A rose by any other name is still a rose. (What’s in a name?)
The following verses appear in rapid succession in the gospel of Matthew.
The events are just moments apart. The scene is a familiar one. Notice
carefully how the two groups (Roman soldiers and religious Jewish leaders)
refer to Christ.
First, let’s observe how these soldiers address Jesus the Messiah:
They stripped him and put a scarlet robe around him, and after plaiting some
thorns into a crown, they put it on his head. They put a staff in his right
hand, and kneeling down before him, they mocked him, saying, “Hail, King of
the Jews!”
Acting under the authority of the Roman government, these same soldiers
scribbled this charge:
Above his head they put the charge against him, that read as follows:
“This is Jesus, the King of the Jews.”
Now Matthew redirects the camera toward the religious Jews. Blinded by their
unbelief and ritualistic religion, they address the Lord, but not as the
Romans did:
In the same way the chief priests along with the experts in the law and
elders were mocking him, saying, “He saved others, but he cannot save
himself! He is the King of Israel!
If he comes down now from the cross, we will believe in him!
This subtle change of designations, from King of the “Jews” to that of
“Israel,” represents more than stylistic variation by Matthew. By taking a
look at the historical development of these terms, we can gain an
appreciation for the subtleties of the language and culture demonstrated by
Matthew.
To some extent, these two titles (Jew and Israel) refer, in a general sense,
to the chosen people of God of the Old Testament. And, if we are looking at
the history of the names of God’s chosen people, we would be remiss to not
start at the beginning. To do that, we should first (at least,
chronologically) look at the word Hebrew.
Without getting into the petty arguments behind the scenes, we are on fairly
neutral and safe grounds when we say that the word ‘Hebrew’ means ‘to cross
over.’ It was first applied to Abram in Genesis 14:
“The conquerors took all the possessions of Sodom and Gomorrah and all their
food and went off. And they took Lot, Abram’s nephew and his possessions and
they went off— because he had been living in Sodom. A fugitive came and told
Abram, the Hebrew.”
Abram (later renamed Abraham), after a temporary stay in Haran, had to
‘cross over’ the Euphrates river in route to Canaan, the Promised Land. Many
believe this ‘crossing over’ reflects the intent of the word Hebrew. In
fact, the Greek translators of the Old Testament, when they came across the
word “Hebrew” in this Genesis passage, used a form of the word ‘beyond’ to
describe Abram, which further adds support to this view. Abram had crossed
over or came from beyond the river.
Some feel that Hebrew is a reference to one of Abram’s forefathers, Eber,
mentioned in Genesis 11:16. If this were the case, you would have to make a
few awkward adjustments to arrive at Hebrew. Hebrew would be some kind of
Gentile form of Eber. But even if this is partially true, the root word for
Eber is the same as Hebrew, so you are right back to ‘crossing over’
something.
At any rate, Abram arrived in Canaan. For those in Canaan, Abram was an
immigrant (from beyond). (Even in today’s vocabulary in our country, we might think of a Hebrew as an immigrant.) The title Hebrew, however, was not so much how Abram identified himself to his own people, but how foreigners referred to him. Or, how he would refer to himself or his people in a conversation with an outsider (foreigner). So, beginning with Abraham, Hebrew soon became a way of labeling any member of the chosen people of God (in contrast to other nations or people). This group of people originated from somewhere ‘beyond’ the river and crossed over.
Though not chronologically next, soon another word arrived on the scene, a
word that would also identify the chosen people of God. That word was Jew.
With the arrival of this word, Hebrew received a gradual shift in meaning.
To make a long story short, many years later the word Jew focused on the
“people,” while Hebrew tended to refer to their “language.” In other words,
a Hebrew soon was used to refer to one who spoke the Hebrew language; a Jew
was a national designation.
By the way, the name Jew is short for Judah. If we trace the unbroken line
of succession from Abraham, we go next to Isaac, then Jacob, and then Judah,
from which we get Jew.
