The X-Files: Chrēstos / Christos / Χρειστος

[Peter Kirby]

TM 64310 = P.Oxy. 3.407 = P.Lond.Lit. 230 = Aegyptus 36 (1956) 249-253
prayer
pap. sheet (ca. 3rd - 4th century)

(noted elsewhere to have a form of the name Christ in full)

Summary: Χρειστου.

The transcription of P. Oxy. 3. 407 (marked as ca. 250-399 in databases) can be viewed here:

https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dl ... 2/mode/2up

ο θεός ο παντ[ο]κρατωρ ο ποιησας τον ουρανον και την γην και την θαλατταν και παντα τα εν αυτοίς βοηθησον μοι ελεησον με [[εξ]] εξαλιψον μου τας αμαρτίας σωσον με εν τω νυν και εν τω μελλοντι αιωνι δια του κυριου κα[ι] σωτηρος ημων Ιησου Χρειστου δι ου η δοξα και το κρατος εις τους αιώνας των αιώνω[ν] αμην.

'O God Almighty, who madest heaven and earth and sea and all that is therein, help me, have mercy upon me, wash away my sins, save me in this world and in the world to come, through our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, through whom is the glory and the power for ever and ever. Amen.'

προσευχη ("A Prayer")

(δραχμαί) Βρλς
χωρ( ) λιτρ ) ε (ἥμισυ ?).

[Leucius Charinus]

Coptic

Jesus the Chrest - Nomina Sacra in the Nag Hammadi Library 2.0
Martijn Linssen
2022, Thomas Miscellaneous, Part V

https://www.academia.edu/84288595/Jesus ... di_Library

Introduction

An unusually concise and even brief publication, this is a single overview of and expansion on something I wrote almost a year ago: Faithfully translating the Nag Hammadi Library: 35 counts of Chrestian, 2 counts of Christian which I published under the title ChrEstian all over the Nag Hammadi Library.

The entire Nag Hammadi Library contains some 165 ligatures that always get translated with ‘Christ’ just as they do in the NT and related writings – yet in addition to that, and unlike almost all Christian / Greek MSS the NHL texts contain a mix of ⲭⲣⲥ as well as ⲭⲥ1

And that is not all: unlike the NT and related writings, the NHL also contains a full version: ⲭⲣⲏⲥⲧⲟⲥ.

The NHL also contains yet another word that doesn’t exist in those other texts: ⲭⲣⲏⲥⲧⲓⲁⲛⲟⲥ - and there are 6 of those, against only 2 occurrences of ⲭⲣⲓⲥⲧⲓⲁⲛⲟⲥ (which neither occurs in any Christian text); and all save one of the former occur in the Gospel of Philip, who narrates the story about Chrestians becoming Christians2
.
And that is not all either: identical to the NT and related writings, the NHL neither contains “the proper version” of the word: ⲭⲣⲓⲥⲧⲟⲥ. The word ‘Christ’ doesn’t exist in any biblical text3 – and not even all New Testament academics, let alone professors know that4, not even an ‘Edward Cadbury Professor of Theology’, apparently. Nowhere does any Christian / Greek early manuscript ever contain a word for "Christ”, and the same holds true for “Jesus”5 – which the NHL however does contain, and it even says Jesus the “Chrest” in the first line to Melchizedek: ⲓⲏⲥⲟⲩⲥ ⲡⲉ ⲭ̅ⲥ̅.

The next pages contain the totals per Nag Hammadi Library Codex and Tractate for each ligature, even where those consist of full words. [Lacunae] are marked accordingly

SUMMARY TOTALS

ⲓⲏⲥⲟⲩⲥ ....................... 1
ⲓⲏⲥ ........................... 36 (+4)
ⲓⲥ ............................ 156 (+2)
⳩ ............................ 1
ⲭⲣⲥ ......................... 30 (+1)
ⲭⲥ ........................... 137 (+7)
ⲭⲣⲏⲥ ......................... 1
ⲭⲣⲏⲥⲧⲟⲥ ..................... 13 (+6)
ⲙⲛⲧ-ⲭⲣⲏⲥⲧⲟⲥ ............... 7
ⲙⲛⲧ-ⲭⲣⲥ .................... 6 (+2)
ⲙⲛⲧ-ⲭⲥ ..................... 7
ⲭⲣⲏⲥⲧⲓⲁⲛⲟⲥ ................ 4 (+2)
ⲭⲣⲓⲥⲧⲓⲁⲛⲟⲥ ................. 2

[Peter Kirby]

