Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Janet Magiera's "Messianic" and "Christian" Versions
#1
Are they pretty much the same accept the use of Semitic terminology in the Messianic and the traditional terminology in the original version? I just ordered the Messianic version in hardback and I'm just curious if there are any more differences than that. I am also wondering why Magiera turns "Yeshua" into "Yeshue". The "e" at the end is a strange choice.
Reply
#2
Hi,
Someone else can explain better but as far as I know it is
because the 'ayin' in Syriac, is written in Latin as 'e and it is not pronounced as 'a' but it is a silent vowel.
Because of this, you also have two variants of Simon (Keefa) which is written as Simeon and as Simon in the Greek NT. The 'e' is because of the ayin.

Therefore, I understand her choice to write it like this Yeshue.
Reply
#3
So you would pronounce it as "Yay-shoo" when reading her translation? Thanks for the response by the way.
Reply
#4
I would pronounce it as 'Yeshu'
Reply
#5
:

In Aramaic it sounds like this eeeee shhhh oooo

Ye is the "eeeee" sound, then the "Shhhhh" sound, then the U' with the silent ayin at the end, is the "ooooo" sound.

Thus, Yeshu' or Eshoo, is the best way to write it out in English. I prefer Yeshu'.

If you put an "a" at the end, you cause the reader to think and say ahhhh at the end...but the final letter is silent.
Reply
#6
Thirdwoe,

by putting the Y at the front you cause a lot of unlearned people, such as I, to pronounce the Y sound as either Yay or Y' at the beginning of the name.

Anywho, I prefer the original Hebrew form of the name myself - Y'-hoe-shoo-ah. The reason being is that no past transliteration, in any other languages in the past, have portrayed this name accurately. This includes the Aramaic rendering, it does not accurately transliterate the original name 100%. Now perhaps the Anointed One actually had the Aramaic rendering of this name instead of the actual Hebrew name, but I, in my reasoning recon that He would of had the Hebrew Name instead of the Aramaic one. Not saying I am right just my line of thinking leads me to believe such is all. After all the original name meant "he will save". The Y' part was the part making the definition future tense, while the O sound was actually the yod in the root yasha, and if you do away with the O sound you effectively destroy the root word. This is why many teach that when people spell the name as Yah-Shuah they are pronouncing in the Hebrew language "Yah has riches", which while this definition is not incorrect about Yah it is not the original definition of this name especially when it is referring to The Anointed One. In order to keep the root word of salvation (i.e. - yasha) in the name, where by retaining the definition of "He will save" the O must be sounded. Or at least technically that is. Any one can make up a new name and claim it means whatever they want but they must have authority to stick that name on some one in order for it to be their name. We do not have the authority to name The Anointed One, and His Heavenly Father gave Him His Name. I can not help but think being the definition of The Anointed One's Name is to be "He will save" that the root of yasha would need to be intact, whereby the O sound needs be heard when speaking the Name. And being the O sound is the Yohd in yasha morphed into a Waw it needs remain in order not to destroy the root. Let him who has ears to hear - hear.

Anyway I spell it as Yehoshuah or Y'hoshuah, the latter being a more technical way of spelling it.

May,
YHWH bless thee and keep thee;
YHWH cause His face to shine on thee, and be gracious to thee;
YHWH lift up His face to thee, and give thee shalom.

Your brother in Yehoshuah The Anointed One.

will
Reply
#7
:

The Yod "Y" has the eeee sound. And the "Y" is silent....You can see/hear this in the Latin vulgate translation too, where it has Iesu, where the "I" is also silent. In Greek it's Iesous...with again the "I" being silent. In fact, if you had an original printing of the 1611 King James Version, it reads Iesus, instead of Jesus...again the "I" being silent...it was when the "J" came to replace the "I" in English in the years after 1611, that we got the "J" spelling and thus the "J" sound...it should still be a silent, that "J" for Jesus...and then if you drop the final "s" which came over from the Greek, it is Esu, which sounds very close to the Aramaic form. These three forms of His Aramaic name, Greek, Latin, and English, are really more transliterations than translations.

Anyway... Our Master knows who we are talking to when we talk to Him...and I'm certain He's not hung up about it. In Choctaw, Yeshu' M'shikha, is spelled/pronounced Chisus Klaist ... <!-- sSmile --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/smile.gif" alt="Smile" title="Smile" /><!-- sSmile --> and many Choctaw (my ancetors) will be with us when Yeshu' or Yehoshuah returns.

