Yeshua is Jesus!

[angellous_evangellous]

I guess I would have to ask why you, being you say you translate allot, would not do so with names, or at least try to stay away from that?

Respect possibly. Most of the people that I read are now daid.

Also, I consider that names usually do not follow the same rules of grammar as other nouns in many of my languages. I try to preserve the original spelling because if someone tries to look for the person that I refer to in the original language, it will be spelled in the original language.

Also, are you saying that the rules as applied to the name Yeshua as are found on the link you posted is in fact the same as all other names that are to be translated?

Sometimes. There really are no hard and fast rules for translation anyway. It's an art, not a science, and there are many people out there translating that make up their own rules. It's an artsy bunch.

Also, since you seem to be one that deems self as being one of those learned individuals as I posted before, I ask if you could walk us all through the process that one would need to follow to go from the Hebrew form of the name Yahshua to the Greek form.

It's really not that difficult. I don't think that I can add to what's already been done. I've posted links to adequate articles.

 

[wmam]

Respect possibly. Most of the people that I read are now daid.

Also, I consider that names usually do not follow the same rules of grammar as other nouns in many of my languages. I try to preserve the original spelling because if someone tries to look for the person that I refer to in the original language, it will be spelled in the original language.



Sometimes. There really are no hard and fast rules for translation anyway. It's an art, not a science, and there are many people out there translating that make up their own rules. It's an artsy bunch.



It's really not that difficult. I don't think that I can add to what's already been done. I've posted links to adequate articles.

So, am I to understand that those that translated the Hebrew "Yahshua" into "Iesous" did so using their own set of rules? Did you post the links in this thread? I like the reasons that you gave not to translate names. I have often heard that one isn't suppose to translate names. I am of firm believe that as it is written that by only one name will one be saved as being the Hebrew name that His Mother called Him. I wish those of past would not have changed the name. I also heard that certain rules apply for translation that all would have to follow for that translation to be valid. One that stands out is that of bringing the full context and meaning of said word/name along with translation. I further heard that the name "Jesus" does not reflect that of the Hebrew and is invalid as a true representation of the Hebrew. What are your thoughts on such?

 

[angellous_evangellous]

So, am I to understand that those that translated the Hebrew "Yahshua" into "Iesous" did so using their own set of rules?

Greek and Hebrew letters are not the same... yeah, I assume that they were sort of making it up as they went along using the best letters for similar sounds. I imagine that the various documents spell the names differently from time to time... standardized spellings are the product of the printing press and are a modern phenomenon, which is a reason why we can't know what Jesus was actually called.

Did you post the links in this thread?

The OP.

I like the reasons that you gave not to translate names. I have often heard that one isn't suppose to translate names. I am of firm believe that as it is written that by only one name will one be saved as being the Hebrew name that His Mother called Him.

That's just it... we don't know if Jesus and his family spoke Hebrew, Aramaic, or Greek - most likely they were at least bilingual - I suppose Aramaic or Greek.

I wish those of past would not have changed the name. I also heard that certain rules apply for translation that all would have to follow for that translation to be valid. One that stands out is that of bringing the full context and meaning of said word/name along with translation. I further heard that the name "Jesus" does not reflect that of the Hebrew and is invalid as a true representation of the Hebrew. What are your thoughts on such?

Well it's been a long time, and the preservers of the NT preserved the name of Jesus only in Greek and not Aramaic or Hebrew, and Jesus is only referred to in the disciples of the apostles in Greek. Apparantly it was not a big deal to preserve the Aramaic if the disciples referred to Jesus in Aramaic. The accessible entire world to them spoke Greek...

I agree that Jesus is not a valid pronounciation of the Hebrew, because it's not Hebrew, it's English, and the standard representation for Jesus in spoken and written English. I don't think that it is unreasonable to assume that when one uses a different representation (Yeshua for Jesus) one is trying to make some kind of artificial distinction between the two.

 

[wmam]

Greek and Hebrew letters are not the same... yeah, I assume that they were sort of making it up as they went along using the best letters for similar sounds. I imagine that the various documents spell the names differently from time to time... standardized spellings are the product of the printing press and are a modern phenomenon, which is a reason why we can't know what Jesus was actually called.

Wow......... then how is one to feel after reading.........."That by no other name given" when translators were making it up as they went and if there is no way of knowing what they called the Ha Mashiach? So sad.

That's just it... we don't know if Jesus and his family spoke Hebrew, Aramaic, or Greek - most likely they were at least bilingual - I suppose Aramaic or Greek.

Are you saying that Yahshua was a Grecian?

 

[gnostic]

If I remember my Greek alphabet correctly, since there are no "j" equivalent in Greek (but correct me if I am wrong). The closest Greek letter to a "j" is iota, which resemble an "i". Then isn't this Greek "Jesus" with a "j" is wrong?

 

[angellous_evangellous]

Are you saying that Yahshua was a Grecian?

Jesus was a Jew during the Greco-Roman period and most likely spoke Greek. It's hard to be more clear than that.

The name that we call God is by faith. The "true" name of God is lost, and the "genuine" pronounciation of Jesus' name is only hypothetical, and nothing is gained by referring to the historical person with a hypothetical nomiker.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

If I remember my Greek alphabet correctly, since there are no "j" equivalent in Greek (but correct me if I am wrong). The closest Greek letter to a "j" is iota, which resemble an "i". Then isn't this Greek "Jesus" with a "j" is wrong?

Not when it's carried over into English transliteration. At the beginning of words, the iota is carried over as a "J", but in words it is carried over as an "i."

 

[wmam]

Jesus was a Jew during the Greco-Roman period and most likely spoke Greek. It's hard to be more clear than that.

Most likely huh? Not debating but only discussing that I truly believe this to me is more in line with your next statement in being that this statement is only hypothetical. Anyone has to do is pick up a history book, and or the Scriptures, to see where it wasn't something that Hebrews accepted all that well. They despised the Gentiles and wanted nothing to do with their languages. To them it was an abomination to even associate with them. Any Jew that was known to speak Greek was an outcast and was considered a Grecian.

The name that we call God is by faith.

I totally disagree with your statement here. Might be to your faith but is not of mine. I call it for what it is which in the Hebrew is "Elohim".

The "true" name of God is lost,

Again I disagree. The Name of the Most High Elohim is "YAH".

and the "genuine" pronounciation of Jesus' name is only hypothetical,

Well I do not accept this jesus as the true Mashiach but rather agree that it is NOT the genuine article but rather Yahshua is.

and nothing is gained by referring to the historical person with a hypothetical nomiker.

I agree. Thats why I don't understand why so many use god, which means super human, and jesus, which is in no way is a correct translation, nor transliteration, of the name of Yahshua. One would think with as smart as todays man thinks he is that he would at least acknowledge that Miryam (Mary for all those that just have to translate a name of a person) never, ever called her Son by this Greek induced name of jesus.

 

[sojourner]

Do you really think that God and Jesus are so small that they cannot or will not accept what is in one's heart rather than what is on one's tongue? Do you really think they're that picayune?

 

[wmam]

Do you really think that God and Jesus are so small

If one is only discussing ones beliefs and not debating then I think one would try not to be so belittling in their statements/questions as to ones understanding.

that they cannot

or will not

Much better choice of verbiage I believe.

accept what is in one's heart rather than what is on one's tongue?

I really rather go by exactly what the Law and the Prophets tell, and command, us, which is also what Yahshua reflected as well, other than follow what I think. It is plainly written how one is to observe, worship and fear the Most High Elohim. Its really a mute point to debate other to me.

Do you really think they're that picayune?

LOL......You really should go back and learn how to play nice with others.

Answer.......... I do not believe that YAH, which is the Most High Elohim, is either "Trivial" nor "Petty". And I mean that in the most complete and strongest meaning that one could assert. I do not believe that Yahshua should have been involved in your question though. It is hard for me because I do not believe that YAH and Yahshua are equal, nor the same, so Yahshua wouldn't do anything without YAH's will. This means the question to me would be if YAH Himself would accept mans poor vain attempts to worship Him by other means rather than following His direct commandments. My answer is no, but, it isn't really my answer but that of YAH the Most High Elohim. It is written what He will do with those that disobey Him.

Now that we have stirred off course, because yet again, someone chose to grab the stirring wheel...........We now go back to our regular scheduled programming...............

 

[gnostic]

Not when it's carried over into English transliteration. At the beginning of words, the iota is carried over as a "J", but in words it is carried over as an "i."

I supposes it is. "i" and "y" can be used interchangably, or to be more precise, they are one and the same.

Just like Yahweh or Iahweh is used in perference over Jehovah. But since Hebrew uses only consonants then the actual name is YHWH. No "j" here too.