New to our site? Join our 'Core Community' and enrich your online experience at First Fruits of Zion.

Sign up and join our 'Core' community:

  • Access more free online resources and get Premium content, email newsletters and special offers from our Store. Find out more »

I can't access my account. »

FFOZ Blogs

Timely updates, teaching, videos and inside information about what's happening at First Fruits, written by staff members and guest contributors.

Yeshua vs. YAHshua

I often receive letters and comments from people who write the name of Yeshua as YAHshua. More than a simple mispronunciation or spelling error, the implication is that the Master's name contained the sacred syllable "Yah," that is the first syllable in the divine name of HaShem (Y/H/V/H). Rather than simply ignore this theologically loaded nomenclature, I have begun to simply correct people and assure them that the name of the Master should be transliterated into English and pronounced as Yeshua - the common Aramaic version of the Hebrew Yehoshua (i.e. Joshua). Last week I received the following response:

Sorry sir! But The Name is "YAHSHUA" and not "Ye-shua"! As the scripture says; "If my people how are called by [MY-NAME; "Y-H-W-H," = "YAH-SHUA!]" His Name is not Ye-shua! The people of Y-H-W-H should be calling them selves YAHUDAH! and not Jew! You be blessed, in The Name of YAHSHUA THE MESSYAH!

What is up with this? Where does this come from? There must be someone out there in the world of internet-scholars promoting this idea. Some object that this is nitpicking and it does not really matter how we pronounce the Master's Name. I agree that it does not matter whether we call Him Jesus, Yeshua, Yehoshua or by whatever pronunciation His actual name legitimately appears in one's language. But those who insist on the YAH-shua pronunciation have a specific theological agenda that is, in my opinion, subversive and dangerous.

Let's use this blog forum to get to the bottom of this. I invite your comments and insights, but please observe at least the basic etiquette of civil discourse. Keep your comments short. No more than 150 words per post. I reserve the right to edit all comments. And remember, no "name-calling!" (Sorry. Bad joke.)

D. Thomas Lancaster
Tevet 24, 5768

About the Author: D. Thomas Lancaster is Director of Education at First Fruits of Zion, the author of the Torah Club programs and several books and study programs. He is also the pastor of Beth Immanuel Sabbath Fellowship in Hudson, WI (www.bethimmanuel.org).

Discussions & Comments

Please keep each of your comments short (around 250 words or less). Comments beyond this length, or of an unreasonable antithetical nature, could be subject to editing or removal.

comments powered by Disqus

Archived Comments

Daniel, Thank you for this thread. I have returned here several times to read the post. I was wondering if you had any input on some other ideas that seem to be from the proponents of the YaHshua school of thought. And, Can you "show" us how to go from Jesus to Yeshua so that one might show others that "Zeus" has nothing to do with the transliteration "Jesus"? Along the same lines, can you shed light on the claim that Adonai was taken from the Greek God Adonis? I don't mean to group all Yahshua proponents into one group. I'm sure not all believe the claim about Adonai. However, it seems that those that believe the name Adonai to be the result of Jewish superstition and connected to Adonis also believe that Yeshua was YaHshua. I think these Greek God connections are wrong and hurtful but I have NO clue how to shed light on the problems with said claims. I realize that I am very off topic and trust that you will only post it if you feel it is appropriate. If you are not able to post it here perhaps you would be so kind as to email me. Thanks in advance, Roni

DTL REPLIES: Shalom Roni. The discussion above explains the mechanics of the transliteration issue (Yeshua to Jesus). You can also find a discussion on it the book King of the Jews. More to the point, FFOZ is now completing a manuscript called "Hallowed Be Thy Name" that will address some of these things. The biggest problem with refuting claims like the Adonis/Adonai claim and other superstitious balderdash generated by the sacred name movement is that these claims are not based upon any historical or linguistic facts whatsoever, so there is nothing to refute. There is no real scholarship to challenge, no documentation to investigate, nothing that can be dealt with in an intelligent manner. Is it sufficient to say that these opinions are based on false etymologies and no competent scholar in the world would support them?

Carolyn Ronnette Macias | April 8, 2008 10:14 PM


I believed the name of our Father in heaven is Yahuweh and the name of the son Yahushua = means Yahuweh is Salvation. Yeshua is common knowledge it is the same thing as Jesus.


dtl replies: Thanks Nenita. The problem with your pronunciation of the divine Name is you are double-employing the vav as a vowel and a consonant. That doesn't work. As for the "Yahushua" theory, see the comments on phonology above.

