Brothers and Sisters

You may be shocked when you read this page as you progress through it you may think I have lost my mind but please bear with me until the end and then if you think I am crazy or stupid or whatever. I do not believe you will though. I do not want anyone to think I am blaspheming when I say this so please do not misunderstand me. I know Christ (Anointed one of God) walked on this earth and died sinless for me and for you also.

I am going to simply prove in this first part that his name was never Jesus. Yes I said his name is in no way shape or form Jesus. Names when they are translated do not lose their pronunciation and if they do they never lose it completely as Jesus has. In my opinion it was never done on purpose.

The truth is if your name was Elijah in Hebrew it might be spelled with Hebrew lettering.

Elijah would be spelled like this “אליּהוּ אליּה“

In Hebrew it was supposed to be pronounced ay-lee-yaw', ay-lee-yaw'-hoo

In Greek it was spelled “Ἡλίας”

In Greek it was pronounced Hēlias hay-lee'-as

These 2 although looks are deceiving are pronounced very similar the H is silent and Greek always adds an S to the end of names. For instance notice that in scripture that Timothy was also called Timotheus” and Mark was sometimes called Markus in our English translations this is because something of Greek translation was left in as it was translated into English. The same happened with Jesus it had an us added while in Greek.

You always have to write names down differently in a new language likewise the entire message has to be in the same tongues or else the reader cannot understand what is being read.

A Hebrew man not knowing Greek cannot read Greek unless it is written in his own tongue so it must be translated. I have heard some people say why did they have to change his name? Why could they just not leave it alone? It could remain said the same but written as I said we did not always have interpreters around with alphabet translations to correct everything. We are talking here about 2 other languages but are talking about it in a third language if you can understand what I am saying.

If Paul had written Corinthians in Greek but omitted Christ name but inserted it in Hebrew lettering the Greeks could not have read what the name was nor could they have baptized people in a name they could not read. I hope everyone is with me on this.

The Letter J added to language in the 14th century and it did not make the J sound of today but rather it made an E sound instead. The ancient Hebrew alphabet or better yet it was called the alephbet because the first letter was aleph did not contain any J’s or J sounds of any type. It also did not contain any vowels. Sometime later they came up with a system of using marks above letters to know where to insert vowels. I am not going to go into vowels discussion.

When the J’s were added in the English language they still had an E sound but later for whatever reason they took on a J sound changing the very nature of the pronunciation.

Jesus is a translation from the original Greek writings that was this word in Greek “ Ἰησοῦς” This translates into the English letters “Iēsous” These in the strongs will be pronounced like this “ee-ay-sooce'” The first King James version of 1611 did not use a J in Jesus name. If you practice saying the EE and AY fast you will come out with a “Yah” sound and you know already from the other names that it should pick up and “US” on the end since it is a name the next part would be the “SOO” which should be pronounced Hebrew style since this is the origin and since Greek has no good way of making a “SH” sound the “SOO” had to do so the sound “SS” should be the sound so when you say it should sound something like this yah-soo-us. All of you will agree that Mary and Joseph were Hebrew that the origin of the name would be Hebrew also. If we look at what the Strongs says about the origin it says it comes from the Hebrew word yehoshua which is pronounced like this “(YAH-SHOO-UH)” The H on the end is again silent like Elijah from above.

If we look closely we figure out that the Greek Word Iesous is very similar to the Hebrew Word Yehoshua and since they mean exactly the same thing they must be the origin of Jesus’ name and since it is traced back that way we have his true name and pronunciation

The Strongs says this Iesous means “Of Hebrew origin [H3091]; Jesus (that is, Jehoshua), the name of our Lord and two (three) other Israelites: - Jesus.”

I am including another web page with my report that another person did. I do not agree with his correction to the book of Hebrews about Joshua as only God Yeshua=Jesus could give rest. I do not guarantee any thing on his page but it has a lot of truth take any of it and prove this for your self.

There is a scripture in the bible that say there is only one name under heaven whereby we must be saved in acts 4:12 is where it is found if this means there is a unique pronunciation then maybe we need to be careful. I believe now that there is a unique pronunciation to his name and if it’s done in ignorance maybe you will be fine but maybe you will not be fine. Think about it.

I have always taught baptism in Jesus name as the only unique form of salvation I now am correcting this to Yeshua as said like so “Yah-shoo-uh.

The plan of salvation as I see it includes repentance and baptism in the name of Yeshua Christ for the remission of sins and the receiving of the gift of the Holy Spirit and the continuance of living in his Word.

