Author Topic: Saying Yeshua is not new and not protestant - Matthew ORIGINALLY in Hebrew  (Read 2411 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline yeshuaisiam

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,697
  • A pulling horse cannot kick.
So the Nazarene Christians existed...  when?  Oh, I thought it was protestant.

“We shall now especially consider heretics who... call themselves Nazarenes; they are mainly Jews and nothing else. They make use not only of the New Testament, but they also use in a way the Old Testament of the Jews, for they do not forbid the books of the Law, the Prophets, and the Writings, so that they are approved by the Jews, from whom the Nazarenes do not differ in anything, and they profess all the dogmas pertaining to the prescriptions of the Law and to the customs of the Jews, except they believe in Messiah.... They preach that there is but one God and His Son Yeshua the Messiah. But they are very learned in the Hebrew language, for they, like the Jews, read the whole Law, then the prophets.... They differ from Jews because they believe in Messiah and from Christians in that they are this day bound to Jewish rites, such as circumcision, the Sabbath, and other ceremonies. They have the good news according to Matthew in it’s entirety in Hebrew. For it is clear that they preserve this, in the Hebrew alphabet, as it was originally written.... Otherwise, this sect of Nazarenes thrives most vigorously in the state of Berea , in Coele-Syria, in Decapolis, around Pella , and in Bashan .... After they departed from Jerusalem , they made their start from here, as all the disciples dwelt in Pella , having been admonished by Christ to depart Jerusalem and emigrate because of imminent danger.” Epiphanius (church father), Panarion 29, 390 A.D.

390 A.D. folks, and that was not their inception.

Sure, Epiphanius called them heretics.  Easy label.

Just making a point that the quip that saying "Yeshua" is a modern protestant inception, is invalid.

These Nazarites have a deep history.    The more I uncover on them, the more I realize just how little of Christianity I know. 

Here you also have an Orthodox Church "Father" stating Matthew was originally written in Hebrew, not Greek.

God Bless.

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

Offline Nephi

  • Monster Tamer
  • Section Moderator
  • Protokentarchos
  • *****
  • Posts: 4,762
Re: Saying Yeshua is not new and not protestant - Matthew ORIGINALLY in Hebrew
« Reply #1 on: November 28, 2012, 01:17:11 AM »
How is this news? Don't most conservative Christian NT scholars think that St. Paul is fighting against "Judaizers" like this even as early as the first century?

Offline Shiny

  • Site Supporter
  • Toumarches
  • *****
  • Posts: 13,267
  • Paint It Red
Re: Saying Yeshua is not new and not protestant - Matthew ORIGINALLY in Hebrew
« Reply #2 on: November 28, 2012, 01:18:43 AM »
Can't wait until the Professor debunks your post.
“There is your brother, naked, crying, and you stand there confused over the choice of an attractive floor covering.”

– St. Ambrose of Milan

Offline Justin Kissel

  • Formerly a *, now a ☆
  • Protospatharios
  • ****************
  • Posts: 31,047
  • High five! (I'm watching)
  • Faith: Agnosticish
Re: Saying Yeshua is not new and not protestant - Matthew ORIGINALLY in Hebrew
« Reply #3 on: November 28, 2012, 01:31:53 AM »
They preach that there is but one God and His Son Yeshua the Messiah.

Where are you getting this translation? This one says:

"For they acknowledge both the resurrection of the dead and that all things have been created by God, and they declare that God is one, and that his Son is Jesus Christ."

EDIT--A google search for your translation brings up a lot of Jews-for-Jesus type sites... ?
« Last Edit: November 28, 2012, 01:33:31 AM by Asteriktos »
"One part dream, one part sound business decision"

Offline dzheremi

  • No longer posting here.
  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,383
Re: Saying Yeshua is not new and not protestant - Matthew ORIGINALLY in Hebrew
« Reply #4 on: November 28, 2012, 01:37:48 AM »
Is calling Jesus by a name they can't pronounce the distinctive mark of orthopraxy for today's neo-Nazarenes? Seems a little silly to me. Why does this matter even slightly to anyone, ever? I don't get it.

Offline Nephi

  • Monster Tamer
  • Section Moderator
  • Protokentarchos
  • *****
  • Posts: 4,762
Re: Saying Yeshua is not new and not protestant - Matthew ORIGINALLY in Hebrew
« Reply #5 on: November 28, 2012, 02:18:03 AM »
Is calling Jesus by a name they can't pronounce the distinctive mark of orthopraxy for today's neo-Nazarenes? Seems a little silly to me. Why does this matter even slightly to anyone, ever? I don't get it.

Some take it further by saying "Yahushua" and "Yahuwah." They make it even more annoying on themselves to say.

Offline Alpo

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,268
  • My borcht recipe is better than your borcht recipe
Re: Saying Yeshua is not new and not protestant - Matthew ORIGINALLY in Hebrew
« Reply #6 on: November 28, 2012, 03:57:26 AM »
There's nothing wrong with "Yeshua" if one happens to be a Hebrew-speaking person. For others it's basically just LARPing.

Offline LBK

  • No Reporting Allowed
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 12,247
  • Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!
  • Faith: Orthodox
Re: Saying Yeshua is not new and not protestant - Matthew ORIGINALLY in Hebrew
« Reply #7 on: November 28, 2012, 03:59:44 AM »
There's nothing wrong with "Yeshua" if one happens to be a Hebrew-speaking person. For others it's basically just LARPing.

This.
No longer posting here. Anyone is welcome to email me at the address in my profile.

Offline Cyrillic

  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,477
  • Cyrillico est imperare orbi universo
Re: Saying Yeshua is not new and not protestant - Matthew ORIGINALLY in Hebrew
« Reply #8 on: November 28, 2012, 04:44:00 AM »
Yes, Nazarene 'Christians' existed even in the first century. In fact, they are the ones that 'bewitched' the Galatians.

Here you also have an Orthodox Church "Father" stating Matthew was originally written in Hebrew, not Greek (emphasis mine).

Oh, c'mon. That's just trolling.
« Last Edit: November 28, 2012, 04:47:20 AM by Cyrillic »
"My idea of an agreeable person is a person who agrees with me"
-Benjamin Disraeli

Online biro

  • Excelsior
  • Site Supporter
  • Hoplitarches
  • *****
  • Posts: 15,658
    • Alaska Volcanoes
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: GOAA
Re: Saying Yeshua is not new and not protestant - Matthew ORIGINALLY in Hebrew
« Reply #9 on: November 28, 2012, 07:49:37 AM »
 ???

