Jesus' name is not Christ

[michel]

Part 2

as well as St. Jerome (In Gal., V, 22), are acquainted with the pagan substitution of Chrestes for Christus, and are careful to explain the new term in a favourable sense. The pagans made little or no effort to learn anything accurate about Christ and the Christians; Suetonius, for instance, ascribes the expulsion of the Jews from Rome under Claudius to the constant instigation of sedition by Chrestus, whom he conceives as acting in Rome the part of a leader of insurgents. The use of the definite article before the word Christ and its gradual development into a proper name show the Christians identified the bearer with the promised Messias of the Jews. He combined in His person the offices of prophet (John 6:14; Matthew 13:57; Luke 13:33; 24:19) of king (Luke 23:2; Acts 17:7; 1 Corinthians 15:24; Apocalypse 15:3),and of priest (Hebrew 2:17; etc.); he fulfilled all the Messianic predictions in a fuller and a higher sense than had been given them by the teachers of the Synagogue.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

This is a speculation based on a report from a Roman historian... the word Crestus only appears once with a possible reference to Christianity, which is hotly disputed.

But at this stage the Greeks and Romans understood little or nothing about the import of the word anointed; to them it did not convey any sacred conception. Hence they substituted Chrestus, or "excellent", for Christus or "anointed", and Chrestians instead of "Christians."

All the Roman citations of Christ are here: http://www.bibleviews.com/non-biblical.html.

Only one of them has "Chrestus," weakening the argument that Romans commonly mistook Christ for Chrest.

 

[Bishka]

A minor matter of semantics.

Christ, is not a name, its a title.

While various beliefs will have different definitions, in the simplest of terms it means annointed one. A messiah to some. An enlightened person to others. It is used to describe someone who has a oneness with God that others do not.

It is incorrect to think it belongs only to Jesus, and when using it with him, it should read Jesus the Christ or Christ Jesus.

Not Jesus Christ.


x

What I'm particularly curious about is why this matters so much to you?!?!? Why is it of supreme importance to point out from your point-of-view that we shouldn't read it "Jesus Christ". What is the problem with that? I'm curious how you think it will affect us and what is so wrong about it.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

What I'm particularly curious about is why this matters so much to you?!?!? Why is it of supreme importance to point out from your point-of-view that we shouldn't read it "Jesus Christ". What is the problem with that? I'm curious how you think it will affect us and what is so wrong about it.

The assumption that Christians are so stupid that they don't even know that Christ is a title and not a name, perhaps.

 

[Bishka]

The assumption that Christians are so stupid that they don't even know that Christ is a title and not a name, perhaps.

Perhaps, but why would it even matter if they assumed it was a name? I know some of the most devout and simple people who think it is, but does that make them stupid?

 

[angellous_evangellous]

BTW, when we use common titles to refer to a singular person, it's a substantive use of the title. The Greco-Romans did it with Homer, refering to him only as "(the) poet." In the west "(the) Christ" is Jesus unless otherwise indicated.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

Perhaps, but why would it even matter if they assumed it was a name? I know some of the most devout and simple people who think it is, but does that make them stupid?

From the point of view of the person who takes the time to point out their 'stupidity...'

 

[uumckk16]

BTW, when we use common titles to refer to a singular person, it's a substantive use of the title. The Greco-Romans did it with Homer, refering to him only as "(the) poet." In the west "(the) Christ" is Jesus unless otherwise indicated.

Isn't this the same idea behind calling Siddhartha "(the) Buddha," as well? Even though he is not the only Buddha, he is referred to in that way...

Can a Buddhist please correct me if I'm wrong?

 

[joeboonda]

Jesus Christ, King of Kings and Lord of Lords, God Almighty from whom cometh salvation:

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Isaiah 45:22
Look unto me, and be ye saved, all the ends of the earth: for I am God, and there is none else.
23 I have sworn by myself, the word is gone out of my mouth in righteousness, and shall not return, That unto me every knee shall bow, every tongue shall swear. 24 Surely, shall one say, in the LORD have I righteousness and strength: even to him shall men come; and all that are incensed against him shall be ashamed.


Romans14:10
But why dost thou judge thy brother? or why dost thou set at nought thy brother? for we shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ.
11 For it is written, As I live, saith the Lord, every knee shall bow to me, and every tongue shall confess to God. 12 So then every one of us shall give account of himself to God.

 

[xexon]

Point out in any of my posts where I have called anyone stupid.

You continuously put words in my mouth that I have never spoken. You have done so since my arrival. You can disagree with what I say, but you should keep your personal attacks to yourself.

As I said, it is a small matter. Hardly worth the effort to blown it out of proportion in the way it has been.

I respect other opinions. I don't have to agree with them, but I respect them.


x

 

[Bishka]

Point out in any of my posts where I have called anyone stupid.

You continuously put words in my mouth that I have never spoken. You have done so since my arrival. You can disagree with what I say, but you should keep your personal attacks to yourself.

As I said, it is a small matter. Hardly worth the effort to blown it out of proportion in the way it has been.

I respect other opinions. I don't have to agree with them, but I respect them.


x

Who exactly are you talking to? When make a statement as thus, it's common courtsey to tell who you are directing at so no one takes offense when it is not meant.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

Point out in any of my posts where I have called anyone stupid.

You continuously put words in my mouth that I have never spoken. You have done so since my arrival. You can disagree with what I say, but you should keep your personal attacks to yourself.

As I said, it is a small matter. Hardly worth the effort to blown it out of proportion in the way it has been.

I respect other opinions. I don't have to agree with them, but I respect them.


x

Tell that to this guy:

I accuse anyone who accepts a single penny for religious or spiritual instruction to be a moneychanger in the temple. I don't care if you are the Pope or a preacher in a country church. If you accept money for your services, you are tainted.

I have no respect for anyone who makes a living off of other people's desire to know God.

Not a sincere nor guniune way to show respect for an opinion (by attacking the person).

 

[UnTheist]

Tell that to this guy:



Not a sincere nor guniune way to show respect for an opinion (by attacking the person).

Maybe he doesn't see it as an acceptable opinion to accept money helping the poor.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

Maybe he doesn't see it as an acceptable opinion to accept money helping the poor.

Ha! If only that were what he said...

 

[MaddLlama]

Point out in any of my posts where I have called anyone stupid.

You continuously put words in my mouth that I have never spoken. You have done so since my arrival. You can disagree with what I say, but you should keep your personal attacks to yourself.

As I said, it is a small matter. Hardly worth the effort to blown it out of proportion in the way it has been.

I respect other opinions. I don't have to agree with them, but I respect them.


x

What exactly makes you think that the information you presented isn't common knowledge? I mean, really, what was the point of making this topic if it wasn't to point out how stupid some Christians are?

 

[Moni_Gail]

Michel! Thanks so much for all of that information. I love reading posts that don't contain animosity.

 

[XAAX]

Not Jesus Christ.
x

Maybe Jesus Harold Stein?

 

[Ernestine]

Yes, "Christ" does mean Messiah, the promised one. It is used with the name "Jesus" to denote and differentiate God's son from other Jesus' since the name was very popular during biblical time.

 

[De Otro Lado]

I agree with Xenon. Jesus Christ is so commonly used that the average person probably does not know his full real earthly name. In my studies his name would have been Yeshua (or some variance as posted earlier) Barabbas. The same name as the seditioner in who he was incarcerated with. Can anybody confirm or deny this?

 

[Ozzie]

A minor matter of semantics.

Christ, is not a name, its a title.

While various beliefs will have different definitions, in the simplest of terms it means annointed one. A messiah to some. An enlightened person to others. It is used to describe someone who has a oneness with God that others do not.

It is incorrect to think it belongs only to Jesus, and when using it with him, it should read Jesus the Christ or Christ Jesus.

Not Jesus Christ.



x

If this is a matter of semantics, when I utter jesus christ as is my habit in frustration, I cannot be taking his name in vain. Is this right?