I'd like to know how is the noun Jesus written in Hebrew or Latin. Thanks a lot!!!?
92528
In Latin it is Iesus or Jesus (there is no J sound in Latin though and the two are pronunced the same). That comes from the Greek Ιησούς (Iesus), which is what the New Testament was written in. He and his disciples, and basically all of the Jews at the time, spoke Aramaic, and in that language, he was called יֶשוּע (Yeshua), which is derived from the Hebrew name ֶהוֹֹשֻע (Yehoshua), usually translitterated as Joshua.
1170516
The basic translation of the Hebrew God's name is YHWH.  The Jews left out the vowels because no human is worthy to either write or speak the full name of God.  Modern English speakers, fill in the vowel spaces with likely sounds, producing Yahweh.\n\nAs far as we can tell, the oldest name for the Hebrew God is YHWH, making this the most proper name.  Also, Christianity and Islam were created out of Judaism, so YHWH would be most proper name for the God of Christians and the God of Islam.\n\nThe basic story, from what I remember, is that Abraham was contacted by YHWH and his family and those who chose to follow YHWH became the Jews.  Over time, the Jews needed a Messiah, or a spiritual leader to bring them back to the right way of worship, so Jesus was sent to earth to help the Jews find the right path.  The followers of Jesus became the Christians.  After some time, Mohammed was born and spent his young life traveling, and came in contact with both Christian and Jewish merchants, from whom he learned about YHWH.  After some time, Mohammed was contacted by YHWH and became his prophet.  The followers of Mohammed became the Muslims.\n\nThat is roughly how it all went.  So, Non-Jews call God YHWH because that is his name, and we all follow that same God.
343028
Yashua ben Yoseph (Joshua, the son of Joseph)\n\nYashua {Hebrew-Aramaic} => Iesu(s) {Latin-Greek} => Jesus
486714
Most people who are named Jesus today come from spanish speaking countries or backgrounds.  In spanish, Jesus is pronounced hey-seus.  English speakers rarely name their children Jesus.
462578
The primary question, as written, demands an answer of "nothing." There is a considerable amount of written text attributed to Jesus' followers, though perhaps to no one who actually knew him. But I've yet to run across anything that claims Jesus' own authorship.
525822
Nowhere at all.  In fact, even in the earliest Greek manuscripts of the NT, the word Jesus doesn't exist. In fact in the 1611 Authorized Version the word Jesus doesn't exist. Mostly because the letter J didn't exist yet.  It was the King Iames version back then (isn't Iames a dog food?)\n\nThe Hebrew manuscripts of Matthew indicate that his name was Yeshua.  This is also the name that appears on the Oshuary of James (actually "Yaakov"). The name Yeshua means "Salvation" in Hebrew and exists a number of places. For example, the song that Moses sang after crossing the Red Sea: "The LORD my God is my strength and my song, He also has become my Yeshua". Do some research on the many places that this word is used, you will find it quite interesting.
998770
Since we're into corrections on spelling:   It is "two" syllables and it is also "Jesus". Also "Sanctity".    Yes, needs definitely to revisit spelling class.   A B C D E F G.....hooked on phonics works for thee.
195257
Actually it was because Latin was considered the langauge of scholars, and it was the church language.  It wasn't the spoken language of the time. Nor was it the language of Jesus' day other than among the Romans.   Jesus' language probably would have been Aramaic.
21605
Using the name of "Jesus Christ" as an oath has been common for centuries, but the precise origins of the letter H in the expression Jesus H. Christ are obscure. Whilst many explanations have been proposed, some serious and many humourous, the most widely accepted derivation is from the divine monogram of Christian symbolism, IHC or IHS. Since IHS already long ago gave rise to the pseudo-explanation Iesus Hominum Salvator (Latin for "Jesus savior of men"), it is plausible that JHC gave rise to "Jesus H. Christ".\n\nOne factor in the transmutation of the monogram into the expression Jesus H. Christ may be that when the first syllable of the phrase "Jesus Christ" is strongly emphasised (as some speakers of some English accents may do when cursing), the rhythm suggests a missing middle syllable between "Jesus" and "Christ". The H may have been adopted from the monogram to fill this gap.\n\nThere is a wide range of speculations on the origin of the expression, often intended as jokes, or else to be considered folk etymologies. Among the more common are\n\nthat the H stands for "Harold" or "Howard", as in "Our Father, who art in Heaven, HAROLD be thy name" (supposedly a child's mispronounciation of "Hallowed" in the Lord's Prayer). \n\nSimilarly in England, a common joke is that the H is for Henry - the letters INRI, seen on crosses and some graves, are a rough approximation of the Cockney "Henry". \n\nthat the H could stand for "haploid", owing to his mother's virgin birth.\n \nthat H simply stands for either "Holy" or "Hebrew", or that it was just chosen at random. \n\nthat the H stands for "Hallowed", implying he is indeed named after His Father.
