Difference between revisions of "Nazarene"

<p> In 18 passages of the [[Gospels]] and Acts Jesus is called ‘the Nazarene’ (the reading fluctuating between Ναζαρηνός and Ναζωραῖος). The use of this designation agrees with the fact that Nazareth was His home until He entered on His public ministry. The incident of the census was the occasion of His birth taking place at Bethlehem according to prophetic intimation. After the [[Egyptian]] episode, the family returned to Nazareth. After the Temptation, Jesus returned and remained there until the violence of the people drove Him to Capernaum, which henceforth was known as ‘his own city’ (&nbsp;Matthew 9:1). The behaviour of the people (&nbsp;Luke 4:29) illustrates what is suggested respecting the repute of Nazareth in &nbsp;John 1:46. In &nbsp;Acts 24:5 ‘the sect of the Nazarenes’ refers to [[Christians]] as a body, and is no doubt meant in a disparaging sense. </p> <p> As indicated above, the name ‘Jesus of Nazareth,’ in the Eng. version, is universally used to translate without distinction two Greek names, Ἰησοῦς Ναζαρηνός and Ἰησοῦς Ναζωραῖος. A recent essay by E. A. Abbott makes it necessary to ask if both terms ‘Nazarene’ and ‘Nazoraean’ connote simply ‘belonging to Nazareth.’ He holds and argues very successfully that the name Nazoraios is significant of more than mere place-origin. His thesis is that Nazarene, meaning a man of Nazareth, and Nazoraean, meaning the Nçṣer or [[Rod]] of [[Jesse]] mentioned by Isaiah, were probably interchanged by a play on the two words; so that the populace, acclaiming Jesus as the Lifegiver and Healer, altered ‘Jesus the Nazarene’ into ‘Jesus the Nazoraean.’ To state the theory more exactly, we should say that they called Him Jesus the Nçṣer, or the Na(t)zoraean, partly because there was a pre-existing belief that the [[Messiah]] would be the Nçṣer, and partly because they vaguely felt what Matthew ventured definitely to express, that His residence from childhood onward in Nazareth had been ordained to fulfil the prophecy, ‘He shall be called Nazoraean (i.e. Nçṣer).’ </p> <p> This theory involves the conclusion that the use of ‘Nazarene’ by Mark and Luke was an error, except in special contexts which may prove that the place-name, not the Messianic title, was meant. </p> <p> There can be no doubt that the Nçṣer (the Branch) of &nbsp;Isaiah 11:1 was interpreted of the Messiah, the [[Targum]] on the passage making that quite definite; and it is quite probable that among the many names in popular use for the Messiah in the 1st cent. Nçṣer had a place. </p> <p> The evidence from hostile sources is confirmatory. Christians were contemptuously called ‘Nazarenes’ by the Jews. But the actual word used was Nôṣrî. This does not closely resemble Nazareth, but it does resemble Nôṣer as used in Ben Sira 40:15, referring to ‘the branch of violence which is not to be unpunished.’ That the enemies of Jesus should call Him Nôṣrî, ‘Branch of violence,’ is intelligible if His friends called Him Nçṣer, ‘the true Branch.’ </p> <p> The question, as Abbott admits, is a difficult one, but it must be acknowledged that he has made out a strong case for regarding the name Nazoraean as more than a mere variant of Nazarene (see [[Edwin]] A. Abbott, Miscellanea Evangelica, II. i., Cambridge, 1913). </p> <p> We find ‘Nazarenes’ used at a later period as the name of a [[Jewish]] [[Christian]] sect having some affinity with the [[Ebionites]] (see Ebionism). The greatest obscurity envelops these Jewish Christian parties. The information coming down to us is meagre, and there is little likelihood of additions being made to it. The Jewish side of Christianity, which gave so much trouble to St. Paul, declined rapidly, especially after the fall of the Jewish State, and eventually disappeared. Our best course will be to summarize the views of two authorities of our day. </p> <p> R. Seeberg (Lehrbuch der Dogmengeschichte, i. [1895] 50) endorses the ordinary opinion that there were two sects, the [[Nazarenes]] and the Ebionites, agreeing with one another in some things, differing in others. Justin [[Martyr]] refers to the former when he speaks of some Jewish Christians who keep the