The name change to Jesus/Joshua.

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: The name change to Jesus/Joshua.

Post by Giuseppe »

Ben C. Smith wrote: Fri Oct 25, 2019 10:32 am
Giuseppe wrote: Fri Oct 25, 2019 10:21 amA good objection against the Couchoud's theory about the Name above all the names is that Joshua was a very common name. While the true name of Lord (YHWH) can't be spoken to a public audience. Even today the Jews write G-D or D-o.
My variation on Couchoud's idea avoids that problem completely. Yahweh is really the "name above all names." Jesus simply contains that name.
ok that Josha contains YHWH but the true name of YHWH couldn't be spoken.
Before any of that came Hebrew eschatological expectation. Nobody hallucinated about some important figure, historical or mythical, or claimed that the figure only seemed to be flesh (the docetics), was a spirit inhabiting a human being (the separationists), had been adopted as the son of a god (the adoptionists), or had inside information about the nature of the cosmos (the gnostics) unless he or she already knew who that figure was (or was supposed to be).

And nobody had to hallucinate anything. They may have anyway, but they did not have to.
I agree but there is no need of pointing out it. An apocalypticist from the II century CE has the same degree of fanatism (and relative ability to hallucinate things) of an apocalypticist from the I century CE. And I do see evidence of separationism/adoptionism/incarnationism only after the docetism of the first gospel. Not before.
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.
User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8994
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: The name change to Jesus/Joshua.

Post by Ben C. Smith »

Giuseppe wrote: Fri Oct 25, 2019 10:43 amok that Josha contains YHWH but the true name of YHWH couldn't be spoken.
Yes, but the point is that the name "Joshua/Jesus" could be the means by which our hero received the "name above all names."
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: The name change to Jesus/Joshua.

Post by Giuseppe »

Ben C. Smith wrote: Fri Oct 25, 2019 10:50 am
Giuseppe wrote: Fri Oct 25, 2019 10:43 amok that Josha contains YHWH but the true name of YHWH couldn't be spoken.
Yes, but the point is that the name "Joshua/Jesus" could be the means by which our hero received the "name above all names."
why "Jesus" (="YHWH saves") and not "John" (="YHWH gives grace"), then?

The reason has to be another.
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.
Secret Alias
Posts: 18362
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: The name change to Jesus/Joshua.

Post by Secret Alias »

Yahweh is really the "name above all names."
I think that this is problematic as Philo thinks kurios (a.k.a. Yahweh) is the lowest of the powers and Philo was influential over early Christianity. There also seems to be some resistance to kurios in Marcionism. My guess would be Philo's highest power would be early Christianity's 'name above all names.' Interestingly Philo does bring some cryptic references to despotes whatever Hebrew name that corresponded to? Adonai?
Last edited by Secret Alias on Fri Oct 25, 2019 11:13 am, edited 1 time in total.
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote
User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8994
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: The name change to Jesus/Joshua.

Post by Ben C. Smith »

Giuseppe wrote: Fri Oct 25, 2019 11:09 am
Ben C. Smith wrote: Fri Oct 25, 2019 10:50 am
Giuseppe wrote: Fri Oct 25, 2019 10:43 amok that Josha contains YHWH but the true name of YHWH couldn't be spoken.
Yes, but the point is that the name "Joshua/Jesus" could be the means by which our hero received the "name above all names."
why "Jesus" (="YHWH saves") and not "John" (="YHWH gives grace"), then?
Because of the eschatological expectations, like I already said: he was (supposed to be) Joshua redivivus, a Messiah ben Ephraim, and so on. That a Joshua narrative was in play seems implied by Theudas wanting to part the river and the Egyptian wanting to knock the walls down.
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: The name change to Jesus/Joshua.

Post by Giuseppe »

Ben C. Smith wrote: Fri Oct 25, 2019 11:13 am
Giuseppe wrote: Fri Oct 25, 2019 11:09 am
Ben C. Smith wrote: Fri Oct 25, 2019 10:50 am
Giuseppe wrote: Fri Oct 25, 2019 10:43 amok that Josha contains YHWH but the true name of YHWH couldn't be spoken.
Yes, but the point is that the name "Joshua/Jesus" could be the means by which our hero received the "name above all names."
why "Jesus" (="YHWH saves") and not "John" (="YHWH gives grace"), then?
Because of the eschatological expectations, like I already said: he was (supposed to be) Joshua redivivus, a Messiah ben Ephraim, and so on. That a Joshua narrative was in play seems implied by Theudas wanting to part the river and the Egyptian wanting to knock the walls down.
but the same name of Theudas is not casual. Theudas may be a form of Dositheus being in turn a variant of John ("gift of God"). Why don't you see eschatological expectations on the name Theudas/John too?
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.
Secret Alias
Posts: 18362
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: The name change to Jesus/Joshua.

Post by Secret Alias »

Here's where I think Ben is correct.

1. Joshua had great significance to early Christianity.
2. the Pentateuch is written in a way that naturally suggests that Joshua is a successor to Moses and Moses was the greatest human being that ever lived.
3. the identification or equation of 'Christ' with Joshua - even Joshua redivivus - is natural (even though one could imagine strict conservatives who viewed the historical Joshua as that figure.
4. Samaritan sectarians seemed to have one part of that equation

But does all of that mean that early Christians read the gospel as is Jesus was the name above all names? I still have difficulty with the nomen sacrum = 'Joshua' given that 'banal' references to Joshua the Patriarch spelled out the name as 'Joshua' and the nomen sacrum was reserved for the Christian savior. I find it difficult to distinguish between the historical Joshua, all Joshuas and THIS Joshua (the Christian savior).
Last edited by Secret Alias on Fri Oct 25, 2019 11:19 am, edited 1 time in total.
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote
Secret Alias
Posts: 18362
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: The name change to Jesus/Joshua.

Post by Secret Alias »

Theudas = Toda (thanks, thank you, thanksgiving something like εὐχάριστος). εὐχαριστία = תודה
Last edited by Secret Alias on Fri Oct 25, 2019 11:21 am, edited 1 time in total.
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: The name change to Jesus/Joshua.

Post by Giuseppe »

Someone has proposed that Moses and Joshua were originally the same guy, Moses being derived not from Hebrew mses but from Greek mesos ("Mediator"). Jesus is called the Mediator also.
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.
Secret Alias
Posts: 18362
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: The name change to Jesus/Joshua.

Post by Secret Alias »

That person was an idiot. Manetho at least argued that Joseph and Moses were the same.
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote
Post Reply