xjwsforChrist

AGUEST SAID

with rather interesting... mmmm... POVs (peace to you all!):

http://www.yahshuaservant.com/index.html

http://www.hiddenbible.com/jesuszeus/jesuszeus.html

Not that I endorse either one... or take any issue. Just thought them interesting and thought perhaps you might, too.

Again, peace to you all!

A slave of Christ,

SA

PSACRAMENTO SAID

I recall you have a similar discussion with Leolaia over on JWN.
I was on the fence about this, to be honest.
It kind of made me feel the way I feel about "Jehovah".
Leo is a linguistics expert and I asked a few others, including Hebrew linguistics experts.
The issue with Jehovah is NOT the "Jeh" part, that is a common translation from Jah, it is the "ovah" part that is not correct in line with the tegramation or the revealed name of God that means " I am That I am".
In regards to Jesus, both the Hebrew linguistisc and greek ones told me the samething:
Jaheshua = Iesous.
Iesous appears in the LXX whenever the name "Jahesua" apears.
Now, what shoudl be asked and considered is WHY do we use the latin transliteration of the Greek Hellinization of the name?
Joshua is the "more" correct transliteration of Jaheshua and we use that name all the time, why not use it for Jesus?
From my understanding the issue was that the name Jesus carried the "weight" of the Christ, one of association.
Even now, you get many Joshua's but the name Jesus is still a "heavy one" to carry, although some hispanic cultures do tend to use it.

None of the lingusitics people I spoke of, Greek or Hebrew, agreed with the "Zeus" thing since in greek, Zeus has a totally different spelling and pronunciation.

Ἰησοῦς = Iēsous
Ζεύς = Zeús

PSACRAMENTO SAID


My personal opinion is that, much like the JW's, when you start putting too much emphases on the name and not what goes WITH it, you get into that, We have the correct" mentality that is very incorrect.
I think that we should use Christ's correct name, Jahesua or at least his "translated" name, Joshua BUT I am also very aware of that that means for many.
I am not Hebrew, so using it makes me come off as "oh, look at him, speaking hebrew", LOL !
Call Him Joshua gets people into the, "who"? and why not use "Jesus", discussion and, quite honestly, I don't see a huge point in debating the merits of translation VS transliteration.
So I have learned to keep with the KISS principle.

AGUEST SAID

Greetings, dear P, and peace to you!

I didn't really post it as to the name itself but as to perhaps there being others whose thinking is similar (considering that some believe I am the only one who considers "Jesus" inaccurate)... and why: is it possible that they, too, have "heard" what I have... that their information came from our Lord... versus scholars/linguistics? I really should have included my reasons for making this thread. My apologies for not doing so (it was late and I really should have turned in but was caught up in wanting to share the links.

BUT since you're comments are valid (and intriguing), I'd like to discuss this further, if you've a mind to:


Yes, and unfortunately the discussion ended when I shared with her that there is no Greek translation for "Joshua" (English). The Greek translation for JESUS (English, from Latin)... is "Iesous." So, from what did "Jesus/Iesous" come, if it was "JahEshua/YahEshua/Yeshua" in Hebrew? And when you ask people what the name "Jesus" means... what is the answer? "Iesous in Greek." And what does "Iesous" mean? I've yet to receive an answer on that one... from ANY source, except my Lord ("Jeh/Jah is Zeus"... "Zeus" not being a name but a title "Highest God"; however, because Greeks turned that title INTO a name for their national God... it means "JAH... is Zeus". Of course, no scholar in his/her right mind will AGREE with that, though...)



Which is why I maintain the [Jesus] when quoting bible verses, but put it in brackets because it's an addition, not an original transliteration. And when speaking with folks who don't know our Lord's true name, I refer to "Jesus." Because it's not their fault they don't know: those who should have told them of it haven't... because THEY don't know it... and it hasn't been revealed to them by our Lord himself... yet.



But shouldn't our concern be that we call on the CORRECT name, given that our salvation depends on it? And it's kind of like the WTBTS partaking thing: if NO ONE does it... our of fear... who will set the example? Who still stand up and show/do/SPEAK... the TRUTH... if NOT us? Will we be persecuted for it? Of COURSE we will! But weren't we promised we WOULD be... yet be HAPPY... because we were doing it for HIS sake? I mean, are we supposed to be trying to AVOID persecution? I know no one wants to SEEK it... but in some matters isn't it inevitable and rather than try to avoid it we should simply accept it... and ask for strength and protection to endure it... will maintaining OUR integrity?


