Few people know this but Jesus is a actually Spanish name.

As a second note:

If anyone has read The Da Vinci Code they would remember that Jewish code breaker graph thing, well I have a theory that if you put the name Jesus into that code breaker then you would come up with Jesus's real name.

the name "Jesus" in spanish is pronounced "Hay-zeus," not the way you're used to.

Jesus's original name was Yeshua A'mashiach ben Josef Nazareth. I guess that's the closest to a phonetic spelling as I can get. Jesus is (strangely) the translation of that to Italian or something.

Cheers,

Lost

Yehoshua ben Yosef is far more likely. HaMashiach is not a title I am willing to apply to him.

how does everyone know this stuff?

Oh googleing.

quote:Originally posted by Sephiroth:

Yehoshua ben Yosef is far more likely. .

yep. and as Nazareth didn't exist at the time its unlikely to have formed part of his name...

although some variant on nazarene (nazaar?) perhaps.

quote:Originally posted by Beholder:

the name "Jesus" in spanish is pronounced "Hay-zeus," not the way you're used to.

Too much Die Hard...

quote:Originally posted by Sephiroth:

Yehoshua ben Yosef is far more likely. HaMashiach is not a title I am willing to apply to him.

Well, it depends on what your beliefs are. If you're christian, then you would apply that title.

Cheers,

Lost

quote:Too much Die Hard...

Never saw it.

quote:Originally posted by Beholder:

Never saw it.

Well that's a line in Die Hard 3 I believe...

Anyways, that's not really how its pronounced.

quote:Originally posted by jackketch:

yep. and as Nazareth didn't exist at the time its unlikely to have formed part of his name...

although some variant on nazarene (nazaar?) perhaps.



Yehoshua ben Yosef HaNetzari

[Edit: They were called the Nazarenes (Netzarim) by Eusebius and other sources. I believe Nazareth was an extent territory at that time.]



[This message has been edited by Sephiroth (edited 07-05-2005).]

quote:Originally posted by LostCause:

Well, it depends on what your beliefs are. If you're christian, then you would apply that title.

Cheers,

Lost

Certainly.

But I think a Christian would insist on Yehoshua ben Yosef ben David HaMelech, HaMashiach. To emphasise their belief that he is simultaneously Mashiach ben Yosef and Mashiach ben David.

quote:Originally posted by Sephiroth:

Originally posted by jackketch:

yep. and as Nazareth didn't exist at the time its unlikely to have formed part of his name...

although some variant on nazarene (nazaar?) perhaps.



Yehoshua ben Yosef HaNetzari

[Edit: They were called the Nazarenes (Netzarim) by Eusebius and other sources. I believe Nazareth was an extent territory at that time.]







if i recall rightly Bish.Lightfoot put Eusebius' birth at around 260 AD...more than time enough for the confusion of nazarene/nazareth to arisen and become cemented.

you got a source for nazareth being a territory at the time of christ?

Jesus is Greek.



EDIT: Google may have just corrected me.

[This message has been edited by drowning.for.rejection (edited 07-05-2005).]

quote:Originally posted by google: Mis-Translating the Mis-Translation

Yeshua is a Hebrew name which has been transliterated into Greek as Iesous (IhsouV: pronounced "ee-ay-SUS"). The English "Jesus" comes from the Latin transliteration of the Greek name into the Latin Iesus. Now Greek has no "y" sound, but the Latin "i" is both an "i" and a "j" (i.e., it can have a consonantal force in front of other vowels), the latter of which is properly pronounced like the English "y" (which explains the German Jesu, "YAY-su")That is why we spell Jesus as we do, taking it straight from Latin, but we pronounce the name with a soft "j" sound because that is what we do in English with the consonantal "j".

The first letter in the name Yeshua ("Jesus") is the yod. Yod represents the "Y" sound in Hebrew. Many names in the Bible that begin with yod are mispronounced by English speakers because the yod in these names was transliterated in English Bibles with the letter "J" rather than "Y". This came about because in early English the letter "J" was pronounced the way we pronounce "Y" today. All proper names in the Old Testament were transliterated into English according to their Hebrew pronunciation via the Latin, but when English pronunciation shifted to what we know today, these transliterations were not altered. Thus, such Hebrew place names as ye-ru-sha-LA-yim, ye-ri-HO, and yar-DEN have become known to us as Jerusalem, Jericho, and Jordan; and Hebrew personal names such as yo-NA, yi-SHAI, and ye-SHU-a have become known to us as Jonah, Jesse, and Jesus. To further complicate matters, there was no letter "J" in the old English alphabet and the letter "I" was often used in its place. Often in early texts of the time, Jesus or Jerusalem would be spelled Iesus or Ierusalem.

