It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


All In The Name?

page: 1

log in


posted on Dec, 28 2017 @ 11:19 AM
There is so much Dishonesty and Falsehood implemented into religion that is has utterly confused the masses into believing things that are not true and swaying away from things that are true.

I can write a whole book on the things that are not true, which gullible ignorants refuse to deny and believe in with all of their pride and ego lasting their whole existence, but let us take just one example today.

The name - Jesus.

If you research history and begin to find that our world has been filled with satanist LIARS since the beginning of any religion, you will find that time after time, these people have changed around the names of their enemies, (by the way, a person who is an enemy of a powerful satanist world leader is a good upright peaceful humble man or woman of Heaven). Even the name of the Almighty, the leaders have made sure that all of the generations including ours do not have the slightest idea as to what it really is, thinking that it is Yahweh or Jehovah.

The name Jesus is a Greek derived name which is an insult to the Master of humanity, the Righteous Teacher and Prophet of the Last Remnant of Israel. So I read from researchers that they have concluded Yeshua was the real name, but they never give an example as to why Yeshua? I personally understand the true name of Christ, but I am asking, why do people think it is Yeshua besides the other closer names that have been proposed in scholarly realms?

posted on Dec, 28 2017 @ 11:24 AM
a reply to: AlienVessel

Because Yeshua translates to "Jason / Iaso" which means "The Healer".

See Iasus a typical ancient Greek name, as also is Iason (Jason) and Iesous (Jesus) all very Greek names, all meaning the Healer from Iaso the Greek goddess of Healing

However, using the older etymology, the Hebrew too could mean "healer:"
Yeshua = shortened Yehowshuwa = Yehovah + Yasha "free," "safe," "saved," "healed," "savior," "healer."

Yeshua is transliterated Hebrew in English. "Jesus" is English, which in itself is ultimately etymologically derived from a transliteration of "Yeshua" into the Greek Iesous.

The Wiki debate


Link to a side example

Jason(Hebrew: Yason, יאסון) of the Oniad family, brother to Onias III, was a High Priest in the Temple in Jerusalem. Josephus records that his name, before he hellenised it, was originally Jesus (Hebrew יֵשׁוּעַ Yēshua`).

edit on 12/28/2017 by muzzleflash because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 28 2017 @ 11:30 AM
the very nature of religion is falsehood and dishonesty. once it became a mass institution, the original purpose of teaching became secondary to control. written by the victors.

posted on Dec, 29 2017 @ 06:44 PM
a reply to: AlienVessel

You claim you could write a whole book, but you failed in really clearly writing anything of an OP, other than an opinion with no facts to back it, to gender any type of meaningful discussion.

edit on 29-12-2017 by ChesterJohn because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 29 2017 @ 07:38 PM
a reply to: AlienVessel

Question: "If His name was Yeshua, why do we call Him Jesus?"

Answer: Some people claim that our Lord should not be referred to as “Jesus.” Instead, we should only use the name “Yeshua.” Some even go so far as to say that calling Him “Jesus” is blasphemous. Others go into great detail about how the name “Jesus” is unbiblical because the letter J is a modern invention and there was no letter J in Greek or Hebrew.

Yeshua is the Hebrew name, and its English spelling is “Joshua.” Iesous is the Greek transliteration of the Hebrew name, and its English spelling is “Jesus.” Thus, the names “Joshua” and “Jesus” are essentially the same; both are English pronunciations of the Hebrew and Greek names for our Lord. (For examples of how the two names are interchangeable, see Acts 7:45 and Hebrews 4:8 in the KJV. In both cases, the word Jesus refers to the Old Testament character Joshua.)

Changing the language of a word does not affect the meaning of the word. We call a bound and covered set of pages a “book.” In German, it becomes a buch. In Spanish, it is a libro; in French, a livre. The language changes, but the object itself does not. As Shakespeare said, “That which we call a rose / By any other name would smell as sweet” (Romeo and Juliet, II:i). In the same way, we can refer to Jesus as “Jesus,” “Yeshua,” or “YehSou” (Cantonese) without changing His nature. In any language, His name means “The Lord Is Salvation.”

As for the controversy over the letter J, it is much ado about nothing. It is true that the languages in which the Bible was written had no letter J. But that doesn’t mean the Bible never refers to “Jerusalem.” And it doesn’t mean we cannot use the spelling “Jesus.” If a person speaks and reads English, it is acceptable for him to spell things in an English fashion. Spellings can change even within a language: Americans write “Savior,” while the British write “Saviour.” The addition of a u (or its subtraction, depending on your point of view) has nothing to do with whom we’re talking about. Jesus is the Savior, and He is the Saviour. Jesus and Yeshuah and Iesus are all referring to the same Person.

