A Breakthrough in My Ishu Theory

[Secret Alias]

I was putzing around adding a comment to Goranson's post in the Jewish section of this forum where I noticed a footnote in Tal's translation (really Ben Hayyim's) of the Tibat Marqe on this section:

"In the name of God. The Book of Wonders by Marqe, let the Favor of the Lord be upon him.

Great is the Great Power who endures forever ... He is great beyond limit and all greatness is His. In the bush he taught Moses teachings (which) revealed His Greatness and what His Glory is. An angel approached him, standing before him, and talked with him (about) what had been and what will be. And the prophet stood prepared facing what he saw, and his limbs trembled when he saw the one sent. by His Master. There is none like him, a prophet is ready to discuss with him. The Good One does not reveal Himself to any man except according to his nature; the good one according to his goodness, the wicked one according to his wickedness. The angels who appeared to the righteous came for one moment only. Three of them appeared to Abraham, and once they announced news to him they departed on the same day. Two of them appeared to Lot toward the evening and what they had to do and left the same night. One of them appeared briefly to Joseph in the field and showed him the way and never appeared to him again. Likewise the angel who appeared in the bush sent by God with a message to the prophet. Great was the miracle that was shown there. Three things that do not resemble one another: a blazing fire, the bush growing in it, and the angel proclaiming, while Moses listens trembling."

The footnote is (I will fill in the Hebrew letters later):

Actually the SP explicitly mentions angels only in the case of Lot's narrative "Gen.19:1, 15). For the messengers sent to Abraham the word is used (Gen. 18.2, 16, 22) a term for angels also occurring in Lot's narrative (Gen. 19:5, 10, 16), where it alternates with . The use of appears to stem from the name of Seth's son Enosh who "began to invoke the name of the Lord." The SP Gen. 4:26 reads which makes Enosh (or Seth) the subject of the active verb (this also the substratum of Jub. 4:11 - 13). The other occurrence of falls in Deut. 32:26, rendered by MS E of the ST as (plural!). In Gen 37:15 however Joseph was found by "a man" (), which the Samaritan exegesis as reflected by MS A of the ST interprets as angel, , in line with TM. Interestingly enough some MSS of the ST render in this spot as אּישׁה using the Hebrew word instead of the Aramaic in order to deliberately stress non-human nature, as stated by TM. So also for the "man" who struggled with Jacob אּישׁה (ST MS J, Gen 32:25 var ). See below Book III, 1b

[Secret Alias]

Of course most of you won't see anything strange about this. But you probably don't know about Aramaic noun suffixes. You probably know that the Jews avoid using Yahweh and instead use the Hebrew ha Shem (השמ) for 'the Name.' The Samaritans however use the Aramaic שמה "His name." The numerology is the same = 345 = Moses.

But what is interesting about the manuscript employment 'man' אּישׁ in these Targums is that gabra is normal word used. But the Samaritan Targum has אישה His Man. Tal takes the form to be imitating שמה. But the Hebrew equivalent would be אישו and שמו. I think that's significant.

As I note in my new article for the Mythicism compendium (which hindsight is hardly comprehensible even to me) Origen explicitly says in his letter to Africanus איש is rendered in Greek as ΙΣ. It's pronounced 'ish' by Jews. But a Targumic rendering of אישו is Ishu/Isu. It also has a gay vibe to it. אישה means 'wife' so אישו is kind of like male same-sex partner. אישו is never used really because it's weird. 'His man' only makes sense kind of as a gay man's husband/wife. It's not that it's used in modern Hebrew like that. It's just weird.

https://books.google.com/books?id=O-8UA ... nd&f=false

The name of the guy who wrestled with Jacob was 'his husband' in the Aramaic Targums of the Samaritan.

[Secret Alias]

אישה epithet of Moses , along with אישה 29 used in the Samaritan Targum for a person of special position , such as an angel or a divine emissary . It derives from passages as Gen 37 : 15,17 , where a mysterious person encounters Joseph. Moses is called upon Num 12 : 3 https://books.google.com/books?id=etOQh ... 22&f=false

[Secret Alias]

So this would be my new thesis:

1. the Samaritan Targum(s) already anticipated the nomen sacrum IC by employing איש a Hebrew not Aramaic name (or specifically אישה)
2. אישה is modeled after שמה the Samaritan substitute for יהוה. It is clearly a divine name. The appropriation from Hebrew cannot be explained otherwise (Tal).
3. Origen identifies ΙΣ as the Greek rendering of איש (Letter to Africanus)
4. Justin identifies 'man' as one of the meanings of the name of the Christian Savior ΙΣ (Markovich)
5. איש = ΙΣ. The specific declined forms in Greek are more difficult to explain unless we revert to the ideas of Monoimos.

I think that's about done. That's a pretty good start for the supernatural origin of the nomen sacrum.

[Jax]

Right on SA, this is very interesting. Do we have any original texts of Justin and or Origen using the NS? Also, what other meanings does Justin assign to IC?

[Secret Alias]

Well in this research there are always caveats.

1. Origen is just talking about how the Hebrew word for 'man' is spelled with Greek letters - iota sigma. In his letter to Africanus.
2. Marcovich explains what Justin is saying. https://www.ideals.illinois.edu/handle/2142/12945 p. 326
"Justin derived the name Jesus from Hebrew 'ish ("man") and from Greek (Soter)"

[Secret Alias]

Anyway, take it anyway you want. Either Jesus was made into a short form or I am right.

