who invented the name Jesus?

[hakeem]

But I think Philo was a significant forerunner to Christianity: his works were used by early Christians and authors. He is said to have influenced Paul (+/- other authors of epistles attributed to him), the author/s of the epistle to the Hebrews, and the author/s of the Gospel according to John (+/- other Johannine works).

No, No, No. Philo wrote nothing about redemption through the resurrection or salvation by crucifixion of Jesus Christ as claimed in the Johanine Gospel and the Epistles. He wrote nothing about worshiping men as Gods.

Christianity, worshiping a man as God and teaching a man was God Creator is in fact blasphemy to Philo.

The worshiping of men as Gods was the most terrible of all impieties [most enormous wickedness] according to Philo.

Philo's On Embassy to Gaius

...... for he regarded the Jews with most especial suspicion, as if they were the only persons who cherished wishes opposed to his, and who had been taught in a manner from their very swaddling-clothes by their parents, and teachers, and instructors, and even before that by their holy laws, and also by their unwritten maxims and customs, to believe that there was but one God, their Father and the Creator of the world...................................................... a thing of the very greatest importance, namely, the erecting the created and perishable nature of a man, as far at least as appearance went, into the uncreated and imperishable nature of God, which the nation correctly judged to be the most terrible of all impieties (for it would have been easier to change a god into man, than a man into God), besides the fact of such an action letting in other most enormous wickedness, infidelity and ingratitude towards the Benefactor of the whole world, who by his own power givers abundant supplies of all kinds of blessings to every part of the universe.

[Bernard Muller]

to Cora,

In the beginning there was Isu (Paul, Marcion) and Justin changed it in Iesous which Irenaeus took over.

to Cora,
In the Egerton Papyrus, normally dated 80-120, the Sacra nomina for "Jesus" is IH. I is the capital for 'i' and H is the capital for 'η' as in the two first letters of 'Ἰησοῦ' (Jesus).

The IH Monogram consists of the Greek letters iota (I) and eta (H), which are the first two letters of the word “Jesus” in Greek, and as such was a common shorthand for “Jesus.”

https://www.pinterest.ca/pin/1184306651 ... .%E2%80%9D

From Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heta

Αα Alpha Νν Nu
Ββ Beta Ξξ Xi
Γγ Gamma Οο Omicron
Δδ Delta Ππ Pi
Εε Epsilon Ρρ Rho
Ζζ Zeta Σσς Sigma
Ηη Eta Ττ Tau
Θθ Theta Υυ Upsilon
Ιι Iota Φφ Phi
Κκ Kappa Χχ Chi
Λλ Lambda Ψψ Psi
Μμ Mu Ωω Omega

NO ISU HERE

Cordially, Bernard

[hakeem]

to Cora,

In the beginning there was Isu (Paul, Marcion) and Justin changed it in Iesous which Irenaeus took over.

to Cora,
In the Egerton Papyrus, normally dated 80-120, the Sacra nomina for "Jesus" is IH. I is the capital for 'i' and H is the capital for 'η' as in the two first letters of 'Ἰησοῦ' (Jesus).

The Egerton Papyrus is now dated to the very end of the 2nd century [c 200 CE]



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egerton_Gospel

The Egerton Gospel (British Library Egerton Papyrus 2) refers to a collection of three papyrus fragments of a codex of a previously unknown gospel, found in Egypt and sold to the British Museum in 1934; the physical fragments are now dated to the very end of the 2nd century CE....

[

[Ben C. Smith]

The Egerton Gospel:

The Egerton Gospel is long enough that its status as a gospel text of some kind seems assured. It has been at the epicenter of a lively debate as to the date of the papyrus fragments, particularly since it was discovered that Köln 255 and fragment 1 of Egerton 2 are from the same page.

[Bernard Muller]

to hakeem,
Also in Wikipedia,

The revised dating for the Egerton Papyrus continues to carry wide support. However, Stanley Porter has reviewed the dating of the Egerton Papryus alongside that of 𝔓52; noting that the scholarly consensus dating the former to the turn of the third century and the latter to the first half of the second century was contra-indicated by close paleographic similarities of the two manuscripts.[6] The 1987 redating of the Egerton Papyrus had rested on a comment made by Eric Turner in 1971 "in the first decade of III AD this practice (of using an apostrophe between two consonants, such as double mutes or double liquids) suddenly becomes extremely common, and then persists.".[7] Porter notes that Turner had then nevertheless advanced several earlier dated examples of the practice from the later second century, and one (BGU III 715.5) dated to 101 CE. Porter proposes that, notwithstanding the discovery of the hooked apostrophe in P. Köln 255, the original editors' proposal of a mid second century date for the Egerton Papyrus accords better with the paleographic evidence of dated comparator documentary and literary hands for both 𝔓52 and this papyrus "the middle of the second century, perhaps tending towards the early part of it".[8]

Anyway, this papirus is more ancient than P46.

