What if "IC XC" Simply Meant "Better Man"?

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
Post Reply
Secret Alias
Posts: 18922
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

What if "IC XC" Simply Meant "Better Man"?

Post by Secret Alias »

Maybe the Marcionites embedded the failure of the initial creation into the name "Jesus Christ."
StephenGoranson
Posts: 2608
Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2015 2:10 am

Re: What if "IC XC" Simply Meant "Better Man"?

Post by StephenGoranson »

"Better man" does not seem to me to fit the uses.
Secret Alias
Posts: 18922
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: What if "IC XC" Simply Meant "Better Man"?

Post by Secret Alias »

Better is one of the meanings of Chrestos.
Secret Alias
Posts: 18922
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: What if "IC XC" Simply Meant "Better Man"?

Post by Secret Alias »

It seems to come up a lot:

Irenaeus:
It is as if there were two iron tools, or instruments, the one of which was continually in the workman’s hands and in constant use, and by the use of which he made whatever he pleased, and displayed his art and skill, but the other of which remained idle and useless, never being called into operation, the workman never appearing to make anything by it, and making no use of it in any of his labours; and then one should maintain that this useless, and idle, and unemployed tool was superior in nature and value to that which the artisan employed in his work, and by means of which he acquired his reputation. Such a man, if any such were found, would justly be regarded as imbecile, and not in his right mind. And so should those be judged of who speak of themselves as being spiritual and superior, and of the Creator as possessed of an animal nature, and maintain that for this reason they will ascend on high, and penetrate within the Pleroma to their own husbands (for, according to their own statements, they are themselves feminine), but that God [the Creator] is of an inferior nature, and therefore remains in the intermediate place, while all the time they bring forward no proofs of these assertions: for the better man is shown by his works, and all works have been accomplished by the Creator; but they, having nothing worthy of reason to point to as having been produced by themselves, are labouring under the greatest and most incurable madness.
And that the whole range of the doctrine of the apostles proclaimed one and the same God, who removed Abraham, who made to him the promise of inheritance, who in due season gave to him the covenant of circumcision, who called his descendants out of Egypt, preserved outwardly by circumcision— for he gave it as a sign, that they might not be like the Egyptians — that He was the Maker of all things, that He was the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, that He was the God of glory — they who wish may learn from the very words and acts of the apostles, and may contemplate the fact that this God is one, above whom is no other. But even if there were another god above Him, we should say, upon [instituting] a comparison of the quantity [of the work done by each], that the latter is superior to the former. For by deeds the better man appears, as I have already remarked; and, inasmuch as these men have no works of their father to adduce, the latter is shown to be God alone. But if any one, doting about questions, 1 Timothy 6:4 do imagine that what the apostles have declared about God should be allegorized, let him consider my previous statements, in which I set forth one God as the Founder and Maker of all things, and destroyed and laid bare their allegations; and he shall find them agreeable to the doctrine of the apostles, and so to maintain what they used to teach, and were persuaded of, that there is one God, the Maker of all things.


Tertullian:
Clearly it is nativity that Gabriel announces.1 'What,' says
Marcion, 'have I to do with the Creator's angel?' And in a
virgin's womb that conception is represented. 'What,' says he,
' have I to do with Isaiah, the Creator's prophet? '2 He abhors delay.
He was for bringing Christ unexpectedly down from heaven.
'Away,' he says, 'with Caesar's enrolments, always a nuisance,
and with inns with no room:3 away with dirty rags and hard
mangers: let the angel host take the responsibility when it gives
honour to its own God, and that by night: the shepherds had
better watch over their flocks: no need for the wise men to be
fetched along from afar: for all I care, they may keep their gold:
also let Herod be a better man, lest Jeremiah have something to
boast of;4 and let not the Child be circumcised, lest he feel pain,
nor brought to the temple, lest he burden his parents with the
expense of an offering, nor put into the hands of Simeon, lest he
make the old man sorry because he is soon to die: also let that old
woman hold her tongue, lest she put the evil eye upon the boy.'5
It is, I suppose, on these considerations, Marcion, that you have
presumed to delete all those documents bearing on Christ's
origins, to prevent his flesh being proved to be flesh. On whose
authority, pray? Show your credentials. If you are a prophet,
foretell something: if an apostle, preach publicly: if an apostolic
man, agree with the apostles: if but an ordinary Christian, believe
the traditional faith. If you are none of these--I have good reason
for saying it--die. Nay, you are already dead, for you are not a
Christian, seeing you do not believe that which, when believed,
makes men Christians: and you are the more dead as you are the
more not a Christian as having been one and having fallen away
by annulling what you formerly believed, as you yourself claim
in a certain epistle, and as your people do not deny, and ours
prove.
Tertullian speaks constantly about the Marcionite melior flesh, melior god idea throughout.

