of more witnesses and manuscripts even the critical text today.

The Nestle Allen 28 20 now the 29th edition.

Jesus.

Delivered the people out of Egypt. So it has his given name, but it's talking about the person of Jesus. Not necessarily that, you know, the name of the age of the Lord was Jesus, but the person of Jesus.

Jesus delivered the people out of Egypt. I'll tell you what though. There's a there's a few different variants some say God but mostly Lord. But now there's really good evidence. And in fact the revised ESV and other some other revised translations now have Jesus delivered the people out of Egypt.

It's a great deity of Christ passage I mean Lord, you know, it means the same thing but Jesus seems to be the.

Better.

Reading these days. What's interesting is there's a variant that's not Viable meaning it most likely Jew didn't write it but it nevertheless it's in. It's in one of the earliest earliest manuscripts of Jude P 72.

P 72 has first and second Peter and Jude earliest manuscripts probably 150 175 AD earliest ones. We have. Here's what it says in that. It's a variant reading, but it's my favorite variant reading. It says.

And it's in the nominus sacra meaning it's abbreviated it says this listen to the title Foss Christos the God Christ delivered the people out of Egypt. It's a beautiful title. The God Christ delivered the people out of Egypt.

Anyways, mostly Sun is used in the context of pre-existence almost every time. In fact when we see pre-existence pre-existing. Appearances of Christ. Pre-incarnation in the Old Testament as the Angel of the Lord for the most part.

Typically people will look at that as Christ ologies. I I think it's more correct to say who ya ology.

Or.

Christ often ease who ya often II because the word who yas is Sun Sun appearances is probably more correct. Instead of Christ often ease Son of man is well accepted. It was derived from Daniel chapter 7 I'm just gonna read 13 and 14 very interesting though in verse 9.

It says thrones plural were set up not a throne but thrones ancient of days and the Son of Man two objects of divine worship. I Kept this is verse 13. I kept looking at the night vision behold in the clouds of heaven one like the Son of Man was coming and he came up To the ancient of days and was presented before him now in verse 14 the Septuagint rendering I'm reading and to him was given dominion glory and the kingdom of all the nations on earth according to their kind and all glory to him and the Septuagint reads Worshipping present active participle they were Worshipping the Son of Man.

It's beautiful in the New Testament. The title Son of Man is used about 84 times 84 times most of the times in the Gospels four times outside of the Gospels for occurrences, it's very interesting because in In the outside the Gospels in Acts chapter 7 where Stephen sees the Son of Man.

But in Revelation 1 13 and 14 14 the exact phrase in Greek as in Daniel is used. Most likely John was alluding to Daniel 7 13 and 14 where the Son of Man rides the clouds and they were worshiping him.

One like the Son of Man the same work the same language is used the same words are used. It's an arthurist meaning it doesn't have the article. I think John was alluding to that in these two places in Revelation now as mentioned.

The Son of Man title does represent it is represented in his humanity. Frequent infrequently though, but more so it represents the deity hypostatic Union pre-existence humanity for example Matthew 8 20 foxes have holes.

But the Son of Man has nowhere To lay his head. Obviously, that's a reference to the Son of Man in his his humanity.

I.

There's not a lot of verses that speak Exclusively of a humanity of Son of Man, but it is used. There's a few more that shows his humanity. It represents his humanity. Most of the time though as mentioned it represents his hypostatic Union God in the flesh or his deity in pre-existence, for example Matthew 16 13.

Now when Jesus came to the district of Caesarea Philippi, he was asking his disciples Who do people say the Son of Man is? And we know Peter's great confession. Remember in Matthew 16 All the 13 to 18, right.

The context is not Peter. It's not the context. And certainly not Peter as the Pope as the Rock. No, that's not the context. The context is not Peter. The context is the identification of Christ. Who do men say that the Son of Man is?

And of course Peter. Same confession we should have as Christians. We have you're the Messiah. You are the Christ the Son of the Living God. Then we saw in Matthew 14 61 through 64. This is a reference to his hypostatic Union the high priest.