The Bible nowhere commands us to only speak or write His name in Hebrew or Greek. It never even hints at such an idea. Rather, when the message of the gospel was being proclaimed on the Day of Pentecost, the apostles spoke in the languages of the “Parthians, Medes and Elamites; residents of Mesopotamia, Judea and Cappadocia, Pontus and Asia, Phrygia and Pamphylia, Egypt and the parts of Libya near Cyrene” (Acts 2:9–10). In the power of the Holy Spirit, Jesus was made known to every language group in a way they could readily understand. Spelling did not matter.

We refer to Him as “Jesus” because, as English-speaking people, we know of Him through English translations of the Greek New Testament. Scripture does not value one language over another, and it gives no indication that we must resort to Hebrew when addressing the Lord. The command is to “call on the name of the Lord,” with the promise that we “shall be saved” (Acts 2:21; Joel 2:32). Whether we call on Him in English, Korean, Hindi, or Hebrew, the result is the same: the Lord is salvation.

posted on Dec, 29 2017 @ 09:56 PM
a reply to: AlienVessel

The name Jesus is a Greek derived name which is an insult to the Master of humanity, the Righteous Teacher and Prophet of the Last Remnant of Israel.

hmm.. not sure where you got that info...

Yeshua is a hebrew name... its actually Joshua

posted on Dec, 30 2017 @ 12:19 PM
a reply to: AlienVessel

The name Jesus is a Greek derived name which is an insult to the Master of humanity, the Righteous Teacher and Prophet of the Last Remnant of Israel. So I read from researchers that they have concluded Yeshua was the real name, but they never give an example as to why Yeshua? I personally understand the true name of Christ, but I am asking, why do people think it is Yeshua besides the other closer names that have been proposed in scholarly realms?

There is no easy answer to your question. Most all Christian NT bibles are translated by translators from Greek to Latin or English simply because the nearly 6,000 Greek MSS overwhelming are available from koine or classical Greek MSS.

There are a few Hebrew Christians who understand the Names of God and His son as in the following explanation.

Eth Cepher
In the Masoretic text, you see the name Yahusha spelled in the Hebrew yod ( ) heh ( ) vav ( ) shin ( ) vav ( ) ayin ( ) or Yahushua. [My Hebrew key board in broken so I can not give you the Hebrew alphabet ( ).] Therefore, the assumption is that Mosheh added not only YAH - the name of He who visited Mosheh at the burning bush, but also added the vav to create "shua" as the ending syllable.

Strong's Hebrew Dictionary 7737 sets forth ( ) as the word shavah. Its usage within the KJV means to level, i.e. equalize; figuratively, to resemble; by implication, to adjust (i.e. counterbalance, be suitable, compose, place, yield, etc.):- avail, behave, bring forth, compare, countervail, (be, make) equal, lay, be (make,a-) like, make plain, profit, reckon.

Therefore the name YAHUSHUA can be understood as YAH, which is the shortened name of the Father, HU (in the Hebrew ( ) which means "he" and finally "shua" which means makes level or equal. Therefore YAHUSHUA means in this analysis, YAH is He who makes equal. The term YAH is found in 45 verses in the Tanakh, including Shemot (Exodus) 15:2 YAH ( ) is my strength ( ) and song ( ) and He is become my yeshua (salvation) ( ) he ( ) is my El ( ) and I will prepare him a habitation ( ) my father's ( ) ELOHIYM ( ) and I will exhalt ( ) him.

(in Part)
We have elected to publish the name YAHUSHA, in the first instance because it is the most accurate transliteration of the name given to the Messiah, as he was given the same name as Husha / Yahusha son of nun, whom the English world has always called Joshua. However the name YAHUSHA means I AM HE who avenges, defends, delivers, helps, preserves, rescues, saves, brings salvation, your Savior, who brings you to victory.

The reason I have shown this to you from the Nazarene point of view is that this is not the view of all translators. This is but the Eth Cepher point of view who are Christian Jews and have done the opposite of most all Christian translators and that is to take the Greek MSS into Hebrew and from Hebrew to English in order to show the Hebrew perspective instead of the Greek perspective. As I said before it can be quite extensive study for the English/Hebrew people to understand.