Everything below here I did not write so as I stated before I added it as information purposes only and to be studied out. Thanks for your time and I ask you to please at least finish the article its worth reading at least once.

Jesus or Yeshua?
The Name Jesus or The Name Yeshua?

The debate over which is the correct name for the Messiah can be a very divisive issue and cause more harm than good. Those who use the name of Jesus point out that “Jesus” is exactly how it is translated into English and since we are reading in English, this is in fact the proper way to say the name in English. Those on the other side of the camp point out that the man the English speaking world calls “Jesus” was born a Hebrew and would have had a Hebrew name. They point out that the translation is in error and that the name should be pronounced Joshua at the least and more likely as Yeshua (also spelled Yashua).

Those who hold to the name Yeshua are usually the ones to stress the importance of this matter. Followers of Yeshua believe that “Jesus” is a false name at best and a pagan name at worst. In either case, it is certain that it could not possibly have been the actual name of the Messiah. In other words, the Apostles did not call their master “Jesus” (GEE-ZUZ) as we pronounce it today. Followers of Jesus on the other hand tend to find this argument trivial and stress that salvation does not come from being able to correctly pronounce a Hebrew name. It is often said by followers of Jesus, “I think God is smart enough to figure out whom you mean when you pray to him.

But, what is the truth regarding the name? Which one, Yeshua or Jesus, is MORE correct? And more importantly, does it matter?

At issue here are two extremes. On one side of the argument, Jesus is the correct English name for the savior, and even if it is not, it doesn’t really matter because God knows the heart and knows what you mean. On the other side of the argument, “Jesus” is a pagan name meaning “Hail Zeus” and therefore makes “Jesus” into a false Messiah and a pagan god. The truth of the matter, as is usually the case when presented with two extremes, probably lies somewhere down the middle.

The evidence that will be presented here will demonstrate two things. First, that “Jesus” (pronounced GEE-ZUZ), could not in fact have been the actual name of the Messiah. It is absolutely 100% impossible that the followers of this man actually called him (GEE-ZUZ) while he was alive. This begs the question then, why should his followers today call him (GEE-ZUZ) if his follower’s back then did not? The second point that will be demonstrated is that “Jesus” most likely developed through some honest translation errors and it is possible that no one intentionally gave him a name meaning “Hail Zeus”. Furthermore, just because “Jesus” is an incorrect name, a person is not likely to lose a chance of salvation simply because they call upon the “wrong name”.

As stated before, the truth is often somewhere down the middle and the evidence presented here will suggest that “Jesus” is an incorrect pronunciation of the Messiah’s name and should therefore avoid being used, however, those who use the name Jesus in ignorance are not in danger of losing salvation.

Names Do Not Change!

It is a simple fact of language that a personal name does not change when a person travels to another country. John is just as much John in the United States as he is when he is in Japan, China, or Pakistan. Even if John were to write his name in a different language (say Chinese or Arabic), the pronunciation will remain the same. Regardless of what letters in the Arabic alphabet John has to work with, the name will still be pronounced (JOHN).

In the United States where I live, we see this example every day. For example, I am a fan of the Seattle Mariners. Seattle has a Japanese baseball player by the name of Ichiro (pronounced EE-CHEE-ROH). Now I can guarantee you that the Japanese alphabet looks nothing like the English alphabet and yet when I was sitting next to a group of Japanese men at a baseball game in Seattle I could not understand a word they said until Ichiro stepped up to the plate. Then with sudden clarity I heard “EEEEE-CHEEEE-ROH!”

Now lets explore this a little further. Looking at the spelling of Ichiro in English and using the English (Americanized) rules of pronunciation, it would seem likely that the name should be pronounced ITCH-IH-ROH or something like that. In fact, I have often heard people calling him ITCH-IH-ROH until they found out everyone else was calling him EE-CHEE-ROH.

The same thing can be seen in the area where I grew up in. My hometown has a large Hispanic population. I know a guy who spells his name as “Jamie” in the English alphabet and yet we pronounce his name (HIGH-MEE). Now in the United States there are people with the name Jamie for which we pronounce their name (JAY-MEE) and there are people for which we pronounce the same spelling “Jamie” as (HIGH-MEE). Same alphabet, different pronunciations based on our understanding of the persons nationality.

