We’ll start by seeing what words are translated "anointed" and try to determine their meaning as best we can. Words used for "anointed" in the Bible (starting from a search for the English word in NASB, then continuing through individual searches for these words in the original languages):

• mashach or its derivatives, 137 times in the Old Testament

• suk, 12 times in the Old Testament

• dashen, once in the Old Testament as "anointing" (otherwise obviously meaning "fat" or specifically "fatness of an animal")

• balal, once in the Old Testament as "anointing" (otherwise meaning "mixed" (as in mixed oil with flour) or "confused")

• b’nei hayitzhar, "sons of fresh oil," once in the Old Testament

• chrio, 8 times in the New Testament

• aleipho, 8 times in the New Testament

• epichrio, twice in the New Testament (translated once as "anoint" in NASB and twice in KJV)

• egchrio, once in the New Testament

• murizo, once in the New Testament

For those who prefer King James, the KJV adds one instance of "anointing" in Is. 10:27, shemen in Hebrew, which NASB translates as "fatness." This word shows up 210 times in the Old Testament, but it is almost always "oil," and often directly tied to mashach in the sense of shemen hamishchah, "oil of anointing."

Perhaps we should start by dispensing with the outliers. B’nei hayitzhar in Zech. 4:14 is translated "anointed ones," referring to two olive trees and branches in Zechariah’s vision which put oil into the lampstand (or menorah in Hebrew) before God. They are very likely Zerubbabel (the governor of Judea, in the line of David and Jesus) and Joshua (the high priest at the time). In fact they are not here seen as being anointed, but as producing oil to fire the lamp before God in the Temple (which was being rebuilt). Their obedience to the Lord is what causes service before the Lord to resume. Trees are not usually seen as being anointed, since they produce oil; here we can be fairly sure that "sons of oil," in the sense of "those who are full of oil and give it," is meant. Note too that they do not produce shemen, the usual anointing oil, but "yitzhar," fresh oil. It is called "gold" or "golden" in 4:12.

Balal in 92:10 is comparing the Psalmist to a beast of the field; usually balal means "mixed" or "confused" (it’s the root for bavel or "Babel"), but it is used in that sense sometimes as mixing oil with flour, for example for a sacrifice which required this mixture. It is literally saying "I have mixed with green oil" or perhaps "I have fed or been fed with green oil." Most commentators compare this to Ps. 23:5, another outlier: it uses dashen to say "you have anointed my head with shemen (oil)." This word seems to be connected to shemen, in speaking of fatness; literally it could be translated "you have made my head fat with oil." Oil was commonly applied to animals as an ointment to keep disease and pests away, and others have pointed out how even the other metaphors here actually refer to sheep and shepherding, so we need not dive further into this one. In both cases the shepherd or cattleman lavishly gives oil to his sheep or ox, for his own good, and the beast is grateful for the expenditure and application.

Finally, suk in the Old Testament shows up twelve times, and two of those are idiomatic uses meaning "incite," while ten times it clearly means "to pour oil," particularly on one’s head. It is associated with the daily ablutions and hygiene of the ancient world; if you were in mourning you would not suk yourself with oil, but if you wanted to clean up and smell good, you would.

In the New Testament murizo is used in Mark 14:8 when Jesus says that the woman who poured perfume on His head was "anointing Him for burial." This is clearly not an "anointing" in a spiritual sense but an application of perfume mixed with oil (in ancient times it was customary to apply perfumed oils to the head and let them run down the hair and over the body, as with suk in Hebrew above). However, murizo is not a careful application, it is more pouring with abandon. Aleipho in Greek, translated "anoint" eight times in NASB, is a careful application of oil. In ancient literature gymnasts and athletes aleipho’d themselves with oil — rubbed themselves down with oil, or their trainers rubbed them down with oil. It was considered good for the skin and muscle tone. Additionally, before modern medicine, the best topical healing ointment and antibiotic available was olive oil, and so this word is used often in a medical sense, applying olive oil to wounds to act as a medicine. Note that one of these uses of aleipho is James 5:14:

Is anyone among you sick? Then he must call for the elders of the church and they are to pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord.