hinc etiam confirmamus eam fuisse carnem in Christo cuius natura est in homine peccatrix, et sic in illa peccatum evacuatum, dum in Christo sine peccato habetur quae in homine sine peccato non habebatur. at neque ad propositum Christi faceret evacuantis peccatum carnis non in ea carne evacuare illud in qua erat natura peccati, neque ad gloriam: quid enim magnum si in carne meliore et alterius (id est non peccatricis) naturae naevum peccati peremit?

"Hence we also affirm that it was flesh in Christ, the nature of which is sinful in man, and thus in it sin is evacuated, since in Christ that which was not in sinful man is held without sin. But neither would Christ's purpose be to evacuate sin by flesh not in that flesh in which the nature of sin was, nor to glory: for what great thing if in better flesh and of another (that is, not sinful) nature he eradicated the blemish of sin?"

Irenaeus again:

For strength is made perfect in weakness,
rendering him a better man who by means
of his infirmity becomes acquainted with the
power of God. For how could a man have learned
that he is himself an infirm being, and mortal
by nature, but that God is immortal and powerful,
unless he had learned by experience what is
in both? For there is nothing evil in learning
one’s infirmities by endurance; yea, rather,
it has even the beneficial effect of preventing
him from forming an undue opinion of his own
nature (non aberrare in natura sua),
Secret Alias
Posts: 18922
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: What if "IC XC" Simply Meant "Better Man"?

Post by Secret Alias »

melior in Tertullian Book 4:

Si autem Helisaeus prophetes creatoris unicum leprosum Naaman
Syrum ex tot leprosis Israelitis emundavit, nec hoc ad diversita-
tem facit Christi, quasi hoc modo melioris dum Israeliten lepro-
sum emundat extraneus, quem suus dominus emundare non
valuerat; Syro facilius emundato, significato per nationes emunda-
tionis1 in Christo lumine earum, quae septem maculis capitalium
delictorum inhorrerent, idololatria, blasphemia, homicidio,
adulterio, stupro, falso testimonio, fraude.


"If, however, the prophet Elisha, the only one of the Creator, cleansed Naaman the Syrian, a leper, out of so many lepers of the Israelites, nor does this make a difference to Christ, as if in this way, by cleansing a leper of Israelites, a stranger makes him better, whom his own master could not cleanse; to the Syrian, more easily cleansed, signified through the nations the cleansing in Christ's light of those things which shuddered at the seven spots of capital sins: idolatry, blasphemy, homicide, adultery, rape, false testimony, fraud."
Quis te constituit magistrum
aut iudicem super nos? Christus vero postulatus a quodam ut inter
illum et fratrem ipsius de dividunda haereditate componeret,
operam suam, et quidem tam probae causae, denegavit. Iam ergo
melior Moyses meus Christo tuo, fratrum paci studens, iniuriae
occurrens. [10] Sed enim optimi et non iudicis dei Christus, Quis me,
inquit, iudicem constituit super vos? Aliam vocem excusationis
invenire non potuit ne ea uteretur qua improbus vir et impius
frater assertorem probitatis atque pietatis excusserat.

"Who appointed you as master or judge over us? But Christ, indeed, when asked by someone to settle a dispute over inheritance between him and his brother, his own brother, and that too for such a just cause, refused. Therefore, my Moses is better than your [Chrestos], seeking the peace of brothers, standing against injustice. However, Christ, the best and not a judge of God, says, 'Who made me a judge over you?' He could not find another excuse to avoid using the one by which an evil and impious brother had shaken off the defender of honesty and piety."
StephenGoranson
Posts: 2608
Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2015 2:10 am

Re: What if "IC XC" Simply Meant "Better Man"?

