Crazy Diamond

Hello,

I just would like your input on the following statements.






Words that Pilate wrote on the plaque: I. E. SUS NAZARENUS REX IUDAEORUM


Id Est Suspended Nazarene Rex Iudaeorum


By writing the word(s) “I.e.sus” on the plaque attached to the green tree where the Lamb was suspended [having His both hands tied together with ropes above His head],

Pilate wrote words only and not a personal name, not even names.




I.E. SVS NAZARENVS REX IVDAEORVM - INRI


Ancient roman language: “The one who is suspended here is Nazarene Rex Iudaeorum”.


Soon, it will be viewed that by writing “I.e.sus”, in truth, Pilate didn’t write a name.


1. In the Roman and Latin languages, the word “sus” means “above, suspended”,

[not in the Medieval Latin].


Romanian: Sus means above and up
French: Sus means above and up
Occitan: Sus means: above and up
Portuguese: Sus means above and up


2. sus – prendere – suspendere – sus’pension
[above]


3. sus – tentare – sustentare – sus’tain
[above]


½. Urge – sus – ursus [bear]. The origin of the ancient latin word urgessus, which means bear.

Initiated with the verb urgere, the word ursus - úrgessus, which means “the one that urges above”, is the Roman origin of the name given to the animal that, when walking upright sustained on both of its feet spontaneously, makes an intimidating sign with its right hand in a vertical and diagonal motion; the sign of the beast.



The origin of the word(s) I.e.sus on the plaque that Pilate wrote, is founded in words that are true and legitimate [Id Est – Suspended]. As word(s) only, and not as name(s), the procedure of writing the word(s) I.e.sus is legal and righteous.

For the word(s) I.e.sus did not have an origin as a name whether in the Roman or Greek language.


The reason why Pilate, by writing the word(s) “I.e.sus”, didn’t write the name of a person, not even names


1. In the original Hebrew name given to the Lamb [Yahshua/Jeh-óshua] abides the tetragram of the name Yahweh/Jehavéh [YHWH/JHVH], and for that, the name of the Lamb was omitted by the High Priest who would in no way pronounce the Name when referring to a condemned one. For it has been a procedure of the High priest based in the Law, and the true Name of the lamb was not given to Pilate by the High priest.


2. The letters of the tetragram couldn’t be brought up once again by having the name Yahshua/Jeh-óshua written on the plaque of whom was said to be an “accursed one”, and according to the High Priest who would have to minister and apply the Law once given to the children of Ishrael, the blasphemy of “one taking the eternal name in vain" would remain when writing the KADDHESH[Holiness], the letters of the tetragram of the sanctified Hebrew Name [Yahweh/Jehavéh/Jahveh] on the plaque of an “accursed one” [according to the High Priest]. – The Lamb was indicted by the Law of the Synedrium [Sanhedrin - Council of seventy-one sages of the Hebrew Court] and the sentence of the death penalty was based in His pronunciation of the Name that remains eternally, by saying ‘I AM’ [Yahweh/Jehavéh], referring to Himself as the Kodhesh [Holy One] of Ishrael; ‘the living Word that became flesh’. By writing the word(s) "I.e.sus" Pilate did not write a name nor a substitute(or false) name to the Lamb, because he and his wife considered the Lamb to be a righteous one. [For his wife sent to him, saying: Have thou nothing to do with that just man; for I have suffered many things this day in a dream because of him].


Paraphrase of scriptures at Mark as originally written; in the time that the High Priest asks Him: – Are you the Kodhesh [Holy One] of Ishrael? – And Yahshua/Jeh-óshua said, – * I AM, and at this **immediate moment I can **be seen sitting at the right hand of Power, glittering in the clouds of the heaven. * Yahweh/Jehavéh; ancient Hebrew language; Je - I, Havéh - Am.


[** immediate moment; Simultaneity is a property of being Eternal, as the Begotten-son always existed eternally. The Begotten-son was He in that exact moment speaking to Nicodemos, and saying to him: “..the Begotten-son who is in heaven..” and at the same time [Simultaneously] the only Begotten-son was in heaven in that same moment:

..If I have spoken to you earthly things, and you remain not [in my words]; how will you remain, if I shall speak to you about heavenly things? And no man hath ascended into heaven, but he that descended from heaven, the Begotten-son Who IS in heaven.


**

What a high price to be paid [spiritually] is the complicity with the lie which states that the words "kristus I.e.sus" are a name and not words only.."



Retrieved from the eternal words: "And in their mouth was found no lie: they are without blemish."


