I want to first state that I do not consider the "name" of Messiah - or for that matter of God - to be a redemptive issue although I do consider it to be important. There are other extreme persons who disagree and feel use of the wrong name for God or Messiah will result in eternal damnation. Such people are typically called "sacred namers" or "sacred name extremists," though they often do not use that term themselves. It is more often applied to them by those like myself who oppose their extremism. They typically have an extraordinarily strict view of the what they consider to be the correct name of God and Messiah. I, however, realize that most who use Messiah's incorrect name of "Jesus" do so out of ignorance of his actual name and are sincere in their use of what they truly feel is correct.
With respect to God's alleged name, their extremism is a sign of their ignorance since God has many "names" and knowing or not knowing them has absolutely no effect whatsoever on a person's eternal destiny. Their apparent view that using God's "name" is effectively some kind of code word that gives them exalted status or a higher spiritual position is nonsensical stupidity. I have no patience with sacred namers who attempt to enforce their "name" of God foolishness on others. Frankly, they disgust me. The name of Messiah, however, is a distinctly different issue.
Sacred name extremists are well intended fools who appear to know little of God's loving, compassionate, and merciful nature. Groups or individuals with such a radically extreme view are in the minority of those who wish to use the actual name for our Messiah.
Please do not misunderstand. I am not reducing the significance of knowing - and subsequently using - the actual name the Messiah was given and addressed as his entire life. Additionally, since he is alive now seated at the right hand of Power it is still his name.
There are also some who, after being informed of Messiah's real name, are simply too emotionally attached to the name "Jesus" and prefer to use it even though they may know it is not his true name. For them the habit of using the name "Jesus" is difficult to break, and I do not judge them in any way since I realize they are motivated out of love for Messiah and not out of a desire to use or advance error. Such people who love Messiah, or "Christ" as he is more often called, apply that love with good intentions to the name "Jesus." The fact that their motivation honestly is love for Messiah leaves me with no real basis for judging their actions, and I dare not do so since it is not within my power anyway. I simply continually encourage them to apply their sincere love in a more accurate manner by using Messiah's actual name instead of a name proven to be incorrect.
It continues to puzzle me why if a person knows Messiah's real name they refuse to use it. Doing so strongly suggest that truth is less important to them than is tradition and their own biased "feelings" and ego. It is very unwise to hold to what one knows to be false just because it feels better since it proves that truth is actually not a real priority to such a person. Why not allow yourself to be motivate by truth instead of by selfish desires?
As for God's "name," making it a redemptive issue is absurd since The Creator and the divine emissaries He sends as His agents are called by many "names" and referenced using many titles within Scripture; therefore, those who demand others use what they consider the true "name" of God are quite simply ignorant and too full of themselves. The issue regarding God's "names" is a very deep and mystical subject which they prove they know nothing about with their insistence on using a "name" they prefer and which very few can adequately discuss. I will not waste time in this article rebuffing such individuals and leave them to the judgment of the God they obviously do not know very well and to their own absurd self-exaltation.
What I will discuss at length and prove in this article is the fact that Christianity knowingly promotes a false name for Messiah. It is actually very easy to prove. I will also make known Messiah's actual name to those who are unaware of it.
Messiah's name contains within it a shortened form of one of the "names" (or Titles) by which God is known. That term is "Yah" or, if the "J" is used, it is "Jah." You can find this term directly used in Psalms 68:4 if you use the King James Version Bible. Most other versions translate it to LORD just as they do the ineffable name of God known as the tetragrammaton. That "name" of God is composed of the four Hebrew consonants YHVH (Yod-Hey-Vav-hey) or as some prefer, YHWH. The absence of the vowel points makes pronunciation problematic - a problem the sacred name adherents claim to have solved and which they elevate to the level of a required tenant of the faith. Sacred namers are among the world's most sadly deluded and misdirected individuals. They are also generally among the world's most judgmental and demanding. It truly is very sad to see them demonstrate such a profound ignorance and condemning attitude.
There are many Hebrew names that contain this "yah" part of the name God. The Bible is full of them. In fact, there are so many such names that the term "theophoric" was coined with which to categorize them. You see it where ever a "ye" or "ya" is at the beginning or end of a Biblical name. It is easier to spot if the actual Hebrew name is used, but it is also quite apparent even when the English version is used. For instance, Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Elijah all have the "yah" sound at the end of their names. The same can be said for another title or name of God, which is "El." El is actually a Hebrew equivalent for the term "god" or "mighty one" and can refer to even false gods. Ezekiel is an example where the "el" is used in the name.
