Adam
The roots of the “son of man” are
according to P. VOLZ ([Die Eschatologie der jüdischen Gemeinde im
neutestamentlichen Zeitalter] 1934: 189f) the Jewish concept of the Urmensch
or Uradam whom God created to fight against the demonic monsters in
order to redeem the cosmos from these chaotic forces to free the heavenly
beings from the annoyance they exerted. Because the glory of the ideal man was
lost, there arose the necessity for an eschatological Adam to restore the lost
to the original state. This eschatological saviour was according to VOLX the Danielic
“son of man”.
A.M. FARRER [A
Study in St. Mark] argued that the seer of Dan 7 read into Gen 1:26 “that the
creation and enthronement of Adam is by implication the subjection of the
beasts, the removal of their dominion” (1951: 260) and built around such an
understanding the “son of man” scene of Dan 7. Therefore, “as Adam makes his
appearance after the decree and in consequence of it, so does the Son of Man in
Daniel.” The relationship between the singular “son of man” and his pluralised
kingship by the saints of the Most High (Dan 7:18) FARRER compared with the
statement: “Let us make man in our image . . . and let them have
dominion.”
According to STEIR (["Adam,"
in: Handbuch theologischer Grundbegriffe] 1962: 23f) two different concepts of
Adam existed. A pessimistic view of Adam was held by the Yahwist by depicting
man as sinful, while an optimistic outlook is found in P (= Gen 1:27) and Psa 8
which associate “man” with original glory, the presence and image of God. A similar
positive perception of man is found in Daniel, Enoch and 4 Ezra. From this
positive perception of the ideal man priestly circles developed in association with
existing Messianic expectations the “son of man” concept as it also reflected in
Dan 7. (Jürg Eggler, Influences and Traditions Underlying the Vision of
Daniel 7:2-14: The Research from the End of the 19th Century to the Present [Orbis
Biblicus et Orentalis 177; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2000], 94-95)