Notice that Yesh brings this up apropos of absolutely nothing. His first post is phrased as an imaginary reply to an imaginary opponent. He's trying to win a dispute that no one else is having.

I learned to read Hebrew when I went to a nursery school taught by a Rabbi's wife.

Yesh still has no idea what he's talking about.
He will come again with glory to judge the living and the dead. His kingdom will have no end.

--

And if I seem a little strange, well, that's because I am

--

If you wish to contact me, please use the information in my profile.

Offline Eastern Mind

  • Hi! I'm Olaf and I like warm hugs!
  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 713
Re: Saying Yeshua is not new and not protestant - Matthew ORIGINALLY in Hebrew
« Reply #10 on: November 28, 2012, 08:37:33 AM »
Is calling Jesus by a name they can't pronounce the distinctive mark of orthopraxy for today's neo-Nazarenes? Seems a little silly to me. Why does this matter even slightly to anyone, ever? I don't get it.

Some take it further by saying "Yahushua" and "Yahuwah." They make it even more annoying on themselves to say.

I have friends who do this.   :laugh: It irritates me too.
"ALL THE GODS OF THE HINDUS ARE DEMONS HAHAHAHAHA!!"

Offline Nicene

  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 615
Re: Saying Yeshua is not new and not protestant - Matthew ORIGINALLY in Hebrew
« Reply #11 on: November 28, 2012, 11:54:54 AM »
The problem is there are those who insist on calling him Yeshua and nothing else. These are your radical messianics who don't want anything that traditional Christianity has accepted and want a purely jewish belief system devoid of anything gentile. It must also be said that the idea Mathew was written in Hebrew is not first found in Epiphanius but in fragments of an earlier father, ie Papias who says it was written in hebrew tongue.

But there is a clear precedent in accepting the name Jesus by the rest of the bible which was primarily written in greek, that Paul finds it acceptable to call him Iesous is good enough reason for me to call him Jesus.
Thank you.

Offline yeshuaisiam

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,697
  • A pulling horse cannot kick.
Re: Saying Yeshua is not new and not protestant - Matthew ORIGINALLY in Hebrew
« Reply #12 on: November 28, 2012, 12:00:58 PM »
Can't wait until the Professor debunks your post.

Debunks a quote?
I learned how to be more frugal and save money at http://www.livingpress.com

Offline yeshuaisiam

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,697
  • A pulling horse cannot kick.
Re: Saying Yeshua is not new and not protestant - Matthew ORIGINALLY in Hebrew
« Reply #13 on: November 28, 2012, 12:02:25 PM »
???

Notice that Yesh brings this up apropos of absolutely nothing. His first post is phrased as an imaginary reply to an imaginary opponent. He's trying to win a dispute that no one else is having.

I learned to read Hebrew when I went to a nursery school taught by a Rabbi's wife.

Yesh still has no idea what he's talking about.

It's an on going dispute.  One that a person with 8,000 posts should be aware of.

So do you have any content to add, or only bashing me?
I learned how to be more frugal and save money at http://www.livingpress.com

Online biro

  • Excelsior
  • Site Supporter
  • Hoplitarches
  • *****
  • Posts: 15,658
    • Alaska Volcanoes
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: GOAA
Re: Saying Yeshua is not new and not protestant - Matthew ORIGINALLY in Hebrew
« Reply #14 on: November 28, 2012, 12:06:09 PM »
You ignored the content of my post.

Do you have anything to add besides another dodge?
He will come again with glory to judge the living and the dead. His kingdom will have no end.

--

And if I seem a little strange, well, that's because I am

--

If you wish to contact me, please use the information in my profile.

Offline Cyrillic

  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,477
  • Cyrillico est imperare orbi universo
Re: Saying Yeshua is not new and not protestant - Matthew ORIGINALLY in Hebrew
« Reply #15 on: November 28, 2012, 12:08:07 PM »
Why is the New Testament not enough for the Judaizers that they have to 'reconstruct' Christ's name?
« Last Edit: November 28, 2012, 12:08:22 PM by Cyrillic »
"My idea of an agreeable person is a person who agrees with me"
-Benjamin Disraeli

Offline Shiny

  • Site Supporter
  • Toumarches
  • *****
  • Posts: 13,267
  • Paint It Red
Re: Saying Yeshua is not new and not protestant - Matthew ORIGINALLY in Hebrew
« Reply #16 on: November 28, 2012, 12:11:45 PM »
Why are you so obsessed with the name Yeshua? It's become idolatry.
“There is your brother, naked, crying, and you stand there confused over the choice of an attractive floor covering.”

– St. Ambrose of Milan

Offline Cyrillic

  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,477
  • Cyrillico est imperare orbi universo
Re: Saying Yeshua is not new and not protestant - Matthew ORIGINALLY in Hebrew
« Reply #17 on: November 28, 2012, 12:13:17 PM »
Why are you so obsessed with the name Yeshua? It's become idolatry.

Name-worshipping heresy  :police:
"My idea of an agreeable person is a person who agrees with me"
-Benjamin Disraeli

Offline yeshuaisiam

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,697
  • A pulling horse cannot kick.
Re: Saying Yeshua is not new and not protestant - Matthew ORIGINALLY in Hebrew
« Reply #18 on: November 28, 2012, 12:16:14 PM »
The point here is that

A)  There were early Christians practicing the Jewish festivals before the "church" made them "illegal" via cannon.  The festivals that Yeshua celebrated, and the Sabbath that Yeshua kept.
B)  There were early Christians that were not part of the "Holy Apostolic Catholic Church" who were not:
     1) Gnostics
     2) Iconoclasts
     3) Arians
     4) But of course still labeled heretics
C) Matthew was ORIGINALLY written in Hebrew according to this quote.
D) The side point is that many Orthodox are unaware that their church forbade the festivals that "Jesus" (Yeshua) kept.  
E) The Orthodox do not Observe the Sabbath as commanded by God, that Jesus (Yeshua) kept - from sunset on Friday until sunset on Saturday (aka 7th day).  From this early quote you can see that there WERE in fact early Christians (non gentile) that kept the Sabbath & Feasts while believing in the son of God.   The "Sunday" worship was formalized in Nicea in 325.
F) These early Christians kept Kosher and the laws of the Jews (as Jesus (Yeshua) did) and have the belief in the son of God.

