Patchwork strangeness

In studying the ideas about the Son of Man, I have run across some very interesting material. It's found in the pseudipigraphical books of the Old Testament. Some call this period of time the intertestamental period. There seems to have been an evolution for the Son of Man.

In Ezekiel, for example, the son of man refers to humans. In Daniel, the son of man seems to be a heavenly creature. That image appears to be the same in 1 Enoch as well a 2 Esdras. When Jesus uses the term, he uses it to refer to himself. If not, then he is referring to some other being to follow him, even another messiah. Most people interpret Jesus' words to mean that he is referring to himself.

Then, there is the use in Revelation. One would think that John, who is a believer and follower of Jesus, would take the term to mean Jesus. Instead, it seems to follow the Daniel, 1 Enoch, 2 Esdras usage. Now that's passing strange. Unless, of course, the apostle John did not write the Revelation, which I tend to be leaning toward the more I read the book.