Keep Factually independent

Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.

Loading...Goal: 1,000 supporters
Loading...

What is the significance of the word 'Raca' in Matthew 5:22?

Checked on November 20, 2025
Disclaimer: Factually can make mistakes. Please verify important info or breaking news. Learn more.

Executive summary

Scholars and popular commentators agree that “Raca” in Matthew 5:22 is an Aramaic-derived insult expressing contempt or emptiness — often glossed “empty-headed,” “worthless,” or “good‑for‑nothing” — and Jesus uses it as an example of contemptuous speech that springs from sinful anger [1] [2] [3]. Translations and commentators differ about nuance and severity: many treat “Raca” as a milder insult in a three‑step escalation (anger → “Raca” → “you fool”), while some note alternate historical senses or social implications that affect interpretation [2] [4] [5].

1. “Raca” as an Aramaic insult: literal sense and mainstream gloss

Most sources identify the word preserved in the Greek text as an Aramaic transliteration related to a root meaning “empty” or “empty‑headed,” and therefore an insult implying someone is worthless or foolish; this is the explanation given by popular commentaries and translation notes [1] [2] [3]. Bible‑study and devotional sites likewise summarize the common view: “Raca” expresses indignation and contempt and was used as a term of reproach in first‑century speech [4] [6].

2. How Matthew uses it: an example in a moral escalation

Translation commentaries and exegetical discussions frame Matthew 5:22 as an escalating sequence: Jesus condemns anger, then the insult “Raca,” and finally the stronger charge “you fool,” linking inner attitude to outward speech and moral liability [2] [7]. TIPs’ translation note explicitly recommends treating “Raca” and “fool” as degrees of foolishness, with the latter potentially implying impiety and greater severity [2].

3. Judicial and social resonance: court, Sanhedrin, and perceived consequences

Several commentaries read Jesus’ warnings about being “answerable” or “in danger of the council” as signaling real social consequences for insult and slander — possibly before local courts or the Sanhedrin — although sources vary in how literally they take that legal reading [4] [8] [9]. Devotional writers interpret the verse as teaching that contempt can bring one before religious or civil authorities, but TIPs cautions that human courts judge deeds not attitudes, complicating a strict legal mapping [2] [8].

4. Translation choices shape meaning: literal preservation vs. dynamic equivalents

Some translations retain the transliterated form “Raca” to convey the original flavor; others translate the term into idioms like “worthless” or “you no‑good” to communicate force in modern languages [2] [10]. TIPs notes translators often render both “Raca” and “fool” with components of “foolishness” but calibrate strength differently — a choice that affects how readers perceive the moral escalation [2].

5. Minority readings and contested implications (sexuality, nuance)

Wikipedia notes that a minority of scholars have argued for a more specialized meaning — for example, that “Raca” could connote effeminacy or have been a term used against homosexuals in some polemical contexts — and that such readings have entered wider debates about New Testament attitudes on sexuality; this is a contested interpretation and not the majority gloss [5]. Available sources do not provide consensus evidence that this specialized meaning is the standard understanding [5].

6. Theological and pastoral significance: what Jesus is addressing

Across sources the theological thrust is consistent: Jesus is addressing the root of violent action — contemptuous anger expressed in speech — and calling for the eradication of that inner contempt because words reveal the heart [1] [7] [11]. Commentators and devotional writers draw a pastoral application: pursue reconciliation rather than demeaning speech, since insults like “Raca” fracture relationships and dishonor persons [12] [11].

7. Limits of the current reporting and remaining questions

The materials provided are mainly translation notes, Bible commentaries, devotional explanations, and summary articles; they converge on the “empty‑headed/insult” gloss but differ on legal‑social implications and rarer lexical proposals [1] [2] [5]. For deeper lexical, epigraphic, or Syriac/Aramaic philological evidence one would need specialist linguistic or patristic sources not included among the current items — not found in current reporting [1] [2] [5].

Summary takeaway: “Raca” functions in Matthew 5:22 as a preserved Aramaic insult meaning essentially “empty‑headed” or “worthless,” intentionally cited by Matthew to illustrate how anger becomes contemptuous speech liable to moral and (arguably) social judgment; debates persist about precise nuance and rarer semantic readings, but the mainstream scholarly and devotional consensus matches the glosses above [1] [2] [3].

Want to dive deeper?
What does the Aramaic word 'Raca' mean and how was it used in first-century Palestine?
How do different Bible translations render Matthew 5:22 and why do they vary on 'Raca'?
What theological implications arise from Jesus' prohibition of calling someone 'Raca' in the Sermon on the Mount?
How have Jewish and early Christian commentators historically interpreted the term 'Raca'?
Are there analogous insults in ancient languages that illuminate the force of 'Raca' in Matthew 5:22?