1

This question already has an answer here:

In the holy gospel, I see that Jesus is called as"son of man" in some occasions, whereas "son of God" in some other. By normal thinking it could be concluded that both are statements of contradictions. What would have been really meant by these names? and How do they target the same man, though it seems different in meaning?

marked as duplicate by curiousdannii, fredsbend, Mr. Bultitude, Dick Harfield, David Stratton Jul 31 '15 at 6:07

This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.

  • 1
    What those names mean is primarily opinion based. Different Christians have different views. This needs to be scoped to a specific theological framework or denomination. Resource to help you edit this: Types of questions that are within community guidelines – fredsbend Jul 28 '15 at 14:59
  • 1
    To confirm what @fred says, one interpretation is that Jesus is quoting Daniel which would actually make Son of Man a stronger claim to divinity than Son of God. Others, see it as an affirmation of Jesus' humanity (i.e. half of the "fully man and fully God" doctrine). Others see it yet other ways. See this answer for a brief overview of the different positions. – ThaddeusB Jul 28 '15 at 15:30
  • 1
    Flagging this as a possible duplicate of Why does Jesus refer to himself as the “Son of Man”?. – Nathaniel Jul 28 '15 at 15:38
1

Jesus is the Son of God. He is often called the son of man to tell people that He is the coming messiah that everyone needs. How can calling Him the son of man tell people he's the messiah? Enter Daniel 7:13:

“I saw in the night visions, and behold, with the clouds of heaven there came one like a son of man, and he came to the Ancient of Days and was presented before him.

This was Old Testament prophecy from the prophet Daniel where he saw Jesus Christ, who came from the clouds of heaven like a "son of man".

People knew the Old Testament pretty well at the time, so when Jesus was referenced as the son of man, people immediately recollected Daniel's vision and connected the dots, placing Jesus as the messiah. Pretty cool, eh?

  • Why then in numbers 23:19 should the son of man repent? – Decrypted Jul 29 '15 at 11:32
  • God is not a son of man indeed! Daniel 7 says one came LIKE a son of man on clouds. That word LIKE is important. Jesus came in the flesh, like men, but God. – Tejas Jul 29 '15 at 11:40
  • Why not consider that the "son of man" means "thoughts and words born from the man"? – Decrypted Oct 22 '15 at 20:53
0

Your question goes to the basic belief of the Southern Baptist belief in that we believe that Jesus was wholly man and wholly God.

When Jesus was referred to as the son of man (usually by himself) he was making reference to his human which he inherited through Mary his human mother.

Luke 1:35 KJV And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.

When he was referred to as the son of God it is in reference to his Deity which He inherited through the Holy Spirit.

In Luke 1:35 we are informed that the Birth of Jesus was a result of Mary being pregnant through the Holy Ghost, by the Power of the highest.

With this we are informed that Mary became pregnant by what can be referred to as artificial insemination for lack of a better term.

This was in keeping with Isaiah's prophesy in:

Isaiah 7:14 KJV Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.

This concept has met with much controversy, even in view of the fact that it is possible through a medical procedure today.

  • The "son of Man" is not necessarily (or even primarily, depending on your perspective) a reference to his humanity, but to Daniel 7:13. – Nathaniel Jul 28 '15 at 15:32
  • Why then in numbers 23:19 should the son of man repent? – Decrypted Jul 29 '15 at 11:32
  • @Onlyheisgood. Because Jesus was not the only Son Of Man. As I indicated in my answer that was Jesus way of identifying himself as a human, and in Numbers son of man is a reference to humanity and not Jesus. That may have been the reason Jesus chose that particular reference to indicate his humanness. – BYE Jul 29 '15 at 12:09
  • @Nathaniel That is not my interpretation of that phrase, it is Biblical as you can see from my response to Only he is good. – BYE Jul 29 '15 at 12:13

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.