Son of Man is a title?
A large part of apocalyptic interpretations of the gospels center on Jesus’ supposed self-identification as the “Son of Man”, theoretically referring to the “Son of Man” in Daniel. However, Jesus spoke Aramaic, and from what I have read, “Son of Man” is “bar nasha”, which could refer to humankind, “someone”, or “I”.
Basically, using the language of the day, Jesus would have had to use some other apocalyptic title than “someone” if he were trying to build an understanding of the end times centered around himself. Although “Son of Man” appears to be used as a title in the Greek gospels, it seems to me that it would have been impossible for Jesus to have said these things in this way in Aramaic. So is this an innocent mistranslation of an Aramaic oral tradition into Greek, or a conscious apocalyptic projection by the author onto Jesus? Or do our English translations give a misleading emphasis?