Often we are asked why we call our ministry to the body of Christ a "non-Christian work". This question is a good one and deserves a thoughtful and reasoned response, and a careful and prayerful explanation.

We have grown up in a culture in which the term "Christian" commands great respect. It has a pleasant ring in the ears of the saints; it was a title of which we were proud; and it never crossed our minds that the term "Christian" ever meant anything else to those who love Jesus. But, in 1993, when I finally understood what Jesus had been saying to me for years in the Spirit, it became obvious that "Christian" is a title that was given to the saints not by God, but by the world. There are three places in the Bible where the word Christian appears. Those three places are Acts 11:26; 26:28; and 1Pet. 4:16. Let's examine each one thoughtfully.

In Acts 11:26 we are told that "the disciples were first called Christians in Antioch." I want to point out the obvious fact that the verb in that sentence is a passive verb. The followers of Jesus were called Christians by others; they did not call themselves Christians. This fact is acknowledged even in Gerhard Kittel's Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, a scholarly work that is used by biblical scholars and teachers of every ilk, everywhere on earth where New Testament Greek is seriously studied and used. In Volume IX, page 537, it is stated that "it is likely that the term [Christian] was first used by non-Christians". (How this same scholar can justify his earlier statement that Christian is "obviously the term which the original [emphasis mine] believers used for themselves" (p. 536) is beyond me. How can the term first be used by non-believers, if the original believers used it for themselves?? Such confusing and conflicting statements are typical of biblical scholars, and we try to ignore them.) The important point here is that the idea that non-believers coined the term Christian as a title for disciples of Jesus is not a far- fetched one.

That being so, we should ask ourselves, "Why would the unbelieving people in Antioch call the followers of Jesus Christians?" ¹ The first reason must lie in the type of city Antioch was. It was a cosmopolitan, sophisticated city, a crossroads of culture from Asia, Africa, and Europe. It was one of the three or four most popular and celebrated cities of that ancient time. Many of its citizens were well educated and wealthy, especially compared to the other cities and regions of the Roman world and the Eastern lands. It is not surprising that the witty citizens of Antioch would be the ones to coin the title Christian in reference to believers.

To rephrase the question a little more completely, we can ask, "Why would the unbelieving people in Antioch call the followers of Jesus Christians, if they themselves did not believe in Christ?" Wouldn't they be admitting that Jesus was the Christ, by saying his disciples were Christ-ians? The answer is yes, they would be admitting there was a Christ of Israel--unless they were being sarcastic. And that is exactly the case. Then, the second, and obvious, reason that Christian was the term which the world invented to refer to God's people is that believers claimed to have found the Christ, or Messiah, of Israel. To call them "Messiah-ers", or "Christians", would seem a perfectly reasonable action for sarcastic unbelievers to take. And this leads us to the third, and last reason that the Antiochans would have chosen that term: it was funny to them.

The Antiochans, as I have said, were sophisticated, worldly people (the kind of people that civilized human beings still are), proud of their city and their status in the Roman world. It suits their times and their attitude for them to have been the ones to come up with a clever, sarcastic name for those who believed that the man from Nazareth whom Pontius Pilate crucified was the Savior of the world. The term Christian would not have been considered a prestigious title. There was no confession of faith in Israel's Messiah at all. It was a belittling title of mockery, scorn, and ridicule, cast upon the humble followers of Christ Jesus by a smug, unbelieving world.

Ignatius, one of the earliest "fathers" of Christianity (early Catholicism) taught that "Christian" was the term for the New Testament people of God which fulfilled Isaiah's prophecy of a new name for God's people (Mag. X on Isa. 61:1-2). However, the word Christian did not come from the Lord's mouth but from the mouths of unbelievers. And in time, Satan cleverly turned that term into something to be admired and envied, and God's people fell into the trap. When Jesus warned his disciples that many false prophets would come "in my name", was he not warning us of ministers who come as Christians?