Post by StephenGoranson »

Linus Pauling allegedly said:
"The best way to have a good idea is to have a lot of ideas. If you want to have good ideas you must have many ideas. Most of them will be wrong, and what you have to learn is which ones to throw away."
User avatar
MrMacSon
Posts: 8892
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 3:45 pm

Re: What if "IC XC" Simply Meant "Better Man"?

Post by MrMacSon »

nota bene:
Secret Alias wrote: Mon Feb 26, 2024 12:36 pm
Quis te constituit magistrum aut iudicem super nos? Christus vero postulatus a quodam ut inter illum et fratrem ipsius de dividunda haereditate componeret, operam suam, et quidem tam probae causae, denegavit. Iam ergo melior Moyses meus Christo tuo, fratrum paci studens, iniuriae occurrens. [10] Sed enim optimi et non iudicis dei Christus, Quis me, inquit, iudicem constituit super vos? Aliam vocem excusationis invenire non potuit ne ea uteretur qua improbus vir et impius frater assertorem probitatis atque pietatis excusserat.

"Who appointed you as master or judge over us? But Christ, indeed, when asked by someone to settle a dispute over inheritance between him and his brother, his own brother, and that too for such a just cause, refused. Therefore, my Moses is better than your [Chrestos], seeking the peace of brothers, standing against injustice. However, Christ, the best and not a judge of God, says, 'Who made me a judge over you?' He could not find another excuse to avoid using the one by which an evil and impious brother had shaken off the defender of honesty and piety."

  • I presume this is wrt Marcion's Christo/Chrestos(?)
Also, what is this about?
Secret Alias wrote: Mon Feb 26, 2024 12:36 pm
melior in Tertullian Book 4:

Si autem Helisaeus prophetes creatoris unicum leprosum Naaman Syrum ex tot leprosis Israelitis emundavit, nec hoc ad diversitatem facit Christi, quasi hoc modo melioris dum Israeliten leprosum emundat extraneus, quem suus dominus emundare non valuerat; Syro facilius emundato, significato per nationes emundationis1 in Christo lumine earum, quae septem maculis capitalium delictorum inhorrerent, idololatria, blasphemia, homicidio, adulterio, stupro, falso testimonio, fraude.

"If, however, the prophet Elisha, the only one of the Creator, cleansed Naaman the Syrian, a leper, out of so many lepers of the Israelites, nor does this make a difference to Christ, as if in this way, by cleansing a leper of Israelites, a stranger makes him better, whom his own master could not cleanse; to the Syrian, more easily cleansed, [signified by the cleansing of the nations in the light of Christ]* of those things which shuddered at the seven spots of capital sins: idolatry, blasphemy, homicide, adultery, rape, false testimony, fraud."

* via https://www.translate.com/latin-english, which gives
as if in this way a better Israelite cleans a leper than a stranger, whom his master had not deigned to clean
for
quasi hoc modo melioris dum Israeliten leprosum emundat extraneus, quem suus dominus emundare non valuerat
So, "a better Israelite"
Secret Alias
Posts: 18922
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: What if "IC XC" Simply Meant "Better Man"?

Post by Secret Alias »

Χρηστός = "best" in Luke 5:39. https://books.google.com/books?id=iy0jf ... ew&f=false

Chrestos means "better" " χρηστός can also be translated “better”; see [Luke] 9:48 and 10:42, where Luke uses a normal adjective to make comparisons (Fitzmyer 1981: 602). " https://books.google.com/books?id=kLVcD ... ke&f=false

"(1) of value superior , better ( LU 5.39 ) ; ( 2 ) of persons kind , obliging , benevolent ( EP 4.32 ) ; of God gracious , good ( 1P 2.3 ) " https://books.google.com/books?id=fs9Xt ... or,+better+(LU%22&hl=en&newbks=1&newbks_redir=0&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwj03569lMqEAxXeFzQIHZEmA44Q6AF6BAgHEAI#v=onepage&q=%22of%20value%20superior%2C%20better%20(LU%22&f=false
Post Reply