What this shows me is that there were people that existed who did this EARLY on.  It's not just a protestant "sola scriptura" bunch that is new.

So I hope the commentaries that this is all a sola scriptura approach, and some of the arguments I have presented on this forum are "new", can now stop.  This is old, arguably as old as the Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church claims to be.
I learned how to be more frugal and save money at http://www.livingpress.com

Offline yeshuaisiam

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,697
  • A pulling horse cannot kick.
Re: Saying Yeshua is not new and not protestant - Matthew ORIGINALLY in Hebrew
« Reply #19 on: November 28, 2012, 12:20:25 PM »
Why are you so obsessed with the name Yeshua? It's become idolatry.

Name-worshipping heresy  :police:

Because all this time, since I was a child, I wasn't made aware of the name of the son of God.  All the time at seminary, and in the church, never once did I hear the name professed.

Didn't Yeshua say - "Whatever you ask in My name, that will I do, so that the Father may be glorified in the Son."  John 14:13

This is not name idolatry, this is an issue of feeling left out of something important - the name of the son of God.
I learned how to be more frugal and save money at http://www.livingpress.com

Offline yeshuaisiam

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,697
  • A pulling horse cannot kick.
Re: Saying Yeshua is not new and not protestant - Matthew ORIGINALLY in Hebrew
« Reply #20 on: November 28, 2012, 12:23:22 PM »
Why is the New Testament not enough for the Judaizers that they have to 'reconstruct' Christ's name?

Nazarites.

Why was his name de-constructed?
Ah yes, because of the Greeks.

Then "re-constructed" to English from the Greek.   
iesus to Jesus.

Rather than translated from the original Aramaic to English.
I learned how to be more frugal and save money at http://www.livingpress.com

Offline yeshuaisiam

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,697
  • A pulling horse cannot kick.
Re: Saying Yeshua is not new and not protestant - Matthew ORIGINALLY in Hebrew
« Reply #21 on: November 28, 2012, 12:28:38 PM »
The problem is there are those who insist on calling him Yeshua and nothing else. These are your radical messianics who don't want anything that traditional Christianity has accepted and want a purely jewish belief system devoid of anything gentile. It must also be said that the idea Mathew was written in Hebrew is not first found in Epiphanius but in fragments of an earlier father, ie Papias who says it was written in hebrew tongue.

But there is a clear precedent in accepting the name Jesus by the rest of the bible which was primarily written in greek, that Paul finds it acceptable to call him Iesous is good enough reason for me to call him Jesus.

What is traditional Christianity?
vs.
What is early Christianity?

They are not the same.

Just remember, its easier to attack something rather than try to understand something.  Just as Epiphanius said "Heretics".   Today I hear "protestants, sola scriptura, radical messianics". 

390 A.D. is old.  If they had Matthew in Hebrew and kept the feasts of the Jews, I would not doubt they go waaay back.

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

Online biro

  • Excelsior
  • Site Supporter
  • Hoplitarches
  • *****
  • Posts: 15,658
    • Alaska Volcanoes
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: GOAA
Re: Saying Yeshua is not new and not protestant - Matthew ORIGINALLY in Hebrew
« Reply #22 on: November 28, 2012, 12:29:31 PM »
Yesh-   

So the Apostles were wrong to write Gospels in Greek?

What is this nonsense that you never heard the Name of God professed at seminary? If this is even true, why were you lax in your responsibilities, because I doubt you reported this to the bishop?

When the chanter at my church sings 'Anastas O Iesous..." is he committing heresy?

Again, do you even realize what you are saying?
He will come again with glory to judge the living and the dead. His kingdom will have no end.

--

And if I seem a little strange, well, that's because I am

--

If you wish to contact me, please use the information in my profile.

Offline jmbejdl

  • Count-Palatine James the Spurious of Giggleswick on the Naze
  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,480
  • Great Martyr St. John the New of Suceava
Re: Saying Yeshua is not new and not protestant - Matthew ORIGINALLY in Hebrew
« Reply #23 on: November 28, 2012, 12:36:42 PM »
Why is the New Testament not enough for the Judaizers that they have to 'reconstruct' Christ's name?

Nazarites.

Why was his name de-constructed?
Ah yes, because of the Greeks.

Then "re-constructed" to English from the Greek.   
iesus to Jesus.

Rather than translated from the original Aramaic to English.

Why do you think it matters? It makes no difference at all if someone refers to me as Iacob, Iacobos, Kuba, Jim or James (just to pick ones I recall being called, though I draw the line at Jamie or Jimmy) as they all mean the same thing, regardless of the fact that I was actually baptised James. I didn't even mind when someone I knew wrote it as Geimz when they didn't know how to spell it. I know more than a few Romanians who 'translate' their names when speaking in English and introduce themselves as, for example, John rather than Ioan, so they obviously don't mind either. If we humans can manage with variants on our names and still recognise them as referring to us, why do you seem to think that Christ couldn't? Unless of course, there's a grain of truth in what Cyrillic wrote regarding name worshipping.

James
We owe greater gratitude to those who humble us, wrong us, and douse us with venom, than to those who nurse us with honour and sweet words, or feed us with tasty food and confections, for bile is the best medicine for our soul. - Elder Paisios of Mount Athos

Offline Nicene

  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 615
Re: Saying Yeshua is not new and not protestant - Matthew ORIGINALLY in Hebrew
« Reply #24 on: November 28, 2012, 12:46:16 PM »
The lord's day as the principle day of worship in which Christians gather was within the church since the earilest centuries, specifically in Ignatius whom says we have the Lord's day over the sabbath, because it is the day which Jesus rose. Justin martyr also testified to this in his apology (chapter 67) and it has been the norm throughout all centuries for most Christians. The council of NIcea did not formalize sunday worship (as far as I can tell) but formalized the day of pascha (another early Christian practice, celebrating the ressurection of the lord, not the old jewish pascha). That you would condemn us for keeping this day which is apostolic when saint Paul said otherwise is not wise (dont let anyone judge you for the days you keep), shows that you either disregaurd saint Paul, or reinterpret him.

So it ultimately comes down to this, would God let the true church which you seem to think is the Nazerenes fail and be utterly destroyed or fade away into non existence? Or will he be with his body forever? Take in mind it was the church you dismiss which has preserved the gospels and those works which attest to the authenticity of the gospels.

Also since no one says otherwise concerning mathew why bring it up?
« Last Edit: November 28, 2012, 12:48:34 PM by Nicene »
Thank you.