How did the word Jew change things?
After the death of Solomon, you may recall, the united Kingdom was divided.
This event would add a new twist to things. Immediately, the northern
Kingdom assumed the more noble name, Israel, while the southern Kingdom, who must have picked second, took the next best name, Judah.
Why was Israel the nobler name?
To Jacob’s astonishment one night, the Lord Himself appeared to him. True to
Jacob’s heart, he asked, no, he insisted that the Lord bless him before He
left. Apparently, Christ gave no indication that He would indeed bless Jacob.
So, of all things, Jacob literally grabs the Lord. Don’t ask me why, but the
Lord was “unable” to free Himself from Jacob’s grip. The Lord, unable to
convince Jacob to let go, finally agreed to bless him. He not only received
a blessing, Jacob also received a new name, Israel. This name Israel would
soon occupy the noblest designation of the chosen people.
Now back to the northern Kingdom. Somewhere around 722 BC, the Assyrian
empire conquered the northern Kingdom and whisked them away. Those Israelis
were soon absorbed and lost into the other nations. Meanwhile, back in the
Promised Land, the southern Kingdom, Judah, alone remained as the
representatives of God’s chosen people. With the northern tribes now “lost,”
the southern Kingdom, originally only part of the whole, now became the
whole. Hence, Jew became the title of the chosen people. By the time of
Christ, you had Jews and Gentiles, not Israelis and Gentiles.
As you can see, the word Jew almost evolved in the exact opposite direction
as did the word Hebrew. Originally, Hebrew referred to the entire people and
their language. But it subsequently reduced in meaning to refer primarily to
their language. A Jew was originally a reference to the southern Kingdom
people only, then expanded to mean the chosen people in general.
But the title Israel was not forgotten. Israel, the name itself, carried
with it the idea of the chosen people of God and their glorious heritage.
Though others soon called all members of the nation Jews, the learned and
proud leaders of this nation were well aware of the significance of Israel,
their self-designated title of honor.
Think of the title Israel as the nation who is the beneficiaries of the
covenant blessings. When you think of Christ reigning in the Millennial
Kingdom, wherein the various covenants to the chosen nation begin their
fulfillment, think of the name Israel.
These distinctions could be summarized as follows: Hebrew, the oldest of the
titles, eventually referred to the spoken language of the nation; Jew
referred to them as a people or nation distinct from the Gentile world.
Israel is their most glamorous title as God’s privileged and chosen people,
the future recipients of the promised covenant blessings.
Now, having laid this extremely brief background, we can return to the
Matthean passages mentioned at the opening of this letter. Why did the
Roman’s call Christ by the title, King of the Jews? They were mere products
of their culture and time. As Gentiles, as well as unbelievers, they
betrayed their ignorance, and Matthew masterfully exposed it. Now when the
Jewish leaders, members of the chosen nation, were mocking the Lord, they at
least knew the proper, most glorious title (King of Israel) to bestow upon
One claiming to be the Messiah.
We may also note in passing, that when the Magi came looking for the one
born King of the Jews, by using this title, again noted by Matthew, they
unknowingly revealed their distant Gentile culture and background.
Or as Trench observed:
“for they would certainly have asked for the King of Israel, had they meant
to claim any nearer share in Him.”
Or, when Christ labeled Nathaniel, “an Israelite indeed,” He bestowed on him
quite an honor. Or, Nathaniel’s reply to Christ was indeed calculated, “You
are the Son of God; You are the King of Israel.” When Peter, on the day of
Pentecost, addressed the Jewish masses, in order to gain a favorable
hearing, addressed them most honorably as “Men of Israel.” This title was
sure to invoke a sense of pride.
Paul called himself, a “Hebrew of Hebrews.” Perhaps implying more than just
his parents were Hebrews, i. e., his lineage could be traced to the very
beginnings of God’s chosen people (Hebrew being the earliest of these
words).
