Yeshua’s name is hotly debated today by far too many people. Those in the Christian community are mostly content to call Him “Jesus,” and there is no reason to quibble over it with them. But, in the Messianic community, there are so many people creating ridiculous versions of His name that are not rooted in SCRIPTURE at all.
I have written on this topic before, but I have a brief conversation to share that is very concise in showing that “Jesus” is not the ‘best’ version of His name in English, which is why I CHOOSE to call Him ONLY Yeshua: I know it is CORRECT in that form, and the keen eye should be able to understand my SCRIPTURAL reason for accepting only ישוע / Yeshua as His Name.
Trying to force a prefix of His Father’s Name into Yeshua’s name is UNSCRIPTURAL, and absolutely unnecessary. And, it drives people away from Him at times. Because many of these forms are ludicrous.
I do NOT disparage people for calling Him “Jesus”; I was introduced to Him that way. But, even as a young boy, I knew that Joshua and Jesus were from the very same word, and I always marveled that, in English, the two were so very different. In Hebrew, Joshua is יהשוע, and Yeshua is ישוע . Yet, in Greek, they ‘tell’ us that the final sigma on the end is ‘grammatically necessary’ in the transliteration of His name to English, to give us “Jesus”. I’ve just never found a solid explanation as to why there is no final “S” on Joshua, nor a final ‘sigma’ in the Greek? The declension [ending] of the two Hebrew versions of the name Joshua, יהשוע and ישוע , is exactly the same in the Hebrew. Why the disparity in Greek? And ‘then’ in English, why so VERY different?
And, in the books of Ezra and Nehemiah, from the Hebrew, where in Babylon they began to use the form ישוע INSTEAD of יהשוע [Yehoshua], and where Moses’ Joshua is called ישוע/Yeshua, the name Yeshua is actually transliterated as Jeshua in the King James English. Nehemiah 8:17 reads this way in English: “And all the congregation of them that were come again out of the captivity made booths, and sat under the booths: for since the days of JESHUA the son of Nun unto that day had not the children of Israel done so. And there was very great gladness.” Which is translated/transliterated from Hebrew, which reads this way: יֵשׁוּעַ בִּן נוּן … Why the disparity? Yeshua in the HEBREW of Nehemiah is spelled EXACTLY the same as it is in Aramaic. Why the difference in the Greek translation? This is why I am just not able to agree that “Jesus” is a purely honest transliteration. To further complicate matters, in the original 1611 King James Version, “Jesus” was actually transliterated as “Iesus” and not “Jesus”; so, the front and back of the name are both different from Yeshua/Joshua in that original English version. THIS is why I default to Yeshua. There is something amiss, and I have found no solid explanation for the differences, other than human intervention.
We did not receive the final English version “Jesus” until 1711….
I tend to think the translators wanted to ‘distinguish’ Yeshua’s name from Joshua by instead creating a new transliterating, “Iesus”, and make His name different from all the other Yeshua’s that exist, even today [I know five Mexicans called Jesus, and 40 friends called Joshua] thinking it necessary, in order to make Phil 2:9-11 more about his human, given name, Yeshua/Joshua, thus “Jesus”, than about His Divine, RECEIVED Name, יהוה. God conferred HIS Name onto Yeshua as well: “Elohim [God the Creator, His Father] has made this Yeshua, whom you executed, BOTH יהוה AND Mashi’akh.” [Acts 2:36] In Aramaic, those verses in Phil 2:9-11 read this way in Aramaic, “therefore, Elohim also has highly exalted Him and given Him a Name which is above every name, that at the Name of Yeshua every knee should bow, of those in heaven, of those on earth, and those under the earth, and every tongue shall confess that He is יהוה Yeshua HaMashi’akh , to the glory of Elohim His Father.” יהוה יֵשׁוּעַ הַמָּשִׁיחַ is His full name, NOT “The Lord Jesus Christ”, as Aramaic has a name, מריא , that is יהוה , and NOT ‘kurios.’ All these funny “yahushuahshsashah” version are REDUNDANT and unscholarly. This is why I think, while not utterly ‘wrong’, and certainly not a damnable heresy, nor a preventer of people from knowing Him, that “Jesus” is at best a dishonest rendering of His Name. [This last one is also one major proof to me that Aramaic New Testament scriptures came first, and that Greek were translated from these. Had the Aramaic been translated FROM the Greek, we would be seeing “מרא’, and NOT “מריא’, where Greek has ‘kurios’, which simply means “lord”, and NOT יהוה .]