(synchrony).20 I believe that the origin of the expression can shed a beneficial light on the questions of meaning, and I have sought to show this elsewhere.21 However, explorations of the origin of ‘the Son of Man’ do not automatically solve the problems, since disagreements over the meaning of possible background material (e.g. Daniel 7: a collective or heavenly messianic figure?) can and do affect scholarly understandings of ‘the Son of Man’ in John.22 Because the topic of this paper is on the