Three Times Only

And Agrippa replied to Paul, “In a short time you will persuade me to become a Christian.” Acts 26:28

Christian – The disciples of our Lord never refer to themselves as Christians.  In fact, the Greek term christianos and its derivatives are only used three times in the New Testament (Acts 11:26, Acts 26:28 and 1 Peter 4:16).  Only the passage in 1 Peter suggests that the term might be applied to followers of Yeshua by those within the community.  The first occurrence in Acts is an historical remark that followers of the Way were first called “Christians” in Antioch.  The second occurrence is here, in Acts 26:28, in the mouth of Festus.  Even here it is not an appellation Paul would have used.  Festus uses the term derogatively.  “Paul, if I let you continue with this persuasive argument, you might even convince me to become mad,” is the gist of it.  Festus has just commented that Paul must be “out of his mind” to speak such nonsense.  But Festus is impressed with Paul’s rhetorical fervor.  His comment is about Paul’s persuasion, not about Paul’s message.  The point of this short investigation is this:  “Christian” was applied to these Jewish Messianic believers by those outside the community of faith.  It stuck, but it wasn’t what they thought of themselves.  Ignatius may have been the first to use the term as a description of believers and Justin Martyr was the one who adopted the word as a title.

Of course, we could examine the Greek word itself (christianos), noticing that it is derived from the christos, the Greek equivalent of the Hebrew Mashiach.  It means “anointed.”  A “Christian” is one connected to the “anointed.”  If Greek were the lingua franca of the 10th Century BC, we would have found the same term used for David’s mighty men.  They were followers of the anointed king, David, and were therefore “Christians.”  Of course, after the Church adopted the word as a title of honor, the meaning changed.  Today hardly anyone associates the word with anything except a religious affiliation.  That causes quite a bit of confusion when we read the New Testament because in general the New Testament is not about “Christians” as a designation of religious affiliation.  It is about Jews and Gentiles who accept Yeshua as the Messiah.  These people are followers of the Anointed.

Does it really matter?  After all, today we understand that “Christian” is a term used for those who accept Yeshua as savior and redeemer.  Does it really matter that the believers in Acts didn’t use this term?  From God’s perspective, probably not.  It makes no real difference what term I apply to myself if I have that vital relationship with YHWH and His Son.  But from the perspective of a witness to the world, I think it does make a difference.  Today “Christianity” is too often associated with a religion that would have been unrecognizable to believers in the first century.  Today “Christianity” too often describes a religion that has accommodated itself to forms of this world, whose passion is relevance rather than difference and whose theological outlook begins with a radical separation of Jews and Christians (so much so that Christians believe they must help Jews convert).  This doesn’t square with Scripture and on that basis the use of “Christian” sends the wrong biblical message.  I would rather be true to the text than worry about the cultural relevance.

Of course, this leaves followers of the Way in no-man’s land.  We aren’t Jewish in the ethnic or traditional sense.  We aren’t Christian in the modern cultural sense.  But we are God’s children, adopted into His kingdom.  Perhaps that’s all that really matters although explaining it to someone will certainly be difficult.  “He who has ears to hear, let him hear.”

Topical Index: Christian, christianos, Acts 26:28

Subscribe
Notify of
18 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Ian Hodge

“the Church adopted the word as a title of honor”

If the word “Christian” was initiated as a title of honor, why do we need to abandon it just because a lot of people misrepresent that title?

Why not rather restore that title of honor by the way we act, the words that we say, the way we live Torah, then all the those around us will have the evidence first hand of what is true Christianity.

Ian Hodge

Again I ask: Why would we abandon a title of honor? Unless it’s for another similar title of honor.

Ian Hodge

I’m not convinced the problem today is the name “Christianity.” The problem is creedal, an unwillingness on the part of those who profess the name to affirm the Athanasian Creed and the Christological formulations of Chalcedon (451 AD). “Very god of very god,” no confusion of the created order with divinity. Hear ye Him; bow down and worship the King.

