posted 12-14-1999 07:24 AM            

I wouldn't trust anybody for anything, let the record speak for itself. Take the risk, but woe unto you if you trust fallible men for anything!

Jeremyah 9:4 * "Beware of your friends; do not trust your brothers. For every brother is a deceiver, and every friend a slanderer.

posted 12-14-1999 02:06 PM            

I am not saying you should not, I am just puting into
perspective that you are choosing who you trust.

If you do not personally know Hebrew and Aramaic then you
must trust someone who DOES know them, learn Hebrew and Aramaic
yourself (and trust your teacher) or use a translation and
trust the translator.

-----

Also,

Regarding the phrase "your Torah" yes there are ways to say this in both Hebrew and Aramaic.

In Hebrew and ARamaic a suffix is added to a noun to form
prnominal posessives like "my El" (Eli) "our Elohim" (Eloheynu) etc. In Hebrew the "You" can be singular or plural and feminine or Masculine as well. Thus were we have only one "you" in Hebrew and Aramaic there are four (Singular Masc.; Singular Fem.; Plural Masc.; Plural Fem.)

posted 12-14-1999 07:13 PM         

Vincent

posted 12-16-1999 02:52 AM            

Evidently you have summarily ignored and dismissed my last response to you.

I specifically gave you the context of Solomon Zeitlin's quote so there would be no misunderstanding of his statement to the effect that the name Yeshua is not Hebrew. In fact Zeitlin soundly criticized Dr. David Flusser for taking the same stance that you hold in regard to the name Yeshua.

I also pointed out that Solomon Zeitlin is well recognized as an authority in the ancient Hebrew language. His credentials along with the titles of his publications can be found by doing a simple search on the internet.

Previously I provided you with another scholarly source ("The Theological Dictionary of the New Testament") which attests to the fact that the name Yeshua is not Hebrew.

Contained in my response are the following two requests which, by your providing the evidence, would help in establishing credibility to your theory.

1. I would be interested to know what sources can be provided to show that the name Yeshua is in fact Hebrew and not Aramaic. (The issue is the name Yeshua, not the common word, therefore Strong's is not germane to the issue)

2. What would go a long way to clear up the matter is to provide evidence that is recognized by Hebrew and Aramaic scholars to support your view.

The following is your response to my last post along with my brief comments:

"Just to let you know I hold a doctorate in Semitic Studies."
(Credibilty attempted and noted)

"I will make this simple and cut to the obvious."
(Seems reasonable)

"To claim that "Yeshua" is not Hebrew is just plain silly."
(Very simple statement which is acknowledged.)

"If YESHUA is not the Hebrew word for "salvation" please fill us all in... what is the REAL Hebrew word for "Salvation"?"
(As I previously noted per my last post and the above request number 1, This is irrelevant, especially once it is recognized, as it is by other scholars, that the name Yeshua is merely an Aramaic form of the Hebrew name, Yahushua.

"Don't say Yahushua, that means "Yah Saves"."
(Had no intention of such a thing.)

"Now go get your Strong's concordance and look up the word "salvation" and use the word numbers to see that the word YESHUA appears throughout the Hebrew text of the Tanak in most if not all of the places where the KJV has "salvation"."
(Irrelevant in regard to the name Yeshua which is the Aramaic form of the Hebrew name Yahushua. See above response.)

"To claim that somehow YESHUA is Aramaic and not Hebrew is just plain silly. YESHUA is ONLY Hebrew and not Aramaic at all."
(Already noted above and recognized as a simple statement. Refer to presented sources that are in disagreement.)

"Trust me... I know both languages."
(Solomon Zeitlin and the scholars affiliated with "The Theological Dictionary of the New Testament" might disagree)

If I may borrow your words, "I will make this simple and cut to the obvious."

Present evidence, not rhetoric.

posted 12-16-1999 03:18 AM            

The statement that Yeshua us "not Hebrew" is absolutely
untrue. Again... go look in your Strong's concordance under the english word "salvation" and find the word number then go look up that word in the back and see that "YESHUA" is undeniably "Hebrew"

We can only be as certain that YESHUA is Hebrew as we can be that the Tanak is written in Hebrew.

posted 12-16-1999 05:35 PM         

Thank you,

Vincent

posted 12-16-1999 07:27 PM         

Vincent

posted 12-18-1999 11:25 AM            

I think Dr.Zeitlen is saying the Yeshua is not the the
pronunciation or spelling of his name that the Messiah used
while he was here in the flesh.. He is saying it was not
a Biblical Hebrew "NAME" during that time period. He is NOT saying it wasn't a HEBREW word. The context is a discussion of HIS NAME. I also don't believe Dr.Zeitlen ruled out that
some Hebrews may have used the form Yeshua instead of Yahshua,
merely to avoid pronuncing the Sacred Name (Yah)weh. But this
is definitely a late post-exilic alteration, and it not the
King's Hebrew if you will; and not universaly practiced. Dr.Zeitlen is focusing on the spelling and pronunciation that the Messiah and those that knew him used. Dr.Zeitlen also explains the existence of a dipthong in Y(HW)SA which prohibits the English transliteration YahUshua or Yehoshua. There are other quality sources about the dipthong as well.

