posted 07-28-2001 06:35 AM            

I believe many times a stumbling block has been placed in peoples' path into commandment keeping by shock tactics like this one.

In the name of our Adonai Yahushua the Messiah,

posted 07-28-2001 02:03 PM            

The TRUE MESSIAH came in His Fathers Name, YAHshua means YAHWEH'S SALVATION every time this correct Name is spoken it brings glory to Father Yahweh.

posted 07-29-2001 02:48 PM            

Matityahu did not not write his book in Greek but in Hebrew. The last part of Matityahu 1:21 says " Thou shalt call his name Yeshua: for he shall save his people from their sins" As qouted from this verse "Yeshua" means "He will save" or "Salvation" The last part of Numbers 13:16 says "And Moses called Hoshea ben-Nun Yhoshua." Yhoshua means "Yah his help" or "Yah is salvation" Yah is a shortened form of Yahweh used most frequently in poetry or hymns.

posted 07-29-2001 04:26 PM         

In Acts 28:11 we find mention of the "sign of Castor and Pollux" who were the twin sons of Zeus. They were the patron deities of sailors, or as modern Catholicism says, the patron saints. Some translations say the sign of the twins or twin brothers, but the New World Translation has it correctly as sons of Zeus. The Greek word here is "dioscurri" and as you can see has no relationship whatsoever to "Iesous" which was the Greek transliteration of Yshua. Yshua was used as a dimminitve of Yhoshua after the Babylonian exile in the writings of Ezra and Nehemiah. It is interesting to notice, however, that in the prophetic writings of Haggai and Zechariah, the Spirit of prophecy (not to be confused with the spirit of plagarism) chose the Yhoshua form over the Yshua form. I believe that Yhoshua was what Mariam named her Son. Yshua became Jesus after it was dragged through the mud of Hellenism and Romanism. Back to dioscurri for a minute. There was a fellow that came around the assemblies in eastern Michigan and Indiana last year around election time teaching that Iesous meant son of Zeus. He also swore up and down that it had been revealed to him that Gore would win the election, "thus saith Yehovah!" I am now told that he insists that Bush is only a figure head and that Gore is really running the country. This is what is called blind faith or fanaticism.

In His Service,

posted 07-30-2001 03:13 PM         

A better way to translate the name would have been to use the name Joshua.

Check out this interesting scan of the original KJV of the bible:
http://www.eliyah.com/forum2/Forum1/HTML/002352.html

Also, here are two of the many past discussions on the topic:
http://www.eliyah.com/forum2/Forum1/HTML/002411.html
http://www.eliyah.com/forum2/Forum1/HTML/002238.html

posted 07-30-2001 05:23 PM         

There are some good comments on this thread. Might I add one technical point? Although in modern Hebrew the ayin is treated by most as a silent letter, anciently it was not. According to Weingreen it was a gulping sound. The vowel (furtive patakh) used with a final ayin is not an ordinary vowel, but only a helping sound to facilitate the pronunciation of the ayin after a heterogeneous vowel. Since the Greeks did not have a sound equivalent to the ayin it was simply dropped along with its furtive patakh when Yeshua was transliterated into Greek.

On the other hand, modern Hebrew has created an unusual hybrid by making ayin silent but retaining (and pronouncing as an ordinary vowel) the furtive patakh. By way of comparison, consider the other three Hebrew gutterals, alef, hei, and khet. The final consonantal hei and khet, both of which are pronounced, take a furtive patakh. But the final alef, which is silent, does not take a furtive patakh. In fact, a final alef is treated as if if were not even there.

Thus, I write "Yeshua" and say "Yeshua", but I know that anciently the pronunciation was somewhat different. It is probably impossible for me, one whose native language is a European language, to correctly make the ancient sound of the ayin. This is a fact I must accept.

B'rakhot

posted 08-02-2001 07:51 PM            

Having listened to each of you carefully, I now essentially agree that "the argument that says Jesus is Zeus or EA Zeus the healing Zeus is based on faulty scholarship," and I have a Catholic friend of mine looking for a copy of the article mentioned above. All considered, I have stopped using (or at least now greatly temper) the "Jesus means son of Zeus!" shock tactic when speaking to others of Y'Shua.

Learning that "Matityahu did not not write his book in Greek but in Hebrew" has been helpful. ... And again: We are in essential agreement as to "Yes, let's get back to Hebrew roots, [and/with] Biblical foundation, but lets quit [the] twisting of facts to try [to] make a point."

