Etymology of the name Jesus

bhaktajan said:
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

Here are excerpted verbatim from my volume of the Bhagavata-purana references [for brevity I’ve omitted chapter/verse reference numbers, but the excerpt is in tact so google-able]:

Isa (pronounced, ee-sha --- Spelt éça )

The word jagad-isa refers to the proprietor of all the universes.
Isa —O supreme controller

Everyone in this world is more or less guilty of the syndrome called Isa-mana, or proudly considering oneself the Lord.

Isa —O ultimate God

yoga-Isa —O master of all mystic power

Isa-tattva — the Supreme Lord, the supreme living force

Isa means Lord

Isa —O Lord

The Supreme Lord, being the supreme possessor of spiritual senses, is the master of the senses, Hrsikesa (Hrsika + Isa). ‘Hrsika’ means the senses, and ‘Isa’ means the master.

My little Sanskrit dictionary lists:
Eesh (eesh) – To rule, to goven.
Click to expand...

Yes, I'm seeing your point. These forms are post-Vedic forms. Do you know of any that appear during the Vedic period? Isa "Lord" looks like it may be a counterpart of the Avestan Izha "Angel of Worship" cf. ishyo, yazata "Divinity," Yasna, Ishaya "Worship"

Ishayas Gerezda "sacrifice of the milk" associated with Izhaya "angel of the sacrifice" cf. Ishayas

OIran. Gerezda : Gk. khristos > christ

OPers. Xsh-ayaa-rshaa > Heb. Akhash-ve-rosh > Gk. As-oue-ros

OIran. -ayaa- > Gk. -oue-

OIran. Izh-aya- > Gk. Ies-ou-(s)

problem simple vowel ii- > ie

Question: what happens to Old Iranian words with simple vowels like [ii] that precede sibilant like [zh]?
 
mojobadshah said:
Moses was a variation of the Avestan Mazda [Ahura] which developed into the Assyrian [Assara] Mazas.
Click to expand...
You are aware that Moshe in Hebrew has no "z" in it? You are aware that Assyrian only has Asshur not "Assara" and that the development is in the reverse direction? And is "Mazas" something you made up yourself or do you have a source for it?
mojobadshah said:
Genesis was written sometime around the 810-781 BC when the Assyrians attest to the Mada "Medes" and the Gimiri "Cimmerians" both Aryan (Irano-Afghan) tribes mentioned in Genesis.
Click to expand...
Chapter 14 of Genesis reflects the politics of ~950 BC. And I have pointed out to you before that the Cimmerians cannot possibly be of the S'atam language group (Indo-Iranian + Balto-Slavic) because the k/g pronunciation of the first consonant would not have been retained (the name would have become *jimmer or *s'immer); the "chamber/comrade" root is here in a form similar to that found in Celtic (Cymry "Welsh") or Germanic (Cimbri formerly in Jutland).
bhaktajan said:
for brevity I’ve omitted chapter/verse reference numbers, but the excerpt is in tact so google-able...
Click to expand...
I should be able to find this. I'm heading on the road tomorrow so it will be a while, but thanks for answering my request for examples of the form.
mojobadshah said:
Isa "Lord" looks like it may be a counterpart of the Avestan Izha "Angel of Worship"
Click to expand...
I would think so too.
mojobadshah said:
OPers. Xsh-ayaa-rshaa > Heb. Akhash-ve-rosh > Gk. As-oue-ros
Click to expand...
The direct borrowing of Kshayarsha into Greek was Xerxes. The borrowing into Aramaic became Achshawarash because "y" between vowels was disfavored; into Greek this became Achasueros (not with an "ou" vowel mind you).
mojobadshah said:
OIran. -ayaa- > Gk. -oue-
Click to expand...
No, the Iranian compound vowels just become simple vowels when borrowed into Greek: Darayawush to Darius for example.
mojobadshah said:
OIran. Izh-aya- > Gk. Ies-ou-(s)
Click to expand...
Impossible. Simple vowels in Iranian don't become compound vowels in Greek; quite the reverse.
 
donnann said:
JESUS is Michael the Archangel aka Michael Jehovah.
Click to expand...
I have heard people say that before, but nobody was suggesting that Joshua and Jesus were the same person. I'm certainly not suggesting that, and Ben M. was objecting to something written in Hebrews. We were talking about where the name 'Jesus' comes from, which is called the etymology of his name. This name is special, because its etymology is explained in the scripture, once for Joshua and once for his namesake, Jesus. The two parts of the name are explained by the author of Matthew, but it is also explained in the Pentateuch. This is especially cool since the etymology is explained twice by people from two completely different millenniums!