Offline primuspilus

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,759
  • Inserting personal quote here.
    • Holy Trinity Orthodox Church
Re: Saying Yeshua is not new and not protestant - Matthew ORIGINALLY in Hebrew
« Reply #25 on: November 28, 2012, 12:51:34 PM »
Quote
Why do you think it matters? It makes no difference at all if someone refers to me as Iacob, Iacobos, Kuba, Jim or James (just to pick ones I recall being called, though I draw the line at Jamie or Jimmy) as they all mean the same thing, regardless of the fact that I was actually baptised James. I didn't even mind when someone I knew wrote it as Geimz when they didn't know how to spell it. I know more than a few Romanians who 'translate' their names when speaking in English and introduce themselves as, for example, John rather than Ioan, so they obviously don't mind either. If we humans can manage with variants on our names and still recognise them as referring to us, why do you seem to think that Christ couldn't? Unless of course, there's a grain of truth in what Cyrillic wrote regarding name worshipping
Thats the whole issue. Folks with these silly ideas need to find ANY kind of legitimization for their beliefs that they go all the way back to the beginning of the church. So, as the quote goes, "If you go looking for something to prove something right or wrong, either way, you'll find it." The whole Yeshua thing is just another example. The Messianics and those like them find one thing in history and scream ,"Hey! Thats us!" and disregard everything else. 7th Day'ers and lots of Baptists do the same exact thing. Reading the arguments about whether or not the Gospel of Matthew was written in Hebrew, or Aramaic, or <insert non-Greek language here> is discussed by lots of scholars. The sayings of Jesus may have very well been written in Aramaic (or Hebrew), or they might not have. The thing is, in the gospel in its entirety does not show the marks of translation. Even folks that believe that the sayings of Jesus were written in Hebrew (or Aramaic) say that. Really, it does not matter, even if it was written in Hebrew or Aramaic. The Gospel of Matthew in the Greek was the one taught in the early Church, and was the one canonized. It would also be the one from which every Bible in the world gets its Gospel of Matthew (lets leave The Message out of this orthonorm :) )

So, if you want to attack what most historians believe, including the publishers of the bible you read, more power to you. Paul said Iesous, and so did every one else. Thats good enough for me.

PP
"I confidently affirm that whoever calls himself Universal Bishop is the precursor of Antichrist"
Gregory the Great

"Never, never, never let anyone tell you that, in order to be Orthodox, you must also be eastern." St. John Maximovitch, The Wonderworker

Offline orthonorm

  • Hoplitarches
  • *************
  • Posts: 17,037
Re: Saying Yeshua is not new and not protestant - Matthew ORIGINALLY in Hebrew
« Reply #26 on: November 28, 2012, 01:00:30 PM »
This thread is called deflection.

YIM creates this thread (a topic which he has argued about numerous times) after getting slapped around for a while about how he would treat his hypothetical gay child.

For someone who seems to be at the ready to demand his right to literally hit his own kids, he can't even take a little figurative beating.

Somehow, I find this unsurprising.

For the deflection, who cares?

Matthew was in Hebrew originally. Maybe. Who cares?

Hebrew speakers may have called Jesus something similar to Yeshua. Who cares?

YIM, how many times do you have to get shut down on this topic?

These are matters of some concern for those who study such things, but are of no theological import for the lay person.

The fact you place a string of characters in the center of whatever misagos of a theology you have cobbled together is of no import to anyone except give insight that your homebrewed-DIY-flawed approach to life infects even how you view God.

At best it is a cautionary tale for those who would follow your lone ranger method in any sense lest it lead to this utter nonsense.
Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.

Offline Cyrillic

  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,477
  • Cyrillico est imperare orbi universo
Re: Saying Yeshua is not new and not protestant - Matthew ORIGINALLY in Hebrew
« Reply #27 on: November 28, 2012, 01:13:35 PM »
What do the Judaizers think about St. Paul? What about the Epistle to the Galatians?
"My idea of an agreeable person is a person who agrees with me"
-Benjamin Disraeli

Offline primuspilus

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,759
  • Inserting personal quote here.
    • Holy Trinity Orthodox Church
Re: Saying Yeshua is not new and not protestant - Matthew ORIGINALLY in Hebrew
« Reply #28 on: November 28, 2012, 01:17:20 PM »
What do the Judaizers think about St. Paul? What about the Epistle to the Galatians?
As I said, as soon as folks find their legitimization, they discard the rest. Heck, we're ALL guilty of doing it at one point of another.

PP
"I confidently affirm that whoever calls himself Universal Bishop is the precursor of Antichrist"
Gregory the Great

"Never, never, never let anyone tell you that, in order to be Orthodox, you must also be eastern." St. John Maximovitch, The Wonderworker

Offline Cyrillic

  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,477
  • Cyrillico est imperare orbi universo
Re: Saying Yeshua is not new and not protestant - Matthew ORIGINALLY in Hebrew
« Reply #29 on: November 28, 2012, 01:22:13 PM »
What do the Judaizers think about St. Paul? What about the Epistle to the Galatians?
As I said, as soon as folks find their legitimization, they discard the rest. Heck, we're ALL guilty of doing it at one point of another.

PP

Fair enough. But I'm still curious. Do they hate St. Paul or just ignore him?
« Last Edit: November 28, 2012, 01:22:30 PM by Cyrillic »
"My idea of an agreeable person is a person who agrees with me"
-Benjamin Disraeli

Offline primuspilus

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,759
  • Inserting personal quote here.
    • Holy Trinity Orthodox Church
Re: Saying Yeshua is not new and not protestant - Matthew ORIGINALLY in Hebrew
« Reply #30 on: November 28, 2012, 01:30:19 PM »
What do the Judaizers think about St. Paul? What about the Epistle to the Galatians?
As I said, as soon as folks find their legitimization, they discard the rest. Heck, we're ALL guilty of doing it at one point of another.

PP

Fair enough. But I'm still curious. Do they hate St. Paul or just ignore him?
I thought they viewed him as an apostle of Christ, but Im not totally sure about how that all works...or their interpretation of Galatians.