Cordially, Bernard

[rgprice]

to Cora,

In the beginning there was Isu (Paul, Marcion) and Justin changed it in Iesous which Irenaeus took over.

to Cora,
In the Egerton Papyrus, normally dated 80-120, the Sacra nomina for "Jesus" is IH. I is the capital for 'i' and H is the capital for 'η' as in the two first letters of 'Ἰησοῦ' (Jesus).

The IH Monogram consists of the Greek letters iota (I) and eta (H), which are the first two letters of the word “Jesus” in Greek, and as such was a common shorthand for “Jesus.”

https://www.pinterest.ca/pin/1184306651 ... .%E2%80%9D

From Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heta

Αα Alpha Νν Nu
Ββ Beta Ξξ Xi
Γγ Gamma Οο Omicron
Δδ Delta Ππ Pi
Εε Epsilon Ρρ Rho
Ζζ Zeta Σσς Sigma
Ηη Eta Ττ Tau
Θθ Theta Υυ Upsilon
Ιι Iota Φφ Phi
Κκ Kappa Χχ Chi
Λλ Lambda Ψψ Psi
Μμ Mu Ωω Omega

NO ISU HERE

Cordially, Bernard

But, wouldn't that also be the first two letters of many different names? Give that the name "Jesus" in Greek is Ἰησοῦς,᾿Ιησοῖ or Ἰησοῦ, and that these are derived from יְהוֹשֻׁעַ - "Yeshu'a" or "Yehoshu'a" and that this name is derived from "Yahweh" which was typically written as the tetragram יהוה, but not necessarily always, how do we know what was really meant by IH?

What if some Gnostic group, of which Paul may have been, decided they were going to write out the name of Yahweh?

What would it have looked like in Greek, if someone decided to actually write out the sacred name? I also see where Ben is going with this too, of saying that Jesus has ended up being the "translation" of what would likely be a name given to the human form of Yahweh, but to me its not clear that this name was actually "Jesus", at least not from Paul. Given the similarities between "Yehoshu'a" and "Yahweh", then you add the fact that "Yahweh" was supposedly unspeakable, and written using different symbols and then language changes on top of that, and then the fact that they didn't even write out any of the names, they used sacra nomina, its a big fat confusing mess, from which later Romans ended up extracting "Jesus", though its not clear that the name "Jesus" ever actually existed in Paul's original letters, or even in the original Gospels.

[hakeem]

to hakeem,
Also in Wikipedia,

The revised dating for the Egerton Papyrus continues to carry wide support. However, Stanley Porter has reviewed the dating of the Egerton Papryus alongside that of 𝔓52; noting that the scholarly consensus dating the former to the turn of the third century and the latter to the first half of the second century was contra-indicated by close paleographic similarities of the two manuscripts.[6] The 1987 redating of the Egerton Papyrus had rested on a comment made by Eric Turner in 1971 "in the first decade of III AD this practice (of using an apostrophe between two consonants, such as double mutes or double liquids) suddenly becomes extremely common, and then persists.".[7] Porter notes that Turner had then nevertheless advanced several earlier dated examples of the practice from the later second century, and one (BGU III 715.5) dated to 101 CE. Porter proposes that, notwithstanding the discovery of the hooked apostrophe in P. Köln 255, the original editors' proposal of a mid second century date for the Egerton Papyrus accords better with the paleographic evidence of dated comparator documentary and literary hands for both 𝔓52 and this papyrus "the middle of the second century, perhaps tending towards the early part of it".[8]

Anyway, this papirus is more ancient than P46.

Cordially, Bernard

You have no evidence to support such assertion. No Christian writer mentioned the Egerton Gospel.

[Ben C. Smith]

to Cora,

In the beginning there was Isu (Paul, Marcion) and Justin changed it in Iesous which Irenaeus took over.

to Cora,
In the Egerton Papyrus, normally dated 80-120, the Sacra nomina for "Jesus" is IH. I is the capital for 'i' and H is the capital for 'η' as in the two first letters of 'Ἰησοῦ' (Jesus).