And during his day in the flesh our Lord condemned the works of the scribes. WHICH scribes, in particular? Since the LXX is the "bible" of HIS time... wouldn't it be THOSE scribes? And what works did he condemn? Perhaps the Septuagint (LXX) was that era's "NWT"... as folks view THAT version today.

And didn't Jeremiah prophesy that their styluses would be "false"? Our Lord's primary language was Aramaic. Should we really think he went around calling himself "Iesous"? Some may assume he read from a Greek translation of Isaiah. Why, though? The Dead Sea Scrolls include Isaiah... written in Hebrew, NOT Greek. There were Hebrew writings available at that time.

Even so, I would also ask, as I recently did Elderelite on JWN (who did not respond, BTW) show me the atrocities done in the name of JAH... or JAHESHUA. Versus those done in the name of "God", "Jehovah", "Adonai" and "Jesus", etc. I mean, would either God OR Christ truly ALLOW all of the reproach upon their TRUE names... as have been heaped upon the popular versions? Think of the things, even heinous crimes, committed in the names of "Jehovah" and "Jesus". Would they REALLY allow that? My understanding is that they would NOT... that that is the very reason behind the words "Let your NAME be sanctified/hallowed/held holy." How, though, can anyone "cleanse" a name of, say, innocents... including children... being harmed, even killed by means of it? IS there a means for cleansing? Such acts are unrighteous and so CANNOT be done by the Most Holy One of Israel... or His Son, the Holy One of Israel. Yet, how many do them, some even after praying TO those names ("Jehovah", "Jesus", etc.)?

The names of the MOST Holy One of Israel... AND the Holy One of Israel... ARE sanctified. By JAH Himself. They ARE clean. They don't need to BE cleansed!



For whom, though, dear one? Us, the Body? Or the world? For those joined to him... or those alienated from him? Those who KNOW him? Or those who claim to... but do not? It is not a name for everyone, dear one. Everyone, including those "called"... have a name: Jesus. Those CHOSEN, though, are given a "new" name... of their own. Is it possible they are given HIS true name, too... and that it is NOT a name for "everyone"? If so, wouldn't that make it even MORE... precious... MORE not to be profaned and reproached?

Zeus has a totally different spelling and pronunciation.

Perhaps, but let me share something with you:



Do you see the "Modern Greek" rendering? "Dias"? Our current English Bible versions are taken from Latin, yes? And what is the LATIN word for "God"? Is it not... "Dios"? Where, though, do you think THAT word came from? It came from the MODERN Greek word... "Dias"... which comes from the ANCIENT Greek word... wait for it... "Zeus".

Don't let the "intelligence" and "knowledge" of the scholars and linguistics fool you, dear one. They may know a lot, yes, but they don't know more than our dear Lord.

I hope this helps and, again, the greatest of love and peace to you!

YOUR servant, sister, and fellow slave of Christ,

SA

JUSTMOM SAID



YES!!!

This is just confirmation that when our master shows us that if we want to know what our heavenly father is like.....just to look at Him! (The Son)
Our lord "never" acted the way the God of the bible acted. And funny thing, the name is right under their noses and they are not allowed to use it because of the reproach that they would bring upon it.

Thanks for sharing
with love Justmom

PSACRAMENTO SAID


Latin word for God is Deus, which is from the Greek word Theos.
Dios is also a valid translation.
That Zeus is called Dios is logical because he was to the greeks, the Father of the Gods.

The issue is that Jesus does NOT mean hail Zeus or anything zeus.

I realy don't think that anyone equated Jesus with Zeus and the story of Paul and Barnabas in acts gives the impression of that also:
ACTS 14:
8 At (S)Lystra (T)a man was sitting who had no strength in his feet, lame from his mother’s womb, who had never walked. 9 This man was listening to Paul as he spoke, who, (U)when he had fixed his gaze on him and had seen that he had (V)faith to be made well, 10 said with a loud voice, “Stand upright on your feet.” (W)And he leaped up and began to walk. 11 When the crowds saw what Paul had done, they raised their voice, saying in the (X)Lycaonian language, “(Y)The gods have become like men and have come down to us.” 12 And they began calling Barnabas, Zeus, and Paul, Hermes, because he was the chief speaker.