This one escaped my notice, in my search, because there was no letter tau.

sb.12.10772 = HGV SB 12 10772 = Trismegistos 26702 = psi.14.1412 (ca. 225-300)

Summary:
Σώτου τοῦ χρησια[ ̣ ̣ ̣ ̣]

[Σαρα]πάμμ̣ων Ὀλυμπιά̣[δι τῇ ἰ]δίᾳ
[μου μ]ητρὶ καὶ Διδύμῃ καλ̣[ ̣ ̣ ̣ ̣ ̣ ̣ ̣] ̣ πλῖ-
σ̣τ̣α̣(*) χαίρειν. γινωσκιν(*) ὑμ̣[ᾶς θέλω] ὅτι
μέχρι τούτου ὁλόκληρό[ς εἰμι. ἔ]λα-
βον δὲ ἀπὸ Ἴωνος τοῦ ἀδελφ̣[οῦ γ]ράμ-
ματα καὶ ἔγνων τὰ περὶ ὑμ̣[ῶν. μ]ὴ οὖν
ἀγωνιᾶτε. μέχρι γὰρ τούτ[ου οὔπ]ω ἤλ-
θαμεν διὰ τὸν ἀγῶνα τὸν [ἐν Ἀ]ν̣τι-
οχείᾳ, μεθʼ ὃν ἐλευσόμεθα. [διεπ]εμψά-
μην σοι δι(*) Σώτου τοῦ χρησια[ ̣ ̣ ̣ ̣] τ̣άλαν-
τα δύο καὶ διὰ Ἴωνος πεντήκ[οντα] χρυσᾶ.
ἐὰν̣ ο̣ὖν̣ θέλῃς {ἐὰν οὖν θέλῃς} [ἔστ]ιν παρʼ
α̣ὐτοῦ ἢ ἐν σίτῳ ἢ ἐν οἴνῳ λα[βεῖν· π]αρὰ γὰρ
τ̣ὴ̣ν̣ παρά συ(*) τιμήν συ(*) διδῖ(*)· κα̣[ὶ γὰ]ρ οὕτως
αὐτῷ συνεθέμην. διεπεμψάμην δέ σοι
[διὰ ̣ ̣ ̣ ̣]υ δέκα χρ̣υ̣σ̣ᾶ. ταῦτα γὰρ
[ἔδωκα α]ὐτῷ. εἰ γὰρ ἔτι εἶχον ἐπεμ̣-
[ψάμην ̣ ̣ ̣] ̣ε. ὁ πατήρ μου ἔγνω περὶ
[ ̣ ̣ ̣ ̣ ̣ διὰ τῶν πεμ]φ̣θ̣έ̣ν̣των γραμ-
[μάτων ̣ ̣ ̣ ̣ ̣ ̣ ̣] ̣ περὶ τῆς Σύρας καὶ
[πρότερον ἔγρα]ψα καὶ νῦν δὲ γράφω̣[⁦ -ca.?- ⁩]
[ὅτι - ca.10 - αὐ]τ̣ῆ̣ς̣ ἀ̣νέξασθ̣ ̣[⁦ -ca.?- ⁩]
[⁦ -ca.?- ⁩]σ̣ε̣η̣π̣[⁦ -ca.?- ⁩]

source: https://papyri.info/ddbdp/sb;12;10772

Translation:

Luijendijk Greetings in the Lord (2008), p. 138

Sarapammon, Olympian victor, to his very mother and Didyme . . . very many greetings. I want you (pl.) to know that until now I am healthy. And I received from my brother Ion (your) letter and learned how you are doing. Therefore, do not be anxious, for until now we have not yet come because of the contest in Antioch after which we will come (home). We send to you (sgl.) via Sotas the Christian two talents and via Ion 50 aurei (gold coins). Therefore, if you want, it can be received from him either in grain or in wine. For he will give it to you for your local price. For thus I have also agreed with him. And I send to you via ... ten aurei. For these I have given to him. For if I still have, I send ... My father knows about . . . because of the letter sent . . . about Syra also I have written before and now I write that ...

[Peter Kirby]

p.kell.1.48 = HGV P.Kell. 1 48 = Trismegistos 20309 (ca. 355)

Summary:
χ[ρη]στιανότη̣τ̣ο̣ς̣ / χ[ρι]στιανότη̣τ̣ο̣ς̣

I have adjusted this to note:

* Walter Shandruk in "The Interchange of ι and η in Spelling χριστ- in Documentary Papyri," p. 219 (link) maintains that "its presence in a sub-literary document," in parallel with several other documentary texts from authors who were not highly familiar with Christianity, "should suggest the eta spelling, χ[ρη]στιανότη̣τ̣ο̣ς̣, as the more probable restoration."