A small minority people consider it offensive to have the shortened term "Yah" within Messiah's name. Such concern is unwarranted. Why is it that use of it in the name of the Messiah is considered offensive yet all other Biblical names that use it considered acceptable? If those who find the name Yeshua offensive can explain why they consider the other theophoric names acceptable I may listen to them, but until then they need to cease their judgmental practices and stop being so offensive themselves.
Messiah's real name was and still is a common Hebrew name. There are various pronunciations that can be used for the true name of Messiah, among which are Yeshua, Yahshua, Yehoshua, and Yahoshua. In the last two variations the "o" is considered by many scholars to be silent; therefore, Yahoshua can be justifiably pronounced Yahshua with the "o" so slightly accented as to make it's precise pronunciation a moot point. The same can be said of Yehoshua and Yeshua.
My name is Bruce. When one says my name they could be using various spellings - Bruce, Broose, Bruice, etc., and I wouldn't know the difference or really care. The names Yeshua, Yahshua, and Yahoshua are similarly equivalent. Frankly, even the extremist name-police probably do not pronounce the name correctly since they do not speak in the precise dialect of those during Yeshua's time. Personally, I prefer to use "Yeshua" and am quite certain it is acceptable to my King Messiah.
The point is that scholars differ regarding the exact pronunciation or spelling for the name of Messiah. Some say Yeshua is correct. Some say Yahshua is correct, and some say Yahoshua or Yehoshua is correct. The fact is no one knows for sure which is the more precise pronunciation for the time during which Messiah lived on this earth. However, all reputable scholars agree "Jesus" is not correct.
Most who use the name Yahshua have no issue with those who prefer Yeshua or Yahoshua, just as those like myself who consider Yeshua correct have no problem with those who use Yahshua or Yahoshua or Yehoshua. I use the names interchangeably since their pronunciation is indistinguishable to all but the most legalistic "heresy hunters." Sometimes others use my articles in their ministries and change the name to Yeshua where Yahshua is encountered or to Yahshua where Yeshua is encountered depending upon their personal preference. I have absolutely no problem at all with that. I do have a problem with the name "Jesus" and do not endorse anyone using that false name in reprints of my articles. Even then, however, I do not consider it a redemptive issue since I am quite certain God will not punish people for their ignorance of the correct name of Messiah if they are sincerely devoted to Him. However, those who are not ignorant of Messiah's real name yet refuse to use it may find themselves more displeasing to God than they realize.
I've begun to use "Yeshua" more and more because I have grown to consider it more correct and because it is quicker and easier for me to type (the "Ye" is easier to type than the "Yah"). Like I said, I consider the names to be identical since their pronunciation is virtually identical; therefore, do not be confused or think I'm suffering from some sort of name schizophrenia if you encounter both names, "Yeshua" and "Yahshua" on this web site.
Those who demand precise pronunciation of a name as they dictate it to be seem to miss the "measure for measure" teaching. "Measure for measure" is a traditional teaching within the Hebraic faith - a teaching that Yeshua supported and taught when he told us in Matthew 7:2 as well as Mark 4 and Luke 6:
The Hebraic meaning of this is that the measure or strictness with which we judge others will be the same measure applied to us in the heavenly court when we are called before it to give an account of our deeds. I would not want to be standing in the shoes of those who are immovably strict in the exact pronunciation of Messiah's name when they are called to appear before that court. Sacred namers display the most ridiculous possible level of legalism. They make a redemptive issue out of one possible syllable of a name or even the "correct" english spelling of Messiah's name (Yeshua versus Yahshua). They seem to be worshipping a God that is completely void of any grace and that is looking for a reason to damn anyone over the most trivial things. The fact is, no one knows the exact pronunciation of the name; therefore, Yahshua, Yahoshua, or Yeshua can all be argued as "correct" - especially in terms of the actual vocalization. At the very least the differences are trivial and most certainly should not be judged as redemptive as done by those that wish to impose the ultimate forms of legalism upon us.