For if the word(s) I.e.sus is a name, then, to me it is not a name, but to the beast[doctrine spiritually imposed] and to those who see it as a name.


Even the word kristus, which means crowned is the ancient Greek translation for the Roman word REX[king].



And if the words kristus i.e.sus are a name, then, to me they are not a name, but to the ‪bestiae[doctrine i.e. spiritually imposed; a spiritual ministry and an ordination] and to those who see the words "kristus i.e.sus" as a name.



**

Chris Weimer

This is all false, starting with sus, which actually meant "pig" and not above at all. Nevermind that the gospels were written in Greek, which actually had ihsous and not i.e. sus.

Oh, and if Pilate actually referred to Jesus, then it wouldn't be id est sus but is est. This whole entire post is pure bs.

Crazy Diamond

Hello Chris Weimer,




If it could be proven that Pilate spoke Medieval Latin, then this would be all false.


You brought the swine from your Medieval Latin,


And Pilate did not speak Medieval Latin, but the Ancient Roman Language.



Can anyone here prove otherwise?




-

-

Phlox Pyros

We like to give book references here. Can you give a reference please so that we may independently check your claims on "ancient Latin"?

I can't, but then I can't prove that Pilate didn't speak "pig latin" either.

Chris Weimer

Wrong sus is clearly attested in ancient Latin. It's even at one point accompanied by a translation. From Varro: "Sus graece dicitur hys" Rerum Rusticarum Libri III. From Ovid "sic impete vulnificus sus fertur" Metamorphoses Liber VIII.

I take it you never actually studied Latin?

Chris Weimer

I suppose I'm good for something then around here. The claim that sus is Medieval Latin is entirely false. It says that either the person spouting the claim has an agenda or does not know Latin at all, or both.

Phlox Pyros

Heh...I don't know Latin very well, but I like to allow people hang themselves in the Socratic fashion. It's more fun, to me, than insults and sometimes actually makes the person think if they have a brain. LOL

gstafleu

Matthew 27:37 ουτος εστιν ιησους ο βασιλευς των ιουδαιων, this is Jesus the king of the jews

Mark 15:26 ο βασιλευς των ιουδαιων, the king of the jews (no Jesus)

Luke 23:38 ουτος εστιν ο βασιλευς των ιουδαιων, this is the king of the jews (no Jesus).
It is prefixed by the statement that the sign was trilingual: Greek, Roman and Hebrew
(although the 1881 Westcott-Hort New Testament omits this).

John 19:20 ιησους ο ναζωραιος ο βασιλευς των ιουδαιων jesus the nazorean the king of the jews.
Finally something Nazareth-like. John also mentions trilinguality.

So there is variety in what was written, only John mentioning the Nazareth-like bit. It is a principle of criticism that later elaborations (John is the latest gospler) are usually extraneous additions, I think. Also, we don't have whatever the Roman (Latin) text may have been. So I think the thesis in the OP is not well founded, piggery pokery notwithstanding .

Crazy Diamond

Chris Weimer,

Regarding the type of Latin you've quoted, it really does not matter what date that it was written,


The only thing that matters is that you do not have the original manuscripts that would help you to prove that what you have quoted from is not just a posterior translation of the original.


While important Museums of the Earth do not have the very original manuscripts of the New Testament, which are part of the Eternal Words,


Does anyone here believe that someone would have kept intact any original manuscripts, from two thousand years ago, of whatever miserable disgraces were written by many swine-eaters?



It would be easier to believe in Santa Claus.


.

Chris Weimer

Hold on a second. You're telling me that sus came from Medieval Latin because we don't have any original manuscripts of anything? Dude. Seriously. There are several major obstacles in your way.

1. How do you explain the meter of the poetry if it didn't have sus? Porcus is one syllable too many.

2. How do you explain that Greek had the etymological cognate of sus with hus? In Greek, the initial 's' is often changed to 'h'. Compare super and huper.

3. How do you account for the thousands (or more!) of instances of sus prior to the Medieval period? All of them are interpolations? Hard to believe. You're asking us that every single instance of sus is an interpolation. If anyone were to bring up implausibility, it would be me.

4. How do you explain that the Greek (which is the original version) and the Aramaic versions of the NT have the name Ιησους and Yeshua respectively where Iesus is in the Latin? The Greek was first, you know. Why would it change in Latin?

I could go on.

While we're at it, what are your credentials in Latin? Have you ever taken a Latin class before? Where have you studied it and for how long? Did you major in Latin? How many degrees in Latin?

I hope you realize how foolish you look.

Vale in optima pace, mi amice,

Chris Weimer