Christian Conspiracy...... BE AWARE

I'm back for the second message..... who knows maybe my last!

I want to talk to you about the importance of a name and its meaning. Now I am not trying to start an argument but debate. I have held this inside me for a long time and have fought it every inch.....knowing this might offend some, which is not what I seek.

Many here are over 40 years of age (Me? I am 65) I see no reason to write a white paper or 20 page document or more on ANY subject at ATS. Q&A is more effective....not getting paid by ATS for info.....so dont expect me to write scholar type work.....read my book instead.It comes out soon on Amazon, goodbooks and other platforms.



Religious texts and the pronouncement of famous names:

Muhammad - is pronounced the same around the world - his name is NOT translated. People around the world have this name with its pronounciation (except in ME and parts of Asia) nut basically pronounced the same.

Here are a few more:

Ganesha
Shiva
Athena
Odin
Zeus
Vishnu
Buddha

You probably know more about these individuals than me. Theae names and proper pronounciation is VERY close and similatr around the world. Why I can the word "Allah" and everyone around the world knows exactly who I am talking about. These cultures and religions have high regard for their gods and prophets, so why doesn't Christianity?

What? huh?

When giving your child his/her first name can be a challenge and fun. The name you choose is special, maybe after child displays some type of character or maybe after a loved one and no matter where you are in the world, you will continue to use that name with your pronounciation of your childs name.

Are you following me and where I am going with this?

So if your name is John and as you walk by I scream, "Hey Larry" ..... John will not respond....for hsi name is John. Makes sense,

Koine Greek, Hebrew and Aramic were the spoken languages at the time of Christ.

We know that an angel called Gabriel visited Mary and told her what to name her son. THIS NAME came from God The Father Yehovah (no J in Hebrew language) can also be pronounced Yahovah, Yahweh, El Shaddai etc.....

So what name did the angel Gabriel tell Mary? It CAN NOT be the name of Jesus.

1) Strongs equates the name "Jesus" with the Hebrew name "Joshua or Johoshua." On what basis does he do this? 2) It appears as though the name "Joshua" "Ya-Save/salvation/saves" is trans‌ literated over into Greek and English in the NT without difficulty, seeing that it appears in Luke 3:29, Acts 7:45 and Hebrews 4:8.

The name Gabriel spoke was Yeshua.

What is the Meaning of Yeshua? Jesus' Hebrew Name Explained It's a name that represents His Hebrew identity and establishes a stronger connection with believers of all generations. What Does "Yeshua" Mean? There are several definitions of Yeshua that can be found in Hebrew and Aramaic biblical text, taken from the Hebrew verb, yasha, that means "to deliver, save, or rescue," and also stated as "Yehoshua."

You see Yeshua is a Jew, NOT a Christian.
His apostles were Jews, NOT Christian.
The 70 selected by Christ were Jews......

We Christians have adopted and accepted the Hebrew God, The WORD, and the Holy Spirit.

STOP saying Jesus (the translated name from his orginal name Yeshua) The ONE important faith that has CHANGED the saviors name meanwhile most all other gods and /or prophets their original names are NOT translated ..... why?

Philippians 2:10-11
Matthew 3:17
John 1:3
Hebrews 7:25
Matthew 10:1
Luke 10:17
Matthew 8:27
John 5:21
Hebrews 2:14
Mark 16:17-18

Just a few bible versus showing the importance of HIS name! Power and authority is HIS name! Not his translated name.

Of course he hears you as you cry out Jesus CHRIST but it has been revealed to me for sometime that HE is touched by those Gentiles who can properly call HIM by HIS GOD GIVEN NAME as pronounced in HIS language which we know HE spoke Hebrew on Mount Olives in front of thousand of listeners. The OFFICIAL language in Israel and Judah at the time of Christ was Hebrew. There are many New Testament parchments found written in the Hebrew language.

It is easy to prove Jesus is God. Read the good book. Many places he references HIS time with HIS Father. He said I AM before Abraham John 8:58.....still NO?

The transfiguration on the mountain in front of 2 disciples as they watched Yeshua talking to Moses and Elijah?

Yeshua Hamashiach has more power than the name of Jesus. Proven in delivery ministry and exorcisms (which takes at MAX a few hours to deliver one from demons, not days, months and years as the RMC allege.

I did not spend time writing this...I will edit ....so watch for more details.....

God bless

DS

a reply to: DeathSlayer

Hey there!

