English Please!

[JaumeJ]

Once more, all of the names are transliterations. Again, all of those names may be translated to English as Salvation, or the Salvation of Yahweh.

When the angel appeared, he instructed Mary and Joseph to call the Baby Jesus for He was to save His people, ergo, Salvation or Salvation of God (Yahweh). No one thinks himself superior or inferior simply for knowing this fact, but we all feel better off for knowing our Salvation, amen?

 

[GandalfTheWhite]

But there was a man in the OT with that name. Kind of why I go for the Greek translation. Calling Jesus Joshua just feels wrong since there was a Joshua and he wasn't God.

Phill is defending his King James Bible. In the KJ Bible there is Joshua, not Yeshua

 

[GandalfTheWhite]

And the Israelites spent 40 years in the wilderness why? Because of their abject obedience and reverence for the Lord?

The reasoning here leaves something to be desired. If we have to use grandiose thought processes in order to prefer one language's rendering of Christ's name over another -- and forgive me for this, Gandalf, but that is what you've done here -- then perhaps there is a more base reason we like the name. Maybe we do think it makes us sound "more spiritual" or educated? In your case, I doubt it. That doesn't fit your personality, form what I've seen.

But please realize that "No," "Nyet," "žádná," "nein," "tsis," "לא,"and 没有 all express the exact same thought in English, Rusian, Czech, German, Homong, Hebrew, and Chinese. In the same way, "Jesus," "Иисус," "Ježíš," "Yexus," "ישו," and "耶稣" identify the same Son of God.

Jesus was also the Son of God, universal, unlimited by language, culture, personality, identity, or lineage. He is the name the one who believes in Him has learned to call Him.

That's true in any language. We get "Jesus" from the Greek iesouß (Iesous) which is nothing more than the Greek rendering of the Hebrew h[wXy (yeshuw'ah). It means "Jehovah is salvation" in the Greek just as it does in the Hebrew. The other languages have done the same, rendering the thought behind His name in their own syntax.

It doesn't make any difference if you use h[wXy, Jesus, Иисус, Ježíš, Yexus, ישו, or 耶稣f. You speak "salvation" in every one of those names. If that's really the reason you use "Yeshua" then you are just as guilty of compromising His name as you seem to think everyone who uses one of those renderings does, because that is nothing more than a transliteration of the Hebrew h[wXy which is actually accurately rendered yeshuw'ah in English. The word as Jesus actually wrote it would be h[wXy .

If you want to use "Yeshua" go ahead. You don't have to make excuses. You also don't have to develop a chip for your shoulder about using it.

I will remove my chip immediately

 

[Galahad]

Please address the questions or it is pointless to continue this conversation. We are not here to one-up each other. If some one presents you with useful information in the form of linking to an expert article and you refuse to read it and hold steady to your own opinion...it shows an element of pride. So again I ask...why do you have such a problem with reading something that may instruct you on the subject you have undertaken?

Jonnah, quit your fleeing. You continue to run from the facts. You refuse to address your false, ridiculous statements about languages. Why did you make them? You were parroting another person.

Now knock it off!

 

[GandalfTheWhite]

 

[Jonnah]

Jonnah, quit your fleeing. You continue to run from the facts. You refuse to address your false, ridiculous statements about languages. Why did you make them? You were parroting another person.

Now knock it off!

Welp, I'm quite done with you here. Our attitude should be one to learn not to try and prove another person wrong. My intention was to shed some light on the subject. I hope you realize how you sound by calling my statements about language false in light of the fact that experts agree, yet you refuse to read them. And of course you will not answer the question because you have no defense. If you so wish to educate yourself on the subject I provided you a resource you can consult.

 

[atwhatcost]

Phill is defending his King James Bible. In the KJ Bible there is Joshua, not Yeshua

I'm not so sure about that. I've spent 3/4ths of my walk in the Lord completely unaware that Joshua is the same word as Jesus. Didn't effect my walk at all, but it is cool.

 

[Galahad]

Welp, I'm quite done with you here. Our attitude should be one to learn not to try and prove another person wrong. My intention was to shed some light on the subject. I hope you realize how you sound by calling my statements about language false in light of the fact that experts agree, yet you refuse to read them. And of course you will not answer the question because you have no defense. If you so wish to educate yourself on the subject I provided you a resource you can consult.

Jonnah: "Yes Hebrew is a functional language whereas our language is more abstract."

Galahad: "No. I disagree Jonnah.
I like food. Abstract.
Pizza is cheesy and when topped with Pepperoni the flavor of the sauce is drawn out. Tastes good. I like it. Concrete.
Depends on what words you use.
Abram = father, exalted father
Abraham = father of many
Hebrew and English."

Jonnah: "We're speaking in general terms brother and any study of languages will tell you Semitic languages are designed to be functional whereas our language is more colorful and abstract. That does not mean you can not find abstract concepts in Semitic languages or functionality in English Be blessed."

Galahad: "Grammar, language is not math. Rules, laws in math. Language, not so fixed. You read and believe what others have surmised. When it comes to language and speaking and grammar, more changes and alternatives exist.
3+2=5. 2+3=5. 5=2+3.

