Originally Posted by spin

I'm aware of the use of the name "Chrestus" in Suetonius, a name usually equated to "Christus". Beyond that I have no specific knowledge of the use of "Chrestus/os", so if you could supply some references to its usage, I'd be happy to contemplate the significance a little more.


spin

Originally Posted by spin

Good show. I don't think that with these attestations of the use of the name "Chrestus" from Latin sources that there can be any doubt as to the reality of the name "Chrestus". I still don't know what to make of the bishops of Christ. I think I could make a fair case for mistake on the part of the writer.

This sentence ipse ille patriarcha cum Aegyptum venerit, ab aliis Serapidem adorare, ab aliis cogitur Christum seems to make some separation between them two (those who adore Serapis and those gathered by Christ), which doesn't seem to be clear to the writer. As I don't understand Latin, the difficulty could just be mine.

Originally Posted by Clivedurdle

That Hadrian comment about Egyptian priests is also worth further study

Originally Posted by gurugeorge

I've been doing a bit of research on these terms, though I don't know how reliable it might be. I'd be interested in what people have to say around this topic.

Apparently in the Greek world "Chrestos" (meaning "good", a fairly common name in the Greek world) was sometimes confused with "Christos" ("anointed"); the confusion was so common it was mentioned by some of the apologists and fathers.

Both terms are known to go back long before 0 CE. (e.g. tombstone inscriptions), and are connected with the Mysteries (probationers to the Mysteries were sometimes called "Chrestos", and initiates sometimes called "Christos"; Osiris was called "Chrestos"). And "Chrestos" was in Christian use up to the 3rd century CE to describe the Messiah (e.g. Marcionite Synagogue inscription).

Plugging this into the MJ theory we have the following hypothetical (I know it's pretty much Freke & Gandy, but it has a bit of a wrinkle):-

There was a broad-based movement from about 400 BCE to 300 CE that represented a sort of democratisation of the Mysteries, an opening-up of the essentially personal salvation gained through the hitherto secretive Mysteries, to ordinary folks. This movement gradually became known as "Chrestian" or "Christian". One strand of this broad-based movement was a Jewish version of the Mysteries using the Messiah figure in lieu of a local Godlet. Because Jews were "cool" (in an exotic way, e.g. comparable to Tibetans nowadays) and monotheism was cool and anti-establishment, the Jewish version of this "Chrestian" movement became very popular, and because of the coincidence of "Messiah" and "Christian" (both "anointed"), the term "Christian" became more popular for this strand of the broad-based personal salvation movement. At some point roundabout the 2nd century CE, and for several possible reasons, the "Christ" figure of this strand came to be belived to have been an actual historical figure.

Comments? Thoughts? The main thing about it, I suppose, is that it's possible to think of the "Christian" movement in much broader terms, deeply connected with the Mysteries, and as going back a lot further in time, as something already established and on-going in the Hellenized world, in relation to which the Jewish version was a relative latecomer.

Originally Posted by Thomas II

Interesting. Wasn't there a passage were people are calling Jesus "good master", and he answers something like "why do you call me "good? Nobody is good but God..."

Originally Posted by jakejonesiv

True, but good in those passages is not chrestos. The closest you can get in today's NT is 1 Peter 2:3; hoti chrestos ho kyrios, "that the Lord is chrestos".

Jake