The second sound in Yeshua's name is called tse-RE, and is pronounced almost like the letter "e" in the word "net". Just as the "Y" sound of the first letter is mispronounced in today's English, so too the first vowel sound in "Jesus". Before the Hebrew name "Yeshua" was transliterated into English, it was first transliterated into Greek. There was no difficulty in transliterating the tse-RE sound since the ancient Greek language had an equivalent letter which represented this sound. And there was no real difficulty in transcribing this same first vowel into English. The translators of the earliest versions of the English Bible transliterated the tse-RE in Yeshua with an "e". Unfortunately, later English speakers guessed wrongly that this "e" should be pronounced as in "me," and thus the first syllable of the English version of Yeshua came to be pronounced "Jee" instead of "Yeh". It is this pronunciation which produced such euphemistic profanities as "Gee" and "Geez".

Since Yeshua is spelled "Jeshua" and not "Jesus" in most English versions of the Old Testament (for example in Ezra 2:2 and 2 Chronicles 31:15), one easily gets the impression that the name is never mentioned in the Hebrew Scriptures. Yet 'Yeshua' appears there twenty-nine times, and is the name of at least five different persons and one village in the southern part of Yehudah ("Judah").

In contrast to the early biblical period, there were relatively few different names in use among the Jewish population of the Land of Israel at the time of the Second Temple. The name Yeshua was one of the most common male names in that period, tied with Eleazer for fifth place behind Simon, Joseph, Judah, and John. Nearly one out of ten persons known from the period was named Yeshua.

The first sound of the second syllable of Yeshua is the "sh" sound. It is represented by the Hebrew letter shin. However Greek, like many other languages, has no "sh" sound. Instead, the closest approximation, the Greek sigma, was used when transcribing "Yeshua" as "Iesus". Translators of English versions of the New Testament transliterated the Greek transcription of a Hebrew name, instead of returning to the original Hebrew. This was doubly unfortunate, first because the "sh" sound exists in English, and second because in English the "s" sound can shift to the "z" sound, which is what happened in the case of the pronunciation of "Jesus".

The fourth sound one hears in the name Yeshua is the "u" sound, as in the word "true". Like the first three sounds, this also has come to be mispronounced but in this case it is not the fault of the translators. They transcribed this sound accurately, but English is not a phonetic language and "u" can be pronounced in more than one way. At some point the "u" in "Jesus" came to be pronounced as in "cut," and so we say "Jee-zuhs."

The "a" sound, as in the word "father," is the fifth sound in Jesus' name. It is followed by a guttural produced by contracting the lower throat muscles and retracting the tongue root- an unfamiliar task for English speakers. In an exception to the rule, the vowel sound "a" associated with the last letter "ayin" (the guttural) is pronounced before it, not after. While there is no equivalent in English or any other Indo-European language, it is somewhat similar to the last sound in the name of the composer, "Bach." In this position it is almost inaudible to the western ear. Some Israelis pronounce this last sound and some don't, depending on what part of the dispersion their families returned from. The Hebrew Language Academy, guardian of the purity of the language, has ruled that it should be sounded, and Israeli radio and television announcers are required to pronounce it correctly. There was no letter to represent them, and so these fifth and sixth sounds were dropped from the Greek transcription of "Yeshua," -the transcription from which the English "Jesus" is derived.

So where did the final "s" of "Jesus" come from? Masculine names in Greek ordinarily end with a consonant, usually with an "s" sound, and less frequently with an "n" or "r" sound. In the case of "Iesus," the Greeks added a sigma, the "s" sound, to close the word. The same is true for the names Nicodemus, Judas, Lazarus, and others.

English speakers make one final change from the original pronunciation of Jesus' name. English places the accent on "Je," rather than on "sus." For this reason, the "u" has been shortened in its English pronunciation to "uh."

quote:Originally posted by jackketch:



if i recall rightly Bish.Lightfoot put Eusebius' birth at around 260 AD...more than time enough for the confusion of nazarene/nazareth to arisen and become cemented.

you got a source for nazareth being a territory at the time of christ?

Yeah, I've found a few in the past. Here's one with some extensive sourcing. (http://tinyurl.com/abf44)

quote:Originally posted by Sephiroth:

Originally posted by jackketch:



if i recall rightly Bish.Lightfoot put Eusebius' birth at around 260 AD...more than time enough for the confusion of nazarene/nazareth to arisen and become cemented.

you got a source for nazareth being a territory at the time of christ?

Yeah, I've found a few in the past. Here's one with some extensive sourcing. (http://tinyurl.com/abf44)





the factual inaccuracies of that site are horrendous. they have obviously never actually checked.

