Did Jesus ever call himself Son of God, or Son of David?

[Provoker]

Considering the fact that Solomon is the only person in scripture who was both the son of David and the son of God, why would both Ezekiel and Jesus refer to themselves as son of man?

[Ancient of Years]

Considering the fact that Solomon is the only person in scripture who was both the son of David and the son of God, why would both Ezekiel and Jesus refer to themselves as son of man?

‘Son of man’ simply means a human being. In Daniel 7 a figure descends from heaven ‘looking like a son of man’. That is, looking like a human being as opposed to the monstrous beast-like figures that arise from below in the preceding verses. This figure was identified with the end of days and (in the popular mind if not literally in Daniel) with the judgment. The figure became the Son of Man.

Whether a real historic Jesus ever referred to himself as the Son of Man is debatable. Most of the references seem to point to someone else who will appear in the future. While the Gospels meld Jesus and the Son of Man, the references just might be traces of earlier traditions that did not connect the two.

Ezekiel has the Lord refer to him (Ezekiel) as son of man, in the original meaning of a human being. Nothing to do with Jesus.

[Provoker]

Considering the fact that Solomon is the only person in scripture who was both the son of David and the son of God, why would both Ezekiel and Jesus refer to themselves as son of man?

‘Son of man’ simply means a human being. In Daniel 7 a figure descends from heaven ‘looking like a son of man’. That is, looking like a human being as opposed to the monstrous beast-like figures that arise from below in the preceding verses. This figure was identified with the end of days and (in the popular mind if not literally in Daniel) with the judgment. The figure became the Son of Man.

Whether a real historic Jesus ever referred to himself as the Son of Man is debatable. Most of the references seem to point to someone else who will appear in the future. While the Gospels meld Jesus and the Son of Man, the references just might be traces of earlier traditions that did not connect the two.

Ezekiel has the Lord refer to him (Ezekiel) as son of man, in the original meaning of a human being. Nothing to do with Jesus.

Hi Bill:
It has occurred to me that along with watching and waiting for the coming kingdom, God's faithful were/are watching and waiting for a coming king as well. The coming king will be the immediate successor of Solomon, who was the last ruler of covenant national Israel. The people were probably looking for someone to take Solomon's place, and titles: Son of David, and son of God. I suspect that Ezekiel referred to himself as "son of man", to dispel any ideas the people might have of making him king(Son of David, and Son of God). Jesus could have referred to himself as "son of man" for the same reason.

[1213]

Considering the fact that Solomon is the only person in scripture who was both the son of David and the son of God, why would both Ezekiel and Jesus refer to themselves as son of man?

I think these confirm that Bible Jesus taught he is son of God.

Simon Peter answered, "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God." Jesus answered him, "Blessed are you, Simon Bar Jonah, for flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven.
Matt. 16:16-17

Jesus answered them, "Isn't it written in your law, 'I said, you are gods?' If he called them gods, to whom the word of God came (and the Scripture can't be broken), Do you say of him whom the Father sanctified and sent into the world, 'You blaspheme,' because I said, 'I am the Son of God?' If I don't do the works of my Father, don't believe me. But if I do them, though you don't believe me, believe the works; that you may know and believe that the Father is in me, and I in the Father."
John 10:34-38

Jesus also calls God his Father, which indicates that he is a son of God. Also disciples of Jesus are God’s children according to this.

But as many as received him, to them he gave the right to become God's children, to those who believe in his name:
John 1:12

But interesting thing is that Jesus was called usually son of God by many others than him. For example:

The unclean spirits, whenever they saw him, fell down before him, and cried, "You are the Son of God!" He sternly warned them that they should not make him known.
Mark 3:11-12

[Provoker]

Considering the fact that Solomon is the only person in scripture who was both the son of David and the son of God, why would both Ezekiel and Jesus refer to themselves as son of man?

I think these confirm that Bible Jesus taught he is son of God.