Though we say 'Jesus' it is not really the pronunciation. Jesus would have called himself 'Joshua' or something similar but that is not what is significant. If he had simply been called 'Joshua' it wouldn't be significant, because there could be 10,000 people with that name. What makes it a clear connection is that the etymology is explained separately for each man. No other Bible character pair has that happen. The gospels go to the trouble of explaining the two parts of Jesus name, just as the Pentateuch explain's Joshua's two parts. (And the two parts mean the same things) Hence there is a connection between the two people, though they are definitely not the same person. It heightens the irony of Jesus, because he is named like the great warrior Joshua yet he doesn't try to do anything warlike.
 
Dream said:
I have heard people say that before, but nobody was suggesting that Joshua and Jesus were the same person. I'm certainly not suggesting that, and Ben M. was objecting to something written in Hebrews. We were talking about where the name 'Jesus' comes from, which is called the etymology of his name. This name is special, because its etymology is explained in the scripture, once for Joshua and once for his namesake, Jesus. The two parts of the name are explained by the author of Matthew, but it is also explained in the Pentateuch. This is especially cool since the etymology is explained twice by people from two completely different millenniums!

Though we say 'Jesus' it is not really the pronunciation. Jesus would have called himself 'Joshua' or something similar but that is not what is significant. If he had simply been called 'Joshua' it wouldn't be significant, because there could be 10,000 people with that name. What makes it a clear connection is that the etymology is explained separately for each man. No other Bible character pair has that happen. The gospels go to the trouble of explaining the two parts of Jesus name, just as the Pentateuch explain's Joshua's two parts. (And the two parts mean the same things) Hence there is a connection between the two people, though they are definitely not the same person. It heightens the irony of Jesus, because he is named like the great warrior Joshua yet he doesn't try to do anything warlike.
Click to expand...

The term or name JESUS has two different aspects. One it refers to the human male the last man adam the immortal man. The second refers to the divine being incarnated into the human body for the purpose of salvation that was ascended where the body was united with the human separated soul and spriit inherited condition when incarnated. So yes JESUS is Michael but also refers to the human being last man adam as well. Of course every adam has an eve and every archangel an archeia so apply all aspects as mary magdeline ect.
 
donnann said:
The term or name JESUS has two different aspects. One it refers to the human male the last man adam the immortal man. The second refers to the divine being incarnated into the human body for the purpose of salvation that was ascended where the body was united with the human separated soul and spriit inherited condition when incarnated. So yes JESUS is Michael but also refers to the human being last man adam as well. Of course every adam has an eve and every archangel an archeia so apply all aspects as mary magdeline ect.
Click to expand...

Excuse the double post.JESUS is a cubic number 888 with the woman who by the way is the living ark literally there are 10 seals 101010.
 
donnann, you don't have to post the same message in all the threads, one will do fine. Also, please stick to relevance to the title or the first post, as in this thread that is about "Etymology of the name Jesus".
 
A Cup Of Tea said:
donnann, you don't have to post the same message in all the threads, one will do fine. Also, please stick to relevance to the title or the first post, as in this thread that is about "Etymology of the name Jesus".
Click to expand...

Sorry about that however my last post is accurate. The name is really a number that is a seal opening referring to the body of jesus being ascended back then.
 
bob x said:
You are aware that Moshe in Hebrew has no "z" in it?
Click to expand...

In addition to the name Moshe and its resemblance to the name Mazda, the Bundahishn, which Boyce claimed preserves archaic features, mentions Mashyo and Mashye, the first man and woman, and these names are cognates of the name Mazda.
 
bob x said:
You are aware that Moshe in Hebrew has no "z" in it? You are aware that Assyrian only has Asshur not "Assara"


The direct borrowing of Kshayarsha into Greek was Xerxes. The borrowing into Aramaic became Achshawarash because "y" between vowels was disfavored; into Greek this became Achasueros (not with an "ou" vowel mind you).
Click to expand...

In sanskit, the Warrior classes are expelled and migrate (or go fortune hunting) out of South Asia ---as the Brahmin caste experienced a sudden brain-drain effect after Krishna pastimes ended 3,000 BC.

That Administrative Warrior Caste had their own supra-passion-driven credos. "Kshatriya" is the name of that caste. Kshatriya (protector of kshetra --protector of the field). This entailed Civic Administrative chores that included physical and martial agilities.

Kshatriyas considered themselves from celetial linage and thus collectively addressed as, "Suras" (descendents of the Sun Demigod, Sri Surya-deva)

One of Brahma's progenetor sons, named, Kasyapa-muni had a wife named Aditi from which the Aditya branch bore "A-suras" mentalities in human-kind.

So there was the ethos of Suras and asuras and expatriots that scattered accross the globe to live peaceful lives. Alas, each refuge of scattered mankind is subjected birth, old-age & diceise in various combinations ---that is the mundane history of mankind now in the beginning epochs of the present age of Kali-yuga ---dying and living for no particular reason this was apparent to progessive minded spiritual saints of antiquity.