350299
Messiah is the anglicised form of Mashiach which is Hebrew for anointed. \nChrist is the anglicised form of Christos which is Greek for anointed.\nThe Old Testament was written mainly in Hebrew (a few parts in Aramaic), and the New Testament was written in Greek. \n\nJesus (Greek Iesous) is a transliteration of Joshua (Hebrew Yehoshua) which means the Lord saves.\n\nJesus was his name and Christ/Messiah was his title. \n\nMatthew 1:20-21 But after he had considered this, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream and said, "Joseph son of David, do not be afraid to take Mary home as your wife, because what is conceived in her is from the Holy Spirit. She will give birth to a son, and you are to give him the name Jesus, because he will save his people from their sins."\n\nJudea & Galilee had been part of the Greek Empire, and was occupied by the Romans at the time Jesus was living there, many of the people would speak Aramaic, but read and discuss the scriptures in Hebrew, so several languages were being used at the same time. This explains why sometimes \n\np.s. some Latin names end in us e.g. Marcus, Julius, Augustus.
348340
Why do many Bible translations not use the personal name of God or use it only a few times?\n\nThe preface of the Revised Standard Version explains: “For two reasons the Committee has returned to the more familiar usage of the King James Version: (1) the word ‘Jehovah’ does not accurately represent any form of the Name ever used in Hebrew; and (2) the use of any proper name for the one and only God, as though there were other gods from whom he had to be distinguished, was discontinued in Judaism before the Christian era and is entirely inappropriate for the universal faith of the Christian Church.” (Thus their own view of what is appropriate has been relied on as the basis for removing from the Holy Bible the personal name of its Divine Author, whose name appears in the original Hebrew more often than any other name or any title. They admittedly follow the example of the adherents of Judaism, of whom Jesus said: “You have made the word of God invalid because of your tradition.”—Matt. 15:6.)\n\nTranslators who have felt obligated to include the personal name of God at least once or perhaps a few times in the main text, though not doing so every time it appears in Hebrew, have evidently followed the example of William Tyndale, who included the divine name in his translation of the Pentateuch published in 1530, thus breaking with the practice of leaving the name out altogether.\n\nWas the name Jehovah used by the inspired writers of the Christian Greek Scriptures?\n\nJerome, in the fourth century, wrote: “Matthew, who is also Levi, and who from a publican came to be an apostle, first of all composed a Gospel of Christ in Judaea in the Hebrew language and characters for the benefit of those of the circumcision who had believed.” (De viris inlustribus, chap. III) This Gospel includes 11 direct quotations of portions of the Hebrew Scriptures where the Tetragrammaton is found. There is no reason to believe that Matthew did not quote the passages as they were written in the Hebrew text from which he quoted.\n\nOther inspired writers who contributed to the contents of the Christian Greek Scriptures quoted hundreds of passages from the Septuagint, a translation of the Hebrew Scriptures into Greek. Many of these passages included the Hebrew Tetragrammaton right in the Greek text of early copies of the Septuagint. In harmony with Jesus’ own attitude regarding his Father’s name, Jesus’ disciples would have retained that name in those quotations.—Compare John 17:6, 26.\n\nIn Journal of Biblical Literature, George Howard of the University of Georgia wrote: “We know for a fact that Greek-speaking Jews continued to write ???? within their Greek Scriptures. Moreover, it is most unlikely that early conservative Greek-speaking Jewish Christians varied from this practice. Although in secondary references to God they probably used the words [God] and [Lord], it would have been extremely unusual for them to have dismissed the Tetragram from the biblical text itself. . . . Since the Tetragram was still written in the copies of the Greek Bible which made up the Scriptures of the early church, it is reasonable to believe that the N[ew] T[estament] writers, when quoting from Scripture, preserved the Tetragram within the biblical text. . . . But when it was removed from the Greek O[ld] T[estament], it was also removed from the quotations of the O[ld] T[estament] in the N[ew] T[estament]. Thus somewhere around the beginning of the second century the use of surrogates [substitutes] must have crowded out the Tetragram in both Testaments.”—Vol. 96, No. 1, March 1977, pp. 76, 77.\n\nWhich form of the divine name is correct—Jehovah or Yahweh?\n\nNo human today can be certain how it was originally pronounced in Hebrew. Why not? Biblical Hebrew was originally written with only consonants, no vowels. When the language was in everyday use, readers easily provided the proper vowels. In time, however, the Jews came to have the super
