Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Clivedurdle · 04-26-2013, 03:52 AM

Has anyone looked at what names are used by whom when and where for the only begotten son and what implications that might have?

Tubby Lardmore · 04-26-2013, 09:20 AM

I don't know how to answer your question, but I will mention that ten years back on Christian radio there was a man--possibly one of the Jews for Jesus type--who never said "Jesus," the Greek version. He always said Yeshua, which may be close in sound to what the friends of the man called him back then.

You may be referring more to "Redeemer," "Lamb of God," "Good Shepherd," "Rose of Sharon," "Lilly of the Valley," and so on, though.

Clivedurdle · 04-26-2013, 11:05 AM

No, I meant more if he was real what would his name have been? A historical core surely would have had some consistency of a name. Is Jesus of Nazareth actually a common way people were named? Were you more likely to be Jesus ben,,

How is this character actually named in the records, and is there any correlation with naming conventions?

mountainman · 04-26-2013, 11:22 PM

Brian?

εὐδαιμονία | eudaimonia

mountainman · 04-27-2013, 11:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clivedurdle

Has anyone looked at what names are used by whom when and where for the only begotten son and what implications that might have?

I have conducted such an investigation. My findings report that the most sacred of names preserved by both the Christians and the heretics in the earliest extant manuscripts (Greek and Coptic) were in fact encrypted.

The earliest texts use Nomina Sacra

Quote:

Nomina sacra (singular: nomen sacrum) means "sacred names" in Latin, and can be used to refer to traditions of abbreviated writing of several frequently occurring divine names or titles in early Holy Scripture, used in Greek, Latin, and Coptic manuscripts. Bruce Metzger's book Manuscripts of the Greek Bible lists 15 such expressions from Greek papyri: the Greek counterparts of God, Lord, Jesus, Christ, Son, Spirit, David, cross, Mother, Father, Israel, Savior, Man, Jerusalem, and Heaven. The nomen sacrum for mother did not appear until the 4th century CE,[1] but all other Nomina Sacra have been found in Greek manuscripts from the 1st - 3rd Centuries CE. The contractions were indicated with overlines.

There has been a dispute about the nature of Nomina sacra, whether they represent a mere shorthand or these overlined words indeed bear a sacred meaning

Why did the Bible (LXX + NT) authors use Encryption?

Quote:

In cryptography, encryption is the process of encoding messages (or information) in such a way that eavesdroppers or hackers cannot read it, but that authorized parties can.[1]:374 In an encryption scheme, the message or information (referred to as plaintext) is encrypted using an encryption algorithm, turning it into an unreadable ciphertext (ibid.). This is usually done with the use of an encryption key, which specifies how the message is to be encoded.

////

There are two basic types of encryption schemes: Symmetric-key and public-key encryption.[1]:375-376

In symmetric-key schemes, the encryption and decryption keys are the same. Thus communicating parties must agree on a secret key before they wish to communicate.

In public-key schemes, the encryption key is published for anyone to use and encrypt messages. However, only the receiving party has access to the decryption key and is capable of reading the encrypted messages.[2]

Public-key encryption is a relatively recent invention: historically, all encryption schemes have been symmetric-key (also called private-key) schemes.[1]

I have not found evidence that suggests the early Christian authors or their preservers published a list of these nomina sacra codes along with their expanded meanings.

The code for Jesus in the Greek Ἰησοῦς was the following code with an overbar.

ΙΣ

The code for Christ/Messiah in the Greek Χριστός was the following code with an overbar.

ΧΣ

So the name (Nominative (Subject)) above all other names, direct from the manuscript evidence was the following code for Jesus Christ, with an overbar ...

ΙΣ ΧΣ

Some questions raised during the investigation:

(1) Why we do not see this code scrawled by Christians all over their dinner plates and wine goblets and tombstones in antiquity?

(2) Does the Christogram disambiguate between Christos and Chrestos?

(3) Who was responsible for the universal use of the coded names above all other names and when did this editor first assemble all the books of the NT and LXX to standardise the universal use of these specific sacred names above all other names? I cant accept that many authors wrote separately using these codes without any agreement or precedent, but there may be something I am missing.

(4) Why did the heretics use the same series of codes for these names above every name?

εὐδαιμονία | eudaimonia

Clivedurdle · 04-28-2013, 01:19 AM

Quote:

The beginning of the good news about Jesus the Messiah,[a] the Son of God

Quote:

This is the genealogy[a] of Jesus the Messiah[b] the son of David, the son of Abraham:

Quote:

You will conceive and give birth to a son, and you are to call him Jesus. 32 He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High. The Lord God will give him the throne of his father David, 33 and he will reign over Jacob’s descendants forever; his kingdom will never end.”

Quote:

1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was with God in the beginning. 3 Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. 4 In him was life, and that life was the light of all mankind. 5 The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome[a] it.

6 There was a man sent from God whose name was John. 7 He came as a witness to testify concerning that light, so that through him all might believe. 8 He himself was not the light; he came only as a witness to the light.

9 The true light that gives light to everyone was coming into the world. 10 He was in the world, and though the world was made through him, the world did not recognize him. 11 He came to that which was his own, but his own did not receive him. 12 Yet to all who did receive him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God— 13 children born not of natural descent, nor of human decision or a husband’s will, but born of God.

14 The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the one and only Son, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.

