Todd Clippard

Topic(s): Bible Infallibility, Jesus

While Bible names certainly had specific meanings, particularly those given to Christ, this argument is without merit. Matthew 1:21, 25; Luke 1:31, and Luke 2:21 all make specific reference to the name of Jesus. The Greek word translated here is onoma, and refers to one’s name (cf Matt 10:2; 27:32, 57.

In Mark 5:22 we read of Jairus, which was the man’s name, not his title. In Luke 3:1 we read of Tiberius Caesar, who was king, and Pontius Pilate, who was governor of Judaea. Now, what were the men’s names and what were their titles? In the first case, Tiberius was his name, and Caesar was his title.

Additionally, the ossuary that has made the news of late would dispel this idea, being inscribed with the names of particular men. Whether or not those identified are indeed the close kin of Jesus is irrelevant; the point is that these are men’s names.

Finally, if this contention is true, how is one to understand Matthew 1 and the genealogy of Jesus?  or any genealogy (pre)dating the first century?  Did anyone in the first century have a name, or were they all titles? And when did men start receiving names instead of titles?  This contention is baseless and illogical.