Simon Peter answered, "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God." Jesus answered him, "Blessed are you, Simon Bar Jonah, for flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven.
Matt. 16:16-17

Jesus answered them, "Isn't it written in your law, 'I said, you are gods?' If he called them gods, to whom the word of God came (and the Scripture can't be broken), Do you say of him whom the Father sanctified and sent into the world, 'You blaspheme,' because I said, 'I am the Son of God?' If I don't do the works of my Father, don't believe me. But if I do them, though you don't believe me, believe the works; that you may know and believe that the Father is in me, and I in the Father."
John 10:34-38

Jesus also calls God his Father, which indicates that he is a son of God. Also disciples of Jesus are God’s children according to this.

But as many as received him, to them he gave the right to become God's children, to those who believe in his name:
John 1:12

But interesting thing is that Jesus was called usually son of God by many others than him. For example:

The unclean spirits, whenever they saw him, fell down before him, and cried, "You are the Son of God!" He sternly warned them that they should not make him known.
Mark 3:11-12

Hi 1213:
It certainly says those things in scripture, but verses, and passages, must be considered in the context of God's own words, and the continuous story which flows through scripture, from God's words. If a verse or a passage does not agree with what God Himself said, we have to assume that the passage is mistranslated or misunderstood. Bible believers who make doctrines from the convenient wording of verses or passages, are divided into thousands of doctrinally disagreeing denominations.
Solomon was the only person in scripture who was both the son of David and the son of God. He was the last ruler of David's kingdom, which fell even though God promise that it will be established forever.
"The son of David", and "the son of God", are titles which will be given to the one who becomes Solomon's immediate successor by resurrecting David's kingdom from the dead and ascending the throne. "The Christ will be given the kingdom of his father David, and there will be on earth peace, good will toward men".
Jesus and his disciples may have expected Jesus to become God's son, but he was crucified without it happening.
What do you think?

[1213]

..."The Christ will be given the kingdom of his father David, and there will be on earth peace, good will toward men".
Jesus and his disciples may have expected Jesus to become God's son, but he was crucified without it happening.
What do you think?

Jesus has the kingdom. But the Kingdom is not natural kingdom.

Jesus answered, "My kingdom is not of this world. If my kingdom were of this world, then my servants would fight, that I wouldn't be delivered to the Jews. But now my kingdom is not from here."
John 18:36

The Kingdom is still in disciples of Jesus.

"The Kingdom of God doesn't come with observation; neither will they say, 'Look, here!' or, 'Look, there!' for behold, the Kingdom of God is within you."
Luke 17:20-21

That Kingdom still exists. And for example Jesus is also my King.

Jesus gives peace that cannot be taken away.

Peace I leave with you. My peace I give to you; not as the world gives, give I to you. Don't let your heart be troubled, neither let it be fearful.
John 14:27

That makes the Kingdom of Jesus, kingdom of everlasting peace. World has no power that could destroy it, also because most people don’t even know where it is.

"Therefore don't be anxious, saying, 'What will we eat?', 'What will we drink?' or, 'With what will we be clothed?' For the Gentiles seek after all these things, for your heavenly Father knows that you need all these things. But seek first God's Kingdom, and his righteousness; and all these things will be given to you as well.
Matthew 6:31-33

[cnorman19]

In regard to this question, an interesting passage appears in all three of the Synoptics:

Then Jesus said to them, “Why is it said that the Messiah is the son of David? David himself declares in the Book of Psalms:

“‘The Lord said to my Lord:
“Sit at my right hand
until I make your enemies
a footstool for your feet.�’

David calls him ‘Lord.’ How then can he be his son?�

While the Pharisees were gathered together, Jesus asked them, “What do you think about the Messiah? Whose son is he?�

“The son of David,� they replied.

He said to them, “How is it then that David, speaking by the Spirit, calls him ‘Lord’? For he says,

“‘The Lord said to my Lord:
“Sit at my right hand
until I put your enemies
under your feet.�’

If then David calls him ‘Lord,’ how can he be his son?� 46 No one could say a word in reply, and from that day on no one dared to ask him any more questions.