What’s in a name? Sometimes more than meets the eye.
The following verses appear in rapid succession in the gospel of Matthew.
The events are just moments apart. The scene is a familiar one. Notice
carefully how the two groups (Roman soldiers and religious Jewish leaders)
refer to Christ.
First, let’s observe how these soldiers address Jesus the Messiah:
They stripped him and put a scarlet robe around him, and after plaiting some
thorns into a crown, they put it on his head. They put a staff in his right
hand, and kneeling down before him, they mocked him, saying, “Hail, King of
the Jews!”
Acting under the authority of the Roman government, these same soldiers
scribbled this charge:
Above his head they put the charge against him, that read as follows:
“This is Jesus, the King of the Jews.”
Now Matthew redirects the camera toward the religious Jews. Blinded by their
unbelief and ritualistic religion, they address the Lord, but not as the
Romans did:
In the same way the chief priests along with the experts in the law and
elders were mocking him, saying, “He saved others, but he cannot save
himself! He is the King of Israel!
If he comes down now from the cross, we will believe in him!
This subtle change of designations, from King of the “Jews” to that of
“Israel,” represents more than stylistic variation by Matthew. By taking a
look at the historical development of these terms, we can gain an
appreciation for the subtleties of the language and culture demonstrated by
Matthew.
To some extent, these two titles (Jew and Israel) refer, in a general sense,
to the chosen people of God of the Old Testament. And, if we are looking at
the history of the names of God’s chosen people, we would be remiss to not
start at the beginning. To do that, we should first (at least,
chronologically) look at the word Hebrew.
Without getting into the petty arguments behind the scenes, we are on fairly
neutral and safe grounds when we say that the word ‘Hebrew’ means ‘to cross
over.’ It was first applied to Abram in Genesis 14:
“The conquerors took all the possessions of Sodom and Gomorrah and all their
food and went off. And they took Lot, Abram’s nephew and his possessions and
they went off— because he had been living in Sodom. A fugitive came and told
Abram, the Hebrew.”
Abram (later renamed Abraham), after a temporary stay in Haran, had to
‘cross over’ the Euphrates river in route to Canaan, the Promised Land. Many
believe this ‘crossing over’ reflects the intent of the word Hebrew. In
fact, the Greek translators of the Old Testament, when they came across the
word “Hebrew” in this Genesis passage, used a form of the word ‘beyond’ to
describe Abram, which further adds support to this view. Abram had crossed
over or came from beyond the river.
Some feel that Hebrew is a reference to one of Abram’s forefathers, Eber,
mentioned in Genesis 11:16. If this were the case, you would have to make a
few awkward adjustments to arrive at Hebrew. Hebrew would be some kind of
Gentile form of Eber. But even if this is partially true, the root word for
Eber is the same as Hebrew, so you are right back to ‘crossing over’
something.
At any rate, Abram arrived in Canaan. For those in Canaan, Abram was an
immigrant (from beyond). (Even in today’s vocabulary in our country, we might think of a Hebrew as an immigrant.) The title Hebrew, however, was not so much how Abram identified himself to his own people, but how foreigners referred to him. Or, how he would refer to himself or his people in a conversation with an outsider (foreigner). So, beginning with Abraham, Hebrew soon became a way of labeling any member of the chosen people of God (in contrast to other nations or people). This group of people originated from somewhere ‘beyond’ the river and crossed over.
Though not chronologically next, soon another word arrived on the scene, a
word that would also identify the chosen people of God. That word was Jew.
With the arrival of this word, Hebrew received a gradual shift in meaning.
To make a long story short, many years later the word Jew focused on the
“people,” while Hebrew tended to refer to their “language.” In other words,
a Hebrew soon was used to refer to one who spoke the Hebrew language; a Jew
was a national designation.
By the way, the name Jew is short for Judah. If we trace the unbroken line
of succession from Abraham, we go next to Isaac, then Jacob, and then Judah,
from which we get Jew.