This understanding is basically from the KJV bible which is the most revealing of all translations. I do not sell or proselytize but only give my understanding. This video will explain exactly what I can offer and it is at the very beginning of the video so that it is a very short explanation. Scroll down to the video and listen to the Hebrew explanation of what I have said.
source -
edit on 30-12-2017 by Seede because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 1 2018 @ 12:34 PM

originally posted by: ChesterJohn
a reply to: AlienVessel

You claim you could write a whole book, but you failed in really clearly writing anything of an OP, other than an opinion with no facts to back it, to gender any type of meaningful discussion.

Am I supposed to think that I am less of a person for that? I had a question, and I asked it to receive information. I do not need to elevate myself in my ego to think that I need to be successful in writing some elaborate investigative OP for your viewing pleasure. LOL. You are a hater, to the fullest.

posted on Jan, 1 2018 @ 12:40 PM
a reply to: ChesterJohn

And you use sarcastic words from a person and change them to be literal in an effort to undermine that person?

That is a deceptive way of distorting the truth in order to make yourself feel elevated over that person.

You are a little human being, with a GIANT ego. Shame on you.

posted on Jan, 1 2018 @ 04:25 PM
a reply to: AlienVessel

Oh, I am sorry I wasn't trying to be sarcastic.

I was quite serious because from what you wrote there was very little info to really gender any type of real discussion because it was just an opinion. And it leaves very little room to have a discussion because you can't over ones opinion without facts. At least with facts we can discuss the facts and then we could see the basis of your opinion and then we could discuss other opinions in a rational way. However with just your opinion it is impossible to have any rational discussion because it would be opinion against opinion.

Your reply is totally irrational and childish.

edit on 1-1-2018 by ChesterJohn because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 1 2018 @ 04:28 PM
a reply to: AlienVessel

we are required by ATS to present an ration OP with facts and links, none of which you afforded us so we could have a rational discussion of the facts of the basis of your opinion.

You claim to have enough experience to write a book but yet you didn't even present your opinion clear enough nor back it with any factual evidence to support it. Thereby leaving us with virtually nothing to discuss except your poor attitude because I dare ask for more facts, and point out your lack thereof.

edit on 1-1-2018 by ChesterJohn because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 6 2018 @ 11:41 PM
a reply to: AlienVessel

We have pretty accurate records of the copies of original letters/books of the New Testament, we don't have the autographs but studies have been done placing most of the copies to around 100 AD and a little after so they are quite close. This is the Nestle Aland Greek New Testament Matt 1:1

Βίβλος γενέσεως Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ υἱοῦ Δαυὶδ υἱοῦ Ἀβραάμ.

So, Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ is E-ay-soo transliterated.

I think they used the translation for "Jesus" in the King James Bible which was basically a translation of Textus Receptus in the Greek which was used for the Latin Vulgate.

I have no issues with the name, it just helps to know the history. I think the documentation is quite good actually, much better than any other historical figure from that time period.

edit on 6-1-2018 by SkeptiSchism because: oopsed

edit on 6-1-2018 by SkeptiSchism because: oops 2x

posted on Jan, 7 2018 @ 01:49 AM
a reply to: AlienVessel
The exact form of the name does not matter. Honestly, there are no penalties for getting it wrong.
"Jesus" is traditional as a way of rendering the word written in the Greek gospels, which is IESOUS.
For what it's worth, the Spanish pronunciation of Jesus (soft J) is probaby closer to the original than the Anglo-Saxon hard J.

posted on Jan, 11 2018 @ 04:24 AM
a reply to: AlienVessel

S/F for a good subject. However. Jesus wasn't named Jeshua or Jehoshua, his name is coded into the text using an albac cipher, and his full name was Yezael Michel. Yezael is a variant of Isaiah, Josvah, Yeshuah, Jeshua and a bunch of other names. Josef (who was actually Julius/Heli's son Caesarion) was instructed in a dream to name his son after Isaiah, whose son's name was Immanuel. Christians categorically misinterpret this and gives Jesus the name Immanuel. Jesus was Yezael's Latin name, and his full Latin name and title was Jesus Caesar Ptolomaius Davidus

edit on 11-1-2018 by Utnapisjtim because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 11 2018 @ 04:47 AM

posted on Jan, 11 2018 @ 04:57 AM
Jesus liked it when the Jesus greek name was heard......that's the only sign early on.......that the new way was spreading

when the greek came looking for him from across the water

posted on Jan, 11 2018 @ 04:59 AM
a reply to: FlyInTheOintment

The nature of man means that he will always have those among his population that will usurp & manipulate any power structure which has developed organically in his midst. Western spirituality progressively moved through evolutions in ancient & modern society - animism, pantheism & the like, onward into the revealed Judeo-Christian faith, along the lines of:

Tribalism - Covenant - Grace - Enlightenment & Rationalism.
Ultimately we are in the final stage of SYNTHESIS of all that we've learned.