Now let’s get to the name of Jesus. You may already be aware that in the United States there are Hispanic males with the name “Jesus”. If you are, then you are probably well aware that you pronounce that name as (HAY-SOOS). Again, why is it that when reading “Jesus” in the English Bible an American will say (GEE-ZUZ) but when looking at “Jesus” in say a phone book he will say (HAY-SOOS)? The word is identical in spelling. But, if the person we are speaking about is Hispanic then “Jesus” is pronounced (HAY-SOOS). So, we rightfully might ask, what if that person was a Hebrew?

Iesous is a Greek Spelling of a Hebrew Name

The development of the name Jesus is a bit confusing but can better be understood when one realizes that the same spelling can be pronounced more than one way. When we understand this fact, we will both come to understand why some Jewish and Messianic believers maintain that “Jesus” (HAY-SOOS) is a pagan name and why other Jewish and Messianic believers say that “Jesus” should actually be written and pronounced as “Yeshua” (YEH-SHOO-UH or YAH-SHOO-UH).

The Greek word transliterated as “Jesus” in modern English Bibles is Strong’s number 2424, Iesous which the Strong’s Concordance says is pronounced as (EE-AY-SOOCE’). We should first ask the question, “If the name is pronounced (EE-AY-SOOCE) then why do we say (GEE-ZUZ)? Remember, a persons name does not change pronunciation with the change of the alphabet. Already we see an inconsistency. According to Strong’s, this name of the Messiah is spelled Iesous and is pronounced (EE-AY-SOOCE) and yet all modern English Bibles spell the messiahs name “Jesus” and pronounce it (GEE-ZUZ). Before I get into defending how the modern spelling and pronunciation came about however, I believe it would be best to explain what I believed happened with the original Greek word transliterated as Iesous.

What we first have to understand is that the messiah did not have a unique name. Many Hebrew men were called by the same name that the messiah was called. One such individual we all know from the Old Testament scriptures is Joshua, the one who led Israel after Moses died. In Greek, the same exact word transliterated Iesous is used to refer to Joshua of the Old Testament and Jesus of the New Testament. There is no difference in the spelling of these two names. In fact, this little truth is the reason why the King James Version made a couple of embarrassing mistakes that was later corrected in the New King James Version. Let’s take a look at this.

If you look up Hebrews 4:8 in the King James Version, this is what you will find:

“For if Jesus had given them rest, then would he not afterward have spoken of another day.” (Heb 4:8 from the KJV)

In the above verse, “Jesus” is Strong’s number 2424, Iesous. The problem is, the context of Hebrews chapter four is not talking about Jesus here! It is talking about Joshua of the Old Testament. The translators of every other modern translation I know of to date, including the New King James Version, have corrected this error. Here are some examples from the more popular translations including the New King James Version.

“For if Joshua had given them rest, then He would not afterward have spoken of another day.” (from the New King James Version)

“For if Joshua had given them rest, He would not have spoken of another day after that.” (from the New American Standard Bible)

“This new place of rest was not the land of Canaan, where Joshua led them. If it had been, God would not have spoken later about another day of rest.” (from the New Living Translation).

“For if Joshua had given them rest, God would not speak later of another day.” (from the Revised Standard Version)

“This new place of rest he is talking about does not mean the land of Israel that Joshua led them into. If that were what God meant, he would not have spoken long afterwards about "today" being the time to get in.” (from The Living Bible)

“For if Joshua had given them rest, God would not have spoken later about another day.” (from the New International Version)

This same exact type of error is also recorded in Acts 7:44 as follows:

"Our fathers had the tabernacle of witness in the wilderness, as he had appointed, speaking unto Moses, that he should make it according to the fashion that he had seen. Which also our fathers that came after brought in with Jesus into the possession of the Gentiles, whom God drave out before the face of our fathers, unto the days of David;" (Acts 7:44-45 from the KJV)

Now read the same verses in other translations:

"Our fathers had the tabernacle of witness in the wilderness, as He appointed, instructing Moses to make it according to the pattern that he had seen, which our fathers, having received it in turn, also brought with Joshua into the land possessed by the Gentiles, whom God drove out before the face of our fathers until the days of David," (Acts 7:44-45 from the New King James Version)


"Our forefathers had the tabernacle of the Testimony with them in the desert. It had been made as God directed Moses, according to the pattern he had seen. Having received the tabernacle, our fathers under Joshua brought it with them when they took the land from the nations God drove out before them. It remained in the land until the time of David," (Acts 7:44-46 from the New International Version)