[Peter Kirby]

I added a link to Walter Shandruk's paper to the first page.

The whole essay by Walter Shandruk is of great interest here. He goes through several of the papyri, looking at the spelling of the terms Christ/Chrest and Christian/Chrestian, noting the examples of each (and attempting a chronological overview of the papyri). I should have occasion to reproduce his tables here.

He focuses on Christian/Chrestian, coming to the conclusion that the Chrestian references cannot have been solely a linguistic phenomenon of interchange between eta and iota spellings. I agree. This is the main focus of the article, argued at length.

He points out that the common name, Chrestos, would have been the misunderstanding of many outsiders when they heard about the figure held in regard by them (i.e., as someone named Jesus and Chrestos), even if it weren't the insider term. I agree.

The name Chrestos also appears in Latin as the name Chrestus. He argues that the Latinized formation (-ian) and the history of the known appearances of the term suggest it was originally an outsider term. I agree.

He says (p. 218):

Indeed, it is possible that this confusion occurred even during the coining of the term, which would make the earliest label for Christians "Chrestiani."

I agree.

[Peter Kirby]

Book 8 of the Sibylline Oracles (source) has the spelling Χρειστος in an acrostic.

It may be of interest that there is also this example of a name appearing in an acrostic, which Suetonius turned up to decide to his satisfaction what the spelling of someone's name was.

Margaret Williams, Early Classical Authors on Jesus, pp. 118-119:

Suetonius’s satisfaction is unconfined when he turns up evidence that Opillus himself had spelled it with two LLs, not one. Where does he find this evidence? It is in an acrostic, no less, that Opillus himself had written in one of his own works, a treatise called Pinax or the Tablet: Huius cognomen in plerisque indicibus et titulis per unam L litteram animadverto, verum ipse id per duas effert in parastichide libelli, qui inscribitur ‘Pinax’ (I observe that his surname is given in numerous catalogues and titles with a single L, but he himself writes it with two in an acrostic in a little book of his called ‘Pinax’) (trans. Rolfe).

This is of minor note to show that using a name in an acrostic is not unique. Also, that it was considered by others to preserve the intended spelling of the word, being found a better form of evidence (understandably) than the appearance of just the spelling in a manuscript.

There is then a possibility that this passage intends quite specifically the spelling Χρειστος, establishing that it is particularly this (according to the author of the text), and that the author may then be aware of alternate spellings, which it doesn't accept.

It could be taking aim at Χριστος because it doesn't have the same numerical possibilities as the eight letter name, as noted by Irenaeus and the author of the Refutation.

I believe there is other evidence that spelling variants are sometimes favored or selected, even if not the most common or correct spelling, for their numerical implications. I have forgotten the reference at this time (maybe it was Nero?).

[Peter Kirby]

Among the oldest manuscripts of texts by Manichaeans (ca. 4th century), one found at Kellis begins:

"I Mani, the Apostle of [Je]su[s] Chrestos and all the other brethren that are with me ... Peace through God the Father and our Lord Jesus Chrestos ..."

Alexander of Lycopolis was a Platonist (generally considered to have been a non-Christian philosopher, sometimes believed to be a 'crypto-Christian') writing against Manichaeism around 300 CE. It should perhaps be noted that Manichaeism was often considered to be a Christian heresy. As shown above, in their texts, Mani claimed to be an apostle of Jesus Chrestos.

Alexander provides this notice (An Alexandrian Platonist against dualism, pp. 91-92):

"Christos, however -- whom they do not even know, but whom they call Chrestos, introducing a new meaning instead of the generally received one by changing the i into e -- they hold to be Intellect."

Alexander delivers this as an aside, without elaborating on the "new meaning" behind the term Chrestos.

This does provide direct attestation of there being a perceived difference in meaning between "Christos" and "Chrestos."

It also places the latter term (Chrestos) among Manichaeans, contrasted with the "generally received one" (presumably, of most Christians known to Alexander). Elsewhere, Alexander is aware of (other) speculative heterodox Christians. I wouldn't read Alexander as claiming that this was limited solely to Manichaeans but rather as saying that (perhaps among others) Manichaeans were among those who made a point of using the name Chrestos and who understood it to have a different meaning.

There's also an implication that Alexander considered that to be a secondary development, with the original word being Christos (according to him). That explains why he says that they had "changed the i into e," because he thought that their spelling was not the original one.