Jewish Law strictly themselves, but do not impose it on all Christians. [[Jerome]] also says that they believe in Christ as the Son of God, who was born of the Virgin Mary, suffered under [[Pontius]] Pilate, and rose again. They recognized St. Paul and his work, and used a [[Hebrew]] Gospel. [[Eusebius]] distinguishes them sharply from Ebionites, but says that they did not accept the pre-existence of the Logos. Seeberg thinks that Eusebius was mistaken in the last statement, confusing the Nazarenes with the Ebionites, who did deny Christ’s Deity. The Nazarenes, Seeberg thinks, simply put aside [[Logos]] speculations. The Ebionites, on the other hand, required all Christians to conform to the Jewish Law of rites and ceremonies, rejected St. Paul as an apostate, and regarded Christ as the son of Joseph and Mary. [[Origen]] seems to know a second Ebionite party, who, while holding these Ebionite tenets, said that Christ at His baptism received the fullness of the Holy Spirit, constituting Him a [[Prophet]] and Son of God in a high degree. They also held millennarian views. If the Nazarenes had so much in common with the Church, it is strange that Jerome should say that, ‘while they claim to be both [[Jews]] and Christians, they are neither.’ Seeberg says that the Nazarenes were Jewish Christians, the Ebionites Christian Jews. </p> <p> F. Loofs (Leitfaden zum Studium der Dogmengeschichte4, 1906, p. 83) agrees in the main with the above account, but thinks that too sharp a distinction is drawn between the Nazarenes and the Ebionites. He holds that the recognition by the latter of the Holy Spirit who fell on Christ at the Baptism, and who is pre-existent and Divine, comes near to the acknowledgment of [[Deity]] in Christ. But this implies that Christ was not [[Divine]] before and became Divine through the descent of the Spirit. Does the same effect follow in us? Both writers agree that the sects ran to seed in the syncretism of the day and in mythological speculations. To [[Irenaeus]] the Ebionites were heretics. The [[Elkesaites]] were an offshoot from the same trunk, and appealed to the book Elkesai as a new revelation, bringing new forgiveness of sins, even the grossest, and new remedies of disease. [[Alcibiades]] of [[Apamea]] about a.d. 220 appeared in Rome as the apostle of this gospel, and met with temporary success. The Clementine romances were still later products of the same movement. </p> <p> (The Nazirites had no connexion, linguistic or other, with Nazareth and the Nazarenes. See Hasting's Dictionary of the Bible (5 vols)and Encyclopaedia Biblica, s.v. ‘Nazirite’; also following article.) </p> <p> Literature.-Article‘Ebionism’ in Encyclopaedia of [[Religion]] and Ethicsand DAC; A. Hilgenfeld, Die Ketzergeschichte des Urchristentums, Leipzig, 1884, pp. 426f., 435, 443; H. L. Mansel, [[Gnostic]] Heresics, London, 1875, p. 125; J. A. W. Neander, History of the Christian Religion and Church, Eng. translation, 1831-41, ii. 18; E. B. Nicholson, The Gospel according to the Hebrews, London, 1879. </p> <p> J. S. Banks. </p>

<p> Matthew, &nbsp;Matthew 2:23, writes "Jesus came and dwelt in Nazareth that it might be fulfilled which is spoken by the prophets, He shall be called a Nazarene"; not "by the prophet," but "by the prophets," meaning no particular quotation but the general description of Messiah in them as abject and despised (&nbsp;Isaiah 53:2-3). The Nazarene people were proverbially so. "Called," as in &nbsp;Isaiah 9:6, expresses what He should be in His earthly manifestation; not that the prophets gave Him the literal name, though His contemporaries did. Matthew plays on similar sounds, as Micah on [[Achzib]] (&nbsp;Micah 1:14) and [[Ekron]] (&nbsp;Micah 2:4). The "Nazarene dweller" (Νatsri ) was, as all the prophets foretold, a "pain sufferer" (natsari from the [[Aramaic]] tsear , "pain"); the Aramaeans pronounced the Hebrew "a" as "o," from whence arose the Greek form Νazoraios . </p> <p> (Biesenthal, Jewish Intelligence, December, 1874). The nickname "Nazarene" agreed with His foretold character as: (1) despised in man's eyes, (2) really glorious. Men in applying the name unconsciously and in spite of themselves