Introduction: A title is a
designation which describes or refers to some particular function or status of
a person and hence may indicate the honor which is to be ascribed to him. Names and titles are closely related. Sometimes what began as a name would become a
title, and vice versa. These rather
general considerations are relevant to a consideration of the titles given to
Jesus in the Bible.
1 Titles commonly used: Here
we will study the following titles which are commonly applied to Jesus:
(a) Messiah: Jewish hopes were centered on the
establishment of God’s rule or kingdom, and this hope was often associated with
the coming of an agent of God to exercise his rule. Such a person would be a king, anointed by
God and belonging to the line of David.
The term Anointed One, which would be used to describe a king, priest or
prophet, came to be used as a technical term in the inter-testamental period
for this expected agent of God. The
Hebrew word was “masiah,” from which was derived the transliterated Greek form
“Messias”, anglicized as Messiah; the corresponding Greek word meaning
“anointed” was “Christos,” from which comes the alternative English form
Christ. Since the expected ruler was
expected to be a King and a Son (that is, descendant) of David, these two terms
were also used as titles or designations for him.
The term “Messiah” is rarely found on the lips of
Jesus. In Mk.12:35 and 13:21 he speaks
about the Messiah and claimants to Messiahship without directly identifying
himself as Messiah. In Mt.23:10 and
Mk.9:41 he is represented as teaching his disciples, apparently with reference
primarily to the situation in the early church.
It follows that Jesus did not refer to himself as Messiah in his public
teaching to the crowds and that at best he used the title rarely in speaking to
his disciples (Jn.4:25f.). On the other
hand, many of Jesus’ activities could be regarded as those of the Messiah. His baptism with the Spirit was regarded by
both himself and the early church as an anointing (Lk.4:18; Acts 4:27;
10:38). He proclaimed the coming rule of
God, associated its coming with his own activity, and acted with an authority
that suggested that he stood in the place of God (Mt.12:28; Mk.2:7). At his trial he was asked whether he was the
Messiah, and on this occasion he did publicly admit the fact (Mk.14:61f.). At an early point Peter named him as the
Messiah, and Jesus did not reject the identification (Mk.8:29f.).
The evidence shows that while Jesus implicitly acted as
Messiah he was reticent on the matter and indeed tried to harsh down
suggestions that he was the Messiah (Mk.8:30).
Various explanations have been offered for his attitude. We can dismiss the view that the Gospels have
misrepresented the situation, and that Jesus was not recognized by himself or
anybody else to be the Messiah; only after the resurrection did the church give
the title to him. One important element
may be that Jesus’ concept of Messiahship was markedly different from that of
many Jews who expected the Messiah to inaugurate a political upheaval and
liberate the country from the Romans.
Maybe that Jesus did not wish to claim Messiahship until he had shown
himself to be Messiah by what he did, or until people recognized the real
significance of his ministry.
(b) Son of God: This title was used in the OT to refer to
the people of Israel as a whole and to their king in particular and to express
the relationship which they had to God in terms of divine care and protection
on the one hand and human service and obedience on the other. It is possible that by NT times the Messiah
was beginning to be regarded as in some special sense the Son of God, and the
thought that godly individuals were the special objects of God’s fatherly care
and concern had also developed.
Jesus himself was
undoubtedly conscious of a particular relationship to God whom he addressed in
prayer by the intimate name of Abba (Mk.14:36).
It is against this background that we should understand his use of the
term ‘Son’ to express his relationship to God as his father (Mt.11:27;
Lk.10:22). Here he claims that the same
intimacy exists between himself and God as between a son and his father, so
that he alone is qualified to reveal God to men. This sense of auniqueSonship goes beyond
the general sense of a filial relationship to God which might have been held by
a pious Jew. It is further to be seen in
the way in which God himself addresses Jesus as his Son in the stories of
baptism and the transfiguration (Mk.1:11; 9:7), and also in the manner of
address used by Satan and the demon (Mt.4:3; Mk.3:11; 5:7). The evidence shows that Jesus himself was
reticent to express his sense of unique personal relationship to God.
(c) Son of Man: The Gospels give the impression that
Jesus preferred to use the title “Son of Man” to refer to himself. Apart from the Gospels this phrase appears
elsewhere in the NT only in Acts 7:56.
The Greek form of the expression represents an earlier Aramaic
expression “bar enash” or its Hebrew equivalent “ben Adam’, an idiom meaning
either a particular member of the species ‘man’ (e.g. Ezek,2:1), or ‘mankind’
in general (e.g. Ps.8:4). However, in
the Gospels, this phrase has become a title for Jesus. The title apparently identifies Jesus as the
“one like a son of man” in Dan.7:13.