"Our fathers had the tabernacle of testimony in the wilderness, just as He who spoke to Moses directed him to make it according to the pattern which he had seen. "And having received it in their turn, our fathers brought it in with Joshua upon dispossessing the nations whom God drove out before our fathers, until the time of David." (Acts 7:44-46 from the New American Standard Bible)

"Our fathers had the tent of witness in the wilderness, even as he who spoke to Moses directed him to make it, according to the pattern that he had seen. Our fathers in turn brought it in with Joshua when they dispossessed the nations which God thrust out before our fathers. So it was until the days of David," (Acts 7:44-46 from the Revised Standard Version)

As you can see, all of the above translations caught the errors of the “authorized” King James Version. However, the error was an honest and simple mistake on the part of the King James translators. The error was made because in Greek there is absolutely no difference in spelling between the name translated as Joshua and the name translated as Jesus.

Notice what the Barne's Commentary has to say:

"His name is Jesus: The name Jesus is the same as Saviour. It is derived from the verb signifying to save. In Hebrew it is the same as Joshua. In two places [Acts 7:45 and Hebrews 4:8] in the New Testament it is used where is means Joshua, the leader of the Jews into Canaan, and in our translation the name Joshua should have been retained." (Barnes' notes: Note on Matt. 1:21)

A further witness has this to say:

"Jesus. The Greek form of a Hebrew name, which had been borne by two illustrious individuals in former periods of the Jewish History --- Joshua, the successor of Moses, and Jeshua, the high priest, who with Zerubbabel took so active a part in the re-establishment of the civil and religious polity of the Jews in their return from Babylon. Its original and full form is Jehoshua, becoming by contraction Joshua or Jeshua." (Word studies in the New Testament, by Marvin R. Vincent)

The question we have to ask ourselves again is, if the spelling for Joshua and the spelling for Jesus are identical (Iesous) why is one pronounced (JOSH-YOU-AH) and the other pronounced (GEE-ZUZ)?

Note what the Encyclopedia Britannica has to say:

"Jesus Christ---...The same is true of the name Jesus. In the Septuagint it is the customary Greek form for the common Hebrew name Joshua;" (Encyclopedia Britannica, 15th ed., Vol. 10 p.149)

Now here is another interesting little tidbit of information. The “J” consonant sound in the modern alphabet is a relatively new invention. The hard “J” sound (JAY) did not even appear in language until around the 15th century (thousands of years after the death of the Messiah). Furthermore, the letter “J” was a development from the letter “Y” which originally had a (YEH) sound. Therefore, even the name “Joshua” as it appears in the English translations would more appropriately be pronounced (YEH-SHOO-UH) by those living prior to the 15th century. What we do know for certain however is that it is absolutely impossible for the apostles to have referred to their master as (GEE-ZUZ) since the hard “J” (JAY) sound did not even exist in the language of the time. More on this later.

So, let’s review what we know so far. What we know for sure right now is that the Greek to English transliteration Iesous is the exact same name for the Old Testament “Joshua” as it is for the New Testament “Jesus”. This fact has led the King James Version to make an “error” in translating Hebrews 4:8 and Acts 7:44-45 with the name “Jesus” when in fact the person being spoken of is Joshua. To be consistent, it should be noted of course that both men should either be called Jesus (Old and New Testament) or both be called Joshua. The spelling of the name simply does not allow different pronunciations, especially since both men are Hebrews. We should not have a problem understanding this concept. How many Joe’s do we have in the United States? For that matter, how many George Bush’s do we have? And yet, people know how to distinguish one George Bush from another.

The next question we should ask is how should the letters Iesous be pronounced? The Strong’s concordance tells us the pronunciation of this word is (EE-AY-SOOCE’). Oddly enough however, neither “Joshua” (pronounced JOSH-YOU-UH) nor “Jesus” (pronounced GEE-ZUZ) sound anything like (EE-AY-SOOCE). Since a person’s name does not change pronunciation with the alphabet as we have shown in modern examples, it should become evident that something is wrong with Strong’s suggested pronunciation. Or is there?

Using our previous examples, if I wrote down the letters of a name “Jesus” and ask someone in America to tell me how you pronounce that name they would very likely say (GEE-ZUZ). But, if I showed them the same name and told them that this is a Hispanic person who’s last name is say Gomez then how would they say his name is pronounced? Most English speaking citizens would clearly make the conversion in their head and tell you that it is pronounced (HAY-SOOS). The same thing could very easily be happening in the Strong’s concordance. Strong’s is telling you how those letters would likely sound in the language it was written – in this case Greek. They simply are saying that a Greek person would pronounce those letters, transliterated as Iesous, as (EE-AY-SOOCE). But what if we told Strong’s that this man was a Hebrew? How would the same exact letters, Iesous, be pronounced if the subject is a Hebrew?