I think you have misunderstood a thing or two. Firstly, Jesus spoke Aramaic. He and His Disciples would have known Hebrew, but it would have been the language of the Synagogue. Greek and Latin was being spoken in all of Israel because of the Romans and Alexander before them. The first Bible that resembles our own was a Greek translation and collection. The Greeks have helped Israel all along. I believe that the Scribes of Israel were first encouraged to write their history down in Babylon after being exposed to so much cosmopolitan literature there from all over the new Babylonian empire, including the Greek literature of Homer which was the Greeks' Torah (their holy book about their gods and all their heroes just as the Old Testament is to the Jews and Christians) in many ways. There are some literary similarities for sure. The way they describe David is very much as a Greek hero from the Odyssey.

Yeshua is Aramaic. Yehoshua is the Hebrew for Yeshua. The Angel told Mary to name Him Jesus because that is the name of Joshua who brought the Hebrews into the Promised Land. Jesus is bringing us all into His Promised Land, His Paradise and His Father's Kingdom, smaller than a mustard seed.

The name Jesus (Yeshua) appears to have been in use in the Land of Israel at the time of the birth of Jesus.[2][19] Moreover, Philo's reference in Mutatione Nominum item 121 to Joshua (Ἰησοῦς) meaning salvation (σωτηρία) of the Lord indicates that the etymology of Joshua was known outside Israel.[20] Other figures named Jesus include Jesus Barabbas, Jesus ben Ananias and Jesus ben Sirach.

The name Jesus was being used in Israel in His life time. It is very possible the Romans and Greeks may have called Him Jesus who were living in Israel at that time. Israel was very hellenized and latinized in Jesus' time. Jesus Himself was very influenced by the Greeks and Romans. It is also possible He was influenced by Buddhism through Persia. There is actual evidence of Buddhism being known in Israel just after Jesus so very possible Buddha was well known even in Jesus' time. They found a Buddha from the period of 2nd Century in the Red Sea.

Buddha's Fire Sermon came well before the Sermon on the Mount. Did Jesus use an idea carried by the Roman Empire through Persian from India there? TS Eliot noticed the similarities between the two Sermons. May be Buddha gave Jesus the idea? Plenty of writers and artists have given me ideas and styles to use to help me express. He came as a man and was obviously incredibly intelligent and exposed to the world of ideas. Might He even have given us a little secret about His respect for Buddhism as a faith? It has many similarities to Judaism and Christianity. To this day the Jews and Indians are very involved and we know Jews were in Persia at the time Persia was colonizing India. The Bible Book of Esther tells us all about that. The modern Hindus are descendents of the Persians from the time between Cyrus and Darius,

The book (of Esther) relates the story of a Jewish woman in Persia, born as Hadassah but known as Esther, who becomes queen of Persia and thwarts a genocide of her people.

Persia had a Jewish Queen for a while. I bet lots of ideas were passing between India and the Jews via Persia during tht time.

en.wikipedia.org...

The Achaemenid conquest of the Indus Valley refers to a process beginning in the 6th century BCE and ending in the 4th century BCE, whereby the Achaemenid Persian Empire established control over the northwestern regions of the Indian subcontinent, today predominantly comprising the territory of Pakistan. The first of the two main invasions was conducted around 535 BCE by Cyrus the Great,[1] who annexed the areas to the west of the Indus River, consolidating the early eastern border of the Achaemenid Empire. With a brief pause after Cyrus' death, the campaign continued under Darius the Great, who began to re-conquer former provinces and further expand Persia's political boundaries. Around 518 BCE, Persian armies under Darius crossed the Himalayas into India to initiate a second period of conquest by annexing regions up to the Jhelum River in Punjab.[6]

www.jpost.com...

The statue (of Buddha) dated back to the 2nd century AD, according to the Egyptian Ministry of Tourism and Antiquities. The statue was made of Mediterranean marble, highlighting possible trade routes between ancient Rome and India. It is also the first of its kind found west of Afghanistan, the New York Review of Books reported. Archaeologists from the University of Delaware and the University of Warsaw found the statue during an excavation of an ancient temple in the city of Berenike. The statue may be small, but it certainly does not lack character. Standing just over two feet tall, the statue shows Buddha standing and holding his garments in one of his hands, with a halo around his head as well as a lotus flower. According to researchers, they believe the statue was created in the Egyptian port city of Alexandria in the second century.

Do you see that the Middle East at the time of Christ was a right old mixture? Simon from Libya was even there at Passover. He was the one who carried Jesus' Cross.

