Evangelist Benincasa Said

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by Michael The Disciple

A few examples of how Hebrew names are altered by putting them into Greek. Emphasis on the s being added to the end.

Elijah becomes Elias
Jeremiah becomes Jeremias
Josiah becomes Josias
Hezekiah becomes Ezekias

Altho the well studied Bible reader will recognize these names either way it cant be denied that the s addition changes them.

Since our own English language does not require an s at the end of a male name why not drop it from Jesus? In older versions they did not retain it but as time went on it made its way back in.

That would be a good place to start.

The "s at the end" in a Greek noun or name results from the case in which the name is being used. If the the name is used in a different sense, usage or a different part of a sentence it will have a different "ending" or inflection.

An example would be " Iesou' " in Matthew 1:1 and Luke 1:31 where it is " Iesou'n. "

[Michael The Disciple]

Originally Posted by Brother David

The "s at the end" in a Greek noun or name results from the case in which the name is being used. If the the name is used in a different sense, usage or a different part of a sentence it will have a different "ending" or inflection.

An example would be " Iesou' " in Matthew 1:1 and Luke 1:31 where it is " Iesou'n. "

Yes I am aware of this but would you agree the s is not part of the actual name?

Was Jeremiahs name really Jeremias and so forth?

[Sam]

Originally Posted by Michael The Disciple

A controversy is how the I was pronounced in early English. Most Im aware of say it was with a y sound. Others say it sounded like a j.

Its important to this topic.

Well, English is a combination of Saxon (old German or Norse) and French (derived from Latin) isn't it? The German language doesn't have a "J" sound, does it? I don't think Latin does. French now has a "JZH" sound as in "je". I have no idea how those folks pronounced "Iesus" 400 years ago, but however they pronounced it, when they called on that name by faith, I am sure that God responded.

[Sam]

Originally Posted by Michael The Disciple

A few examples of how Hebrew names are altered by putting them into Greek. Emphasis on the s being added to the end.

Elijah becomes Elias
Jeremiah becomes Jeremias
Josiah becomes Josias
Hezekiah becomes Ezekias
...

My CJB (Complete Jewish Bible) has
Eliyahu for Elijah
Yirmeyahu for Jeremiah
Yesha'yahu for Isaiah
Yoshiyahu for Josiah
Y'chizkiyahu for Hezekiah

[Michael The Disciple]

Originally Posted by Sam

My CJB (Complete Jewish Bible) has
Eliyahu for Elijah
Yirmeyahu for Jeremiah
Yesha'yahu for Isaiah
Yoshiyahu for Josiah
Y'chizkiyahu for Hezekiah

Hi Sam,

I am not advocating the use of Hebrew names in all cases. Only for the name above every names. Only for the name to which every knee shall bow and every tongue confess. Only for the name of the Messiah.

The examples I gave from Greek to English were only meant to prove that by adding the s names were altered and specifically the Lords name.

Something very telling from the version you drew these names from.

The CJB gives the Hebrew name with its English transliteration.

YESHUA FOR JESUS

That is the name Dom has constantly attacked ever since I have known him.

[Michael The Disciple]

Originally Posted by Brother David

The "s at the end" in a Greek noun or name results from the case in which the name is being used. If the the name is used in a different sense, usage or a different part of a sentence it will have a different "ending" or inflection.

An example would be " Iesou' " in Matthew 1:1 and Luke 1:31 where it is " Iesou'n. "

How would you pronounce Iesou?

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by ManOfWord

Great point above, Michael. There is no "J" in Hebrew and there is NO way that the angel told Mary to call him "JESUS."

Fact of the matter is, you hardly have any clue to what the angel told Mary.

Remember, you believe it is a coin toss between the two?

Yet, you want to still defend that it would be ok if someone had a shofar moment, and wanted to baptize someone in one of those misnomers.

What I have been saying over and over again is why not advocate what we do have. The representation of a name that has been around and in use longer than the mystery name. Until the Messianic Christian movement came in vouge, and the Sacred Name Cults launched to high gear, everyone was happy to use Jesus Christ. Then with the advent of the Hebrew Roots and Yahwists Jesus got a name change. He was given a kipa, peyos, tzitzes, and a shofar to blow over those He prayed for. Music in the services sounded more like what would be heard in Synagogue in Bensonhurst Brooklyn.
Jesus went from being God in the flesh, the Christ, to Yeshua Ha Messiah the Lubavitcher Rebbe of Brooklyn Heights?

Michael the Hebrew Roots Disciple, asked me why I made the comment to him about using the tried and true name (one that he himself called the highest in the English language no less) the name of Jesus Chirst.

I then replied to him that the name of Jesus had been in use for over 2200 years. Yet, that information went on deaf ears. We then tugged back and forth over word jumbles, semetic language Phds (one who claims that Yeshua was short form of Yehoshua? Good grief) and leading all the way to how the Angel told Mary how Jesus SHOULD be called. Yet, no one seemed to acknowledge that in the LXX the name Joshua is Iesoûs, not Yeshua.

