Since the meaning of words is their use in language, it is extremely important to place in context the title 'Son of Man' used by Jesus so that we arrive at the meaning intended by him. For this purpose, we shall try to analyse the language used by the Apostles and the Evangelists who have transmitted to us what Jesus said and did about the title. The meaning intended by Jesus through the title is to be seen in the intention of the Evangelists and the writers of the New Testament when they used the title as having application to Jesus. It is, therefore, enough to grasp the intention of the New Testament writers in each context of its use for ascertaining the meaning intended by Jesus. The justification for this substitution of Jesus' intention with that of the writers is to be seen in the fact that they are the authoritative witnesses of what happened and reported by them, besides the fact that they are inspired by God to write without deflecting from His intention of what He wanted to communicate. This means that what we are able to extract from the authors of the New Testament is what we can know of the meaning of the title used by Jesus. We shall, therefore, try to see below how Jesus understood the title 'Son of Man' as applied to his own self in different situations.
We have an interesting episode recorded by John the Evangelist (John, 1: 43-51) where Philip introduces Nathaniel to Jesus. Nathaniel was skeptical about anything good coming out of Nazareth when told that they have met the man spoken of in the Law and by the prophets, Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph. On the invitation by Philip, Nathaniel approached Jesus who made an observation about his inner spiritual state by declaring that there was a true Israelite worthy of the name in whom there was nothing false. Nathaniel wanted to know the source of Jesus' knowledge about him to which another enigmatic reply was given by Jesus. It was enigmatic for everyone except for Jesus and Nathaniel who immediately proclaimed Jesus to be the Son of God and the king of Israel. The reply of Jesus that he saw Nathaniel under the fig tree before Philip spoke to him as the source of his intimate knowledge of Nathaniel turned a skeptic into a believer. There have been innumerable interpretations of the passage about what Jesus saw under the fig tree and yet we shall not accept any of them. The reason for our refusal to accept any such interpretation is to be seen in the whole thrust of the passage that leads to the further revelation by Jesus of the Son of Man. The incident under the fig tree referred to by Jesus had no relevance to any one else and was meant to be a secret as per the intention of the author. Something that could be known by everyone would not have evoked such a spontaneous and sudden response from a skeptic and turned him into a believer, Besides, it is not necessary to go looking for what Jesus meant here as it was used only for shaking Nathaniel out of his lethargy leading him and others to greater things. "Then he added, 'In truth, in very truth I tell you all, you shall see heaven wide open , and God's angels ascending and descending upon the Son of Man'" (John, 1: 51).It is clear from Jesus' own words that the Son of Man is greater than the Messiah in whom Nathaniel professed his faith where the 'Son of God' did not mean anything more than the Messiah. Even the angels have to go through the Son of Man as the only mediator for approaching God. This would be clear to us when the heaven is wide open and that would be possible only when the Son of Man enters the Holy of Holies with his glorified body that would serve as the veil revealing and concealing the face of the Father. According to Jesus, what is going to happen in the future is already relevant in the present when the Son of Man is encountered to understand whom both his past and future must be kept in mind. This was the reason why Jesus explained to Nathaniel what he would be later seeing about the Son of Man compared to which his profession of faith in Jesus as the Messiah was nothing special.
The previous Posts discussed the title 'Son of God' as applied to Jesus Christ and here we shall only mention that it is the basis of the title 'Son of Man' properly understood. Although the title could stand for any man or mankind in general in its previous history, as used by Jesus it has taken a complete new turn involving his title 'Son of God' whereby it could properly be used only for Jesus Christ. He did not arrogate the title to himself without any justification, since Jesus did for the entire human race things which only God could do, as we shall see in the coming Posts through our discussion of the other aspects of the title. The first chapter of the Gospel according to John lays the foundation for the entire Gospel where the pre-existence of the Son as Word of God , the mission of the Son of Man and the destiny of the Lamb of God are succinctly expressed.This first chapter being the introduction of the Gospel, a proper understanding of it is essential for a grasp of the entire Gospel and the intention of the author in various contexts. The title 'Son of Man' also explains how the Son of God could turn out to be the Lamb of God in perpetual oblation to God. In Mark 14: 62 we have the High Priest questioning Jesus about his true identity challenging him to answer whether he is the Messiah, Son of the blessed One. Without denying the implications contained in the High Priest's query, Jesus tried to take him to another higher level with the introduction of the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of God and coming with the clouds of heaven. The High Priest considered it a blasphemy, which implies that the claim of Jesus was actually a claim for his equality with God. The title 'Son of Man' as applied by Jesus to himself contained the mystery of both his divinity and his humanity with a tilt to the role played by him as a servant of humanity. (To be cont'd). .
We have an interesting episode recorded by John the Evangelist (John, 1: 43-51) where Philip introduces Nathaniel to Jesus. Nathaniel was skeptical about anything good coming out of Nazareth when told that they have met the man spoken of in the Law and by the prophets, Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph. On the invitation by Philip, Nathaniel approached Jesus who made an observation about his inner spiritual state by declaring that there was a true Israelite worthy of the name in whom there was nothing false. Nathaniel wanted to know the source of Jesus' knowledge about him to which another enigmatic reply was given by Jesus. It was enigmatic for everyone except for Jesus and Nathaniel who immediately proclaimed Jesus to be the Son of God and the king of Israel. The reply of Jesus that he saw Nathaniel under the fig tree before Philip spoke to him as the source of his intimate knowledge of Nathaniel turned a skeptic into a believer. There have been innumerable interpretations of the passage about what Jesus saw under the fig tree and yet we shall not accept any of them. The reason for our refusal to accept any such interpretation is to be seen in the whole thrust of the passage that leads to the further revelation by Jesus of the Son of Man. The incident under the fig tree referred to by Jesus had no relevance to any one else and was meant to be a secret as per the intention of the author. Something that could be known by everyone would not have evoked such a spontaneous and sudden response from a skeptic and turned him into a believer, Besides, it is not necessary to go looking for what Jesus meant here as it was used only for shaking Nathaniel out of his lethargy leading him and others to greater things. "Then he added, 'In truth, in very truth I tell you all, you shall see heaven wide open , and God's angels ascending and descending upon the Son of Man'" (John, 1: 51).It is clear from Jesus' own words that the Son of Man is greater than the Messiah in whom Nathaniel professed his faith where the 'Son of God' did not mean anything more than the Messiah. Even the angels have to go through the Son of Man as the only mediator for approaching God. This would be clear to us when the heaven is wide open and that would be possible only when the Son of Man enters the Holy of Holies with his glorified body that would serve as the veil revealing and concealing the face of the Father. According to Jesus, what is going to happen in the future is already relevant in the present when the Son of Man is encountered to understand whom both his past and future must be kept in mind. This was the reason why Jesus explained to Nathaniel what he would be later seeing about the Son of Man compared to which his profession of faith in Jesus as the Messiah was nothing special.
The previous Posts discussed the title 'Son of God' as applied to Jesus Christ and here we shall only mention that it is the basis of the title 'Son of Man' properly understood. Although the title could stand for any man or mankind in general in its previous history, as used by Jesus it has taken a complete new turn involving his title 'Son of God' whereby it could properly be used only for Jesus Christ. He did not arrogate the title to himself without any justification, since Jesus did for the entire human race things which only God could do, as we shall see in the coming Posts through our discussion of the other aspects of the title. The first chapter of the Gospel according to John lays the foundation for the entire Gospel where the pre-existence of the Son as Word of God , the mission of the Son of Man and the destiny of the Lamb of God are succinctly expressed.This first chapter being the introduction of the Gospel, a proper understanding of it is essential for a grasp of the entire Gospel and the intention of the author in various contexts. The title 'Son of Man' also explains how the Son of God could turn out to be the Lamb of God in perpetual oblation to God. In Mark 14: 62 we have the High Priest questioning Jesus about his true identity challenging him to answer whether he is the Messiah, Son of the blessed One. Without denying the implications contained in the High Priest's query, Jesus tried to take him to another higher level with the introduction of the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of God and coming with the clouds of heaven. The High Priest considered it a blasphemy, which implies that the claim of Jesus was actually a claim for his equality with God. The title 'Son of Man' as applied by Jesus to himself contained the mystery of both his divinity and his humanity with a tilt to the role played by him as a servant of humanity. (To be cont'd). .
No comments:
Post a Comment