15 (John testified concerning him. He cried out, saying, “This is the one I spoke about when I said, ‘He who comes after me has surpassed me because he was before me.’”) 16 Out of his fullness we have all received grace in place of grace already given. 17 For the law was given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ. 18 No one has ever seen God, but the one and only Son, who is himself God and[b] is in closest relationship with the Father, has made him known.

John the Baptist Denies Being the Messiah

19 Now this was John’s testimony when the Jewish leaders[c] in Jerusalem sent priests and Levites to ask him who he was. 20 He did not fail to confess, but confessed freely, “I am not the Messiah.”

21 They asked him, “Then who are you? Are you Elijah?”

He said, “I am not.”

“Are you the Prophet?”

He answered, “No.”

22 Finally they said, “Who are you? Give us an answer to take back to those who sent us. What do you say about yourself?”

23 John replied in the words of Isaiah the prophet, “I am the voice of one calling in the wilderness, ‘Make straight the way for the Lord.’”[d]

24 Now the Pharisees who had been sent 25 questioned him, “Why then do you baptize if you are not the Messiah, nor Elijah, nor the Prophet?”

26 “I baptize with[e] water,” John replied, “but among you stands one you do not know. 27 He is the one who comes after me, the straps of whose sandals I am not worthy to untie.”

28 This all happened at Bethany on the other side of the Jordan, where John was baptizing.

John Testifies About Jesus

29 The next day John saw Jesus coming toward him and said

Quote:

1 Paul, a servant of Christ Jesus, called to be an apostle and set apart for the gospel of God— 2 the gospel he promised beforehand through his prophets in the Holy Scriptures 3 regarding his Son, who as to his earthly life[a] was a descendant of David, 4 and who through the Spirit of holiness was appointed the Son of God in power[b] by his resurrection from the dead: Jesus Christ our Lord. 5 Through him we received grace and apostleship to call all the Gentiles to the obedience that comes from[c] faith for his name’s sake. 6 And you also are among those Gentiles who are called to belong to Jesus Christ.

Seems to me there is some confusion about the name of this god and a lot of energy has been spent discussing its name!

Clivedurdle · 04-28-2013, 03:45 AM

And I missed a variant in the paragraph above - why in one paragraph would someone's name be written in three different ways?

And when was "Jesus of Nazareth" invented?

Cheerful Charlie · 05-01-2013, 05:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clivedurdle

No, I meant more if he was real what would his name have been? A historical core surely would have had some consistency of a name. Is Jesus of Nazareth actually a common way people were named? Were you more likely to be Jesus ben,,

How is this character actually named in the records, and is there any correlation with naming conventions?

Yeshua ben Yoseph.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yeshua_(name)
Yeshua in Hebrew is verbal derivative from "to rescue", "to deliver"

Cheerful Charlie

aa5874 · 05-01-2013, 05:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clivedurdle

No, I meant more if he was real what would his name have been? A historical core surely would have had some consistency of a name. Is Jesus of Nazareth actually a common way people were named? Were you more likely to be Jesus ben,,

How is this character actually named in the records, and is there any correlation with naming conventions?

If Jesus of Nazareth was real he would probably be declared a mad man like Jesus son of Ananus or would have most likely been executed without a trial if he was declared a false prophet and was leading people astray.

See Wars of the Jews 6.5 for Jesus the madman and Antiquities of the Jews for the false prophet and magician who had his head chopped off without a trial.

Ironically, Jesus would have had the lowest of low names--a mad man or a false prophet.

Antiquities of the Jews 20.5

Quote:

1. NOW it came to pass, while Fadus was procurator of Judea, that a certain magician, whose name was Theudas, (9) persuaded a great part of the people to take their effects with them, and follow him to the river Jordan; for he told them he was a prophet, and that he would, by his own command, divide the river, and afford them an easy passage over it; and many were deluded by his words.

However, Fadus did not permit them to make any advantage of his wild attempt, but sent a troop of horsemen out against them; who, falling upon them unexpectedly, slew many of them, and took many of them alive.

They also took Theudas alive, and cut off his head, and carried it to Jerusalem....

04-26-2013, 03:52 AM	#1
Clivedurdle Contributor Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: London UK Posts: 16,024	The Name above every name Has anyone looked at what names are used by whom when and where for the only begotten son and what implications that might have?

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

04-26-2013, 09:20 AM	#2
Tubby Lardmore Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: USA Posts: 5,470	I don't know how to answer your question, but I will mention that ten years back on Christian radio there was a man--possibly one of the Jews for Jesus type--who never said "Jesus," the Greek version. He always said Yeshua, which may be close in sound to what the friends of the man called him back then. You may be referring more to "Redeemer," "Lamb of God," "Good Shepherd," "Rose of Sharon," "Lilly of the Valley," and so on, though.

04-26-2013, 11:05 AM	#3
Clivedurdle Contributor Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: London UK Posts: 16,024	No, I meant more if he was real what would his name have been? A historical core surely would have had some consistency of a name. Is Jesus of Nazareth actually a common way people were named? Were you more likely to be Jesus ben,, How is this character actually named in the records, and is there any correlation with naming conventions?

04-26-2013, 11:22 PM	#4
mountainman Contributor Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Falls Creek, Oz. Posts: 11,192	Brian? εὐδαιμονία \| eudaimonia

04-28-2013, 03:45 AM	#7
Clivedurdle Contributor Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: London UK Posts: 16,024	And I missed a variant in the paragraph above - why in one paragraph would someone's name be written in three different ways? And when was "Jesus of Nazareth" invented?

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.