sacred name theory

Jesus is a translation into English, correct. Neither of them held that Jesus was used in that language or at that time. They were arguing the opposite. The end result is the same, though. No relationship between Jesus and Zeus.
 
Ichneumonwasp said:
Jesus is a translation into English, correct. Neither of them held that Jesus was used in that language or at that time. They were arguing the opposite. The end result is the same, though. No relationship between Jesus and Zeus.
Click to expand...
Honestly no it isn't a translation. Your name is the name your parents gave you wherever you travel and whatever language is spoken (unless you legally change your name). You can't translate a name. Let's say my name is John. If i go to China, my name is John regardless of the locals calling me anything else. If they respect me enough, they will use my proper name. Let's say for arguments sake that they called me Xon and then I went to Europe. Is my name Xon or whatever they decided to translate it as or is my name John as my parents gave me?
 
Are you suggesting that in the Koine Greek surviving manuscripts that we have, we see the name Jesus? Spelled exactly like that J-e-s-u-s?

ETA

I mean, come on. At the very least we are forced to transliterate because we use a different script.
 
Last edited:
Ichneumonwasp said:
Are you suggesting that in the Koine Greek surviving manuscripts that we have, we see the name Jesus? Spelled exactly like that J-e-s-u-s?
Click to expand...

Of course not. This forum uses ASCII and UNICODE for its character represtentations, and Koine Greek used EBCIDIC. ASCII hadn't been invented yet.
 
Ichneumonwasp said:
Are you suggesting that in the Koine Greek surviving manuscripts that we have, we see the name Jesus? Spelled exactly like that J-e-s-u-s?

ETA

I mean, come on. At the very least we are forced to transliterate because we use a different script.
Click to expand...
Read my posts and stop being idiotic. I said jesus is not in the Tanach. Are you always such a stubborn nutcase that misreads anything written by someone you disagree with? Show me where I said the name jesus appears in the Tanach or retract your idiotic strawman.
 
OK, I'll try one more time. No one has said the name J-e-s-u-s is in the Tanakh. Malachi said that the name we have in the Greek is a transliteration of a name that does appear in the Tanakh -- more than once. The name that we transliterate as Joshua is the same in the Greek as the name we translate/transliterate as Jesus. Now, there are two possibilities here. There is the common name that we transliterate as Joshua that when transliterated from Hebrew into Greek becomes Ihsou (it's actually different in the Greek because it is in a different script). We have that same name being used for the name that we translate/transliterate as Jesus. Same name in the Greek. Now it may be that there is a separate name that is transliterated Jesus and that his name was not really what we make into Joshua, but there is no evidence of that. If that doesn't help I don't know what your point is. And I would appreciate your leaving personal attacks out of this.
 
Or, I suppose we could all admit the literal truth. Yes, the name Jesus does not appear in the tanakh. It also does not appear in the New Testament.
 
Ichneumonwasp said:
OK, I'll try one more time. No one has said the name J-e-s-u-s is in the Tanakh. Malachi said that the name we have in the Greek is a transliteration of a name that does appear in the Tanakh -- more than once. The name that we transliterate as Joshua is the same in the Greek as the name we translate/transliterate as Jesus. Now, there are two possibilities here. There is the common name that we transliterate as Joshua that when transliterated from Hebrew into Greek becomes Ihsou (it's actually different in the Greek because it is in a different script). We have that same name being used for the name that we translate/transliterate as Jesus. Same name in the Greek. Now it may be that there is a separate name that is transliterated Jesus and that his name was not really what we make into Joshua, but there is no evidence of that. If that doesn't help I don't know what your point is. And I would appreciate your leaving personal attacks out of this.
Click to expand...
Actually, you can try all you want but as long as you attribute that idiocy you wrote earlier to me, you are falling on deaf ears or in this case my ignore list. Your next post will contain either an apology or retraction of that moronic statement otherwise I will introduce you to my ignore list...understandable?
 
It's fine with me if you want to put me on your ignore list. I'm not sure how I offended you by re-stating Malachi's and Dr. Kitten's position, but so be it. I only asked you a simple question, "Are you supposing that J-e-s-u-s is in the Greek?". A simple "no" or "yes" would have sufficed. I haven't accused you of anything, nor have I attributed anything to you. I am trying to understand precisely what your position is because, frankly, I cannot see what the big deal here is.
 
