Where Did The Name Jesus Come From

[Greektim]

I am not putting words in you mouth at all. It was you who said,



If the name Jesus is not the name God wants man to call on, then millions have died who called on Jesus. That is where your doctrine leads, HW. IT IMPLIES THAT I, AND MILLIONS MORE, AM/ARE LOST BECAUSE WE CALLED ON A PAGAN NAME RATHER THAN ON THE NAME GOD GAVE HIS SON.

I've proven that the word "jesus" is not related to paganism and that it is a natural development of cross-language transliteration. People who want to see conspiracies will find them every time.

 

[Fred's Wife]

here again you call the name of Christ another Gospel--the Lord Judge you according as he will.

Seems as though you are questioning the salvation of anyone who is in disagreement with you. I am very familiar with the Sacred Name cult and its false teachings about the Name of Jesus.

First you say that Jesus is the archangel Michael, then you say that the name of JESUS is not the correct Name of our Lord and Saviour. What will you come up with next? What you are promoting on this forum is clearly not Baptist nor is it Biblical doctrine. Then you have the audacity to judge me?

Please check the BB posting rules here

 

[HisWitness]

If God did not want His Son called Jesus, He would not have allowed the name to be put in our Bibles.

you gotta be kidding me right ???

Did God want Adam to eat of the fruit he said not too ?? NO

Did God stop him from eating of the fruit?? NO

Men's wickedness stretches far and wide--Men change translations to fit their own agenda whether God wants them too or not.

The only texts that are not tampered with are the originals that God had his men to write--and God directed them step by step---and there was NO mistake in the originals---BUT through the Centuries Men have translated over and over again the originals---and now we have mistakes made by men in our bibles today---:flower::flower::flower:

 

[HisWitness]

It's the same name in 2 different languages!!!

Good grief! Some people will argue about anything apparently!

im not the one arguing and saying his name is another gospel.

the question is why translate the original name that we can pronounce easily into another English name ???

Was it men with an agenda who had this translation put into our bibles--and if so---what was their agenda ???

 

[HisWitness]

I've proven that the word "jesus" is not related to paganism and that it is a natural development of cross-language transliteration. People who want to see conspiracies will find them every time.

what iv stated is that a form of the name jesus means Hail Zeus.

not all forms of it means that --but 1 form does

why translate something that was known and very pronounceable unto us in the first place is the question--isn't the original name God gave Christ good enough for us ???

 

[Steadfast Fred]

Yes, it was men with an agenda. Their agenda was to translate the Bible into English for an English speaking people.

I don't know if you realize this or not, but Yashua is not English. Nor is Yahushua.

 

[HisWitness]

Seems as though you are questioning the salvation of anyone who is in disagreement with you. I am very familiar with the Sacred Name cult and its false teachings about the Name of Jesus.

First you say that Jesus is the archangel Michael, then you say that the name of JESUS is not the correct Name of our Lord and Saviour. What will you come up with next? What you are promoting on this forum is clearly not Baptist nor is it Biblical doctrine. Then you have the audacity to judge me?

Please check the BB posting rules here

your the one mis-representing what im saying in your darkness--im saying jesus was not the name that he had in his eartly lifetime---and was not called by other people with the name jesus

 

[Fred's Wife]

your the one mis-representing what im saying in your darkness--im saying jesus was not the name that he had in his eartly lifetime---and was not called by other people with the name jesus

Jesus wasn't called "Michael" either....but you have been arguing for the name Michael too. So which is it?

BTW, you claim that the "correct" name is in the "originals".....where are the "originals"?

 

[HisWitness]

Yes, it was men with an agenda. Their agenda was to translate the Bible into English for an English speaking people.

I don't know if you realize this or not, but Yashua is not English. Nor is Yahushua.

if we could not pronounce nor understand the meaning of the name --then I could understand it---but that's NOT the case here

 

[HisWitness]

Jesus wasn't called "Michael" either....but you have been arguing for the name Michael too. So which is it?

what has that got to do with this thread at all ????

 

[DHK]

you gotta be kidding me right ???

Did God want Adam to eat of the fruit he said not too ?? NO

Did God stop him from eating of the fruit?? NO

Men's wickedness stretches far and wide--Men change translations to fit their own agenda whether God wants them too or not.

The only texts that are not tampered with are the originals that God had his men to write--and God directed them step by step---and there was NO mistake in the originals---BUT through the Centuries Men have translated over and over again the originals---and now we have mistakes made by men in our bibles today---:flower::flower::flower:

You have a very low view both of the inspiration and of the preservation of the Bible. It is a wonder that you believe in the Bible at all the way that you have expressed yourself above.
Do you believe that we have the Word of God in the Bible today?

Certainly it was inspired in the original documents. It is not translations that we need to be so concerned about. We have over 5,000 manuscripts of the NT alone attesting to the veracity of it being a genuine document.
The Jews still use the Hebrew OT. Would they use something that is flawed? The Masoretic Text is basically the same as the one used in OT times.
If I have a question about the meaning of a word, it is not a translation that I need to consult, but the word in the original language, which God has preserved for us. It seems you have a problem with the preservation of God's Word and therefore cast aspersions and doubt as to its reliability.
This is a very weak argument and should not be used in debate.
The basis of debate here, in this forum, is that the Bible is the final authority in all matters of faith and doctrine. You should be able to accept that.
If you can't accept that why do you call yourself a Baptist?
Why are you posting in Baptist forums?
You should change your profile and tell us what you really are.