Like earlier Jewish interpreters, such as the authors of Similitudes of
Enoch and 4 Ezra 13, Jewish Christians interpreted the “one like a son of man”
in Dan.7:13 as the Messiah. From that
passage they developed the expression “the Son of Man” as a messianic title
referring to Jesus.
The NT usage of
the term “Son of Man” at the first sight is very simple. Apart from the citation of Ps.8:4 in Heb.2:6
and an allusion to dan.7:13 in Rev.2:13, and with one exception (Acts 7:56),
the expression “Son of Man” is used by Jesus in reference to himself. In the Synoptic Gospels “Son of Man” is used
by Jesus for himself. Among the
Synoptic, Mark presents a more theological significant usage of the term “Son
of Man” as applied to Jesus. Jesus as
the “Son of Man” in Mark has three stages:
(a) exalted “Son of Man”; (b) the suffering Son of Man; and (c) the
coming Son of Man. But in John “Son of
Man” as a self-referent of Jesus has a more varied usage, the most
characteristic being those sayings that speak about the exaltation of the Son
of Man, an expression that makes an allusion to the ‘cross’ and ‘exaltation’
(Jn.3:14; 8:28; 12:34).
(d) Lord: The NT refers to Jesus as “Lord “ (Kyrios) in
two primary senses: (a) often the term is simply a title of respect, used in
the same way that English idiom uses “sir;”
(b) at other times it has a mare exalted sense, used of someone who has
lordship or dominion. In the latter
sense, gods, emperors, and kings were called “lord.” The Jews used the term “Lord” to refer to
their God, Yahweh.
In Greek there
are two words for “lord” and “master”:
(a) Despotes, and (b) Kyrios.
(i) Despotes (δεσπότης) denotes
the lord as owner and master in the sphere of family and public life, where
lordship sometimes entails harshness and caprice. Despotes is twice used with reference to
Jesus in 2 Pet.2:1 and Jude 4 which uses the same underlying idea. In both passages the term is used in
opposition to heretical statements.
(ii) Kyrios(κύριος): Kyrios which occurs more often means lord,
and carries with it overtones of the legality and acknowledged authority of
lordship. Kyriosas applied to Jesus is in
the first instance a polite form of address, as it is with other people. This form of address also implies recognition
of Jesus as a leader, and willingness to obey him (Mt.7:21; 21:29ff.; Lk.6:46). As “Son of Man”, Jesus is also “Kyrios” of
the Sabbath. He has control over the
holy day of God’s people (Mk.2:28f).
Even after his death and resurrection the words of Jesus have
unrestricted authority for the Christian community. By the resurrection God had demonstrated that
Jesus was indeed the Lord, and the early church applied the words Ps.110:1 to
Jesus in virtue of the resurrection event (Acts 2:34-36). This text had already been used by Jesus when
he taught that the Messiah was David’s Lord (Mk.12:36) and in reply to the high
priest at his trial (Mk.14:62). The
Lordship of the Messiah, Jesus, is a present reality. He is exercising in a hidden way God’s
authority and Lordship over the world and will bring it to completion in the
eschatological future.
In the biblical tradition, ‘God’ and ‘Lord’ are
understood and used as interchangeable titles.
Therefore, it is significant to note that though many people rejected
Jesus’ divinity, that is, Jesus as God, the immediate Easter community’s
confession was “Jesus is Lord” (Acts 2:36; 1 Cor.12:3;Phil.2:11) and the Jewish
opponents of Jesus and his movement seem to find nothing objectionable in that
confession.
If Jesus was now Lord, it followed that the task of the
early church was to lead people to recognize the status of Jesus. New converts became members of the church by
acknowledging Jesus as Lord (Rom.10:9 cf. 1 Cor.12:3). The great significance of this confession is
seen in Phil.2:11 where the climax of God’s purpose is that all creation will
acknowledge Jesus Christ as Lord.