Nenita | March 27, 2008 12:57 PM

As DTL explains, no one disputes that YAH occurs as a shortened form of the Divine Name in the Hebrew Scriptures. Sandra Lee cited one occurrence (Psa 68:5), but it occurs independently twenty-four times in the Hebrew Scriptures. It also occurs in various combinations; for example, it appears at the end of "Hallelujah" twenty-three times. To take this shortening of the Divine Name, however, and use it to replace the first syllable of another existing name to derive YAHshua is, indeed, a "HYBRID" name. Yeshua is not a "hybrid" name. It appears in the Hebrew Scriptures twenty-six times (see my entry on January 4); I did not make the name up. It stands in the Hebrew Scriptures. As already pointed out several times in this blog, Nehemiah 8:17 is a particularly interesting use of Yeshua; it refers to the biblical person we all know as Yehoshua, the servant of Moses. Yeshua is a shortening of Yehoshua (see my phonological work, January 4). Once again, offer a phonological argument for your "hybrid" YAHshua, not a theological argument.

Steve Lancaster | January 21, 2008 11:18 AM

I would like to respond to Yeshua vs Yahshua blog. It seems there are some well meaning "intellectuals" also responding to this blog using words that most people find them hard to understand. It seems they want to hold onto the "HYBRID" name "ye"-shua/jesus no matter what. I bring your attention to the Hebrew "TANACK:" The Stone Edition, and page #1491, concerning The Name ~~> YAH! And pslam 68:5,the words; "sing to God, make music [to] His Name; and extolHe who rides upon the highest heavens with HIS NAME YAH,and extol before Him. --- Also the new King James Bible reads about the same! ~~> "BY HIS NAME YAH!" -- Now to prove A point: those who call themselves "JEWS" also teach NOT to speak or write The Names YAHWEH/YAHSHUA! BUT! with "NO HESATATION! Speak and write both "HYBRID" names ye-shua/jesus. Lets keep in mind Acts 2:21 and 4:12 Salvation IS in These Names ~~> YAH-SHUA/YAHWEH, only!

SANDRA LEE 7:37 am 1/17/08

dtl responds: Sandra. I am probably one of those well meaning intellectuals, so let me speak on their behalf. I will not use big words. No one is arguing that "YAH" is one of the syllables in the Sacred Name of God. We are simply demonstrating that it is not one of the syllables in the Master's name. The name "YAHshua" is a theological fiction. The Hebrew language does not work that way.

SANDRA LEE | January 17, 2008 6:37 AM

Thanks, DTL, this is a perfect example of why these debates are confusing and, really, serve no good purpose. There are so many of us who aren't experts in the field of language and interpretation so we are left at the mercy of the "so-called" experts. Even investigating the "expert" can be difficult. I don't know what agendas others have for perpetrating the false and, it's difficult to detect when you're just a layman, at best. The idea of "Little Zeus" actually came from a Messianic Rabbi who, supposedly, is well educated in Hebrew and Greek languages. Yeshua knows Who we're referring to...and, no doubt, so does satan. Thanks, again.

Judah | January 13, 2008 11:56 AM

Shalom Ya'll

First I would like to say that this as been a very interesting blog. And after coming across so many Sacred Name Advocates....I searched the web for anything that would explain this from a more factual point of veiw....and I found a wonderful article by Dr. Daniel Botkin with very interesting information from Dr. Ben Gigi, an Israeli Linguist....below is the link to the article..


I pray this sheds some light. What concerns me so much regarding this movement, is the intense damage it does to heart and soul...and it goes without saying that it is completely doctrinally unsound.

Be Blessed...


Christine | January 12, 2008 9:49 PM

I have tried to stay abreast with the posting on the name of my beloved savior, and boy there are so many different opinions, it is scary.
I just recieved a book " Come out of Her My People",by C J Koster, from the INJ organization that came with the Hebraic Roots Scriptures,(new "bible" directly from the Hebrew scriptures,both new and old convenants); which addressed this same issue of the spelling of Yeshua's name. They went into great detail and stated his name is not to be spelled Yeshua, but Yahushua. Ok, needless to say, I am very confused!!! I wish I could specifically speak and relay the information in the book, but it was way to advanced for me.
As someone stated earlier, we need to stop majoring in the minors and get on track. When Moshe asked our heavenly father what his name was, he "I am that I am". That to me encompasses so many things, and encompasses so many different names, but he is the "One true Abba", There are so many people who call their fathers by so many different names, but they do not love him any less, or disrespect him, but just have a fond love and appreciation for their father. Our main concern, should be to "love the lord our G_d with all our heart, mind and soul".

