What's In A Name? [Part 2]
What's in a Name? [Part 2]
Jesus, Yeshua, Joshua - how do we know?
In the third century BCE, the Hebrew Scriptures (what Christians call the Old Testament) were translated into a version of Greek known as Koine Greek. This translation became known as the Septuagint, or LXX for short, from the seventy Jewish elders who made if. Fortunately for us, the name Iesous (see Part 1 of this series) appears in the Greek text, transliterating both the names Yehoshua and Yeshua; this is supported by other writings, such as Josephus and Philo of Alexandria who also wrote in Greek and made the same transliteration. The same form, Iesous, is used in the New Testament to denote Joshua the son of Nun (see Acts 7v45 and Hebrews 4v8), and where the KJV uses the name 'Jesus' instead of Joshua, though the verses clearly refer to Joshua and not Jesus. This helps us see that the name Iesous in Greek and the names Yeshua and Yehoshua (both Hebrew) are in fact the same name.
Furthermore, the LXX uses the name Iesous for the name Hoshea, which was the original name for Joshua. Moses changed Hoshea's name to Yehoshua by adding the prefix 'Ye-' from a contraction of the sacred name for God. Instead of Hoshea, meaning 'he saves', the name was now Yehoshua, meaning 'the LORD saves':
"Moses gave Hoshea the son of Nun the name Yehoshua" (Numbers 13v16)
In addition, Joshua (Yehoshua) son of Nun is rendered 'Yeshua ben Nun' in Nehemiah 8v17. This then ties all three names together in one person: Hoshea, Yehoshua and Yeshua. In English, all three are rendered Joshua and in Greek, they are all rendered Iesous. Usually, however, the name Yeshua in the Old Testament is rendered Jeshua in English but is still Iesous in Greek.
For further corroboration, in Ezra 3v2, we read of one Jeshua the son of Jozadak, which in the Hebrew is Yeshua ben Jozadak. In Zechariah 3v1, the same person is referred to as Joshua/Yehoshua. In the Babylonian Talmud, the name Yeshua appears only once and refers to this same man, Joshua son of Jozadak.
Thus the different spellings (Yehoshua, Yeshua) are both rendered Iesous in the LXX and are even used interchangeably when referring to the same person. Therefore it is not unusual to find both names for people called Joshua in the Hebrew Scriptures and other Greek writings of the time. It's a bit like Shakespeare, who spelled his name variously Shakespeare, Shakespear, Shakespere, yet all spellings refer to the same man - he even used the different spellings himself!
It is in the later Hebrew writings that we more commonly find the name Yeshua, as opposed to Yehoshua. There is a single reference to Yeshua, meaning Joshua the son of Nun and twenty eight references to Joshua the High Priest and four or five other Joshuas of the period. However, in English the name Yeshua is often rendered Jeshua rather than Joshua, the exception being Joshua the son of Nun. But as we have seen, the names and spellings all refer to the same original names and are sometimes used interchangeably for the same person.
Contracted, or shortened, names were quite frequent in the later Hebrew manuscripts, the most common one being the contraction of Yeho- to Ye-, for example, Yehochanan (John) contracted to Yochanan; Yehoshua (Joshua) shortened to Yeshua; Yehosef (Joseph) contracted to Yosef. However, both Yehoshua and Yeshua were commonly used names among the Hebrew and Aramaic speaking people. The name Yeshua became more the default spelling during the Second Temple period (538 BCE - 70 CE). The Aramaic speaking Jews (those who had returned to Israel from the Babylonian exile) tended to use the form Yeshua as an Aramaic name, leading some to conclude that the name was of Aramaic origin. However, both names are Hebrew in origin.
In Galilee, some scholars think that the name might have been spelled Yehoshua, but pronounced Yeshua. Some others however think the Galilean form of the name was further shortened to Yeshu. Those in Judea tended to spell their names phonetically, thus Yeshua, or even Y'shua was the usual form.
I have mentioned another form of the name, the further contraction to Yeshu. The Babylonian Talmud renders all references to Joshua as Yehoshua - with two exceptions: The first is Joshua ben Jozadak (who is called Yeshua - see above). The second is, the name of Jesus is always rendered Yeshu. The name Yeshu has, however, an unfortunate acronym, the letters of the name standing for the words 'may his name be obliterated forever' in Hebrew. For this reason, believers tend to avoid the name Yeshu, though it seems that most Jews in Israel are oblivious to the acronym.
To recap briefly, the names Yeshua and Yehoshua are used interchangeably, thus showing that they are in fact variations of the same name. The Greek renders both names Iesous. The name Yeshua was more common amongst the Aramaic speaking Jews and those living in Galilee and is more evident in the later writings of the Old Testament, of the Second Temple era. While Jesus was deemed to be from Nazareth in Galilee (where his mother came from), He was actually born in Bethlehem in Judea (where Joseph came from), thus fulfilling both criteria for the Yeshua form of the name. Therefore, we can conclude that the form of the name most likely to have been given to Jesus was in fact Yeshua. Iesous is the transliteration that, after coming through Greek, Latin and adapted by Germanic languages, has become the English form, Jesus.
The question is, does it actually matter?
Amongst some in the Hebrew Roots movement, you will find the idea that unless you use Jesus's Hebrew name, then you are worshipping a false god, one of your own making. Some will also say that unless you pronounce the name exactly as they do, then you are not even a believer. The trouble is, none of these groups can agree on what they consider the 'correct' form of the name (and there are several variations, which will form the subject of my next article).
The question remains, if there is "no other name under heaven given among men whereby we must be saved" (Acts 4v12), which name should we use? Jesus? Yeshua? Joshua? One of the several other forms?Is it enough that we use the adapted, transliterated form Jesus, or should we all be using the Hebrew form of the name, whatever that form is or should be? Once again, people are divided over this issue.
If Jesus was Jewish (and He was) and His Jewish name was Yeshua, then shouldn't we be using that name? After all, His family, friends and followers all called Him Yeshua, so perhaps we should too.
How do people generally feel about their own name? Usually, if someone gets our name wrong, we are quick to correct them. I have a friend who is a native Spanish speaker. Many, if not most, of her friends and family (including her husband) in the UK call her by an anglicised form of her name. Let's suppose her name was Joanna (name changed to protect her privacy) - the name as pronounced by her family and friends would be Jo-ah-na (with an elongated 'a' in the middle), instead of the usual Joanna (with the short 'a' in the middle). Is this wrong? Does she know who we mean when we mispronounce her name? Has she accepted her name in this form? Is it in fact disrespectful for her English friends to have arbitrarily changed her name in this way and not to have tried harder to pronounce it correctly?
But the name Jesus is not simply a mispronunciation of His Hebrew name - it is quite different. Is it disrespectful to have changed His name? Does He know who we mean when we call Him Jesus? Is it even sinful - and there are those who will say a resounding yes! to that question!
On the other hand, when Paul wrote the words "every tongue shall confess that Jesus Christ is Lord", he was not writing in English. Nor for that matter was he writing in Hebrew. No, he wrote those words in Greek. The words translated 'Jesus Christ is Lord' were written as 'Iesous Christos Kyrios'. The Hebrew would have been 'Yeshua HaMashiach (is) Adonai'. He could easily have inserted the Hebrew into the text, just as the Gospel writers inserted some Aramaic into the Greek text of their gospels (eg the phrase 'talitha cumi' - little girl, arise - is Aramaic). If Paul was not overly concerned about using Jesus's Hebrew name exclusively, then should we be?
In my opinion, the name Yeshua is not difficult to pronounce (Ye-SHOO-a, with the emphasis on the second syllable). Therefore, if we are able to use His original name, I believe we should. Besides, the name 'Jesus' has come to mean different things to different people, even to being used as an expletive! Perhaps the time has come to make a change. Yeshua means only one thing and, today, refers to only one Person. It doesn't (yet) have the 'baggage' that the name Jesus has. But when all is said and done, this issue probably comes legitimately under the realm of "let each be persuaded (or convinced) in his own mind". As for me, I shall continue to use His Hebrew name Yeshua, but I won't insist that you do too.
(To be continued...)
Comments
Post a Comment