Joshua is a given name derived from the Hebrew יְהוֹשֻׁעַ‎‎ (Modern: Yəhōšūaʿ, Tiberian: Yŏhōšūaʿ),[5] prominently belonging to Joshua, an early Hebrew leader of the Exodus period who has a major role in several books of the Bible. The name was a common alternative form of the name יֵשׁוּעַ‎ (Yēšūaʿ) which corresponds to the Greek spelling Ἰησοῦς (Iesous), from which, through the Latin Iesus, comes the English spelling Jesus.[6][7] As a result of the origin of the name, a majority of people before the 17th century who have this name were Jewish. A variant, truncated form of the name, Josh, gained popularity in the United States in the 1920s.

We can clearly trace Yeshua to Jesus as the very same name. It says in Revelation He will come back in a new name,

"Revelation 3:12; The one who is victorious I will make a pillar in the temple of my God. Never again will they leave it. I will write on them the name of my God and the name of the city of my God, the new Jerusalem, which is coming down out of heaven from my God; and I will also write on them my new name."

Jesus tells us there through the Angel to John that He will come with a new name. It also says on His head He wears many crowns and only He knows His Name,

"Revelation 19:12; His eyes were as a flame of fire, and on His head were many crowns; and He had a name written that no man knew, but He Himself."

So the name Jesus was for His previous incarnation. When He returns it will not be through a woman's womb. It will be from the very sky and the clouds. The whole earth will see His Sign in the sky and there shall be no doubt about who has come to the earth. It says that all the nations will mourn once they see He is for real and that He really did suffer all those things written about Him on account of us so we might be saved from death.

a reply to: DeathSlayer

So the God who has extended peace and mercy to humanity for millennia, sent His Son to die on a cross, who self describes as Love, is so petty,
He gets offended by incorrect use of His name
Your God sounds petty

I believe God measures the heart, measures the motive, so tell me, what does God do to infidels who choose His wrong name, what punishment awaits them/me? Almost as if Jesus isn’t enough, His death was powerless and only getting His name correct is important

And why has God revealed it to you only deathslayer, are you more important? Special?
If it was that big an issue, maybe God would have placed a bit more effort into revealing it to many, more than just a keyboard evangelist

I don’t read the king James bible either, now I have His name wrong, guess eternal separation is my calling

It seems you want to add to the word, a new revelation, a new teaching.

Hey

too much to discuss.

its late. me sleepy

Not bragging......I wish you could visit and see my library and collections.

If I was you I would not quote Wikipedia.....

Rabbi Yeshua was taught in the temple and often read the OT which was ONLY in Hebrew within the temples. Let me explain.... the Torah which is handed down through generations was completely written in Hebrew not aramic until later. See Dead Sea Scrolls.....BUT make sure you read from the correct translators!!!

OT is also called the Tanakh. Do you have a Tanakh? If not get the JPS version it is worth the money.

Hebrew alphabet does not hsve the letter "J" and it was not pronounced as a "Y".

Not tooting my horn.....theology studies going on for over 40 years.....I cant see where I would miss these info after studying the Tanakh, The Misnah and both Talmuds....

God bless




a reply to: Merman

You're still speaking the wrong language.

Ask yourself what your first language is and then ask yourself what language you knew before that. then learn that language.

a reply to: DeathSlayer

Surely the first Gospels were written in Koine Greek, that had no letter 'J'?

Wouldn't the recorded name therefore be 'Iesous' in Koine Greek, or, if you take the Latin of the Vaticanus as source, 'Iesus'.

Not to mention that the common tongue in the area at the time was Aramaic, so it would be 'Isho'.

And 'Christ' is a title, not a surname (and it also has numerous language forms).

a reply to: DeathSlayer

Transliteration drift. No evidence of the letter J until the 1400's.

Joshua = Yeshua or Y'shua (Hebrew: ישוע)

And why go after the name? I'd start with Yeshua needing melanin and brown eyes. Possibly make him racially and regionally accurate. Appearance and name alike have been transliterated over the years.

By the time of the 15th century the Gospel of John had already been through The Gospel of Yohanan and Johannes. And everyone was now white as the kings of Europe.

If one were to assert their own divine right to speak for god. People have always been fallible enough.

Ah, the name game. This is how I see it from my research.

Yahweh is the horned god of the Canaanites.
Christ is from Christos which is Horus the son of Isis.
Jehova is Jupiter which is Latin for Zeus.
Jesus literally means 'son of Zeus.'
The letter J did not exist two thousand years ago, therefore Jesus could not have been a name then.

