041. Chapter 20 - Messianic Titles
Chapter 20 - Messianic Titles The Name of Jesus The first chapter of John abounds in Messianic titles which are applied to Jesus by others or by Himself. The Hebrew word “Messiah” and its Greek equivalent “Christ” mean “Anointed One.” “Jesus” is the personal name of our Lord and “Christ” is the customary Messianic title. But the personal name and the official title soon lost their strict significance and were used separately or together in interchangeable order. Paul says either “Jesus Christ” or “Christ Jesus.” The “Messiah” meant to the Jews all that “Moses in the law and the prophets” wrote concerning the great Redeemer who was to come. Some of the most important passages in the Pentateuch are: “The seed of the woman shall bruise the serpent’s head” (Genesis 3:15); “All nations of the earth shall be blessed in him” (Genesis 18:18); “Until Shiloh come” (Genesis 49:10); “Scepter shall rise out of Israel” (Numbers 24:17); “God shall raise up unto thee a prophet” (Deuteronomy 18:15). The prophets with increasing clearness, in numerous passages, wrote of the Messiah. Isaiah 7:1-25; Isaiah 9:1-21; Isaiah 11:1-16, and Isaiah 53:1-12, and the Son of Man prophecies in Daniel are the most famous. Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Malachi and other prophets also wrote of His coming.
King of Israel The title “King of Israel” given by Nathanael expresses the popular idea of the Messiah. There are two evident lines of prophecy in the Old Testament. One line represents Jesus as the suffering Servant, humble, despised and dying for the sins of the people. The title “the Lamb of God,” which has already been discussed, expresses this view. The popular conception completely overlooked or set aside these predictions of humility and suffering and followed the line that represents the Christ as a King in all His magnificence coming on the clouds to judge the nations of the earth. These predictions evidently refer to the second coming of Christ. But, of course, the Jews did not understand this. “King of Israel” suggests the grandeur of David and Solomon, the overthrow of the Roman power and the increasing dominion of the Jews over all nations.
Son of David
“Son of David” is also a Messianic title hot it does not occur in this chapter. The genealogies have as their purpose to prove that Jesus is the Son of David. Blind Bartimaeus, the Syrophoenician woman, and the crowd at the triumphal entry use this title. It comes out in Jesus’ discussions with the Pharisees. When Jesus asks, “What think ye of the Christ, whose son is he?” they are able to answer immediately, “The Son of David.” Then Jesus silences them with the question as to why David called the Messiah “Lord” if He is his son. They either could not or would not answer His challenge. Either they did not understand or would not admit that Christ was also the Son of God.
Son of God The title “Son of God” occurs in this first chapter of John — at the very opening of Jesus’ ministry — and is repeated throughout the Gospels in this or other forms which carry the same general meaning. God called Jesus His Son at the baptism and on the Mount of Transfiguration. The devil used this title in the temptations: “If thou art the Son of God.” John the Baptist testified to the descent of the Spirit and called Him the “Son of God.” The early use of this among the disciples must have been produced by the testimony of John. The demoniacs applied this title to Jesus (Mark 3:11). The disciples called Jesus the “Son of God” (Matthew 14:33; Matthew 16:16). The Gospel writers use the title (Mark 1:1; John 3:18; John 20:31), while Thomas calls Him, “My Lord and my God” (John 20:28). The crowd rails at Jesus under this title: “If thou art the Son of God” (Matthew 27:40). The centurion, taking it from the mouth of the multitude, repeats the title. It is evident that Jesus Himself used it (Matthew 27:43; John 5:25; John 9:35). It also appears constantly in another form wherever the words “My Father” are used by Jesus (Matthew 7:21; Matthew 10:32; Matthew 11:27; Matthew 15:13; Matthew 16:17; Luke 10:22 etc. and throughout the Gospel of John). Sanday calls Matthew 11:27 “the classical passage in the Synoptics for the correlative use of ‘the Father’ and ‘the Son.”
