It is a language translation issue. A direct translation of His name from Hebrew (Yeshua) to English would be rendered as Joshua. However, the New Testament was written in Greek. The translation from Hebrew (Yeshua) to its Greek form is rendered as Iēsous. When the Greek form of Yeshua (Iēsous), is translated into English we have what is familiar to us as Jesus. The direct translation from Hebrew (Yeshua) to English (Joshua) would be a more accurate rendering of His name. I really don't think He views this as a deal breaker. The important thing, I believe, is His Lordship over an individual's heart.
Agreed. The savior’s name is completely besides the point. It is semantics & getting way too “religious” which is what Jesus/Yeshua objected too. As you said, it is about the relationship with and the belief with Christ. This is how man ruins things.
If he was Yahweh only begotten son then he was elohim..an alien... Yahweh was the war commander of the elohim..supposed fallen angels.... and going by the Bible the people of Israel who picked him rather than one of the other .commanders.. Jehovah MIK el Al... Gabriel etc he promised to destroy every firstborn baby and firstborn cattle of is ra els enemies .he also wanted his followers to kill the other elohim ....see book of Psalms
.they had 13 different type of vehicles flying in the skies..reining fire and brimstones etc t.hey gave us the money system to make the Israelites dominate the world. which hopefully is being destroyed now....see Deuteronomy
Mauro biglino Von daniken and lots of other scholars know the truth ...
"it actually tied me stronger to the fact that the Messiah WAS in fact a Jew, observed the Sabbath and the Feasts and Festivals, the Passover, and went to the Temple as expected... yet no one expected him to overthrow those seeking profit within the temple or criticize the Pharisees."
Jesus was not a Jew. This is has been debunked so many times. Of course, this is one of the 5 major falsehoods repeated ad nauseum to conceal the nature and protect Khazarian mafia status and power. And Christians have been deceived in believing it because of a lack of etymological study.
This word "Jew" unfortunately has been a gross misappellation in English and intermingled with the words 'Israelite', 'Judahite', 'Judean', 'pharisee', and 'Edomite' for over 400 years. It's use in the Bible is ambiguous and unfortunately needs to be deciphered for every verse that it is used. Some times it refers to the Roman province of Judea, other times it refers more accurately to Edomites. Other times it references 'Israelites".
The Greek word for Jews (G2453) is ‘ioudaios’. This is an adjective descriptive of, but is more properly referenced to the Israelites living in Judea.
The word Jew is an English word originally referring to those Eastern European people who spoke Yiddish. Even the Yiddish people did not view themselves as Israelites. The word 'Jew' did not exist during the Roman times. Rome referred to the region as 'Judea' and those people of the region as 'Judeans'. Even Pontius Pilate inscribed a title in Latin on the torture stake that read - "Jesus the Nazerene King of the Judeans". Every ancient historian, including Josephus referred the region as a greatly mixed population. This makes sense, since the region is indeed at the cross road of trade between three continents. It is also for this reason that there has been constant upheaval of wars. The cross road of trade has always been highly coveted. The entire population of the region has been replaced several times over. Whenever it was conquered, its people were enslaved and carried away in captivity. The allies of the conquering army were rewarded with much of the spoils. By the time the Greeks conquered the region, the people inhabiting the region was vastly populated by the conquering aliens and allies. We know from history that one of the allies, who were instrumental for the conquest of Judah by Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, were the Edomites. They were rewarded by given the lands of Judea. This included the shops, businesses, orchards, homes, and more. It is no coincidence that the ancient Greeks prior to the Romans called the region 'Idumea' meaning land of the Edomites. King Herod himself was an Edomite. One doesn't rise to power of a king unless there is an ethnic kinship representing those people. Then we have this from the Jewish Encyclopedia, 1925 edition, Vol. 5, Page 41, which states -- "Edom is in modern Jewry".
As mentioned above, the word 'Jew' derives from a 16th Century Old English mistransliteration of Yiddish. It stuck. This information is derived from English etymology. The name Jew is analogous to the English appellative name "German" that refers to the people of Deutschland. The people of Deutschland (Germany) call themselves "Deutsch" (the people; race) or 'teuto' as in 'Teutonic' as they were called by the Gallic or 'Tuatha De Dannan', which means 'race or people of Dan'. Obviously, the Deutsch do not call themselves 'Germans'. Another example to the gross misappellation is the name -- 'Welsh'. This is an English word deriving from High German 'wallische' meaning 'strangers'. How utterly absurd for the alien German Angles to call the aborigine Brit population 'strangers'. The 'Welsh' call themselves among each other 'Khumri'. The Jews do not refer to themselves as Israelites. In the 1980 Jewish Almanac, 1st chapter "Identity Crisis" and also found in the Jewish Encyclopedia IV, 1902, p 335), it states -- "Strictly speaking, it is incorrect to call an ancient Israelite a 'Jew' or to call a contemporary Jew an 'Israelite' or a 'Hebrew'".