In other words, the elders are called upon to treat the sick man medically and pray over him. In the context it becomes clear that medicine is called for, and then the man is called to repentance in case the disease has been brought about by his spiritual condition. Neither Christian Science nor the faith healers have handled this correctly; this is what happens when we don’t consult the original language. All these words have been "lossily compressed" into the one word "anoint," and this is the result.

Having covered all but the primary words for "anoint" and their meanings, we will look at the most significant understanding for the word, in Hebrew and in Greek, in the next two parts. In Part 2 we will talk about mashach in the Old Testament, and in Part 3 we will talk about chrio in the New Testament. In Part 4 we will bring our understanding together and make some sense out of Biblical anointing, and draw some conclusions.

Here is the list of things which are mashiach or anointed in the Old Testament:

• Jacob’s pillar

• Aaronic priests

• unleavened meal offerings in the form of wafers

• the brazen altar

• tabernacle and all that is in it

• laver and its stand

• the priestly garments

• utensils used for the altar

• kings

• the Faithful Priest of 1 Sam. 2:35

• Elisha

• shields

• Isaiah in Is. 61:1 (but Jesus appropriated this as a Messianic passage)

• houses (Jer. 22:14, probably means "paint")

• a cherub, the King of Tyre

• Those at ease in Samaria (who "anoint" or spread themselves)

• The Anointed Prince (Dan. 9:25)

If we assume that Isaiah is speaking prophetically in the name of the coming Son of David in Is. 61:1, and that the "anointed cherub" in Ezek. 28:14 is Satan rather than the human king of Tyre (as most Christians do), then the only human beings who are ever considered to be "anointed" in God’s eyes are kings and priests. One could also carefully review Ezek. 28 and determine that the King of Tyre is being called anointed there because Hiram provided materials and furnishings for Solomon’s Temple, which likely would have been anointed because the Temple was consecrated similarly to the tabernacle. Therefore Tyre had a sort of "representation" before the Lord, and its anointing is seen as being imputed to him.

But wait, you may say, what about Elisha in 1 Kings 19:16? But I would then ask you, when did Elijah actually anoint Elisha? He only threw his mantle over him. In fact Elisha is included on this list of "kings" to be anointed because he is spiritually taking the place of a king in Israel, since Israel’s kings never grew to fill their God-given roles. The "anointing" here is a metaphor, nothing more. Elisha did not receive power when he was anointed; he received the "double portion" (some Bible scholars now see that he was asking for 2/3 portion, not double, which makes more sense under the circumstances) after Elijah was taken from him.

So, when we speak of a person being "anointed" or mashiach in the Old Testament, we are only talking about kings and priests. While we who are part of God’s family through adoption are considered to be royalty, and we are told that we are or will be a holy priesthood in 1 Peter and Revelation, this is general to all believers, and not the privilege of a few teachers or preachers. Note too that, when David (who was anointed) refrained from doing anything to Saul (also anointed), because of Saul’s anointing, he could be absolutely certain that Saul had been anointed; it was common knowledge. There was "fruit" of that anointing, in the sense that he was king and the effects were plain to see. In the case of teachers today who claim to have "anointing," I would counter that just saying you are anointed doesn’t make you anointed; convince me by your words and fruit that you are anointed, and then I will acknowledge that and refrain from killing you while you’re using the bathroom (which is what happens to David in 1 Sam. 24:3-6). Note too that David’s concern for Saul’s anointing did not extend to giving in to him or submitting to him.

