Littlejohn

from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yeshua_(name)

«..Eusebius related it to the Greek root meaning "to heal" thus making it a variant of Jason meaning healer....» (Jason = Iasoun/Iesoun)

An amazing confirmation about what I'm arguing from many years ago until today! ...

The greek name of Jesus, namely Iesous (Iησοuς), was neither a translation nor a transliteration of hebrew name Yehoshuah or Yeshua, and this is clear from Jerome's Vulgate, where he transliterate Yehoshuah (see the biblical book of Yehoshuah/Joshua ) with IOSUE' and not with Iesous!

In particular, 'Iesous' was the ionic form of the greek-attic 'Iasous', whose meaning was precisely healer. The 'Iasoun' version (as 'Iesoun Barabban', in practice a form of declination Greek) was transliterated into Latin with 'Iason/Jason'. Iasous, at least in the ancient times, certainly had the sense of the masculinization of IASO, the daughter of the same god-healer Asclepius.

Keep in mind that in hebrew language 'Yehoshuah' stands for 'God saves' or 'one who saves' or simply 'Savior', and not 'God heals'! In greek, the correct translation of Savior is 'SOTER', known attribute applied to the god Asclepius, who summed up into himself and the figure of 'Iasoun/Iesoun' (healer) and that of 'Soter' (ie savior).

In all likelihood, though yet today it no longer appears in 'light', as a result of hallucinating process of manipulation and deception, which have been undergone the texts handed down, by performance of the christian scribes in the service of forger 'fathers', which dictated guidelines for the mystification. (Assuming that the scribes have been as mere 'writers', lack of specific knowledge)

Since there are few doubts that the term 'Essene' is quite similar to the term 'therapeutes' (therapist, doctor )(*), as evidenced by the writings of Philo of Alexandria, is therefore highly probable that 'Essene' has the greek root 'Iasoun' or its equivalent ionic 'Iesoun'. Probably this was the passage: Iesoun → Iesen → Iessen, and this should be happened during the period when the Greeks ruled over Palestine.

Almost certainly, there must have been some dispute between the same fathers about the appropriate way to interpret the apparent greek name Iesous, ie as if a name derived from the transliteration of Hebrew name Yehoshuah or as an attribute-greek name.

All this is evident from the fact that Hippolytus has shown, in his writings, that the heretic 'Marcus' stated that he knew the real name of Jesus, adding that it was an old and respected name (in practice YESHAY, transliterated with Iesse/Jesse, the famous David's father).

The Marcus/Mark in question, was none other that John called 'Mark' (see Acts of the Apostles), which was the second son of Jesus and Mary Salome of Magdala, who emigrated to Gaul with his mother and other its relatives, after giving their father the last goodbye during their stay in Ephesus, where the family was found, including also old mother of Jesus, who just died in Ephesus (**).

It is highly probable that just the city of Ephesus did from 'frame' to the real 'Last Supper', ie the last supper that Jesus ate with his family, before it to go away forever migrating in Gaul. Not by chance, for what concerns the veracity of that event, 'Mark', namely John Mark, just in Gaul he founded a Gnostic sect ('good blood' does not lie!), that will be called '"marcosians' sect", from his pseudo-name of 'battle'!

Very 'symptomatic' is puzzling reluctance of Augustine about heretic father 'Marcus'. Just after that his predecessors had spoken to galore about him, he avoided any comment about this figure, saying, basically, to ignore life, death and miracles concerningthis character!.... Crazy! ..

What should to mean this strange and incredible behavior?... Surely he knew very well that he was the Jesus' son (furthermore the pseudo author of the 4th gospel), end he, surely, did not had want to talk evil about him, as had done, for example, Irenaeus, who surely knew that it was John ' Marcus ', the second son of Jesus, so as knew this many others of his time!


__________________________________

Notes:

(*) - It is possible that the slight difference between the terms 'Essene' and 'Therapeutes', derived by the 'professional' figure represented by the therapist, than the rough and 'homemade' one represented by the healer 'Essene', often itinerant. (See Jesus of Nazareth)

(**) - It has made a lot of confusion about this, as many believe that in Ephesus died Mary Magdalene also. However, it is a mistake, caused by one of the most hallucinating historical falsifications made by counterfeiter Fathers, namely the 'syncretic' merger of two distinct historical figures, i.e. Mary Salomè of Magdala, (wife of Jesus) and Mariamne of Magdala (mother of Jesus), in a single character, which was simply given the name 'Mary Magdalene' o 'Mary of Magdala. Obviously it was not an idle mystifying exercise, but of a targeted operation, aimed at achieving a specific purpose: remove the image of the 'sinful woman' away by the mother of Jesus (according to the rabbinic Talmud, she had sex with many men: historical and archaeological evidences paradoxically confirm it!), discharging all its 'negativity' in the 'pout-pourri' consisting of the figure almost 'fictional' of Mary Magdalene! ..