I am now going to show you how the Greek to English transliteration, Iesous, would actually be pronounced as (YEH-SHOO-UH or YAH-SHOO-UH) if the subject is a Hebrew. Keep in mind, modern translators have already confirmed this for you by translating Iesous as “Joshua” in Hebrews 4:8. They are well aware that the word Iesous can sound like “Joshua” (JOSH-YOU-UH) or (YAH-SHOO-UH). The only reason they don’t translate the name as “Joshua” when referring to the messiah is that they have mistakenly believed that Iesous is the Messiah’s GREEK name instead of recognizing that Iesous is the Greek SPELLING of the HEBREW name as in the case of “Joshua”.

Strong’s concordance tells us that the word Iesous is pronounced (EE-AY-SOOCE). In Greek, the letter represented by “I” in Iesous carries an “EE” sound. This is common to many languages around the world. The second letter represented as “e” carries an “AY” sound, again common to many languages. However, the two sounds combined, when said quickly, produce a sound like (YAY). Try it. Say “EE” and then “AY” over and over until you start to blend them into one. Quickly you will hear the “YAY” sound developing. This sound (YAY) is a close approximation to the Hebrew sound (YAH) or (YUH).

Often times one language does not have an exact equivalent sound or letter combination to produce a sound from another language. In this case, the “Ie” combination makes the closest Greek transliterated approximation to the “YAH” or “YUH” sound in Hebrew. It is not perfect but close enough that a person who knows the name is Hebrew can make the alteration

It is also interesting to note that in the Greek language there is no way to represent the sound “SH”. No combination of Greek letters will produce the “SH” sound when reading in Greek. Therefore, the closest approximation to this would be the sound “ESS”. So, in a Greek transliteration how would we make the sound (SHOO)? The closest we could come was to make the sound (SOO). Notice how Strong’s translates the last half of the name Iesous as (SOOCE). Do you see the (SOO) sound in there? Yes, of course.

Now lastly we must understand that a Greek language tradition is that all male names end in a “US” sound. Matthias, Timothias, Marcus, etc. If the Messiah’s name ended with an “UH” sound then the way we would transliterate that from Greek to English would be with a “us” ending.

So, let’s break down the transliteration Iesous. We shall break it into three parts like so, Ie-so-us. As we learned above, the “Ie” combination makes a “YAY” or “YAH” sound. The “so” combination makes a “SOO” sound and the “us” combination makes an “UHS” sound. Put them all together and we have something like (YAY-SOO-UHS) or (YAH-SOO-UHS). Now, it should readily be understandable that the pronunciation (YAH-SOO-UHS) is not very far off from the pronunciation (YAH-SHOO-UH). It is my firm belief therefore that the transliteration, Iesous, was the closest approximation to (YAH-SHOO-UH) that could be made given the alphabet and grammar rules we have to work with. It is up to the reader or speaker therefore to understand that the subject of the word is a Hebrew and pronounce it in the appropriate manner.

In the introduction I pointed out that there is a group of believers who claim that “Jesus” is a pagan name, which gives honor to a pagan God. Those who hold to this position point out that the Greek transliteration, Iesous is pronounced (YAY-SOOS) and that this is close to “Yeah Zeus!” or “Hail Zeus”. The Strong’s suggested pronunciation of Iesous (EE-AY-SOOCE) is very close in sound to (YAY-SOOS) so the argument has some validity. The full presentation of the subject is worthy of study and can be found at many websites on the internet, however, for the purpose of this article I will point out what I believe is a fundamental error in this line of thought.

As we have demonstrated above, Iesous, is likely the closest approximation to (YAH-SHOO-UH) that the Greek transliteration could make. Strong’s is likely showing the pronunciation as it would be pronounced in GREEK. However, if we understand that the subject being spoken of is a HEBREW it changes everything. The argument that Iesous is a pagan name rests on the position that Iesous is the GREEK name for Jesus which was different than his HEBREW name. However, it is more likely that Iesous is the closest Greek approximation to his HEBREW name and therefore is not a new name given to him by the Greeks. Again, if you asked an English speaking person to pronounce “Jamie” they would say (JAY-ME) unless you first told them the person is Hispanic in which case they would likely say (HIGH-ME). Strong’s is simply showing the Greek pronunciation without taking into account that “Jesus” was HEBREW. Therefore any argument that Iesous is a pagan name meaning “Hail Zeus” or “Yeah Zeus” is off on the wrong track at the start.