I did find this off of a Messianic website:
http://www.lightofmashiach.org/smicha.html

Quote
Sha'ul is explaining here that because of mainstream Israel's rejection of Messiah, non-Israelites (wild olive branches) who accept Yeshua have been given a place in Israel's cultivated olive tree. But note these wild olive branches remain wild. Gentiles do not become Israelites here, they merely share the tree with believing Israel. Gentiles are further warned not to boast about G-d placing them in the tree, because they too can be removed. In fact, G-d reminds them that the natural branches would graft back in well since its their own tree and their own nature to be included in it; but it is contrary to the very nature of the wild branches that they too are included! So yes, Gentiles can be placed in the tree of Israel, but at no point do they become cultivated -- they always remain wild branches grafted into a tree not their own. When a Gentile becomes a part of Israel, they still remain a Gentile (albeit a Gentile counted among Israelites). Now note: The One grafting these wild branches in is G-d, not man. No conversion ritual is needed -- this is a purely supernatural event!

Seems kind of far fetched to me.

PP
"I confidently affirm that whoever calls himself Universal Bishop is the precursor of Antichrist"
Gregory the Great

"Never, never, never let anyone tell you that, in order to be Orthodox, you must also be eastern." St. John Maximovitch, The Wonderworker

Offline Cyrillic

  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,477
  • Cyrillico est imperare orbi universo
Re: Saying Yeshua is not new and not protestant - Matthew ORIGINALLY in Hebrew
« Reply #31 on: November 28, 2012, 01:38:57 PM »
« Last Edit: November 28, 2012, 01:40:10 PM by Cyrillic »
"My idea of an agreeable person is a person who agrees with me"
-Benjamin Disraeli

Offline Justin Kissel

  • Formerly a *, now a ☆
  • Protospatharios
  • ****************
  • Posts: 31,047
  • High five! (I'm watching)
  • Faith: Agnosticish
"One part dream, one part sound business decision"

Offline primuspilus

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,759
  • Inserting personal quote here.
    • Holy Trinity Orthodox Church
Re: Saying Yeshua is not new and not protestant - Matthew ORIGINALLY in Hebrew
« Reply #33 on: November 28, 2012, 02:21:49 PM »
Nazarites.

Do you mean Nazarenes?
Nazarite - A Christian following the Nazarene belief system, and are at most, 3 1/2 feet tall.

PP
"I confidently affirm that whoever calls himself Universal Bishop is the precursor of Antichrist"
Gregory the Great

"Never, never, never let anyone tell you that, in order to be Orthodox, you must also be eastern." St. John Maximovitch, The Wonderworker

Offline yeshuaisiam

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,697
  • A pulling horse cannot kick.
Re: Saying Yeshua is not new and not protestant - Matthew ORIGINALLY in Hebrew
« Reply #34 on: November 28, 2012, 09:05:27 PM »
Yesh-   

So the Apostles were wrong to write Gospels in Greek?

What is this nonsense that you never heard the Name of God professed at seminary? If this is even true, why were you lax in your responsibilities, because I doubt you reported this to the bishop?

When the chanter at my church sings 'Anastas O Iesous..." is he committing heresy?

Again, do you even realize what you are saying?

Nope, and no.

I just think it is ironic that God told us to pray in his name, yet we were never once taught what his name was.
I learned how to be more frugal and save money at http://www.livingpress.com

Offline yeshuaisiam

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,697
  • A pulling horse cannot kick.
Re: Saying Yeshua is not new and not protestant - Matthew ORIGINALLY in Hebrew
« Reply #35 on: November 28, 2012, 09:07:05 PM »
Why is the New Testament not enough for the Judaizers that they have to 'reconstruct' Christ's name?

Nazarites.

Why was his name de-constructed?
Ah yes, because of the Greeks.

Then "re-constructed" to English from the Greek.   
iesus to Jesus.

Rather than translated from the original Aramaic to English.

Why do you think it matters? It makes no difference at all if someone refers to me as Iacob, Iacobos, Kuba, Jim or James (just to pick ones I recall being called, though I draw the line at Jamie or Jimmy) as they all mean the same thing, regardless of the fact that I was actually baptised James. I didn't even mind when someone I knew wrote it as Geimz when they didn't know how to spell it. I know more than a few Romanians who 'translate' their names when speaking in English and introduce themselves as, for example, John rather than Ioan, so they obviously don't mind either. If we humans can manage with variants on our names and still recognise them as referring to us, why do you seem to think that Christ couldn't? Unless of course, there's a grain of truth in what Cyrillic wrote regarding name worshipping.

James

The quote was more than just the name. It is referencing a group of early Christians that were NOT protestant speaking in Hebrew, and keeping the feasts of the Jews. ++Sabbath
I learned how to be more frugal and save money at http://www.livingpress.com

Offline yeshuaisiam

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,697
  • A pulling horse cannot kick.
Re: Saying Yeshua is not new and not protestant - Matthew ORIGINALLY in Hebrew
« Reply #36 on: November 28, 2012, 09:10:23 PM »
Quote
Why do you think it matters? It makes no difference at all if someone refers to me as Iacob, Iacobos, Kuba, Jim or James (just to pick ones I recall being called, though I draw the line at Jamie or Jimmy) as they all mean the same thing, regardless of the fact that I was actually baptised James. I didn't even mind when someone I knew wrote it as Geimz when they didn't know how to spell it. I know more than a few Romanians who 'translate' their names when speaking in English and introduce themselves as, for example, John rather than Ioan, so they obviously don't mind either. If we humans can manage with variants on our names and still recognise them as referring to us, why do you seem to think that Christ couldn't? Unless of course, there's a grain of truth in what Cyrillic wrote regarding name worshipping
Thats the whole issue. Folks with these silly ideas need to find ANY kind of legitimization for their beliefs that they go all the way back to the beginning of the church. So, as the quote goes, "If you go looking for something to prove something right or wrong, either way, you'll find it." The whole Yeshua thing is just another example. The Messianics and those like them find one thing in history and scream ,"Hey! Thats us!" and disregard everything else. 7th Day'ers and lots of Baptists do the same exact thing. Reading the arguments about whether or not the Gospel of Matthew was written in Hebrew, or Aramaic, or <insert non-Greek language here> is discussed by lots of scholars. The sayings of Jesus may have very well been written in Aramaic (or Hebrew), or they might not have. The thing is, in the gospel in its entirety does not show the marks of translation. Even folks that believe that the sayings of Jesus were written in Hebrew (or Aramaic) say that. Really, it does not matter, even if it was written in Hebrew or Aramaic. The Gospel of Matthew in the Greek was the one taught in the early Church, and was the one canonized. It would also be the one from which every Bible in the world gets its Gospel of Matthew (lets leave The Message out of this orthonorm :) )

So, if you want to attack what most historians believe, including the publishers of the bible you read, more power to you. Paul said Iesous, and so did every one else. Thats good enough for me.

