OrthodoxChristianity.net
October 25, 2014, 07:44:37 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2 3 »  All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: The name "Jesus Christ" used pejoratively.  (Read 4192 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Father H
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian--God's One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: UOCofUSA-Ecumenical Patriarchate
Posts: 2,611



« Reply #45 on: August 01, 2012, 11:55:49 PM »

Greetings in that Divine and Most Precious Name of Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ!


I'm saying that his name is "Yeshua", and spelled that way pronounced in English was either the exact or dramatically close to  what he was named/called on Earth.

Quote
Now Pilate wrote a title and put it on the cross. And the writing was:

JESUS OF NAZARETH, THE KING OF THE JEWS.

20 Then many of the Jews read this title, for the place where Jesus was crucified was near the city; and it was written in Hebrew, Greek, and Latin.

21 Therefore the chief priests of the Jews said to Pilate, “Do not write, ‘The King of the Jews,’ but, ‘He said, “I am the King of the Jews.”’”

22 Pilate answered, “What I have written, I have written.
John 19:19-22
Saying our Savior didn't speak Greek in the Roman era is like saying an educated person doesn't speak English in the modern world, it was the literary/scholarly language, and we already know Jesus was arguing with the Scribes and priests often Wink
Quote
Ask your priest/bishop if they speak English if they recognize the name of their God.  


In the Ge'ez/Amharic Our Savior's name is pronounced ኢየሱስ ክርስቶስ (Ieyesus Kiristos) and the Ethiopians speak several Semitic languages, I can only assume that if for the past 1400 years the Ethiopians have preferred Ieyesus it for some reason of the Holy Spirit, after all, Amharic and Ge'ez is filled with Hebrew/Aramaic cognates..

stay blessed,
habte selassie

Yes, absolutely agree with you.
My point being that I personally feel that saying Yeshua in English, is more of a perfect transliteration.

Aramaic -> English

By saying Jesus there is more transliteration

Aramaic -> Greek -> "Old English" -> English

In King James day, the i's and j's (as in latin) wemere intertwined (Indiana Jones and the last crusade anybody?  Remember when he spelled Jehovah).   From my research King James transcribed the "J" because it sounded like an I to match the greek Iesus.

Today we have a hard J sound. 

But anyway, I just feel its more perfect to say Yeshua.

So you want to throw out the New Testament written in Greek for what you think should have been written in Aramaic.  Got it.   Roll Eyes
Logged
Father H
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian--God's One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: UOCofUSA-Ecumenical Patriarchate
Posts: 2,611



« Reply #46 on: August 01, 2012, 11:57:32 PM »

Greetings in that Divine and Most Precious Name of Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ!

Phonetically, doesn't his name end in an 'ayn (ܥ in Syriac; I don't know the Aramaic equivalent), not an a? Something tells me these "Yeshua" people don't speak a Semitic language that retains the 'ayn. I don't speak Aramaic or Syriac, either, but from what little Arabic I speak, I know that calling Him يسوا or يسوى instead of His name (يسوع) would not be appropriate, and as the other languages also have it ending in a voiced pharyngeal fricative (a consonant, not one of those silly and variable vowels!), I don't doubt that the same is true for them.

If you can't pronounce it properly, I don't know why you'd get hung up on what His name is phonetically. Just a general comment, by the way, not directed to anyone in particular, as I've noticed this same sort of preoccupation among neophyte Muslims and the like who just have to take an Arabic name even though they couldn't pronounce a Qof or a Ṣad to save their lives. It's kind of funny, in a way. Smiley



stay blessed,
habte selassie

 Grin

Logged
dzheremi
No longer posting here.
Warned
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic
Posts: 4,383


« Reply #47 on: August 02, 2012, 12:06:25 AM »

Hahaha. I'll have to give you a nod in my syllabus for "Brospeak 101", Habte. Grin Or maybe just put Toothpaste For Dinner under optional readings.
Logged

Antonis
"The Most Honourable The Morquess of Something"
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Metropolis of San Francisco Outside of San Francisco
Posts: 1,640


You must try this Balkan blend, Barsanuphius.


« Reply #48 on: August 02, 2012, 01:42:46 AM »

What an offense!

I think I'll find something that common Orthodoxy has never practiced but is somehow more "ancient" and "appropriate" despite theologians far more versed than I not holding it to any significant degree.

This "hipster Christianity" is for Protestantism, it doesn't have a place within Orthodoxy. Your ideas seem to mirror a lot of what the "name-worshippers" preached.

WHOA how offensive!  Oh, I'm blushing and ducking!
The name Yeshua... Oh I'm so offended.    Huh  So hip... So Protestant that his mother even called him it!   What his parents called him doesn't have a place in Orthodoxy!   Name worshipers oh-my!

Jokes aside -

My friend, his name was phonetically pronounced "yeshua".   You can either live by it or deny his name.  Or simply keep saying "Jesus", which is 2 transliterations of his name and doesn't sound much of what his mother called him.

I ABSOLUTELY disagree with you, the name of our savior, which phonetically is Yeshua, does belong in Orthodoxy.  I would have absolutely NO problem whatsoever if the bishops would allow the clergy to pronounce his name this way. 
I never said it doesn't have a place, and I didn't deny that that is what he was called by his fellow Hebrews. Please, do refer to Him as such if you so choose, although English is my primary language I occasionally refer to Him as Isou Xriste in my prayers. But to go so far as to campaign that he be referred to as such does not have a place within Orthodoxy.

To suggest that referring to him as Yeshua holds special power is even a step beyond what the name-worshippers would advocate.
Logged

As I dissipate, Christ precipitates.
Carl Kraeff (Second Chance)
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 6,886



« Reply #49 on: August 02, 2012, 05:01:38 PM »


I ABSOLUTELY disagree with you, the name of our savior, which phonetically is Yeshua, does belong in Orthodoxy.  I would have absolutely NO problem whatsoever if the bishops would allow the clergy to pronounce his name this way. 

Why do you have a problem with following the current usage? It seems to me that you are hung up on a relatively minor matter. Are you using a personal preference not to be a member of the Body?
Logged

Michal: "SC, love you in this thread."
Severian
God save Egypt, Syria, Lebanon & Iraq
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Miaphysite Orthodoxy
Jurisdiction: The Church of Alexandria
Posts: 5,042


Saint Severus of Antioch - the Eloquent Mouth

Partisangirl
WWW
« Reply #50 on: August 02, 2012, 06:10:16 PM »

@Yeshuaisiam Do you know how to pronounce the "a'iin" at the end of "Yeshua3?"
« Last Edit: August 02, 2012, 06:10:31 PM by Severian » Logged

"These things I have spoken unto you, that in me ye might have peace. In the world ye shall have tribulation: but be of good cheer; I have overcome the world." -Jesus Christ

I am currently not an active poster on the forum. Please forgive any offense I might have caused in the past. Thank you.
Orthodox11
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,999


« Reply #51 on: August 02, 2012, 06:13:45 PM »

@Yeshuaisiam Do you know how to pronounce the "a'iin" at the end of "Yeshua3?"

I asked that question several times in this thread already. Still no answer.
Logged
Severian
God save Egypt, Syria, Lebanon & Iraq
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Miaphysite Orthodoxy
Jurisdiction: The Church of Alexandria
Posts: 5,042


Saint Severus of Antioch - the Eloquent Mouth

Partisangirl
WWW
« Reply #52 on: August 02, 2012, 06:24:09 PM »

@Yeshuaisiam Do you know how to pronounce the "a'iin" at the end of "Yeshua3?"

I asked that question several times in this thread already. Still no answer.
Sorry, I didn't catch that initially.
Logged

"These things I have spoken unto you, that in me ye might have peace. In the world ye shall have tribulation: but be of good cheer; I have overcome the world." -Jesus Christ

I am currently not an active poster on the forum. Please forgive any offense I might have caused in the past. Thank you.
Orthodox11
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,999


« Reply #53 on: August 02, 2012, 06:42:51 PM »

Sorry, I didn't catch that initially.

Keep asking, just don't hold your breath. My money's on "no, he doesn't."
Logged
dzheremi
No longer posting here.
Warned
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic
Posts: 4,383


« Reply #54 on: August 02, 2012, 06:53:55 PM »

So it's another truth v. authenticity dichotomy, then...?  I wonder how many have stopped short of a commitment to the Christian life in order to hold out for eventual membership in the Most Holy Apostolic Orthodox Church of St. Goldilocks where everything is pronounced and done just so? I'm sure it's around here somewhere...
Logged

yeshuaisiam
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox, Anabaptist, Other Early Christianity kind of jumbled together
Posts: 4,275


A pulling horse cannot kick.