(e) Rabbi:
Jesus was regarded as “Rabbi” by his disciples as well as by his
opponents (Mk.12:14; Jn.3:2) and the people generally. All the evangelists, except Luke, preserve
the Aramaic word “Rabbi” or its variant “Rabboni.” He taught publicly in the open air, in Synagogues
and in the temple. Privately he taught
his disciples. Like contemporary Jewish
teachers he gathered disciples though, unlike them, he did not create a school
of scriptural interpretation but sent his disciples to share his own
proclamation (Mk.6:7-13). As a
recognized rabbi he was consulted on questions of conduct and doctrine. For instance, Jesus was asked about the
legality of divorce and gave distinctive teaching in reply (Mk.10:1-12), about
a particular accusation of adultery (Lk.12:13-15), and about the legality of
Jewish tribute to Caesar (Mk.13:13-17).
In all these matters Jesus was moving entirely within the interests of
contemporary teachers and on some points, his teaching was closely similar to theirs.
In the Synoptic
Gospels, Jesus’ teaching is dominated by the Kingdom of God whose content is
derived from the OT where the dual conviction is maintained that God is already
King and will finally reign in open triumph.
This duality is present in those parables of Jesus. In all his teaching, Jesus closely associated
a body of disciples with himself. They
were to learn his teaching and pass it on; they shared his work of
proclamation, healing and feeding, to receive or reject the disciples was to receive
or reject Jesus himself (Mt.10:40).
2 Less frequently used titles: Wehave seen titles commonly used in
reference to Jesus in the first section.
Now we turn to some titles less frequently applied to Jesus as follows:
(a) Logos:
Logos (λόγος) is the transliteration of a common Greek word that
generally means ‘word,’ ‘speech,’ ‘account,’ ‘strong,’ or ‘message.’ Logos is used 128 times in the Gospels. Of its occurrences we would like to mention
Johannine usage of Logos. In his prologue
John uses ‘logos’ in a particular way to refer to Jesus. The most distinctive sense in which John uses
‘logos’ is his personification of ‘logos’ and its identification with Jesus
(cf. 1:1-3, 14). The Word is the person
of the Godhead through whom the world was created, who took on human nature in
history and who is the source of life and light of humanity.
(b) Last Adam:According to the old
story in Gen.3:1-9 it was through Adam’s sin that death came into the world as
its direct consequence and penalty. It
was the belief that all had sinned in Adam; therefore all were under the
penalty of death. But with the coming of Christ that chain was broken. Christ was sinless and conquered death. Just as all men sinned in Adam, so all men
escaped from sin in Christ; just as all men died in Adam, so all men conquered
death in Christ.
Paul saw in Adam
a type of Jesus Christ by the way of contrast (Rom.5:12-21; 1
Cor.15:21-23). The first Adam was made
from the earth, but the Last Adam (Christ) came from heaven. The first Adam disobeyed God and brought sin
and death into the world, but the Last Adam (Christ Jesus) obeyed the Father
and brought righteousness and life.
(c) Son of David: The OT looked forward to a king who would be
from the line of David (Jer.23:5; 33:15).
In post-Christian Judaism, ‘Son of David’ occurs frequently as a title
of the Messiah. Matthew recognizes Jesus
on several occasions as the ‘Son of David’ (Mt.9:27; 12:23; 15:22; 20:30). Since his first readers were the Jews, the
title ‘Son of David’ was relevant. Mark
uses only once (Mk.10:47). Paul in
Rom.1:3 states that Jesus was “descended from David according to the
flesh.” In the controversy, Jesus is
accusing the scribal experts of an inadequateunderstanding of the
Messiah. He is indeed ‘David’s
Son’: but this is not enough. David wrote, “The Lord said to my lord, sit
at my right hand.” How can the Messiah
be David’s Son if he also David’s Lord?
It is here we can see his position on messianic secret. His supernatural origin is made visible here.
As a Christological title, Son of David points to Jesus
as the royal Messiah in the line of David.
In his person and ministry, Jesus fulfills the promises of God given to
Davidic dynasty. However, Jesus refused
to be a political king. He was the
Suffering Servant. Son of David as a
title for Jesus is, however, used only 11 times in the NT.
Conclusion: Study of the
names and titles of Jesus Christ as found in the Bible enables us to see how
the thinking of the disciples was moulded by their first contact with Jesus
during his lifetime, and then decisively fixed by their experience of him as
the risen Lord, and finally elaborated in the course of their evangelism and
teaching in the Jewish and Hellestic world.
In differing ways the titles express the supreme worth of Jesus as Son
of God, his saving function as Messiah, and his honorable position as the
Lord. Some titles proved less adequate
than others, but collectively they all bear testimony to the fact that in Jesus
God has acted decisively to judge and save the world, and they summon all to
acknowledge that this Jesus is indeed one with God and worthy of the worship
that is fitting for God himself.
No comments:
Post a Comment