The IH Monogram consists of the Greek letters iota (I) and eta (H), which are the first two letters of the word “Jesus” in Greek, and as such was a common shorthand for “Jesus.”

https://www.pinterest.ca/pin/1184306651 ... .%E2%80%9D

From Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heta

Αα Alpha Νν Nu
Ββ Beta Ξξ Xi
Γγ Gamma Οο Omicron
Δδ Delta Ππ Pi
Εε Epsilon Ρρ Rho
Ζζ Zeta Σσς Sigma
Ηη Eta Ττ Tau
Θθ Theta Υυ Upsilon
Ιι Iota Φφ Phi
Κκ Kappa Χχ Chi
Λλ Lambda Ψψ Psi
Μμ Mu Ωω Omega

NO ISU HERE

Cordially, Bernard

But, wouldn't that also be the first two letters of many different names? Give that the name "Jesus" in Greek is Ἰησοῦς,᾿Ιησοῖ or Ἰησοῦ, and that these are derived from יְהוֹשֻׁעַ - "Yeshu'a" or "Yehoshu'a" and that this name is derived from "Yahweh" which was typically written as the tetragram יהוה, but not necessarily always, how do we know what was really meant by IH?

What if some Gnostic group, of which Paul may have been, decided they were going to write out the name of Yahweh?

What would it have looked like in Greek, if someone decided to actually write out the sacred name? I also see where Ben is going with this too, of saying that Jesus has ended up being the "translation" of what would likely be a name given to the human form of Yahweh, but to me its not clear that this name was actually "Jesus", at least not from Paul. Given the similarities between "Yehoshu'a" and "Yahweh", then you add the fact that "Yahweh" was supposedly unspeakable, and written using different symbols and then language changes on top of that, and then the fact that they didn't even write out any of the names, they used sacra nomina, its a big fat confusing mess, from which later Romans ended up extracting "Jesus", though its not clear that the name "Jesus" ever actually existed in Paul's original letters, or even in the original Gospels.

For some reason people seem to think of the nomina sacra as some kind of vortex through which one can drive a reality changing machine. The nomina sacra, despite their quirks, are a complete, comprehensible system of abbreviations. There exists no manuscript in which the meaning of those abbreviations is opaque to us, given the overall system. If one wants any one or more of the abbreviations to mean something other than what the overwhelming weight of the manuscript evidence tells us it or they mean, then one has to hypothesize an earlier layer of development which is completely unevidenced. One cannot validly look at ΙΗ and say, "Hmm, that could mean almost anything," because that would entail ignoring the combined evidence of all the manuscripts at our disposal in order to propose a meaning backed up by nothing at all.

[Ken Olson]

Forgive me if this has already been covered, but how is the name Joshua (Ἰησοῦς) rendered in the earliest manuscripts containing Acts 7.45 and Hebrews 4.8? Is it written out or abbreviated?

Thanks,

Ken

[Ben C. Smith]

Forgive me if this has already been covered, but how is the name Joshua (Ἰησοῦς) rendered in the earliest manuscripts containing Acts 7.45 and Hebrews 4.8? Is it written out or abbreviated?

I do not have the earliest manuscript information for Acts 7.45 handy, but I do have Sinaiticus, Alexandrinus, Vaticanus, and Ephraemi Rescriptus, all of which bear ΙΥ, whereas Bezae has Ἰησοῦν. (The preposition μετά supports any of the oblique cases.)

ETA: A glance through the verse ranges of NT papyri reveals that Acts 7.45 may not be represented in them until century IV or later, anyway. Ƿ74 looks like it might have it, but it dates to century VII, apparently. So the great codices listed above may be our earliest for that verse.

Here is some information I have posted about Hebrews 4.8 and also about early LXX/OG manuscripts which contain the name of Joshua:

Papyrus Oxyrhynchus 657 (Ƿ13, early century III), column 3, lines 73-74a (= Hebrews 4.8): 73-74a [Εἰ γὰρ α]ὐτοὺς Ἰ(ησοῦ)ς κατέπαυσεν, οὐκ ἂν π[ερὶ ἄλλης ἐλά]λι μετὰ ταῦτα ἡμέρας.