Shabbat Shalom!

posted 12-18-1999 11:53 PM            

I will try to respond to your statements as follows:

Statement: I think Dr.Zeitlen is saying the Yeshua is not the the pronunciation or spelling of his name that the Messiah used while he was here in the flesh.

Response: I agree
-------

Statement: He is saying it was not a Biblical Hebrew "NAME" during that time period.

Response: I agree
-------

Statement: He is NOT saying it wasn't a HEBREW word. The context is a discussion of HIS NAME.

Response: I agree
-------

Statement: I also don't believe Dr.Zeitlen ruled out that some Hebrews may have used the form Yeshua instead of Yahshua, merely to avoid pronuncing the Sacred Name (Yah)weh.

Response: This would be only speculation and cannot be deduced from the source cited, though it is possible.
-------

Statement: But this is definitely a late post-exilic alteration, and it not the King's Hebrew if you will; and not universaly practiced.

Response: If you are saying that the Aramaic language was not commonly used during the time of Yahushua then I would have to disagree. In fact Hebrew/Aramaic was was the ordinary language of the people at that time. It had made its way into the pure Hebrew language mainly during the Babylonian captivity, and especially became more prominent in the post-exilic period at the time of Ezra and Nehemiah.

The name Yeshua would no doubt have been used by the Jews during the 1st century C.E. since it is but an Aramaic form of the pure Hebrew name Yahushua . Other Aramaic forms of Yahushua would have utilized Yah, Yo, and Yeho as in Yahshua, Yoshua, and Yehoshua.
-------

Statement: Dr.Zeitlen is focusing on the spelling and pronunciation that the Messiah and those that knew him used.

Response: I agree. No doubt that those who personally knew the messiah, family and friends, would have referred to him as Yahushua and not Yeshua. We know this for various reasons. In the KJV of Acts 7:45 it is stated:

"Which also our fathers that came after brought in with JESUS into the possession of the Gentiles, whom eloahim drave out before the face of our fathers, unto the days of David;"

When we consult the corresponding event in the Old Testament we know that it was Yahushua (Joshua) the son of Nun that is referred to as Jesus in the the book of Acts. Therefore the connection between the names is direct. Jesus = Yahushua.

In the book of Hebrews:

"For if JESUS had given them rest, then would he not afterward have spoken of another day." (Hebrews 4:8)

Again the person being referred to is Yahushua the son of Nun. The picture is clear. Yahushua the son of Nun was a prophetic type of Yahushua the messiah and their very names would and do agree. Jesus = Yahushua.

Also note in the KJV when the angel told Meriam what she was to name her child it is the same name.

And, behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shalt call his name JESUS. (Luke 1:31)

There can be no doubt that the angel told Meriam to name the child the pure Hebrew name Yahushua, not the slanged Aramaic form Yeshua. Therefore whether or not the common people spoke Hebrew/Aramaic is a moot point in regard to the name of the messiah. The name was Yahushua and would have been pronounced as such. To do otherwise would have been to disobey the angel's instruction.

If in fact the messiah had a Hebrew name it would be the same name that even the New Testament testifies to when making the connection of his name to Yahushua the son of Nun. Jesus = Yahushua.

I have already provided the context of Solomon Zeitlin's statement in a previous post so there would be no misunderstanding of what he was saying. He states:

"The innocent reader would assume this is the autograph of Jesus. Yod shin waw ayin (YESHUA) IS NOT HEBREW. In Hebrew the name is written yod he waw shin ayin (YAHUSHUA)."
-------

Statement: Dr.Zeitlen also explains the existence of a dipthong in Y(HW)SA which prohibits the English transliteration YahUshua or Yehoshua. There are other quality sources about the dipthong as well.

Response: Zeitlin nowhere explains such a thing in the article being referenced. This is a position taken by various sacred name groups to justify the form of the messiah's name as Yahshua. They have taken the same position as the Pharasaic Jews by removing and not pronouncing the "waw." By utilizing late Jewish rules for pronunciation it gives the impression as if the "waw" in the theophoric element did not exist at all.

A few questions one might ask are:

Could there be a good reason why the "waw" is in fact contained in the name Yahushua?

Could it be that it is there to actually be pronounced?

Why not just complete the job of the scribes and just strip it out wherever it remains since we shouldn't pronounce it anyway? What difference does it make?

To ignore the letters given by Yahweh (orginally palaeo-Hebrew) as given in the name Yahushua and to force human rules of pronunciation, along with oftimes deceptive vowel points, on them is rather arrogant to say the least.

I have presented evidence from Hebrew scholars that testify to the fact that the name Yeshua is not Hebrew. Somehow it just gets ignored and is relegated to being silly.

Time to move on I suppose.

posted 12-19-1999 01:24 AM            

I have a question,

If the spelling of "Joshua/Jesus" is > Y H U SH A
Why isn't it pronounced Yahusha ?
Why have we added the "waw/vav" between the shin(sh) and the ayin? AND.... are we supposed to pronounce the ayin if it is at the end?

posted 12-19-1999 02:54 AM            

YUD-HEY-VAV-SHIN-AYIN is pronounced YAHUSHUA

however there is no evidence that anyone in the first century ever used that name. Many tomb inscriptions from that time have YESHUA (YUD-SHIN-VAV-AYIN) but not one has YUD-HEY-VAV-SHIN-AYIN