Why was Christ called "Joshua"?

[Giuseppe]

The explanation that is often given is that Joshua means Salvation or "God-saves".

The more probable explanation is that Christ was called Joshua to exalt his obedience.

Evidence of this is the Philippians Hymn, but especially the same figure of the biblical Joshua: a mere obedient continuation of Moses, a mere executor, absolutely without an original personality of some kind (because he was designed to merely continue the work of the his precursor: to conquer the Holy Land).

The obedience is also a feature of the Joshua of Zechariah.

And surely a passive figure was the guy (mentioned by Josephus) who leads a lot of Jews in the wilderness (or to Jordan) to repeat the actions of Joshua.

So I wonder: was this "obedience" deliberately "wanted" for the person of Christ when this same Christ was becoming more and more a riotous and disturbing/embarrassing figure in the field of the spiritual figures?

Especially when anyone felt the Christ "in me" just as Paul did.

Especially when anyone said that "the Christ is here, the Christ is there"...

So to call the spiritual Christ as "Jesus" is a later step. The pauline expression "another Jesus" was a deliberate paradox, since there couldn't be even seen the possibility that Joshua was the contrary of the obedient figure par excellence such as he was and could only be conceived.

[Joseph D. L.]

In the Septuagint, χρηστός is used to translate ישר in Proverbs 2:21. That’s interesting because ישר appears as the prefix for ישראל, Israel.

Supposing for a moment the usage of pesher and midrash, it’s well within the realm of possibility that Chrestus was interpretative of Jacob’s wrestling with the Angel, איש (Ishu) and his mystical transformation into Israel.
But notice also, ישר (yashar), ישוע (yeshua), and ישו (yeshu) appear very close to one another, with a one letter difference between yeshua and yeshu, and a slight modification to resh to make vav. Now look at Daniel 9:26, where the Christ shall be “cut off”–resh shall be cut off for vav; or ayin shall cut off from yeshu. (Conspicuously, ayin represents the mystical number, seventy.)

In other words, the reason Joshua/Yeshua is used is not because of Zechariah, but because it at once signifies Israel, its death and resurrection. This may also explain why Paul uses Jesus and Christ interchangeably, because they both mean the same thing: the mystical transformation before YHWH.

I also speculate if the idea of being "cut off" also lead to the idea of the Christ leaving Jesus at his passion.

[Ethan]

In the Septuagint, χρηστός is used to translate ישר in Proverbs 2:21. That’s interesting because ישר appears as the prefix for ישראל, Israel.

Supposing for a moment the usage of pesher and midrash, it’s well within the realm of possibility that Chrestus was interpretative of Jacob’s wrestling with the Angel, איש (Ishu) and his mystical transformation into Israel.
But notice also, ישר (yashar), ישוע (yeshua), and ישו (yeshu) appear very close to one another, with a one letter difference between yeshua and yeshu, and a slight modification to resh to make vav. Now look at Daniel 9:26, where the Christ shall be “cut off”–resh shall be cut off for vav; or ayin shall cut off from yeshu. (Conspicuously, ayin represents the mystical number, seventy.)

In other words, the reason Joshua/Yeshua is used is not because of Zechariah, but because it at once signifies Israel, its death and resurrection. This may also explain why Paul uses Jesus and Christ interchangeably, because they both mean the same thing: the mystical transformation before YHWH.

I also speculate if the idea of being "cut off" also lead to the idea of the Christ leaving Jesus at his passion.

The first part of Proverbs 2:21 in the Septuagint is absent in the Masoretic.

2:21 χρηστοὶ ἔσονται οἰκήτορες γῆς ἄκακοι δὲ ὑπολειφθήσονται ἐν αὐτῇ ὅτι
εὐθεῖς κατασκηνώσουσι γῆν καὶ ὅσιοι ὑπολειφθήσονται ἐν αὐτῇ

εὐθεῖς is the translation off יָשָׁר

εὐθύς - straight, upright
יָשָׁר - Straight, upright

[Joseph D. L.]

The first part of Proverbs 2:21 in the Septuagint is absent in the Masoretic.

2:21 χρηστοὶ ἔσονται οἰκήτορες γῆς ἄκακοι δὲ ὑπολειφθήσονται ἐν αὐτῇ ὅτι
εὐθεῖς κατασκηνώσουσι γῆν καὶ ὅσιοι ὑπολειφθήσονται ἐν αὐτῇ

εὐθεῖς is the translation off יָשָׁר

εὐθύς - straight, upright
יָשָׁר - Straight, upright

Ah, you're correct. That was my blunder.