« Reply #55 on: August 04, 2012, 11:56:12 PM »

Greetings in that Divine and Most Precious Name of Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ!


I'm saying that his name is "Yeshua", and spelled that way pronounced in English was either the exact or dramatically close to  what he was named/called on Earth.

Quote
Now Pilate wrote a title and put it on the cross. And the writing was:

JESUS OF NAZARETH, THE KING OF THE JEWS.

20 Then many of the Jews read this title, for the place where Jesus was crucified was near the city; and it was written in Hebrew, Greek, and Latin.

21 Therefore the chief priests of the Jews said to Pilate, “Do not write, ‘The King of the Jews,’ but, ‘He said, “I am the King of the Jews.”’”

22 Pilate answered, “What I have written, I have written.
John 19:19-22
Saying our Savior didn't speak Greek in the Roman era is like saying an educated person doesn't speak English in the modern world, it was the literary/scholarly language, and we already know Jesus was arguing with the Scribes and priests often Wink
Quote
Ask your priest/bishop if they speak English if they recognize the name of their God.  


In the Ge'ez/Amharic Our Savior's name is pronounced ኢየሱስ ክርስቶስ (Ieyesus Kiristos) and the Ethiopians speak several Semitic languages, I can only assume that if for the past 1400 years the Ethiopians have preferred Ieyesus it for some reason of the Holy Spirit, after all, Amharic and Ge'ez is filled with Hebrew/Aramaic cognates..

stay blessed,
habte selassie

Yes, absolutely agree with you.
My point being that I personally feel that saying Yeshua in English, is more of a perfect transliteration.

Aramaic -> English

By saying Jesus there is more transliteration

Aramaic -> Greek -> "Old English" -> English

In King James day, the i's and j's (as in latin) wemere intertwined (Indiana Jones and the last crusade anybody?  Remember when he spelled Jehovah).   From my research King James transcribed the "J" because it sounded like an I to match the greek Iesus.

Today we have a hard J sound. 

But anyway, I just feel its more perfect to say Yeshua.

So you want to throw out the New Testament written in Greek for what you think should have been written in Aramaic.  Got it.   Roll Eyes

Nope.  I want the people to admit that his mother did not call him "Jesus".
Logged

I learned how to be more frugal and save money at http://www.livingpress.com
yeshuaisiam
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox, Anabaptist, Other Early Christianity kind of jumbled together
Posts: 4,275


A pulling horse cannot kick.


« Reply #56 on: August 05, 2012, 12:36:31 AM »


I ABSOLUTELY disagree with you, the name of our savior, which phonetically is Yeshua, does belong in Orthodoxy.  I would have absolutely NO problem whatsoever if the bishops would allow the clergy to pronounce his name this way. 

Why do you have a problem with following the current usage? It seems to me that you are hung up on a relatively minor matter. Are you using a personal preference not to be a member of the Body?

“And whatever you ask in My name, that I will do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son. If you ask anything in My name, I will do it." John 14:13-14

This translation, is very important to me.  I have been an Eastern Orthodox Christian since the cradle.  I've lived in St. Vlad's seminary with my parents when I was young, and was involved in the church for many years.  I gone to St. Vladimir's myself...

Never, not one time, did I hear his name, except the Greek transliteration.  It is disturbing.
Logged

I learned how to be more frugal and save money at http://www.livingpress.com
yeshuaisiam
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox, Anabaptist, Other Early Christianity kind of jumbled together
Posts: 4,275


A pulling horse cannot kick.


« Reply #57 on: August 05, 2012, 12:47:43 AM »

I can't possibly debate everybody here.  I have a wife, 5 children, and a farm.

But let me post this -

I would really like for somebody to show me where the transliteration came from on the Greek translation out of the Codex Sinaiticus.  

http://codexsinaiticus.org

Also, video to consider http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NcDOmOOQTtA&feature=relmfu

Still despite anything, I really don't see why you guys have such a problem calling him by his real name and have to only take on the Greek transliteration?

Orthodoxy never taught me his real name.  Never even mentioned it.  Not once, in 3 decades.
« Last Edit: August 05, 2012, 12:49:51 AM by yeshuaisiam » Logged

I learned how to be more frugal and save money at http://www.livingpress.com
yeshuaisiam
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox, Anabaptist, Other Early Christianity kind of jumbled together
Posts: 4,275


A pulling horse cannot kick.


« Reply #58 on: August 05, 2012, 12:49:22 AM »

@Yeshuaisiam Do you know how to pronounce the "a'iin" at the end of "Yeshua3?"

I asked that question several times in this thread already. Still no answer.
Sorry, I didn't catch that initially.
Actually its erroneous.
Watch the video in the link in the above post ^
Logged

I learned how to be more frugal and save money at http://www.livingpress.com
dzheremi
No longer posting here.
Warned
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic
Posts: 4,383


« Reply #59 on: August 05, 2012, 04:24:21 AM »

I do not have the inclination nor time to watch a nearly two hour video on the topic. Can you briefly summarize what you mean by claiming that "it is erroneous"? By "it", do you mean the presence of the 'ayn (phonetically, a voiced pharyngeal fricative) in the various Semitic languages' name for Christ? Because the name that you can clearly see circled at 7 seconds into the video you've linked ends in an 'ayn (in Hebrew, the letter representing this sound looks like this: ע). In Classical Syriac, Jesus' name is spelled ܝܫܽܘܥ, with the sound represented by ܥ (as I wrote previously); in Arabic, it is يسوع, with that same sound represented by ع (which is why you often see it represented in transliterated Arabic used by lazy people like me by the number 3). The only Semitic languages that I know of that do not conform to this pattern are those that have taken it from other sources and don't have that sound segment anyway, like Maltese (Ġesù - obviously a Latinate borrowing, cf. Italian Gesù) or Amharic (ኢየሱስ - Iyesus, from the Greek).

Logged

Ansgar
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: More than an inquirer, less than a catechumen
Jurisdiction: Exarchate of orthodox churches of russian tradition in western Europe
Posts: 2,989


Keep your mind in hell and do not despair


« Reply #60 on: August 05, 2012, 09:20:49 AM »

Quote
Still despite anything, I really don't see why you guys have such a problem calling him by his real name and have to only take on the Greek transliteration?
Throught the last 2000 years, we have had saints praying in the name of Iisus, Jesus, Iesus, Yeshua, Isus, Yēsū, Jezu, Jesús and many more. Judging fro the state of holiness these many saints achieved, I can only get to one conclusion: It isn't as important how to say His name as you want it to be.
Logged

Do not be cast down over the struggle - the Lord loves a brave warrior. The Lord loves the soul that is valiant.

-St Silouan the athonite
yeshuaisiam
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox, Anabaptist, Other Early Christianity kind of jumbled together
Posts: 4,275


A pulling horse cannot kick.


« Reply #61 on: August 05, 2012, 12:26:39 PM »

I do not have the inclination nor time to watch a nearly two hour video on the topic. Can you briefly summarize what you mean by claiming that "it is erroneous"? By "it", do you mean the presence of the 'ayn (phonetically, a voiced pharyngeal fricative) in the various Semitic languages' name for Christ? Because the name that you can clearly see circled at 7 seconds into the video you've linked ends in an 'ayn (in Hebrew, the letter representing this sound looks like this: ע). In Classical Syriac, Jesus' name is spelled ܝܫܽܘܥ, with the sound represented by ܥ (as I wrote previously); in Arabic, it is يسوع, with that same sound represented by ع (which is why you often see it represented in transliterated Arabic used by lazy people like me by the number 3). The only Semitic languages that I know of that do not conform to this pattern are those that have taken it from other sources and don't have that sound segment anyway, like Maltese (Ġesù - obviously a Latinate borrowing, cf. Italian Gesù) or Amharic (ኢየሱስ - Iyesus, from the Greek).


See I knew I would get the "I don't want to watch the video" remark.  The man clearly lays out the name, explains it in depth.   There is no summary I can give you, as you aren't interested in really learning about it.  You are interested in arguing about it.

The man lays it out in Hebrew and Aramaic very clearly.  It would answer your question.
Logged

I learned how to be more frugal and save money at http://www.livingpress.com
yeshuaisiam
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox, Anabaptist, Other Early Christianity kind of jumbled together
Posts: 4,275


A pulling horse cannot kick.


« Reply #62 on: August 05, 2012, 12:37:06 PM »

Quote
Still despite anything, I really don't see why you guys have such a problem calling him by his real name and have to only take on the Greek transliteration?
Throught the last 2000 years, we have had saints praying in the name of Iisus, Jesus, Iesus, Yeshua, Isus, Yēsū, Jezu, Jesús and many more. Judging fro the state of holiness these many saints achieved, I can only get to one conclusion: It isn't as important how to say His name as you want it to be.