I read over this thread and no one even mentions that in Ezra, and in the book of Joshua the name of Jesus is spelled differently. Ezra, Yeshua, and in the book of Joshua it is the earlier from. Yeshua is a latter from. Yet, 200 years before Christ, the name appears in Ezra as Ἰησοῦς, and in the book of Exodus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, and Joshua as Ἰησοῦς. Anyone starting to understand what I'm trying to say here? Masoretic text seems hard pressed to figure out what name to use, yet 200 years before Christ was born, the name is found preserved in the Greek OT. Later the KJV, would preserve the name of Joshua as Ἰησοῦς in the book of Hebrews. Now, what would be easier?
Fishing around, flipping a coin, just wanting desperately to sound Hebraic?

God is NO RESPECTER OF PERSONS!!!! Jesus is God, NOT a nationality!

Originally Posted by ManOfWord

Listen,

I'm still waiting to find out how someone who doesn't go to a seminary, becomes a seminary professor? Maybe its because you speak English, and they're Korean, and Chinese?

Originally Posted by ManOfWord

I have no problem with people digging into their history and stating that we need to return to our "roots."

We?? Who is the *we?* Looking for a robe and sandals? I presented 2200 years of history. Yet, one half of America pictures Jesus as a hippy in a robe and flip flops, and the other as a Hasidic Rabbi living in the Middle East.

Originally Posted by ManOfWord

However, most only go as far back to their "roots" as they are comfortable with.

Yeah, as long as they aren't a part of your congregation. I doubt that you would be exicted about having your parishoners dressed like the cast of the Ten Commandments. Or, maybe you would?

Originally Posted by ManOfWord

I've studied Judaism in its historical context for 20yrs. I can always tell when someone is shallow in their study by saying that we must return to the "original."

Brother, most want us to return to Rabbinical Judaism (evolved after the destruction of the second temple and was codified by the middle ages). Also, some like the sacred name groups go into some odd type of homogenized Law Keeping religion. Yet, complete with skull caps, long beards, and a mix of Yiddish, and Hebrew.

Originally Posted by ManOfWord

If they knew what that really meant, they wouldn't go there.

I totally agree with you there.

Originally Posted by ManOfWord

If we want to back to the "original" we'll have to stop using Jesus and go to Yeshua, which is favored above Yehoshua.

You see, the debate is still on even about those two names. Going back to an original wouldn't be an issue, if the original Gospel accounts were written in Hebrew, and we had the original Aramaic/ Hebrew perserved. It is silly to say we have two originals so lets flip a coin. You have JESUS, for 2200 years and climbing. My argument isn't about originals, or Hebrew guess words, mine is more about agendas. If you have a name used for over 2200 years, why bother to force people to endure being greeted inb broken Hebrew?

Originally Posted by ManOfWord

But I've gone down that road as well and read from those who promote that doctrine. They only go that far because it suits their desires.

You are correct.

Originally Posted by ManOfWord

Only the foolish really advocate for returning to the biblical "original" when it comes to Bible because they'll have to bring a culture back into their lives which they're not willing to implement. At least in my experience anyway.

It is just like Islam who desires their people to learn Arabic, and the men to wear a dress and the women slacks. Go figure.


In Jesus NAME!

Brother Benincasa

www.OnTimeJournal.com

[Michael The Disciple]

Dom said

Michael the Hebrew Roots Disciple, asked me why I made the comment to him about using the tried and true name (one that he himself called the highest in the English language no less) the name of Jesus Chirst.

I asked about no such thing. I asked about the name you said was preserved in GREEK.
The name Jesus seems to never have been in the Greek. Neither was it ever in the English until after 1611.

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by Michael The Disciple

I asked about no such thing. I asked about the name you said was preserved in GREEK.
The name Jesus seems to never have been in the Greek. Neither was it ever in the English until after 1611.

Mike, the name Jesus is handed down to us through the Greek. Iesous is Iesus. Which is a direct translation of Iesous, as

Mike, your above statement doesn't make any sense. The Greek Iesous is Iesus, were we get Jesus. 1611 you say? In 1611 we had Iesus (still in its first century Latin spelling). On the cross, the name of Jesus appeared in Latin, Greek, and Aramaic. Its a coin toss on how we are to guess which would be correct in Hebrew or Aramaic, yet in Greek and Latin the name would be Iesous/Iesus. 200 years before His birth, His name is recorded in the LXX as Iesous. For over 2,000 years He has been called Jesus.


1611? How about 382 AD, and even earlier in early Latin texts, the name is Iesus.

Hebrew roots movements have caused much confusion on such a simple subject.

In Jesus name

Brother Benincasa

www.OnTimeJournal.com

[Jeffrey]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

Mike, the name Jesus is handed down to us through the Greek. Iesous is Iesus. Which is a direct translation of Iesous, as

Mike, your above statement doesn't make any sense. The Greek Iesous is Iesus, were we get Jesus. 1611 you say? In 1611 we had Iesus (still in its first century Latin spelling). On the cross, the name of Jesus appeared in Latin, Greek, and Aramaic. Its a coin toss on how we are to guess which would be correct in Hebrew or Aramaic, yet in Greek and Latin the name would be Iesous/Iesus. 200 years before His birth, His name is recorded in the LXX as Iesous. For over 2,000 years He has been called Jesus.


1611? How about 382 AD, and even earlier in early Latin texts, the name is Iesus.

Hebrew roots movements have caused much confusion on such a simple subject.

In Jesus name

Brother Benincasa

www.OnTimeJournal.com