You need to go back to before the Egyptian 'The Book of the Dead' to really get anywhere. A lot of the 'Good News' is plagerized from 'The Book of the Dead'. The problem is which translation of what original texts are correct.

It has all been changed many time to protect the common people from the truth and control them.


God made everything. Mankind made god in the image of mankind along with making Lucifer, Saten, the Devil etc... God is God, god isn't God. Mostly mankind follows god and not God. Men even wrote books about god and not about God. Then men said these books were the word of God. Man does not always tell the truth.

I don’t understand this thread at all. Joshua is Christ’s name. ALL of the prophets names are translated. Gods name isn’t God but the unspeakable Tetragrammaton, and everyone pronounces all Gods wrong. Zeus for example, here in Greece, is pronounced rhyming with the English name Jeff. “Zeffs!”

a reply to: AlexandrosTheGreat

Caveat: It's stupid for an English only person to instruct a multi lingual person on languages.

I am stupid. --- end of caveat.

It's like if someone said to you "But Homer did not pronounce Ζεύς in the way you just did. Homer's pronunciation is way more powerful."

The Dead Sea Scrolls unlike the bible were written at the relevant time when JC was active. They are approximately two thousand years old, dating from the third century BCE to the first century CE. They were written by people who were living in the area JC was active. The scrolls tell us much about Judaism at the time the Temple still stood in Jerusalem which again was the time Jesus Christ was active. Considering the importance put upon the scrolls there is no mention of Jesus when quite obviously there should be! It would be like finding a newspaper in 1918 London and it having no mention of the war!

There is no evidence other than in the bible JC ever existed.

originally posted by: redchad
There is no evidence other than in the bible JC ever existed.

Why do you people keep perpetuating the same lie? Of course there's plenty of proof outside of the Bible that Jesus existed. If you're interested in educating yourself, here's a link that lists some of the proofs:

Here’s The Historical Evidence From Non-Christian Sources That Jesus Lived And Died

I'm going to answer my own question. "Why do you people keep perpetuating the same lie?" It's because Satan told you to and he's your master. And here's why I say that:

Luke 11:23 - Whoever is not with me is against me, and whoever does not gather with me scatters.

Those were the words of Jesus.

You will not respond to admit you were wrong, of course.

There is no contemporary, first-hand evidence Jesus existed. The link you provided has no real evidence in it. It's all hearsay, re-enactments and opinion, often sourcing from the bible.

originally posted by: TerraLiga
There is no contemporary, first-hand evidence Jesus existed. The link you provided has no real evidence in it. It's all hearsay, re-enactments and opinion, often sourcing from the bible.

"There is no contemporary, first-hand evidence Jesus existed."
Does that prove that there never was any contemporary evidence? The absence of proof is not proof of absence. But you already knew that, didn't you?

And as for the rest of your statement: So, you're saying that all these people, from different periods of time and from different parts of the world, all created this same exact mythical person named Jesus, spontaneously out of thin air, just so that you could come along 2000 years later and say it's just hearsay? Maybe those people referred to contemporary evidence that existed in their time, but is lost now? Could that have been possible? You people will just reach for anything.

The Bible does mention how Satan thinks very highly of himself, so his minions might exhibit those traits as well. Are you for or against Jesus?


TCB

originally posted by: TrulyColorBlind

originally posted by: redchad
There is no evidence other than in the bible JC ever existed.

Why do you people keep perpetuating the same lie? Of course there's plenty of proof outside of the Bible that Jesus existed. If you're interested in educating yourself, here's a link that lists some of the proofs:

Here’s The Historical Evidence From Non-Christian Sources That Jesus Lived And Died

I'm going to answer my own question. "Why do you people keep perpetuating the same lie?" It's because Satan told you to and he's your master. And here's why I say that:

Luke 11:23 - Whoever is not with me is against me, and whoever does not gather with me scatters.

Those were the words of Jesus.

You will not respond to admit you were wrong, of course.