.

show_no_mercy

How exactly would you propose writing ישע (y'shua or y'shu) with Greek letters to make it pronounceable in Greek? Yod is usually transposed to Greek as Iota, Shin usually transposed as Sigma, and Ayin has a variety of interpretations; you would probably end up with a "u" sound for Greek speakers.

Hebrew doesn't have set vowels, they are provided by the reader. Jerome's difference between IOSUE and IESUS is probably just Christians trying to give Jesus a unique name.

There are at least two different people named "Ιησους" in the LXX (Greek version of the Tanakh or OT) which was in existence for years prior to the Christian era.

Numbers 13:16 LXX καὶ ὲπωνὸμασεν Μωυσῆς τὸν Αὐσῆ υἱὸν Ναυῆ Ἰησοῦν (and Moses named Hosea, son of Nun, Jesus)

Zechariah 3:1 LXX 3:1 και εδειξεν μοι ιησουν τον ιερεα τον μεγαν εστωτα προ προσωπου αγγελου κυριου και ο διαβολος ειστηκει εκ δεξιων αυτου του αντικεισθαι αυτω (Then he showed me Jesus the high priest standing before the angel of the LORD, and Satan [b] standing at his right side to accuse him.)

This much is obvious when you read the Greek version of Luke 3, where he lists the genealogy of Jesus the Nazarene:

Lk 3:29 του ιησου του ελιεζερ του ιωριμ του μαθθατ του λευι ([the son] of Jesus, [the son] of Eliezer, [the son] of Jorim, [the son] of Mattai, [the son] of Levi.

The "Jesus" in Luke 3:29 is translated as "Joshua" in our modern Bibles...

mountainman

Despite the additional information supplied by Eusebius and his man Clement of the Clementine Forgeries we are also presented with the fact that the evidence before us, in the form of the earliest greek manuscripts, do not make any reference whatsoever to the greek name of Jesus, namely Iesous (Iησοuς).

The earliest Greek manuscripts contain only the corresponding nomina sacra codified Greek abbreviation of "ΙΣ". Who invented the code and distributed uniformally and universally into not only all the earlest greek manuscripts of the 4th century, but also into all the earliest papyri fragments?

Was Clement the first to tell us about the code name "ΙΣ" which physically appears in the vatican archives, the Oxyrhnchus rubbish dumps and also (with its Coptic variant) in the Nag Hammadi Codices and other NT related codices.

This universal use of the Jesus Code had to either have been either very early or very late. If it was early, everyone simply followed it by some form of agreement - maybe the apostles just shook hands with Paul et al. If it was late Eusebius is looking sheepish because at the end of the day it cannot be interpretted in any other manner that its strong suggestion of a single redactor for the earliest greek manuscripts and papyri. etc.



Jerome was tutored by the thug Bishop and Pontifex Maximus Damasius. He did what he was told. Damasius supported the legend of "Peter Was Right Here" with his troops and tourism budgets.


The Therapeutae of Asclepius were not "christian" but Greek.

Soter is everywhere on non christian Greek inscriptions


Pausanius cites the Essenes as a Greek temple assistance in a temple in Ephesus. The Therapeutae are undoubtedly the equivalent temple servants and assistants to the higher "priesthood" in all the many scattered temples to Asclepius which existed prior to the arrival of Constantine. Medical students will know that Galen was one of the therapeutae of Asclepius. An abundance of archaeological remains inform us that Constantine's immediate total destruction of the temples of Asclepius in 324 CE when he became the supreme military controller had a political aspect. Apollonius of Tyana was stronly associated with this temple network which probably preserved his many works and books. Eusebius authors his treatise against Apollonius. This Nicaean Jesus is all a political Jesus and not a religious or a historical Jesus.

Jesus was needed to remove Asclepius and Apollonius and Pythagoras and Plato and Plotinus et al and the greek temple priesthoods (who preserved Euclid). If Jesus removed Asclepius and the Greek influences, then the Pontifex Maximus Constantine would own his own religion. The Jews had no influence over a gangster "Pontifex Maximus". That the Jews were the imperial scapegpoat may be seen in some of Constantine's laws, and in the New Testament literary PACKAGE (ie: Eusebius, etc) which was published in the epoch.

Absolute power corrupts absolutely.

