Talk:Ichthys

message: I would like to discuss this edit. I have issue with an anonymous user removing cited content their "justification" being this. The content seems valid, relating to the history of the symbol.
Thoughts? I do not want to take part in an edit war. = paul2520 (talk) 15:52, 28 October 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  recent removal of content 

message: I've consulted the Greek version of the Sibylline Oracles and the acrostic really does contain 27 letters. https://archive.org/details/dieoraculasibyl02geffgoog/page/n217/mode/2up See line 225 (on page 155)... begins with 'Ε' so the full phrase reads "Ἰησοῦς Χρειστὸς Θεοῦ Υἱὸς Σωτήρ", not "Ἰησοῦς Χριστὸς Θεοῦ Υἱὸς Σωτήρ". If somebody wants to argue that this is bad Greek then I guess that's fine, but that's how it's written in the Sibylline Oracles (which St. Augustine was citing) so his ignorance of Greek really has nothing to do with it. (I myself have never studied Greek. Are we sure that "Χρειστὸς" isn't just a genuine variant spelling? At the very least I'm thinking that what the author did may not have been that unusual in the ancient world. I know that St. Ireneaus, for numerological reasons, added an 'ε' to the spellings of "Λατῖνος" (=> Λατεινος) and "Τιτάν" (=> Τειταν) (see here)) 2601:49:C301:D810:60D6:3777:B8C0:7F2D (talk) 18:37, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  I don't think Augustine was wrong about the 27... 

message: What does this mean? Apart form the Satanist-Masonic proselitism, Modernist vehicles has no concerns with the origins of the Christian symbol. Even if that sentence is sourced, it is merely stuff. And it can be hopefully posted in the right place, namely after the end of the article, in a separated seat.Theologian81sp (talk) 21:57, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: What on earth are you on about? I've restored it to the end of the article, where the stickers were already mentioned. Johnbod (talk) 00:06, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed section 

message: The claim, that the Ichthys is a secret symbol, lacks historical justification. The earliest source I am aware of for this claim dates back to the 19th century and also claims this without justification, see . I couldn't find any scholarship acknowledging the secret symbol. The German article also acknowledges that this is a historically unjustified legendary tale.   EntropicPrinciple (talk) 
:Wikipedia appeals to reliable sources for its content. Branded Faith: Contextualizing the Gospel in a Post-Christian Era by Rajkumar Dixit makes it clear that, "The early Christians adopted the sign of the fish (Icthus) as a secret symbol of the faith." Wipf and Stock is a reputed publisher. The source you cited is outdated, going back to 1835, and it's not a scholarly text. --1990'sguy (talk) 00:04, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
replies: text:  Rajkumar Dixit provides no evidence or sources of his claim. In order to assess whether the Ichthys was used as a secret symbol, we need to trace back the origin of the claim. A historian will search for early Christian evidence. I couldn't find any! There are many pages and books that make the assertion of the Ichthys's use as a secret symbol ( just like in Branded Faith), but none of them make reference to historical or scholarly literature on the issue. If this claim is not backed by evidence then it is at best legendary. EntropicPrinciple (talk) 21:36, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Secret Symbol