While Jesus was teaching in the temple courts, he asked, “Why do the teachers of the law say that the Messiah is the son of David? David himself, speaking by the Holy Spirit, declared:

“‘The Lord said to my Lord:
“Sit at my right hand
until I put your enemies
under your feet.�

David himself calls him ‘Lord.’ How then can he be his son?�

The large crowd listened to him with delight.

We never talked much about these passages in seminary. I've often wondered what Christians make of them.

[Provoker]

..."The Christ will be given the kingdom of his father David, and there will be on earth peace, good will toward men".
Jesus and his disciples may have expected Jesus to become God's son, but he was crucified without it happening.
What do you think?

Jesus has the kingdom. But the Kingdom is not natural kingdom.

Jesus answered, "My kingdom is not of this world. If my kingdom were of this world, then my servants would fight, that I wouldn't be delivered to the Jews. But now my kingdom is not from here."
John 18:36

The Kingdom is still in disciples of Jesus.

"The Kingdom of God doesn't come with observation; neither will they say, 'Look, here!' or, 'Look, there!' for behold, the Kingdom of God is within you."
Luke 17:20-21

That Kingdom still exists. And for example Jesus is also my King.

Jesus gives peace that cannot be taken away.

Peace I leave with you. My peace I give to you; not as the world gives, give I to you. Don't let your heart be troubled, neither let it be fearful.
John 14:27

That makes the Kingdom of Jesus, kingdom of everlasting peace. World has no power that could destroy it, also because most people don’t even know where it is.

"Therefore don't be anxious, saying, 'What will we eat?', 'What will we drink?' or, 'With what will we be clothed?' For the Gentiles seek after all these things, for your heavenly Father knows that you need all these things. But seek first God's Kingdom, and his righteousness; and all these things will be given to you as well.
Matthew 6:31-33

Hi 1213:
We have to look at the context provided by God's own words, and the continuous bible story, to decide whether or not "the spiritual kingdom", as the post-Nicaean church sees it, is valid.
The faith for which bible scripture was written in the first place, is God's everlasting, unconditional, gospel promise to Abraham: A great Abrahamic nation will inherit everlasting possession of all the land between the Euphrates and the river of Egypt, and will bless all the families of all nations.
As believers in God, we must believe that an everlasting, unconditional, good news promise made by God, is going to be fulfilled. We also know that God's gospel promise has not been fulfilled.
We know that to be faithful to God, we must continue to believe God's promise. That is the definition of faith in God.
Moses, and the children of Israel, attempted to fulfill God's promise, but failed when covenant national Israel fell into non-existence.
Regardless of what happened to covenant Israel, God's faithful know that God's everlasting gospel promise will be fulfilled, so they are watching and waiting for the one who is anointed to establish and lead the great Abrahamic nation of God's promise. From a strictly Jewish point of view, this means resurrecting the fallen kingdom of Israel from the dead, to everlasting life through the new covenant, which will keep resurrected Israel from breaking the ten commandments and falling again.
The Jews who returned to Judea after the Babylonian captivity ended, were committed to the resurrection of David's kingdom so it could fulfill God's gospel promise.
However, the land which God promised that a great Abrahamic nation would possess forever, just happened to be in the possession of the Roman Empire.
Rome went into damage control mode, and gave the Jews a pseudo kingdom, a pseudo king, and old Israelite laws. This tricked the Jews into no longer watching and waiting for the messiah, and they became the backslidden lost sheep of the house of Israel...except for a small group who remained zealous for David's kingdom...the Zealots.
Jesus came to heal the backsliding of the Jews by preaching the gospel of the coming kingdom, which was the gospel of the coming great nation which God preached first to Abraham. Remember that the great nation of Israel was a kingdom when it fell:-)
Only once in scripture did Paul define the gospel which he preached. In Gal.3:8 Paul said; God preached the gospel first to Abraham saying, In thee shall all nations be blessed. That is the gospel of the coming great nation/kingdom:-)
So it should be clear that Jesus and his gospel were a threat to the national security of the Roman Empire. John 11:45-55 tells us that Jesus was killed to prevent a war between the Jews and Rome, in which all the Jews might be killed. Jesus died to save all the Jews.
"My kingdom is not of this world" was said by Jesus while he was before Pilate, and his fate was obvious. "this World" here does not mean "this planet", it means "this place at this time". The place of the kingdom is well defined by God Himself, but no one knows the time of the kingdom.
It is very clear that the coming kingdom is a literal kingdom on all the land between the Euphrates and the river of Egypt, but it will be a spiritual kingdom in the hearts and minds of those who watch and wait for it's coming.
The only words of God which define the messianic purpose are; He will be given the kingdom of his father David, and there will be on earth peace, good will toward men.
Do you see why it is my opinion that the verses you quoted are either mistranslated, or misinterpreted?