Check this video out for some perspective...pretty neat.
http://wycliffeusa.wordpress.com/2010/04...ld-report/

Blessings,
Chuck
Reply
#8
Chuck,

as for looking at the Old English Bibles You can go to the following webpage and there you will find a facimal copy of the first page of the Book of Mattith-YaHu of almost every English translation of Old between the years 1390 and 1841 (including the KIV [king Iahmez/Eahmez/or Yahmez Version that is), and the English Oxford Dictionary showing the pronunciation of the elongated s as sh.
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.scribd.com/my_document_collections/3941715">http://www.scribd.com/my_document_collections/3941715</a><!-- m -->
(There are 2 pages to this folder so be sure and look them both over)
The above mentioned webpage also has information on the English letter J. It did not become official in the English language until 1630.

The Encyclopedia Americana contains the following on the J:
The form of J was unknown in any alphabet until the 14th century. Either symbol (J,I)
used initially generally had the consonantal sound of Y as in year. Gradually, the two
symbols (J,l) were differentiated, the J usually acquiring consonantal force and thus
becoming regarded as a consonant, and the I becoming a vowel. It was not until 1630
that the differentiation became general in England
.

Also for the Old English spelling of The Anointed One's Name they had an older form of the letter s that was taller and slenderer (elongated so to speak) which was to denote the sh sound (see Concise
Oxford English Dictionary at the above mentioned webpage under Pronunciation). So the Old English spelling, other than the dastardly Greek sigma attached, would have been spot on to the Aramaic rendering of The Anointed One's Hebrew Name, but still short of the Hebrew pronunciation. As the Aramaic not only does not pronounce the initial Y sound or even the O sound in the middle of the Name but it is missing the ah sound at the end of the Name as you correctly pointed out. Oh by the way I never hinted that they were translations I said they were poor transliteration (BIG DIFFERENCE).

As for the video I think it is cool, but if I may be so bold as to say "before they start another Bible in a language never done before I would like to put in a request for at least one more English Bible - The Eastern Aramaic PeshittA". Really I would like to see both Old and ReNewed Covenants of the Peshitta in English in many different translations, but that's just me. <!-- sBlush --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/blush.gif" alt="Blush" title="Blush" /><!-- sBlush -->

And yes, I think my grandmaw <!-- s:inlove: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/inlove.gif" alt=":inlove:" title="In Love" /><!-- s:inlove: --> will be in the age to come here upon the renewed earth also, even though she called The Anointed One by the name JEE-zuhs and was a Sun's-day gotomeeting, pork eating, Southern Baptist (that observed Christ's-Masses and Easter Sun's-day sun rise services) to boot. But that does not mean that He like her doing such things! Heaven forbid! So yes he knows of Whom we are speaking to or of but that does not mean that He likes the fact that we are for the most part ignorant of His and His Son's Names. And just because he will be far more lenient toward the unknowing does not mean He will not or is not peeved at the arrogant for thinking such that His Name or His Son's Name can be pronounced to suite our fancy as opposed to His. Again it is one thing to not know but do one's best to respect the how to pronounce the Names, yet entirely another to shun and/or rebuke knowledge we know to be true.

And the Choctaw transliteration, apparently from the Greek of the Aramaic, which you shared backs up what I said earlier about all languages in the past misnomered The Anointed One. Misnomer look it up - Web definitions:

an incorrect or unsuitable name
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=misnomer">http://wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=misnomer</a><!-- m -->

An error regarding a name.
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.irausa.com/glossary.asp?letter=m">http://www.irausa.com/glossary.asp?letter=m</a><!-- m -->


{2Timo-Theos [2Timothy] 2:15}
Make every effort to diligently study thine ownself,
in order to assist the Eloheem, a teacher that needs not to be ashamed,
righteously preaching the Word; of Truth.
{2 Kayfah [2Peter] 1:5}
And beside this, giving all diligence, add to your faith virtue;
and to virtue knowledge;
{1Thessalonians 5:21}
Prove all things; hold fast that which is good.
{Romans 12:2}
And be not conformed to this world:
but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind,
that ye may prove what is good, and acceptable, and perfect, the will of Eloheem
{Colossians 2:4}
And this I say, lest any man should Bamboozle you with enticing words.

