Chrestos in the Jewish Scriptures

[DCHindley]

An overlooked 'christological' passage, used by Justin and Barnabas happens to be the earliest Chrestos reference I believe:

Δήσωμεν τὸν δίκαιον, ὅτι δύσχρηστος ἡµῖν ἐστίν (Isa 3:10)

The passage is read as if it predicted the Jewish mistreatment of Jesus at the crucifixion.

I'm having trouble locating that. Isaiah 3, v10?

"10 “Say to the righteous that it shall be well with them,
For they shall eat the fruit of their doings."

Yes it is. The word is translated as "well". It doesn't help that the verb involved, ἐστίν, which my feeble memory tells me is in the present tense, is translated as a future, "shall be". Today we'd render this into American English as "Say to the righteous: 'You are fine'."

DCH

[Secret Alias]

I can't get over how similar Wisdom 2 and Isaiah 3:10 are in the LXX and how incomprehensible the LXX is when compared with the original Hebrew of Isaiah. If Wisdom is citing Isaiah LXX then obviously Isaiah LXX is earlier than the present translation of Isaiah. The name 'LXX' is a misnomer of course because the Seventy did not translate anything other than the Pentateuch. But (a) since most Church Fathers cite only the one line (3.10 LXX) and (b) that line is such a bad translation of the Hebrew whether in fact they were originally citing Isaiah or rather they were citing Wisdom in some sort of 'mystery' context and that later editors of the early author(s) = Justin to reshape the discussion. The problem isn't 'say' becoming 'bind' necessarily but (1) duschrestos emerging from its antithesis and (2) the fact that the LXX reads εἰπόντες Δήσωµεν (= a 'double translation' - initially translating אמרו correctly and then mistranslating אמרו as Δήσωμεν) and finally (3)Wisdom's translation as ἐνεδρεύσωμεν.

I saw this doctoral thesis https://openaccess.leidenuniv.nl/bitstr ... sequence=6 which sums up the situation:

אמרו εἰπόντες different mood of corresponding verbs
אמרו Δήσωµεν double translation and formal association (אסרו(
צדיק τὸν δίκαιον
ι כי־ ὅτι
טוב δύσχρηστος semantic association (antonym)?
(–) ἡµῖν addition
(–) ἐστι addition

אמרו seems to have received a double translation in the LXX as both εἰπόντες and Δήσωµεν.
The latter is an associative rendering, echoing the Hebrew imperative אסרו”) bind!”). The
relation between טוב and δύσχρηστος is somewhat obscure; maybe the translator has opted
for a Greek adjective meaning “nuisance” because it forms an antonym to טוב.

This can't be called a translation. I am sorry this is not an actual translation. It is a purposed attempt to make Isaiah a witness for the Passion. It must have been attempted by a Christian editor. All of which makes me wonder whether Wisdom 2:12 was the source text and Isaiah 3:10 LXX was an attempt at taking the Wisdom passage out of its original context (i.e. Alexandrian 'mystery' argument) into a more traditional (for us but not for Christianity) understanding of 'the Jewish writings/prophets' predicting Jesus's Passion. Just a thought. When was Isaiah LXX translated? Note that Justin speaks of Isaiah LXX and another translation here (Dial 136).

[archibald]

Yes it is. The word is translated as "well". It doesn't help that the verb involved, ἐστίν, which my feeble memory tells me is in the present tense, is translated as a future, "shall be". Today we'd render this into American English as "Say to the righteous: 'You are fine'."

DCH

Do you think these words referred to a person (and are therefore 'nomen sacrum') or are they merely 'what the word chrestos generally meant'? I suppose I'm quite heavily inclined to think the latter, and that later, a person or figure was given a title related to the general meaning(s).

[Secret Alias]

My teacher argued Chrestos is a translation of the title/figure Shilo in the Genesis prophesy i.e. the one like Moses. I will post the proof shortly. I think it is the best explanation.

[archibald]

My teacher argued Chrestos is a translation of the title/figure Shilo in the Genesis prophesy i.e. the one like Moses. I will post the proof shortly. I think it is the best explanation.

Thanks.

In Isaiah 3 v10, if it's our word 'well', it appears to be what I would call (I only speak English) an adjective. I suppose being 'like Moses' could have become the equivalent of an adjective, if Moses was seen as [insert any of the Koine Greek meanings which seemed to pertain, such as useful, well, kind, etc]. Though, (and I'm guessing here) it had a Greek meaning outside Judaism and outside religious texts, I believe. If this was the case, how would we know, when reading from Jewish sources, when this 'general (Koine) Greek' was the intended meaning and when it might have been related to a person from Judaism?

[Irish1975]

The LXX concordance at Blue Letter Bible gives 12 instances of the adjective χρηστός ("good").

In 11 out of 12, it is "The Lord" who is called good. (κύριος, with or without the article).

Of these, 9 appear in Psalms. The others are at Jeremiah 33:11 and Nahum 1:7.

In 6 cases the words are immediately juxtaposed:

χρηστὸς ὁ κύριος (34:8)
κύριε χρηστὸς (86:5)
χρηστὸς κύριος (100:5, 145:9, Jer 33:11, Na 1:7)


YMMV