It is the refusal of the church to acknowledge this Christological foundation that allows them to misread the New Testament and dismiss too many portions of Torah with a replacement morality. The created dualism opposes The YHWH of the Tanakh with the Messiah of the New Testament.

As my friend John would say, this is nuts.

Pastor Paul Sims

Thank You Skip! Today’s message is “Spot On” for me!
Pastor Paul Sims
Alabama
Baruch Hashem!

carl roberts

It is the highest honor for me to be called a “Christian.” Yes, the disciples (talmudim) were first called “Christians” (little Christs) in Antioch. Please, call me a “little Christ.” It is “both” who I am and who I am becoming. It is my identity, to be called by His name- “Christ”- (the) Annointed ONE. Yeshua Hamashiach, Son of the Living G-d- blessed be the Name, yes, “Jesus”-(to the Greeks), Yeshua- to the Jews, -I call Him LORD. He calls me His own. I call Him, “Father.” He calls me-“son.”
If you think for a second “Christianity” is a religion, get off that train track quickly- for you, my friend, are headed in the wrong direction. True, biblical “Christianity”- is NOT (caps for emphasis) a religion, it is a relationship. May I, should I repeat? We (you and I) are (now) the sons of (the living) G-d by faith in Jesus (who is the) Christ. End of story. Or is it the beginning? lol!- Listen again (for the first time)- “if any man be in Christ, he is a new creation”. Whose words are these? Mine? no. lol!- “What He said,” in His book.. “if any man”- Jew, Greek, Barbarian, Scythian- (what’s a Scythian?), bond or free.. “if any man”. Question of the day- Am I included in this- “any man?” Yes! Praise G-d, I am among those who have placed their entire faith and trust in the shed blood of the Passover Lamb who died for my sins on the cross of Calvary. Oh.. we haven’t discussed the cross (the tslav, the execution stake) much, have we? Seems we have wandered away.. things that cause me to say -“hmmm.”
My friends, (“both” Jew and Gentile), I’ll even go so far as to say “whosoever will,” -Now who would that include? the world? er-uh.. “She will give birth to a Son, and you are to give him the Name, (XXXXX) because He will save His people from their sins.” Think you know His name?- lol! “and His name shall be called- “Pele-yoez-el-gibbor-Abi-ad-sar-shalom” lol!- but wait!!– there’s more! -(so much more..)

Judith Jeffries

Thank you Carl and Ian !

Brian

Shalom to all,

I believe I am at the other end of the spectrum Ian, Carl, and Judith. Christian is not the overwhelming signature of the Apostolic Writings to describe who we are! Should we not bear witness to those terms instead of “Christian?” I have also heard that this term used in Antioch was used in a derogatory way!
If this so, it we would make a lot of sense in 1 Peter 4:12-16, Beloved, do not be surprised at the fiery trial when it comes upon you to test you, as though something strange were happening to you. But rejoice insofar as you share Christ’s sufferings, that you may also rejoice and be glad when his glory is revealed. If you are insulted for the name of Christ, you are blessed, because the Spirit of glory and of God rests upon you. But let none of you suffer as a murderer or a thief or an evildoer or as a meddler. Yet if anyone suffers as a Christian, let him not be ashamed, but let him glorify God in that name.
It seems to me based on the context of this passage, and the derogatory remarks in the other two, that Peter is putting a spin on this as a term used by others in a insulting and degradatory way! It was a punchline to make his point! In my estimation it was used by outsiders in a insulting way, and not used by the disciples, believers, and seperated ones of YHWH on the inside!

What do the rest of you think?

Ian Hodge

“I have also heard that this term used in Antioch was used in a derogatory way!”

Brian, I would like to read the evidence for this. Send me in some direction to read.

God bless.