I love Jesus in my heart.
In my heart I love Jesus.
Not necessarily the same.
Now knock it off, Jonah, Jonnah!"

"We're speaking in general terms." Is Jonnah's response to my example! Apparently, my example was just specific, accurate, and not abstract. I was specific. Specific whereas you were general. You then agree.

You must stop parroting statements. Okay. Study it for yourself. So when you say "expert" as it relates to languages, that expert is not the same as an "expert" in the field of physics. Okay.
The preface to a dictionary...enlightening as to "experts."

 

[Jonnah]

Jonnah: "Yes Hebrew is a functional language whereas our language is more abstract."

Galahad: "No. I disagree Jonnah.
I like food. Abstract.
Pizza is cheesy and when topped with Pepperoni the flavor of the sauce is drawn out. Tastes good. I like it. Concrete.
Depends on what words you use.
Abram = father, exalted father
Abraham = father of many
Hebrew and English."

Jonnah: "We're speaking in general terms brother and any study of languages will tell you Semitic languages are designed to be functional whereas our language is more colorful and abstract. That does not mean you can not find abstract concepts in Semitic languages or functionality in English Be blessed."

Galahad: "Grammar, language is not math. Rules, laws in math. Language, not so fixed. You read and believe what others have surmised. When it comes to language and speaking and grammar, more changes and alternatives exist.
3+2=5. 2+3=5. 5=2+3.

I love Jesus in my heart.
In my heart I love Jesus.
Not necessarily the same.
Now knock it off, Jonah, Jonnah!"

"We're speaking in general terms." Is Jonnah's response to my example! Apparently, my example was just specific, accurate, and not abstract. I was specific. Specific whereas you were general. You then agree.

You must stop parroting statements. Okay. Study it for yourself. So when you say "expert" as it relates to languages, that expert is not the same as an "expert" in the field of physics. Okay.
The preface to a dictionary...enlightening as to "experts."

Hey you're back and still with no answer as to why you won't read the source You can flip it any way you like, you aren't an expert and neither am I. I have studied Semitic languages and have some level of understanding. So when will you read the source? I'm curious as to what you will discover and how it fits your assessment Also, no need to be so angry brother we're merely discussing a topic not arguing. Or have you jumped over to the side of defending and arguing? Hope not. God bless you and let me know how you enjoyed that reading.

 

[Jonnah]

Jonnah: "Yes Hebrew is a functional language whereas our language is more abstract."

Galahad: "No. I disagree Jonnah.
I like food. Abstract.
Pizza is cheesy and when topped with Pepperoni the flavor of the sauce is drawn out. Tastes good. I like it. Concrete.
Depends on what words you use.
Abram = father, exalted father
Abraham = father of many
Hebrew and English."

Jonnah: "We're speaking in general terms brother and any study of languages will tell you Semitic languages are designed to be functional whereas our language is more colorful and abstract. That does not mean you can not find abstract concepts in Semitic languages or functionality in English Be blessed."

Galahad: "Grammar, language is not math. Rules, laws in math. Language, not so fixed. You read and believe what others have surmised. When it comes to language and speaking and grammar, more changes and alternatives exist.
3+2=5. 2+3=5. 5=2+3.

I love Jesus in my heart.
In my heart I love Jesus.
Not necessarily the same.
Now knock it off, Jonah, Jonnah!"

"We're speaking in general terms." Is Jonnah's response to my example! Apparently, my example was just specific, accurate, and not abstract. I was specific. Specific whereas you were general. You then agree.

You must stop parroting statements. Okay. Study it for yourself. So when you say "expert" as it relates to languages, that expert is not the same as an "expert" in the field of physics. Okay.
The preface to a dictionary...enlightening as to "experts."

Here are some snippets to get you going brother and hopefully encourage you to click through and educate yourself

"In the world, past and present, there are two major types of cultures; the Hebrew (or eastern) culture and the Greek (or western) culture. Both of these cultures view their surroundings, lives, and purpose in ways which would seem foreign to the other."

"
Greek thought views the world through the mind (abstract thought). Ancient Hebrew thought views the world through the senses (concrete thought).
Concrete thought is the expression of concepts and ideas in ways that can be seen, touched, smelled, tasted and/or heard. All five of the senses are used when speaking and hearing and writing and reading the Hebrew language. An example of this can be found in Psalms 1:3; “He is like a tree planted by streams of water, which yields its fruit in season, and whose leaf does not wither". In this passage we have concrete words expressing abstract thoughts, such as a tree (one who is upright, righteous), streams of water (grace), fruit (good character) and a unwithered leaf (prosperity).
Abstract thought is the expression of concepts and ideas in ways that can not be seen, touched, smelled, tasted or heard. Hebrew never uses abstract thought as English does. Examples of Abstract thought can be found in Psalms 103:8; “The LORD is compassionate and gracious, Slow to anger, abounding in love”. As you noticed I said that Hebrew uses concrete and not abstract thoughts, but here we have such abstract concepts as compassionate, gracious, anger, and love in a Hebrew passage. Actually these are abstract English words translating the original Hebrew concrete words. The translators often translate this way because the original Hebrew makes no sense when literally translated into English."