Most Christians don't realize Judaism is a newer religion than Christianity is and Christianity has NEVER been based on Judaism. This is a inconvenient truth that is publicly a taboo subject. Believe it or not, Judaism was created to confront the spread of Christianity - using the Bible as a prop and also to conceal Judaism's ritualistic practice of blood-letting. The proof is of course in writing and can be found in Judaism's foundational Passover text.
Judaism's foundational Passover text is not from the Old Testament but rather the Haggadah, a thoroughly Talmudic work. (M. Hoffman III, "Judaism Discovered"). The Talmud was compiled as a result of the absolute destruction of Herod’s temple, in which every stone was carried away leaving no trace of it’s existence. In it we learn:
In 66 CE, when the Roman general Vespasian swept into Jerusalem, Judaism was a cultic, oral religion, with Herod's massive temple as its lodestar. Everything happened in the temple complex. Four years later, Vespasian's son Titus razed it to the ground. A quote from the Talmud:
"Where was God under the rubble?" wondered the Rabbis. "How to praise him now that the temple was gone?" The sages agreed: Jews would have to BECOME a people of the book, or they would disappear.
Hence, they were NOT a people of the book before this time.
Thank you for the time and energy you put into that explanation. It makes logical sense to me although I do not have the knowledge to say yea or nay on any minor point.
It doesn't seem to be "time and energy" spent when setting the record straight. I've been at studying examining forensically the etymology of the Word for over 40 years and am still learning new truths. It's important to use a Lexicon and go to the Greek.
Well to be sure, that is time well spent and the Word will always have new insights for us because it is living. I appreciate your perspective Tewdryg.
Christ abolished the Jewish religion, it ceased to exist when the earth shook and the curtain in the temple was torn in two, the day they crucified God. He fulfilled the Old Law, made a New Covenant. The OT ceremonial laws were abolished, the civil laws were abolished, all that remains is the Moral Law. Jews today do not worship the Triune God. Pray for their conversion.
I have seen somewhere, in a tract about demonology that yeshua is the name of a Assyrian demon. I am searching around for this, if I do find it I will post it on here.
Being fluent in Japanese, I have zero trust anymore in how anything is translated.
Even with the best of intentions of making an accurate translation, different languages will necessarily inject big distortions into the mix. Often depending on the personality of the translators.
Nuances critical to a clear understanding are either dropped without fanfare to prioritize a smooth translation, or stubbornly included in a clumsy way that makes the final result feel clunky but is technically, sorta, kinda correct (in an "Akshually..." kind of way).
Add in the fact of it being a holy book, translators' quirks now become fiercely-defended gospel, and the in-fighting starts from there.
They now say the old testament was written after the new testament. Jesus or whatever you want to call him is never mentioned in the old testament...
The book says he said he came for the Jews....he was born a Jew and died a Jew...
The story of jesus is the same as the story of Mithras ..same lamb of God .same date of birth death etc. This story has been told many many times ..12 disciples etc. Three days rose from the dead etc is a story told before Books etc and is a story of what was happening in the sky...where it looks like the son/sun dies for three days and then seems to rise. again.....astrotheology...
Christianity existed thousands of years before Jesus...
Research...as Q says everything we believe is a lie..or is that the film the matrix?
Man has always told stories....don't confuse them with truth.
If you can listening to the truth about the Bible then read Mauro biglino..official translator for the Vatican who revealed truths that got him sacked. He takes you through the old testament and reveals the errors and goes back to earliest Bible and other books the truth is plain to see...but like the covidians people want their illusions. They cry for a daddy to come and rescue them...a saviour.....
It is a language translation issue. A direct translation of His name from Hebrew (Yeshua) to English would be rendered as Joshua. However, the New Testament was written in Greek. The translation from Hebrew (Yeshua) to its Greek form is rendered as Iēsous. When the Greek form of Yeshua (Iēsous), is translated into English we have what is familiar to us as Jesus. The direct translation from Hebrew (Yeshua) to English (Joshua) would be a more accurate rendering of His name. I really don't think He views this as a deal breaker. The important thing, I believe, is His Lordship over an individual's heart.