Where I may consider it at risk of Divine punishment is in those situations where the true Hebraic name (Yeshua, Yahshua, or Yahoshua) is viciously attacked by those who refuse to accept that "Jesus" is not Messiah's true name. Such attacks are not against a mere word, but are against THE name of THE Messiah! Common sense suggests such attacks are, at the very least, disappointing to the Almighty Creator. So, it may very well be that those who vehemently attack the Hebraic name may be risking a level of punishment in the hereafter since their attacks are actually against the one to whom the name applies, but that is not for me to say. What is clear is that Scripture does appear to emphasize the "name" as being a notable issue, despite the fact most Christians consider it unimportant.
The fury with which some attack the obvious correct name for Messiah while promoting a known false name suggest something very sinister and dark about their true motives. But this only applies to leaders who do not have the excuse of ignorance. The vast majority of Christians are sincere and simply not aware of the true name; however, this ignorance is not a reasonable excuse for those in leadership positions. If they are that ignorant, they have no right to be leaders. Now to the discussion.
Anyone who thinks the Israeli parents of the Israeli Messiah who were strong adherents to the Judaic principles and lived in a Jewish contextual setting would give their son a non-Hebrew name of Greek origins is lacking in common sense. Seriously! How can anyone be deceived to the point of thinking the Hebrew Messiah would have a Greek name? Such a thought is preposterous!
Countless numbers of defiant Christians implicitly promote the following outrageous position - a position that defies all common sense reason - a fact of which many Christian leaders are fully aware:
I will be blunt. The idea that the Hebrew Messiah would be given a Greek name that then changed when a new alphabetical sound was added to an English alphabet centuries years later is brainless. Note that: from Hebrew to Greek to English. It is utterly crazy. Why not just use his actual HEBREW name "Yeshua" as is done with any Jew on earth who has a Jewish name?
Harsh? Well, the truth is sometimes harsh, especially for those who refuse to accept it because it differs from what they prefer. Worse still, millions upon millions are actually too brainwashed by Christian merchants of deception (and antisemitism) to see the truth. Such blindness is predicted for those that embrace the "spirit of delusion."Christianity has:
It is a fact. The use of the name "Jesus" is irrefutable evidence that Christian leaders promote intentional error for the sake of tradition. There is no argument, and anyone who attempts to make an argument can be easily shown their error. The true name of the Messiah is no mystery. Christian leaders have known since the very beginnings of the "church" that the name of the Messiah is not "Jesus." Whereas one could argue the early Greek name of Iesous may have been an innocent mistake, there is no excuse why today Christian leaders continue to willfully promote a name for the Messiah that is undeniably false.
Well meaning Christians often quote Acts 4:12 and Philippians 2:9-11.
12 Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.
9 Therefore God also has highly exalted Him and given Him the name which is above every name, 10 that at the name of Yeshua every knee should bow, of those in heaven, and of those on earth, and of those under the earth, 11 and that every tongue should confess that Yeshua Messiah is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.
Christians quote these passages with great fervor and love for the lord yet use an incorrect name! Perhaps Christians should, themselves, seriously take these passages to heart and use "none other" than the actual name. Since they proclaim there is "none other name ... whereby we must be saved", and since that name is most certainly not "Jesus", Christians should use the real name - the name with which "God also has highly exalted Him and given Him." It is bizarre to see Christians use these passages to enforce calling upon the name of Messiah then violate the verses themselves by calling on a false name. Perhaps the time has come for sincere Christians to honor their Messiah by using his God-given name "Yeshua" instead of the man-given name of "Jesus" which is a product of blatant and generally ongoing antisemitism within Christianity.
My opponents who choose to intentionally use what is proven to be a false name often slander me and those like me by placing all promoters of Messiah's true name into the category they negatively refer to as "name fanatics". They often use all manner of contrived and faulty arguments in their attempts to vainly "prove" that the name "Jesus" is correct. I agree there are some that even I consider "name fanatics" and addressed that topic earlier; however, those within Christianity who oppose the true Hebraic name practice unjust stereotyping and are often aware that the name we use is correct.
