Response to the Question -- Why not use His Birth Name?

 Endtime Ministries - Dr Irvin

Thank you for your reply.  When reading verses such as Acts 4:12, and 1 John 4:3, and Hebrews 2:12, and Hebrew 13:15, it seems to me that what we think, concerning the replacing of His Name does not mean so much.  Christian authority has deliberately replaced His name with another (John 5:43, 2 Cor 11:4), and make various excuses for not correcting this error, or so it seems to me.  When is the correcting the translations that erred in the past, not a good thing?  How is a continuing in the error somehow a good thing, or a reason to stay with the deception (2 Tim 3:12-14))?  Also, I am wondering why we Christians would be using this name, Jesus, when His real, original name is available.  You point out that in the Greek it is Iesous, but the fact is, that is an assumption, and if true, would mean that the Greeks were the first to "change" His name.  Even so, Iesous, is not pronounced, JESUS (Geezus), and is closer to how HeZeus, is pronounced-- think about it.  It isn't like this name, given to Mary and Joseph, by the messenger angel, Gabriel, from our Heavenly Father is totally lost and cannot be recovered, or am I missing something here?  It has been my experience that names to not change from language to language.  Your name and mine are still pronounced the same.  My name is not changed from Dan to Frank when speaking with a French person, it remains Dan, however the French person may pronounce it, it remains Dan, perhaps with a French accent, but still, Dan, not Bobby, not Marcella, but Dan.  Thanks again for your response and if you have anything stronger to present, scripture would help, if you have something based on His Words it would be appreciated.  Thanks, Dan

On 4/9/2012 7:26 AM, Bible Studies wrote:

Thank you so much for your honest assessment.  Your view on this is somewhat different from what I have heard others say.  Thank you again for your insight.  Please allow me to express a couple objections to your view --

You say -- "Saving efficacy rests in the meaning of the name, not the pronunciation."  

Really?  Saving efficacy?  Efficacy is defined: "Capacity or power to produce a desired effect."  We do not use His Birth Name as some kind of magical incantation.  While a name can define a person, and can define what that person is meant or assigned to do, a name becomes a part of the individual.  A name sets one person apart from others.  Very simple.  Without names, we can become confused about everything.  Imagine, worshipping Ba'al, or Lucifer, based on your view, by their meaning only.  Ba'al, means 'Lord', and Lucifer, means the Morning Star.  But wait, there is more than one Morning Star, and there are many Lords -- so, which one is yours, which one do you call on?  Names are more than meanings, they are Identity.  

If the "Greek Iesous is correct then we should be using that name.  From what I have been able to found out, however, is this form is pronounce differently than in the first century, as The English have changed the way the "I" is now pronounced.  IESOUS would have been closer to YeHsou, the "s" on the end was a trick the Greeks and the Latins used in making names their own.  This does not make it right.  I know this can be argued all day long but one thing is still sure -- His Name is known today, it is not some aberration of men but a known name, even the KJV uses "Joshua" as opposed to the name "Jesus" in the all of the Bible, except when it came to the New Testament, why is that?  That seems odd to me, but it does seem to follow the Roman Catholic for changing names and even customs, while following the Greek example in changing His name to IESvS, from which the King James moves on to JESUS, pronounced as Geezus, nothing even remotely close to our Lord's actual Birth Name.

Next, if His name is really "Immanuel" then we should be using that name but when the context in the Hebrew is considered it is not that this is a name but a definition, "God with Us", more of a title.   The example you gave in Judges 12:4-6 is good and a very good example of differences in dialect that is nearly impossible for some of other languages to over come.  It is a very good point, but there is a consistency in the name of our Savior, the same name of Moses second in command, Joshua - original pronunciation, Yahshua, or as some Hebrew Linguist say, Yehoshua.  We can see the "short form" for the Name of the God of all creation, in this name, YaH (YHWH). This short form "YH", or YaH, overcomes all dialects.  Anyway, I see your point and understand what you are saying and appreciate your view on this.  Still, none of this reasoning over comes the verses I entered in my last email.  In the Book of Revelation we are told that the Name of God will be marked on His servants.  Seeing how the mark of the Beast is also dealing with names, it reminds me of the battle the prophet Elijah (Eli-YaH) had with the prophets of the Lord (Ba'al) and it was all about the name of their god as opposed to the real God, YH YHWH.  This is all speculation, of course (or is it?), and only time will really tell.  When we are all at the Judgement seat, I wonder which Name we will have to confess?  I'm thinking it will be the name given to Mary and Joseph at His birth.  And a time is coming when He says He will be putting the Name of the Father on those that have overcome --

 (Rev 3:8) I know your works: behold, I have set before thee an open door, and no man can shut it: for thou hast a little strength, and hast kept my word, and have not denied my name.  
(Rev 3:12) Him that overcomes will I make a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall go no more out: and I will write upon him the Name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, which is new Jerusalem, which comes down out of heaven from my God: and I will write upon him my new Name.

When we look at Revelation it does seem like it is a battle of names, winners and losers.  His name, not denied, the name of the Father and His New Name written on those that are His as opposed to the Beast Name and Number.  It would be interesting if you or Dr Irvin did an in depth study on this as there are so many sides to be presented.  

Thank you for taking the time to read a reply, and while I cannot agree with your reasoning, I do appreciate the response.  I enjoy your website and many of the studies do stimulate my interest in digging deeper into Scripture, thanks, Dan

Comments and questions to:  dan@servantsofyahshua.com