With regard to the Son of Man seen so often in the Book of Enoch and believed to be there in the versions of the book known to Jesus, who identifies with the Son of Man teaching, why ‘the Son of Man’? The parallel with the Book of Daniel chapter 7 passage on “one like a man” is clearly important to understanding the title. Likewise the reference back to a similar passage about this man in Daniel chapter 10 from a passage by John in Revelation chapter 1 describing Jesus is more important still, bringing into the picture the humanness of Jesus, the Christ Himself. Yet Enoch parallels Revelation in importance because to be called Son of Man is more precise than Daniel’s passage and mirrors John’s Revelation contribution to the understanding of this person because even angels are described like men in the Book of Daniel but describing a being as LIKE a man is not as precise as describing the being as the Son of Man. If Jesus merely became a man it would not be saying as much about that humanity as when scripture, by calling Him ‘the Son of Man’ says this person humbled Himself to actually be a child of humans taking cellular form and embryo and foetus form growing in a womb and being born from that woman’s womb, growing up as a child of human parents. Adam was called Man, yet did not live as a Son of Man because as a direct creation he had no earthly parents, whereas the Christ would be born as a Son of Man, as humble and fully human as we are, yet having existed as the Son of Man mysteriously in Enoch’s time of ascension into Heaven. So this utter humanity (yet without sin and fully the son of God) is what the righteous humans need to help them cope with life in this world and eternally continue as children of God, and what every human needs in a mediator with God the Father.