Why are certain things and people anointed in the Old Testament? We can clearly see in the case of the Tabernacle and the priests that the things which were anointed were being set apart from earthly things. All of Israel was supposed to be set apart, but all of Israel was not anointed (except compared to the rest of the world, see Ps. 105:15); in effect, Israel was called to be in the world but not of it, while the Temple system was called to be another step removed from the world. Lev. 21 lays out the rules by which the priests were to be set apart: e.g., they could not marry divorced women, but only widows or virgins, and the high priest could only marry a virgin (probably one from among the Levites). There were much greater consequences for the priests when they were unclean; being unclean was a fact of life for the Israelite layman much of the time, but the priests had to maintain a higher standard. Note too that although priests were considered anointed, after the dedication of the Tabernacle only the high priest is ever actually anointed with oil as far as we know. It would seem that people anointed are wholly dedicated to God’s purpose, and no longer control their own destiny. A priest who wanted to be a farmer, could not; they had duties, and they were not allowed to own land. A king, once anointed, belonged to God, and had to act in the best interest of God’s people from that day on. Among a people set-apart (or "sanctified"), the anointed ones were even more sanctified.

Since the Old Testament is quoted so frequently with regard to being anointed (mostly Ps. 105:15: "Do not touch my anointed ones, and do My prophets no harm," which as we noted above spoke of the entire nation of Israel in the period of the Patriarchs), let us consider that in the Old Testament, the Anointed One was one of two people: the king or the high priest. In the Torah it was primarily speaking of the high priest or the priesthood in general, because they were (again) "set apart among the set-apart," or "sanctified from among the sanctified," or even better "holy of holies." In the period of the kings it seems to have always referred to the king. So, if today we say that a certain teacher is "anointed," and we speak of him/her in OT terms like these, we must be saying that he is holier than we are? Or that he is our ruler in God’s eyes? Or that we must work through him to reach God, that he is our mediator?

I hope that nobody looks upon any Bible teacher and thinks that he is a mediator to God for us, or that God has given him the hereditary title of "king" over us, or that we cannot be as holy to the Lord as he is! This is the kind of reasoning that brought about the Catholic priesthood, the idea that even though the Scriptures teach us that there is one Mediator, the man Christ (Mashiach) Jesus, we must still have someone mediate between Him and us — that somehow people can set themselves apart through special vows or special pieties to be closer to God than us. That is Catholicism, man’s religion diluting and tainting the pure truth of God’s Word. We call no man father, and nobody in the church today has the right to be mashiach king or anointed king except for the Anointed One Himself. And may we never think that a man through his works will be closer to God than we are; our only way to approach the Father is through His Son and the grace extended to us through His death and resurrection.

So, nobody in the Church can be our king or our priest (except in so far as we ourselves are fellow priests). Claiming any kind of special privileges because of an "anointing" in any Old Testament sense appears to be impossible. The only "anointed" of God that we must be careful not to "touch" is Yeshua or Jesus the Mashiach — anointed by the Holy Spirit at His baptism, and we even note in Matthew 12:32 that we can be forgiven speaking against Him, as long as we do not speak against That Which anointed Him and endowed Him with His special purpose.

OK, what about things that were anointed? Mashach means "spread" in its most literal sense, so "spreading oil on a shield" makes sense (shields were leather stretched over wooden frames as often as not in those days, and if they weren’t kept supple they would become brittle and break). The meal offerings in the form of wafers were mixed with oil and then spread to form those wafers. The only anointed inanimate object that really sticks out is Jacob’s Pillar, and again, Jacob saw that as being a place that is holier even than most places where altars would be built, because he saw angels ascending and descending from the Lord on that spot. He decided to set up the pillar and then anoint it to proclaim that this was a special place for him, a place "holier than holy," and many commentators have seen that Rock as symbolizing Jesus, who is Himself anointed to be our Rock and Salvation.

One other reference should be pointed out: in Dan. 9:25-26 we see somebody called only Mashiach, "The Anointed," and "The Anointed Prince," who will appear 69 weeks after the rebuilding of Jerusalem is decreed. From this word mashiach, after passing through several languages, we end up with the transliteration "Messiah." He is given no other name in this passage. When this passage was translated into Greek in the Septuagint, this person was called Christos.