Schøyen 2648 (late century II or early century III), column 2, lines 11b-14 (= Joshua 10.29): 11b-14 Καὶ ἀπῆλθεν Ἰη(σοῦ)ς [יְהוֹשֻׁעַ, Masoretic] κα[ὶ πᾶς Ισ]ραηλ μετ᾽ αὐτοῦ ἐκ [Λεβ]νὰ εἰς Λαχείς, καὶ περιεκάθισεν αὐτὴν. [Link.]

Colossians 4.10-11: 10 Aristarchus, my fellow prisoner, sends you his greetings; and also Barnabas’s cousin Mark (about whom you received instructions; if he comes to you, welcome him); 11 and also Jesus who is called Justus [καὶ Ἰη(σοῦ)ς ὁ λεγόμενος Ἰοῦστος, Ƿ46 (late century II or early century III)]. These are the only fellow workers for the kingdom of God who are from the circumcision, and they have proved to be an encouragement to me.

Edgar Battad Ebojo, A Scribe and His Manuscript: An Investigation into the Scribal Habits of Papyrus 46, pages 338-339 (Contraction Profile table reformatted into lines):

ΙΗΣΟΥΣ

CONTRACTION PROFILE:
SACRAL, Nomina Sacra = 107, Plene = 0.
NON-SACRAL, Nomina Sacra = 2, Plene = 0.

Like κυριος, abbreviation for Ιησους is consistently applied, using the 3-letter format; the 2-letter suspension (ι̅η̅), used in a few contemporary manuscripts, was never employed in Ƿ46. Except in two instances,* all have Jesus Christ as the referent. Paap noted that ι̅η̅ς̅ (χ̅ρ̅ς̅) in Heb 13.21 is dative in function despite its nominative form. This is only partly true; it is more likely that in context it has a genitival function, hence, consequently stimulating scribal correction toward the genitive, i.e., ι̅η̅υ̅ χ̅ρ̅υ̅. / Viewed against the backdrop of other surviving papyri witnessing to the text of Pauline Epistles and Hebrews, Ƿ46 shares only with two other papyri (Ƿ30 and Ƿ65 [both from the third century]) in equally exhibiting preference for the 3-letter compendium. In contrast, the majority of them prefer the shorter form, although they mostly represent a production timeframe after the 3rd century.

* Col 4.11 (“Jesus the one called Justus”) and Heb 4.8 (referring to “Joshua”). Surprisingly, Hurtado, The Earliest Christian Artifacts, 129, erroneously reported that these (as well as 2Cor 11.4 [“another Jesus”]) were written plene in Ƿ46.

Chester Beatty VI (early or mid century II) is quite possibly our earliest manuscript which has any nomina sacra at all, and the name of Joshua is abbreviated in all cases except one. Here are two of the abbreviated cases and the one nonabbreviated one:



Before Chester Beatty VI, the LXX/OG manuscripts at our disposal write out Joshua's name in full:

Deuteronomy 31.2-3: 2 And he said to them, “I am a hundred and twenty years old today; I am no longer able to come and go, and Yahweh has said to me, ‘You shall not cross this Jordan.’ 3 It is Yahweh your God who will cross ahead of you; He will destroy these nations before you, and you shall dispossess them. It is Joshua/Jesus [יְהוֹשֻׁעַ, Ιησοῦς] who will cross ahead of you, just as Yahweh has spoken.”

Papyrus Fouad 266, column 65, fragment 96 (Deuteronomy 31.2-3):

XX 2 [καὶ εἶπεν πρὸς αὐτούς ἑκατὸν καὶ εἴκοσι]
XX [ἐτῶν ἐγώ εἰμι σήμερον οὐ δυνήσομαι ἔτι]
XX [εἰσπορεύεσθαι καὶ ἐκπορεύεσθαι יהוה δὲ]
08 [εἶπεν πρό]ς μ[ε οὐ διαβήσῃ τὸν Ιορδά-]
09 [νην τοῦτ]ον. 3 יהוה [ὁ θεός σου ὁ πορευ-]
10 [όμενος π]ρὸ προσώπ[ου σου αὐτὸς ἐξο-]
11 [λεθρεύσε]ι τὰ ἔθνη τ[αῦτα ἀπὸ προσώπου]
12 [σου κ]αὶ κατακλη[ρονομήσεις αὐτούς]
13 [καὶ Ἰ]ησοῦς ὁ πορε[υόμενος πρὸ προσώ-]
XX που σου καθὰ ἐλάλησεν יהוה.

Hope this helps.