Yes you are right about what he was called through 2000 years.

I have presented the Codex Sinaiticus, as I believe it is the earliest (remaining?)Greek compilation of the scripture, where "Iesus" was never once written.   

It's right there online.  I've presented a challenge to everybody to find the Greek "Iesus" or Ἰησοῦς

Guys, I'm not PUSHING for an agenda, but I'm always open to the fact that I am human and can be wrong.  Beliefs I have could be wrong.  Saints and theologians can be wrong.  I don't know.  THIS IS RESEARCH!

I just believe saying "Yeshua or "Yehoshua" is a more correct way of saying his name.  That's where I stand right now.
Logged

I learned how to be more frugal and save money at http://www.livingpress.com
sheenj
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Indian/Malankara Orthodox Syrian Church
Posts: 1,402


St. Gregorios of Parumala, pray for us...


« Reply #63 on: August 05, 2012, 01:03:30 PM »

Quote
Still despite anything, I really don't see why you guys have such a problem calling him by his real name and have to only take on the Greek transliteration?
Throught the last 2000 years, we have had saints praying in the name of Iisus, Jesus, Iesus, Yeshua, Isus, Yēsū, Jezu, Jesús and many more. Judging fro the state of holiness these many saints achieved, I can only get to one conclusion: It isn't as important how to say His name as you want it to be.

Yes you are right about what he was called through 2000 years.

I have presented the Codex Sinaiticus, as I believe it is the earliest (remaining?)Greek compilation of the scripture, where "Iesus" was never once written.   

It's right there online.  I've presented a challenge to everybody to find the Greek "Iesus" or Ἰησοῦς

Guys, I'm not PUSHING for an agenda, but I'm always open to the fact that I am human and can be wrong.  Beliefs I have could be wrong.  Saints and theologians can be wrong.  I don't know.  THIS IS RESEARCH!

I just believe saying "Yeshua or "Yehoshua" is a more correct way of saying his name.  That's where I stand right now.

Do you also say the Lord's prayer only in Ancient Aramaic because that's the only way Jesus(sorry Yeshua) taught us to pray?
Logged
orthonorm
Warned
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,523



« Reply #64 on: August 05, 2012, 01:33:28 PM »

I can't possibly debate everybody here.  I have a wife, 5 children, and a farm.

But let me post this -

I would really like for somebody to show me where the transliteration came from on the Greek translation out of the Codex Sinaiticus.  

http://codexsinaiticus.org

Also, video to consider http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NcDOmOOQTtA&feature=relmfu

Still despite anything, I really don't see why you guys have such a problem calling him by his real name and have to only take on the Greek transliteration?

Orthodoxy never taught me his real name.  Never even mentioned it.  Not once, in 3 decades.


Everyone.

You have to watch at least five minutes past the intro music.

This is nearly as good as some of youtube clips of young "Muslim teachers" out there.

What is with this style of delivery?

Good times.

Thanks Yesh!
« Last Edit: August 05, 2012, 01:33:54 PM by orthonorm » Logged

Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.
orthonorm
Warned
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,523



« Reply #65 on: August 05, 2012, 01:54:23 PM »

You can't afford to miss this video.

Fantastic.

Jesus = I will be a horse
Logged

Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.
orthonorm
Warned
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,523



« Reply #66 on: August 05, 2012, 01:56:33 PM »

I just believe saying "Yeshua or "Yehoshua" is a more correct way of saying his name.  That's where I stand right now.


Your video says your wrong. Both your ways of transliterating the name of the Messiah are wrong.
Logged

Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.
Orthodox11
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,999


« Reply #67 on: August 05, 2012, 02:12:03 PM »

Actually its erroneous.

You're now removing letters from the divine Name of our Lord and claiming they're not supposed to be voiced? Just as His Mother didn't use the modern English form of His name, nor did she pronounce His name with an American accent and omit the voiced pharyngeal fricative.

The man clearly lays out the name, explains it in depth.

The man in the video pronounces everything in a heavy American accent. He even gets the ח at the end of משיח wrong. ח is a heavy (and very noticable) h sound, equivalent to the Arabic ح, yet this guy omits it altogether, saying "Mashia" rather than "Mashiaḥ". In other words, this guy clearly hasn't got a clue about the pronunciation of Semitic languages, and citing him as an authority doesn't exactly help your argument.

The fact that he warns against saying "Jesus" because "sus" sounds like "Zeus" is beyond stupid, and only vaguely works in English. This guy is clueless.

I want the people to admit that his mother did not call him "Jesus".

Have you ever heard anyone argue that His Mother pronounced His name the way it's said by current day English speakers? If so, you need to stop hanging out with morons. If not, why are you so keen to have people admit something that is common knowledge and not denied by anyone?

Again, no one is arguing that "Jesus" was what people called Him in His day. What people are arguing against is the idea that people should adopt a Semitic pronunciation of His name (which contains a sound most non-Semites, including you and the guy in your video, aren't even able to pronounce) on the basis that prayer "in His name" is somehow compromised when pronunciation is Latinised, Anglicised, etc.
« Last Edit: August 05, 2012, 02:37:53 PM by Orthodox11 » Logged
dzheremi
No longer posting here.
Warned
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic
Posts: 4,383


« Reply #68 on: August 05, 2012, 02:15:02 PM »

I do not have the inclination nor time to watch a nearly two hour video on the topic. Can you briefly summarize what you mean by claiming that "it is erroneous"? By "it", do you mean the presence of the 'ayn (phonetically, a voiced pharyngeal fricative) in the various Semitic languages' name for Christ? Because the name that you can clearly see circled at 7 seconds into the video you've linked ends in an 'ayn (in Hebrew, the letter representing this sound looks like this: ע). In Classical Syriac, Jesus' name is spelled ܝܫܽܘܥ, with the sound represented by ܥ (as I wrote previously); in Arabic, it is يسوع, with that same sound represented by ع (which is why you often see it represented in transliterated Arabic used by lazy people like me by the number 3). The only Semitic languages that I know of that do not conform to this pattern are those that have taken it from other sources and don't have that sound segment anyway, like Maltese (Ġesù - obviously a Latinate borrowing, cf. Italian Gesù) or Amharic (ኢየሱስ - Iyesus, from the Greek).


See I knew I would get the "I don't want to watch the video" remark.  The man clearly lays out the name, explains it in depth.   There is no summary I can give you, as you aren't interested in really learning about it.  You are interested in arguing about it.

The man lays it out in Hebrew and Aramaic very clearly.  It would answer your question.

No, I'm not actually interested in arguing about it. I'm interested in getting an answer to my question: What do you mean when you say "it is erroneous"? Is "it" the presence of the voiced pharyngeal fricative in the Semitic equivalents of 'Jesus Christ'?

If you can't summarize the basis for your objection, chances are you don't know what you're talking about. Throwing a bunch of silly pseudo-science babbling at us via silly youtube videos doesn't exactly help dispel that impression.

I'm watching it now, by the way. "Many people are saying things and they don't even understand what's coming out of their mouths." No kidding. Grin
Logged

Ansgar
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: More than an inquirer, less than a catechumen
Jurisdiction: Exarchate of orthodox churches of russian tradition in western Europe
Posts: 2,989


Keep your mind in hell and do not despair


« Reply #69 on: August 05, 2012, 03:28:21 PM »

Quote
Still despite anything, I really don't see why you guys have such a problem calling him by his real name and have to only take on the Greek transliteration?
Throught the last 2000 years, we have had saints praying in the name of Iisus, Jesus, Iesus, Yeshua, Isus, Yēsū, Jezu, Jesús and many more. Judging fro the state of holiness these many saints achieved, I can only get to one conclusion: It isn't as important how to say His name as you want it to be.

Yes you are right about what he was called through 2000 years.

I have presented the Codex Sinaiticus, as I believe it is the earliest (remaining?)Greek compilation of the scripture, where "Iesus" was never once written.   

It's right there online.  I've presented a challenge to everybody to find the Greek "Iesus" or Ἰησοῦς

Guys, I'm not PUSHING for an agenda, but I'm always open to the fact that I am human and can be wrong.  Beliefs I have could be wrong.  Saints and theologians can be wrong.  I don't know.  THIS IS RESEARCH!

I just believe saying "Yeshua or "Yehoshua" is a more correct way of saying his name.  That's where I stand right now.