χρηστοὶ ἔσονται οἰκήτορες γῆς ἄκακοι δὲ ὑπολειφθήσονται ἐν αὐτῇ ὅτι εὐθεῖς κατασκηνώσουσι γῆν καὶ ὅσιοι ὑπολειφθήσονται ἐν αὐτῇ

So you will walk in the way of the good and keep to the paths of the righteous. For the upright will inhabit the land, and those with integrity will remain in it,

Although I still stand by my conjecture regarding Daniel 9:26, and that the "cut off" was interpreted to be resh (an abbreviation of both yashar and chrestos), being cut down to vav (abbreviation for yeshu). Though I'll admit that my knowledge of Hebrew or its many facets is woefully wanting (as you can tell from the above blunder).

As a bonus, I have also mused over the possibility that yashar, upright, was the origin of the idea that Christ had to be crucified. Stadios is a similar concept. Someone who is on a cross (or was the cross) would definitely be upright and standing.

[Giuseppe]

What escapes your (serious) views is any reference to the biblical Joshua. I think that the "Angel of the Lord" was already implicitly Joshua (since they both conquer the Holy Land) but what I am adding is that especially the obedience of the biblical Joshua was decisive to choose "Joshua" as the name of the Christ.

[Joseph D. L.]

Of course the Moses/Joshua dichotomy should be considered, as it's Moses who is destined to die and Joshua to enter the Holy land. (Just as Jesus dies, while another is released).

Joshua could be the Angel of the Lord, who's name is Man, but that's not readily apparent to me. Do you know of any rabbinical commentaries on the matter?

But it's the reference in Daniel that I think resolves a lot of things; both the naming of Jesus Christ, as well as the Christ leaving--or being cut off--from Jesus.

[Ethan]

Although I still stand by my conjecture regarding Daniel 9:26, and that the "cut off" was interpreted to be resh (an abbreviation of both yashar and chrestos), being cut down to vav (abbreviation for yeshu). Though I'll admit that my knowledge of Hebrew or its many facets is woefully wanting (as you can tell from the above blunder).

As a bonus, I have also mused over the possibility that yashar, upright, was the origin of the idea that Christ had to be crucified. Stadios is a similar concept. Someone who is on a cross (or was the cross) would definitely be upright and standing.

Daniel 9:1 mentions Darius III , ' Messiah ' in 9:26 and then Cyrus in 10:1 , titled 'Messiah' in Isaiah 45:1 (Cyrus Christ). The command to 'restore & build Jerusalem"(Dan 9:25) is mentioned in Isaiah 44:26 "That saith of Cyrus. Jerusalem, Thou shalt be built" .

I suspect the naming of Christ derived from Isaiah 45:1 ' χριστῷ μου Κύρῳ ' [משיחו כורש] ... Κύριος της Ασίας[מֶשֶׁךְ].

[Joseph D. L.]

Not to argue or belabour the point, but I'm thinking of this as one living when the Jesus story was still in its preliminary stages. Though Cyrus the Great is a messianic figure to the Daniel author(s), by the first-second centuries, such prominence would be either lost, or redirected in the ensuing time between which Daniel was composed, and when the new theology was developing. We see this front and center with the placing of the life/passion of Jesus before the destruction of the Temple in 70 ad. to conform with the prophecy of seventy weeks. Cyrus the Christ doesn't address Giuseppe's main question: why Jesus is named after Joshua. At the very least, my interpretation that resh and vav are abbreviations for Christ/chrestos and Jesus respectively, and based on Daniel 9:26, is pertinent to this topic. Any pre-Jesus Christ figure would serve as an antetype, but still wouldn't address why Joshua/yeshua was the name above all.

[Ethan]

The story of Christ is anachronistic rather then prophetic , Mark 1:2 interpolates Isaiah 40:1.. 44:28 Cyrus, He is my shepherd 45:1 Cyrus, Christ and the Book of Revelation reiterates the Fall of Babylon an attribute of Cyrus and thus identifying Joshua with Cyrus . Thus the story of Jesus is a parody of past events, i.e Joshua expelling the Merchants (Mark 11:15).

The Cyrus in the Old Testament is not Cyrus the Great but Κύριος της Ασίας

Dan 8:20 - The ram which thou sawest having two horns


- karath [כָּרַת]
- Kerata [ Horn] ( Dan 8:20)

Horn was both a Musical & Anointing instrument.
Mousikh(μουσική) - Mashiyach(מָשִׁיחַ) - Musiqaa (موسيقى)

[Joseph D. L.]

With all due respect I think you're not getting this. Giuseppe is asking why Christ is named Joshua. Not as to what the etymology of Christ is. Cyrus was not named Joshua.

It may very be that Joshua the High priest was Ezra, with Joshua being more so an honourary title rather than a name proper. In that sense, Cyrus could have also been named Joshua (as I've argued above, yeshua and yashar are indicative of the same principle, that of being transformed before YHWH), but for Christians, he would hold no relevance. Instead the reason for Jesus being named Joshua would lie elsewhere.

I've long interpreted Jesus Christ to be a full title, with his real name possibly being Simon or John.