PP

It's not just about a name.  There is a lot in that quote.

Look, Paul can say Iesous, and that is fine.  The Greeks could not spell or pronounce his name in their language.  King James translated "Jesus" from Greek, when his English could have just phonetically taken from the original.

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

Offline orthonorm

  • Hoplitarches
  • *************
  • Posts: 17,037
Re: Saying Yeshua is not new and not protestant - Matthew ORIGINALLY in Hebrew
« Reply #37 on: November 28, 2012, 09:11:49 PM »
Yesh-   

So the Apostles were wrong to write Gospels in Greek?

What is this nonsense that you never heard the Name of God professed at seminary? If this is even true, why were you lax in your responsibilities, because I doubt you reported this to the bishop?

When the chanter at my church sings 'Anastas O Iesous..." is he committing heresy?

Again, do you even realize what you are saying?

Nope, and no.

I just think it is ironic that God told us to pray in his name, yet we were never once taught what his name was.

What's a name?
Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.

Offline orthonorm

  • Hoplitarches
  • *************
  • Posts: 17,037
Re: Saying Yeshua is not new and not protestant - Matthew ORIGINALLY in Hebrew
« Reply #38 on: November 28, 2012, 09:12:50 PM »
Quote
Why do you think it matters? It makes no difference at all if someone refers to me as Iacob, Iacobos, Kuba, Jim or James (just to pick ones I recall being called, though I draw the line at Jamie or Jimmy) as they all mean the same thing, regardless of the fact that I was actually baptised James. I didn't even mind when someone I knew wrote it as Geimz when they didn't know how to spell it. I know more than a few Romanians who 'translate' their names when speaking in English and introduce themselves as, for example, John rather than Ioan, so they obviously don't mind either. If we humans can manage with variants on our names and still recognise them as referring to us, why do you seem to think that Christ couldn't? Unless of course, there's a grain of truth in what Cyrillic wrote regarding name worshipping
Thats the whole issue. Folks with these silly ideas need to find ANY kind of legitimization for their beliefs that they go all the way back to the beginning of the church. So, as the quote goes, "If you go looking for something to prove something right or wrong, either way, you'll find it." The whole Yeshua thing is just another example. The Messianics and those like them find one thing in history and scream ,"Hey! Thats us!" and disregard everything else. 7th Day'ers and lots of Baptists do the same exact thing. Reading the arguments about whether or not the Gospel of Matthew was written in Hebrew, or Aramaic, or <insert non-Greek language here> is discussed by lots of scholars. The sayings of Jesus may have very well been written in Aramaic (or Hebrew), or they might not have. The thing is, in the gospel in its entirety does not show the marks of translation. Even folks that believe that the sayings of Jesus were written in Hebrew (or Aramaic) say that. Really, it does not matter, even if it was written in Hebrew or Aramaic. The Gospel of Matthew in the Greek was the one taught in the early Church, and was the one canonized. It would also be the one from which every Bible in the world gets its Gospel of Matthew (lets leave The Message out of this orthonorm :) )

So, if you want to attack what most historians believe, including the publishers of the bible you read, more power to you. Paul said Iesous, and so did every one else. Thats good enough for me.

PP

It's not just about a name.  There is a lot in that quote.

Look, Paul can say Iesous, and that is fine.  The Greeks could not spell or pronounce his name in their language.  King James translated "Jesus" from Greek, when his English could have just phonetically taken from the original.



And you can't pronounce it either and neither can your youtube dude.

BTW, do you access to the private forums, cause there is a thread there with your name on it.
« Last Edit: November 28, 2012, 09:13:07 PM by orthonorm »
Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.

Offline yeshuaisiam

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,697
  • A pulling horse cannot kick.
Re: Saying Yeshua is not new and not protestant - Matthew ORIGINALLY in Hebrew
« Reply #39 on: November 28, 2012, 09:15:02 PM »
This thread is called deflection.

YIM creates this thread (a topic which he has argued about numerous times) after getting slapped around for a while about how he would treat his hypothetical gay child.

For someone who seems to be at the ready to demand his right to literally hit his own kids, he can't even take a little figurative beating.

Somehow, I find this unsurprising.

For the deflection, who cares?

Matthew was in Hebrew originally. Maybe. Who cares?

Hebrew speakers may have called Jesus something similar to Yeshua. Who cares?

YIM, how many times do you have to get shut down on this topic?

These are matters of some concern for those who study such things, but are of no theological import for the lay person.

The fact you place a string of characters in the center of whatever misagos of a theology you have cobbled together is of no import to anyone except give insight that your homebrewed-DIY-flawed approach to life infects even how you view God.

At best it is a cautionary tale for those who would follow your lone ranger method in any sense lest it lead to this utter nonsense.

I have never once been shut down on this topic.

I've had lots of personal attacks, and lots of "who cares".

"Utter nonsense" a personal attack pillaged through dissonance, of a quote from an Orthodox Church "Father".

And no, I was not slapped around about the hypothetical gay child. The Orthodox responses frightened me at the lack of the EO Christians understanding their own faith.  Orthodox history proves (through excommunication) that my point was valid (men excommunicated because of them being non-repentive homosexuals).  Unless of course you want to challenge Orthodox bishops here.... Or just call them wrong... Or say "who cares".
I learned how to be more frugal and save money at http://www.livingpress.com

Offline yeshuaisiam

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,697
  • A pulling horse cannot kick.
Re: Saying Yeshua is not new and not protestant - Matthew ORIGINALLY in Hebrew
« Reply #40 on: November 28, 2012, 09:17:43 PM »
Nazarites.

Do you mean Nazarenes?
Nazarite - A Christian following the Nazarene belief system, and are at most, 3 1/2 feet tall.