How did the word Jew change things?
After the death of Solomon, you may recall, the united Kingdom was divided.
This event would add a new twist to things. Immediately, the northern
Kingdom assumed the more noble name, Israel, while the southern Kingdom, who must have picked second, took the next best name, Judah.
Why was Israel the nobler name?
To Jacob’s astonishment one night, the Lord Himself appeared to him. True to
Jacob’s heart, he asked, no, he insisted that the Lord bless him before He
left. Apparently, Christ gave no indication that He would indeed bless Jacob.
So, of all things, Jacob literally grabs the Lord. Don’t ask me why, but the
Lord was “unable” to free Himself from Jacob’s grip. The Lord, unable to
convince Jacob to let go, finally agreed to bless him. He not only received
a blessing, Jacob also received a new name, Israel. This name Israel would
soon occupy the noblest designation of the chosen people.
Now back to the northern Kingdom. Somewhere around 722 BC, the Assyrian
empire conquered the northern Kingdom and whisked them away. Those Israelis
were soon absorbed and lost into the other nations. Meanwhile, back in the
Promised Land, the southern Kingdom, Judah, alone remained as the
representatives of God’s chosen people. With the northern tribes now “lost,”
the southern Kingdom, originally only part of the whole, now became the
whole. Hence, Jew became the title of the chosen people. By the time of
Christ, you had Jews and Gentiles, not Israelis and Gentiles.
As you can see, the word Jew almost evolved in the exact opposite direction
as did the word Hebrew. Originally, Hebrew referred to the entire people and
their language. But it subsequently reduced in meaning to refer primarily to
their language. A Jew was originally a reference to the southern Kingdom
people only, then expanded to mean the chosen people in general.
But the title Israel was not forgotten. Israel, the name itself, carried
with it the idea of the chosen people of God and their glorious heritage.
Though others soon called all members of the nation Jews, the learned and
proud leaders of this nation were well aware of the significance of Israel,
their self-designated title of honor.
Think of the title Israel as the nation who is the beneficiaries of the
covenant blessings. When you think of Christ reigning in the Millennial
Kingdom, wherein the various covenants to the chosen nation begin their
fulfillment, think of the name Israel.
These distinctions could be summarized as follows: Hebrew, the oldest of the
titles, eventually referred to the spoken language of the nation; Jew
referred to them as a people or nation distinct from the Gentile world.
Israel is their most glamorous title as God’s privileged and chosen people,
the future recipients of the promised covenant blessings.
Now, having laid this extremely brief background, we can return to the
Matthean passages mentioned at the opening of this letter. Why did the
Roman’s call Christ by the title, King of the Jews? They were mere products
of their culture and time. As Gentiles, as well as unbelievers, they
betrayed their ignorance, and Matthew masterfully exposed it. Now when the
Jewish leaders, members of the chosen nation, were mocking the Lord, they at
least knew the proper, most glorious title (King of Israel) to bestow upon
One claiming to be the Messiah.
We may also note in passing, that when the Magi came looking for the one
born King of the Jews, by using this title, again noted by Matthew, they
unknowingly revealed their distant Gentile culture and background.
Or as Trench observed:
“for they would certainly have asked for the King of Israel, had they meant
to claim any nearer share in Him.”
Or, when Christ labeled Nathaniel, “an Israelite indeed,” He bestowed on him
quite an honor. Or, Nathaniel’s reply to Christ was indeed calculated, “You
are the Son of God; You are the King of Israel.” When Peter, on the day of
Pentecost, addressed the Jewish masses, in order to gain a favorable
hearing, addressed them most honorably as “Men of Israel.” This title was
sure to invoke a sense of pride.
Paul called himself, a “Hebrew of Hebrews.” Perhaps implying more than just
his parents were Hebrews, i. e., his lineage could be traced to the very
beginnings of God’s chosen people (Hebrew being the earliest of these
words).
What’s in a name? Sometimes more than meets the eye.