Again, I am not saying that The Anointed One was never called Ee-shoo or that he never answers prayers unless you pronounce His Name correctly. I have personally had many a prayers answered back when I was a Sun's-day gotomeeting, piglet eating (e.g. - pass the porkchop please), First Baptist (that observed Christ's-Masses and Easter Sun's-day sun rise services) all while calling The Anointed One by the name JEE-zuhs <!-- s:biggrin: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/biggrin.gif" alt=":biggrin:" title="Big Grin" /><!-- s:biggrin: --> and proud of it, so yes many people will be with Him in the Age to come but not all will be priest -

{Hos 4:6}
because you have rejected knowledge, I will also reject you, that you shall be no priest to Me
(no offence meant, none should be taken, just saying is all. You know iron sharpens iron type stuff)
Reply
#9
ScorpioSniper2 Wrote:Are they pretty much the same accept the use of Semitic terminology in the Messianic and the traditional terminology in the original version? I just ordered the Messianic version in hardback and I'm just curious if there are any more differences than that.

ScorpioSniper2, you can check between these two versions upon any verse you wish to compare by using your hardcover copy of the Messianic Edition and the ELECTRONIC EDITION of Magiera (Christian) Peshitta NT Translation found at the following URL:

<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://ccmz.info:10080/bexpo/english/engmgi/index.php">http://ccmz.info:10080/bexpo/english/engmgi/index.php</a><!-- m -->
Reply
#10
The Texas RAT Wrote:Also for the Old English spelling of The Anointed One's Name they had an older form of the letter s that was taller and slenderer (elongated so to speak) which was to denote the sh sound (see Concise
Oxford English Dictionary at the above mentioned webpage under Pronunciation). So the Old English spelling, other than the dastardly Greek sigma attached, would have been spot on to the Aramaic rendering of The Anointed One's Hebrew Name, but still short of the Hebrew pronunciation.

Shlama Will,

The long "s" is no different phonetically from the regular "s". See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long_s. The letter "esh", a very similar-looking letter was only introduced in 1847 to represent the "sh" sound, which was later adopted into the International Phonetic Alphabet. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Esh_%28letter%29. Therefore, the English "Jesus" results from a transliteration from the Greek, where there is no s/sh distinction.

bar Sinko
Reply
#11
bar Sinko Wrote:
The Texas RAT Wrote:Also for the Old English spelling of The Anointed One's Name they had an older form of the letter s that was taller and slenderer (elongated so to speak) which was to denote the sh sound (see Concise Oxford English Dictionary at the above mentioned webpage under Pronunciation). So the Old English spelling, other than the dastardly Greek sigma attached, would have been spot on to the Aramaic rendering of The Anointed One's Hebrew Name, but still short of the Hebrew pronunciation.

Shlama Will,

The long "s" is no different phonetically from the regular "s". See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long_s. The letter "esh", a very similar-looking letter was only introduced in 1847 to represent the "sh" sound, which was later adopted into the International Phonetic Alphabet. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Esh_%28letter%29. Therefore, the English "Jesus" results from a transliteration from the Greek, where there is no s/sh distinction.

bar Sinko

After reading your references I see the difference between the older long s and the 1847 form for the sh sound. I will no longer reference the IPA one as the same archaic one in the older texts.

And at the same time no one should reference the Jnfamous capital letter i as the modern hard consonant J sound, but either as the long e vowel sound or as the consonant y sound, as history clearly show that the capital letter i only appears to resemble the modern capital j.
Reply
#12
Thirdwoe Wrote::

In Aramaic it sounds like this eeeee shhhh oooo

I think this pronunciation is an eastern Aramaic pronunciation (possibly a later one).
IIUC . "Jesus" coming from the west would have been pronounced with the "y" sound in the same way english speakiers would pronounce it at the start of such a word.

IOW in the west it would have been Yeshu, in the east it would have been Eshu (or something similar)
Reply
#13
:

Yea...the oooo there is like E Shoe...or E Shew Not E Show....but I've heard that pronuciation as well. There are so many versions of His name, it's crazy. I like Eshu, for the Eastern Peshitta, but Yeshu is fine too. Even in His time on Earth, He had Aramaic, Hebrew, Greek, and Latin variations of His Name...On the sign above His head for instance.

Shlama/Shalom,
Chuck
Reply
#14
judge Wrote:IOW in the west it would have been Yeshu, in the east it would have been Eshu (or something similar)

As it stands, in Jesus' own dialect of Aramaic (early Galilean) it would have been closer to "Yeshua" (Yeh-shoo(ah)).

Although the gutterals would have been slightly reduced (Kutscher makes some good arguments about the extent), they would not be eliminated, nor would the vowels on them completely disappear.

Initial yod elongating into an "ee" sound is only attested in one Galilean word and only in the Emphatic (/ida/ vs /yada/ = "the hand"; Galilean retains the Absolute/Emphatic distinction). It also does not seem to be a universal feature of the dialect as it only occurs on ~2 unique occasions out of 230+ times /yad/ occurs in the corpus overall.

Peace,
-Steve
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)