PP

Yes.  Nazarenes
I learned how to be more frugal and save money at http://www.livingpress.com

Offline yeshuaisiam

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,697
  • A pulling horse cannot kick.
Re: Saying Yeshua is not new and not protestant - Matthew ORIGINALLY in Hebrew
« Reply #41 on: November 28, 2012, 09:18:38 PM »
Quote
Why do you think it matters? It makes no difference at all if someone refers to me as Iacob, Iacobos, Kuba, Jim or James (just to pick ones I recall being called, though I draw the line at Jamie or Jimmy) as they all mean the same thing, regardless of the fact that I was actually baptised James. I didn't even mind when someone I knew wrote it as Geimz when they didn't know how to spell it. I know more than a few Romanians who 'translate' their names when speaking in English and introduce themselves as, for example, John rather than Ioan, so they obviously don't mind either. If we humans can manage with variants on our names and still recognise them as referring to us, why do you seem to think that Christ couldn't? Unless of course, there's a grain of truth in what Cyrillic wrote regarding name worshipping
Thats the whole issue. Folks with these silly ideas need to find ANY kind of legitimization for their beliefs that they go all the way back to the beginning of the church. So, as the quote goes, "If you go looking for something to prove something right or wrong, either way, you'll find it." The whole Yeshua thing is just another example. The Messianics and those like them find one thing in history and scream ,"Hey! Thats us!" and disregard everything else. 7th Day'ers and lots of Baptists do the same exact thing. Reading the arguments about whether or not the Gospel of Matthew was written in Hebrew, or Aramaic, or <insert non-Greek language here> is discussed by lots of scholars. The sayings of Jesus may have very well been written in Aramaic (or Hebrew), or they might not have. The thing is, in the gospel in its entirety does not show the marks of translation. Even folks that believe that the sayings of Jesus were written in Hebrew (or Aramaic) say that. Really, it does not matter, even if it was written in Hebrew or Aramaic. The Gospel of Matthew in the Greek was the one taught in the early Church, and was the one canonized. It would also be the one from which every Bible in the world gets its Gospel of Matthew (lets leave The Message out of this orthonorm :) )

So, if you want to attack what most historians believe, including the publishers of the bible you read, more power to you. Paul said Iesous, and so did every one else. Thats good enough for me.

PP

It's not just about a name.  There is a lot in that quote.

Look, Paul can say Iesous, and that is fine.  The Greeks could not spell or pronounce his name in their language.  King James translated "Jesus" from Greek, when his English could have just phonetically taken from the original.



And you can't pronounce it either and neither can your youtube dude.

BTW, do you access to the private forums, cause there is a thread there with your name on it.

I guess I'm going to get flamed there.
« Last Edit: November 28, 2012, 09:19:47 PM by yeshuaisiam »
I learned how to be more frugal and save money at http://www.livingpress.com

Offline Shiny

  • Site Supporter
  • Toumarches
  • *****
  • Posts: 13,267
  • Paint It Red
Re: Saying Yeshua is not new and not protestant - Matthew ORIGINALLY in Hebrew
« Reply #42 on: November 28, 2012, 09:20:50 PM »
I guess I'm going to get flamed there.
He's genuinely asking the question.

Some of us are curious too. Please go reply in that thread.

kthxbai
“There is your brother, naked, crying, and you stand there confused over the choice of an attractive floor covering.”

– St. Ambrose of Milan

Offline JamesRottnek

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 5,123
  • I am Bibleman; putting 'the' back in the Ukraine
Re: Saying Yeshua is not new and not protestant - Matthew ORIGINALLY in Hebrew
« Reply #43 on: November 28, 2012, 09:40:11 PM »
This thread is called deflection.

YIM creates this thread (a topic which he has argued about numerous times) after getting slapped around for a while about how he would treat his hypothetical gay child.

For someone who seems to be at the ready to demand his right to literally hit his own kids, he can't even take a little figurative beating.

Somehow, I find this unsurprising.

For the deflection, who cares?

Matthew was in Hebrew originally. Maybe. Who cares?

Hebrew speakers may have called Jesus something similar to Yeshua. Who cares?

YIM, how many times do you have to get shut down on this topic?

These are matters of some concern for those who study such things, but are of no theological import for the lay person.

The fact you place a string of characters in the center of whatever misagos of a theology you have cobbled together is of no import to anyone except give insight that your homebrewed-DIY-flawed approach to life infects even how you view God.

At best it is a cautionary tale for those who would follow your lone ranger method in any sense lest it lead to this utter nonsense.

I have never once been shut down on this topic.

I've had lots of personal attacks, and lots of "who cares".

"Utter nonsense" a personal attack pillaged through dissonance, of a quote from an Orthodox Church "Father".

And no, I was not slapped around about the hypothetical gay child. The Orthodox responses frightened me at the lack of the EO Christians understanding their own faith.  Orthodox history proves (through excommunication) that my point was valid (men excommunicated because of them being non-repentive homosexuals).  Unless of course you want to challenge Orthodox bishops here.... Or just call them wrong... Or say "who cares".

When did excommunication begin equalling homelessness?
I know a secret about a former Supreme Court Justice.  Can you guess what it is?

The greatest tragedy in the world is when a cigarette ends.

American Spirits - the eco-friendly cigarette.

Preston Robert Kinney (September 8th, 1997-August 14, 2011

Offline neon_knights

  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 513
  • My political hero.
Re: Saying Yeshua is not new and not protestant - Matthew ORIGINALLY in Hebrew
« Reply #44 on: November 28, 2012, 10:39:49 PM »
This thread is called deflection.

YIM creates this thread (a topic which he has argued about numerous times) after getting slapped around for a while about how he would treat his hypothetical gay child.

For someone who seems to be at the ready to demand his right to literally hit his own kids, he can't even take a little figurative beating.

Somehow, I find this unsurprising.

For the deflection, who cares?

Matthew was in Hebrew originally. Maybe. Who cares?

Hebrew speakers may have called Jesus something similar to Yeshua. Who cares?

YIM, how many times do you have to get shut down on this topic?

These are matters of some concern for those who study such things, but are of no theological import for the lay person.

The fact you place a string of characters in the center of whatever misagos of a theology you have cobbled together is of no import to anyone except give insight that your homebrewed-DIY-flawed approach to life infects even how you view God.

At best it is a cautionary tale for those who would follow your lone ranger method in any sense lest it lead to this utter nonsense.

I have never once been shut down on this topic.

I've had lots of personal attacks, and lots of "who cares".

"Utter nonsense" a personal attack pillaged through dissonance, of a quote from an Orthodox Church "Father".

And no, I was not slapped around about the hypothetical gay child. The Orthodox responses frightened me at the lack of the EO Christians understanding their own faith.  Orthodox history proves (through excommunication) that my point was valid (men excommunicated because of them being non-repentive homosexuals).  Unless of course you want to challenge Orthodox bishops here.... Or just call them wrong... Or say "who cares".

So if your child converts to another religion, he gets the boot?

