Page 270 - Demo

Chapter XI266The Son of man According to the Jewish ApocalypsesFrom what has been already discussed in these pages it will have been that the appellation “Barnasha,” or “the Son of Man,” is not a title like “Messiah,” that could be applied to every prophet, high priest, and legally anointed king; but that it is a proper noun, belonging exclusively to the Last Prophet. The Hebrew Seers, Sophees, andthe Apocalyptists describe the Son of Man, who is to come in due time as appointed by the Almighty to deliver Israel and Jerusalem from the heathenish oppression and to establish the permanent kingdom for “the People of the Saints of the Most High.” The Seers, the Sophees, foretell the advent of the Powerful Deliverer; they see him -only in a vision, revelation, and faith- with all his might and glory. No Prophet or Sopheeever said that he himself was “the Son of Man,” and that he would “come again on the Last Day to judge both the quick and the dead,” as the Nicene Creed puts it on the pretended authority of the Sayings of Jesus Christ (pbuh) .The frequent use of the appellation in question by the evangelists indicates, most assuredly, their acquaintance with the Jewish Apocalypses, as also a firm belief in their authenticity and divine origin. It is quite evident that the Apocalypses bearing the names of Enoch, Moses (pbuh) , Baruch, and Ezra were written long before the Gospels; and that thename “Barnasha” therein mentioned was borrowed by the authors of the Gospels; otherwise its frequent use would be enigmatic and an incomprehensible-if not a meaningless- novelty. It follows, therefore, that Jesus (pbuh) either believed himself to be theApocalyptic “Son of Man,” or that he knew the Son of Man to be a person distinctly other than himself.