Abstract
The name Jesus Christ is at the heart of one of the prominent faiths in the world today. The faith started as a movement around the teaching and fate of a man called Jesus, who came from a village called Nazareth in Israel and lived approximately 2 000 years ago. From an insignificant group of followers the movement grew to become one of the greatest religions the world has ever known. The name Jesus was a well-known Jewish name, but where does the name Christ come from? Most people nowadays use the combined name Jesus Christ as a proper name. However, Christ was originally not a proper name, but an appellative, i.e. a qualifying term or title. Christ is the Latinised form of the Greek christós, which in turn is a translation of the Hebrew mashiach (Messiah). The fact that the word christ changed into a proper name over time conceals its cultural and religious origin. This led to the fading of the earlier identifying and confessional aspects of the term in its association with the person of Jesus of Nazareth.
The purpose of this article is to show that the grammaticalisation of christós, together with the harmonising of different Christological interpretations in accordance with the regula fidei, led to the transformation of a confession into a proper name, as employed in the so-called ecumenical creeds of the Christian church. The creeds, in turn, are at present instrumental in the continuation of the harmonising process. Thereby the original confessional aspect of the term begins to fade. By directing attention to this process it may be possible to reclaim the original powerful content of the term by identifying Jesus, through the appellative Christ, as the One through whom God’s saving of the world was decisively wrought.
The article consists of 6 main sections, comprising the following:
1. Introduction – The study proceeds from the assumption that the Bible contains the source text which forms the basis of all reflection about the relationship between God and man. Certain ground rules pertaining to this assumption are to be followed in any investigation trying to elucidate a meaningful interpretation of the text. Creeds and confessions are based on the Bible and need to be engaged in the same critical manner. However, they are not simply summaries of Biblical content. Rather, they articulate deep-seated spiritual convictions that evolve from an existential meeting with God, always embedded in circumstance, culture and symbolic frames of reference. In light of the preceding the term Christ is investigated here in terms of sociolinguistics, on the basis of which each text is a meaningful ordering of language with the intention to communicate. Language therefore has a social function with social outcomes. The research question is: What is communicated through the use of the term Christ? This article focuses on the functional and referential substance of the term over time, and its symbolic significance in the creeds today. The communicative intention is investigated by looking at the lexicographical or “marked” meaning, as well as its functional use in various contexts with reference to semantic domains. The Old Testament, rabbinical writings, the New Testament and the early church present the logical fields of investigation.
2. Old Testament – This is deemed to be the earliest stage at which the Hebrew term mashiach (Greek christós) is used. The word occurs only a few times in the Old Testament, never with reference to an eschatological figure but always denoting a contemporary historical person. An important question relating to the use of the term Messiah is whether it refers to the future. It is argued that messianic texts reflect a built-in duality in referring to a historical person, while at the same time overriding or transcending the present and reaching toward the future. In this way the Messiah can be both the reigning monarch and the eternal king promised by God; both political and spiritual; human and divine; king and priest; triumphant and suffering. The king and the high priest were anointed on acceptance of office, and are combined in the figure of the future Messiah. The messianic expectation stayed alive in Israel until about the Second Jewish Uprising in 135 CE.
3. Rabbinical writings – In the rabbinical writings there are various layers and trajectories associated with the messianic tradition. Some descriptions are so exaggerated that they amount to fantasy. In other cases it seems that the Messiah was not a prominent figure in the discussions of the rabbis. They were more interested in the Law. They differentiated between “this world” (Olam ha-zeh) and “the coming world” (Olam ha-ba). In this scheme the Messiah presented and effected the end of the “present age” and was not part of the “coming world”. According to the rabbinical scholars the future world would be inaugurated by the resurrection of the dead, not by the Messiah. There were views that gave the Messiah more prominence by separating the messianic time from the present as a provisional time of salvation, but even so it was not seen as the time of fulfilment of God’s promises. That would happen only in the coming age.
The Messiah would be announced by the prophet Elijah. He would be an exalted figure, but humble at the same time. He would restore the brightness (doxa) of the human countenance which Adam possessed; the original extended life span of people; the giant stature of man (tall as trees); the fertility of earth to produce a thousandfold harvest; the exponential growth of Israel; and the brightness of the moon and the stars. The description is reminiscent of paradise.
The coming world was understood by the rabbinical scholars to be a heavenly world where the souls of the righteous would abide. It is also referred to as the Garden of Eden. Following the messianic time, it would be the final chapter in human history, and it would last for ever.
4. New Testament – The New Testament provides no evidence that Jesus was literally anointed with anointing oil in accordance with the Old Testament ritual. This raises the question on what grounds the title Messiah was conferred upon Him.
Scholars differ on whether Jesus appropriated the role of the Messiah. In the gospels He never applied the term Messiah to himself, and when the disciples did so, He ordered them to keep silent about it.
Paul, however, uses the term χριστός (anointed) more than 200 times with reference to Jesus. His use of the term is considered to be in accordance with the general use of messianic language in ancient Judaism. This confirms that messianic expectations were alive at the time.
Luke (4:18–21) presents Jesus as applying Isaiah 61:1 to Himself, claiming to have been anointed by God and therefore possessing the Spirit of the Lord. Thereby Luke combines the (anointed) figures of priest, king and prophet in the person of Jesus.
The possibility that different interpretations of Jesus were current in various parts of the early church supports the view that harmonising tendencies had not yet had a major influence on the texts at that time. If the term christós was applied to Him it would indicate a deliberate and definite bestowal of honour, with at least some experiential confessional intent. In later times the harmonising tendencies are clear to see in various manuscripts.
5. The confession – Indications are that, since about the Babylonian captivity, there existed an expectation in Israel of the coming of a person called by God and sanctified by the ritual of anointing, to take the role of Messiah – that is, the signatory anointed of God. This expectation grew out of a long history of Israel being subject to other powers, and the longing to be a free people in their own land. It was a matter of heart and soul, and it found expression in the passionate confession of Peter in answer to Jesus’ question about who the disciples thought He was: You are the anointed of God! In this confession the original meaning of the word christós can be clearly discerned.
The harmonising of the different Christological interpretations and the development of the trinitarian creedal formulas served to detract from the marked meaning of the word. It came to be more and more closely associated with the name and person of Jesus. Over time the grammaticalisation process contributed to the term’s acquiring a new grammatical and syntactical function. Through the process of semantic bleaching and the redistribution of meaning the word became part of the name of Jesus, with only faint echoes of the original confessional content.
6. Conclusion – Peter’s confession of Jesus as the Christ indicates the original energy of the word christós in its application to the long-expected saviour of Israel who would bring honour back to the nation. This meaning has eroded over time and the term was reapplied through various processes as part of the name of Jesus. Although it has retained some faint memory of its original meaning, the highlighting of its erosion may lead to the recapturing of some of the existential energy of the experience of God’s love and compassion as expressed in the confession of Peter.
Keywords: anointing; Christology; confession; future era; grammaticalisation; Jesus Christ; Messiah; messianic era; present era; ritual; semantic bleaching; spirituality
Lees die volledige artikel in Afrikaans: Christus ongedaan – 'n evaluering van die betekenisverlies van die term gesalfde.
The post Christ undone – an evaluation of the loss of meaning of the term anointed appeared first on LitNet.