I am not saying you are wrong. I can gladly accept that Jesus was called Yeshua during his time on Earth. However, I don't understand why it should somehow be theologically incorrect to change his name in different languages. I don't refer to Saint John as Saint Yochanan, but I'm still speaking about the same person.
Logged

Do not be cast down over the struggle - the Lord loves a brave warrior. The Lord loves the soul that is valiant.

-St Silouan the athonite
Pan Michał
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: The Polish Autocephalous Orthodox Church
Posts: 477



« Reply #70 on: August 05, 2012, 03:46:02 PM »

I have presented the Codex Sinaiticus, as I believe it is the earliest (remaining?)Greek compilation of the scripture, where "Iesus" was never once written.  

It's right there online.  I've presented a challenge to everybody to find the Greek "Iesus" or Ἰησοῦς

Του δε ΙΥ ΧΥ η γενεσις ουτως ην

Tou de IY XY e genesis houtos en

Codex Synaiticus, Matt. 1:18


What do I win?




DISCLAIMER - to cut the following "it's not name, but just shortcut", the scholars used to shorten some type of words. For example, you won't see in latin codexes the word "habentes", only "hntes".
« Last Edit: August 05, 2012, 03:54:30 PM by Pan Michał » Logged
yeshuaisiam
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox, Anabaptist, Other Early Christianity kind of jumbled together
Posts: 4,275


A pulling horse cannot kick.


« Reply #71 on: August 05, 2012, 06:49:30 PM »

I have presented the Codex Sinaiticus, as I believe it is the earliest (remaining?)Greek compilation of the scripture, where "Iesus" was never once written.  

It's right there online.  I've presented a challenge to everybody to find the Greek "Iesus" or Ἰησοῦς

Του δε ΙΥ ΧΥ η γενεσις ουτως ην

Tou de IY XY e genesis houtos en

Codex Synaiticus, Matt. 1:18


What do I win?




DISCLAIMER - to cut the following "it's not name, but just shortcut", the scholars used to shorten some type of words. For example, you won't see in latin codexes the word "habentes", only "hntes".

Nothing.  You didn't find "Iesus" or Ἰησοῦς
Logged

I learned how to be more frugal and save money at http://www.livingpress.com
yeshuaisiam
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox, Anabaptist, Other Early Christianity kind of jumbled together
Posts: 4,275


A pulling horse cannot kick.


« Reply #72 on: August 05, 2012, 06:51:21 PM »

I just believe saying "Yeshua or "Yehoshua" is a more correct way of saying his name.  That's where I stand right now.


Your video says your wrong. Both your ways of transliterating the name of the Messiah are wrong.

I know the author of the vids.   He claims himself Yeshua is shortened, Yehushua to Yeho(w)shua are proper.  Don't know what you are talking about.
Logged

I learned how to be more frugal and save money at http://www.livingpress.com
yeshuaisiam
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox, Anabaptist, Other Early Christianity kind of jumbled together
Posts: 4,275


A pulling horse cannot kick.


« Reply #73 on: August 05, 2012, 07:08:31 PM »

I do not have the inclination nor time to watch a nearly two hour video on the topic. Can you briefly summarize what you mean by claiming that "it is erroneous"? By "it", do you mean the presence of the 'ayn (phonetically, a voiced pharyngeal fricative) in the various Semitic languages' name for Christ? Because the name that you can clearly see circled at 7 seconds into the video you've linked ends in an 'ayn (in Hebrew, the letter representing this sound looks like this: ע). In Classical Syriac, Jesus' name is spelled ܝܫܽܘܥ, with the sound represented by ܥ (as I wrote previously); in Arabic, it is يسوع, with that same sound represented by ع (which is why you often see it represented in transliterated Arabic used by lazy people like me by the number 3). The only Semitic languages that I know of that do not conform to this pattern are those that have taken it from other sources and don't have that sound segment anyway, like Maltese (Ġesù - obviously a Latinate borrowing, cf. Italian Gesù) or Amharic (ኢየሱስ - Iyesus, from the Greek).


See I knew I would get the "I don't want to watch the video" remark.  The man clearly lays out the name, explains it in depth.   There is no summary I can give you, as you aren't interested in really learning about it.  You are interested in arguing about it.

The man lays it out in Hebrew and Aramaic very clearly.  It would answer your question.

No, I'm not actually interested in arguing about it. I'm interested in getting an answer to my question: What do you mean when you say "it is erroneous"? Is "it" the presence of the voiced pharyngeal fricative in the Semitic equivalents of 'Jesus Christ'?

If you can't summarize the basis for your objection, chances are you don't know what you're talking about. Throwing a bunch of silly pseudo-science babbling at us via silly youtube videos doesn't exactly help dispel that impression.

I'm watching it now, by the way. "Many people are saying things and they don't even understand what's coming out of their mouths." No kidding. Grin
He clearly lays it out. Each letter, one at a time.   What was it that he said that turned to babble to you?

I'm sorry folks, Jesus was not the name he was called here on Earth.  You just are going to plainly have to accept it.  You can cry, attack me, stop your feet, or whatever.  He was not called Jesus.  I think Jesus is a very weak transliteration of his name, and I don't entirely buy into th conspiratorial arguments here.

I've even presented the codex sinaiticus, which does not contain Ἰησοῦς (iesus).   

His name was a derivative of Yeshua, Yehushua, or Yehowshua, - but most linguistic scholars say "Yeshua".   This is not uncommon and I did not make this up.  There are MANY web sites written by laymen, religious buffs, pastors, professors, doctors, and historians that call him Yeshua.

It's non arguable unless you want to claim his mother called him "Jesus". <- That would not speak much for credibility.

As I've said, before all this got re-erupted, I believe that saying "Jesus" is a very weak transliteration, and that "Yeshua" is a more perfect transliteration and extremely close if not exact to his name.

To answer a question above, yes I would say the Lord's prayer as transliterated.  The words in context would equate.  But rather than avoiding his name by saying "In the name of the Father, the son, and the Holy Spirit" - I would pray in HIS name, as Yeshua OUR GOD commanded us to do.  In my home we say some form of "In Yeshua's name we pray, amen".
Logged

I learned how to be more frugal and save money at http://www.livingpress.com
Father H
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian--God's One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: UOCofUSA-Ecumenical Patriarchate
Posts: 2,611



« Reply #74 on: August 05, 2012, 07:09:34 PM »

I have presented the Codex Sinaiticus, as I believe it is the earliest (remaining?)Greek compilation of the scripture, where "Iesus" was never once written.  

It's right there online.  I've presented a challenge to everybody to find the Greek "Iesus" or Ἰησοῦς

Του δε ΙΥ ΧΥ η γενεσις ουτως ην

Tou de IY XY e genesis houtos en

Codex Synaiticus, Matt. 1:18


What do I win?




DISCLAIMER - to cut the following "it's not name, but just shortcut", the scholars used to shorten some type of words. For example, you won't see in latin codexes the word "habentes", only "hntes".

Nothing.  You didn't find "Iesus" or Ἰησοῦς


You would have been disappointed at Pentecost, each man hearing the name of the Lord in his own language and all that.  It is too bad you can't go back and tell the Holy Spirit that He was wrong.   Lips Sealed
« Last Edit: August 05, 2012, 07:10:10 PM by FatherHLL » Logged
Father H
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian--God's One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: UOCofUSA-Ecumenical Patriarchate
Posts: 2,611



« Reply #75 on: August 05, 2012, 07:16:27 PM »

I do not have the inclination nor time to watch a nearly two hour video on the topic. Can you briefly summarize what you mean by claiming that "it is erroneous"? By "it", do you mean the presence of the 'ayn (phonetically, a voiced pharyngeal fricative) in the various Semitic languages' name for Christ? Because the name that you can clearly see circled at 7 seconds into the video you've linked ends in an 'ayn (in Hebrew, the letter representing this sound looks like this: ע). In Classical Syriac, Jesus' name is spelled ܝܫܽܘܥ, with the sound represented by ܥ (as I wrote previously); in Arabic, it is يسوع, with that same sound represented by ع (which is why you often see it represented in transliterated Arabic used by lazy people like me by the number 3). The only Semitic languages that I know of that do not conform to this pattern are those that have taken it from other sources and don't have that sound segment anyway, like Maltese (Ġesù - obviously a Latinate borrowing, cf. Italian Gesù) or Amharic (ኢየሱስ - Iyesus, from the Greek).


See I knew I would get the "I don't want to watch the video" remark.  The man clearly lays out the name, explains it in depth.   There is no summary I can give you, as you aren't interested in really learning about it.  You are interested in arguing about it.

The man lays it out in Hebrew and Aramaic very clearly.  It would answer your question.

