Littlejohn

No, not 'Jesus', but YEHOSHUAH (*) or its aramaic contraction 'YE'SHUAH'.

Iesous (apparently translated by Yeshu in the Talmud and Toldoth Yeshu) was not a Jewish name, but a greek attribute (healer), which with Christianity also became a name.

Under the current rabbinic version about it, the name Yeshu is actually an acronym which underlie the phrase "YEmach SHem Vezichro", whose literal meaning is "May his name and his memory be erased '(from the Book of the Living). However, I have reason to believe that such a pseudo name derives from a partial modification of the original name of Jesus of Nazareth, who was YESHAY (or Y'shay: see The Safed's Scroll), transliterated into Latin with Iesse (in English with Jesse). We have an indirect confirmation of this from the writings of Epiphanius of Salamis (Cyprus)

It is highly probable that the Jews of the century following that in which Jesus of Nazareth lived in, have replaced the ending -AY of the name YESH-AYwith the ending -U, thus obtaining the name YESH-U. All this in order to adapt phonetically the name Yeshay with the greek term Iesous, whereby which Jesus, through the successes reported in proselytizing by Christian missionaries, was becoming famous throughout the empire.

«...From the writings of Josephus it was probably the most common name used in his writings..»

This is because the writings of Josephus there have been handed-down through many re-copying by Christian scribes ...


Greetings


Littlejohn

.

aa5874

But were not the works of Josephus translated to Greek under the supervision or authority of Josephus ?

The preface to "Wars of the Jews" The name "Jesus" is found over 50 times in the works of Josephus without any apparent translation errors BY SCRIBES except for ONLY the forgeries in AJ 18.3.3 and 20.9.1.

In effect, without the forgeries, there would have been no supposed scribal error with respect to the name "Jesus".

The name Jesus in AJ 18.3.3 and 20.9.1 appeared NOT to have been result of any scribal error but at the hands of a fraudster.

Littlejohn

".. But were not the works of Josephus translated to Greek under the supervision or authority of Josephus? .."

Are you thinking that the copies come down to us are those "under the supervision or authority of Josephus "?... Do think you that really Josephus had written the 'Testimonium Flavianum'?...

The 'Testimonium Flavianum' is a dazzling historical forgery. However, Josephus not only really spoke of Jesus of Nazareth in his writings, but even he knew him personally !!...(*) Ergo, he certainly knew his name and knew then that the name of Jesus of Nazareth was NOT Jesus (Iesous), because no one had him named thus in his time in Palestine. Jesus of Nazareth, in fact, began to become known in the provinces of the empire with such a pseudo name, since the founding of the Roman Catholic Christian, which took place in Rome between 140-150 AD

".. In effect, without the forgeries, there would have been no supposed scribal error with respect to the name "Jesus". .."

What??...The works of Josephus were totally distorted by the Christian scribes, who expunged by them a lot of material 'compromising'!

However, this did not happen immediately. Due to the fact that Christianity was born with the direct sponsorship of imperial and senatorial power of time (for once in 'love and harmony'!), the 'team' of forgers who had been given the task of lay the foundations for the cult, could count on full cooperation of Roman power.

All this, almost certainly, means that initially the texts of the works by Josephus were removed from circulation, and in their place, was circulated a 'domesticated' version, produced by an unknown person, who still today the Catholic clergy remembers by the name 'EGESIPPUS' (from the greek 'IOSIPPOS', ie 'Joseph'). Surely it was not his name, but an attribute applied to this character to indicate that he rewrote the works of Joseph, along the lines desired by the nascent Catholic clergy.

The work by 'Egesippus' was composed of 5 volumes, in which the author 'merged' together elements taken both from the Jewish War and Jewish Antiquities of Josephus. It is not excluded (indeed could be very likely also) who has been this unknown person the real author of the notorious passage known as 'Testimonium Flavianum'.

In later centuries, however, you chose to put anew into circulation the works by Josephus suitably modified, more or less as they appear today. In these modified versions, you also chose to introduce the false 'Testimonium Flavianum', as well as the mention of John the Baptist, also false and probably written by the same author of 'Testimonium'.


Greetings


Littlejohn

__________________________

Note:

(*) - even more: it is highly probable that has been the same Josephus, when he was a 'governor' of Galilee, at the beginning of the first Jewish War, to convince Jesus of Nazareth (then an chiefrobber who commanded about 800-900 men, see Lactantius), to enter in the front of anti-Roman rebellion.

.

show_no_mercy

aa5874 is not talking about the Testimonium Flavianum. Do you really think that the name "Jesus" is written over 50 times in one paragraph?

aa5874

How many times must I tell you that the "TF" AJ 18.3.3 and AJ 20.9.1 were forgeries.

You admit that the "TF" was a "dazzling forgery" yet appear to rely on the very dazzling forgery to claim Josephus knew Jesus of Nazareth.

Well if you are claiming the works of Josephus were TOTALLY distorted by Christian scribes please show me what Christian scribes distorted about:

1. Jesus the son of Sapphias.

2. Jesus the son of Gamala

3. Jesus the Galilean who sojourned at Jerusalem

4. Jesus the high priest.

5. Jesus, the son of Ananus

6. Jesus the son of Thebuthus

7. Jesus, the son of Sie.

8. Jesus, the son of Damneus

9. Jesus, the son of Josadek

Littlejohn

"..There are two different people with the name Ιησους..."

I think you continue to slip out an essential aspect: the Gospels were not written by Jews, but by Latins and Greeks! Who wrote what you have reported had every incentive to convince people that 'Iesous' (Ιησους) was the transliteration of Hebrew YEHOSHUAH: what absolutely false, since Ιησους was an ancient Greek word, that had meaning stand-alone, that is HEALER!

Among other things, the two genealogies given by Matthew and Luke, are a resounding false history, as all the rabbis know that for ordinary Jew people, the 'anagrafiche" (italian adjective for 'registry office') traces you stopped at second or, at the most, third generation! .. So, where did 'catch' their genealogies Luke and Matthew ??...

The truth, that has not been sensed still by any scholar in the world, is that the counterfeiters evangelists were trying desperately to clouded the Jewish 'rumors' according to which Mary, the mother of Jesus (and NOT the father of Jesus!) was of royal descent! It was for this that they, the evangelists, they invented this perplexing genealogies! .. Still today we read in the Talmud, about Mary 'Virgin', mother of Jesus, ".. she, that descended from princes and rulers, get to do the prostitute with the carpenters! .."

"..This is the problem with not knowing the languages you're trying to argue about. I'm not going to respond to your nonsense until you provide your own translation of the Aramaic ישע into Koine Greek. If you don't do that, I'll assume that you simply don't know WTF you're talking about..."

But what a 'nonsense'???.... All this not only I say it, but even the same church fathers:

Just will not you take note of this? ... Do you think that Eusebius, Clement of Alexandria and St. Cyril of Jerusalem don't know also ".. the languages you're Trying to Argue about .."??...

Greetings


Littlejohn

.

Littlejohn

AGAIN??!...

It seems to me that ours is a dialogue 'between deafs'.....

Greetings


Littlejohn

.

show_no_mercy

That was a pretty pathetic attempt to dodge the question at hand. I've asked you to provide your own translation of the Aramaic ישע into Koine Greek. Not into Latin (as Jerome did), not into English.

aa5874

Perhaps you become blind and deaf when people do not agree with you.

It is most obvious that the writings of Josephus were NOT totally distorted by fraudsters with respect to the name JESUS.

There are ONLY two known forgeries with respect to the name Jesus in ALL of Josephus, AJ 18.3.3 and 20.9.1, where Jesus was called the Christ and was RAISED from the dead.

Littlejohn

There are evidences under which Joseph knew Jesus and that he was also his friend! ... To find them and need to look carefully and compare data from research with others already known.

If you 'linger' on theory of non-historical existence of Jesus Nazareth, you never will find such evidences: exactly what it want the forger clergy, and it is for this that, by sneaky way and using compliant 'pasdarans', it seeks to support such an argument, which it is much less dangerous than the research on the historical Jesus! ..


Greetings


Littlejohn

.