[1213]

Hi 1213:
We have to look at the context provided by God's own words, and the continuous bible story, to decide whether or not "the spiritual kingdom", as the post-Nicaean church sees it, is valid.
The faith for which bible scripture was written in the first place, is God's everlasting, unconditional, gospel promise to Abraham: A great Abrahamic nation will inherit everlasting possession of all the land between the Euphrates and the river of Egypt, and will bless all the families of all nations....

I think you have relatively good point. I believe the Promised Land will be Jews. However that doesn’t mean that these are not true at the same time:

"My kingdom is not of this world. If my kingdom were of this world, then my servants would fight, that I wouldn't be delivered to the Jews. But now my kingdom is not from here."
John 18:36

"The Kingdom of God doesn't come with observation; neither will they say, 'Look, here!' or, 'Look, there!' for behold, the Kingdom of God is within you."
Luke 17:20-21

But maybe I have to think this more.

[Provoker]

Hi 1213:
We have to look at the context provided by God's own words, and the continuous bible story, to decide whether or not "the spiritual kingdom", as the post-Nicaean church sees it, is valid.
The faith for which bible scripture was written in the first place, is God's everlasting, unconditional, gospel promise to Abraham: A great Abrahamic nation will inherit everlasting possession of all the land between the Euphrates and the river of Egypt, and will bless all the families of all nations....

I think you have relatively good point. I believe the Promised Land will be Jews. However that doesn’t mean that these are not true at the same time:

"My kingdom is not of this world. If my kingdom were of this world, then my servants would fight, that I wouldn't be delivered to the Jews. But now my kingdom is not from here."
John 18:36

"The Kingdom of God doesn't come with observation; neither will they say, 'Look, here!' or, 'Look, there!' for behold, the Kingdom of God is within you."
Luke 17:20-21

But maybe I have to think this more.

Hi 1213:
A couple of things: Jesus would not have said that about being delivered to the Jews, because Jesus was a Jew, and in Matthew 11:45-55 we find that Jesus was killed because the Jews were flocking to follow him. It was the chief priests, the pharisees, and the temple guard who were after him, not the Jews as such. He would not have wanted to be delivered to the Romans.
As far as Luke 17:20-21 goes, when Jesus told backslidden Jews that they should be watching and waiting for the coming kingdom, the backslidden Jews would say; look here, we have Herod's kingdom. The answer is that the kingdom is not found by looking for it, the kingdom is in the hearts and minds of those who watch and wait for it, and are committed to it's resurrection from the dead.
Covenant national Israel must have a second coming(resurrection) for God's gospel promise to be fulfilled, and scripture tells us that God will make a new covenant with Israel. God made that the new covenant promise through Jeremiah long after Israel had fallen, so it was obvious back in Jeremiah's day, that Israel would be resurrected from the dead(have a second coming).
Remember, faith is the substance of things hoped for. IOW, the spiritual kingdom is in the hearts and minds of those who hope for it's literal coming. On the other hand, those who claim to have faith in God, but are not looking forward to the coming of David's kingdom, do not have the spiritual kingdom, and they do not have faith in God. Faith in God is very specific. It is the one and only faith which justifies. It is the faith of Abraham. Jesus preached it to backslidden Jews and Paul preached it to gentiles.
Notice in the post by another gentleman above, that the subject was never brought up in Seminary. Doesn't that smack of a coverup?
What do you think?