They called Barnabas, who was preaching about Jesus and being a servant of Jesus to the people of Lystra, Zeus.


As for what God has allowed done in His name, well...there is a warning about his, isn't there?
Romans 2:24
For "THE NAME OF GOD IS BLASPHEMED AMONG THE GENTILES BECAUSE OF YOU," just as it is written.

Ezekiel 36:20

New American Standard Bible (NASB)

20 When they came to the nations where they went, they (A)profaned My holy name, because it was said of them, ‘These are the (B)people of the Lord; yet they have come out of His land.’

Isaiah 52:5

New American Standard Bible (NASB)

5 Now therefore, what do I have here,” declares the Lord, “seeing that My people have been taken away without cause?” Again the Lord declares, “Those who rule over them howl, and My (A)name is continually blasphemed all day long.


2 Peter 2:2

New International Version (NIV)

2 Many will follow their depraved conduct(A) and will bring the way of truth into disrepute.

PSACRAMENTO SAID

Many a horrific thing has been done in God's name, before, during and after Christ and it follows that many a horrific thing was done in Christ's name.
Free will is a bitch BUT for it to be free, one must be allowed to do whatever one wills ( and reap the consequences of course).

Personally, and this may be because of too much JW's influence, I do NOT like it when a name, any name, is used to make people, any people, feel "better" or "superiour" about themselves and I don't like it when it is used/becomes a stumbling block ( as is the case with the term Jehovah for many).

I think we must understand that God works through Christ, though His Holy Spirit that is Christ and that when we accept God Via The HS that is Christ His Son, regardless of what name we feel comfortable in using, we are giving our salvation over to His Only Begotten Son.

AT times it seems that, like the JW's it is being insinuated ( though they do more than insinuate) that only those that use the "real name" are saved.

God Saves through Christ Via His Holy SPirit.
IT is NOT based on what we DO, what we ACT like, what NAMES we use, but By God's divine Grace.

As Paul said:
It is by His loving Grace that we are saved and not by works, so that no man may boast.

YPPUPLLEH SAID

*nod nod nod*
_________________
Love is a warm rubber puppy...

AGUEST SAID







Yes, dear one (as always, peace to you!) and as you state, Paul "Hermes." WHY again, though, did they call him that? Who, though, truly IS the "chief speaker" [for God]? And who was considered the "Father of the gods" by ancient Greeks?

I realize that accepting that "Iesous" really does mean "Je[h] is Zeus"... or "Jah is [Highest God]"... can be... mmmmm... well, let's say not necessarily easy. But that really IS what He is, is He not? And it is what the Greek Hebrews considered Him... and so what was meant by the name "Iesous" (which was put IN the writings by the Greek "scribes" who compiled the LXX).

Again, though, that TERM "Highest God"... or "zeus"... came to be the NAME of the Greek national god... "Zeus"... so that by the time my Lord arrived in the flesh, there is no way he would have called himself by that name. You must realize that the term referred to HIM, yes? The account in Zechariah was referring to HIM. Besides the fact that his name was "JahEshua"... for which, again, there IS no Greek rendering. In ENGLISH it's "Joshua". Guess what "Joshua" is in Greek? Joshua. Not "Iesous."

The reason for MANY of the mistransliterations in the Writings is... a misunderstanding by MANY... of phonetics. There were no vowels in ancient Hebrew... and so words were based on SOUNDS. Phonetics. Misunderstand the phonetics... and one can misunderstand... and so mistransliterate... the spelling.

Look, I am neither a linguistics expert or even a scholar. I'm just a servant. You can put your faith in the explanations of the linguistics experts and scholars if you wish, no problem. That is entirely your prerogative, dear one, truly. You can also just go the One whose name we're discussing... and ask him. As I did (because I learned that what the scribes translated couldn't be trusted). Ask HIM to tell you what his name is... and what the one attributed to him means. I also exhort you to do so... in faith.

I hope this helps and, again, the greatest of love and peace to you!