It seems obvious that by the time Luke wrote the book of Acts that the title Christian had already been popularized as a term for those who followed Jesus, and in his Acts of the Apostles he apparently thought that the reader might want to know where that term originated; but the real issue is not whether it had become popular but popular with whom? Certainly not with Jesus' disciples; they would hardly have felt worthy to refer to themselves by the sacred title of Christ. It seems to me that to have invented that word for themselves would have required an arrogance and pride that they did not possess. And it would be good to point out here that there is an awful, unclean spirit of pride that still attends the claim of "being a Christian". It has become a term of which to be proud, as is evidenced by the incontestable fact that the vast majority of those in the world who call themselves Christians do not have the holy Ghost, and do not want it. They see no need of it, because . . . well, because they are Christians. The word Christian is, as it always has been, a term that belongs to the world, and it is another astonishing proof of man's ignorance and foolishness that so many millions of human beings have fallen in love with the very term of abuse which the world invented as ridicule toward the faithful. The tragedy is that those with the holy Ghost have been taken in by it as well.

The second place in the New Testament where we find the word Christian is also in Acts 26:28. Paul, as a prisoner, reasoned so powerfully with King Agrippa concerning the righteousness of the gospel that the king said that he was "almost persuaded" to be willing to be called a Christian himself. His remark shows that (1) he considered Paul to be one of those who were called Christians and (2) the word Christian was such a disreputable term that he could not bear the thought of being called one. It is absolutely clear from King Agrippa's own words that he would rather run the risk of rejecting the truth than to be called a Christian. In other words, it was known as a term of reproach, a reproach which he was not willing to bear.

The word Christian being a term of scorn and reproach, several things are obvious. First, the saints did not reproach themselves. God's people did not make up this term of scorn for themselves. They were called Christians by others. Secondly, the king was paying Paul a high compliment. He was telling Paul that his preaching and his reasoning from the Scriptures was so profound and clearly true that he, the great King Agrippa, had almost been persuaded to confess it himself and, so, lose his exalted social standing and reputation and be branded as a Christian himself. Paul would not have quibbled with the king over using Christian in reference to him, when the king was actually using it because the gospel had so deeply touched him.

The last reference to the word Christian is found in 1 Peter 4:16. "Yet if any man suffer as a Christian, let him glorify God on this behalf." Apparently, by the time Peter wrote this letter, which was to the congregation of present day Turkey, the term Christian had become widespread and common among unbelieving men as a title for all who believe that Jesus was the Christ. It certainly was not a title which was widespread and common among the faithful. This is the only case in the Bible where any man of God ever pens the word.

First, let me point out the extremely important, but oft-overlooked fact that Peter himself is not calling believers Christians. He never addressed the early believers as a body of Christians. (Nor did Paul, nor yet any other man of God.)

In order to hear what Peter was saying, as these precious believers heard it, we need to substitute the word Christian with a modern equivalent. We could use "cult member", or "jackass" or "fool", or any such term, because when those ancient unbelievers called you a Christian, that is what they were calling you. So then, Peter was simply exhorting the early believers to praise God when they were ridiculed. He was not glorifying the word Christian, as so many seem to think he was doing. Actually, "jackass" may be the best choice. There was actually a rumor occurrent in the ancient Roman world that those who were called Christians worshipped a jackass. There is a very well known and widely published ancient drawing (below) which was found scratched on an ancient wall in Rome (on the Palatine Hill, chief of Rome's famed seven hills). This crude drawing shows a believer looking toward a man with the head of a jackass being crucified on a cross, with graffiti that mockingly says of the believer "Alexamenos worships his god." Here is the picture:

Let's take a minute now and substitute the word jackass for Christian in those three verses in the New Testament where Christian is found, and we will discover what was really being communicated at that time.

• Acts 11:26 "And the disciples were first called jackasses at Antioch."
• Acts 26:28 "The Agrippa said to Paul, `Almost thou persuadest me to be a jackass.'"
• 1Pet. 4:16 "Yet if any man suffer as a jackass, let him glorify God on this behalf."