I.R.M. Boid' on Shilo as Chrestos

In the realm of early Christian and Samaritan studies, few discussions are as riveting as the interpretation of prophetic and messianic titles. Recently, Secret Alias highlighted an intriguing analysis by Boid, which delves into the equivalence of Shilo and Chrestos. This new perspective, set to be published soon, promises to shed light on a nuanced understanding of messianic expectations in both Jewish and Samaritan contexts.

Justin Martyr and the Dual Translations

Justin Martyr’s Dialogue with Trypho provides a fertile ground for exploring these translations. In Chapter 120, Justin quotes Genesis 49:10, presenting two distinct Greek translations: τὰ ἀποκóμεινα ἀυτῷ and ᾧ ἀπόκειται. These phrases, translating to “what is stored up for him” and “he for whom it is stored up,” respectively, reflect different theological nuances. Justin’s audience, likely familiar with the Samaritan Pentateuch, may have understood these phrases in the context of their unique traditions, diverging from the Septuagint (LXX) used by Jews.

The Samaritan Influence

Boid suggests that the Samaritans, with their distinct religious texts and interpretations, played a crucial role in shaping early Christian thought. The term Shilo, often linked to messianic expectations, carries significant weight in Samaritan theology. In Samaritan texts, the word שלה (Shilo) is sometimes spelled שילה, aligning numerically with the name Moses (345). This numerical equivalence hints at deeper connections between Samaritan messianism and early Christian titles.

The Concept of Chrestos

The term Chrestos, meaning “good” or “kind,” appears in various early Christian and Gnostic texts. Boid posits that Chrestos could have originally signified an aspect of the awaited messianic figure, one who embodies moral and spiritual excellence. This interpretation aligns with the Samaritan and early Christian understanding of a divine redeemer, distinct from the traditional Jewish Messiah.

Theological Implications

Boid’s upcoming work emphasizes the profound theological implications of these linguistic and textual analyses. The usage of Shilo and Chrestos reflects a broader attempt to reconcile different messianic expectations within early Christianity. It underscores a theological shift from a purely Jewish framework to a more inclusive interpretation that incorporates Samaritan and Hellenistic elements.

Conclusion

As we anticipate Boid’s full publication, the discussion around Shilo and Chrestos offers a fascinating glimpse into the complex interplay of religious texts and traditions in early Christian theology. This analysis not only enriches our understanding of Justin Martyr’s works but also highlights the enduring influence of Samaritan thought on Christian doctrine.