No, I'm not actually interested in arguing about it. I'm interested in getting an answer to my question: What do you mean when you say "it is erroneous"? Is "it" the presence of the voiced pharyngeal fricative in the Semitic equivalents of 'Jesus Christ'?

If you can't summarize the basis for your objection, chances are you don't know what you're talking about. Throwing a bunch of silly pseudo-science babbling at us via silly youtube videos doesn't exactly help dispel that impression.

I'm watching it now, by the way. "Many people are saying things and they don't even understand what's coming out of their mouths." No kidding. Grin
He clearly lays it out. Each letter, one at a time.   What was it that he said that turned to babble to you?

I'm sorry folks, Jesus was not the name he was called here on Earth.  You just are going to plainly have to accept it.  You can cry, attack me, stop your feet, or whatever.  He was not called Jesus.  I think Jesus is a very weak transliteration of his name, and I don't entirely buy into th conspiratorial arguments here.

I've even presented the codex sinaiticus, which does not contain Ἰησοῦς (iesus).  

His name was a derivative of Yeshua, Yehushua, or Yehowshua, - but most linguistic scholars say "Yeshua".   This is not uncommon and I did not make this up.  There are MANY web sites written by laymen, religious buffs, pastors, professors, doctors, and historians that call him Yeshua.

It's non arguable unless you want to claim his mother called him "Jesus". <- That would not speak much for credibility.

As I've said, before all this got re-erupted, I believe that saying "Jesus" is a very weak transliteration, and that "Yeshua" is a more perfect transliteration and extremely close if not exact to his name.

To answer a question above, yes I would say the Lord's prayer as transliterated.  The words in context would equate.  But rather than avoiding his name by saying "In the name of the Father, the son, and the Holy Spirit" - I would pray in HIS name, as Yeshua OUR GOD commanded us to do.  In my home we say some form of "In Yeshua's name we pray, amen".

So you think that the Lord instructed His Apostles wrongly to, in your opinion, "avoid the name" by baptizing in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit?  BTW, Son is capitalized.  I don't know why anyone would want to join your religion, wholly separated from the blessings of Pentecost and the direct instructions of the Lord. 
« Last Edit: August 05, 2012, 07:17:20 PM by FatherHLL » Logged
Orthodox11
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,999


« Reply #76 on: August 05, 2012, 07:28:14 PM »

He clearly lays it out. Each letter, one at a time.   What was it that he said that turned to babble to you?

I'm sorry folks, Jesus was not the name he was called here on Earth.  You just are going to plainly have to accept it.  You can cry, attack me, stop your feet, or whatever.  He was not called Jesus.  I think Jesus is a very weak transliteration of his name, and I don't entirely buy into th conspiratorial arguments here.

I've even presented the codex sinaiticus, which does not contain Ἰησοῦς (iesus).   

His name was a derivative of Yeshua, Yehushua, or Yehowshua, - but most linguistic scholars say "Yeshua".   This is not uncommon and I did not make this up.  There are MANY web sites written by laymen, religious buffs, pastors, professors, doctors, and historians that call him Yeshua.

It's non arguable unless you want to claim his mother called him "Jesus". <- That would not speak much for credibility.

As I've said, before all this got re-erupted, I believe that saying "Jesus" is a very weak transliteration, and that "Yeshua" is a more perfect transliteration and extremely close if not exact to his name.

To answer a question above, yes I would say the Lord's prayer as transliterated.  The words in context would equate.  But rather than avoiding his name by saying "In the name of the Father, the son, and the Holy Spirit" - I would pray in HIS name, as Yeshua OUR GOD commanded us to do.  In my home we say some form of "In Yeshua's name we pray, amen".

What does any of the above have to do with the voiced pharyngeal fricative, the ע, in the Hebrew name of our Saviour?
Logged
dzheremi
No longer posting here.
Warned
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic
Posts: 4,383


« Reply #77 on: August 05, 2012, 07:55:49 PM »

He clearly lays it out. Each letter, one at a time.   What was it that he said that turned to babble to you?

The part where he (and you) are attaching some theological importance to pronouncing the name of Jesus correctly according to Semitic languages that you cannot even properly pronounce yourselves. It makes absolutely no sense.

Quote
I'm sorry folks, Jesus was not the name he was called here on Earth.  You just are going to plainly have to accept it.  You can cry, attack me, stop your feet, or whatever.  He was not called Jesus.
 

I don't know who you're having this conversation with, but it doesn't appear to be anyone in this thread, as nobody is arguing that He was called "Jesus" during His time here on earth.

Quote
I think Jesus is a very weak transliteration of his name, and I don't entirely buy into th conspiratorial arguments here.

Why is Jesus a "very weak transliteration"? What does that even mean? (I'm not sure what you mean by using the term "transliteration"; you don't appear to be a linguist, so I can't assume that we have the same understanding of the term.)

Quote
I've even presented the codex sinaiticus, which does not contain Ἰησοῦς (iesus).
 

But does contain the abbreviated form IY XY, as presented by Pan Michal, which I would bet many dollars would have been pronounced as the full name you claim isn't there. I can do that because we do the same in Coptic, which is likewise written in Greek: "Ebshois" is abbreviated with three letters, "Efnouti" is abbreviated with three letters, "Ethowab" is abbreviated with three letters, etc. But all of these abbreviations are understood and read aloud as the full word. Nobody says "ebs" in place of ebshois, or "ethw" in place of ethowab, etc. You're just clinging to this non-point because it's all you have, but it doesn't mean anything.

Quote
To answer a question above, yes I would say the Lord's prayer as transliterated.
 

Could you answer my question from the earlier posts, please: When you say "it is erroneous", by "it" are you referring to presence of the voiced pharyngeal fricative in the name of Christ as it is in Hebrew, Arabic, Syriac, etc. (the majority of the Semitic languages)?
« Last Edit: August 05, 2012, 07:57:20 PM by dzheremi » Logged

yeshuaisiam
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox, Anabaptist, Other Early Christianity kind of jumbled together
Posts: 4,275


A pulling horse cannot kick.


« Reply #78 on: August 05, 2012, 08:05:30 PM »

I do not have the inclination nor time to watch a nearly two hour video on the topic. Can you briefly summarize what you mean by claiming that "it is erroneous"? By "it", do you mean the presence of the 'ayn (phonetically, a voiced pharyngeal fricative) in the various Semitic languages' name for Christ? Because the name that you can clearly see circled at 7 seconds into the video you've linked ends in an 'ayn (in Hebrew, the letter representing this sound looks like this: ע). In Classical Syriac, Jesus' name is spelled ܝܫܽܘܥ, with the sound represented by ܥ (as I wrote previously); in Arabic, it is يسوع, with that same sound represented by ع (which is why you often see it represented in transliterated Arabic used by lazy people like me by the number 3). The only Semitic languages that I know of that do not conform to this pattern are those that have taken it from other sources and don't have that sound segment anyway, like Maltese (Ġesù - obviously a Latinate borrowing, cf. Italian Gesù) or Amharic (ኢየሱስ - Iyesus, from the Greek).


See I knew I would get the "I don't want to watch the video" remark.  The man clearly lays out the name, explains it in depth.   There is no summary I can give you, as you aren't interested in really learning about it.  You are interested in arguing about it.

The man lays it out in Hebrew and Aramaic very clearly.  It would answer your question.

No, I'm not actually interested in arguing about it. I'm interested in getting an answer to my question: What do you mean when you say "it is erroneous"? Is "it" the presence of the voiced pharyngeal fricative in the Semitic equivalents of 'Jesus Christ'?

If you can't summarize the basis for your objection, chances are you don't know what you're talking about. Throwing a bunch of silly pseudo-science babbling at us via silly youtube videos doesn't exactly help dispel that impression.

I'm watching it now, by the way. "Many people are saying things and they don't even understand what's coming out of their mouths." No kidding. Grin
He clearly lays it out. Each letter, one at a time.   What was it that he said that turned to babble to you?

I'm sorry folks, Jesus was not the name he was called here on Earth.  You just are going to plainly have to accept it.  You can cry, attack me, stop your feet, or whatever.  He was not called Jesus.  I think Jesus is a very weak transliteration of his name, and I don't entirely buy into th conspiratorial arguments here.

I've even presented the codex sinaiticus, which does not contain Ἰησοῦς (iesus).  

His name was a derivative of Yeshua, Yehushua, or Yehowshua, - but most linguistic scholars say "Yeshua".   This is not uncommon and I did not make this up.  There are MANY web sites written by laymen, religious buffs, pastors, professors, doctors, and historians that call him Yeshua.

