When do the expanded forms Jesus, Christ, Chrest 1st appear?

[Leucius Charinus]

There is another word/spelling of Christus: Chrestos, with slightly different Greek to Χριστός (I have it somewhere on a hard drive; I'll look)

One means 'annointed', or 'selected'; and the other (Chrestos?) means 'good' (often as good slave, which is interesting given the enslavement of many in the Diaspora).

Someone recently asserted (outside this forum) they had only ever seen the Chrestos version in pre 6th C texts.

I have seen this assertion too. The complimentary question of course is this ... what is the first occurrence in history where the word "Christos" is found in full, and I guess the same question may be asked for "Jesus", and for the concatenated term "Jesus Christ" (or alternatively, "Jesus Chrest"). I think the Manichaean mss recently found at Kellis and dated to c.400 CE show the latter, ie: "Jesus Chrest". And AFAIK Vaticanus has a reference to "Chrestian". Why this question is not valueless is due to the (universal) use of "nomina sacra" codes for "Jesus" and for "Christ", and because the code (CH, CT or CHT) for "Christ" and "Chrest" is the same.

So the general question is, with regard to all the available evidence, in which century does the expanded form of the following three terms first appear?-

a) Jesus
b) Christ
c) Chrest

[spin]

the code (CH, CT or CHT)

I realize that this is another of mountainman's fishing expeditions to get information he can mangle enough to develop into his answer as to why christianity exists, but we have to take our amusement where we can. And in this case it is drawn from his illuminations of new testament philology.

[Leucius Charinus]

the code (CH, CT or CHT)

I realize that this is another of mountainman's fishing expeditions to get information he can mangle enough to develop into his answer as to why christianity exists, but we have to take our amusement where we can. And in this case it is drawn from his illuminations of new testament philology.

Not too many people will be comfortable with the Greek forms spin. The Greek code "XP" represents the word χριστος (XPRISTOS / Christos) but may also represent the word χρηστὸς (XPRESTOS / Chrestos). I don't know why Christianity used these Greek codes. You may (and if so please elaborate), but that is not what the OP is about. The reason I used the English form was simply to demonstrate the process of how the "Encryption" of the "Sacred Name" can be seen in simple English. No need to get upset. Perhaps you might like to make an attempt at answering the question(s) posed by the OP in regard to the evidence itself?

[MrMacSon]

The Greek code "XP" represents the word χριστος (XPRISTOS / Christos)

but may also represent the word χρηστὸς (XPRESTOS / Chrestos).

Yep, pretty sure that's the two versions in Greek.


This Wikipedia entry is interesting for the summary and references (copied here for preservation):

It has been stated that both the terms Christians and Chrestians had at times been used by the general population in Rome to refer to early Christians.[19] Robert Van Voorst claims that many sources indicate that the term Chrestians was also used ... by the second century.[18][20] The term Christians appears only three times in the New Testament, the first usage (Acts 11:26) giving the origin of the term.[18] In all three cases the uncorrected Codex Sinaiticus, in Greek, reads Chrestianoi.[18][20] In Phrygia a number of funerary stone inscriptions use the term Chrestians, with one stone inscription using both terms together, reading: "Chrestians for Christians".[20]

Adolf von Harnack argued that Chrestians was the original wording, and that Tacitus deliberately used Christus immediately after it to show his own superior knowledge compared to the population at large.[18] Robert Renehan has stated that it was natural for a Roman to mix the two words that sounded the same, that Chrestianos was the original word in the Annals and not an error by a scribe.[21][22] Van Voorst has stated that it was unlikely for Tacitus himself to refer to Christians as Chrestianos i.e. "useful ones" given that he also referred to them as "hated for their shameful acts".[17] "

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tacitus_o ... Chrestians


References
16. J. Boman, Inpulsore Cherestro? Suetonius’ Divus Claudius 25.4 in Sources and Manuscripts, Liber Annuus 61 (2011), ISSN 0081-8933, Studium Biblicum Franciscanum, Jerusalem 2012, p. 355, n. 2.
17. Van Voorst, Robert E (2000). Jesus Outside the New Testament: An Introduction to the Ancient Evidence Eerdmans Publishing ISBN 0-8028-4368-9 pages 44-48
18. International Standard Bible Encyclopedia: A-D by Geoffrey W. Bromiley 1995 ISBN 0-8028-3781-6 page 657
19. Christians at Rome in the First Two Centuries by Peter Lampe 2006 ISBN 0-8264-8102-7 page 12
20. Van Voorst, Robert E (2000). Jesus Outside the New Testament: An Introduction to the Ancient Evidence Eerdmans Publishing ISBN 0-8028-4368-9 pages 33-35
21. Robert Renehan, "Christus or Chrestus in Tacitus?", La Parola del Passato 122 (1968), pp. 368-370
22. Transactions and proceedings of the American Philological Association, Volume 29, JSTOR (Organization), 2007. p vii

[Leucius Charinus]

Order to arrest a Chrestian: 28 February, AD 256: http://www.papyrology.ox.ac.uk/POxy/VEx ... stian.html

Papyrus Oxyrhynchus 3035: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Papyrus_Oxyrhynchus_3035

The order was issued by the head of the Oxyrhynchus ruling council, to the police in a country village,
to arrest a man described as a Christian (note χρισιανόν, the papyrus has the early spelling, χρησιανόν).

