A. Daniel 7: Jesus as the Son of Man as the End-Time Adam and End-Time Israel

The title “Son of Man” is used of Christ in the four Gospels eighty times. A number of these uses allude to Daniel 7:13-14, combining “Son of Man” with other words or phrases from 7:13-14. However, it is likely that the phrase “Son of Man” even by itself is an allusion to 7:13. This echoes an Adamic eschatological rule, where God gives an end-time king an eternal kingdom and glory (7:13-14).

That the “son of man” in Daniel 7 alludes to Adam in Genesis 1 is apparent from several observations. We saw in chapter 1 (sec. I.D) that Daniel 7:13-14 is among a number of reiterations ultimately of the Adamic commission of Genesis 1:28, though Daniel 7:13-14 is most directly an allusion to the Genesis 22:17-18 prophecy of an end-time king in Abraham’s line, which is also one of the Adamic reiterations. The link is especially evident because Genesis 22:17-18 is the only repeated Adamic promise that also contains “possess[ing[ the gates of [your] enemy,” a major theme likewise in Daniel 7 concerning the son of man and the Israelite saints. Also the son of man’s rule of sea beasts (portraying the enemy) reflects Adam’s original commission to do the same. The allusion to the Adamic commissions, especially Genesis 22:18, in Daniel 7 is further confirmed by the fact that the precise phrase “all the nations of the earth” (panta ta ethne tēs gēs [Dan. 7:14 OG]) occurs only five other times in the OT, four of which are among the repetitions of Adam’s commission in Genesis 1:28 (esp. Gen. 22:17-18; 26:4, as well as Deut. 28:10; Josh. 4:24). Daniel 7:13-14 may also allude partly to Psalm 8:5-8; both refer to the (1) “son of man” (2) as a ruler over all creation, and (3) particularly over sea beasts. If this is the case, then the Adamic association of Daniel 7:13-14 is enhanced, since Psalm 8:5-8 is one of the clearest developments of the commission to Aam in Genesis 1:28 in all of the OT. Some even see a direct allusion to Genesis 1:26, 28 (1:26: “rule . . . over all the earth”) in Daniel 7:14 in the Old Greek (“to him was given dominion” over “all the nations of the earth”).

Since these Adamic associations are present in Daniel 7:13-14 to one degree or another, Jesus’s repeated application of the Danielic son of man to himself is a good example of the connection between Adam and Jesus. In this case, the link highlights Jesus’s Adamic kingship.

Now, in this light, we want to investigate further the Daniel 7 context of Daniel 7:13-14. In the visionary section of Daniel 7:1-15, there is a vision of four beasts appearing in succession and exercising an increasingly oppressive power, until at least “the Ancient of Days” sits in judgment over them, and they are judged. Then “one like a son of man” comes with the clouds of heaven to the Ancient of Days and is given an everlasting dominion over all peoples.

In the interpretive section of Daniel 7:15-28, the four beasts are interpreted to be four successive empires (vv. 17, 23). But how does this section identify the son of man? At first glance, one might say that he is not identified, since the phrase “son of man” is not mentioned in the following interpretive section. However, verses 15-28 present themselves as the interpretation of the visionary section of verses 1-15. This means that for there to be no interpretation of the climax of the vision in verses 13-14, which his the son of man and his coming kingdom, would be quite unlikely. Daniel 7:13-14 says that the son of man “was given dominion,” which was an “everlasting dominion” and a “kingdom . . . which will not be destroyed.” Likewise, verse 18 says that the “saints” of Israel will “possess the kingdom forever,” verse 22 that the “saints took possession of the kingdom,” and verse 27 that this till be an “everlasting kingdom.” Thus, it is very likely that the interpretive section of the vision identifies the “son of man” figure with end-time Israel, “the saints of the Most High” (vv. 18, 22, 27), who, though first oppressed by the fourth kingdom, were vindicated and exalted to dominion over all powers through God’s judgment. Both the “son of man” and the saints are said to receive a kingdom.

Therefore, the keynote is vindication and exaltation of the son of man in the vision and also of the saints of Israel in the interpretive section: the inauguration of the son of man’s kingdom is the inauguration of Israel’s eschatological kingdom, which supersedes the human kingdoms that previously opposed God and oppressed his people. It should also be noted that the “coming” of the son of man in verse 13 appears to be a coming to God in heaven and receive authority, not a coming to earth. In Daniel 7, is the “son of man” figure merely a personification of the “saints of the Most High” or is he an individual “ruler”? The first answer that we have been led by the interpretive section is that the son of man is identified with Israel and Israel is identified with him.

Part of the key to understanding the figure of the son of man is the Hebrew conception of corporate headship or representation, whereby an individual (usually a king, priest, or father) represents others and thereby sums them up in himself .Even though the king, priest, or father is technically distinct form what he represents, each one is corporately identified and represents the kingdom, nation, or family. That the son of man was so conceived is evident form the fact that the beasts represent kings who represent their respective empires (peoples), and there is clear parallelism between the role of the beasts and the son of man. For example, all four beasts are interpreted in verse 17 as individual “kings” (malkīn, from melek), and in verse 23 the fourth beast is described corporately as “a . . . kingdom” (malkû [or “royalty, reign”]).

Therefore, this suggests that the Son of Man is both an individual and a corporate representative for the Israelite community. Such representation means that what is true of the representative is true of the represented. In the case of Daniel 7, the interpretive section refers to the Son of Man as the faithful nation Israel, presumably because he is the individual king of Israel representatively sums up the people in himself. Consequently, certain of his actions become representative of them, and vice versa. Their general identity is also the same. Both can be conceived of as Israel (just as the battle between David and Goliath could be referred to as one between Israel and the Philistines). Thus, since the Son of Man, the end-time Adam, receives a kingdom, so his people (Israel) receive a kingdom; and just as Israel goes through end-times tribulation, so the Son of Man, the end-time Adam, likely goes through tribulation. The same two realities are true of Jesus as Son of Man, the end-time Adam, and of his followers, who identify with him. This identification with Jesus as Son of Man and Adam begins during Jesus’s ministry and is climaxed with his resurrection and exaltation. This identification in the Synoptics is mostly implicit, with the idea lying in the background of Daniel 7.

A good example, however, of the representational function of the Son of Man is Matthew 19:28: “And Jesus said to them, ‘Truly I say to you, that you who have followed Me, in the regeneration when the Son of Man will sit on His glorious throne, you also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.’” Since the Son of Man receives the consummate reward of sitting as king on a throne, so those who follow and identify with him will sit as kings on thrones. This eschatological benefit occurs at the time of Christ’s resurrection and exaltation, when the new creation (“the regeneration”) begins, through it focuses on the consummation of the kingdom. This again is in line with Daniel 7, where the Israelite saints’ identification with the Son of Man means that they are also identified with and participate in the kingdom that he obtains at the eschaton.