It's non arguable unless you want to claim his mother called him "Jesus". <- That would not speak much for credibility.

As I've said, before all this got re-erupted, I believe that saying "Jesus" is a very weak transliteration, and that "Yeshua" is a more perfect transliteration and extremely close if not exact to his name.

To answer a question above, yes I would say the Lord's prayer as transliterated.  The words in context would equate.  But rather than avoiding his name by saying "In the name of the Father, the son, and the Holy Spirit" - I would pray in HIS name, as Yeshua OUR GOD commanded us to do.  In my home we say some form of "In Yeshua's name we pray, amen".

So you think that the Lord instructed His Apostles wrongly to, in your opinion, "avoid the name" by baptizing in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit?  BTW, Son is capitalized.  I don't know why anyone would want to join your religion, wholly separated from the blessings of Pentecost and the direct instructions of the Lord.  
and what is the name of the Father, Son, and Holy spirit?

We were told to PRAY in HIS name.  

Also your last snide comment I could rip apart, about not following direct instructions of the Lord FATHER HLL.
« Last Edit: August 05, 2012, 08:18:42 PM by yeshuaisiam » Logged

I learned how to be more frugal and save money at http://www.livingpress.com
yeshuaisiam
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox, Anabaptist, Other Early Christianity kind of jumbled together
Posts: 4,275


A pulling horse cannot kick.


« Reply #79 on: August 05, 2012, 08:06:18 PM »

He clearly lays it out. Each letter, one at a time.   What was it that he said that turned to babble to you?

I'm sorry folks, Jesus was not the name he was called here on Earth.  You just are going to plainly have to accept it.  You can cry, attack me, stop your feet, or whatever.  He was not called Jesus.  I think Jesus is a very weak transliteration of his name, and I don't entirely buy into th conspiratorial arguments here.

I've even presented the codex sinaiticus, which does not contain Ἰησοῦς (iesus).   

His name was a derivative of Yeshua, Yehushua, or Yehowshua, - but most linguistic scholars say "Yeshua".   This is not uncommon and I did not make this up.  There are MANY web sites written by laymen, religious buffs, pastors, professors, doctors, and historians that call him Yeshua.

It's non arguable unless you want to claim his mother called him "Jesus". <- That would not speak much for credibility.

As I've said, before all this got re-erupted, I believe that saying "Jesus" is a very weak transliteration, and that "Yeshua" is a more perfect transliteration and extremely close if not exact to his name.

To answer a question above, yes I would say the Lord's prayer as transliterated.  The words in context would equate.  But rather than avoiding his name by saying "In the name of the Father, the son, and the Holy Spirit" - I would pray in HIS name, as Yeshua OUR GOD commanded us to do.  In my home we say some form of "In Yeshua's name we pray, amen".

What does any of the above have to do with the voiced pharyngeal fricative, the ע, in the Hebrew name of our Saviour?

It's not there. Watch the video.

BTW his name was in Aramaic, not Hebrew.
Logged

I learned how to be more frugal and save money at http://www.livingpress.com
yeshuaisiam
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox, Anabaptist, Other Early Christianity kind of jumbled together
Posts: 4,275


A pulling horse cannot kick.


« Reply #80 on: August 05, 2012, 08:15:03 PM »

He clearly lays it out. Each letter, one at a time.   What was it that he said that turned to babble to you?

The part where he (and you) are attaching some theological importance to pronouncing the name of Jesus correctly according to Semitic languages that you cannot even properly pronounce yourselves. It makes absolutely no sense.

Quote
I'm sorry folks, Jesus was not the name he was called here on Earth.  You just are going to plainly have to accept it.  You can cry, attack me, stop your feet, or whatever.  He was not called Jesus.
 

I don't know who you're having this conversation with, but it doesn't appear to be anyone in this thread, as nobody is arguing that He was called "Jesus" during His time here on earth.

Quote
I think Jesus is a very weak transliteration of his name, and I don't entirely buy into th conspiratorial arguments here.

Why is Jesus a "very weak transliteration"? What does that even mean? (I'm not sure what you mean by using the term "transliteration"; you don't appear to be a linguist, so I can't assume that we have the same understanding of the term.)

Quote
I've even presented the codex sinaiticus, which does not contain Ἰησοῦς (iesus).
 

But does contain the abbreviated form IY XY, as presented by Pan Michal, which I would bet many dollars would have been pronounced as the full name you claim isn't there. I can do that because we do the same in Coptic, which is likewise written in Greek: "Ebshois" is abbreviated with three letters, "Efnouti" is abbreviated with three letters, "Ethowab" is abbreviated with three letters, etc. But all of these abbreviations are understood and read aloud as the full word. Nobody says "ebs" in place of ebshois, or "ethw" in place of ethowab, etc. You're just clinging to this non-point because it's all you have, but it doesn't mean anything.

Quote
To answer a question above, yes I would say the Lord's prayer as transliterated.
 

Could you answer my question from the earlier posts, please: When you say "it is erroneous", by "it" are you referring to presence of the voiced pharyngeal fricative in the name of Christ as it is in Hebrew, Arabic, Syriac, etc. (the majority of the Semitic languages)?

He didn't find Iesus in the text.  This has been stressed over and over.  It's not there.

I have answered the question.  You are asking about teh voiced pharyngeal fricative in the name of Christ as it is in Hebrew, Arabic, and Syriac.

The language spoken was Aramaic, and the author in the video I posted clearly lays it out.   Breaking it down letter by letter.

I am being mistaken by many here.  I'm not calling Jesus erroneous, I'm saying its a weak transliteration.  Yes even a weak transliteration used by saints, theologians, partriarchs, King James, priests EO & RC, and many others for years even dating back to apostolic times.

We were told to baptize in the "NAME of the Father, and of the Son, and Holy Spirit".   The son's name was Yeshua.  That is all.  Say Jesus if you want, I was just referring at the start of this thread that people use use it in a blaspheming or subjective name create an irony, because it really wasn't his name.

If you are going to shout "JESUS CHRIST!", its ironic to say something so assertive that is weak in translation.
« Last Edit: August 05, 2012, 08:16:18 PM by yeshuaisiam » Logged

I learned how to be more frugal and save money at http://www.livingpress.com
Cavaradossi
法網恢恢,疏而不漏
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Chalcedonian Automaton Serial No. 5Aj4bx9
Jurisdiction: Chalcedonian Automaton Factory 5
Posts: 1,621



« Reply #81 on: August 05, 2012, 08:27:55 PM »

He clearly lays it out. Each letter, one at a time.   What was it that he said that turned to babble to you?

I'm sorry folks, Jesus was not the name he was called here on Earth.  You just are going to plainly have to accept it.  You can cry, attack me, stop your feet, or whatever.  He was not called Jesus.  I think Jesus is a very weak transliteration of his name, and I don't entirely buy into th conspiratorial arguments here.

I've even presented the codex sinaiticus, which does not contain Ἰησοῦς (iesus).   

His name was a derivative of Yeshua, Yehushua, or Yehowshua, - but most linguistic scholars say "Yeshua".   This is not uncommon and I did not make this up.  There are MANY web sites written by laymen, religious buffs, pastors, professors, doctors, and historians that call him Yeshua.

It's non arguable unless you want to claim his mother called him "Jesus". <- That would not speak much for credibility.

As I've said, before all this got re-erupted, I believe that saying "Jesus" is a very weak transliteration, and that "Yeshua" is a more perfect transliteration and extremely close if not exact to his name.

To answer a question above, yes I would say the Lord's prayer as transliterated.  The words in context would equate.  But rather than avoiding his name by saying "In the name of the Father, the son, and the Holy Spirit" - I would pray in HIS name, as Yeshua OUR GOD commanded us to do.  In my home we say some form of "In Yeshua's name we pray, amen".

What does any of the above have to do with the voiced pharyngeal fricative, the ע, in the Hebrew name of our Saviour?

It's not there. Watch the video.

BTW his name was in Aramaic, not Hebrew.

It doesn't matter. The letter Ayin is ubiquitous in Semitic languages, and it existed in the Aramaic of Jesus' day as well, pronounced as some type of voiced pharyngeal consonant.
Logged

Be comforted, and have faith, O Israel, for your God is infinitely simple and one, composed of no parts.
dzheremi
No longer posting here.
Warned
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic
Posts: 4,383


« Reply #82 on: August 05, 2012, 08:31:55 PM »

He didn't find Iesus in the text.  This has been stressed over and over.  It's not there.

And this apparently means a whole lot to you, for reasons that nobody but yourself can begin to fathom.

Quote
I have answered the question.  You are asking about teh voiced pharyngeal fricative in the name of Christ as it is in Hebrew, Arabic, and Syriac.

