The “Son of Man” May Not Have Been Jesus
by Arthur Telling
Just Who is the “Son of Man?”
Recorded in the New Testament gospels are stories of Jesus. He tells of the “Son of Man” to be treated badly and crucified, rising on the third day. The term “son of man” was originally an Old Testament term. The Jews, making the distinction between the sons of ordinary men and the sons of Adam. Adam being the father of a new kind of man, cognizant of and giving obedience to a one God. It manifests in the phrase:
“God is not a man, that he should lie; neither the son of man, that he should repent….” – King James Bible, Numbers 23:19; a “son of man” thus, being a man develops a conscience. Modern biblical translations of the Old Testament sometimes substitute terms like “human being” for “son of man.” This is a more recent translation of the same passage reading: “God is not human, that he should lie, not a human being, that he should change his mind.” -New International Version.
The original “son of Adam” distinction is perhaps lost. Due to a problem of language translations from the original Hebrew, and Aramaic spoke by Jesus, it offers no modern usage term for defining a son of Adam; that is, son of man. But while we may lose nuances between men and “son of man” in modern translations, it is significant that all Old Testament versions do regard “son of man” as a man.
What the Bible Tells about Jesus and the Son of Man
The New Testament, alternatively, invariably uses the term “Son of Man” (capitalized) in an entirely different way whenever Jesus himself speaks the term, and he often does. Christians called Jesus the “Son of God”, and yet they universally believe that Jesus is speaking of himself whenever he uses the term “Son of Man.”
Even while he at other times, speaks of himself in the normal “I,” thus referencing himself directly as “I” and indirectly as the “Son of Man.” The latter illustrated as Jesus saying: “Foxes have holes and birds have nests, but the Son of Man has no place to rest.” -International Standard Version, Matthew 8:20. This is interpreted by Christians as Jesus finding no rest in the world. Contemporary scholars cannot define the “Son of Man” New Testament term in a more modern way. This is because Christians give the term a special meaning. It is the Son of God referring to himself indirectly in the third person.
A rare 1945 discovery of the Gnostic Gospels of Thomas used by early followers of Jesus, but not bound into the New Testament Bible, brought to light new Jesus sayings. Some of these are similar to the New Testament gospels, including the Matthew 8:20 “Foxes have [dens]…” passage mentioned above.
Modern and Different Translations Broaden Meaning
The “Scholars Version” translation of the Thomas Gospel by Stephen Patterson and Marvin Meyer, the two leading experts in Christian manuscripts, deviates from the New Testament gospels. It uses “human being” in their translation of Thomas.
“Foxes have their dens and birds have their nests, but human beings have nowhere to lay down and rest.” -Gospel of Thomas, Saying #86.
With the new translation, the meaning of this phrase changes. Now, Jesus is not referring to himself but to his followers. They, human beings, are the ones finding no rest on the earth. The implication being if they follow Jesus he will give them rest. Various New Testament passages support the Patterson and Meyer translation, such as Jesus instructing: “Come to me, … and I will give you rest.” -New International Version, Matthew 11:28.
Patterson and Meyer’s Thomas definition of “Son of Man” cause no problems for the Church. Maybe because Thomas is a rejected gospel, but a similar redefine in the New Testament gospels would be very problematic to the Church.
Radical Ideas in Other Books?
As this Jesus saying shows: “You know that after two days the Passover is coming, and the Son of Man is to be handed over for crucifixion.” -New American Standard Bible, Matthew 26:2. Such a replacing of “Son of Man” with “human being” changes the meaning. It is as if Jesus speaks of the crucifixion of another man, not himself. This would destroy the central Church element of salvation through the Cross.
This radical idea finds support in other Gnostic text interpretations and in the Koran. It is also in plain words in the popular 1970’s-era Jane Roberts/Seth material. It says that another man was mistaken as Jesus and crucified. I am inclined to believe that the Crucifixion story was altered after the fact. This makes it in agreement with the recorded Roman Procurator Pontius Pilate’s account of putting Jesus to death.
Fortunately, Stephen Patterson does not leave Christians without hope. His studies of the Gospel of Thomas, when compared alongside New Testament, Gospels leads him to believe, contrary to majority academia, that Jesus did not preach an apocalyptical end of world message. Rather, He spoke of a present, spiritual-moment nature. Such a message would indeed be the “good news” for a coming age.
About the Author
Arthur Telling has written numerous stories and articles on religion, philosophy, and metaphysics. His article, “A Different Jesus Message” appeared in the Nov. 2011 AMORC Rosicrucian Digest. Telling is the author of “Johann’s Awakening“, and three novels including “Kaitlin’s Message.” The latter explores the authenticity of the Crucifixion and the secret sayings of the Gospel of Thomas. His website is: www.arthurtelling.com