[StephenGoranson]

Thanks for the link to the Walter Shandruk article.

Though it is possible that the Latinate form (in Acts, thought to be first in Antioch--to that author's knowledge, accurate or not), was first, and possibly by outsiders, I'm not yet sure that that was the first version of the name, nor, with Bickerman(n) [spelled both ways, while we're on spelling], necessarily by outsiders.

[Peter Kirby]

Alexander provides this notice (An Alexandrian Platonist against dualism, pp. 91-92):

"Christos, however -- whom they do not even know, but whom they call Chrestos, introducing a new meaning instead of the generally received one by changing the i into e -- they hold to be Intellect."

Here is the Greek:

Τὸν δὲ χριστὸν οὐδὲ γιγνώσκοντες, ἀλλὰ χρηστὸν αὐτὸν προσαγορεύοντες τῇ πρὸς τὸ ἢ στοιχεῖον μεταλήψει ἕτερον σημαινόμενον ἀντὶ τοῦ κυρίως περὶ αὐτοῦ ὑπειλημμένου εἰσάγοντες νοῦν εἶναί φασιν.

This is my own attempt at a more wooden translation, showing how the phrases line up against the Greek:

Christos, though, they do not acknowledge,	Τὸν δὲ χριστὸν οὐδὲ γιγνώσκοντες,
but addressing him as Chrēstos,	ἀλλὰ χρηστὸν αὐτὸν προσαγορεύοντες,
with the vowel Eta	τῇ πρὸς τὸ ἢ στοιχεῖον
indicating a different meaning	μεταλήψει ἕτερον σημαινόμενον
instead of the one regularly supposed about him,	ἀντὶ τοῦ κυρίως περὶ αὐτοῦ ὑπειλημμένου
which they have introduced,	εἰσάγοντες,
they say that he is Mind.	νοῦν εἶναί φασιν.

In terms of the interpretation, this definition of στοιχεῖον in the LSJ is operative:

1 a simple sound of speech, as the first component of the syllable, Pl.Cra.424d; τὸ ῥῶ τὸ στοιχεῖον ib.426d; γραμμάτων σ. καὶ συλλαβάς Id.Tht.202e; σ. ἐστι φωνὴ ἀδιαίρετος Arist.Po.1456b22; φωνῆς σ. καὶ ἀρχαὶ δοκοῦσιν εἶναι ταῦτ' ἐξ ὧν σύγκεινται αἱ φωναὶ πρώτων Id.Metaph.998a23, cf.Gal.15.6:—στοιχεῖα therefore, strictly, were different from letters (γράμματα), Diog.Bab.Stoic.3.213, Sch.D.T.p.32, al., but are freq. not clearly distinguished from them, as by Pl.Tht.l.c., Cra.426d; τὰ σ. τῶν γραμμάτων τὰ τέτταρα καὶ εἴκοσι Aen.Tact.31.21; σ. ε letter ε (in a filing-system), BGU959.2 (ii A.D.); ἀκουόμενα στοιχεῖα letters which are pronounced, A.D.Adv.165.17; γράμματα and στοιχεῖα are expressly identified by D.T.630.32; the ς. and its name are confused by A.D. Synt.29.1, but distinguished by Hdn.Gr. ap. Choerob.in Theod.1.340, Sch.D.T. l.c.:—κατὰ στοιχεῖον = in the order of the letters, alphabetically, AP11.15 (Ammian.); dub.sens.in Plu.2.422e.

The remark here is on Eta, showing that a distinction in meaning is being drawn between Chrēstos and Christos.

[Peter Kirby]

but addressing him as Chrēstos (ἀλλὰ χρηστὸν αὐτὸν προσαγορεύοντες),
with the vowel Eta (τῇ πρὸς τὸ ἢ στοιχεῖον)

In this manuscript at least, shared in Martijn's book, you can see "ἀλλὰ χρηστὸν αὐτὸν" (on the right side, line 5 from the bottom) and "ἢ στοιχεῖον" (in the center, line 4 from the bottom), although it may not be easy if unfamiliar with the script:

http://mss.bmlonline.it/s.aspx?Id=AWODj ... o#/oro/398

alexander-ms.jpg (263.41 KiB) Viewed 443 times

In this manuscript, "Christ" is inferred from the abbreviation (at the beginning of line 5 from the bottom), while "Chrestos" (χρηστὸν) is written in full, and the letter eta (ἢ στοιχεῖον) is also written as such.

The manuscript uses (what is correctly called) a ligature for sigma-tau.