And Aramaic, yes. I used the others as examples of the pattern that you find in the Semitic languages, Y-š-ʕ, which holds true also for Aramaic. I also provided explanations for why it doesn't always appear in, for instance, Maltese and Amharic, despite the fact that they are Semitic languages as well.

Quote
The language spoken was Aramaic

Which is certainly not without the voiced pharyngeal.

Quote
I am being mistaken by many here.  I'm not calling Jesus erroneous, I'm saying its a weak transliteration.  Yes even a weak transliteration used by saints, theologians, partriarchs, King James, priests EO & RC, and many others for years even dating back to apostolic times.

What do you mean when you call it a weak transliteration, though?

Quote
If you are going to shout "JESUS CHRIST!", its ironic to say something so assertive that is weak in translation.

I don't see what's ironic about it, but I'll assume that's another word you're using without knowing what it means.
Logged

Father H
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian--God's One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: UOCofUSA-Ecumenical Patriarchate
Posts: 2,611



« Reply #83 on: August 05, 2012, 08:48:34 PM »

I do not have the inclination nor time to watch a nearly two hour video on the topic. Can you briefly summarize what you mean by claiming that "it is erroneous"? By "it", do you mean the presence of the 'ayn (phonetically, a voiced pharyngeal fricative) in the various Semitic languages' name for Christ? Because the name that you can clearly see circled at 7 seconds into the video you've linked ends in an 'ayn (in Hebrew, the letter representing this sound looks like this: ע). In Classical Syriac, Jesus' name is spelled ܝܫܽܘܥ, with the sound represented by ܥ (as I wrote previously); in Arabic, it is يسوع, with that same sound represented by ع (which is why you often see it represented in transliterated Arabic used by lazy people like me by the number 3). The only Semitic languages that I know of that do not conform to this pattern are those that have taken it from other sources and don't have that sound segment anyway, like Maltese (Ġesù - obviously a Latinate borrowing, cf. Italian Gesù) or Amharic (ኢየሱስ - Iyesus, from the Greek).


See I knew I would get the "I don't want to watch the video" remark.  The man clearly lays out the name, explains it in depth.   There is no summary I can give you, as you aren't interested in really learning about it.  You are interested in arguing about it.

The man lays it out in Hebrew and Aramaic very clearly.  It would answer your question.

No, I'm not actually interested in arguing about it. I'm interested in getting an answer to my question: What do you mean when you say "it is erroneous"? Is "it" the presence of the voiced pharyngeal fricative in the Semitic equivalents of 'Jesus Christ'?

If you can't summarize the basis for your objection, chances are you don't know what you're talking about. Throwing a bunch of silly pseudo-science babbling at us via silly youtube videos doesn't exactly help dispel that impression.

I'm watching it now, by the way. "Many people are saying things and they don't even understand what's coming out of their mouths." No kidding. Grin
He clearly lays it out. Each letter, one at a time.   What was it that he said that turned to babble to you?

I'm sorry folks, Jesus was not the name he was called here on Earth.  You just are going to plainly have to accept it.  You can cry, attack me, stop your feet, or whatever.  He was not called Jesus.  I think Jesus is a very weak transliteration of his name, and I don't entirely buy into th conspiratorial arguments here.

I've even presented the codex sinaiticus, which does not contain Ἰησοῦς (iesus).  

His name was a derivative of Yeshua, Yehushua, or Yehowshua, - but most linguistic scholars say "Yeshua".   This is not uncommon and I did not make this up.  There are MANY web sites written by laymen, religious buffs, pastors, professors, doctors, and historians that call him Yeshua.

It's non arguable unless you want to claim his mother called him "Jesus". <- That would not speak much for credibility.

As I've said, before all this got re-erupted, I believe that saying "Jesus" is a very weak transliteration, and that "Yeshua" is a more perfect transliteration and extremely close if not exact to his name.

To answer a question above, yes I would say the Lord's prayer as transliterated.  The words in context would equate.  But rather than avoiding his name by saying "In the name of the Father, the son, and the Holy Spirit" - I would pray in HIS name, as Yeshua OUR GOD commanded us to do.  In my home we say some form of "In Yeshua's name we pray, amen".

So you think that the Lord instructed His Apostles wrongly to, in your opinion, "avoid the name" by baptizing in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit?  BTW, Son is capitalized.  I don't know why anyone would want to join your religion, wholly separated from the blessings of Pentecost and the direct instructions of the Lord.  
and what is the name of the Father, Son, and Holy spirit?

We were told to PRAY in HIS name.  

Also your last snide comment I could rip apart, about not following direct instructions of the Lord FATHER HLL.

Are you a "oneness" believer? 
Logged
Cavaradossi
法網恢恢,疏而不漏
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Chalcedonian Automaton Serial No. 5Aj4bx9
Jurisdiction: Chalcedonian Automaton Factory 5
Posts: 1,621



« Reply #84 on: August 05, 2012, 09:01:27 PM »

I do not have the inclination nor time to watch a nearly two hour video on the topic. Can you briefly summarize what you mean by claiming that "it is erroneous"? By "it", do you mean the presence of the 'ayn (phonetically, a voiced pharyngeal fricative) in the various Semitic languages' name for Christ? Because the name that you can clearly see circled at 7 seconds into the video you've linked ends in an 'ayn (in Hebrew, the letter representing this sound looks like this: ע). In Classical Syriac, Jesus' name is spelled ܝܫܽܘܥ, with the sound represented by ܥ (as I wrote previously); in Arabic, it is يسوع, with that same sound represented by ع (which is why you often see it represented in transliterated Arabic used by lazy people like me by the number 3). The only Semitic languages that I know of that do not conform to this pattern are those that have taken it from other sources and don't have that sound segment anyway, like Maltese (Ġesù - obviously a Latinate borrowing, cf. Italian Gesù) or Amharic (ኢየሱስ - Iyesus, from the Greek).


See I knew I would get the "I don't want to watch the video" remark.  The man clearly lays out the name, explains it in depth.   There is no summary I can give you, as you aren't interested in really learning about it.  You are interested in arguing about it.

The man lays it out in Hebrew and Aramaic very clearly.  It would answer your question.

No, I'm not actually interested in arguing about it. I'm interested in getting an answer to my question: What do you mean when you say "it is erroneous"? Is "it" the presence of the voiced pharyngeal fricative in the Semitic equivalents of 'Jesus Christ'?

If you can't summarize the basis for your objection, chances are you don't know what you're talking about. Throwing a bunch of silly pseudo-science babbling at us via silly youtube videos doesn't exactly help dispel that impression.

I'm watching it now, by the way. "Many people are saying things and they don't even understand what's coming out of their mouths." No kidding. Grin
He clearly lays it out. Each letter, one at a time.   What was it that he said that turned to babble to you?

I'm sorry folks, Jesus was not the name he was called here on Earth.  You just are going to plainly have to accept it.  You can cry, attack me, stop your feet, or whatever.  He was not called Jesus.  I think Jesus is a very weak transliteration of his name, and I don't entirely buy into th conspiratorial arguments here.

I've even presented the codex sinaiticus, which does not contain Ἰησοῦς (iesus).   

His name was a derivative of Yeshua, Yehushua, or Yehowshua, - but most linguistic scholars say "Yeshua".   This is not uncommon and I did not make this up.  There are MANY web sites written by laymen, religious buffs, pastors, professors, doctors, and historians that call him Yeshua.

It's non arguable unless you want to claim his mother called him "Jesus". <- That would not speak much for credibility.

As I've said, before all this got re-erupted, I believe that saying "Jesus" is a very weak transliteration, and that "Yeshua" is a more perfect transliteration and extremely close if not exact to his name.

To answer a question above, yes I would say the Lord's prayer as transliterated.  The words in context would equate.  But rather than avoiding his name by saying "In the name of the Father, the son, and the Holy Spirit" - I would pray in HIS name, as Yeshua OUR GOD commanded us to do.  In my home we say some form of "In Yeshua's name we pray, amen".

So you think that the Lord instructed His Apostles wrongly to, in your opinion, "avoid the name" by baptizing in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit?  BTW, Son is capitalized.  I don't know why anyone would want to join your religion, wholly separated from the blessings of Pentecost and the direct instructions of the Lord. 
and what is the name of the Father, Son, and Holy spirit?

We were told to PRAY in HIS name. 

Also your last snide comment I could rip apart, about not following direct instructions of the Lord FATHER HLL.

