Biblical Criticism & History Forum - earlywritings.com

Those who believed that the Christ was a heavenly and powerful spirit said upon seeing Jesus on the cross:

“but he can’t save himself! Let this Messiah, this king of Israel, come down now from the cross, that we may see and believe.””

(Mark 15:32)

2 possibilities:
1) They believed that the man Jesus was the Christ since they called him "king of Jews" before Pilate. But then Jesus was not the Christ (for the author of the story).

2) they believed that Jesus was not the Christ. But then Jesus had to be the Christ (for the author of the story).

In both the cases we have evidence of Christians (since the scribes allegorize rival Christians, too) who didn't identify Jesus and Christ.


It is not a coincidence that the only place in all the NT where there is no distinction between Jesus and Christ are the pauline epistles. The only way the interpolator had to make historicist these otherwise mythicist epistles was to insert in them the name of Jesus.

Jesus and Christ are very similar in appearance to each other in Hebrew. (ישוע and ישו respectively). This serves to highlight the Jewish priority of Pauline Christianity, wherein Jesus and Christ are used interchangeably. (Doesn't really work in the Greek).

I have speculated elsewhere that the idea of Christ entering and leaving his (its?) host was inspired by Daniel 9:26:


Upon Jesus's death upon the upright (read, yeshar) cross, the spirit of ישו leaves the yav, an abbreviation of ישוע, leaving it with nothing. In John, this is precipitated by the effuse of water and blood from Jesus, sending forth the flood waters that washes away the old covenant. It is these waters in which Paul preaches for Christians to be baptized in, the waters of the new covenant (though really the first covenant, of Noah--hence, the flood).

In the Odes of Solomon the name ''Jesus'' never occurs.

Don't really see a connection between that and my post above, so I'll just leave it at that.

Joseph D. L. wrote: ↑Thu May 17, 2018 9:42 pm Jesus and Christ are very similar in appearance to each other in Hebrew. (ישוע and ישו respectively).

I am not sure what you mean here. Christ is the English transliteration of Latin Christus, which is the Latin transliteration of the Greek Χριστός, which was used to translate the Hebrew משיח (Mashiach/Messiah) in the Old Greek. The two words above, ישוע and ישו, are just two variants of the same Hebrew name (Joshua/Jesus); neither of them means Christ/Christus/Χριστός/Anointed.

Hee hee hee. You can play a doctor on TV and think that you've acquired all the medical skills from acting but what do you do when someone is having a heart attack and they need you to do something ...

Joseph D. L. wrote: ↑Fri May 18, 2018 12:47 am Don't really see a connection between that and my post above, so I'll just leave it at that.

I am questioning the presence of "Jesus" in the original paulines.

Yeah sure you do.

Ben C. Smith wrote: ↑Fri May 18, 2018 5:28 am

Joseph D. L. wrote: ↑Thu May 17, 2018 9:42 pm Jesus and Christ are very similar in appearance to each other in Hebrew. (ישוע and ישו respectively).

I am not sure what you mean here. Christ is the English transliteration of Latin Christus, which is the Latin transliteration of the Greek Χριστός, which was used to translate the Hebrew משיח (Mashiach/Messiah) in the Old Greek. The two words above, ישוע and ישו, are just two variants of the same Hebrew name (Joshua/Jesus); neither of them means Christ/Christus/Χριστός/Anointed.

Excuse me. I meant ישר, yashar, which is translated in the Septuagint as chrestos in the Septuagint. (Proverbs 2:21)

One website I looked at did translate ישו as christ. I can't read or speak Hebrew, so I'm not able to instantly recognize Hebrew words.

So just chalk this up to me being human and making a mistake.

Joseph D. L. wrote: ↑Fri May 18, 2018 10:51 am

Ben C. Smith wrote: ↑Fri May 18, 2018 5:28 am

Joseph D. L. wrote: ↑Thu May 17, 2018 9:42 pm Jesus and Christ are very similar in appearance to each other in Hebrew. (ישוע and ישו respectively).

I am not sure what you mean here. Christ is the English transliteration of Latin Christus, which is the Latin transliteration of the Greek Χριστός, which was used to translate the Hebrew משיח (Mashiach/Messiah) in the Old Greek. The two words above, ישוע and ישו, are just two variants of the same Hebrew name (Joshua/Jesus); neither of them means Christ/Christus/Χριστός/Anointed.

Excuse me. I meant ישר, yashar, which is translated in the Septuagint as chrestos in the Septuagint. (Proverbs 2:21)

One website I looked at did translate ישו as christ. I can't read or speak Hebrew, so I'm not able to instantly recognize Hebrew words.

So just chalk this up to me being human and making a mistake.

Okay, but ישר appears some 161 times in the Hebrew scriptures, while χρηστός appears some 30 times in the Old Greek, and only once does the latter translate the former (in Proverbs 2.21, as you point out). That is not the usual pairing, and χρηστός is not the same as χριστός anyway.

The usual Old Greek translation of ישר is εὐθύς.

In short, ישר does not mean Christ in any way. It is in the Old Greek translated exactly once as χρηστός, which merely sounds similar to χριστός: the actual basis for the word Christ.