shed glory on Him; for Nazarene is related to neetser , a "branch," Messiah's distinctive title, indicating His descent from royal David yet His lowly state (&nbsp;Isaiah 11:1); the same thought and image appear in the term tsemach (&nbsp;Jeremiah 23:5; &nbsp;Jeremiah 33:15; &nbsp;Zechariah 3:8; &nbsp;Zechariah 6:12). Also Νaziraios , applied to a Nazarite by vow in Old Testament (from the Hebrew root nezer "dedication," "the high priest's mitre," and "sovereignty"), indirectly refers to Christ under His New Testament distinct designation "Nazarene" and Νazoraios , i.e. belonging to Nazarene. </p> <p> Samson the Nazarite, "separated" or "dedicated unto God," typically foreshadowed Him (&nbsp;Judges 13:5; &nbsp;Judges 16:30), separated as holy unto God, and separated as an "alien" outcast by men (&nbsp;Psalms 69:8). Though the reverse of a Nazarite in its outward rules (&nbsp;Matthew 11:18), He antitypically fulfilled the spirit of the Nazarite vow and ritual. Had the prophets expressly foretold He should be of Nazareth, it would not have been so despised; nor would the Pharisees, who were able from Micah 5 to tell Herod where Messiah's birthplace was - Bethlehem (Matthew 2) - have been so ignorant of the prophecy of His connection with Nazareth as to say, "out of Galilee ariseth no prophet" (&nbsp;John 7:52). (See [[Nazarite]] ; NAZARETH.) </p>

<p> [[Nazarene]] (''Năz'A-R'' ''Çne''' ). When our Lord was taken as a child to Nazareth, which thus became for many years his dwelling-place, the evangelist records this as a fulfilment of prophecy, &nbsp;Matthew 2:23, citing no particular place, but referring generally to "the prophets," who predicted Messiah's humble and despised condition. See Isa. chaps. 52, 53. The words, "He shall be called a Nazarene," do not occur in the writings of the Old Testament; but the thing or meaning conveyed by them is sufficiently obvious. Jesus, living at Nazareth, was from that very circumstance contemned; and we find in the course of his public career his connection with that town repeatedly used against him. &nbsp;John 1:46; &nbsp;John 7:41; &nbsp;John 7:52. Matthew notes that event which branded him with an ill-omened name, "Jesus of Nazareth." and his followers as Nazarenes, comp. &nbsp;Acts 24:5, as an exact fulfilment of what ancient seers had foretold. It is an error to connect &nbsp;Matthew 2:23 with &nbsp;Isaiah 11:1-16, from a fancied relation of the original Hebrew word there translated "branch" with the name Nazareth. </p>

<p> an epithet given to our Lord. There are two Greek words for this designation — Ναζαρηνός (only &nbsp;Mark 1:24; &nbsp;Mark 14:67; &nbsp;Mark 16:6; &nbsp;Luke 4:34); and (elsewhere) Ναζωραῖος — both derived from Ναζαρέθ '','' Nazareth of Galilee, the place of the Savior's childhood and education. These two Greek words occur in the New Testament nineteen times; twice only are they rendered Nazarene (&nbsp;Matthew 2:23; &nbsp;Acts 24:5); everywhere else by the words "of Nazareth," as &nbsp;Matthew 21:11. This appellative is found in the New Testament applied to Jesus by the daemons in the synagogue at [[Capernaum]] (&nbsp;Mark 1:24; &nbsp;Luke 4:34); by the people, who so describe him to Bartimsus (&nbsp;Mark 10:47; &nbsp;Luke 18:37); by the soldiers who arrested Jesus (&nbsp;John 18:5; &nbsp;John 18:7); by the servants at his trial (&nbsp;Matthew 26:71; &nbsp;Mark 14:67); by Pilate in the inscription on the cross (&nbsp;John 19:19); by the disciples on the way to [[Emmaus]] (&nbsp;Luke 24:19); by Peter (&nbsp;Acts 2:22; &nbsp;Acts 3:6; &nbsp;Acts 4:10); by Stephen, as reported by the false witness (&nbsp;Acts 6:14); by the ascended Jesus (&nbsp;Acts 22:8); and by Paul (&nbsp;Acts 26:9). At first it was applied to Jesus naturally and properly, as defining his residence. In process of time, however, other influences came into operation. Galilee was held in disesteem for several reasons: its dialect was provincial, rough, and strange (Buxtorf, ''Lex. Talmud;'' &nbsp;Mark 14:70); its population was impure, containing not only provincial Jews, but also heathen, as Egyptians, Arabians, Phoenicians (Strabo, ''Geog.'' 16:523); its people were seditious (Josephus, as