We saw that earlier Are you the Christ the Son of God and Jesus? Answers he actually he adds to that. He says yes, I'm Christ and I'm the Son of God and he says you'll see the Son of.

Man.

Coming with clouds Sitting at the right hand of Power of another person. Did you know. It's very interesting. As a side note. And of course the priest responded you wanted to kill him. Son of Man son of God it was too much.

It was too many deity titles to be ambiguous. Son of Man, let's kill this guy. But it's interesting on in every significant claim of deity ontological deity that we find whether it's the I am.

The.

Co-equality with the Father in John and John 5. I and the Father are one essence. We are one thing. John 10 30. All these significant claims. He mentions the Father in the same breath. He doesn't want anyone to be a modalist.

I'm distinct from the Father. I'm remembered. One is Pentecostals do not believe the Son is God. They believe the Son represents only humanity and God represents his deity. You have Jesus as the one person God as The Unitarian God and whose name is Jesus and sometimes he's the father in the father mode as God and then in the son mode He's only human.

But what do you do with the passages where the son affirms his deity in the same breath as mentioning the father? It's irrefutable.

So in.

1461 of Mark through 64 He claims to be the Son of Man and the response of the priest was appropriate according to his own doctrine Let's kill him. Let's condemn him to death. Did you hear what he said?

Also in John 5 25 and 27 Jesus said there's gonna come a time. Will the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God and Those who hear him will live and then it says in verse 26 for just as the father has life in himself He gave life the authority to judge to the Son Do you have life in himself?

And he gave the authority to execute judgment because he is the Son of Man. We're looking at his hypothetic Union. In terms in the context of Son of Man in I Won't spend time on this but in too much time in John 6 53 and 64 Jesus said truly truly I say to you unless you eat of the flesh of the Son of Man and Drink his blood you have no life in yourself.

And then in verse 54. Well before I read verse 54, this is not dealing with the Lord's Supper that mean that that hadn't happened yet that was the year later and Clearly the context is connected with verse 35.

In fact in the Lord's institution the word for flesh is Soma here at Sarks. He's not using it's not the Lord's institution here. It's connected and It's a beautiful grammatical parallel in verse 35. Before I quote 35 in verse 54.

I'll read it literally ha tro gone. Tro gone is the word. It's a participle that means munching the one munching on the flesh of me. Munching it's a participle ongoing action the one munching. That's the lexical meaning there.

It's not the normal word for eating munching the one munching on the flesh of me and Pinon drinking it's a participle munching and drinking on me or on the blood. Has eternal life. The one munching on my flesh and drinking my blood has eternal life.

Well, Jesus already explained what he meant in verse 35 in verse 35. He says this I Am the bread of life. He's the bread of life. Of course, it's spiritual metaphorical I'm the bread of life. He says the one Coming participle they're Coming to me the key.

That's us. We keep coming to Christ all the time because we're saved. The one coming to me or gominos. Never never literally never never non-impossibility show hunger. He's the bread of life coming to him.

You'll never go hungry. Coming to him is the same as munching on his flesh coming to him same. Syntactical phrases are used. I mean tenses are used and then he says and the one believing participle just like Pinon and in 54 drinking the one believing in me Will never never not even a possibility thirst at any time.

So believing in him you'll never thirst that's tantamount to drinking his blood. See the syntactical parallel. Coming to him. He's the bread. You'll never go hungry. That's the same as eating his flesh.

Believing in him you'll never go thirsty. That's the same as drinking His blood. The same syntactical tenses are used. It's beautiful. That's what he meant not a divine sushi bar like Roman Catholics believe where you're literally munching not metaphorically.

Not spiritually not figuratively. You're literally eating his flesh now the accents and drinking his blood and. Also, we know in the Catechism that it's also a soul in divinity. You're you're eating all that and drinking all that according to Rome.

Well, one of the problems aside from denying a one-time sacrifice. Because they call the Eucharist propitiatory. They said it's the same sacrifice. It's the same thing. So his work is never completed.

