We meet very much the same series of designations applied to our Lord in Luke as in the other Synoptists. But they are applied with some characteristic differences.
In Luke, too, the ordinary narrative designation of our Lord is the simple ‘ Jesus,” which occurs about sev-. enty-seven times.¹’ This simplest of all desi. ignations is not so exclusively employed in the narrative of Luke, however, as in those of Matthew and Mark. There is an occasional variation in Luke to the more descriptive designaflonsof “ithe Lord (7¹³,¹⁹ 10¹,³⁹,⁴¹ 11³⁹ 12⁴² 43¹ 3558 18⁶ 19 22⁶¹,⁶¹1 fourteen times). No other designation than these two, however, occurs as a narrative designation in Luke, although in three instances Luke makes use of another in his narrative. In two of these instances he is apparently repeating words from the lips of others: he tells us that it had been revealed to Simeon that he should not die until he had seen the Lord’s Christ (2²⁶) and that Bartimzus was told that ‘ Jesus of Nazareth was passing (187). In the remaining instance he remarks that the evil spirits knew that Jesus was the Christ (4⁴¹); where the Christ is not strictly a designation of Jesus, but the \
general term the Messiah.” These instances exhibit Luke’s willingness to speak of Jesus as the Messiah indeed; but are scarcely exceptions to the general fact that he himself designates Jesus in the course of his narrative only as ‘ Jesus’ and as the Lord.1 As in the other Synoptists, the simple ‘ Jesus’ in Luke is also practically reserved for the narrative designation. Only in the two instances of the annunciation of His name by the angel (1)¹, which is no exception, and in the address to Jesus on the cross by the dying thief (23⁴2)2 is this rule broken. But, as in the other Syn-optists, the name Jesus’ occurs in compound forms of address to Him recorded by the evangelist,— “Jesus, Thou Son of God (8²⁸), Jesus, Thou Son of David (157)3, Jesus, Master (17¹); and at the hands of the evil spirits (4³⁴), the people (18³⁷) and His disciples (24¹) alike, Jesus the Nazarene
— whence it emerges that it was by this name that He was popularly identified.⁴
The ordinary forms of address applied to Jesus in Luke are the simple honorifics, Teacher,” ‘ Master,” Lord,’ employed, however, with a certain discrimination.⁵ The Aramaic form Rabbi does not occur in Luke at all. Its common Greek rendering, Teacher (διδάσκαλε), seems to be treated as the current noncommittal honorific, especially appropriate on the lips of those who were not, or at least not yet, His disciples (7⁴⁰ 10²⁵ 11⁴⁵ 12¹³ 1818 19³⁹ 2021253; 9³⁸). The only exception to its employment by this rule is supplied by 21⁷ where we are told that certain of His disciples “ asked Him saying, Teacher,’ “etc. That it was not thought inappropriate as a form of address from His disciples to Him is also evinced, however, by the report of His own employment of it on two occasions. He instructs His followers, in preparing the last passover meal for Him, to say to the goodman of the house, The Teacher saith unto thee, where is the guest-chamber, where I shall eat the passover with my disciples” (22¹¹); and He tells them, broadly indeed, but no doubt with some, though certainly remote, reference to Himself and them, that
“” the disciple is not above his teacher; but every one when he is perfected shall be as his teacher “(6⁴⁰). The choice of the term Teacher (0d:ddoxaloc) in these two passages appears to be due to the correlative “disciples” occurring in each; and it remains true that Teacher ( dcddoxale) as a form of address is characteristic in Luke, of non-followers of our Lord. The place of Teacher on the lips of His followers is partly taken by a new term for ‘ Master,” peculiar to Luke ( émeordryc),⁷ which however occurs only six times (35⁵ $⁴,⁴⁵ g³³,⁴⁹ 17¹³), only one of which (17¹³) forms an exception or quasi-exception to the rule that the term indicates that the user of it stands in the closest relation to Jesus, and acknowledges Him as his Superior Officer—Chief, Commander, Master, Leader. This quasi-exception occurs in the case of the ten lepers who, we are told, lifted up their voices and said, Jesus, Leader, have mercy on us.” Perhaps there is an intention to convey the impression that these lepers, formally at least, recognized the authority of Jesus completely. We cannot account ⁵ another such exception, since the whole tone of the narrative indicates that this was not the first call of Peter to become Jesus’ disciple (cf. Jno 1⁴²), but his call to become Jesus’ constant companion. There is no such direct use of Jesus in Luke (or in Mk) as in Matthew of the figurative expression ‘ Master of the House