[Leucius Charinus]

The Sinaiticus manuscript has a peculiar way of spelling the word Christian as "Chrestian."
The Vaticanus manuscript of the same age, utilizes a slightly transitional spelling: "Chreistian."



Neither of these Greek codices contain the term "Christians", so (unless someone made a mistake?) the terms "Christians" must have appeared later.

What do Alexandrinus and Bezae have to say?

[spin]

The Vaticanus manuscript of the same age, utilizes a slightly transitional spelling: "Chreistian."

Extremely naughty, mountainman. This is not a "transitional" spelling. You just made that up, as is so frequently the case with your claims. Koine Greek often diphthongized the iota into an epsilon-iota, as can be seen in the same book of Acts,

• 11:19, Vat. φλειψσεως, Sin. φλιψσεως (affliction), Vat. φοινεικης, Sin. φοινικης (Phoenicia),
  11:28, Vat. λειμον, Sin. λιμον (famine),
  12:9, Vat. γεινομενον, Sin. γινομενον (was done),
  12:17 Vat. σειγαν, Sin. σιγαν (keep peace).

Be good and cut the bullshit. The Vaticanus diphthong attests to an underlying iota.

[DCHindley]

Don't need to propose a misspelled "Christian:"

χρησιανὸν, the nominative masculine singular form of the substantive χρήστης:
I. One who gives or expounds oracles, a prophet, soothsayer
II a creditor, usurer, lender, or debtor in a middle/passive verbal form.

DCH

Order to arrest a Chrestian: 28 February, AD 256: http://www.papyrology.ox.ac.uk/POxy/VEx ... stian.html

Papyrus Oxyrhynchus 3035: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Papyrus_Oxyrhynchus_3035

The order was issued by the head of the Oxyrhynchus ruling council, to the police in a country village,
to arrest a man described as a Christian (note χρισιανόν, the papyrus has the early spelling, χρησιανόν).

[Leucius Charinus]

The Vaticanus manuscript of the same age, utilizes a slightly transitional spelling: "Chreistian."

Extremely naughty, mountainman. This is not a "transitional" spelling. You just made that up, as is so frequently the case with your claims.

Actually that's not the case. I lifted the phrase from the marcionite-scripture site. The phrase is replicated around the net.

The 4th century Marcionite inscription is another item of evidence that explicates "Chrestos" and not "Christos".
So the score to the end of the 4th century for the "Christ/Chrest" tournament of evidence is something like .... Chrest 7, Christ 0.
Don't you think that this distribution of evidence requires some sort of explanation, and if so, what is this explanation?

Koine Greek often diphthongized the iota into an epsilon-iota, as can be seen in the same book of Acts,

• 11:19, Vat. φλειψσεως, Sin. φλιψσεως (affliction), Vat. φοινεικης, Sin. φοινικης (Phoenicia),
  11:28, Vat. λειμον, Sin. λιμον (famine),
  12:9, Vat. γεινομενον, Sin. γινομενον (was done),
  12:17 Vat. σειγαν, Sin. σιγαν (keep peace).

Well thanks for taking he time to outline this explanation. I did not know this: it's not really explained anywhere I could find to date.

The Vaticanus diphthong attests to an underlying iota.

It also attests to the fact that there was no stock standard way of spelling the word (either Christians" or "Chrestians").
Sinaiticus has "Chrestian", but I do not know how the term is presented in Alexandrinus and Bezae. Do you?

But doesn't it strike you as strange that the scribes could not even agree upon the Greek spelling of "Christians" (or "Chrestians")?
It seems to suggest that the sacred name of Poo-Bar was so deeply encrypted that when it came to the surface there were problems.

This issue significantly highlights the OP.

The scribes did not have to spell out "Christ" or "Chrest" (or "Chreist") because they used the nomina sacra.

Does anyone know of the oldest extant manuscript in which we find the expanded names in the OP?

[Leucius Charinus]

Thanks Dave. This make a great deal of sense.

But why do you think it is that the Oxford University advertises this as a "Christian papyrus"?
See the link (below) to the Oxford Papyri website.

Don't need to propose a misspelled "Christian:"

χρησιανὸν, the nominative masculine singular form of the substantive χρήστης:
I. One who gives or expounds oracles, a prophet, soothsayer
II a creditor, usurer, lender, or debtor in a middle/passive verbal form.

DCH

Order to arrest a Chrestian: 28 February, AD 256: http://www.papyrology.ox.ac.uk/POxy/VEx ... stian.html

Papyrus Oxyrhynchus 3035: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Papyrus_Oxyrhynchus_3035

The order was issued by the head of the Oxyrhynchus ruling council, to the police in a country village,
to arrest a man described as a Christian (note χρισιανόν, the papyrus has the early spelling, χρησιανόν).