Agreed. The savior’s name is completely besides the point. It is semantics & getting way too “religious” which is what Jesus/Yeshua objected too. As you said, it is about the relationship with and the belief with Christ. This is how man ruins things.
Just remember he was not a Synagogue of Satan Jew.
How do you know that?
If he was Yahweh only begotten son then he was elohim..an alien... Yahweh was the war commander of the elohim..supposed fallen angels.... and going by the Bible the people of Israel who picked him rather than one of the other .commanders.. Jehovah MIK el Al... Gabriel etc he promised to destroy every firstborn baby and firstborn cattle of is ra els enemies .he also wanted his followers to kill the other elohim ....see book of Psalms
.they had 13 different type of vehicles flying in the skies..reining fire and brimstones etc t.hey gave us the money system to make the Israelites dominate the world. which hopefully is being destroyed now....see Deuteronomy
Mauro biglino Von daniken and lots of other scholars know the truth ...
THis is the last pope
All I can say is Wow!
Yeshua is the Aramaic version of The Name, Yehoshua is the Hebrew version.
"Jesus" was an effort to transliterate the name, which means to try to recreate the sounds of one language in the alphabet of another language.
There was no Y sound in Greek or Latin so they substituted an I sound.
Ises or Isas was a Greek goddess of healing so there is a similarity there in sound and meaning as well.
There was no "J" sound in English until quite late, I think about 1600's.
Yesha means "salvation" among other things such as deliverance....
If your name is Joe in English, would you become Giuseppe if you went to Italy? Not usually! Usually, your name remains your name however you say it.
There is a great deal to be learned as this subject is explored, as I began to do 22 years ago. ...and great blessing as well!
Yep, No J, V, U, or a Z in the 1911 King James Bible. IF I remember correctly.
Jesus was not a Jew. This is has been debunked so many times. Of course, this is one of the 5 major falsehoods repeated ad nauseum to conceal the nature and protect Khazarian mafia status and power. And Christians have been deceived in believing it because of a lack of etymological study.
This word "Jew" unfortunately has been a gross misappellation in English and intermingled with the words 'Israelite', 'Judahite', 'Judean', 'pharisee', and 'Edomite' for over 400 years. It's use in the Bible is ambiguous and unfortunately needs to be deciphered for every verse that it is used. Some times it refers to the Roman province of Judea, other times it refers more accurately to Edomites. Other times it references 'Israelites".
The Greek word for Jews (G2453) is ‘ioudaios’. This is an adjective descriptive of, but is more properly referenced to the Israelites living in Judea.
The word Jew is an English word originally referring to those Eastern European people who spoke Yiddish. Even the Yiddish people did not view themselves as Israelites. The word 'Jew' did not exist during the Roman times. Rome referred to the region as 'Judea' and those people of the region as 'Judeans'. Even Pontius Pilate inscribed a title in Latin on the torture stake that read - "Jesus the Nazerene King of the Judeans". Every ancient historian, including Josephus referred the region as a greatly mixed population. This makes sense, since the region is indeed at the cross road of trade between three continents. It is also for this reason that there has been constant upheaval of wars. The cross road of trade has always been highly coveted. The entire population of the region has been replaced several times over. Whenever it was conquered, its people were enslaved and carried away in captivity. The allies of the conquering army were rewarded with much of the spoils. By the time the Greeks conquered the region, the people inhabiting the region was vastly populated by the conquering aliens and allies. We know from history that one of the allies, who were instrumental for the conquest of Judah by Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, were the Edomites. They were rewarded by given the lands of Judea. This included the shops, businesses, orchards, homes, and more. It is no coincidence that the ancient Greeks prior to the Romans called the region 'Idumea' meaning land of the Edomites. King Herod himself was an Edomite. One doesn't rise to power of a king unless there is an ethnic kinship representing those people. Then we have this from the Jewish Encyclopedia, 1925 edition, Vol. 5, Page 41, which states -- "Edom is in modern Jewry".
