posted 05-20-2001 04:03 PM            

BrBill,
______________
You said:

Surely I will not agree with the name jesus no matter what the true meaning of the name is either in the Greek or the Latin language. At one time I thought jesus was the correct name. I did not eat pork or anything that contained pig meat in it or was made from pig. Neither did anyone else in the church that I attended. Yet, we were (as you put it ) Jesus people.
_____________
Me:
Yes we (wwcg) were jesus people Bill... thats because we were deceived, victims of h.w.a. and company.
_____________
You said:

You asked. (on what I wrote) Do most Jesus people eat swine/pig meat? Unless you have some statistics (proof) on this I don’t think anyone could give a correct answer. We can not say that all Jesus people ( as you put it) eat swine (pig meat) if we do say that then we breaak the following commandment found in
Deut.5:20
“You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor”.
______________
Me:

"You asked. Do ----> [most] Jesus people eat swine/pig meat?"
We can not say that -------> [all] Jesus people ( as you put it) eat swine (pig meat)

Bill I only said -----> [ M O S T ], most is not "ALL", I knew there are some jesus people that don't eat swine/pig meat,
i.e. Seventh Day ch-rch of g-d, and the fall out of wwcg. etc.
But they are a small minority compared to all the jesus people, but they still carry the christian, jesus people label.
________________
You said:

You Quote Isaiah 58:1
You blatantly took this scripture out of context in order to make yourself look righteous in saying, “pig eating Jesus people”.

Bill, I did not use Isa.58:1, to make myself look righteous.

Whould you read Rom.2:1, and Job 15:6 before posting next time.

It says in Ecc. there is a time for everything, and the time now is to call a spade a spade.
BTW, my posting flushed Glenn out of the bushes.

Iesous --> Iesus --> jesus.

jesus --> Iesus --> Iesous

Forwards or backwards it says the same thing --> "the/pig".

Iesous --> Iesus --> YAHHUSHUA, its not the same here is it?

Why?... because YAHHUSHUA is ---> "THE LAMB"

<> MN Marlin

posted 05-21-2001 08:47 PM            

Sorry. Didn’t mean to offend you.
I just felt that you were being very offensive toward the Christians what you said about the name Jesus and the meaning of it in Latin.
I thought the name Jesus came from IESOUS which is Greek.

All of us must understand that a name in one language may mean something totally different in another language.
For Instance:
Language #1----I know a man who’s last name in English is just a name.
Language #2----The man’s last name in his nationality and language means, something good.
Language #3----The same man’s name in another nationality and language means, someone’s behind.
The spelling is not necessarily the same, but only the pronunciation is the same.

Would or could anyone have the audacity to tell that man what his name means in Language #3 ?
NO need to answer that.

posted 06-25-2001 05:46 PM         

There are a number of people who post here who would say that the Messiah's name is yod-hei-waw-shin-ayin or yod-hei-waw-shin-waw-ayin, and they insist on transliterating the name as Yahushua. Now I don't agree about the vowels used in the first two syllables, but that is not the point of this post. I wish to focus on the third syllable shin-ayin. The important point is that the final letter is an ayin. Now the ayin is a gutteral consonant and anciently it was not silent. In fact there were two pronunciations a harsh pronunciation similar to a greek gamma or an English "g" and a softer pronunciation that one grammar book describes as similar to a gulp. It is the latter sound that ends the Messiah's name. The precise pronunciation of the ayin has probably been lost and in modern Hebrew the ayin is usually treated as a stop like the alef. Since the ayin in Messiah's name follows a long "u" it has a furtive patakh, which is a very brief "a" sound inserted between the "u" and the gutteral to aid in pronunciation. The author of one grammar book states that the furtive patakh is not a vowel, is not a syllable, and is not stressed. In other words the ayin with its furtive patakh constitutes the closing sound of the third syllable of the word. The point is yod-hei-waw-shin-ayin is is not a four syllable word with the last two syllables being "shu-a".

When people write something like "Yahushua's disciples" they fail to realize that what they are doing is dropping the sound of the ayin (because the sound does not occur in English) while lengthening the furtive patakh (which was only there in the first place to aid in pronouncing the ayin!) to a full vowel and then adding a English possessive ending. How is this different from what the translators of the LXX did when they transliterated yod-shin-waw-ayin into Greek? They simply dropped the ayin with its furtive patakh (since there is no equivalent sound in the Greek language) and added a Greek masculine nominative ending. Please think about it.

B'rakhot

ThePhysicist