(In Part 3 we will examine the New Testament word chrio. In Part 4 we will draw conclusions based on what we have learned.)

Of the eight times that chrio or the noun form chrisma is used in the New Testament, we see:

• two are quotes from the Septuagint (Greek Old Testament), both translating mashach in Hebrew

• four are clearly references to Jesus, including the two above

• one is a reference to Paul and his companions

• three are references to the readers of John’s first epistle, including twice in one verse

We may be able to guess that we can include ourselves among the readers of 1 John, and therefore we can consider ourselves "anointed" in the sense that we received the Holy Spirit from Jesus, and He teaches us "all things" (1 John 2:20-27). Note that all believers are considered to have received this ability to learn truth directly from God and His Word — this is not a special dispensation for certain leaders or teachers. If we abide in Him, then this anointing abides in us. What is this anointing?

If we compare this to the anointing said to be on all Israel, we may be able to find out. In Ps. 105:15 we saw that Israel (in the Patriarchs’ time) was considered anointed, as well as being prophets. Prophets have communion with the Holy Spirit and receive God’s Word from Him. We as believers in Christ have the Holy Spirit within us, a step beyond the Patriarchs in fact who did not have the indwelling Holy Spirit, and it teaches us God’s Word. This does not mean that He will reveal things to you apart from God’s Word, new revelations which do not fit the Scriptures or run counter to their teaching; Protestants usually view this as meaning that we read the Bible and the Holy Spirit is our Divine Teacher, explaining it and grafting the Word onto our lives. So, if we are "anointed" in the sense that Israel was anointed, another way of defining us as being set apart from the rest of the world, and capable therefore of hearing from God in ways that nobody else can, then certainly we are anointed, and this definition seems to fit John’s usage of the word. Note, however, that this is an anointing shared by every believer, and nobody is seen to be "more anointed" or even "differently anointed" than anybody else.

Paul in 2 Cor. 1:21 says that "He who establishes us [Paul, Silas, and Timothy] with you in Christ and anointed us is God." The anointing here is incidental and not critical to the point he is trying to make (explaining why they did not visit Corinth at some point), but again since the anointing seems to be connecting with "the Spirit in our hearts as a pledge" in v.22, we cannot be blamed for thinking that Paul is probably referring to the anointing all believers receive when they receive the Holy Spirit into themselves at salvation. Again, there are no hints of special powers or authority being conferred along with the anointing; it is a sign of holiness, sanctification that belongs to every believer.

The rest are references to Jesus, and in each and every one, God is the One Who anoints Him. This anointing can be seen as a special one, setting Him apart from everybody else, because we see in the context to each of these passages His peculiar mission in this world — to set captives free in Luke 4:18, to carry out God’s predestined mission in Acts 4:27, healing in Acts 10:38, and as One greater than the angels in Heb. 1:9. This is most similar to the special anointing for kings and priests in the Old Testament, and Hebrews spends a great deal of time setting Jesus up as the ultimate High Priest in fact. Revelation then gives us a picture of Him as King. He is the Anointed One, the Mashiach.

There are three uses we didn’t cover previously: first, epichrio in John 9 is used twice, and is sometimes translated as "anoint." epi- means "on," and prefixed to -chrio it means "to rub on," indicating that Jesus rubbed clay on the blind man’s eyes. Obviously this is not the most spiritual application of the word "anointing," so we did not count this one. The other one is Rev. 3:18, in which Jesus sells the Laodiceans eyesalve which they are to rub into their eyes, or egchrio. The situation is similar to the one above; it is clearly a simple physical term being used here, "to rub in" rather than "to anoint," and therefore we discounted this one as well.

And finally, the most-used chrio derivative is of course Christos, from which we get "Christ," which all boils down to the Hebrew Mashiach or "Messiah," the Anointed One. In using this title He is connected directly to the Mashiach Prince of Dan. 9, the only One with authority and power, anointed directly by God the Father with the Holy Spirit, which He then gave to us — the High Priest’s true anointing making it possible for all of us as His adopted kinsmen to be considered anointed.