One must ask who are the real "name fanatics"? Why are those who use the correct name persecuted? Why is it that those of us who trust in the true Messiah Yeshua and call him by the name he knows as his own are condemned as "fanatics"? Frankly those who use the name "Jesus" and who fashion together ludicrous lies in their attempts to prove that "Jesus" is the correct name are the true "name fanatics" since because of a fanatical embrace of tradition they intentionally suppress and oppose a simple truth! Are you a "Jesus" name fanactic? If so, do you wish to break free of that dishonest radical cult of liars?
The name "Jesus" is sad proof of the stiff-necked, arrogant attitude of most Christian leaders. Who is actually wrong? The facts prove that promoters of the name "Jesus" are wrong, but their pride and biased addiction to erroneous tradition will not allow them to move to correct this clear false practice. Why do they ignore, censor, or attack reverence of the true name, Yeshua?
Perhaps it is because all denominations - not just Catholicism - unwisely elevate their leaders to god-like positions of infallibility and consider them "divine lawmakers" with power to actually overrule the true Divine Lawgiver. In this case they attempt to overrule that Lawmaker's given name for Messiah. The refusal of Christian leaders to break with tradition even when they have no basis for their position is astounding.
The determined use of a false name for the Messiah is a clear example to which one can point to prove how the "church" prefers traditional error instead of truth even when the error is blatantly obvious.
Strangely, most leaders acknowledge the error yet prefer - for puzzling reasons - to promote a false name. It must also be recognized how the intentional use of a false name proves how deeply antisemitism and anti-Judaic feeling infest Christianity, since one of the unspoken reasons for failure to use the true name is because it is Jewish. Since Christianity (not to be confused with the true Messianic faith) was designed by the "church fathers" to oppose Judaism, as well as the true Messianic faith that is totally Hebraic, there is unyielding opposition to the use of the true Jewish name for our Jewish lord from the Jewish tribe of Judah.
Some people mistakenly argue that "Jesus" is the English translation of Yeshua. This is often the case among those who wrongly teach that Greek was the mother tongue of Jews in the first century. Such people ignore evidence such as archaeological digs of construction during that time in which the Jewish workers wrote construction notes - much as is done today - as they worked. Those notes were in Hebrew, not Greek! Of course they also may have spoken Greek, but that was only because the ruling government all but required it. The same can be seen today in the USA when Mexicans, Germans, or any other person from a non-English speaking country who comes to work or live in America. They may speak English, but it is not their mother tongue or their preferred language. These dishonest and bias-blind "scholars" are clueless as to the intensity of feeling among the Jews of that time regarding their resistance to being fully absorbed into the Greek/Roman culture and their determination in use of their Hebrew language.
These antisemitic, lying "scholars" also argue that names change depending upon the culture in which the name is spoken despite the fact such is not the case with virtually every other Hebrew name one can think of. Even today Americans, Brits, etc. refer to an Israeli by his or her Israeli (Hebrew) name. Examples include Benyamin Netanyahu, Ariel Sharon, Ehud Barak, Yitzak Rabin, and Yosef. (Note Yosef and Benyamin are often pronounced as Joseph and Benjamin due to the "J" issue I will discuss a bit later.) And what about all the names in the Tanakh (irreverently called the "Old" Testament)? Why, if names change according to culture, are the English translations of them still pronounced in a manner closely matching their actual Hebrew name?
I will provide three irrefutable arguments proving that "Jesus" is not the English translation of Yeshua.
When these facts are uncovered from the centuries of intentional deception perpetrated by the "church," even hard line Christians IF they are sincere will have to concede that the name "Jesus" is a fabricated lie conceived by Christian leaders and promoted for centuries.
Within the discussion of the first verse of the gospel of Mark in the book Wuest Word Studies in the Greek New Testament we find the following:
"... Jesus Christ (Iesous Christos), Iesous, (pronounced yay'-soos) the transliterated form of the Hebrew word we know as Jehoshua, which means, “Jehovah saves;” Christos, the transliterated form of the Greek word which means “The Anointed One; ...”
In the quote just shown the author is stating:
So what does it mean to "transliterate" something? The Merriam-Webster Collegiate Dictionary defines transliterate as:
trans•lit•er•ate: to represent or spell in the characters of another alphabet
That same reference defines "translation" as:
trans•la•tion: a rendering from one language into another; also : the product of such a rendering
Similarly, the internet source, MSN Learning & Research Plus, gives the following definitions:
transliterate - transcribe something into another alphabet: to represent a letter or word written in one alphabet using the corresponding letter or letters of another, so that the sound of the letter or word remains approximately the same.
translation - 1. version in another language: a word, phrase, or version in another language that has a meaning equivalent to that of the original. 2. expressing of something in a different language: the rendering of something written of spoken in one language in words of a different language.