And as promised, Abba has revealed what I needed. Praise Him; Thank you!
------------

Using the subject title "I smell a KJV rat!" I have posted a message on other boards and have sent e-mails to some friends and associates to encourage others to check out "What were they thinking?" here on this board ... I hope all who might come here will be appreciative and respectful of the same warm welcome I have received from each of you! ... Also, I am studying the other discussions you pointed me toward here on this board.

Oh, and the "fellow that came around the assemblies in eastern Michigan and Indiana last year around election time" is actually quite interesting (to me, at least). I do not agree with him on every point, but I do believe he is on to something that all would do well to note -- essentially, that the stage is now well-set for the antichrist -- and from that I have extracted and am assembling some materials on what I believe is an end-time salvation deception centered around Satan's whenever-or-however-he-did-it hijacking of the name "Jesus."

In return to each and every one of you: Love and Shalom in Messiah Y'shua, Yah's Son-Saviour sent to redeem us!

Blessings!

posted 08-04-2001 03:16 AM            

Blessings!
------------

Exposing An End-Time Deception

(draft of incomplete) preface

Within these pages, you are going to hear it said that the English name "Jesus" -- "Iesus" in Greek -- means "son of Zeus." Such was our belief when we first began this project, but we have since learned that we must distinguish between how that name might merely sound (phonetics) and literary, or literal accuracy herein. So, let us explain how one can hear "Jesus" and end up with Zeus. For, you see, that is what these pages are about: Exposing An End-Time Deception.

If you have internet access, check out this photo scan of a page in King James' first printing of his "authorized" (by someone) version the Bible:

>http://www.eliyah.com/forum2/Forum1/HTML/002352.html<.

Here is the focus of what you will find there:

Luke, chapter 4, verse 27: "... in the time of Elizeus the prophet ..."

And in a search of King James' Bible at the Electronic Text Center, University of Virginia, we found (you can get there via a web search for 'king james'):

Luke, chapter 4, verse 27: "... in the time of Eliseus the prophet ..."

Apocrypha,* chapter 48: "... and Eliseus was filled with his spirit ..."
(*Apocrypha is part of at least the Roman Catholic Bible.)

In a minute, you might wonder what "spirit" was just implied -- and, your copy of today's KJV will read "Elisha." But, let's look at the above from Luke:

That verse is supposed to be speaking of Elisha the prophet. Somehow, though, his name (through Greek, then English) has been altered to Elizeus! Has there been any change as to the meaning of Elisha's name there? Most definitely!

In Hebrew, Eli means "My Mighty One," and the word "sha" represents salvation. So, the name Elisha would descriptively mean "My Mighty One Saves!" Follow?

If we removed the "sha" from Elisha and replaced it with "Yah" for this moment, we would get "Eliyah," meaning "My Mighty One (is) Yahweh." But when the King James' translators first removed "sha" from Elisha and replaced it with "Zeus," the result was so blasphemously disgusting that we say no more about it here.

Scholars argue that early KJV editions displayed the name Eliseus in that verse (rather than Elizeus) -- as if the above is some kind of fabrication -- thereby proclaiming that we are somehow off-track. But, that would change nothing, for here is where phonetics (simple sounds) drive this argument anyway. To wit:

Close your eyes, listen closely, and tell us what differences you hear between Eliseus and Elizeus ... Do that again ... And again ... Too close to call? Same for us! Now compare the sounds and meanings of those names to the sounds and meaning of Elisha ... Case closed: "seus" does not sound like salvation!

As far as we are concerned, and since Elisha's Mighty One was Yah, not Zeus, all scholars and others who wish to do so can keep both Elizeus and Eliseus in their Bibles. But as for us in our homes, our "Mighty One" is the same as Elisha's.

Just as was done to Elisha's name, so was The Name of The Son of The Most High G-d (intentionally or otherwise) altered (at least phonetically) centuries ago. Whatever Yah told Yoseph when actually sounding it out to him through an angel, that holy, precious, Yah-means-salvation name chosen for His Son later got what some people call "trans-lie-terated" into a name with the ring of "Zeus" on its tail: Ieosous; Iesous; Iesus; Yesus; Jesus. Folks, those are know facts.

Still not convinced? Okay ... Maybe you have heard someone speak the name "Jesus" in Spanish: "Hey Zeus!" ... Let's talk about Satan's deceptive mis-use of the Bible ...
------------

... incomplete draft ... more to follow ... seeking comments, corrections, insights ...
------------