Image Greek & Roman Status quo of ancient times for the common life-time denisen of the time. The average "Quality of life" was probably quite enchanting . . . for generations!!!!!

But we spirits are in the material world of temporal works and mirages of collected memories ---Q: All to what end? A: To resort to repeating the same prior life's pastimes, but preferably with a Chinese menu of options and simply a clean slate with new and improved facilities to live another life-time here in the material world of 'samsara'

now that's a sort of rant for you,
Bhaktajan
 
Originally Posted by mojobadshah
Question: what happens to Old Iranian words with simple vowels like [ii] that precede sibilant like [zh]?
Click to expand...

In general, I have observed classical Langauges abberate due to sloven speach.

Where the classical pronunciation of a language required real exercise of the articulators of vocal speech ---later, creole-like usages were replaced by common-speakers. Now after years of standardised usage of all native langauages in distant parts we have slang rise to an ennobled avantguard and venacular art-form for no other reason than an excuse to speak and be heard and taken seriously when we drunk, half-asleep or just having sex all awile giving a speech to nation on live TV.

Lazy speech for whatever subversive attitude is what has abberated the spread of a once unified language group.

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
BTW, something different:

I heard a recent discovery around the world regarding language acquisition in children ages 7 and below, "They acquire a vast vocalbulary of Proper Names of Animals" ---across the board of various nationalities, children were found to know Long, Difficult to pronounce, multi-syllabic, un-connected to conventional life, syuch as the names of a myraid of animal species' names and attributes too.
 
Let me try to unpack this: "Infinity ... again", do you mean G!d shows is the beyond (Infinity) sometimes? "G!d ... different", G!d is interested but does not want change? "Your...head", not doing anything gets you close to the G!dhead?

About right?
 
donnann said:
the name jesus really refers to 888 which is the number of the ascended body that is one with the soul and spirit.
Click to expand...


I am talking about being a Messianic leader. Moses was one for bringing the Israelites (Jewish People) from Egypt back to the Land of Canaan. Joshua was the next for completing the work of Moses. Cyrus was another for proclaiming the return of the Jewish People from Babylon to the Land of Israel and financed the rebuilding of the Temple. And Herzl was the modern Messianic leader for having inpired the Jewish People with love for Zion. What did Jesus do? At his time, the Jewish People were suffering under the Roman oppression and ended up by being exiled for almost 2000 years. Even as a Messianic leader Jesus could not classify; let alone as the Messiah.
Ben
 
Dream said:
Thanks for the information which reminds me he was 'Exalted' in the eyes of Israel according to Joshua 3:7, a verse which in English says of him "As I was with Moses so I will be with you." So there we go, a passage about Joshua taking over for Moses. Joshua even did the same miracle as Moses of making a water passage, the Jordan, open up to walk through. The man was legendary in scope. Also Joshua 4:14 says "they stood in awe of him, as they had stood in awe of Moses, all the days of his life." Its also clear that he gave orders to priests.
Click to expand...


I couldn't have put it any better myself. Now, there is no doubt at all that the prophet like unto Moses of Deut. 18:18, that God promised to raise from among the Jewish brotherhood was indeed Joshua. Thanks Dream.
Ben
 
mojobadshah said:
Source? I tried Googling "Zoroaster statue Syria" but didn't find much.
Click to expand...

I think the source I had come across was mistaken. It wasn't a statue of Zoroaster it was a portrait of Zoroaster at Dur Europus which was a Parthian fortress in Syria which was occupied by the Romans in 165 AD. It was created after the expulsion of the Parthians. Zarathushtra from Dura Europus
 
Kanishka was a religious syncronist. He fused everything from Zoroastrianism, to Buddhism, to Mithraism into one. He had an adviser named Yusuf Asaf. Now this anomaly "Yusuf Asaf" may be of some interest. On previous threads I've mentioned an etymology for the name Joseph via the Aryan (Irano-Afghan) form Aspa cf. Afghan, equine. The Yusefzai "son's of Joseph" is the name attributed to one of the Pashtun tribes in Afghanistan. Yusuf Asaf and Kanishka lived around the same time the earliest Biblical sources appear Second Clement and Justin Martyer 150CE. From what I have seen Yusuf Asaf was later attributed to both Joseph and Jesus among the Persians. Then there is the Aryan (Irano-Afghan) place-name Merv or present day Mary, Turkmenistan which may also be of some interest. Finally there are all those legends of how Yusuf Asaf, Jesus, and even Mary traveled to the east and tombs in the east which are said to hold their remains. If you want my personal opinion, we know that a good deal of Christian expressions are rooted in the Aryan (Zarathushtrian) lore. I think that the story of Jesus, itself, is rooted in the east, and that what happened is that after all the [cultural] invasions that the Aryan (Irano-Afghan) zone experienced so many mythologies were confused and supplanted over the true or original story of the character we call Jesus today.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top