DTL Replies: There are actually not a plethora of opinions on this matter among people who actually read and understand Hebrew. Koster's book is not a reliable source.

Janice | January 12, 2008 11:34 AM

The language has been in non-use for over 5,000 years. I highly doubt Messiah used Paleo-Hebrew when talking to the disciples.

Actually, I don't think this is quite accurate. Correct me if I'm wrong, but Paleo-Hebrew is just an ancient script of Hebrew, not a different language. One cannot "speak" in Paleo-Hebrew. Hebrew is Hebrew. One can write with the Paleo script or the Aramaic script.

But yes, if/when the Master wrote, it would have undoubtedly been in the Aramaic script, the one that the Jewish people have used since the days of Ezra and Nehemiah.

dtl replied: That is correct, it is an older font, so to speak. However, the post to which Jeremiah was responding was using it in the sense of an earlier strata of the language's development.

Shays | January 11, 2008 12:11 AM

Thanks Steve. I see the mistake of my post.

jay | January 10, 2008 3:30 PM

The spelling Y'shua also arises from confusion between the feminine noun yeshu'ah (e = sheva; ' = 'ayin; ah = feminine ending) and the proper noun yeshua' (e = sere; a = anaptyptic vowel between a non a-class vowel and a final gutteral ['ayin]; ' = 'ayin). We sometimes carelessly mix up yeshu'ah, 'salvation' with the name yeshua', 'salvation.' The sheva of yeshu'ah and the sere of yeshua' both derive from the same original, short a-class vowel, but it behaves differently in different phonological environments. In yeshu'ah, the short a-class vowel reduced to a sheva in a distant, open syllable. In yeshua', as I explain in my first entry above, the sheva (originally a short a-class vowel) upgraded to a sere in a near, open syllable after the loss of the feminine ending and the resultant accent shift. These are regular and consistent rules of Hebrew phonology that can be demonstrated over and over again.

This raises a greater issue regarding many of the comments in this blog. The issue of yahshua' versus yeshua' is a phonological issue and must be argued on phonological grounds. Phonology does not arise from theology nor from wishful thinking nor from concocting some mistaken argument about tampering with the language. If you know historical grammar, you know that the language is consistent, and nobody tampered with it. They preserved it. If you propose the argument that someone tampered with the language, you must support it with true phonological evidence, not with wishful thinking.

I am still waiting for a lucid and coherent phonological explanation that takes Yahu+yashu'ah to Yahoshua to Yashua'. I am interested in your phonological work, not your theology.

Steve Lancaster | January 10, 2008 10:07 AM

Can someone just 'briefly' explain why the spelling of 'Yeshua' is more correct? This is the spelling that I use also, but I am not totally sure why. I've also seen Y'shua used.
thanks so much, Carol

DTL Replies: The difference between Yeshua, Y'shua and Yeishua are just questions of English transliteration of the same Hebrew name. The apostrophy version Y'shua was first introduced by Jews for Jesus. Not sure why. That's a problematic spelling because it implies a sheva instead of a tzere vowel under the initial yod. The "e" in Yeshua is best pronounced like the "ei" in the word "heir," but English speakers tend to shorten it to an "e" like in the word "Yes."

Carol Trader Barton | January 9, 2008 12:50 PM

there seems to be alot of discussion of knowing the name of the messiah. In the book of Revelations chapter 19 we are told that we do NOT know His name. All the names applied to Ha shem - Blessed be His Holy Name, are descriptive terms. The same also applies to the Messiah.
it is more inportant to know HaShem and the Word { the aleph tav] than His Name. You now know my name but you still do not know me!! It is interesting that we have seem to have forgotten that when His name is spoken - all will bow and confess He IS KING OF KINGS AND LORD OF LORDS.

DTL Replies: Good comment and good thoughts. In this blog string, we are not assuming to be able decipher His ultimate, unknowable Name, rather we are simply arguing over how the Hebrew name Yeshua was pronounced.

mark prillwitz | January 9, 2008 7:02 AM


I have been reading the responses and it's been really interesting....

I used to belong to the YAHshua group. I even went as far as to tell my friends that if they did not call his name Yahshua, they were not saved (HaShem forbid). To my shame, my former beliefs were based only on ignorance.
After learning Hebrew, history, and simple context all of those beliefs vanished away.
Intelligent ignorance (which is what this is) is a very dangerous thing. It, first, causes us to say things that we wouldn't usually say and, later, do things we wouldn't usually do. It is, most of the time, blind obedience to certain teachers. From my experience, all this teaching does is causes you to seperate yourself from everyone around you and that is where false doctrines thrive; seclusion.

David ha'melekh chai v'kayam b'Mashiach Yeshua!
-Michael M.

Michael Murray | January 8, 2008 8:09 PM

Not to be rude but, what intelligent person seriously looks at the Paleo-Hebrew for backing of his point? The language has been in non-use for over 5,000 years. I highly doubt Messiah used Paleo-Hebrew when talking to the disciples.


Jeremiah | January 8, 2008 7:49 PM

I know the topic is Yeshua vs. YAHshua, but where is the word "mashiYAH" coming from? This boggles my mind...

sabrina | January 8, 2008 5:54 PM

Just to add my two cents to the YAH group.

occurs 164 times in 158 verses in the KJV
Page 1 / 7 (Gen 49:18 - Psa 18:46)

KJV Strong's H3444 matches the Hebrew ישועה (yĕshuw`ah).

(salvation) AND H3444
occurs in 64 verses in the KJV

In the way that it is meant in these passages as salvation it is pronounced as Yeshua. The Greek Apostolic Scriptures has it spelled out as Iseos which means "Jehovah is salvation". That said,
Yeshua's parents were Hebrew not Greek so I would assume they chose Yeshua which is what the word "salvation" means. The words in the OT that meant salvation in this context match up with the Talmud as well. So the Yeshua pronounciation would be closer to correct than what you are attempting. I hope this made some sense, I sometimes tend to confuse myself. ;)

JAY | January 8, 2008 4:41 PM

There are a couple of valid reasons why "Yeshua" cannot accurately be the eternal name of the MashiYAH. 1) "Yeshua" is never written as the MashiYAH's name in practically all of the 5300 Greek Great texts. Those like the P-46 manuscript in the Chester Beatty Museum in Dublin Ireland, and others, have "XPY IHY" which is "Chruw YAHU" meaning "the crucified YAHU" YAHU being the middle form of YAHUWAH which is the eternal name of our heavely Father. Texts from the Latin vulgate say it is "Christos Iesous" which we get the modernized "Jesus." This lie has been propounded for some 1800 years and is now being exposed.
2) The name "Yeshua" does not "carry" the Father's name. It describes his ministry (salvation) and so at best it could be used as one of his titles. There is a difference between calling Him by a title or by His name. At some point in any relationship, if two parties would like to become more intimate with one another, names will have to be exchanged. Marriage is an example. Get to know the name of your future bridegroom from the heavenlies.
3) The TANAK bears a triple witness that YAHUWAH would become our yashuah (YeshYAHU 12:2, Shemoth 15:2, Teh 118:14). In none of these verses is the name "Yeshua, Yesu, Iesous, Esus, or Jesus" declared as truth.
4)MashiYAH declare in YAHUchanan 5:43 "I have come in my Father's name and power" (Amplified version). The Father's name from the paleo Hebrew is YAHUWAH/YAHUAH.
5) Whoever shall call on the name of YAHUWAH, shall be saved (Yoel 2:32, Rom 10:13). "Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must ve saved" (Acts 4:12).
6) YAHUWAH is the name above every name (Phil 2:9). That includes above the "common name/title of "Yeshua."
7) Yahshua is a contraction of YAHUshua, which is a contraction of YAHUWAH yashuah. It phonetically echoes the short form of The Name "YAH" (Teh 68:4), whereas "Yeshua" does not. Other Yisralites in the scriptures carried the name "Yeshua." The Rabbis refused to recognize MashiYAH and His Name. So "YAH" was shortened or changed to "Ye." Thereby hiding or covering up THE NAME. This learned ignorance is still with us today.
8) One final comment, rabbincal tradition, Hebrew grammatical vowel markings and such are no guarantee for truth. Let's press in to the kingdom, even with the revelation of His wonderful awesome NAME. It is the key to unlock the treasures of the scriptures. Let us repent, for the kingdom of YAHUWAH is near!