How We Arrived at "Jesus" (GEE-ZUZ)

All of this still leaves us with the question of how we came about to have the spelling and pronunciation of the name “Jesus” (GEE-ZUZ). The development of the name can be summarized as follows. First, we must understand that Iesous is the closest Greek approximation to the HEBREW pronunciation (YAH-SHOO-UH) as we could get. However the Greek letters themselves, if we did not know the subject was HEBREW, sounds more like (YAY-SOOS). This sound (YAY-SOOS) was picked up by the Latin Vulgate which gave it a slightly different pronunciation and then from Latin to English still another pronunciation. In the English language the letter “Y” representing a “YAH” sound was replaced by the letter “J” when at the start of a word and before a vowel. This effectively, and for simplicity sake, changed the sounding of (YAY-SOOS) to (JAY-SOOS). When the messiah's name was transliterate into Greek, the transliteration came out to "Iesous". Later, when Iesous was transliterated into Latin, it became "Iesus", which was then carried over into English it became our modern day "Jesus" when the letter "J" developed. From this point then it is not hard to see how the pronunciation could easily evolve from (JAY-SOOS) to (GEE-ZUZ).

Notice what the Catholic Encyclopedia has to say:

"The Sacred Name ---- The word Jesus is the Latin form of the Greek "Iesous" which in turn is the transliteration of the Hebrew Jeshua, or Joshua, or again Jehoshua, meaning 'Jehovah is Salvation' " (Catholic Encyclopedia, Vol. 8, p. 374)

Again, all of this mumbo jumbo boils down to one common error. A persons name does not change with the change of the alphabet or culture! Ichiro Suzuki is (EE-CHEE-ROW) in Japan, the United States, Germany, China, Afghanistan, Budapest, etc, etc, etc. The translators simply failed to maintain this grammatical rule and allowed the pronunciation of the name to change slightly with each language that was transliterated into. It is simply not true that “Jesus” (GEE-ZUZ) is the messiah’s “English” name any more than Iesous (EE-AY-SOOCE) is his Greek name. Iesous is a Greek form of the HEBREW name. Jesus is an English form of the Latin form of the Greek form of the HEBREW name. The name of the messiah did not change…only the alphabets his name was written in!

Conclusion

As a recap now, there is one thing we know for absolute certain: “Jesus” pronounced (GEE-ZUZ) cannot possibly have been the actual name of the messiah. The “J” consonant and sound does not appear in either the Hebrew language or the Greek language in which the messiah lived. To claim therefore that anyone who uses a different name (other than GEE-ZUZ) is in danger of losing salvation is a grave error. There are in fact Christians who quote the scripture that “there is only one name under heaven by which we can be saved” to prove that unless you say (GEE-ZUZ) you cannot be saved. These individuals unfortunately have missed the boat entirely.

It is fairly certain that (YEH-SHOO-UH or YAH-SHOO-UH) is a much closer pronunciation to the messiah’s name. So close in fact that nearly ALL modern English translations speak of “Joshua” pronounced (JOSH-YOU-UH) and thereby confirm that (YAH-SHOO-UH) is a close approximation. Furthermore, we have proven that “Joshua” and “Jesus” are the same identical Greek transliterated word Iesous and therefore should be pronounced the same. At the VERY least we should be pronouncing the messiah’s name as “Joshua” (JOSH-YOU-UH), not (GEE-ZUZ).

We also know that Iesous is likely the closest approximation that could be made in the Greek to the Hebrew pronunciation (YAH-SHOO-UH). Having understood this then, why would anyone choose to use a blatantly false name instead of a name that is much more accurate? Yet, it boggles the mind to watch most people come to this understanding and agree that (GEE-ZUZ) is not the correct pronunciation of the messiah’s name and then turn around and refuse to correct their error.

I guarantee you that the messiah did no call himself (GEE-ZUZ). His Hebrew mother did not call him (GEE-ZUZ). The Hebrew apostles did not call him (GEE-ZUZ). If the messiah and the apostles did not use this name then why should we? Furthermore, why should we insist that others do so as well?