About the Ancient Hebrew Culture


Hope this hleps, God bless and have a wonderful day.

 

[Galahad]

Hey you're back and still with no answer as to why you won't read the source You can flip it any way you like, you aren't an expert and neither am I. I have studied Semitic languages and have some level of understanding. So when will you read the source? I'm curious as to what you will discover and how it fits your assessment Also, no need to be so angry brother we're merely discussing a topic not arguing. Or have you jumped over to the side of defending and arguing? Hope not. God bless you and let me know how you enjoyed that reading.

"Some level of understanding." Now there's a statement! Some level of understanding, so you continue to avoid and misstate and post falsehood, all in a cloak of pride. If you were sincere, you would never have sidetracked.

"English is more abstract. English is more abstract." And the support you gave for this abstract statement was? ZERO, ZILCH. NOTHING. Hope that isn't abstract for you. Or is it not, or is it? Phooey.

I give evidence that shows you are wrong.
You come along and sidetrack the issue.

"English is more abstract." Wrong. A most ridiculous statement regarding language. Terrible.

 

[Galahad]

By the way, Jonnah, I congratulate on your study of Sematic languages. I truly do. That's good. How did you like it? I found my study of a particular language to be pulling. Pulls me in. In the sense that I wanted to learn more and more and more about the words and their etymology. From there I realized languages are like building blocks, you learn one language outside your native tongue, and you recognize much more about your own language.

Wish I would have studied Latin. Greek did that to me.

Okay.

I will look over the post that contains the snippets of the "expert." Seeing as you were so kind to provide it to the forum.

I thank you.

 

[Galahad]

By the way, Jonnah, I congratulate on your study of Sematic languages. I truly do. That's good. How did you like it? I found my study of a particular language to be pulling. Pulls me in. In the sense that I wanted to learn more and more and more about the words and their etymology. From there I realized languages are like building blocks, you learn one language outside your native tongue, and you recognize much more about your own language.

Wish I would have studied Latin. Greek did that to me.

Okay.

I will look over the post that contains the snippets of the "expert." Seeing as you were so kind to provide it to the forum.

I thank you.

Jonnah, I did more than read the snippets, I went to the site. Uhm, I'm going to correspond with Mr. Henner. Hope he's open for discussion, what do you think? Are you a friend of Benner's? Just curious. I think I've been to his site, but never did add it to "Favorites."

Again, Congratulations on your study of the Sematic languages. Words are our most important tools.

Will be praying for you and will send you a Friend Request. Hope you accept.

Blessings.

 

[Jonnah]

"Some level of understanding." Now there's a statement! Some level of understanding, so you continue to avoid and misstate and post falsehood, all in a cloak of pride. If you were sincere, you would never have sidetracked.

"English is more abstract. English is more abstract." And the support you gave for this abstract statement was? ZERO, ZILCH. NOTHING. Hope that isn't abstract for you. Or is it not, or is it? Phooey.

I give evidence that shows you are wrong.
You come along and sidetrack the issue.

"English is more abstract." Wrong. A most ridiculous statement regarding language. Terrible.

As I have repeatedly stated brother, my statements are backed up by someone who is an expert in the field. My level of understanding consists of Seminary level studies of Biblical Greek and Hebrew but I by no means consider myself an expert. I hope you understand the point isn't to exchange credentials but to help each other learn. The only reason I bring up my level of study is because you have repeatedly questioned where I came up with such statements-

Answer-Bible College and reading the works of experts and numerous Hebrew/Ancient Hebrew and Greek Lexicons.


But as far as I'm concerned, there is no quarrel. Be blessed.

 

[Jonnah]

Jonnah, I did more than read the snippets, I went to the site. Uhm, I'm going to correspond with Mr. Henner. Hope he's open for discussion, what do you think? Are you a friend of Benner's? Just curious. I think I've been to his site, but never did add it to "Favorites."

Again, Congratulations on your study of the Sematic languages. Words are our most important tools.

Will be praying for you and will send you a Friend Request. Hope you accept.

Blessings.

Mr. Benner is most certainly available for discussion. While I have not corresponded with him personally, he has visited our congregation a few times and he is always welcoming and encourages people to reach him with questions. His study consists more of the Ancient Hebrew than it does the modern Hebrew. Let me know if you were able to contact him and if not I can ask my pastor if he knows of a better way to reach him.


God bless you.

P.S Thank you for the kind words. I look forward to future stimulating discussion

 

[Galahad]

As I have repeatedly stated brother, my statements are backed up by someone who is an expert in the field. My level of understanding consists of Seminary level studies of Biblical Greek and Hebrew but I by no means consider myself an expert. I hope you understand the point isn't to exchange credentials but to help each other learn. The only reason I bring up my level of study is because you have repeatedly questioned where I came up with such statements-

Answer-Bible College and reading the works of experts and numerous Hebrew/Ancient Hebrew and Greek Lexicons.


But as far as I'm concerned, there is no quarrel. Be blessed.

Okay. I appreciate the fact that you do not consider yourself an expert. I mean that sincerely. Hope you never do. It is relative. It means little in some fields.

Hope you accept my request.