The 'slab' of Caesarea Maritima dates from somewhere 200 -400 AD! no one disputes there was a 'nazareth' from circa 90 -143 AD onwards.

to be frank i would expect better from someone of your calibre.



[This message has been edited by jackketch (edited 07-05-2005).]

quote:Originally posted by Sephiroth:

Yehoshua ben Yosef is far more likely. HaMashiach is not a title I am willing to apply to him.

quote:Originally posted by jackketch:



the factual inaccuracies of that site are horrendous. they have obviously never actually checked.

The 'slab' of Caesarea Maritima dates from somewhere 200 -400 AD!Actually, from the first-second century by every reference I can find, because of its relationship to the Bar Kokhba Revolt... quote:no one disputes there was a 'nazareth' from circa 90 -143 AD onwards.Well then that doesn't pose much of a problem for there having been one there before hand. Your argument that it didn't exist before its earliest mention in the Gospel of Mark (65-80) (followed by three other gospels in the same century) or in the inscription detailing the assignment of priests after the Bar Kochba Revolt, is an appeal to a lack of evidence fallacy. As they say, an absence of evidence doesn't constitute evidence of absence. I'd say documenting the existence of a small and humble town to within the same century as our target when we're reaching across millenia is admirable enough, particularly when we have four separate texts from that time that tell of its existence prior to that. Especially as it is portrayed as having been a residence for bumpkins in the Christian writings.

Certainly nothing could have made that town stand out excepting perhaps a boost in fame when a false Messiah sprang out of it (netzer being roughly equivalent to "sprout" as a hebrew "root": so many puns, so little time). Now since I'm not prepared to believe he was the Mashiach, I can offer the conjecture that the disconnect between the town's existence and its notoriety in relevance to Jesus' lifespan is explainable by his emerging posthumous fame at the time and the theories of his Messiahship, probably first that he was Mashiach ben Yosef: the Suffering Messiah who is to die and precede the final redemption. This would have given the town an increase in fame.

Likewise, the emergence of Bar Kokhba several decades later must have seemed a confirmation to those who had believed this "Ribi Yehoshua ben Yosef" to have been Mashiach ben Yosef and perhaps helped to fuel the revolt wherein the great Sage Rabbi Akiva speculated that that Shimon bar Kokhba was Mashiach ben David.

Piece that together with literature that would have been circulating at that time about a man from a place called Nazareth, saying things to the effect that "verily I tell you, this generation shall not pass away before all the prophecies have been fulfilled" and a backwoods town gets its spot on the map. Birthplace of the Suffering Messiah. When bar Kochba failed in his revolt and was killed (to much greater notoriety than Jesus' execution) and Akiva realised and stated publically that he could not have been the Mashiach ben David (for the Mashiach ben David is not supposed to die before he takes his throne), Jesus' followers likely created the story of the second coming. Their squashed hopes in the redemption through the revolt could be translated into a theory much easier to deal with. If Jesus were to come back from the dead and be not only Mashiach ben Yosef, but Mashiach ben David in a "second coming," we could endure anything, for we could always be confident that our miracle performing teacher would soon return to redeem us all.

quote:to be frank i would expect better from someone of your calibre.

If you don't mind, I think I'd like to see your sources as well. Merely using unsourced assertions and condescending language is not enough to refute someone of whom you've just demanded a display of sources.

[This message has been edited by Sephiroth (edited 07-06-2005).]

quote:Originally posted by Sephiroth:

If you don't mind, I think I'd like to see your sources as well. Merely using unsourced assertions and condescending language is not enough to refute someone of whom you've just demanded a display of sources.



unfortunately i have to go out now so i'll reply later.

i'm afraid you are a victim of your own success :P i have an image of you as one of the very few here who actually know something about the subject. so when you post sources as weak as that one its disappointing.

i don't mind being proved wrong , i do mind sloppy evidencing.

[This message has been edited by jackketch (edited 07-06-2005).]

seph, while checking some sources i found this I AM NOT SAYING HE IS RIGHT but i would be interested in your opinion.

quote:

It is doubtful, however, that the inscription really mentions Nazareth. The several related fragments of the inscription were interpreted by means of Hebrew liturgical poems dating from the sixth to seventh centuries - when present-day Nazareth was already a thriving tourist site and the name was well-known. The letters n-ts-r-t are bounded by broken edges of the stone (in fact, the n is only partially present), and it is not certain what letter may have preceded the n. In my opinion, the damaged n probably was preceded by a g (a narrow letter in Hebrew, easily fitting into the space hypothesized by the discoverers of the inscription) and read Gennesaret, not Nazareth. Gennesaret was founded in Hellenistic times and was well known.

i found that on http://w ww.atheist s.org/christianity/jesuslife.html#F21B (http: //www.athe ists.org/c hristianit y/jesuslif e.html#F21 B)

oh and as for sources , you could try " Archaeology and the Galilean Jesus" by the noted archeologist Jonathan Reed. He's dug the sites so can be considered authorative.

