Jesus or Yeshua/Yehoshua?

[pickguard1]

Another claim of theirs is that:

“There’s no proof that the original accounts of Yahshua were written in Greek. They are all second hand accounts at best.”

Again, how would you refute this?

Where is their “first-hand” account that it was NOT written in Greek? Hmmm? I agree with LilyM that if “they” feel the New Testament is corrupted, A) why do they care? The New Testament, apart from Sacred Tradition (which “they” obviously don’t lend any credence to) is really the primary written source of ANY information about Jesus. If it’s wrong - there’s nothing reliable to go on anyway and B) it’s universally recognized (but apparently not ) that different languages have different words for the same thing. That doesn’t make the “thing” different. If the word used in a different language were overtly attempting to discredit or defame or impugn Jesus’ name, or change it to mean something it is not, then it would be blasphemy, but contrary to that, all renderings of “Jesus” in various languages are merely transliterations that retain the same understanding of the “thing” in question, which is the Second Person of the Holy Trinity, the Son of God. If I call a flag “red” and someone else calls it “rojo” or “rot” or “krasnaya” - they all mean red - and the flag doesn’t care because all those words reflect the same reality.

And for the record, I think at least in Catholic circles, using the term “Yahweh” is now discouraged as it isn’t really a rendering of the name of God. It would be like calling the Roman Catholic Church the “Roach”.

 

[Spiritoftruth]

Potato, Potahtow, tomato, tomahtow… knock yourself out, I doubt the good lord will be picky over what you call him as long as you call…pick up the phone…

 

[andrewagill]

They apparently believe that the New Testament is corrupted. Does anyone know some sources which prove otherwise?

I would look at The Text of the New Testament: Its Transmission, Corruption and Restoration by Bruce Metzger (who was involved in the RSV translation and head translator of the NRSV).

We have many sources of Greek versions of the NT from the second century, including one dating back to 100-150 AD. We do not have any Aramaic sources, to my knowledge. It is unlikely that we would have a translation that close to the time of composition but no versions of the untranslated documents.

 

[juliamajor]

Paul is his latin name-Saul the jeswish name.He never changed it.It was what he was known as in Israel and the Roman Empire.Like my cousin’s name in Italy is Ettore- in English it’s Hector.

 

[andrewagill]

Paul is his latin name-Saul the jeswish name.He never changed it.It was what he was known as in Israel and the Roman Empire.Like my cousin’s name in Italy is Ettore- in English it’s Hector.

Oops! It looks like you are right.

 

[Evan]

I’ll have to call you out on this:

Quo usque tandem abutere, Catilina, patientia nostra?

Catiline (Catilina) was a dude.

From the Bible, we have Aquila, also male.

You may be thinking of first declension nominative nouns in Latin, which end in -a, and most of those are feminine, but there are some masculine first declension nouns (e.g. poeta, agricola) as well.

And just to be clear,

Mark was not Luke, and Saul changed his name to Paul, ceasing to be Saul. Paulus means small, while Saul means asked for or borrowed, by the way. Oh, and I’m pretty sure that Mark (Marcus) is a Latin name.

I agree with almost every thing above. I was just putting out the ‘usual’ uses. I always liked latin because of the very few exceptions. Things like agricola, poeta were always a problem.

But Paul did not change his name. Almost all hebrews had 2 names, hebrew and greek. Mark did have a hebrew name (it was John). Paul started using his Greek name more as he moved more into the circle of Greek speaking people.

newadvent.org/cathen/10675a.htm

 

[brotherinsearch]

I have two things to say about this thread

1. Though I have zero knowledge of hebrew/greek/latin languages, I enjoy the (name removed by moderator)ut on this thread very much. I have an idea that God enjoys it when we are trying to learn about him in our efforts to be closer to and understand him more and more, all the while knowing we will never understand him fully. It is truly far away from the flesh to spend time pondering God and ideas of him even though it’s at some point impossible for us to comprehend. It is a silly notion to think we will completely know God here when we can’t even know ourselves at times.
2. In my efforts to try to know God more, I can understand wanting to say his name just as it used to be pronounced. It makes it more personal for me. To be able to speak elohim and understand (to the best of our knowledge) that this is what Jesus uttered himself while speaking to his father. To help envision his time here, to create the picture in our minds, in our hearts. I want to hear the name his disciples actually spoke to him. If it was Yeshua, I want to say it to hear it exactly how it sounded while he was here. I understand the english translation and can accept its daily use. For me to try to get a good feel/vision of him, it helps to say it as it was spoken.

That’s all. Peace and Bless us all in our walk of life.