Brian

Shalom Skip,

My blogging is not going through very quickly today, and I had to resubmit my name and email address earlier? In regards to the passage in 1 Peter 4:12-16, I can see Peter’s great sense of Jewish humor here. I have never seen it this way before, I have taken these verses very seriously (and I still do), but I remember in one of your audio teachings you said the rabbis say ‘if you do not laugh and see the humor in Torah you have not really studied correctly.’ This is very refreshing for me to see this passage as Peter communicating and relating forcefully with humor. Do you think I am on the right track in viewing it this way? I was right behind you in answering Ian, but that blog is still awaiting moderation. Thanks for responding to the inquiry of Ian.

Patrick (Skip's Tech Geek)

Brian, your comments were with the email address ****@yaho.com, which is in invalid domain. I’m pretty sure you meant to type ****@yahoo.com. Anyways, it was sending some server errors, so I changed it. That’s why your blog comments stopped coming through.

Ian Hodge

Skip,

I guess I’m missing something in this discussion. But you are the one who said it was a title of honor. We all recognize the crisis of belief today. So what is wrong with restoring the title of honor?

Thanks for the reading list.

Leithart’s Against Christianity is an interesting title, especially since he remains with the fold of Christianity with ordination vows to uphold the Westminster Confession of Faith as his subordinate standards. Maybe one day he’ll explain why he remains within this “heresy of heresies”. It can’t be bad enough for him to quit or abandon his association with the “heresy.”

Thanks for the reference to the Godfather. I have to admit, I have never thought of going to fiction – in this case, Hollywood – for the truth about anything.

Brian

Ian,

I believe I first heard it fom Dwight Pryor of The Center For Judaic Christian Studies or possible the group of teachers that surround him. This was several years ago. There seems to be a lot of resources on the Internet when you type in “first time Christian was used in Antioch, was it used in a derogatory way?” I am still looking through these!

I am looking at the context of the Antioch passage in Acts 11:19-26. Now those who were scattered because of the persecution that arose over Stephen travelled as far as Phoenicia and Cyprus and Antioch, speaking the word to no one except Jews. But there were some of them, men of Cyprus and Cyrene, who on coming to Antioch spoke to the Hellenists also, preaching the Lord Jesus………………. Antioch was introduced to Jesus because of the persecution that arose over Stephen. It is not a far stretch of the imagination that those outside the doings of YHWH in Antioch, after a year at least according to 26b, For a whole year they met with the church (Barnabus and Saul) and taught a great many people. And in Antioch the disciples were first called Christians.

This community of believers sprung up from persecution and this would seem to present a historical possibility that the unbelievers at Antioch would have come to know that particular story within that year at least. A God who would allow His Son to be crucified, a stumbling block to Jews, and folly to the Gentiles. And also allowed His own people to be persecuted and killed. Then you add Barnabas and Paul there at that community a whole year teaching, and the controversies and persecutions that followed them. I believe the context and the historical situation can have some sign of pointing toward “Christian” used as a slur.

In His Care, Brian

Barry

Acts 24:5 references Sha’ul before Felix as, “A ringleader of the sect of the Natsarenes.” (ISR) I find the designation “Nazirite Judaism,” very descriptive of the early followers of Yeshua.

Brian

Thanks Patrick for taking care of that.

luzette

May be we should be content with what Yeshua calls His followers. What does the Hebrew translations say of John 15:14,15? Friends?Bondservants?

I don’t see myself as a Christian, rather a Believing do-er. In the name of Christianity too many wrongs were done. Most of the time you first have to find out what doctrine or man-made rules a Christian believes in to know in which Christian box he fits in. Christ + something.
This is why I am desperately seeking to get to know Whom God says He is.

What if you had some followers or better, grandchildren (the Hodges, the Roberts, the Moens, no offence)? Would you be happy if they rather call themselves by the Greek version of your name whatever that may be? Would the community immediately see them as part of your family or would we have to do some reseach first.
My view may be a little ignorant.