183624
Was the Old Testament originally written in Hebrew?\n----YES\n\nWas the New Testament originally written in Greek?\n--------YES, although Christians claim there was, originally, a Hebrew version. The fact that it did not survive shows that the Greek version was more important to the early Christians than the Hebrew, indicating the degree to which they were assimilated into Greek religion and Culture.\n\nHow difficult are these languages to learn?\n-------Hebrew is easy, i cannot speak for Greek. I teach people to read (vocalize) the Hebrew text, not to translate, just to pronounce, in just 3 hours.\n\nHow beneficial would it be for me to learn them?\n------if you dont want to rely on someone else's translations, it is vital that you learn them!\n\nAnd where would I get a copy of the Bible in both English and Greek/Hebrew\n--------I recommend the Koren Publishing Company's translation. The Koren Publishing Company is in Jerusalem, so, unfortunately, they called their translation The Jerusalem Bible, which, in the U.S., is the name of a Catholic translation, and they are not the same thing. Most Barnes and Nobles have the Koren translation, which has the Hebrew on the left and the English on the right. Unfortunately the English still sounds like something from King James, but at least the translation tried to be literal. Of course, this is only the Hebrew Scriptures, and a Greek/English, i know nothing about.\n\nI would urge you NOT to get what is called an Interlinnear translation. All they do is take their copyrighted translation and match those individual words to the Hebrew that they want translated that way, regardless of whether or not it means what their copyrighted translation says.
616497
His real name was Joshua or Yeshua. That's what all the people who knew him probably would have called him. But when the various writers of the Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke, John) decided to write about him, they wrote in what was the most internatiionally used language in their region in those days (Greek) so that as many people as possible would be able to understand their "Good News". So in their writing they translated his name to the nearest Greek equivalent (Jesus).  The way his name is rendered into a langauge is not important. The meaning of his name (Savior) is.
892127
"Jesus was born during the Jewish feast of Tabernacles, Sukkot.\nIt is happy celebration and a time of joy and rejoicing. Jesus is our joy. This makes sense."\n\nyes, it does.\n\n"That is why all the rooms were gone in Bethlehem too."\n\nactually, this probably makes sense too, PLUS with all the people from the tax thing. your explanation makes sense, and also, that might be why the Romans decidend to take taxes then, becuase the people would all be in one place anyways.\n\n"It is NOT wrong to celebrate Christ's birth any day. Just trying to let you know, he was born in the feast of joy! PRAISE HIM!"\n\nAMEN! he is worthy of praise, celebrate his love EVERYDAY!
425302
i just love all the absolute ignorance that is to be found here on Y!A....\n\nThe sixth letter in the Hebrew aleph-bet is a 'vov,' and it is not pronounced the way a 'double-u' or 'W' is pronounced in English. That was the mistake of the ignorant Christian Biblical scholars of the 1800's and the Christians who didnt know any better. When transliterating the Hebrew characters, they distinguished between a 'vet' and a 'vov' by using a 'b' for a 'bet' and for a 'vet,' and a 'w' for a 'vov,' even though both the 'vet' and the 'vov' are pronounced exactly the same, which is like the 'V' in English.\n\nAnd, by the way, if you didnt understand or follow what i just wrote, PLEASE LEARN HEBREW, especially before you try to study the Bible!
1183785
Ah, well, the origins of Spanish is Latin. The name Jesus...which did not originally have a "J"...just a corresponding "Y" ...would be the way it would have been said......yes-u-ah...rather than the pronounciation in Spanish..hey-sus.
644233
All of the Gospels were written by people who had never met  Joshua and long after he was dead. Mark is the earliest . It was written  in Syria at least 30 years after JC cashed in his chips. John was written by several people at least 100 years after the Crucifixion.