In other words, to transliterate a word from one language to another the scholar takes the letters (spelling) of the original language and replaces the letters with the corresponding letters from the alphabet of the language into which the word is being transliterated. This is sometimes done by replacing the first letter of the original language with the first letter of the final language, the second letter of the original language with the second letter of the final language, the third letter with the third, etc. The result is a totally different word that is not a translation.
On the other hand, to translate a word the scholar takes the word from the original language and translates or transforms it into an equivalent word in the second language. The focus of translation is to render the meaning of a word from one language to another or into an equivalent word of the second language; however, the focus of transliteration is to render the spelling or sound of a word from one language to another. It may have been an attempt to render a similar sounding word without regard to the true representation of the name. This seems legitimate since "Yay-soos" and "Yay-shua" are quite similar in pronunciation. It is quite possible in my opinion that the Greek term Iesous (Yay-soos) was a sincere attempt by New Testament scribes to imitate the sound of Messiah's name (Yeshua) in Greek (Yaysoos).
Though I do not personally agree with it, there are also some discussions found in the book, Come Out of Her My People, by C. J. Koster, that reveal how the false Greek name for Messiah, Iesous, is pronounced identically to the name of the Ionic Greek goddess of healing, Ieso and that Iesous may be a masculine equivalent. Yeshua was a healer which perfectly fits the pagan Greek concept of a god of healing.
However, I must again state that I do not personally agree with the "name conspiracy" some try to advance by alleging that "jesus" is derived from the name of a pagan deity. The same sort of allegation is made with regard to the pagan name "zeus". The Greek term, Iesous, (YAY-soos) is in my opinion simply the phonetic equivalent (sounds the same) of his Hebrew name written in Greek. It is not some dark conspiracy to replace his name with that of a pagan deity as some suggest.
"Jesus" allegedly originates from a transliteration of Messiah's original Hebrew name that today as "Jesus" is not even close to the proper name pronunciation. It doesn't sound like the original name. So, "Jesus" is a defective pronunciation of the Greek word, Iesous, which was an alleged transliteration which may have sounded similar to his true name in the Greek language of that day.
The most profound fact, however, is that Christian leaders know "Jesus" is not the true name yet continue to intentionally avoid using the true name. They knowingly promote a false name for Messiah! This is a fact, despite the attempts of Christian leaders to conceal the truth.
I can't think of a single person I have ever known from any country on earth who went by a "translated" or "transliterate" name that sounded nothing like their true name. I have had the pleasure of meeting numerous people from Europe, Asia, middle-east, and other countries, but I cannot think of a single individual who wished to be called by a "translated" or "transliterated" name that was completely different from their real name. Even if their name was difficult to pronounce in English they still wished the name to be used, and myself and others would do our best to do so.
It was and still is considered rude to use a false "nickname" for people unless they personally give permission. I do not recall a verse anywhere in the New Testament in which Yeshua was asked if his true name could be replaced with something else, nor do I recall him giving anyone permission to do so. In fact, quite the opposite is true!
The true name of Messiah, "Yeshua," is the only example I personally know of where people claim it is ok to change his name to suit the language in which it is used. I'm sure there are possibly other examples some of you may be aware of, but I'm simply speaking for myself. And I know of no other examples.
But all the discussion over "translation" vs. "transliteration" is really not necessary, and it does not matter if you disagree with me on that point. In fact, I've even considered removing that particular issue from this article since it really doesn't matter. If you wish to believe that "jesus" is a translation, fine! I will not waste my time arguing about it because it still does not prove that "jesus" is Messiah's actual name.
The point is that "Jesus" is not Messiah's name. No amount of excuses from christian "scholars" or anyone else who prefers the name "Jesus" can change that simple, undeniable fact. Anyone that tells you "Jesus" is the true name for Messiah is either ignorant of the truth, does not wish to admit the truth, or is a blatant liar.
Yeshua is an Israeli. He was given a Hebrew name. His family, all his friends, and all his original followers called him by his Hebrew name. I want to be his friend and to worship him as my God-anointed King; therefore, I will do likewise.