[This message has been edited by jackketch (edited 07-06-2005).]

quote:Originally posted by midgetbasketball:

how does everyone know this stuff?

Oh googleing.



Seph is a Jew.

Original Poster

Sorry, but you're a little off...especially since I doubt there were an abundance of Mexicans hanging around Israel during Jesus' time.

Granted, that wasn't actually his name anyway, it's just the standard English bastardized version of it.

--------------------------------------------

The word Jesus is the Latin form of the Greek Iesous, which in turn is the transliteration of the Hebrew Jeshua, or Joshua, or again Jehoshua, meaning "Jehovah is salvation." Though the name in one form or another occurs frequently in the Old Testament, it was not borne by a person of prominence between the time of Josue, the son of Nun and Josue, the high priest in the days of Zorobabel. It was also the name of the author of Ecclesiaticus of one of Christ's ancestors mentioned in the genealogy, found in the Third Gospel (Luke 3:29), and one of the St. Paul's companions (Colossians 4:11). During the Hellenizing period, Jason, a purely Greek analogon of Jesus, appears to have been adopted by many (I Machabees 8:17; 12:16; 14:22; II Machabees 1:7; 2:24; 4:7-26; 5:5-10; Acts 17:5-9; Romans 16:21). The Greek name is connected with verb iasthai, to heal; it is therefore, not surprising that some of the Greek Fathers allied the word Jesus with same root (Eusebius, "Dem. Ev.", IV; cf. Acts 9:34; 10:38). Though about the time of Christ the name Jesus appears to have been fairly common (Josephus, "Ant.", XV, ix, 2; XVII, xiii, 1; XX, ix, 1; "Bel. Jud.", III, ix, 7; IV, iii, 9; VI, v, 5; "Vit.", 22) it was imposed on our Lord by God's express order (Luke 1:31; Matthew 1:21), to foreshow that the Child was destined to "save his people from their sins." Philo ("De Mutt. Nom.", 21) is therefore, right when he explains Iesous as meaning soteria kyrion; Eusebius (Dem., Ev., IV, ad fin.; P.G., XXII, 333) gives the meaning Theou soterion; while St. Cyril of Jerusalem interprets the word as equivalent to soter (Cat., x, 13; P.G., XXXIII, 677). This last writer, however, appears to agree with Clement of Alexandria in considering the word Iesous as of Greek origin (Paedag., III, xii; P.G., VIII, 677); St. Chrysostom emphasizes again the Hebrew derivation of the word and its meaning soter (Hom., ii, 2), thus agreeing with the exegesis of the angel speaking to St. Joseph (Matthew 1:21). http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08374x.htm

quote:Originally posted by Digital_Savior:

Seph is a Jew.

No need to insult the man.....

quote:Originally posted by napoleon_complex:

No need to insult the man.....

Very funny... http://www.totse.com/bbs/rolleyes.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/rolleyes.gif)

quote:If anyone has read The Da Vinci Code they would remember that Jewish code breaker graph thing, well I have a theory that if you put the name Jesus into that code breaker then you would come up with Jesus's real name.

Atbash cipher?

Jesus = Wugeg

haha, fairly far fetched i think, maybe if you used the cipher on the traditional name of Jesus, that is, when we decide what it actually was.

quote:Originally posted by napoleon_complex:

No need to insult the man.....

Ummm...borderline bigotry isn't funny.

quote:Originally posted by napoleon_complex:

No need to insult the man.....

Play nice Napoleon.

-Val

quote:Originally posted by midgetbasketball:

Few people know this but Jesus is a actually Spanish name.



didnt know that.

Jesus, the name, not the "lamb of god" - Is a VERY common name for many Puerto Ricans

quote:Originally posted by napoleon_complex:

No need to insult the man.....

i sincerely hope i misunderstood that comment/your intent.

quote:Originally posted by jackketch:

i sincerely hope i misunderstood that comment/your intent.



You people are waaaaaaay too sensitive.

Twas merely a joke. I love the Jews and Israel, moreso Israel though.....

quote:Originally posted by napoleon_complex:

You people are waaaaaaay too sensitive.

Twas merely a joke. I love the Jews and Israel, moreso Israel though.....

nah normally 2 years of totse have hardened my skin to steel like proportions but anything that kinda reeks of anti-semitism tends to worry me.

quote:Originally posted by Digital_Savior:

Seph is a Jew.

She means Jewbag.