Christological Titles
Thesis
Boston had been under siege for nine months by the British and the commander of the colonial forces was journeying to Cambridge to break the impasse. Though three frontal assaults by the Red Coats had been repulsed at Breed’s Hill, mistakenly recorded as Bunker’s Hill, the coastal city still remained in possession of King George.
As the general journeyed north a lesser known yet more significant development occurred by legislative fiat, far surpassing the victory at the Battle of Bunker Hill. Both the New York and Massachusetts legislatures wrote congratulatory letters to General George Washington, addressing him as “His Excellency.” This became his official epithet throughout all the colonies for the remainder of the war. Less imposing than “His Majesty,” as one would approach a king, it still carried the hallmarks of European elitism. Semi-royal status was bestowed upon the designated sovereign of the American Revolutionary War.
The war was won, a constitution ratified, and it came the day before the inauguration and the issue arose: how was the new President of the United States to be addressed? Should the first president continue to be hailed as “His Excellency,” known for this throughout the war years? John Adams, the presiding officer over the senate and a man of great vanity, desired to keep with European formalities advocated the title of “His Highness.” Washington refused such high-mindedness as unfitting for a democratic state that purposely separated itself from royalty, settled for the more subdued “Mr. President.” It was a simple enough title, but he reasoned it would acquire dignity and respect.
“His Excellency.” “His Highness.” “Mr. President.” All three are titles with very distinct meanings and implications. Interchangeable they are not. If George Washington would have adhered to the advice of his vice-president John Adams, the occupant of the Oval Office would be viewed much differently today, not only by the citizens of our own country, but also by foreign dignitaries.
In our daily conversations, television news coverage, and reading of newspapers, we understand the designations ascribed to an individual. Through associations, resulting from acculturation, we assign certain unquestionable attributes to these office holders. President. Senator. Congressman. Governor. These titles, when encountered, imprint upon us a distinct political implication. A Colonel is not a General, and certainly neither is a Sergeant. These ascriptions are not subtle nuisances; rather, they are bold announcements to which we heed.
The same is true for Christological titles. Jesus. Jesus Christ. Jesus the Christ. Christ Jesus. Christ. These affirmations of who Jesus is are not transposable. Son of Man. Son of God. Son of David. These titles have distinct theological pronouncements that would make it abhorrible to substitute one for another. Suffering Servant. Lamb of God. Savior. Messiah. These confessions would perilously be used in the same connotation.
These titles for Jesus were cautiously employed by the gospel and epistle writers to make a very clear and definitive theological statement. Those who reviewed the treatises written by these men were cognitive of the differences conveyed, permitting them to readily understand in the message conveyed. Sadly, the reason why the New Testament has lost much of its thunder for readers today is because the terminology is now only a whisper. For the enrichment of our faith, and to enable us to read the Scriptures with renewed excitement, and to fully comprehend the Christ-event, we need to understand the numerous titles ascribed to Jesus.
Christology comes from two Greek words: Christos for “Christ” or “anointed” and Logos for “word.” Christological studies specifically relate to the theological interpretation of Jesus. Christological titles were employed by the first century authors to convey the message of who Jesus was and what he meant.
Scholars have recorded numerous lists regarding the titles imputed to Jesus. The lengths of which range from a few to several hundred. This obviously has nothing to do with Jesus and everything to do with the fluidness of theological research. Though, as a theologian, I would like to report that there are less than a score that require scrutinization.
There was a three-stage development in Christology which is reflected in the application of titles. The first stage distinguished the earthly from the risen Jesus. The earthly Jesus is described as: Servant, Shepherd, Rabbi, or the use of the proper name Jesus (though the name is not categorized as a title.) The second stage referenced the risen Jesus with the titles: Son of God, Lord and Jesus the Christ. (Note: The title is “Jesus the Christ,” though today we have wrongly made it into a proper name by saying “Jesus Christ.”) Exaltation is the third stage in which the resurrected Jesus is perceived as the Messiah who reigns over creation. With this confession we affirm that Jesus is Christ.
The transitional stages for this process are evident in the prologue to the Gospel of John (1:1-14) where Jesus is identified as: the pre-existent Word of God through whom all creation is brought into existence; the Word who became flesh in the human, historical Jesus through the miracle of the incarnation; and the reigning Lord of post-Resurrection glory. This three-stage Christology as set forth by John orders: pre-existence, incarnation, exaltation.
The use of the titles demonstrates an evolution of understanding of the mission of Jesus. In the gospels the name of Jesus is used 612 times, in the remaining books only 71 times, of which 38 are in the transitional book of Acts. In the four gospels Christ is spelled 56 times while the other books pen the word on 256 occasions. This brief word count of two titles ascribed to Jesus testifies to selective and purposeful usage of titles. The gospels recounting the life of Jesus; the epistles recalling Christ enthroned in heaven.
Feminist and author Virginia Woolf once wrote, “Each has his past shut in him like the leaves of a book known to him by heart and his friends can only read the title.” We have read the titles for Jesus, let us now open the book to discover the heart that lies within each.