We have already seen that the name "Jesus" comes from a transliteration and is not a translation at all. However, stiff-necked traditionalists and intentional deceivers will still refuse to acknowledge the truth. Ok, then how can they reject proof from the very passages of the New Testament. Let's see them squirm to avoid that!
The New Testament translators accidentally uncover the error of the fanciful argument that "Jesus" is an "English translation" and therefore further expose the deceit of many who promote the name "Jesus". We have already shown that "Jesus" is not the English translation of Yeshua's name. It can be further proven from the New Testament, and Acts 7:45 and Hebrews 4:8 do so. Note the verses as rendered in the King James Version:
Now note the exact same verses taken from the Updated New American Standard Version:
In both of these verses the person being referred to is Joshua - the servant of Moses that lead Israel into the promised land. The reason the KJV says "Jesus" is because it comes from the exact same Greek word, Iesous, and the King James Version translators apparently either did not catch the error or, more probably, chose to perpetuate Christianity's anti-Hebraic lie.
These verses help to further understand the difference between translation and transliteration. "Joshua" is not a transliteration, but it does come from the Greek word Iesous, which IS a transliteration. "Joshua" is a correct modern English translation from the original Hebrew of Messiah's name if the "J" is used instead of the "Y". The translators correctly rendered "Joshua" because they knew it to be the true translation of the original Hebrew name for the servant of Moses. In short, they ignored the Greek transliteration, Iesous, because they knew it to be faulty.
Now, the question for those who claim "Jesus" is the correct English rendering of "Yeshua" is this: if the translators of Scripture elsewhere, especially in the Tanakh (Old Testament) and also in most modern versions of the New Testament, correctly render the same Greek word, Iesous, as "Joshua" in Acts 7:45 and Hebrews 4:8, why do they refuse to correct the false rendering of "Jesus" for the name of our Messiah? It is the exact same Greek word being used as the name! Please do not overlook the important fact that the Greek Translation of the Tanahk (The Septuagint, or LXX) in which Iesous is found always translates it to "Joshua" in the English translations. Why is it not "Jesus" instead if that is the correct English translation?
The English equivalent of Messiah's name if a person insists on using the modern English "J" sound is "Joshua" (or Yeshua if correctly pronounced), not "Jesus." Why is Messiah's name correctly translated to Joshua (Yeshua) only in the cases where it doesn't apply to him? Why does Christianity willfully refuse to correctly render Messiah's Hebrew name even when they correctly render the exact same Greek word in cases where he is not the one being referenced?
What this shows is that translators and Christian leaders know "Jesus" is not correct. Why is the most important name ever given purposely mistranslated and promoted by Traditional Christianity? Why is "Joshua" the "English translation of Yeshua" in most verses of Scripture (notably the LXX Greek Translation of the Old Testament and everywhere Joshua is mentioned in the New), and "Jesus" suddenly the "English translation of Yeshua" in others? Which is actually the "English translation"? The correct translation is Yeshua (or Joshua if you want an Englished version).
Another revealing bit of evidence can be seen from the fact that there was no "J" sound common in the English language until well into the 16th century. Note that I said "J" sound. The "J" did exist prior to that but it was pronounced differently. Prior to that time words now shown with a J were often shown with an "I" and were pronounced as though the J was a Y or an H as I mentioned previously. And of course, the Hebrew language has no "J" sound within it, thereby providing yet more proof that "Jesus" (Gee zus) is not the correct name.
So "Joshua," even in English, is proven conclusively to be "Yeshua" when the original Y sound is used. Thus, it is impossible for "Jesus" to be anything close to the true name since the "J" sound did not exist when he was alive! Did you get that? The name "Jesus" is proven to be incorrect simply from the fact that the English pronunciation of the word "Jesus" did not exist until only 500 years ago because there was no such thing as a "J" sound in the language. This fact alone proves "Jesus" (Gee zus) is an incorrect name.
Below are two passages from the original King James version proving that the "J" was not common in the English language in 1611 when the KJV was first written. The first picture shows the famous verse from the gospel of Matthew (Matt 1:21) in which Messiah's name is first mentioned. Just to be sure you do not think the "I" shown where the "J" should be is simply poor typesetting, I have also included the first page of the gospel of "Iohn" (John) which leaves no doubt regarding the fact that the English language had no "J" until well into the 16th century. Try as you may, you will find not one single "J" anywhere in the orginal KJV, and why should you since there was no such thing as the "J" sound!