In Rome the work is never ever completed and the Lord's Supper they call communion. It's a huge sacrifice and it mocks the crossword because it denies it represents The body and blood of it represents his sacrifice over and over because his work was never done.

Well, what if I'm taking the Lord's Supper at that Roman Catholic Church? I think we passed one and You know, we're in there say all of us. We're taking it and the priest has the power to Transubstantiate to change the bread to literal flesh not spiritual.

In fact, Thomas Aquinas said this was an ontological change and then the priest has the power He changes the wine to the to the literal blood. So we're all eating his literal flesh. Well, wait a second.

My friend lives in Nepal. What if he's doing the same thing? That means his literal flesh is here and his literal flesh is in Nepal and Rome and South America and everywhere. Where someone's doing this?

Blasphemous thing that means Jesus's body and blood was not truly man. It was ubiquitous.

Truly.

Incarnate he was truly incarnate as truly man, but truly man is not ubiquitous. So we see what he means in this passage. Because he already explained what he means by munching and drinking. Munching his flesh drinking his blood.

I will raise him up at the last day John 8 20 28 again. It's one of those places where the Son of Man Jesus Christ Affirms that he's God and mentions the Father in the same breath. So when Jesus said when he lift up the Son of Man.

When he lift up the Son of Man. Then you will know That I am Unpredicated. I am Jews understood this. Then you will know that I'm the eternal God. Then he says I do nothing on my own, but I say these things as the Father instructed me.

He mentions the Father in the same breath the same verse as affirming that he's God. Son of Man is God Son of Man in reference to his divine pre-existence.

John.

662 What if you see the Son of Man says Christ? What if you see the Son of Man ascending to where he was before. Is that not a simple dimple verse? What if you see the Son of Man ascending to where he was before he was in heaven in chapter 6 alone eight times?

It mentions he came from heaven. He came out or out of Heaven or from the Father eight times in just chapter 6 alone. John 3 13 he tells Nicodemus. No one has ascended into the heaven except Ha ek to Rano the one from heaven.

The Son of Man. Jesus also associates his his identification of Son of Man With our salvation mark 1045. The Son of Man did not come to be served but to serve and give his literally says his soul his life as a ransom.

For the many that's what the Son of Man does. The Son of Man was on that cross. He was God in the flesh. He had to be God it to have infinite value of the atonement. But we know in Scripture the Son of Man was on the cross.

Also identified as the Son of God on the cross by the centurion truly this was the Son of God mark 1529 same dialogue with Nicodemus chapter 3 14 and 15. Jesus says as. By the way, this is the context of 316.

No one ever quotes these verses people just throw out John 3 16 as it if it's at some kind of invitational universal kind of Interpretation there and they put it a big banner at baseball games. Well, the context starts in the garden in the in the wilderness verse 14.

He says as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness. Even so must the Son of Man be lifted up. The Son of Man was on the cross showing the means of salvation and everyone believing in him and. This is the same phrase in 15 as in 16 every one believing in him has life eternal.

We believe in the Son of Man. He was crucified for us. He was God in the flesh. He pre-existed we worship him. Just like the Son of God. Of course then you have verse 16 after he sets forth the context.

Everyone believing in him shall not perish by the way that that's a that's really a blessing for us. It's not invitational. That's not how the Greek reads. It literally reads pass ha Pisto on Everyone all the one.

Singler everyone believing present active present tense. It's a promise to us we're believing. Who is the world in 16 it's the ones doing the action of the participle of the verb the ones believing. That's it.

You want that so the world is Jews and Gentiles that are believing John 9 36 and 38 as I mentioned. When they put out the blind man talking about the blind man. Do you believe in the Son of Man? Who is he Lord that I may believe in him and Jesus said in verse 37 you've both seen him and He's the one talking to you.

It says.

Lord.

Records the blind man saying Lord, I believe and he worshiped the Son of Man gives eternal life. Mark 2 10 the Son of Man has the power to forgive sins. We read but so that you may know the Son of Man has the authority on earth to forgive sins.

So he told the paralyzed man John 5 26 and 27 as we saw he gave authority to execute judgment. Because he is the Son of Man. I like 624 do not work for food that perishes. Food that perishes is your works.