 

[HisWitness]

You have a very low view both of the inspiration and of the preservation of the Bible. It is a wonder that you believe in the Bible at all the way that you have expressed yourself above.
Do you believe that we have the Word of God in the Bible today?

Certainly it was inspired in the original documents. It is not translations that we need to be so concerned about. We have over 5,000 manuscripts of the NT alone attesting to the veracity of it being a genuine document.
The Jews still use the Hebrew OT. Would they use something that is flawed? The Masoretic Text is basically the same as the one used in OT times.
If I have a question about the meaning of a word, it is not a translation that I need to consult, but the word in the original language, which God has preserved for us. It seems you have a problem with the preservation of God's Word and therefore cast aspersions and doubt as to its reliability.
This is a very weak argument and should not be used in debate.
The basis of debate here, in this forum, is that the Bible is the final authority in all matters of faith and doctrine. You should be able to accept that.
If you can't accept that why do you call yourself a Baptist?
Why are you posting in Baptist forums?
You should change your profile and tell us what you really are.

Do you refute that we have some words or names that have been translated wrongly from the original texts in our bibles today ?

 

[DHK]

Do you refute that we have some words or names that have been translated wrongly from the original texts in our bibles today ?

I can easily refute the garbage that you have been spouting on this thread.
But I would rather you answer my post directly instead of answering it with another question. Your line of argument is just what a J.W. would do.

 

[Steadfast Fred]

I refute it. If any name or word is translated wrongly, the God is proven to be a liar and has not kept His promise to preserve His Word.

Your position calls God a liar and casts doubt on His Word.

 

[HisWitness]

I can easily refute the garbage that you have been spouting on this thread.
But I would rather you answer my post directly instead of answering it with another question. Your line of argument is just what a J.W. would do.

im not the one arguing--answer the question if you are right and im wrong--is what we have today in our bibles--without ANY translation errors at all?

 

[HisWitness]

I refute it. If any name or word is translated wrongly, the God is proven to be a liar and has not kept His promise to preserve His Word.

Your position calls God a liar and casts doubt on His Word.

How is God a liar ??

 

[DrJamesAch]

you can mock all you want--but you are mocking Christ not me--his name is very pronounceable for us---and should have never been translated into an English name--he was NOT a English amercian--but a Jew.

ESP. when a form of the name jesus relates to the greek god Zeus.

Yashua/Yahshua only relates to Yahweh and it means Salvation of Yahweh.

Man translated the name of Christ into Jesus--God did NOT-- the translation of the name to Jesus was NOT in the first written texts by the Apostles.

Man has made many mistakes in words and names down through the centuries in his many translation attempts of the original texts.

I'm surprised that since you claim Jesus is a pagan invention that you even admit He is a Jew since that argument revolves on attacking the transliteration of the letter "J".

You are slandering other Christians over a name that you yourself are continuing to misspell, and I bet 2 egg shells to a bucket of sheep feed that you can't pronounce it right. I've rarely met any English speakers that can. It is so distinguishable that pronunciation was even used as a test in the OT. Judges 12:6

Furthermore, it is a fact that the NT was written in Greek. So why don't you use the Greek word for Christ when referring to Him-Christos? And have you ever seen the "first text"? And what source are you relying on from someone that has?

Although that's a pretty silly argument over the name Jesus being in the "original" considering that English was not developed until several hundred years later. Can you show evidence where the apostles followed your rules of translation into translating all of God's proper names in Hebrew the same way into Greek? Is שדי left that way in the Greek texts? Can you show from ANY source that אֲדֹנָי was retained in the same form in ANY GREEK TEXT that derived from the "originals" written by the apostles?

Unless you can literally THINK in Hebrew much less read and write it, your argument against the English usage is fallacious.

 

[DrJamesAch]

How is God a liar ??

Did you just use the word, "God" to refer to who you believe in? I could have swore I just saw you write that the English Bibles do not correctly translate His name, and "God" is a usage of the Greek "Theos" which is also a term used to describe other 'gods'. So you are now violating your own rules.

If salvation depends on calling on your version of names, you are DOOMED:thumbs:

 

[HisWitness]

I'm surprised that since you claim Jesus is a pagan invention that you even admit He is a Jew since that argument revolves on attacking the transliteration of the letter "J".

You are slandering other Christians over a name that you yourself are continuing to misspell, and I bet 2 egg shells to a bucket of sheep feed that you can't pronounce it right. I've rarely met any English speakers that can. It is so distinguishable that pronunciation was even used as a test in the OT. Judges 12:6

Furthermore, it is a fact that the NT was written in Greek. So why don't you use the Greek word for Christ when referring to Him-Christos? And have you ever seen the "first text"? And what source are you relying on from someone that has?

Although that's a pretty silly argument over the name Jesus being in the "original" considering that English was not developed until several hundred years later. Can you show evidence where the apostles followed your rules of translation into translating all of God's proper names in Hebrew the same way into Greek? Is שדי left that way in the Greek texts? Can you show from ANY source that אֲדֹנָי was retained in the same form in ANY GREEK TEXT that derived from the "originals" written by the apostles?

Unless you can literally THINK in Hebrew much less read and write it, your argument against the English usage is fallacious.

I never claimed myself that jesus was from a pagan source--I just offered other sources for comments.

How am I slandering Christians ???

Im asking a question in all this--if the name was not pronounceable---then how did they know to translate it to jesus ???

 

[Steadfast Fred]

HW, why do you continue to avoid answering DHK's questions?