The sheer number of available denominations in the Christian faith is evidence of its validity, as the central principles are almost always the same, yet with differences in worship style & preferred ritual bringing a universalism of personal preference which is utterly absent in all other religions/ faith groups.

In my humble opinion, the evidence points to the ultimate Truth of the revelation of the person & teaching of Christ, and at this time in history, we are charged with synthesising all that came before, developing a new understanding & tolerance throughout all faith practices, setting a city on a hill which cannot be hidden, the light of which will enrich all men. I respect other faiths (except Islam, as many will already know from my historical posts) - I find them fascinating*, though many are ultimately invalid due to ideological & detail-related pollution, which was caused by interlopers posing as gods (in the beginning) & great teachers (ever since).

*I find the vast structure of Buddhist cosmology to be immensely interesting, for example - you can read it here:

Incredible Buddhist Cosmology

edit on JanuaryThursday1801CST05America/Chicago-060001 by FlyInTheOintment because: layout

posted on Jan, 11 2018 @ 05:02 AM
a reply to: GBP/JPY

Have you been drinking from that emoji at the end of your post? You're not making much sense, honestly, barely any, in fact. Could you clarify what you actually intended to say/ the point you are making?

posted on Jan, 11 2018 @ 03:34 PM
Below is an excerpt from a book written by a former occult Grand Master.

It is THE most fascinating writing I have found on this subject...

He also has one of the most incredible conversion stories I have ever seen, here and here(Pg.14).


After this, the Angel led me to a certain realm of Heaven where I met some of the Prophets of old and true Saints, who now live in the higher realm of Jehovah God and His Christ. Though I saw many other Prophets and Saints of old, but Daniel and Peter specifically spoke to me.

Daniel spoke and specifically emphasized that Heaven is the true home of pure souls, wherein nothing unclean is found. He then pointed out one mistake that many make on Earth, with regards to how they address the Lord. He stated that it is not proper to address the Lord, who died on the cross to save the world, merely as 'Jesus.' He further pointed out that in earthly terms 'Jesus' is a name that any human being can bear. It is true that there are some people past and present who bear this name 'Jesus.' I learnt from him that Heaven expects the Earth to take very serious the sacred teachings embodied in the Kingdom of God in this regard. Furthermore, Daniel said:

"The Angels and Saints of the Kingdom of God frown when the children of men on Earth call the King of kings and Lord of lords 'Jesus,' like they do when they say in Jesus name."

This, according to him, is contrary to what is expected in Heaven and the Kingdom of God in all the realms, including the world of man. "Though," he further stated, "the Lord may overlook this, and consider it as one of the defects of souls still in the world of human existence; yet it is the desire of the Kingdom of God that the Lord should be properly addressed always." How do we properly address the Lord? In this connection, Daniel spoke and said:

"Brother Iyke, let the Christians on Earth know that the proper way to address the Lord of all the realms of existence, who saved the world by His Blood, as demanded by the Kingdom of God, is thus: Our Lord Jesus Christ." Daniel continued: "Therefore let them know that even in their prayers they should not say 'in Jesus name' rather they should call Him Our Lord Jesus Christ."

I turned to Saint Peter and said: "Brother Peter, it is reported in the Holy Scriptures that you and other Apostles at diverse times addressed the Lord merely as 'Jesus' even in your prayers."Peter held my hand at this point and spoke to me thus:

"Yes, but based on the knowledge we had then. You must know that the Scripture is a divine clue, pointing to that which is perfect. Heaven is the realm of perfection. Therefore one must be ready to comprehend things, in the Kingdom of God, on a more perfect level than is generally known among men”.

Daniel and Peter took time to speak to me on different matters of the kingdom of God, nay the realms of Heaven. The issue of addressing the true Lord, not merely as 'Jesus,' but as 'Our Lord Jesus Christ,' was seriously emphasized, as a point of difference between the name of the Lord and other human beings bearing the same name, 'Jesus.'

My 300 Minutes Experience of Heaven [Google & Scribd]

edit on 1.11.2018 by Murgatroid because: Felt like it...

posted on Jan, 14 2018 @ 05:16 PM
It's funny how hung up people are on earthly bullcrap when getting spiritual.

You can talk about God without bringing up men ya know.

top topics


log in