Originally Posted by
FreelancePoliceman
If you go the sola scriptura route, the psalmist is telling people not to believe in people calling themselves the "son of man." Obviously this would include Jesus
I found a quick summary on Wikipedia which elaborates on the meaning “son of man” as it was used in those times.
- As generally interpreted by Jews, "son of man" denotes mankind generally in contrast to deity or godhead, with special reference to the human weakness and frailty (Job 25:6; Psalms 8:4; Psalms 144:3; Psalms 146:3; Isaiah 51:12, etc.)[2]
- The term "ben adam" is but a formal substitute for the personal pronoun or maybe a title given to the prophet Ezekiel, probably to remind him of his human weakness.[2]
"Son of man" in Job 25 and Psalm 146 is ben adam (Hebrew: בן־אדם), and "son of man" in Psalms 144 is ben enosh (Hebrew: בן־אנוש).
Among Jews the term "son of man" was not used as the specific title of the Messiah. The New Testament expression ὅ ὑιὸς τοῦ ἀνθρόπου is a translation of the Aramaic "bar nasha," and as such could have been understood only as the substitute for a personal pronoun, or as emphasizing the human qualities of those to whom it is applied. That the term does not appear in any of the
epistles ascribed to
Paul is significant. In the [Christian] Gospels the title occurs eighty-one times. Most (..) have come to the conclusion that
Jesus, speaking Aramaic, could never have designated himself as the "son of man" in a Messianic, mystic sense, because the Aramaic term never implied this meaning.
[2]