Next time: Part 4, our conclusions.

• Jesus is the Anointed One, by virtue of His offices as both High Priest and King.
  
• All believers may be said to have "an anointing," which is the gift of the Holy Spirit in our hearts. This sets us apart from the rest of the world, but we only receive this anointing by virtue of our adoption into Jesus’ family; His anointing is what makes ours possible. It is imputed to us by faith, rather than being a specific act of God (much like the priests of ancient Israel, who were not themselves regularly anointed, but had an imputed anointing through their High Priest).
  
• The anointing in our lives is demonstrated through our words and deeds as influenced by the Holy Spirit, which is how we are set apart. Internally the Holy Spirit is our pledge that the promises of God to us are true. In both ways it serves as a "mark" on us; it is the sign of our adoption into His family.
  
• Unbelievers who persecute us might be said to be "touching the Lord’s anointed ones," and will be judged for this action if they do not repent.
  
• Doing harm to the Lord’s Anointed can only be construed as meaning harm done to Jesus; He is the King and High Priest, and we are not.
  
• No person in the church is "more anointed" than another; we all receive the same grace through trust in Christ. Therefore sharing the truth in love with another believer is not "touching the Lord’s anointed." Neither is comparing the words of a teacher with the Word of God, even if the comparison is unfavorable to that teacher.
  
• In fact, pointing out false teaching is actually making use of the anointing.
  
• These things I have written to you concerning those who are trying to deceive you. As for you, the anointing which you received from Him abides in you, and you have no need for anyone to teach you; but as His anointing teaches you about all things, and is true and is not a lie, and just as it has taught you, you abide in Him.
  — 1 John 2:26,27

The anointing is not a special message from God, or a special dispensation of power. The anointing on Jesus is the mark of the Mashiach or Messiah — that which demonstrates His role as our Priest and King. Any anointing we have is only a shadow of the anointing on Him. Only when we reflect His glory — best by learning the Word of God and performing it — do we demonstrate an anointing on our own lives. Those who claim special privilege or a freedom from criticism by the Body of Christ because they are "anointed" would do well to consider the possible consequences of claiming to be Mashiach:

And Jesus answered and said to them, "See to it that no one misleads you. For many will come in My name, saying, ‘I am the Christ [Anointed One],’ and will mislead many."
— Matt. 24:4,5

Note that He said that many would come "in His name," suggesting that they would identify themselves with Him, even as they claim that they are anointed. If they claim the privileges of the Anointed One, does this make them a false Messiah? By the standards of the Old Testament, from which we derive the concept of anointing, we would have to say that it does.

The alternative is to assume that those who complain that we are "touching His anointed" believe that we must not have an anointing, otherwise the term is meaningless. We are already commanded not to pronounce judgment on other believers, and yet this does not remove our responsibility to fight for the truth, expose falsehood, confront believers who sin in love, and confront those who twist the Word of God for their own agenda. Certainly there is a great deal of precedent in Scripture for exposing false teaching and correcting those who misuse or abuse the Word of God, including Jesus Himself and His criticism of the Pharisees. They "sat in the seat of Moses" (Matt. 23:2), and yet Jesus did not consider their shallow understanding of the Scriptures to be sacrosanct, but called them to repentance for their interpretation and their teaching.

We as believers have nothing to fear when we put the Word of God first, and defend Godly principles of interpretation and application. This, brothers and sisters, is how we exercise our anointing. Pray that we may be people who "have no need for anyone to teach us; but… His anointing teaches us about all things."

(Editor’s note: in hopes that these articles would gain wider circulation, we have opted to speak of "Jesus Christ" rather than our usual "Yeshua the Messiah." We hope you have found this series edifying.)


Question or comments on this article?  Contact the author.