YOUR servant, sister, and fellow slave of Christ,

SA

PSACRAMENTO SAID



Hi Shel
First off, Joshua in greek is not Joshua, it is:
ιησούς του ναυή
And Jesus is:
ιησούς

Same root form.

Lets not forget that Isaiah and Joshua also mean the same thing: God (Yah) is salvation

That said, my issue ( if it is an issue, which it isn't) is NOT how Our Lords name is pronounced, far from that.
It is what seems to be implied, that ONLY by using his Hebrew name can we know Our Lord.
Sound familiar?

AGUEST SAID

Q

My apologies, dear one (peace to you!) - I should have stated there is no Greek translation for "Joshua" IN THE BIBLE. In the LXX you have:

Ἰησοῦ (as to Joshua, protege of Moses)... translated as "Jesus" - Exodus 17:9

Ἰησοῖ υἱῷ Ναυη (as to Joshua, the son of Nun)... translated as "Jesus son of Nun" - Joshua 1:1

Ἰησοῦν AND Ἰησοῦς (as to Joshua, the High Priest)... translated as "Jesus" - Zechariah 3:1, 3

ALL of these are "Joshua's"... yet, the translation is "Jesus". NONE of these include the translation (ιησούς του ναυή) that you provided.

BUT... I am not saying that "only by using the Hebrew name can we know our Lord," not at all. I did not know that name when I first came to know our Lord; I knew "Jesus". I HAVE come to learn, though, that it is the name we must CALL on, the name that MEANS "JAH Saves/Salvation of JAH"... and that the accurate ENGLISH translation of that name... which is just as appropriate... is "Joshua"... not "Jesus."

I realize that many don't believe the name is important. And they are entitled to that belief. I would be absolutely remiss in MY service, though, if I did not share with others, and particularly the Body... that the name IS important, that it bears GREAT weight... and does make a difference.

As I write this, my Lord directs me to ask you:

If you were, say, from the deep south of the USA... and had never heard your name spoken in, say, Chinese... which would you more quickly respond to? Your name as YOU know it... or as perhaps someone called it out in Chinese? Now, consider this: while you might accommodate that one if they were UNWILLING to call you as you preferred, but wouldn't it show more regard for YOU... if that one asked YOU... how YOU wished to be called... and then attempted to call you by such... even if it took some practice to get it right?

We in the western world so often insist on doing what WE want to do... rather than conceding to respect and regard for others. Sure, maybe I should make a big deal over whether someone calls me "Sally" rather than "Shelby"... because, well, others call me that and what's the big deal, anyway? But how am I wrong if I WANT to be called accurately, if I WANT others to show just this "least" bit of regard for me?

So let me ask you, dear P... if I called you, say, "Paolo"... but you PREFERRED "Paul", wouldn't it be disrespectful... and some level of disregard of YOU by ME... if I INSISTED on calling you "Paolo"? Wouldn't my LOVE for you compel me to consider what YOU want... and that it's not all that much a burden... than what I want... because, well, I can't bother to be inconvenienced?

This is the Holy One of Israel, dear one. If you and others think a name isn't important to him... AND to the Father... you've missed something: no point in praying for a name to BE sanctified... if you can't even bother to know... and use... the RIGHT name.

Hence:

"Choose a NAME rather than great riches..." Proverbs 22:1 (and please, don't believe the rendering of the scribes - this is NOT about having a good reputation, but about choosing the name of JAH... over riches; the Master... over mammon! Look at the Hebrew!)

and...

"And in that day you will say, Praise JaHVeH, call upon his name, declare his doings among the people, make mention that his name is exalted." Isaiah 12:4

and...

"The nations will see your righteousness, and all kings your glory; you will be called by a new name that the mouth of JaHVeH will bestow." Isaiah 62:2

and...

"'Therefore say to the house of Israel, 'This is what the Sovereign LORD says: It is not for your sake, O house of Israel, that I am going to do these things, but for the sake of my holy name, which you have profaned among the nations where you have gone. I will show the holiness of my great name, which has been profaned among the nations, the name you have profaned among them. Then the nations will know that I am JaHVeH, declares the MOST High JaHVeH, when I show myself holy through you before their eyes." Ezekiel 36:22, 23

And HOW did the Most Holy One of Israel DO that... show HIMSELF "holy" through Israel? When He sent His Son, the One who came "in the name of JAH[Veh]." Although ISRAEL has yet to say "bless is" that One, the NATIONS came to know of Him through that One. The One whose name MEANS... "JAH Saves/Salvation of JAH"... and not "Jeh is Zeus."