cited in Schleusner, s.v. Γαλιλαῖος ); whence also the point of the accusation made against Paul, as "ringleader of the sect of Nazarenes" (&nbsp;Acts 24:5). Nazareth was a despised part even of Galilee, being a small, obscure place. Accordingly its inhabitants were held in little consideration everywhere. Hence the name Nazarene (Kuinol, in &nbsp;Matthew 2:23) became a term of reproach (Wetstein, in &nbsp;Matthew 2:23), and as such, as well as a mere epithet of description, it is used in the New Testament. "The name still exists in Arabic as the ordinary designation of Christians, and the recent revolt in India was connected with a pretended ancient prophecy that the Nanzarenes, after holding power for one hundred years, would be expelled." (See Nazareth). </p> <p> In &nbsp;Matthew 2:23, it is said of Jesus, "And he came and dwelt in a city called Nazareth; that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophets, He shall be called ''A Nazarene."'' This citation has received the following explanations (Spanheim, ''Dubia Evangelica,'' 2:538-648; Wolf, ''Curce Philologicae,'' 1:46-48; Hengstenberg, [[Christology]] of the O.T. 2:106-112): </p> <p> '''1.''' It is generally thought that the evangelist does not limit himself to a quotation from any single prophet, but alludes to the several passages of the prophets where the Messiah is spoken of as "despised of men," as Psalms 22; Isaiah 53. (See Paulus, Rosenmuller, Kuinil, [[Van]] der Palm, Gersdorf, Olshausen, Ebrard, Davidson, Lange, and others, ad loc.) </p> <p> '''2.''' But many (as Bauer, Gieseler, in the ''Stud. U. Krit.'' 1831, page 588 sq.; De Wette, Bretschneider, 3d ed.) find here an allusion to the passages where the Messiah is called נֵצֶר, ''Netser,'' a branch or sprout (&nbsp;Isaiah 11:1; see Hengstenberg, Christol. 2:1 sq.). " This explanation, which Jerome mentions as that given by learned (Christian) Jews in his day, has been adopted by Surenhusius, Fritzsche, Krabbe (Leben Jesu), Drechsler (on &nbsp;Isaiah 11:1), Schirlitz ''(N.-T. Wsorterb.),'' Robinson ''(N.T. Lex.),'' and Meyer. It is confirmed by the following considerations </p> <p> '''(1)''' ''Netser,'' as Hengstenberg, after De Dieu and others. has shown, was the proper Hebrew name of Nazareth. </p> <p> '''(2)''' The reference to the etymological signification of the word is entirely in keeping with &nbsp;Matthew 2:21-23. </p> <p> '''(3)''' The Messiah is expressly called a ''Netser'' in &nbsp;Isaiah 11:1. </p> <p> '''(4)''' The same thought, and under the same image, although expressed by a different word, is found in &nbsp;Jeremiah 23:5; &nbsp;Jeremiah 33:15; &nbsp;Zechariah 3:8; &nbsp;Zechariah 6:12, which accounts for the statement of Matthew that this prediction was uttered 'by the prophets' in the plural." </p> <p> It seems, however, rather refined for so general a quotation; nor does it after all point especially to any particular passage of the Old Testament as being cited. Moreover, the ζ in Ναζωραῖος cannot correspond to צ, but to ז (see Olshausen. ad loc.; so Bengel, who derives the word from נֵזֶר ''Acrown).'' </p> <p> '''3.''' Others have supposed a direct quotation from some lost prophecy (Chrysostom, Theophylact, Clericus, etc., ad loc.), or from some apocryphal book (Ewald), or that it is a traditional prophecy (Calovius; Alexander, ''Connection And [[Harmony]] Of The Old And New Testaments),'' all which suppositions are refuted by the fact that the phrase "by the prophets," in the New Testament, refers exclusively to the canonical books of the Old Testament. Nor is there any evidence elsewhere of such a source. </p> <p> '''4.''' Many would make Ναζωραῖος ''= נָזַיר, Nazarite,'' i.e., one especially [[Consecrated]] or [[Devoted]] to God (&nbsp;Judges 13:5); but this does not at all accord with our Saviour's character (see &nbsp;Matthew 11:19, etc.), nor with the Sept. mode of spelling the word, which is generally Ναζιραῖος, and never Ναζωραῖος ''.'' (See Schleusners ''Lex. To Lxx,'' ad verb.) (See Nazarite). </p> <p> '''5.''' "Recently a suggestion, which Witsius borrowed from Socinus, has been revived by Zuschlag and Riggenbach, that the true word is נֹצֵר or נֹצְרַי, ''My Savior,'' with reference to Jesus as the [[Savior]] of the world, but without much success (Zuschlag, in ''The Zeitschriftfur Die Lutherische Theologie,'' 1854, pages 417-446; Riggenbach in the Stud. u. Krit. 1855, pages 588, 612)." (See Jesus). </p>

<p> ''''' naz ''''' - ''''' a ''''' - ''''' rēn ''''' ´; ''''' naz´a ''''' - ''''' rēn ''''' ( Ναζαρηνός , <i> ''''' Nazarēnós ''''' </i> ; <i> ''''' Nazōraı́os ''''' </i> in Matthew, John, Acts and Luke): A derivative of Nazareth, the birthplace of Christ. In the New Testament it has a double meaning: it may be friendly and it may be inimical. </p> 1. An Honourable Title: <p> On the lips of Christ's friends and followers, it is an honorable name. Thus Matthew sees in it a fulfillment of the old Isaiah prophecy (&nbsp;Isaiah 11:1 (Hebrew)): "That it might be fulfilled which was spoken through the prophets, that he should be called a Nazarene (&nbsp; Matthew 2:23 ). According to an overwhelming array of testimony (see Meyer, <i> [[Commentary]] </i> , in loc.), the name Nazareth is derived from the same <i> '''''nācar''''' </i> , found in the text quoted from Isa. We have here undoubtedly to do with a permissible accommodation. </p> <p> It is not quite certain that Matthew did not intend, by the use of this word, to refer to the picture of the Messiah, as drawn in &nbsp;Isaiah 53:1-12 , on account of the low estimate in which this place was held (&nbsp;John 1:46 ). Nor is permissible, as has been done by Tertullian and Jerome, to substitute the word "Nazarite" for "Nazarene," which in every view of the case is contrary to the patent facts of the life of the Saviour. </p> <p> Says Meyer, "In giving this prophetic title to the Messiah he entirely disregards the historical meaning of the same [[Septuagint]] reading in &nbsp;Isaiah 11:1 , <i> '''''ánthos''''' </i> ), keeps by the relationship of the name Nazareth to the word <i> '''''nācar''''' </i> , and recognizes by virtue of the same, in that prophetic Messianic name <i> '''''necer''''' </i> , the typical reference to this - that Jesus through His settlement in Nazareth was to become a , ' <i> '''''Nazōraios''''' </i> ,' a 'Nazarene.'" This name clung to Jesus throughout His entire life. It became His name among the masses: "Jesus of Nazareth passeth by" (&nbsp;Mark 10:47; &nbsp;Luke 24:19 ). Perhaps Matthew, who wrote after the event, may have been influenced in his application of the Isaian prophecy by the very fact that Jesus was popularly thus known. Even in the realm of spirits He was known by this appellation. Evil spirits knew and feared Him, under this name (&nbsp;Mark 1:24; &nbsp;Luke 4:34 ), and the angels of the resurrection morning called Him thus (&nbsp;Mark 16:6 ), while Jesus applied the title to Himself (&nbsp;Acts 22:8 ). In the light of these facts we do not wonder that the disciples, in their later lives and work, persistently used it (&nbsp;Acts 2:22; &nbsp;Acts 3:6; &nbsp;Acts 10:38 ). </p> 2. A T itle of Scorn: <p> If His friends knew Him by this name, much more His enemies, and to them it was a title of scorn and derision. Their whole attitude was compressed in that one word of Nathanael, by which he voiced his doubt, "Can any good thing come out of Nazareth?" (&nbsp;John 1:46 ). In the name "Nazarene," the Jews, who opposed and rejected Christ, poured out all the vials of their antagonism, and the word became a Jewish heritage of bitterness. It is hard to tell whether the appellation, on the lips of evil spirits, signifies dread or hatred (&nbsp;Mark 1:24; &nbsp;Luke 4:34 ). With the gatekeepers of the house of the high priest the case is clear. There it signifies unadulterated scorn (&nbsp;Matthew 26:71; &nbsp;Mark 14:67 ). Even in His death the bitter hatred of the priests caused this name to accompany Jesus, for it was at their dictation written above His cross by Pilate (&nbsp;John 19:19 ). The entire Christian community was called by the leaders of the Jewish people at Jerusalem, "the sect of the Nazarenes" (&nbsp;Acts 24:5 ). If, on the one hand, therefore, the name stands for devotion and love, it is equally certain that on the other side it represented the bitter and undying hatred of His enemies. </p>