RGR Posted January 13, 2004 Group: Royal Member Followers: 2 Topic Count: 512 Topics Per Day: 0.07 Content Count: 8,601 Content Per Day: 1.13 Reputation: 125 Days Won: 2 Joined: 07/16/2003 Status: Offline Birthday: 12/04/1973 Author Share Posted January 13, 2004 Greetings Shiloh, Yeshua's name is Yeshua. It is not Jesus. That is just historical fact. I do not subscribe to the whole "Zeus" thing that has been posted. I have seen that stuff put out by the heretical Yahwist cults that claim that unless you pray using the name "Yahweh," your prayers are never heard. That is just wrong. Now is it that big of a deal that we also refer to Him as Jesus? I do not think so, but we need to at least acknowledge what His real name is. I believe that people are saved if they pray to Yeshua or Jesus. He knows who they are talking to. I will again pose this question TO YOU. From all that has been gathered so far from Bible historians, the NT was written primarily if not totally in Koine Greek. The oldest portion of NT scripture is from about 40-50 AD and it was in Greek. Also since the majority of the NT was written to non-Hebrew speaking gentiles, then the liklihood is that the "original" books were even more likely to have been written in Greek. What this means is that the Disciples used Iesus in their writings instead of Yeshua. Where does one get off telling us gentiles we must use the Hebrew Name Yeshua? Blessings, Dad Ernie Right on!!! I called on the name of JESUS for the cleansing of my sins and I was saved! I DID NOT call on Zeus or some other pagan deity!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snowdoove Posted January 13, 2004 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 2 Topic Count: 303 Topics Per Day: 0.04 Content Count: 698 Content Per Day: 0.09 Reputation: 3 Days Won: 0 Joined: 01/15/2003 Status: Offline Birthday: 01/05/1946 Share Posted January 13, 2004 When I said "transliteration," that means the same thing as John in French becoming Jacques or in Spanish Jose (I believe?). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
papadawg Posted May 8, 2006 Group: Members Followers: 0 Topic Count: 0 Topics Per Day: 0 Content Count: 4 Content Per Day: 0.00 Reputation: 0 Days Won: 0 Joined: 05/03/2006 Status: Offline Share Posted May 8, 2006 I know obviously Yeshua is the equivalent term of Jesus, just as Joshua is I believe. Could someone clue me in as to why it is spelled this way and when it came into popular usage? I've seen "Yeshua" being used quite a bit on the boards and wanted to know more if that makes sense. Thanks. Ronald, I have been learning the Hebrew language and the closest thing to Jesus in the Hebrew language is "the horse" the = he seus = horse. As I seen other ppl say Yeshua or Yashua both translate to Yah is salvation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest onethang Posted August 11, 2006 Share Posted August 11, 2006 I can't believe Mashiachim refer to themselves as Messianics. Go back to the origional hebrew, because El doesn't understand any other languages. Besides, Messianic is an insult from the English language, deriving from the word Messy and Maniac. So we must stop refering to ourselves as crazy slobs, instead use the term Mashiachim. And what's all this "Moses" stuff? his name was Moshe. Or do you believe in the law of "More Zeus"? that's right Mo-ses = Mo' Zeus. And what's the deal with Shabbat Candles? they are not made from cans people! If you speak any language other than Eberit (you may know it as Hebrew, but it's not about brewing beer or coffee, it's about Avraham's grandpa) then you are part of the Babelonian Conspiracy. (dripping with satirical sarcasm.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Floatingaxe Posted August 11, 2006 Group: Royal Member Followers: 3 Topic Count: 62 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 9,613 Content Per Day: 1.45 Reputation: 656 Days Won: 9 Joined: 03/11/2006 Status: Offline Birthday: 05/31/1952 Share Posted August 11, 2006 Besides, Messianic is an insult from the English language, deriving from the word Messy and Maniac. Not to go off track here, but that is ridiculous! Messiah believers are Messianics! Simple adjectival suffix there! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 12, 2006 Share Posted September 12, 2006 Reply to Ronald: 1) Hebrew has no vowels. See: Hebrew in encyclopedia. 2) Neither Hebrew or Greek has a letter, "J." 3) Joshua, Strong's #3091 reads: 'WSWHY (no vowels). [Heb. reads right to left.] 4) Greek name for Joshua is the same as Iesous. 5) Geneva Bible; 1599, had one corrupted "Jesus" in Matthew, Chapter One; with about four uncorrupted "Iesous" names. 6) 1611 Edition of KIng Iames Version, had no letters "J." The British invented the letter "J" in about AD 1725. Today, men are teaching that the Jews' Aramaic is superior to the Koine Greek New Testament. And that is where "Yehoshua" comes from; from casting away the Bible. sidwms Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EricH Posted September 12, 2006 Group: Royal Member Followers: 3 Topic Count: 366 Topics Per Day: 0.05 Content Count: 10,933 Content Per Day: 1.57 Reputation: 212 Days Won: 1 Joined: 04/21/2005 Status: Offline Share Posted September 12, 2006 Reply to Ronald: 1) Hebrew has no vowels. See: Hebrew in encyclopedia. This is only partially true. Hebrew as originally written did not indicate what the vowels were. The Masoretes added vowel pointings later to indicate the vowels. They always existed phoenetically. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yahsway Posted September 13, 2006 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 2 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 657 Content Per Day: 0.09 Reputation: 3 Days Won: 0 Joined: 08/20/2004 Status: Offline Birthday: 02/15/1959 Share Posted September 13, 2006 correct me if i am wrong, but isn't "Jesus" the Latin term taken from the Greek "Iesous" which is taken from the Hebrew "Yeshua"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Naziyr Posted September 15, 2006 Group: Junior Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 0 Topics Per Day: 0 Content Count: 113 Content Per Day: 0.02 Reputation: 1 Days Won: 0 Joined: 09/15/2006 Status: Offline Birthday: 04/30/1984 Share Posted September 15, 2006 Shalom (as is much needed here apparently), It is my first day here, so be kind if you do not agree with what I have to say . There have been a few stated ideas concerning the name of the Moshiac, and some are really quite blasphemous and hurtful to the credibility of the True Church in the eyes of those who seek knowledge of the roots of the Faith. My main point should be easily accepted and believed when given a pinch of logic and understanding, and shouldn't warrent harassing me or namecalling against me, or stating I am "ignorant" because I have a differing view that might possibly hold more weight. Some are guilty of this, as brothers are turned easily against brothers here it seems. Once again, Shalom to all, and here's what I bring: The name of Jesus has undergone a few changes since it was first spoken in Aramaic. Aramaic is the bases for the majority of the middle eastern Cananite languages. From Aramaic Hebrew gets it's roots. Later on of course, as is with most languages, the roots make a full revolution and come back to add weight. (As we see Chaldean tongues being introduced into Hebrew but being easily assimilated because of it's root dialect Aramaic) For a brief overview of the name of Jesus starting from Hebrew: Y'shua Hebrew to Iesous Greek to ... oh dear I forgot the Latin.. um I think it's Iesus...but anyways Greek to Latin to Jesu German to Jesus English Now I've heard it said and argued that the name Iesous comes from Zeus and is a trace element of Pagan practice in the Christian Church, but this is not so. A simple in depth study of the name as it transitions from tongue to tongue would yield easily, the answer to many people's questions. For the sake of common resource, I will use the Strongs Concordance to show the transition, and the importance of knowing the context of the languages involved. First lets see the Hebrew name... Y'shua. Now I do Y'shua, because the name of Y'shua holds the title of G-d and since I am Jewish, I don't write out the name as we're commanded not to, but for teaching purposes I will write it out here. If you choose to print, please use the bolded version of what I type and delete the non bolded. Hebrew: Yehoshua Y'shua This word finds it's roots in two words that are close relatives to their Aramaic forms... and this is important, but for now let's examine the roots. Yeh - meaning G-d Y'h Shua - meaning Saves Yeh in it's pure root form is "Yehovah" (which really isn't correct cause Jehovah didn't come along till the German Language got a hold of YHVH and Adonai and tried to mix the two but for concordance sake, we'll use Jehovah) This name YHVH is purposely not spelled out in Hebrew Texts because it is the Holy name of G-d and isn't to be written out for a number of reasons, and in Anchient Hebrew history, the name was mentioned by the High Priests only a handful of times, and that was for special occasions only. Shua in it's pure root form is "yaw-shah" meaning "free, open, etc. etc.". Well it doesn't mean "etc. etc." but you get the idea This may not seem important now, or to some, may be a repeat of a lessoned learned already, but it's important once we get to the next translation which.. is next. Haha. Now what in the world made the Greeks translate Yehoshua into Iesous? Let's break down the word Iesous. (and again, no it wasn't cause of a pagan god *rolls eyes*) The word itself, is NOT PURELY GREEK. Again? THE WORD ITSELF IS NOT PURELY GREEK. Then what else is in it you ask? ARAMAIC. Anyone that knows Aramaic knows that "sous" is the Greecian/Aramaic form of "shua" which means "saves" or in most references "saved" So if we know what "sous" means, what can you imagine does "Ie" stand for? Well there's another catch. "Ies" is the Greecian/Aramaic form of G-d. Why is the Greek language mixed with Aramaic? A simple study of Military Occupation and Transitional Languages will reveal the answer. Anchient Persian Military occupation (A primarily Aramaic speaking civilization) left it's mark on many languages. But we really shouldn't let the name of the Moshiac be what divides us, but instead what unites us . Again, Shalom (P.S. I Looooooove these smileys!) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Christopher_John Posted September 24, 2006 Share Posted September 24, 2006 Shalom (as is much needed here apparently), It is my first day here, so be kind if you do not agree with what I have to say . Again, Shalom (P.S. I Looooooove these smileys!) Hi Naziyr welcome aboard. Excellent post. Peace CJ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts