On the Consideration of Jesus as "Son of God" with a Consideration of How This Runs in Contradistinction to His Title as "Son of Man"

John 1: 29-34                                      February 26, 2021

29 The next day he saw Jesus coming towards him and declared, ‘Here is the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world! ³⁰This is he of whom I said, “After me comes a man who ranks ahead of me because he was before me.” ³¹I myself did not know him; but I came baptizing with water for this reason, that he might be revealed to Israel.’ ³²And John testified, ‘I saw the Spirit descending from heaven like a dove, and it remained on him. ³³I myself did not know him, but the one who sent me to baptize with water said to me, “He on whom you see the Spirit descend and remain is the one who baptizes with the Holy Spirit.” ³⁴And I myself have seen and have testified that this is the Son of God.’

            This is the Son of God.  John the baptizer has seen him, he is testifying to him.  Almost like he is going to conclude “Nuff said”.  And given all that John the baptizer has testified to, it makes sense.  From the Word was God to the Spirit descending and remaining on Him, it is an incredible introduction.  It is certainly ingrained in Christian technobabble, “Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.”  Interesting how they all come together in this opening chapter of the Gospel.

            But here is a new thought for me.  It so happens that this week in church, the lectionary reading from the gospel is from Mark 8, where Jesus self-refers as the “Son of Man”.  Now I have grown up with these titles for Jesus, known them my entire life.  I will admit, I have confessed to Jesus as Son of God in the worship service, but I do not believe I have ever used “Son of Man” in the context of worship, at least not consciously, not in the resources I gather.

            I have also never been really clear on why one title is used in one place and one is used in another.  It is like someone looking at how they walk and trying to analyze their pace and step.  It is something one is so used to, it is a mental exercise to take a ‘step back’ to consider. 

            So here is the theory of “Son of God” versus “Son of Man”.  We have come to understand Jesus, as revealed by God in the Bible as ‘fully God and fully Human’.  There is a line in the Scots Confession that really touched me.  To paraphrase, God cannot die and yet, due to original sin, humanity cannot live.  Except for Jesus, who encompassed both.

            So what if these titles are shorthand for Jesus’ teachings?  In Mark 8, He spoke of the need of Jesus to suffer, to be rejected by the leadership, and to die-rising three days later.  In John 1, this is the Lamb of God who took away the sins of the world.  This is the one on whom John the baptizer witnessed the Spirit coming down upon in the form of a dove.  This is the one about whom the entire introduction of John is setting up as God come down. 

            Now, there is a lot more work to be done to see if this theory holds water.  But it does raise a powerful question in reading the Bible.  What does it mean when Jesus self-refers as the “Son of Man”?  How is this different from John’s identification of Jesus as “Son of God”?  I never really thought about it, just put it down to ‘stylistic preferences’.  But I think it is something more.

Pastor Pete