oops we can`t edit a post in this forum?I have an error in the beginning...
Yisrael=Israel
Yahudah=Judah
the "Jew" come from the Jew-dah-ism religion
by Yizuman 105 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
oops we can`t edit a post in this forum?I have an error in the beginning...
Yisrael=Israel
Yahudah=Judah
the "Jew" come from the Jew-dah-ism religion
Edit2:(in Greek a name that end by A is feminine and the messiah name can have be the key for the YHWH name)
Because the Greek "can" have remove the A letter for this reason and replace it by a false "sous" sound and with the meaning/spelling of the name Yahuwdah&Yahuwshuah we can come with the final name YAHUWAH! uw=oo sound
Sorry for the third post I was very tired that night.
I suggest that we ought to be very careful in using the term "false" regarding language use. In the case of Greek, the "-sous" in QFT's Post 11 (which QFT erroneously labels as a false "sous") is a case of phonology in the case of the -s- and a case of declension in the case of the -ous. These are rules to do with Greek grammar. The Hebrew Y is replaced by the Greek I, the Hebrew h vanishes as it enters Greek, the Hebrew -sh- changes to the Greek -s-, and the final Hebrew -ah is replaced by the Greek masuline -ous, and finally (apparently to complete the transformation into Greek, the Hebrew Yah- is replaced by the Greek Ie-. Of course, this is based on the Hebrew form Yahshua, which is a simplification of the earlier Hebrew Yahuwshuah. Thus, it is more correct to speak of Yahshua, Yahuwhshuah, Iesous, Jesus, and Joshua as variations of the one name, all with the root idea of Jehovah providing salvation (to redeemable mankind through the ransom sacrifice of Jesus); just as Pierre, Pedro, Peter, Petros, and even Kephas are variations of another one name, all with the root idea of stone or rock (used in building one's faith based on Jesus' key role in Jehovah's purposes).
Yes you can have right but with the name "Jesus" have begin the Trinity and the lost of the hebrew signification.
QFT & ST,
The Greek Ièsous (already in the LXX for all "Joshuas") doesn't transliterate any *Yahshua` (*yhshw` -- which afaik is never attested as a Hebrew name and in any case is not found in the Bible corpus) but Yeshua` (yshw`, 1 Chronicles 24:21; 2 Chronicles 31:15; Ezra 2:2,6,36,40; 3:2 etc.) which is a late non-theophoric form of the former theophoric Yehôshua` (yhwsh`, Exodus 17:9 etc., yhwshw`, Deuteronomy 3:21 etc.).
More generally -yh (-yah)is the abbreviated form of the theophoric element -yhw as a suffix -- never as a prefix; the usual abbreviated prefixed theonym is yw- (Yô-), and it is not found for this particular name. It is possible that the Masoretic vocalisation differentiation of the fuller yhw as prefix (Yehô- ) and suffix (-yahu) is secondary, and that even the prefixive yhw- were originally pronounced yahu-, as the Akkadian syllabic transliterations suggests. However that would say nothing about the abbreviated forms, and yw- could not possibly have been pronounced Yah.
My english is not too good...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iWyopD9rhno
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sjPhf3hkszc&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jCwl79G7g8s&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8gunQUAcHlw&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PUUfgmL9egs&feature=related
that will explain it for me
<!-- /* Font Definitions */ @font-face {font-family:"Cambria Math"; panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4; mso-font-charset:0; mso-generic-font-family:roman; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:-1610611985 1107304683 0 0 159 0;} @font-face {font-family:Calibri; panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4; mso-font-charset:0; mso-generic-font-family:swiss; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:-1610611985 1073750139 0 0 159 0;} @font-face {font-family:"DejaVu Sans"; panose-1:2 11 6 3 3 8 4 2 2 4; mso-font-charset:0; mso-generic-font-family:swiss; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:-419418369 -771686913 168042537 0 -2147483137 0;} /* Style Definitions */ p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal {mso-style-unhide:no; mso-style-qformat:yes; mso-style-parent:""; margin:0in; margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";} .MsoChpDefault {mso-style-type:export-only; mso-default-props:yes; font-size:10.0pt; mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size:10.0pt;} @page Section1 {size:8.5in 11.0in; margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in; mso-header-margin:.5in; mso-footer-margin:.5in; mso-paper-source:0;} div.Section1 {page:Section1;} -->
I've livened QFT's links, as follows, to further the discussion:—
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iWyopD9rhno
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sjPhf3hkszc&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jCwl79G7g8s&feature=related
Big fonts and big claims do not add up to an argument.
I pointed to a specific fact, namely that the Greek Ièsous is not a direct transliteration of the older and fuller Hebrew form Yhwsh(w)` (Yehoshua` in Masoretic vocalisation, possibly Yahushua` earlier;a Greek transliteration of that form would normally have started with Iô-, e.g. Iôsaphat) but of the later (post-exilic) form Yshw`(Yeshua`) which (probably for the sake of dissimilation of the first two vowels, ô-u -> e-u) had already lost the usual theophoric prefix in Hebrew, making the name a quasi-homonym to the noun yshw`h, "salvation". In the 1st century AD, the Hebrew name corresponding to the Greek Ièsous was neither Yehoshua` nor Yahushua` but Yeshua`.
Hebrew Yeshua` becomes Greek Ièsous very easily because the Hebrew Y- corresponds to the Greek I-, the Greek doesn't have the -sh- in its classical phonology (so the -sh- shifts to plain -s-), the Hebrew -u- equates to the Greek -ou-, the Greek doesn't have the -` (so the -` gets dropped), and male names don't end in -a for Greek (so the -a becomes -s). All in all, the Hebrew Yeshua` becomes the GreekIèsous by a whole set of very exact sound laws.