Does Syriac have this "corruption" like the Galilean?

[The Texas RAT]

I heard talk of Hebrew "Yehoshua" being the original. ... ... ... Ascertaining the original name would be great...

Yehoshua is possible though, considering that the Galileans used this form quite a bit (according to Wikipedia <!-- s:eh: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/eh.gif" alt=":eh:" title="Eh" /><!-- s:eh: --> ).

ZekharYahu [Zechariah] 6:9-13:
9 And the word of YHWH came unto me, saying,
10 Take of them of the captivity, even of Kheldah'ee, of TobeeYah, and of YedahYah, which are come from Babylon, and come thou the same day, and go into the house of YosheeYah the son of ZephanYahu;
11 Then take silver and gold, and make crowns, and set them upon the head of Yehoshua the son of Yehotsawdawk, the high priest;
12 And speak unto him, saying, Thus speaketh YHWH of hosts, saying, Behold the man whose name is The BRANCH; and he shall grow up out of his place, and he shall build the temple of YHWH:
13 Even he shall build the temple of YHWH; and he shall bear the glory, and shall sit and rule upon his throne; and he shall be a priest upon his throne: and the counsel of peace shall be between them both.

If this is truly a prophesy, fortold by YHWH himself, the questions becomes "do we believe YHWH knew what His Son's Name would be, or was He just guessing?". And just who gets to name their child, the ones whom have authority over them, or anybody and their dog in the far distant future?

Here is how we arrived at the English "Jesus":

Hoshea (Hebrew)- Hoe-shay-ah
Yehoshua (Hebrew)- Yay-hoe-shoo-wah
Yeshua (Hebrew/Aramaic)- Yay-shoo-wah
Iesous (Greek)- Ee-yay-soos
Iesvs (Latin)- Yay-zoos
Jesus (English)- Jee-zus

It does not matter how a names (d)evolve over the years from one culture unto another, but rather what was one called at the time by their parents. This being said if someone in this day and time is named Jesus (JEE-zuhs) then that is how you pronounce their name, to the best of your ability no matter how much time goes by or just what becomes of this name between the time there parent named them and you begin to speak it. As it is not proper to use another form of a name just because it has (d)evolved. So if the foretold prophecy mentioned above is not only correct but authoritive then Yehoshua be the correct English transliteration of the Name of YHWH's only begotten Son.

I'd say that the Peshitta is some of the best proof we have that the name of the Messiah in His own language was pronounced "Yeshua".

History tell us that many of the copies of the ReNewed Covenant (or possiblly even some of the Originals) were destroyed. And in addition to statements made by the early Christian church fathers, the ancient Jewish Rabbis also hint, of a Hebrew original of the Gospels. Both the Jerusalem and Babylonian Talmuds and the Tosefta, relate a debate among Rabbinic Yehudeem over the method of destruction of manuscripts of ReNewed Covenant books(t. Shab. 3:5; b. Shab. 116 a; j. Shab. 15c). Specifically mentioned is a book called by them as "Gospels"(b.Shab. 116a). The question which arose was how to handle the destruction of these manuscripts, since they contained the actual Name of Eloah. It is of course, well known that the Greek New Testament manuscripts do not contain the Name but use the Greek titles "Theos" and "Kurios" as substitutes. This is because the Name is not traditionally translated into other languages, but instead is (unfortunately) translated "Lord", just as we have it in most English Bibles, and just as we find it in our late manuscripts of the Septuagint. The manuscripts these Rabbi's were discussing, must have represented the original Hebrew text, or at least early copies thereof, from which the Greek and Aramaic Texts were translated from.

Putting the preceding of the priest aside, at best the Texts of the Eastern PeshittA that we have today are from the 5th or 4th century and are beyond any doubt simply mere copies (not the original) of copies of the autographs of the apostles. Can anyone say that these copies were 100% faithful in the spellings of names? As it is clear from one copy unto the next that names were spelled differently. Again does an author of a translation, or new version for that matter, have the authority to change the way a name sounds at their whim? And on that note I ask - "Just who has the right (or audacity) to override YHWH's authority to change the Name of our Adon and Savior?" You, me? Personally, I think not. What say you?

Now within the Eastern PeshittA (absolutely the Oldest and Best that we have today) the evidence is quite clear that when The Anointed One told Shaul what His Name was He spoke it in the HEBREW language. Is this just a coincidence that The Anointed One used the same language as that of His Heavenly Father did when foretelling what His Son's Name would be? Or is it possible that The Anointed One said this Name in Aramaic but just translated it so well that Shaul just though that He was speaking Hebrew? Well being The Anointed One said a whole sentence we should be able to be assured He spoke in the Hebrew tongue and therefore spoke His Name in Hebrew.

All I am saying is let them that were named Yehoshua be called by Yehoshua, and those named Yeshua should be called Yeshua, all the while any one name Jesus should be called Jesus. Plain and simple the (d)evolution of a name should never effect names coming or going, backwards or forward ... ... ...

<!-- s --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/smile.gif" alt="" title="Smile" /><!-- s -->