This really is NOT about semantics, dear one... bu about respect, regard... and no indifference, but obedience. Even as to the least things:

"I made known to them your name, and I will continue to make it known, that the love with which you have loved me may be in them, and I in them." John 17:26

As our Lord himself is recorded to have said, he didn't come in his own name - he came in the FATHER'S name. WE, the Body, have the task of ensuring that that name IS "sanctified"... among US. But how can that be if we don't even use the RIGHT name?

This isn't about semantics, dear one... it's about respect, regard... and obedience. I say that again, for emphasis. If you doubt that the correct name is important, I implore you to read the Psalms... in their entirety, again. Particularly Chapters 5-9, 18, 20, 22, 29, 31, 33, 34, 41, 44, 45, 48, 52, 54, 61, 63, 66, 68, 69, 72, 74, 75, 79, 80, 83, 86, 89, 91, 92, 96, 99, 100, 102, 103, 105, 106, 109, 111, 113, 115, 116, 118, 119, 122, 124, 129, 135, 138, 139, 140, 142, 143, 145, 148, and 149.

We are supposed to be faithful in what is LEAST... so as to be considered faithful in what is MUCH, dear one. To you, the accurate rendering of the name is a small matter; I have learned, however, that that truly is not the case... and only wish to share that truth with you and other others who can receive it. I understand that perhaps you and others haven't "gotten there", yet... and I do not judge or condemn ANYONE for that. But I would be remiss, again, in MY work... if I did not make known the name given ME by that One, the Holy One of Israel, JAHESHUA, the Chosen One of JAH (MischaJah)... as YOU would be were it given to you in the same way... and for the same purpose.

Again, rather than taking my word for it OR that of the "experts/scholars"... you need only ask. I have NO doubt that the truth of the matter will be revealed to you, as well, even if it takes a bit more time.

As always, peace to you!

YOUR servant, sister, and fellow slave of Christ,

SA

PSACRAMENTO SAID

That's bordering on JW doctrine of the name Jehovah there Shelby.
Slippery slope...

AGUEST SAID

Nothing like that to fear, dear P (peace to you!); it's not up to me what people choose to call our Lord... and if he wants them to get it/call him accurately, he will let them know that. So, I'm going around telling folks what they HAVE to do - each one must choose for himself/herself. I cannot, though, call him a name I KNOW is inaccurate. Sorry, but can't do it. Sticks in my throat and almost chokes me. Like "Jehovah."

Please know that my seemingly pedantic tendencies are really only a desire to no longer foment lies regarding both the MOST Holy of Israel, JAH of Armies, OR the Holy One of Israel, JAHESHUA, the Chosen One of JAH (MischaJah) to ANYONE... ever again. So... gotta keep it accurate as to what I receive from that One... because of the "slippery slope" (trying to please people, rather than my Lord) that can lead to such lies. I'm sure you can understand that -

Peace to you, my dear bruh!

YOUR servant, sister, and fellow slave of Christ,

SA, hoping nothing more than perhaps, after having lived a time of false "integrity" in her life, reflect a tad of what endeared Na'than'a'El to our Lord (John 1:47)... if she possibly can... even if others don't quite get that/agree

AGUEST SAID

Oops... NOT going around telling folks what they HAVE to do... sorry. Dratted "submit" button... and "old" eyes (that don't proofread very well - ah, well...)

Peace!

A slave of Christ,

SA

PSACRAMENTO SAID

Don't worry Shelby, at least from my view, you are NOT telling me what to do, simply expressing what Our Lord has revealed to you

My concern is a simple one:
I don't want to give anyone the idea that there is something they HAVE to DO to get Our Lords divine grace, that there is something they have to work for or a special term/name they must use to get His favour.

The JW's have it wrong.

God's gift of Grace is just that, a gift.
It is given freely because of Our Lord's sacrifice for US.
Grace is given to us because of what Our Lord did, NOT because of anything WE do.

And Yes, I much prefer Jaheshua myself also
Maybe because the name Jesus is thrown around so much or maybe because of it reminds me of BOTH of them, Father and Son.