Littlejohn

"...with Greek letters to make it pronounceable in Greek?"

This is called to do transliteration... It may be 'literal', phonetic or both.

The greek word "Ιησους" is neither literal nor a phonetic transliteration by the hebraic YEHOSHUAH (עשוהי), translated into English by Joshua and not with Jesus! ... Just as Jerome translated it with Joshua and not with Iesus, pseudo-latin name of Jesus of Nazareth.

The greek word Iesous (Ιησους) has a meaning stand-alone and it is HEALER! .. This is not ONLY Littlejohn to support it but also, and especially, Eusebius, Clement of Alexandria and St. Cyril of Jerusalem, as shown by this extract of the Wikipedia page:

Note that the hebraic YEHOSHUAH means 'God saves' or 'One who saves' or simply 'Savior'. The correct translation into greek by this meaning is Soter.

The fact that Jesus was a 'healer' is clear just from the gospels themselves, which is why there is absolutely no wonder that the inhabitants of Greece Ionian (Asia Minor) they had appealed him Iesous, ie 'healer'. Jesus. to Rome, came instead appealed 'O CHRESTOS', ie 'the Good': probably not for its moral 'quality'! (by Celso we can know that the Romans, or at least part of them, they had not great respect for Jesus)

?????!..... But we are kidding ??... A 'negazionist' theory, ie a theory that denies the historicity of Jesus, should be based on rational assumptions ... I do not see what can be rational in all this...

In the New Testament of the Vulgate, Jerome called Jesus IESUS. If this were the true and correct transliteration of Hebrew YEHOSHUAH, why in the Old Testament Jerome should have used the term IOSUE'???... All this makes no sense ..

As mentioned above, IESOUS can not be the correct transliteration of Hebrew YEHOSHUAH: ergo, it is all too clear that the 'Iesous' of the LXX has been a late-style Christian manipulation, intended to give the impression that Iesous was the equivalent of the hebraic Yehosdhuah!

The fact that counterfeiters fathers, who gave birth to catholic-christian worship, tried to remove from the Iesous word its true meaning, namely 'healer', it is too much obvious also that there must be a reason behind a lot pressing, which 'escapes' again to the more modern exegetics (but not for much longer yet!).

Greetings


Littlejohn


.

show_no_mercy

No, Jerome did not translate yod-shin-ayin into Greek. He translated it into Latin. And as I said before, Hebrew doesn't necessarily have set vowels, so there can be various interpretations of y'shu or y'shua.

However, the Greek translators of the Pentateuch c. 280 BCE did translate y'shua into Ιησους. Corroborating this Joshua is also rendered as Ιησους in Ben Sirah 46. The author of Ben Sirah himself is also called "Jesus" (Ben Sirah 50)

And besides that, who is the "Jesus" in Luke 3:9? It's not Jesus the Nazarene. Again, Luke 3:9 says του Ιησου. I see you conveniently forgot to address that.

Here are some other people named "Jesus":

Jesus son of Joiada had a brother named John who was High Priest during the reign of Artaxerxes II of Persia. John got in a fight with his brother Jesus and John subsequently kills Jesus in the temple. The fight might have been instigated because Artaxerxe's general Bagoses had promised Jesus the high priesthood instead of John. Accordingly, Bagoses made use of this pretense, and punished the Jews seven years for the murder of Jesus

Antiquities of the Jews 11.7.1

Jesus son of Ananias was a homeless preacher who preached solely about the end times starting around the year 62 CE. He caused a disturbance in the Temple while shouting continually "woe to Jerusalem" during the Passover feast. He was brought to the Procurator Albinus by the Jews who were worried that he was possessed by an evil spirit. This Jesus was whipped and punished in front of the procurator without saying a word other than "woe to Jerusalem" and said nothing else in his defense. Albinus, seeing that Jesus was innocent of any crime but simply out of his mind, released him.

Jesus continued to preach "woe to Jerusalem" in the streets of Judea for the next 8 years until, during the war between Judea and Rome, he was killed by a seige weapon.

War of the Jews 6.5.3

Josephus also talks about Joshua the second in command to Moses... but writes his name as Ιησους.

So... if you want to argue your case better, maybe you should show how you would render yod-shin-ayin (ישע) in Koine Greek. Not Latin, not English.

aa5874

The name "Jesus" regardless of its meaning appears to have been given at birth to Jewish children.

From the writings of Josephus it was probably the most common name used in his writings and he did not claim or write that the name "Jesus" was given to Jewish ADULTS as a title.