It's ok. When Yeshua said, 'call no man father,' he only meant that in Aramaic. It is permissible to call one's priests father, since father is a very weak transliteration of the Aramaic, abba.
« Last Edit: August 05, 2012, 09:11:10 PM by Cavaradossi » Logged

Be comforted, and have faith, O Israel, for your God is infinitely simple and one, composed of no parts.
HabteSelassie
Ises and I-ity
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church
Posts: 3,332



« Reply #85 on: August 05, 2012, 09:45:16 PM »

Greetings in that Divine and Most Precious Name of Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ!


Again, no one is arguing that "Jesus" was what people called Him in His day. What people are arguing against is the idea that people should adopt a Semitic pronunciation of His name (which contains a sound most non-Semites, including you and the guy in your video, aren't even able to pronounce) on the basis that prayer "in His name" is somehow compromised when pronunciation is Latinised, Anglicised, etc.

Is anything in Yeshuain glottalized? As an American, it literally took me THREE years just to learn how to properly glottalized a k in the soft way of Amharic Wink

stay blessed,
habte selassie
Logged

"Yet stand aloof from stupid questionings and geneologies and strifes and fightings about law, for they are without benefit and vain." Titus 3:10
Father H
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian--God's One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: UOCofUSA-Ecumenical Patriarchate
Posts: 2,611



« Reply #86 on: August 05, 2012, 11:48:58 PM »

I do not have the inclination nor time to watch a nearly two hour video on the topic. Can you briefly summarize what you mean by claiming that "it is erroneous"? By "it", do you mean the presence of the 'ayn (phonetically, a voiced pharyngeal fricative) in the various Semitic languages' name for Christ? Because the name that you can clearly see circled at 7 seconds into the video you've linked ends in an 'ayn (in Hebrew, the letter representing this sound looks like this: ע). In Classical Syriac, Jesus' name is spelled ܝܫܽܘܥ, with the sound represented by ܥ (as I wrote previously); in Arabic, it is يسوع, with that same sound represented by ع (which is why you often see it represented in transliterated Arabic used by lazy people like me by the number 3). The only Semitic languages that I know of that do not conform to this pattern are those that have taken it from other sources and don't have that sound segment anyway, like Maltese (Ġesù - obviously a Latinate borrowing, cf. Italian Gesù) or Amharic (ኢየሱስ - Iyesus, from the Greek).


See I knew I would get the "I don't want to watch the video" remark.  The man clearly lays out the name, explains it in depth.   There is no summary I can give you, as you aren't interested in really learning about it.  You are interested in arguing about it.

The man lays it out in Hebrew and Aramaic very clearly.  It would answer your question.

No, I'm not actually interested in arguing about it. I'm interested in getting an answer to my question: What do you mean when you say "it is erroneous"? Is "it" the presence of the voiced pharyngeal fricative in the Semitic equivalents of 'Jesus Christ'?

If you can't summarize the basis for your objection, chances are you don't know what you're talking about. Throwing a bunch of silly pseudo-science babbling at us via silly youtube videos doesn't exactly help dispel that impression.

I'm watching it now, by the way. "Many people are saying things and they don't even understand what's coming out of their mouths." No kidding. Grin
He clearly lays it out. Each letter, one at a time.   What was it that he said that turned to babble to you?

I'm sorry folks, Jesus was not the name he was called here on Earth.  You just are going to plainly have to accept it.  You can cry, attack me, stop your feet, or whatever.  He was not called Jesus.  I think Jesus is a very weak transliteration of his name, and I don't entirely buy into th conspiratorial arguments here.

I've even presented the codex sinaiticus, which does not contain Ἰησοῦς (iesus).  

His name was a derivative of Yeshua, Yehushua, or Yehowshua, - but most linguistic scholars say "Yeshua".   This is not uncommon and I did not make this up.  There are MANY web sites written by laymen, religious buffs, pastors, professors, doctors, and historians that call him Yeshua.

It's non arguable unless you want to claim his mother called him "Jesus". <- That would not speak much for credibility.

As I've said, before all this got re-erupted, I believe that saying "Jesus" is a very weak transliteration, and that "Yeshua" is a more perfect transliteration and extremely close if not exact to his name.

To answer a question above, yes I would say the Lord's prayer as transliterated.  The words in context would equate.  But rather than avoiding his name by saying "In the name of the Father, the son, and the Holy Spirit" - I would pray in HIS name, as Yeshua OUR GOD commanded us to do.  In my home we say some form of "In Yeshua's name we pray, amen".

So you think that the Lord instructed His Apostles wrongly to, in your opinion, "avoid the name" by baptizing in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit?  BTW, Son is capitalized.  I don't know why anyone would want to join your religion, wholly separated from the blessings of Pentecost and the direct instructions of the Lord.  
and what is the name of the Father, Son, and Holy spirit?

We were told to PRAY in HIS name.  

Also your last snide comment I could rip apart, about not following direct instructions of the Lord FATHER HLL.

"We are told to pray in His name":

Revelation 19:13
He was clothed with a robe dipped in blood, and His name is called The Word of God

Revelation 19:16
And He has on His robe and on His thigh a name written: KING OF KINGS AND LORD OF LORDS.
 
While Scripture gives Satan a name in both Hebrew and Greek languages:
"And they had as king over them the angel of the bottomless pit, whose name in Hebrew is Abaddon, but in Greek he has the name Apollyon" (Rev. 9.11)

...it gives the name of the Lord in only one language, and that is Greek:  ὁ Λόγος τοῦ Θεοῦ (Rev. 19.13).

BTW, toward your last comment--as already pointed out by another poster, I don't sing as well as ABBA, and nobody calls me by that title. 

You have a nice day nonetheless. 




 
 
Logged
Father H
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian--God's One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: UOCofUSA-Ecumenical Patriarchate
Posts: 2,611



« Reply #87 on: August 05, 2012, 11:59:17 PM »

^Also, ONLY the Orthodox Church prays in the name of the Lord as given in Rev. 19.13:  Μονογενὴς Υἱὸς καὶ Λόγος τοῦ Θεοῦ
Logged
Pan Michał
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: The Polish Autocephalous Orthodox Church
Posts: 477



« Reply #88 on: August 06, 2012, 08:43:22 AM »

Nothing.  You didn't find "Iesus" or Ἰησοῦς


What about the rest of my text? Will you take an opinion or just take a word from context? Do you have any knowledge about how manuscripts were written in a matter of papyrology or is this just your personal belief to which you want to bend philology and late antiquity script contraction method?

I'm sorry If I've wrtitten it too harsh, didn't mean to.
« Last Edit: August 06, 2012, 09:02:48 AM by Pan Michał » Logged
yeshuaisiam
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox, Anabaptist, Other Early Christianity kind of jumbled together
Posts: 4,275


A pulling horse cannot kick.


« Reply #89 on: August 06, 2012, 11:35:48 AM »

Guys, I don't have time to argue the point anymore, and trust me, I believe on each side we'd be beating a dead horse.  Nobody is budging.
I have a wife, 5 children, and a farm to maintain.  There are several responses, and i just don't have time to answer them all.

If you want, use the accents or not, written or not... whatever.  It doesn't matter to me.  The name of Yeshua is incredibly close if not exact to what he was called.  The transliteration of "Jesus" is phonetically VERY far from what he was called from his mother.

We were commanded to pray in his name.
If you don't that's your business.
If you don't see anything wrong with praying to "Jesus"....  Your business.

For my family, we pray in the name his mother called him as he walked the Earth - "Yeshua".  EVEN IF we are off by accent or slight phonics, that's our imperfection, but we are trying.  But we don't purposely and intentionally pronounce his name "Jesus" as we know it has been very much changed from his original name.  The attempts to throw in pharyngeal fricative (which many linguistic scholars would argue against because they pronounce his name "Yeshua") to say "see you don't say it right" is redundant. 

If the pharyngeal fricative argument is valid, I would change the way I pronounce his name in order to do it the most correct way.

The question is - Would you? 

I believe my points bother many Eastern Orthodox Christians because they know there IS validity to what I am saying, but in order to say it would work somewhat against "how the EO church does things".   "The church is the church, and the church is right, period no matter what".

It's like "God forbid you want to actually call him by his correctly pronounced name".

Anyway, like I said, I'm sure I'm probably beating a dead horse.  I can assure you on my end, I won't budge.  I feel passionate about praying in his name and pronouncing it correctly.   I feel robbed that in all my years in the Orthodox church, including a good while at an Orthodox Seminary, that I NEVER one time actually heard the real name of our savior.   Yes.. That really matters.


 
Logged

I learned how to be more frugal and save money at http://www.livingpress.com
Tags:
Pages: « 1 2 3 »  All   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.213 seconds with 72 queries.