[MrMacSon]

Well in this research there are always caveats.
1. Origen is just talking about how the Hebrew word for 'man' is spelled with Greek letters - iota sigma. In his letter to Africanus.
2. Marcovich explains what Justin is saying. https://www.ideals.illinois.edu/handle/2142/12945 p. 326
"Justin derived the name Jesus from Hebrew 'ish ("man") and from Greek (Soter)"

Marcovich is, of course, referring to J.M's First Apology 33.7 (which he says is lacunose)

J.M's First Apology, 33

And hear again how Isaiah in express words foretold that He should be born of a virgin; for he spoke thus: "Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bring forth a son, and they shall say for His name, 'God with us'." [Isaiah 7:14] ...

And the angel of God who was sent to the same virgin at that time brought her good news, saying, 'Behold, you shall conceive of the Holy Ghost, and shall bear a Son, and He shall be called the Son of the Highest, and you shall call His name Ἰησοῦς/Iēsoús; for He shall save His people from their sins' [Luke 1:32; Matthew 1:21] — as they who have recorded all that concerns our Saviour Iēsoús Christ have taught, whom we believed, since by Isaiah also, whom we have now adduced, the Spirit of prophecy declared that He should be born as we intimated before.

It is wrong, therefore, to understand the Spirit and the power of God as anything else than the Word, who is also the first-born of God, as the foresaid prophet Moses declared; and it was this which, when it came upon the virgin and overshadowed her, caused her to conceive, not by intercourse, but by power [of the Word].

And the name Ἰησοῦς in the Hebrew language means/manifests [the same as] Σωτήρ (Saviour) in the Greek tongue - Τὸ δὲ Ἰησοῦς* ὄνομα <άνθρωπος> τῇ ἑβραΐδι φωνῇ σωτὴρ τῇ ἑλληνίδι διαλέκτῳ δηλοῖ - Wherefore, too, the angel said to the virgin, 'You shall call His name Ἰησοῦς/Iēsoús, for He shall save His people from their sins.' And that the prophets are inspired by no other than the Divine Word, even you, as I fancy, will grant.

https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0126.htm
http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/t ... ology.html
https://biblehub.com/library/richardson ... justin.htm

Moreover, Marcovich notes,

• "This is confirmed by II Apology 6. 4" viz. -
  
  
  But 'Jesus', His name as man and Saviour, has also significance. For He was made man also, as we before said, having been conceived according to the will of God the Father, for the sake of believing men, and for the destruction of the demons.
  
  

Marcovich's full statement is

• "Justin derived the name Jesus from Hebrew 'ish ("man") and from Greek Ιάσων = Σωτήρ [Soter]"
  
  Ιάσων = Iásōn [later Jason] = an ancient Greek mythological hero (leader of the Argonauts) whose quest for the Golden Fleece featured in Greek literature
  
  The Golden Fleece has a number of interpretations including representing royal power

---

fwiw, the first half to two-thirds of J.M's II Apology 6

But to the Father of all, who is unbegotten there is no name given. For by whatever name He be called, He has as His elder the person who gives Him the name. But these words Father, and God, and Creator, and Lord, and Master, are not names, but appellations derived from His good deeds and functions.

And His Son, who alone is properly called Son, the Word who also was with Him and was begotten before the works, when at first He created and arranged all things by Him, is called Christ, in reference to His being anointed and God's ordering all things through Him; this name itself also containing an unknown significance; as also the appellation God is not a name, but an opinion implanted in the nature of men of a thing that can hardly be explained. But 'Jesus', His name as man and Saviour, has also significance ...

nb.

called Christ, in reference to His being anointed and God's ordering all things through Him; this name itself also containing an unknown significance ... an opinion implanted in the nature of men of a thing that can hardly be explained

[MrMacSon]

fwiw, I was listening to David Brakke talking about Gnosticism and Judaism and the scholars/scholarship who think what used to be known as 'gnosticism' arose out of Judaism. He refers to Philo and says Philo concluded that the names of God in the Greek Bible such as God and Lord must refer not to the ultimate God himself but to powers or aspects of God. The name God, Philo said, refers to God's creative power and Lord refers to his ruling power. God is therefore not just one but also three. According to Philo, God and Lord are not the only powers of God, just the most senior ones.

As it was God's speech that brought the world into existence, Philo designate the Logos or Word of God as the divine principle that mediates between the ultimate God and the creation and the Word as God's chief messenger standing on the border and separating the 'creature' from the Creator.

Brakke points to chapter 18 of Genesis where the Lord appeared to Abraham as three men (as Abraham sat at the entrance to his tent by the great oaks of Mamre). These men talk with Abraham and tell him his wife Sarah will become pregnant.

He also points to Daniel chapter seven where Daniel sees a figure called an Ancient One seated on a throne dressed in white clothing and having hair like wool. That would seem to be God, but then there’s a second figure: one like a son of man who is presented to the Ancient One and is given glory and dominion so that all peoples and nations shall serve him ie. a second Power.

As I've pointed out before, there are various entities in the first part of the first few chapters of Zechariah who are each described as or called an angel, man, and Lord in the same chapter.

[Secret Alias]

That's why Jews are so loquacious.

I think the flaws in Brakke.

1. the Israelite tradition was rooted at Mount Gerizim originally, not Jerusalem.
2. the older Israelite traditions are found among the Samaritans and would be likely to be shared among the Sadducees, neo-Sadducaic groups (R Ishmael) and the Karaites.
3. the existence of a Great Power or angel is prominent among the Samaritans