The Messiah's Name

[The Texas RAT]

Will, ... And your name IS a misnomer...it's a shortened form of the name William. Now, make the same argument apply to your name, and see if it makes any sense at all...as you are trying to do with The Messiah's Name.

Chuck, you just do not seem to get it do you? Well I'll try and say it real slow for you OK.

William is the original name, of what origin I do not know, and Will is a short form thereof - as Yah is for YHWH. Yah is not a transliteration of YHWH it is a shortened form of the Divine Name.

OK, now this is where I seem to lose you, I was not named William. And anyone named William was not name Will. To call me William would be misnomering me, and to call someone whom was named William Will would be misnomering them.

Same goes for Yehoshua, Yeshua, Iesus (pronounced: yay-SOOCE), Jesus (pronounced: JEE-zuhs), and Jesus (pronounced: hay-SOOCE).[can you see where the Spanish speaking people realized that the English form was to have the last syllable pronounced like the Greek and made the correction in their pronunciation of this name, yet they messed up the first syllable with the H sound. They should of realized at the same time that the J was to make the sound of Y and therefore used what ever letter they use for the Y sound. What a mess]. But while these are poor transliteration of the original Hebrew name of Yehoshua they are just that poor transliterations of the original Hebrew name. They are not misnomers until they are used for the wrong people. So if one was named with one of these poor transliterations then that is not misnomering them. To misnomer them you would either need to further hack up the name or even go back and try to use the original (correct) form of the name on them. So to call someone named Jesus (pronounced: hay-SOOCE) Jesus(pronounced: JEE-zuhs) would be misnomering them even though one used the seemingly correct spelling. It would not be proper to call someone named Jesus(pronounced: JEE-zuhs) Yehoshua (pronounced: Y'-ho-SHOO-ah), as that would be misnomering them. It is all about the pronunciation one's parents put on them, not what the name may have become or used to be.

A nomer is a specific phonetic sound set upon one as a specific appellation. It is disrespectful to misnomer others unless they ask that you do so. Let's just for an example here say that The Anointed One's Name was actually Yeshua (a poor Aramaic transliteration of the Hebrew Name Yehoshua, or posibly a shortenen form at best) - then it would be misnomering Him to call him by the original form of the name as that would not have been the appellation YHWH put on Him.

So now back to my name it is not nor was ever William, yet as a shorter form it retain the phonetics. But I have heard that Germans would tend to pronounce the W as a V, in which then if they did so they would be misnomering me (ignorantly at best). In which case I would not be upset with them but if they where going to be around much I would tell them that Vill is not my name and that they are misnomering me. I would try as gently as I know how to correct them. And if they tried but could not pronounce my name correctly I would be alright with them doing so, but not if they had the attitude that they could care less and was going to just call me Vill anyway. Such would be disrespectful of me and my parents whom named me. But by the same means it would be misnomering a German that was named Vill to call the Will. Chuck, if you can not see that then we be wasting our time and clogging up this thread going round and round, back and forth, up and down a rabbit trail.

His name is awesome, in any language, ... ... ...

Yes His Name is awesome no matter what language one would speak it in, and just in case you still do not get it I will reiterate that it will sound exactly the same when done properly no matter what language one would speak it in! I agree that the other forms and or poor transliterations sound differently but at the same time they are not The Anointed One's Appellation.

and I have nothing but respect for all forms of it, and so should you. Just like you and I have respect for each other?s form of the longer name, ... ... ....

I have no problem with calling people by their appellation, and if that was a poorly done transliteration then so be it. But I will not use such on one whom's name is another so-called form of the same name as that would be misnomering them. Anyone that was named Jesus (pronounced: JEE-zuhs) that is what I call them, and anyone that was named Jesus (pronounced: hay-SOOCE) that is what I call them. I do not mismatch the so-called different forms of a name, and again I say I do so to be respectful unto them as not to hack their name up.

You can also call me Chas or Charley if you like, it won't bother me at all.

Again, just because you do not mind is not a righteous reason for you to use your sentiments as a righteous reason to misnomer others.

Jesus must have been called by at least two forms of His Name, The Hebrew and the Aramaic forms, which was the main languages in use at that time in Israel among the Jewish People. The Greek and Latin forms were most likely also heard by Him, from those who spoke those languages.

Ignorance is rampant throughout this earth, and because of such I agree that He most likely heard it all. But it must have been taught that we should respectfully use the correct form of His name as Celsus wrote (in 178AD) of the early Believers:
"They assume that by pronouncing the Name of their Teacher they are armored against the powers of the earth and air. And they are quite insistent on the efficacy of the Name as a means of protection: pronounce It improperly, they say, and it is ineffective. Greek and Latin will not do; it must be said in a barbarian tongue to work." Celsus on the True Doctrine, A Discourse Against the Christians, R. Joseph Hoffman (page118)
Now this is a comment made by a non-Believer so you can not say that believers thought just as he says (being he could easily be putting extra words in to they mouths, as you, Chuck, keep doing here with me), but it does show that they believed that pronouncing it correctly was a big deal, and that no one should use other forms of it as that is not proper etiquette.

Will, you seem to think that Our Father gets upset if you don't use Hebrew terms when referring to Him or speaking with Him. If this is true, then He's upset all the time with millions of His Children who don't speak Hebrew, but use their own languages to speak with and refer to Him.

I never said anything about having to speak Hebrew or that Hebrew was better than any other language. All I have tried to simply convey is if one's name was originally in one language then that is how one should pronounce it despite whether their language has a different for thereof, or even if their language has the original form of the name they should still pronounce someone's name as their parents proclaimed it to be. So no I do not think we have to speak Hebrew until we come to the names of Hebrew People that were actually named with a Hebrew name.

And I thought this is rather odd, Will...but the name in Choctaw for "Will", your name, is "Chuk".

[/quote]
Sounds to me like that is a translation not a transliteration. And even though that is the Choctaw equivalent (definition wise) it is not proper to translate names so Choctaw speaking people should call me Will, and I would in return call some one that was named Chuk in Choctaw Chuk out of respect to them.


Anyway being this is (still) a rabbit trail, would it be alright with you, Chuck, if we get back on tract (whether we agree on misnomers or not) and to our best ability try to discuss the definition of The Anointed One's Name?