Your your so-called meritorious works. All the cults all the religious atheists whether it's Roman Catholics or one is Pentecostals Mormons all the groups that have works in order to get something. Justification or salvation that's food that perishes according to Christ.

Do you want work for food that perishes but for the food that lasts to eternal life? Which the Son of Man will give you the Son of Man gives us life. That's what Jesus said, which the Son of Man will give you for on him the Father.

God has set his seal. We already saw where the Son of Man was worshiped by the blind man and in and also in Daniel 7 they kept worshiping him. In the same way as we saw in Hebrews 1 6 the Father says.

The author of Hebrews refers to the Father. It's really interesting in Hebrews chapter 1 because from chapter 5 onwards. It's as though the author steps back now. He's just quoting the father. He's just referring to the father when he brings his firstborn into the world again.

He says to all the angels. Worship him worship the Son. That's a commandment to all the adjectives use all the angels worship the Son. Worship him. No, it's really interesting as we're concluding here if you look in in most translations in Hebrews 1 6 let all the angels of God worship him.

That's what it says of reference to the Son. If you look at the little cross note reference at the very bottom and know the cross note references was we're not inspired. Neither were the maps. If you look at the bottom, you'll see in most of your translations.

You'll see a footnote. As to pointing to the place. Where that is quoted from the Old Testament. Remember the father is quoting Old Testament passages referring to Yahweh and he's applying it to the Son.

It says Deuteronomy 32 43. I think in most of your translations Deuteronomy 32 43, right?

Well.

In most of your translations. Unless you have a new world translation hopefully not. If you go to Deuteronomy 32 43. You read it and you do this. I don't see anything about worshiping the Son. There's nothing about worshiping the Son.

It's not even that passage. Well number one. The father, you know, this is a quotation from the Septuagint by the way. But here's what's interesting if you look at the Masoretic text, which is our. That's what most of our Old Testament is based upon.

Masoretic text around 900 AD. It doesn't have anything about worship.

Nothing.

But.

And I saw this actually. I saw it in the last Dead Sea Scroll exhibit in Simi Valley. I've seen it before. It goes in Deuteronomy 32 43. That's the quotation in Hebrew in the Dead Sea Scrolls k4. Let all the angels of God worship him.

What happened? I don't know. I don't know. No one knows for sure. Did someone tamper with it, I don't know but I know this in the earliest manuscript of Deuteronomy 32 43. Let all the angels of God Worship him.

And in the Septuagint and in whatever edition Justin Martyr had. Because he was arguing with Trifu, a Jew, a Trifu, a Jew. He quoted Deuteronomy 32 43. And it was just like the Septuagint just like the Dead Sea Scrolls.

Let all the angels worship him. Finally, there's eschatological references to the Son of Man. Mark 13 26 and 27. Then they will see the Son of Man coming in the clouds with great power and glory. And.

Then he'll send forth his angels. Michael the Archangel doesn't have angels. The Son of Man does. He'll send his angels.

They will.

Gather, I said his angels because the pronouns in the parallel passage of Matthew 13 41 He will gather together his elect. He has elect. No creatures have elect. No creatures have angels. He will gather his elect Alchu, the pronouns there, his elect.

He has elect. He'll gather his elect from the four winds. From the furthest end of the earth to the furthest end of heaven. In conclusion here, there's a lot more but our mortal enemy time is always Against us.

Jesus asked the people who is the Son of Man? This is the end. Who is the Son of Man? We need to answer properly and let me tell you that's a great question to ask in evangelism. What do you think about the Son of Man?

Who is the Son of Man? Jesus spelled out his messianic task as The Son of Man precisely in these these terms in these situations serving suffering and glory. He's represented Son of Man is identified as pre-existence mostly and deity hypostatic union deity and pre-existence Infrequently humanity.

It's a very significant title and the Jews understood it and his friends understood it just like the Son of God. The person of Christ has identified it as the Son of God as the Son of Man. The the Son of Man is the divine Messiah.