Tuesday, January 19, 2021

The Son of Man

 The Son of Man

John 1:43-51[1]

All of us have our favorite “images” for Jesus. Unfortunately, the source of those images is not necessarily the Bible, but our own culture. Western Civilization is filled with art works that portray Jesus, typically looking and dressing like someone from the artist’s own time and place. The advent of films has only expanded these images of Jesus. They range from the serene figure in “The Passion of the Christ” to the strung out and possibly deranged character in “Jesus Christ Superstar.” For most of us, the image of Jesus we know best is the picture that has hung in many of our homes and churches. It was painted by the American artist Warner Sallman in 1940, entitled simply “The Head of Christ”, and it depicts a very “American” Jesus.

This “imaging” of Jesus goes back to the Bible itself. The apostles and teachers who wrote the New Testament used words to describe who Jesus was and is. They called him “Teacher,” “Master,” and “Messiah.” In the episode that precedes our Gospel lesson, John the Baptist called him the “Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world.” They saw Jesus as the one who had been crucified but who had risen and had ascended to God’s right hand, exalted to reign as the “King of Kings.”  We still use these and other NT images to try to understand who Jesus was and who he is for us today.

One feature in the story of Jesus is that the people of his day, including his own disciples, continually came to him with their own ideas, and he continually corrected them. We see this dynamic in our Gospel lesson for today. They called him “Messiah,” “Son of God,” and “King of Israel,” but he insisted on calling himself “Son of Man.” Part of the reason was their own pre-conceived notions about him based on what they may have seen or heard. In the Jewish culture there were lots of expectations about what a “Messiah” would be like and what he would do for their people. But when faced with those expectations, Jesus insisted that he was much more than they assumed him to be.

Following Jesus’ baptism, John the Baptist directed two of his own disciples toward Jesus. One of them, Andrew, found his brother Simon (also known as Peter), and told him, “We have found the Messiah” (John 1:41). Something similar happens in our lesson when Philip sought out Nathanael. Philip told him, “We have found him about whom Moses in the law and also the prophets wrote” (John 1:45). Initially, Nathanael was skeptical about Jesus. But later when he met Jesus, he exclaimed, “Rabbi, you are the Son of God! You are the King of Israel!” (John 1:49).

 All of this may sound very natural to us. But I’m pretty sure Andrew and Nathanael didn’t understand what they were saying when they called Jesus “Messiah,” “Son of God,” and “King of Israel.” They expected Jesus to miraculously deliver them from their enemies, and to re-establish the Kingdom of David. Jesus had to tell his own closest friends over and over that wasn’t his mission. They were looking for a human deliverer; mighty in battle and wise as a ruler but nevertheless human. And the kingdom they imagined pales in comparison to the kingdom that Jesus intended to bring: the kingdom of God.

Jesus’ insistence on calling himself “Son of Man” may seem confusing to us, because we tend to assume that “Son of God” refers to him as fully divine and “Son of Man” refers to him as fully human. So why didn’t he call himself “Son of God”? I think the answer lies in that when Jesus’ disciples called him “Son of God” they meant he was the extraordinary human being chosen by God to lead the people of Israel to their former glory, but nevertheless a human being. As we see throughout the Gospels, Jesus responded by calling himself the “Son of Man.” In our lesson for today, Jesus told Nathanael and the others that they would see “heaven opened and the angels of God ascending and descending upon the Son of Man” (John 1:51).

In order to follow Jesus’ intent, I think we have to understand the background of the “Son of Man.” It comes from Daniel 7, where at the end of his vision of all the man-made kingdoms of the earth brought to an end by God’s kingdom, Daniel sees one like a “Son of Man” who comes “with the clouds of heaven” and appears before God, as if he were equal to God (Dan. 7:13)! And what is said of him should sound familiar to us: “To him was given dominion and glory and kingship, that all peoples, nations, and languages should serve him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion that shall not pass away, and his kingship is one that shall never be destroyed” (Dan. 7:14). With that in mind, I would say Jesus refers to himself as the “Son of Man” in order to indicate that he was much, much more than people imagined when they called him “Messiah” and “Son of God.” He had not come simply to restore Israel; he had come to rule over a kingdom that would encompass all the peoples of the world!

It’s not easy to understand how Jesus could be both “fully human” and “fully divine” at the same time. It’s tricky to balance those two in our minds. And it’s always been easy for us to fall off on one side or the other. The witness of the Bible clearly affirms both. Jesus “was born of woman as is every child, yet born of God’s power as was no other child.”[2] It takes more than a sermon to fully elaborate who Jesus was and is. For now, I will say that as the “Son of God,” Jesus came to save us all. As the “Son of Man,” Jesus came to establish God’s reign of peace, justice, and freedom for the whole human family!



[1] ©2021 Alan Brehm. A sermon delivered by Rev. Alan Brehm, Ph. D. on 1/17/2021 for Hickman Presbyterian Church, Hickman, NE.

[2] A Declaration of Faith, 1977, 4.1 (Presbyterian Church in the United States, 1977; reissued by Presbyterian Church [U.S.A.], 1991).

No comments: