The question of whether the name Jesus (Ἰησοῦς in Greek) developed from a transliteration of the Hebrew word for "man" (אישו, "Ishu") is far more complex than traditional Christian scholarship often suggests. When we approach the topic through the Marcionite tradition and the earliest Christian manuscripts, we must acknowledge that the evidence does not neatly align with the narrative that has been constructed by later Catholic tradition.
The Problem with Ἰησοῦς: Forced Interpretation?
Let’s start with what we have: early manuscripts often present ΙΣ, the nomen sacrum (sacred abbreviation) used for the name of Jesus. Scholars tend to assume that ΙΣ is an abbreviation for Ἰησοῦς, but why make this leap? What evidence supports this interpretation? We need to ask if this assumption is an anachronistic imposition influenced by later orthodox readings of the text.
The reality is that the Marcionite tradition, which predates Catholic orthodoxy, does not support the idea that their divine figure was ever named Ἰησοῦς—a name connected to the Joshua typology that Marcionites expressly rejected. If we accept that the Marcionites were not simply a rogue sect but represented an early and significant form of Christianity, we should question why their text consistently uses ΙΣ instead of spelling out Ἰησοῦς. It suggests a fundamentally different understanding of their savior, one that was not anchored in the Joshua tradition.
The Marcionite "Stranger" and the Luminous Man
The Marcionites saw their savior as a divine, luminous being descending from heaven—a "stranger" to this world. This figure, floating down from the heavens (or, as Ephrem records, coming down from a cosmic mountain), was not a historical figure like Joshua. Why, then, would the Marcionites attach the name Ἰησοῦς to this celestial entity?
The Marcionite manuscripts, when read plainly, use ΙΣ, a form that aligns more naturally with the Hebrew איש (Ish), meaning "man." In Samaritan tradition, איש is not just any man but an angelic figure, a powerful being who intervenes on Israel's behalf. This understanding fits neatly with the Marcionite portrayal of their divine stranger, one who transcends earthly typologies and resists attempts to ground him in the Jewish tradition.
Is ΙΣ a Misread Abbreviation?
Catholic tradition insists on reading ΙΣ as a shorthand for Ἰησοῦς, ignoring the plain evidence on the page and imposing an interpretation that aligns with their established theology. This approach forces us to fill in the blanks and assume that ΙΣ is just an abbreviation, dismissing the possibility that it is a standalone, complete designation. This creates a scenario where the Marcionite "sky god" is shoehorned into the Catholic paradigm—a strategy that ultimately reveals the manipulation of early Christian texts to fit later orthodox narratives.
Reinterpreting the Demonic Recognition in the Gospel
In the Marcionite version of the gospel, the stranger who descends remains unnamed until the demons identify him. This is not a trivial detail but a crucial theological statement. The demons recognize him not as Ἰησοῦς but as ΙΣ—the Holy One of God. This points to an identity that is understood by supernatural forces but is not immediately apparent to humanity. The gospel narrative deliberately withholds his name, reinforcing his role as a divine, cosmic stranger rather than a historical figure tied to Jewish messianic expectations.
If we read Τί ἡμῖν καὶ σοί, ΙΣ as "What have you to do with us, Ish?" the text preserves the Marcionite understanding that this figure is an angelic "man" from Genesis—one who embodies divine power and authority, but not in the manner that later Catholic interpretations would have us believe. The demons recognize this being as a heavenly entity, reinforcing the Marcionite claim that he was not of this world.
The Exodus Connection: The איש מלחמה (Man of War)
The Marcionites’ rejection of the Ἰησοῦς typology is further clarified when we examine their identification of Jesus as the "man of war" (איש מלחמה) from Exodus 15:3. The Marcionites viewed their divine figure as the true "man" of God, the one who embodies the divine warrior leading Israel through the waters of redemption. This echoes their understanding of baptism, not as an earthly purification ritual but as a cosmic act where the heavenly man rescues souls and ascends back to the highest heaven.
Tertullian’s commentary on Jesus walking on water, which he tries to connect to the Marcionite view, shows that even the Church Fathers were aware of this deeper tradition. The connection between Jesus and the איש מלחמה motif demonstrates that the Marcionites held to a cosmic, pre-existent understanding of their savior, an understanding that aligns more closely with a heavenly being than with a historical Joshua.
The Samaritan Link: The Angelic Man in the Pentateuch
If we consider the Samaritan tradition, we find further support for reading ΙΣ as "Ish." In Samaritan theology, איש is a powerful angelic figure who plays a crucial role throughout the Pentateuch. This figure—hidden but present—acts as an intermediary between God and Israel. It makes sense that the Marcionites, whose theology aligns more closely with Samaritan concepts than with later orthodox Christian ones, would retain this understanding. For them, ΙΣ represented this angelic man, a being not bound by earthly constraints or typologies.
Why the Marcionites Could Never Accept Ἰησοῦς
To suggest that the Marcionite god could have been named Ἰησοῦς is an absurdity when placed in the context of their beliefs. How could a celestial, luminous figure descending from heaven bear the same name as an earthly patriarch? The Marcionite refusal to adopt the Joshua typology reinforces their commitment to a cosmic, rather than historical, interpretation of their savior.
This reluctance aligns with Ephrem's records that Marcionites denied that their savior was ever tied to Joshua. They rejected any earthly association, instead holding firm to the idea that their divine man was an unearthly, pre-existent being. The manuscripts support this: ΙΣ stands as a direct representation of the divine "man" concept from Genesis and other Pentateuch passages.
The Marcionite interpretation provides a coherent and internally consistent framework for understanding their divine figure as ΙΣ. It aligns with Samaritan theology, early Christian mystical traditions, and the cosmic vision of their gospel. The later Catholic reinterpretation, which forced ΙΣ into the mold of Ἰησοῦς, was a deliberate attempt to reframe the Marcionite tradition and impose an orthodox narrative.
In the end, the textual evidence, the Marcionite theology, and the Samaritan parallels point to ΙΣ as a reference to the divine "man"—not as a shorthand for Ἰησοῦς, but as a standalone title that aligns with the earliest Christian understanding of their savior as a cosmic, pre-existent being. To accept Ἰησοῦς as the original form is to impose an anachronistic interpretation that ignores the complexities and nuances of early Christian thought.