Ahh Josephus!
At face value, Josephus appears to be the answer to the Christian apologist's dreams. In a single paragraph (the so-called Testimonium Flavianum) Josephus confirms every salient aspect of the Christ-myth.
Not a single writer before the 4th century – not Justin, Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian, Cyprian, Arnobius, etc. – in all their defences against pagan hostility, makes a single reference to Josephus’ wondrous words.
The third century Church 'Father' Origen, for example, spent half his life and a quarter of a million words contending against the pagan writer Celsus. Origen drew on all sorts of proofs and witnesses to his arguments in his fierce defence of Christianity. He quotes from Josephus extensively. Yet even he makes no reference to this 'golden paragraph' from Josephus, which would have been the ultimate rebuttal. In fact, Origen actually said that Josephus was "not believing in Jesus as the Christ."
Origen did not quote the 'golden paragraph' because this paragraph had not yet been written.
It was absent from early copies of the works of Josephus and did not appear in Origen's third century version of Josephus, referenced in his Contra Celsum
In fact, the Josephus paragraph about Jesus does not appear until the beginning of the fourth century, at the time of Constantine.
Bishop Eusebius, that great Church propagandist and self-confessed liar-for-god, was the first person known to have quoted this paragraph of Josephus, about the year 340 AD. This was after the Church of Rome had become the custodians of religious correctness.

I’ll deal with Tacitus next

When you reach out for help or praise, He knows you mean Him.

to worship one so legalistic as to deny salvation because of a vague entomology of His name... Too fickle a God, and that is not who He is.

He shares a name with many in the Bible, Yeshua.

a reply to: TrulyColorBlind

Sometime before 117 AD, Tacitus the Roman historian apparently wrote:
"Nero looked around for a scapegoat, and inflicted the most fiendish tortures on a group of persons already hated for their crimes. This was the sect known as Christians. Their founder, one Christus, had been put to death by the procurator, Pontius Pilate in the reign of Tiberius. the term 'Christian' was not in use during the reign of Nero.
No Christian apologist for centuries ever quoted the passage of Tacitus
An Ultraviolet photo of a critical word from the earliest known extant manuscript of Tacitus (second Medicean, Laurentian library, Italy).
The photograph reveals that the word purportedly used by Tacitus in Annals 15.44, chrestianos ("the good"), has been overwritten as christianos ("the Christians"
In short, the passage in Tacitus is a fraud and adds no evidence for a historic Jesus.

a reply to: TrulyColorBlind

Caius Suetonius (c.69–140 AD)
Nowhere in any of Suetonius's writings does he mention 'Jesus of Nazareth.' Suetonius did write a biography called Twelve Caesars around the year 112 AD and of Emperor Claudius he says:
"As the Jews were making constant disturbances at the instigation of one Chrestus, he expelled them from Rome."

Jesus in Rome in 54 AD? Of course not. But the unwary can be misled by this reference.
'Chrestus' does not equate to 'Christ' in English but to 'the good' in Greek It was a name used by both slaves and freemen and is attested more than eighty times in Latin inscriptions. Clearly, Suetonius was explaining why the Jews (not Christians) were expelled from Rome and is referring to a Jewish agitator in the 50s – not to a Galilean pacifist of the 30s.

a reply to: TrulyColorBlind

Did the Rabbis Know Jesus?
In a most ironic twist, Christian apologists sometimes bring forward an ancient anti-Jesus slur, circulated by the rabbis, as "evidence" that their godman existed.
Yet the earliest rabbinic writings – for example, the Mishnah ("study") (of which the Talmuds are later commentaries) – make no reference to a "Jesus" character at all
A 2nd or 3rd century, rabbinical reference is to a magician who had led some Jews into apostasy. This is in an addendum to the Mishnah – 'Baraitha Sanhedrin 43a' – which records the hanging of a 'Yeshu' on the eve of Passover for sorcery. It also adds that he had 5 disciples – Mattai, Naqai, Netzer, Buni and Todah – not exactly the familiar names!
The 3rd century Tosefta (another supplementary commentary on the Oral Law, even later than the Mishnah) tells of an attempt to invoke the name of 'Yeshu ben Pandira' to cure a rabbi of a snake bite (Chullin 2:23).
Both Talmuds are 'late' constructions: the Jerusalem Talmud was compiled in the early 5th century AD and the Talmud of Babylon was compiled during the 6th century. By this date the only source of information about Jesus available to the rabbis was the Christians themselves! But far from confirming anything found in the gospels the rabbinic authors appear to have confounded at least two Jesuses – a 1st century BC Yeshu ben Pandira and 2nd century AD Yeshu ben Strada.

a reply to: redchad

Wow you almost have yourself convinced. No scholar of any merit denies
that a man called Jesus by the Romans. Was tried by Pilate, crucified and
that he walked out of the grave he was buried in.

I would also say that despite what anyones says about the Shroud of
Turin. If science can't identify how the image was created there on?

Then no one can say the shroud isn't evidence. No one in the past needed
proof of what was accepted as common knowledge.

Without Christ there simply would be no Christians.

What you're spreading is a lie