Jesus and the Christ

Jesus and the Christ

Christ is God, and Jesus is the Christ’s historical manifestation in time. Richard Rohr [1]

A common misconception perpetuated by many, if not most, Christian churches is that Jesus and the Christ are the same, as if Christ were Jesus’ last name. It is an easy assumption to make because Jesus Christ, Christ Jesus, Christ, and Jesus are used interchangeably in many, if not most Christian discussions. And it is true that Jesus, in some biblical contexts, is referred to as Jesus Christ or Christ Jesus. On careful reading, however, one notices that references pairing the title of Christ with Jesus refer primarily to his resurrected being. Jesus Christ, or Jesus the Christ, is used only three times in the four Gospels telling the pre-crucifixion life and teachings of Jesus (Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John). In other words, when the title of Christ is included, it refers to something related to but different from the human being known as Jesus of Nazareth.

This may seem like unnecessary nit-picking, and for some it will be a distinction without a difference. But for those genuinely seeking to follow the life and teachings of Jesus, failing to distinguish between Jesus and the Christ becomes an obstacle to more deeply understanding who Jesus was and the nature of the journey he invites us to follow.

Another set of titles often used synonymously with Jesus include Son of God, Son of Man, God’s Son, and the Son (referring to the second person of the Trinity). In the gospel accounts, Jesus does not refer to himself as the Son of God, as some others do. Jesus presumably (although not directly) refers to himself as the Son of Man, which means “the human one.” Yet, even when speaking of the Son of Man, Jesus speaks in the non-personal third person, as if speaking of someone else or, more plausibly, speaking of a level of conscious awareness he has accessed that has not yet been accessed by others. For example, in Matthew 8:20, Jesus says, “The Son of Man has no place to lay his head,” instead of saying, “I have no place to lay my head,” which would be a first-person account.

In Jesus’ day, the title Son of God was often given to kings and emperors to suggest they were divinely chosen, or anointed Messiahs over their earthly domains. It implied that their actions were super-human because of their direct connection to God. Some histories of emperors even include a virgin birth narrative, further differentiating the leader from the subjects. Tales of unique and unnatural events were told and titles bestowed in order to link a human leader with a divine source. Leaders with no such divine heritage would have been considered less than or inferior. Jesus, however, did not seek an earthly title nor did he attempt to amass earthly power, although many, then and now, mistakenly thought he was or should. Thus, he received titles reserved for emperors. Indeed, a significant portion of his followers were expecting a warrior king to lead a rebellion to overthrow their Roman oppressors. That was what came to mind when Jesus was called Messiah or Son of God because that was the implication of the titles at the time. It is fascinating that many of the stories handed down about Jesus’ birth and his titles are so similar to those of leaders of the earthly empires of his time. Few would have believed Jesus had divine status without them. Regardless, most missed the true nature of his kingship.

The word Christ is the English translation of Christos, which is the Greek translation of Messiah, a Hebrew word meaning anointed or chosen. The title of Messiah referred to a Savior, meaning one who was anointed by a supreme being and given divine authority and power to save the people from some unpleasantness. It was not the strictly religious title it is today, so a reasonable image of a Messiah would be a king who rallied his armies to defeat an occupying force, thus saving the people from enslavement. In today’s religious context, the unpleasantness most people seek salvation from sin. My point is that the language used by many New Testament authors and Christian leaders today in describing and referring to Jesus as a spiritual Messiah is the same language used by people in biblical times to describe their leaders who held earthly power by force and oppression. That language differs significantly from the way Jesus spoke of himself.

While I believe the title of Christ is appropriately applied to Jesus, I do not believe he was the only Christ of God, nor does it seem he believed that either. Distinguishing between Jesus and the Christ can be enlightening.

This is the 3^rd in a series titled Crucifying Christianity, Resurrecting the Way. The opinions expressed here are mine. To engage with me or to explore contemplative spiritual direction, my email is ghildenbrand@outlook.com.

Pierre Teilhard de Chardin’s

Mass on the World

In Celebration of the Vernal Equinox

Saturday, September 21, 2024

7:00 am, Baker Wetlands Discovery Center Overlook

1365 N 1250 Rd, Lawrence, Kansas

---

[1] Richard Rohr, The Universal Christ, Convergent Books, 2019, p. 19.