Among messianic interpreters of Daniel 7’s “one like a son of man,” a division exists between those who see a solely victorious Messiah and those who believe the Messiah is there presented as suffering on earth before being enthroned in heaven. This paper proposes that God intended readers of Daniel 7 to interpret the son of man as Israel and its Messiah, who would represent his saints in his own persecution unto death before vindication through resurrection and exaltation. The fullest argument for this position remains to be made by means of Daniel’s allusions to antecedent Scriptures, deference to the angelic interpretation in Daniel 7 in its literary context, and the New Testament use of Daniel 7, especially Jesus’s combining the Greek of Daniel 7:13 and 7:25 in predictions of the suffering Son of Man.
In Daniel 7, the allusions to Genesis 1–3 activate the promise of the Messiah’s victory through representative suffering (3:15), foreshadowed in characters to whom Daniel 7 also alludes (Joseph, Moses, David, and Ezekiel) and promised in one “from the sons of man” in Isaiah 52–53 (esp. 52:14). Daniel 6, chronologically rearranged, influences the reading of the chapter 7 son of man as the ultimate Joseph/Daniel, raised from persecution among the beasts to second in command.
Then the angel explained the son of man as the saints, martyred but vindicated (7:18–27). Although many messianic interpreters sharply distinguish an individual son of man in the vision from the saints in the angel’s interpretation, some rightly recognize the dual reference, consistent with the beasts, which were explained as kings and kingdoms (7:17, 23, 24). Therefore, the “one like a son of man” signifies Israel and its Messiah. Antecedent Scriptures have prepared readers for this corporate representation of the Messiah as the forerunner in Israel’s persecution by the beasts and vindication by the Most High. In 9:24–26 the Messiah’s participation as propitiation is confirmed, followed by resurrection in 12:1–3.
Therefore, when Jesus said that “it is written” that “the Son of Man” must be “given into the hands of” the Romans (Mark 9:31; 10:33–34; 14:21, 41), he combined Daniel 7:13 and 7:25 in line with their original intention. Jesus correctly taught that it was written in Daniel 7 that the Messiah must die and be raised. John’s Gospel affirms the Son of Man suffered in the Danielic “hour” of distress. Indeed, exalted in glory, the Son of Man is still being persecuted in union with his saints, such as Stephen and those harassed by Saul, those who are even now sharing in his vindication (Acts 7:56; 9:4–5). Finally, John’s Apocalypse interprets Daniel 7:13–14 (in Rev 4–5) as the enthronement of the slaughtered Lamb, whom the beast is still trying to war against at the second coming (17:14). Therefore, we have in Daniel 7 the fullness of the gospel and one of the clearest examples of how both antecedent and subsequent biblical theology can enrich our exegesis of a specific passage.