Offline neon_knights

  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 513
  • My political hero.
Re: Saying Yeshua is not new and not protestant - Matthew ORIGINALLY in Hebrew
« Reply #45 on: November 28, 2012, 10:40:12 PM »
Are Arabs wrong when they call Jesus "Yasu"?

Offline NicholasMyra

  • Avowed denominationalist
  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,251
  • Nepsis or Sepsis™
Re: Saying Yeshua is not new and not protestant - Matthew ORIGINALLY in Hebrew
« Reply #46 on: November 28, 2012, 10:49:49 PM »
God's Israel holds the ancient feasts to this day, if you ever bothered to look some calendars.

But, of course, you only care about how the anti-Christian sect of Jews performed feasts after the destruction of the temple.

There were Jewish Christians who followed the Law and were Orthodox. Then there were neoplatonist fringe Jewish Christians who did a bunch of wacky stuff. And there were also Christians who joined in the versions of feasts practiced by the anti-Christian sect, and these were reprimanded.

Your understanding of Judaism is that Rabbinic Judaism is real Judaism and Christianity is some non-Jewish thing. Have you, then, never really read St. Paul? Romans 9?
« Last Edit: November 28, 2012, 10:51:16 PM by NicholasMyra »
Quote from: Orthonorm
if Christ does and says x. And someone else does and says not x and you are ever in doubt, follow Christ.

Πλούσιοι επτώχευσαν και επείνασαν
Οιδε εκζητούντες τον Κύριον
Ουκ ελαττωθήσονται παντός αγαθού

Offline akimori makoto

  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 3,126
  • No-one bound by fleshly pleasures is worthy ...
Re: Saying Yeshua is not new and not protestant - Matthew ORIGINALLY in Hebrew
« Reply #47 on: November 28, 2012, 11:23:37 PM »
Your understanding of Judaism is that Rabbinic Judaism is real Judaism and Christianity is some non-Jewish thing.

Thread won.
The Episcopallian road is easy and wide, for many go through it to find destruction. lol sorry channeling Isa.

Offline jmbejdl

  • Count-Palatine James the Spurious of Giggleswick on the Naze
  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,480
  • Great Martyr St. John the New of Suceava
Re: Saying Yeshua is not new and not protestant - Matthew ORIGINALLY in Hebrew
« Reply #48 on: November 29, 2012, 05:28:54 AM »
I just think it is ironic that God told us to pray in his name, yet we were never once taught what his name was.

Do you understand that doing something in somebody's name means something other than literally requiring you to utter the sounds of that name? Saying, 'Do X in the name of the Queen', for instance, does not require that I add 'Elizabeth II' to the end of my sentence. It doesn't even require that I actually know the name of the current queen. What it does say is that I am telling you to do it on her behalf - 'in her name'. Why do you seem to insist on taking the phrase so incredibly literally?

James
We owe greater gratitude to those who humble us, wrong us, and douse us with venom, than to those who nurse us with honour and sweet words, or feed us with tasty food and confections, for bile is the best medicine for our soul. - Elder Paisios of Mount Athos

Offline Shlomlokh

  • 主哀れめよ!
  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,318
Re: Saying Yeshua is not new and not protestant - Matthew ORIGINALLY in Hebrew
« Reply #49 on: November 29, 2012, 11:41:53 AM »
Does anyone else find humor in that not a single Hebrew character has been posted on this thread?

In Christ,
Andrew
"I will pour out my prayer unto the Lord, and to Him will I proclaim my grief; for with evils my soul is filled, and my life unto hades hath drawn nigh, and like Jonah I will pray: From corruption raise me up, O God." -Ode VI, Irmos of the Supplicatory Canon to the Theotokos

Offline sheenj

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,424
  • St. Gregorios of Parumala, pray for us...
  • Faith: Oriental Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Indian/Malankara Orthodox Church
Re: Saying Yeshua is not new and not protestant - Matthew ORIGINALLY in Hebrew
« Reply #50 on: November 29, 2012, 11:55:02 AM »
Does anyone else find humor in that not a single Hebrew character has been posted on this thread?

In Christ,
Andrew


The name in question: ישוע‎
Bonus, in Aramaic: ܝܫܘܥ

Offline Cyrillic

  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,477
  • Cyrillico est imperare orbi universo
Re: Saying Yeshua is not new and not protestant - Matthew ORIGINALLY in Hebrew
« Reply #51 on: November 29, 2012, 12:16:51 PM »
an Orthodox Church "Father".

How mature  ::)
"My idea of an agreeable person is a person who agrees with me"
-Benjamin Disraeli

Offline yeshuaisiam

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,697
  • A pulling horse cannot kick.
Re: Saying Yeshua is not new and not protestant - Matthew ORIGINALLY in Hebrew
« Reply #52 on: November 30, 2012, 12:11:39 AM »
Hope everybody feels better.

As much as you may hate it, the quote validates there were ones who did this.

Hate me all you want.  Flame me. Accuse me of deflection from a hypothetical gay son kick out thread (LOL), but in historical records exists a quote providing information in my OP.
I learned how to be more frugal and save money at http://www.livingpress.com

Offline Justin Kissel

  • Formerly a *, now a ☆
  • Protospatharios
  • ****************
  • Posts: 31,047
  • High five! (I'm watching)
  • Faith: Agnosticish
Re: Saying Yeshua is not new and not protestant - Matthew ORIGINALLY in Hebrew
« Reply #53 on: November 30, 2012, 12:18:30 AM »
I missed the post where you gave a source for the quote...? Do you have a source that isn't by a group/person who has a bias and wants that to be the rendering?
"One part dream, one part sound business decision"

Offline JamesRottnek

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 5,123
  • I am Bibleman; putting 'the' back in the Ukraine
Re: Saying Yeshua is not new and not protestant - Matthew ORIGINALLY in Hebrew
« Reply #54 on: November 30, 2012, 12:25:21 AM »
Hope everybody feels better.

As much as you may hate it, the quote validates there were ones who did this.

Hate me all you want.  Flame me. Accuse me of deflection from a hypothetical gay son kick out thread (LOL), but in historical records exists a quote providing information in my OP.

Do you laugh every time you think about a child being kicked out of their parents home, or does that just happen when a homo's kicked out of a home?
I know a secret about a former Supreme Court Justice.  Can you guess what it is?

The greatest tragedy in the world is when a cigarette ends.

American Spirits - the eco-friendly cigarette.

Preston Robert Kinney (September 8th, 1997-August 14, 2011