Meaning of the Titles The “Son of God” has always been a favorite Messianic title in the mind of the church. The chief reason is that it expresses so clearly the divine nature of Jesus. The confession of Peter uses this title and the express approval of Jesus at that time is impressive. The repeated use of the title in the Epistles and the place of the “good confession” in the early church made this a favorite title when the word “Christ” lost its strict significance and became a part of the personal name of Jesus. The usual question of scholars is, “What did these terms signify to the people — the scholars and the unlearned?” This involves a painstaking study of the Old Testament and all the other Jewish writings of the period. But this question is of secondary importance. The chief question is, “In what sense did Jesus use or accept these titles?” This must be the true sense. This must be the sense which He tried to reveal to those who had only a partial understanding. The central passage of the Old Testament for this title is Psalms 2:7. A revolutionary change in the opinion of the radical critics, who have long denied the Messianic character of the passage, is shown by Wellhausen’s statement: “The Messiah is the speaker and the whole psalm is composed in his name.” He tends toward identifying the “Messiah” and “Israel” in the passage since the Messiah embodies so completely the hopes of the nation, but this does not destroy the startling character of his assertion of what the conservatives have always held: that the passage is Messianic. The Talmud gives but few examples of the use of the title “Son” for the Messiah. The Book of Enoch uses it once and IV Ezra uses it frequently. This shows that it was a Messianic title among the Jews. The readiness with which Nathanael uses it and the fact that the New Testament shows that the scribes and the common people alike understand it as Messianic prove that this title was current. Jesus, however, puts a new content into the term and it can only be understood, in the light of His pre-existence, virgin birth, sinlessness, resurrection, ascension, and His clear affirmations of Son-ship, as “attributing to the Son a coequal Godhead with the Father” (Sanday). The Son of Man The favorite title in the mouth of Jesus is “Son of Man.” How this suggests His humility and His kinship with the whole human race! His divine nature and claims shine out as the noonday sun in His teaching and miracles. And even in this title of humility it is plain He is not a son of man, but He is the Son of man. In His very kinship with us He is unique. He was not the Son of a man, but of all men — of the whole human race — in that He shared flesh and blood with us and came to redeem us. The title is used about eighty times in the Gospels. “Whereas the other titles are used by others of Him this is used only by Him and of Himself” (Sanday). The familiar Old Testament passage which furnishes the origin of this title is Daniel 7:13. The “Son of man,” a superhuman personality coming to judge the world, figures largely in the Similitudes of Enoch which is held by many to have been written in the early part of the first century b.c. but may be a post-Christian document. It may be that the “Son of man” in Daniel was being interpreted as a Messianic prophecy. Critics attempt to prove that the Aramaic original of this phrase means man” or “mankind” and thus destroy its personal and Messianic significance in the New Testament. But even Wellhausen admits that the “Son of man” is used by Jesus as a personal title to designate Himself. Sanday sees in this generic meaning of the Aramaic (“mankind”) not a denial of its personal use as a title for Christ, but an assertion that He is “the ideal of humanity” — “the representative of the human race.”
It is interesting to note that Jesus associates this title with the idea of His suffering and death (Mark 8:31, etc.). This harks back to Isaiah 53:1-12. Sanday holds that this ministry of suffering is “embodied in the character of the Son of Man as conceived by Jesus, but not exactly in the name.” Passages like Matthew 16:27 use the “Son of man” in connection with His glorious return on the clouds of heaven. Thus the two extremes of His ministry — His humiliation and glory — are associated with this title, the “Son of man.” Its use in this first chapter of John suggests the resplendent heavenly associations — “the angels ascending and descending on the Son of man.” “As Son of God, Jesus looked upward to the Father; as Son of man, He looked outwards upon His brethren, the sheep who had no shepherd.” (Cf. Sanday, Hastings Dictionary of the Bible, article, “Son of God” and Outlines on the Life of Christ, pp. 91-98.)