A Jesus name fanatic tried to counter my position by arguing that since the "J" can be found prior to the 1611 date, for instance in the Wycliffe Bible, that "Jesus" is the correct name.
First, this person purposely ignores all other evidence supporting the fact that "Jesus" is not his name. Secondly, that name fanatic also ignored the fact that at that time when John Wycliffe translated his early semi-English version of Scripture the "J" had a different pronunciation. Such people are particularly loathsome to me because they utterly refuse, despite an overabundance of evidence against their position, to abandon their antisemitic, anti-Torah bias. Embracing truth is not a consideration for them. For them, all that matters is to perpetuate the infestation of false teaching within Christianity - even a false name for Messiah. Their deceit knows no bounds.
Furthermore, though I am not convinced of it myself, as mentioned previously there is evidence that shows the Greek name for Messiah, Iesous, may be derived from the name of a pagan deity. Yes, there is evidence to support the idea that "Jesus" is derived from the name of a pagan Greek God. It may honor a pagan deity. The aforementioned book, Come Our of Her My People, by C. J. Koster, provides evidence of this as well as many other proofs of Christianity's pagan foundations. Of course, few Christians dare investigate these things for fear of what they may discover. Their fears are well founded since they will find ample facts proving Constantinian Christianity to be a counterfeit, Babylonian based religion.
Why are Christian leaders intentionally discarding and censoring the true name for Messiah and using a false name instead?
The name issue is crucial for a number of reasons, not the least of which is how it proves an intentional embrace of tradition instead of truth within Christianity! If the church can't even get the name right - one of the most basic things - how can one believe their other doctrines are correct?
The name "Jesus" is proof-positive of serious foundational errors in Christianity. It is an irrefutable fact, regardless of how uncomfortable it may seem to Christians, that they are clearly utilizing a false name whenever they use the name "Jesus". Sadly, most Christians don't care!
I don't know about you, but if church leaders can't get the name right, I'm not going to trust them with anything else - especially not my eternal soul!
It is irrefutable that "Jesus" is not the correct name. Actually, the practice of name usage is totally abandoned in the case of the name of Messiah! Common practice is to call one by their native name no matter where they are from. That has always been the case. Why is it that the name of Messiah is an instance where Christians break that practice? It is because of tradition and the antisemitic nature of Christianity. I have little patience with those that defy the clear common sense of this issue and prefer to use a paganized name for my Messiah.
For those of us who wish to honor the true name of our Messiah along with his God and Father - the One and Only God - passages such as the following which describe the last days leap from the pages of the New Testament as we endure the slander of those that prefer to worship tradition. Though these passages may apply more broadly, the bitterness we have witnessed regarding our promoting of the use of the Messiah's actual name suggests they certainly also apply directly to the name issue.
9 Then they will deliver you to tribulation, and will kill you, and you will be hated by all nations on account of My name.
The New American Standard Bible, (La Habra, California: The Lockman Foundation) 1977.
13 And you will be hated by all on account of My name, but the one who endures to the end, he shall be saved.
The New American Standard Bible, (La Habra, California: The Lockman Foundation) 1977.
17 and you will be hated by all on account of My name.
The New American Standard Bible, (La Habra, California: The Lockman Foundation) 1977.
13 I know your works, and where you dwell, where Satan's throne is. And you hold fast to My name, and did not deny My faith even in the days in which Antipas was My faithful martyr, who was killed among you, where Satan dwells.
The New King James Version, (Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson Publishers) 1998, c1982.
8 I know your works. See, I have set before you an open door, and no one can shut it; for you have a little strength, have kept My word, and have not denied My name.
The New King James Version, (Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson Publishers) 1998, c1982.
A dark secret festers within Christianity. A secret that for over 2000 years has been successfully hidden from all but the most determined and studious men and women. Particularly eye opening are false teachings that directly conceal basic truths about God and the Messiah. I believe the unexplainable and intentional censorship of the true name of Messiah may be the tip of the iceburge and evidence for far more severe errors within Traditional Christianity.