Davka

I'm with Show No Mercy on this one. The fairly common Hebrew name Y'shu'a (lit. "God will save") is transliterated as Ιησουv in the pre-Christian Septuagint translation of the OT. The likelihood that someone would choose the exact same transliteration for a different name seems pretty low.

If it makes you feel any better, Y'shu'a does not mean "savior." The reference is to God, not the person named Y'shu'a. There are a number of Hebrew names with similar construction: Yonatan (Jonathan) = "God has given," Yermiyahu (Jeremiah) = "God sends/throws," and so on.

Naming your kid "God will save" during a time when Israel was under Roman occupation is no big deal. Remember, the guy Pilate supposedly let go when the crowd cried for Jesus to be crucified was also named Jesus, but was called Barabbas (lit. "son of fathers," probably a slur on his mom). Although Barabbas is not called "Jesus Barabbas" in all the Greek manuscripts, the ones which do contain this name render it, too, as Ιησουv.

So unless you're willing to entertain the possibility that the writers considered Barabbas a "healer," I think you may have nothing but a rabbit trail here.

Littlejohn

But what does this mean? ... Jerome translated YEHOSHUAH (Joshua) with Joshua in the book of Joshua of the Old Testament, while Jesus, in the New Testament, he indicated it with Iesus ... How can you say that both terms, Joshua and Iesus, they mean Yehoshuah? ..

I've shown you that the ancient fathers argued that IESOUS was a greek word and not the transliteration of a Hebrew name, as you say it! .. The meaning they gave to this Greek word is HEALER and Jesus, among many other things, it was just a healer, as it is clear from the gospels!. I repropose here again the quote from Wikipedia:

from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yeshua_(name)

Clearer than that? ... If you do not want to give weight to my words, at least don't 'rip up' those of ancient fathers!

Again? ... All well-informed scholars know that the rabbinic world, since the synod of Jamnia, happened in the early 90s (first century AD), they had rejected the LXX as unreliable and full of errors text.

However, we can comfortably say that, at least until that date, in the LXX did not appeared at all the greek word Iesous, as a mere transliteration of Hebrew YEHOSHUAH. Surely it was a Christian interpolation, made in subsequent centuries.

You might also think as a translation of the meaning, but it is extremely unlikely that a Jewish scholar of the time (any of the alleged 70) did not know that to translate into greek the meaning of the Hebrew word 'Yehoshuah' would have been need to use the greek word Soter and NOT Iesous, which means instead HEALER, as stated by Eusebius, Clement of Alexandria and Cyril of Jerusalem!

Sorry .. but by who you believe the Gospels were writtenm, by aliens?... Are they not been written by same counterfeiters who gave birth to worship catholic-Christian?...

The mere fact that we find reported the infamous 'Testimonium Flavianum' in Josephus' Jewish Antiquities, does that mean that this is a 'genuine' passage? .. ie it was actually written by Josephus? ..

The decisive confirmation that Iosuè and Iesus are NOT the same thing, it comes us also by the KJV, where Yehoshuah was translated as Joshua and NOT as Jesus!

Before closing, I would like to ask you a question: how you interpret the 'Peter' of the KJV? ... As a transliteration or a translation of the greek 'Petros' or Latin' Petrus'?...

Greetings


Littlejohn

.

Littlejohn

Maybe I was not very clear ... In Hebrew 'Yehoshuah' (יהושע) means 'God Save' or 'one who saves' or simply 'Saviour'.... The exact translation in the greek of such one concept is Soter and not Iesous (or its greek declination 'Iesoun', whence almost certainly derived attribute 'essene', ie 'healer')

«..Eusebius? Not contemporary. Stop evading...»

Not only Eusebius, but Cyril of Jerusalem and Clement of Alexandria also, who lived in the second century ... The testimony from these multiple personalities, confirms UNEQUIVOCALLY that the meaning of the term Iesous/IESOUN (or IASOUS/IASOUN) was that of healer; an attribute almost certainly applied to Asclepius, the god of healing (*), father of goddess of healing IASO! .. Iasous/Iesous, in fact, almost certainly was the male version of the name IASO.

Iasoun (or Iasous) was the greek name of Jason, the husband of legendary healer witch Medea. He too was considered a healer and together his wife Medea used to gather herbs for healing preparations (or poisoning, as appropriate to the case!)


Greetings


Littlejohn

.

show_no_mercy

You seem to be utterly confused about the issue (which might be due to me writing Luke 3:9 instead of Luke 3:29). Here the geneaology in Luke in its entirety:

There are two different people with the name Ιησους. Unless you want to claim that the Jesus of Christianity went back in time and fathered his great-great-great-...grandfather.

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.