Evangelist Benincasa Said

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by ManOfWord

More than likely, from what I've studied, the name that was given to Mary was Yeshua or Yehoshua. There is no "J" in the Hebrew "aleph-bet." When the disciples said that there was no other name, they most certainly did NOT use "Jesus."

Excuse me, but aren't you proving my point with the above? So, it is a coin toss between the two? Heads Yeshua, tails Yehoshua?

I guess it is just too easy to use a name that has been in business for over 2200 years and climbing. What is the name of the Messiah? Wouldn't the skinny answer would be Jesus? Yet, the students just reel back on their heels to hear the doctor tell them it is a guess beetween two words?

Originally Posted by ManOfWord

That being the case,

Yes, since a coin toss is just a wee bit ludicrous, you do what?

Originally Posted by ManOfWord

I still baptize in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ.

Now isn't that just amazing! Wow, the lucky boys and girls are never dependent on a coin flip.

Originally Posted by ManOfWord

The "correct" name or pronunciation is not a "talisman" or incantation that causes things to happen...it is the person of Jesus Christ which the name we use represents.

The person of Jesus Christ?

Isn't a correct name or formula used in world history to show the authority of whose name and formula being used?

Therefore you sign your checks with your personal name, business name, and use proper account numbers, so to give authority for transaction. Therefore baptisms through out history wether they were Christian or pagan evoked a name or formula. All to show authority of the particular group, shaman, priest, or deity.

I by no means believe water baptism to be magic, using an incantation or abracadabra, being spoken over the neophyte. Water baptism in Jesus' name has all to do with the baptizer, and the baptizee. The individual being baptized needs to be a believer or one who trusts in the owner of the name.
The one who baptizes also should be one who trusts and believes in the authority of the one who owns the name. Genealogy in the Bible was crucial to the children of Israel, and therefore it was painstaking work to make sure you was begat by who, and who was married to who. All a collection of names of different male patriarchal leaders of different families.

Jesus speaks to Nicodemus about rebirth, and the rebirth that Jesus speaks of will use water baptism. A mikvah that will be done in the authority of the one who owns the name. All those who would take on that name through baptism would be added to the lineage of the one who owned the name.

The prophet Isaiah asks the queestion of who shall declare His generation (Isa 53:8)?

Jesus died young and without lineage, yet, through the power of His resurrection and His Spirit we are added to His genealogy by taking His name.

Originally Posted by ManOfWord

If we say we must return to the "original" then we'll more than likely have to go back to Yeshua.

Heads?

Originally Posted by ManOfWord

I'm not for that even though it is probably correct.

Aren't you not for that because you presently use a name that has been around for over 2200 years? We aren't talking about splicing DNA here, we are talking about historical proofs throughout time.

Originally Posted by ManOfWord

Remember, the Greek language was used to communicate throughout the Roman empire since that was the language of it, but the writers were Jewish not Greek.

So, that means what? If someone is Mexican and has full knowledge of a foreign language (a language of commerce) that would make him less Mexican? No, but how about a Mexican named Tse Lu, who can speak and write Chinese, but he was raised in Mexico, others in his city were also business people who dealt with Chinese, and therefore would be able to effectively communicate in Chinese. Would that make those Mexican any less Mexican?

The Jews in the time of Jesus, spoke the language of the occupation which was Latin, the language of world commerce, which was Greek, and the language of their religion Hebrew. Those who lived around Judea spoke Aramaic. 200 years before Christ, the OT was translated into Greek, that OT LXX would be quoted from the New Testament scrolls used by the early church. None of those scrolls were written in Hebrew or Aramaic, because this wasn't a message just for a desert city, but for aan entire world throughout history. Andrew, and Phillip were as Jewish as Jesus, but they both had Greek names, given to them by Jewish parents. The name of Jesus has been preserved for over 2200 years and counting, no coin toss, no word jumbles, and no guess work. Just use the most used name...Jesus.

Originally Posted by ManOfWord

The mistake most seminaries make is the over study of Greek culture, language etc to understand the NT. It was Jewish minds and cultures which wrote the NT not greeks.

MOW, how many years was the Jews under Gentile occupation?

What seminary did you go to?

In Jesus name

Brother Benincasa

www.OnTimeJournal.com