Ichneumonwasp said:
It's fine with me if you want to put me on your ignore list. I'm not sure how I offended you by re-stating Malachi's and Dr. Kitten's position, but so be it. I only asked you a simple question, "Are you supposing that J-e-s-u-s is in the Greek?". A simple "no" or "yes" would have sufficed. I haven't accused you of anything, nor have I attributed anything to you. I am trying to understand precisely what your position is because, frankly, I cannot see what the big deal here is.
Click to expand...
Welcome to ignore...
 
Yeah, all the Egyptian gods did. Their power "resided" in their "real" name, which was the hidden name.
 
There was a Jewish work written in Greek about 200 years before Jesus Christ supposedly existed by a guy named Jesus. This book is in the deuterocanon and is a part of many Bibles, it's called Wisdom of Jesus son of Sirach. It is included in Catholics and Orthodox bibles.

That's a clear and easy to find example of a Jesus before "Jesus".
 
Malachi151 said:
There was a Jewish work written in Greek about 200 years before Jesus Christ supposedly existed by a guy named Jesus. This book is in the deuterocanon and is a part of many Bibles, it's called Wisdom of Jesus son of Sirach. It is included in Catholics and Orthodox bibles.

That's a clear and easy to find example of a Jesus before "Jesus".
Click to expand...
If it was referring to someone who spoke Aramaic or Hebrew and had Aramaic or Hebrew speaking parents, his name was NOT jesus. you can point out all the Koine "jesus" you want and that is not going to change the fact that jesus is not in the Tanach. Do you really think anyone is dumb enough to believe that the parents of jesus (who spoke Aramaic) and lived in a predominantly Aramaic speaking community gave their baby a mixed Greek/English name of jesus? That is providing of course you believe a man called jesus existed. Come to think of it, I know a few christian fundamentalsists that are dumb enough to believe that his real name was jesus.
 
think enigmas point is this:

JENNIFER f English
From a Cornish form of the Welsh name Gwenhwyfar, which is composed of the elements qwen meaning "fair, white" and hwyfar meaning "smooth"...
GUINEVERE f English, Welsh Mythology
Old French form of the Welsh name Gwenhwyfar, which is composed of the elements gwen meaning "fair, white" and hwyfar meaning "smooth"...

but calling a jennifer, guinevere or gwenhwyfar, is not her name. her name is jennifer. even though they mean the same thing it's not the same as calling each by their proper names. this is the same problem i had and why i started my research into the actual name of god and jesus.
 
Wait, none of the people in this discussion thinks his real name was Jesus. They think, if he existed, that his real name was Yeshua.

ETA

I may remember this incorrectly, but I thought that Jesus was first used in the King James Bible.
 
Last edited:
Wait, none of the people in this discussion thinks his real name was Jesus. They think, if he existed, that his real name was Yeshua.

ETA

I may remember this incorrectly, but I thought that Jesus was first used in the King James Bible.
Click to expand...

the whole argument comes down to: why call her guinevere when her name was jennifer? that's where i started anyway, and that's what it seems to me to be the whole argument in the thread. not that anyone thinks that his contemporaries called him jesus, but that it's dumb to call him that now when that wasn't what he was called then. the whole, 'but jennifer and guinevere came from the same name' argument... if he was yeshua (if/when) was alive, the least you can do is call him that now regardless of if you believe he existed or not. i was trying to figure out what his name would have been... not the translation of, not from hewbrew to greek to english, but his actual no kidding name.
 
mylfmyhnr said:
the whole argument comes down to: why call her guinevere when her name was jennifer? that's where i started anyway, and that's what it seems to me to be the whole argument in the thread. not that anyone thinks that his contemporaries called him jesus, but that it's dumb to call him that now when that wasn't what he was called then. the whole, 'but jennifer and guinevere came from the same name' argument... if he was yeshua (if/when) was alive, the least you can do is call him that now regardless of if you believe he existed or not. i was trying to figure out what his name would have been... not the translation of, not from hewbrew to greek to english, but his actual no kidding name.
Click to expand...

I don't think anyone was arguing to call him Jesus. That has not been my point, nor was it Dr. Kitten's, nor was it Malachi's point. They were trying to point out how the translation/transliteration issue turned Yeshoaha to Yeshua to Iesos to Jesus (nothing to do with Zeus). People are given names. If you hear everyone else saying to some guy, "Hey Jimmy, let's go get a beer", next time you see the guy you are likely to call him Jimmy. Never mind that his real name is James, or possibly even Reginald. Jesus is the current convention, and that is why people use that name. Is it correct? No, it's not correct. From what I recall it was a decision of the creators of the King James Bible. So blame them. But that was never the point in most of the discussion -- at least any that I witnessed lately and what Malachi and Dr. Kitten were on about. I only tried to clear up some of the confusions in what Enigma thought of them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom