They Shalt Call His Name, Immanuel, God With Us, Not Jesus!
In The Name Of Jesus?
Copyright 2012 VVeasey Publishing
If you've never studied the history of the Bible, not the history in the Bible, but the history of how the Bible came into existence, who wrote it, when and why and for what purpose and you believe that everything you read in the Bible is absolutely true. You probably don't want to examine your beliefs to see if they are true, but defend and protect them from what may be true. They're not to be examined or analyzed, but swallowed whole-hog and passed down to the next generation and kept alive.
I don't mean any harm by that...that's just the way I see it.
Sooooo...if you don't believe in freedom of speech when it comes to the Bible. You might want to change the channel, no...please change the channel, because this hub is probably not for you.
Now! I'm just a country boy who when he sees something that looks kinda funny or out of place, that's supposed to fit together like a puzzle but doesn't. Makes me want to take a closer look at it. Yeah...yeah...I know...curiosity killed the cat! I ain't no cat! So I ain't worried...at least...not much! So don't get your boy wrong! I don't have nothing against the Bible or my boy, Jesus.
I just like shining the light on some of the things I've been told all my life were true, to see if they are true, or just ingrained beliefs or non-sense, that we've all learned to believe as starry-eyed little kids! I'm bout ta shine my light on one of those things below right now.
A Scripture That's Puzzling
Here's a scripture that kinda puzzles me. "But while he (Joseph) thought on these things, behold, the angel of the LORD appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost. And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall save his people from their sins. Now all this was done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying, Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us". Matt 1:20-23
This is the verse that Christian clergy, theologians and emperors have used over the centuries to "prove" that Jesus is the Messiah and born of a virgin. The quote is from the Old Testament Prophet, Isaiah, who is said to be referring to Jesus' birth hundreds of years later.
Now lets take a look at Issiah's actual scripture to see what he said: "Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel. Isaiah" 7:14. (Immanuel or Emmanuel are different spellings of the same name, are interchangeable, and mean the same thing)
Now I'm a country boy and all that and a simple-minded fellow, but I can see a couple a two thangs wrong with this scenario.
First... The Hebrew word "almah." translated as virgin, means a young woman of marriageable age, maiden or newly married." When Hebrew scholars, translated the Hebrew Bible into the Greek Bible called the Septuagint ,in 200 BC. They translated the Hebrew word "almah" using the Greek word "parthenos meaning virgin.This meaning was eventually translated into Latin and English bibles.
Jesus' mother, Mary, was obviously a virgin before she became pregnant, but she probably became pregnant before she was married, and this virgin birth story was created as a cover story to hide the fact that she was pregnant and not married, which was not a cool thing for a unmarried "woman" to be (she was probably 13 or 14 yrs old) back in those days, in that culture. That's why the writer has the angel say "fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost". because she was already pregnant! And Joseph wasn't the father. So the writer has to hide it by having, Mary, being impregnated by a ghost, by a spirit! Can't have the "Son Of God" or contradictorily "God In The Flesh" being born out of wedlock now can we?
Don't mean any harm, but all the kinder gardeners who believe Mary was impregnated by a ghost (spirit)...even a "holy" ghost.. raise your hands!
Impregnated By A Ghost?
Now here's the second problem that this ole country boy's simple mind sees with this dang story. The writer of Matthew shoots himself in the foot!
First he says "that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost. And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS". But then he quotes Isaiah who says "that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying,Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us".
Wait! Did cha get that?
The angel of the Lord appears to Joseph in a dream, and tells him to name the child Jesus; but Isaiah says the Lord himself will give a sign and the child's name shall be Emmanuel which means God with us! (This is where the idea that Jesus is God in the flesh comes from)
Now I may be stupid but I ain't crazy! How in tar-nation can this prophecy be referring to the Jesus we all know and love? If it was...shouldn't his name be Emmanuel (God with us) "God In the flesh" instead of Jesus? Jesus (Yeshua) means God (Yahweh) saves, not "God with us.
See the difference?
Joseph was told by the angel of the lord to name the child, Jesus. But Isaiah said the Lord himself says the child shall be named Emmanuel! I ain't too bright but I do know this! If the Lord himself tells you to do something, that trumps anything an angel of lord is telling you to do in a dream, don't you agree?
Aaaah...but true believers probably won't have a problem with these contradictory versions of what the Lord and an angel of lord said and will find a way to excuse it. Because their beliefs are more important to them than the truth!
Trying To Match Up Two Different Stories
Isaiah was written hundreds of years before Matthew and was held in great esteem. That why newly converted pagan Roman Catholic priests wrote this verse, in an attempt to convince the Jewish clergy and intellectual elites, that their newly created god-man, Jesus, was the prophesied Messiah, referred to in Isaiah. That's why Matthew says "Now all this was done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet" He's blatantly telling you why he's writing that. But this was hundreds of years after the prophet wrote his scripture.
They were trying to match it up with what Isaiah wrote to legitimize their writings about Jesus being the Messiah. And from the looks of all those who believe it...they did a bang-up job!
But the Jews didn't accept Jesus then and don't accept him now and with good reason.Their Messiah' name is Emmanuel, God with us! Not Jesus.
Let's take a slight detour. Here's another interesting thing you may not know. There was more than one Christ.
"Thus says the LORD to his anointed, to Cyrus, whose right hand I have grasped, to subdue nations before him and to loose the belts of kings, to open doors before him that gates may not be closed: Isaiah 45:1 (English Standard Version) Isaiah said that the Persian King, Cyrus, is the Lord's anointed, that he is the Lord's Christ! Gaaaalee! Did cha know that?
Here's the meaning of Christ "Christ: learned respelling of Middle English, Old English Crīst fromLatin, Chrīstus from Greek, chrīstos anointed, translation of Hebrew māshīaḥ anointed, Messiah" (Dictionary.com), Christ and Messiah mean the something: the anointed of God or anointed by God.
This is kindaaaaa looking like the Messiah, doesn't have to be Jewish to be a Messiah, as long as he's anointed by God, doesn't it? All the ancient kings of Israel were Messiahs or Christs.They were the anointed of God.During their coronation their heads were anointed with holy oil by the high priest to signify that they were chosen by God, the ultimate authority, to be Kings.
So you see, Jesus wasn't the first or only Christ or Messiah as we've all been mislead to believe. To the Jews, he wasn't a Messiah or a Christ at all. He was only the Messiah of the Roman Christian clergy, who tried to pass him off to the Jewish clergy as the Messiah they expected to come, but they weren't buying it.
The expected Messiah was to be a Warrior-King who would free them from Roman bondage, the way the Messiah, Persian King, Cyrus, freed the Jews before them, from Babylonian captivity. Or like Moses, the Messiah, who although not a king was chosen by God to lead the Israelites out of Egyptian slavery. Or like Moses' right hand man, Joshua, (Yeshua/Jesus) who was the first Jesus, who led the Israelites into the promised land of Canaan.
The concept of the Messiah originated in the Old Testament, and the later concept of Christ was derived from it. That's why during the Roman period, the fledgling Christian cult, had to be shored up by the Roman Christian clergy by connecting it to the much older and more established Israelite/Jewish religious book,The Hebrew Bible.The Christian clergy renamed it and turned it into the Old Testament when they added it to their newly created New Testament writings, to create the, Latin Vulgate, the first Christian Bible.
So who is the Messiah? Emmanuel or Jesus? Isaiah says the very Lord himself said his name shall be called Emmanuel!
Son Of the fish
But First, before we continue, let me say this,
If you don't like the smell or taste of what I’m cooking
Pleeeease change the channel…Because this hub is not for You!
When the Hebrew Bible (the Old Testament" was translated in to Greek in 200 BC and renamed, The Septuagint. Yeshua (Joshua) the son of Nun (Mose's right hand man, who actually led the Children of Israel into, Canaan, the promised land) name was transliterated to Ieous.This was the first time that the name that would eventually end up in English as, Jesus, appears in history. Yeshua (Hebrew) to Ieous (Greek) to Iesus (Latin) to Jesus (English)
The Septuagint was the Bible of the Greek speaking Orthodox Jews in Egypt and Early Christians, among whom many were Jews.When the early Christians read the name, Ieous the son of Nun, they knew that this was referring to Joshua the son of Nun, who led the Children of Israel into the promised land of Canaan.
When the New Testament was written it was written in Greek...and the name used to refer to Jesus was…you guessed it, Ieous! Now, when these early Christians saw the name, Ieous, who do you think they immediately thought of ?
Here’s another interesting thing about Yeshua. Nun means fish!
Yeshua son of the fish or in English, Jesus son of the fish!
Now, don’t everybody raise your hands at the same time. But what was the sign of the early Christians? The fish! Right again! You get the Golden cookie!
The first disciples were fisherman. Jesus said he’d make them fishers of men. Can't cha see how all of this ties in with the first Jesus, Yeshua the son of Nun? If you can’t…what’s wrong with your eyes?
Yeshua The Savior
But wait! There’s more!
Yeshua means Yahweh saves, Yahweh is salvation.Hummmm…anybody seeing what I’m seeing? Yep that’s right! Salvation, savior...Yeshua the son of Nun was the original Biblical, Savior! Yeshua lived a thousand years or more before the Jesus of the New Testament was supposedly born (or as some historians say, was created).
Don’t cha think that when the early Greek speaking Christians saw the name Ieous in the New Testament, which was written in Greek, they thought this was referring to Yeshua the son of the Nun?
The King James Bible
The reason, many of you, probably don’t know this or want to believe it, or even consider it, is because when the King James Bible version of the Bible, was created in1600 Ad. The Latin name for the savior,Iesus, (used in the Latin Vulgate Catholic Bible ) was translated into English as Jesus.That's why, the only accepted and recognized name for the English speaking Christians for Yeshua, is Jesus.
The King James translators, wanted to keep a clear distinction between Jesus and Yeshua. That's another reason, you may not know that Yeshua was the original Jesus.They didn’t want people to start thinking…getting any funny ideas…that there was a connection between their Jesus and the Hebrew Yeshua. Because people might start putting two and two together…we can’t have that now can we!
How does all of this tie into Emmanuel?
Yeshua was the original model for Jesus. He was the original savior, as his name in Hebrew shows. Yeshua, meaning Yahweh saves or Yahweh is salvation.Yahweh means God. God saves or is salvation, implies that Yeshua is intimately connected to God, and is a part of God.Yeshua is the savior, God in the flesh, God with us.
This is what the later Roman Christians would imply about Jesus. Yeshua is connected to Emmanuel and they appear to be the same, both of them are, God with us in the flesh. So there you have it. Love it, lump it, like it, or hate it...do what you want with it.
I'm just stating how it, looks to me, and exercising my freedom of thought, and freedom of speech about it. But there’s no room, for freedom of speech or freedom of thinking, for die hard religious believers, whether they be Christians, Muslims, or Buddhists etc., when it comes to anything that may impinge on their religious beliefs. If they profess to believe in freedom of speech and thought, they quickly draw the line at the Bible, and definitely, draw the line at any free thought, or critical speech about Jesus (I think Jesus can take care of himself)
If your freedom of speech or thought, goes against their cherished beliefs.They will angrily and or hostilely attack you, and try to convince you, that you’re wrong and only they are right.
If you don't like the smell or taste of what I’m cooking. Pleeeease Turn the channel…Because this hub is not for You!
I mean that in a kind way!