As mentioned above, the word 'Jew' derives from a 16th Century Old English mistransliteration of Yiddish. It stuck. This information is derived from English etymology. The name Jew is analogous to the English appellative name "German" that refers to the people of Deutschland. The people of Deutschland (Germany) call themselves "Deutsch" (the people; race) or 'teuto' as in 'Teutonic' as they were called by the Gallic or 'Tuatha De Dannan', which means 'race or people of Dan'. Obviously, the Deutsch do not call themselves 'Germans'. Another example to the gross misappellation is the name -- 'Welsh'. This is an English word deriving from High German 'wallische' meaning 'strangers'. How utterly absurd for the alien German Angles to call the aborigine Brit population 'strangers'. The 'Welsh' call themselves among each other 'Khumri'. The Jews do not refer to themselves as Israelites. In the 1980 Jewish Almanac, 1st chapter "Identity Crisis" and also found in the Jewish Encyclopedia IV, 1902, p 335), it states -- "Strictly speaking, it is incorrect to call an ancient Israelite a 'Jew' or to call a contemporary Jew an 'Israelite' or a 'Hebrew'".
Most Christians don't realize Judaism is a newer religion than Christianity is and Christianity has NEVER been based on Judaism. This is a inconvenient truth that is publicly a taboo subject. Believe it or not, Judaism was created to confront the spread of Christianity - using the Bible as a prop and also to conceal Judaism's ritualistic practice of blood-letting. The proof is of course in writing and can be found in Judaism's foundational Passover text.
Judaism's foundational Passover text is not from the Old Testament but rather the Haggadah, a thoroughly Talmudic work. (M. Hoffman III, "Judaism Discovered"). The Talmud was compiled as a result of the absolute destruction of Herod’s temple, in which every stone was carried away leaving no trace of it’s existence. In it we learn:
In 66 CE, when the Roman general Vespasian swept into Jerusalem, Judaism was a cultic, oral religion, with Herod's massive temple as its lodestar. Everything happened in the temple complex. Four years later, Vespasian's son Titus razed it to the ground. A quote from the Talmud:
"Where was God under the rubble?" wondered the Rabbis. "How to praise him now that the temple was gone?" The sages agreed: Jews would have to BECOME a people of the book, or they would disappear.
Hence, they were NOT a people of the book before this time.
Thank you for the time and energy you put into that explanation. It makes logical sense to me although I do not have the knowledge to say yea or nay on any minor point.
It doesn't seem to be "time and energy" spent when setting the record straight. I've been at studying examining forensically the etymology of the Word for over 40 years and am still learning new truths. It's important to use a Lexicon and go to the Greek.
Well to be sure, that is time well spent and the Word will always have new insights for us because it is living. I appreciate your perspective Tewdryg.
Simple version. Big nosed shekel gatherers have been corrupt scum for centuries.
Christ abolished the Jewish religion, it ceased to exist when the earth shook and the curtain in the temple was torn in two, the day they crucified God. He fulfilled the Old Law, made a New Covenant. The OT ceremonial laws were abolished, the civil laws were abolished, all that remains is the Moral Law. Jews today do not worship the Triune God. Pray for their conversion.
💯
Jesus came to fulfill the law. It is finished!
I have seen somewhere, in a tract about demonology that yeshua is the name of a Assyrian demon. I am searching around for this, if I do find it I will post it on here.
Being fluent in Japanese, I have zero trust anymore in how anything is translated.
Even with the best of intentions of making an accurate translation, different languages will necessarily inject big distortions into the mix. Often depending on the personality of the translators.
Nuances critical to a clear understanding are either dropped without fanfare to prioritize a smooth translation, or stubbornly included in a clumsy way that makes the final result feel clunky but is technically, sorta, kinda correct (in an "Akshually..." kind of way).
Add in the fact of it being a holy book, translators' quirks now become fiercely-defended gospel, and the in-fighting starts from there.
Don't even get me started about name distortions.
He doesn't care. He knows we're talking about Him.
Bingo! And an upvote for having sense.
They now say the old testament was written after the new testament. Jesus or whatever you want to call him is never mentioned in the old testament...
The book says he said he came for the Jews....he was born a Jew and died a Jew...
The story of jesus is the same as the story of Mithras ..same lamb of God .same date of birth death etc. This story has been told many many times ..12 disciples etc. Three days rose from the dead etc is a story told before Books etc and is a story of what was happening in the sky...where it looks like the son/sun dies for three days and then seems to rise. again.....astrotheology...
Christianity existed thousands of years before Jesus...
Research...as Q says everything we believe is a lie..or is that the film the matrix?
Man has always told stories....don't confuse them with truth.
If you can listening to the truth about the Bible then read Mauro biglino..official translator for the Vatican who revealed truths that got him sacked. He takes you through the old testament and reveals the errors and goes back to earliest Bible and other books the truth is plain to see...but like the covidians people want their illusions. They cry for a daddy to come and rescue them...a saviour.....
I wonder if God knows this???? Not!