Bro. Yahuseph

DTL replies: Thank you for posting. I appreciate hearing from the other side of the argument.

For the sake of the blog readers who might otherwise miss your points, let me summarize your premises. Note that I disagree with everyone of these, and I feel they exhaust all reasonable credibility. I do not mean to be contentious, I just fail to see any of these as "valid reasons."

The Greek manuscripts are faulty so they cannot be relied upon as sources.
Based upon texts cited above, the Messiah's name must be identical with or contain an explicit theophoric element.
The Vav in God's name is both a vowel and a consanant, so conventional pronunciations are in error.
The Jews distorted the Messiah's name and somehow perpetrated that distortion on the manuscripts, which is why we cannot trust the Bible.
The Jews also distorted the Hebrew language through the Masoretic tradition which is why we cannot trust the rules of Hebrew grammar.

Incidentally, the Hebrew for "Anointed One" is Mashiach. It is impossible to render it as MeshiYAH. Since you are obviously interested in Hebrew and etymological relationships, I think you would profit from a conventional, formal study of the language.

Shalom b'Mashiach

Bro. Yahuseph | January 8, 2008 11:52 AM

Well put, Ariel.

Adonai, it would seem, cannot fit neatly into a box...
neither creed, theology, doctrine, ritual, sacrament, nor name.

webbmd | January 8, 2008 9:06 AM


There once lived a very pious and humble Rabbi. His devoted prayers at Yom Kippur would move all the peoples to cries of t'shuvah and shouts of joy knowing HaShem heard their cries. While in prayer the Rabbi heard a voice tell him that there was one far greater in their prayers than he. The Rabbi's heart lept for joy and he began searching for this man from town to town. An innkeeper of a small town invited him to stay for Shabbos. Arriving at Shul for prayer, he again heard there is one much greater in prayer. After Shabbos, he thanked the innkeeper and began to continue his search when he came upon a wood-cutter. The Rabbi sensed something about the wood cutter but did not see anything unusual. As he got closer, he heard the wood-cutter repeating the Alef-Beis. The Rabbi asked he why he was doing this? The wood-cutter replied that he didn't know the Hebrew prayers but only the Aleph-Beis so he simply asked HaShem to take his letters and form them into prayers pleasing to Him. It was then the Rabbi realized it was this wood-cutter's simple faith that HaShem had spoken of as great in prayer. The Rabbi stayed a month or so, bringing joy to this wood-cutter by teaching him the Hebrew prayers.
One should never think that it is the length of prayer, nor just the words alone but by faith know that G-d had heard them. Those insistent on this "name only" movement are in error to think that the Holy One - blessed be He - only hears those who speak "the name". It's not in the name but in the faith.
Be Well

Ariel | January 7, 2008 2:46 PM

FFOZ blog,

I am a very new Hebraic roots follower (6 years +/-) and I have found it etremely interesting to read the above comments concerning the name(s) of our Messiah. All I know is that my mother and father gave me the name Stephen. I do not prefer to be called Esteban or Stephanos or any other name in another language. Will I respond to being called something else if I know they are referring to me? It depends on their attitude and/or purpose. If they are "well-meaning" and respectful, then 'YES' I will respond.
So, what I would like to know is: What did Miriam and Yosef call our Messiah? They got the message from Ruach HaKodesh. Surely they would know.

Stephen (Steve)

DTL Replies: Right on Steve, or Stephen if you prefer. That is precisely the point. Since we can linguistically prove how His name was pronounced, why alter it for the sake of a theological agenda? And by the way, I think his mother might have called Him "Yeshy," but that's just a guess.

Stephen Snyder | January 7, 2008 12:42 PM

If it pleases I do not know that much about languages. I do understand in the First chapter of John it reads that the word was with God and the Word was God and the Word became Flesh! ... do the study on the book of Hebrews and you will find out in reading the WORD there are many names for Yeshua and many ways to spend you time yet are you spending like it says in the book of proverbs WISELY? Telling others about Him and what He did and Wo He is?

sincerly The least to be heard
Patricia Mayhew

Patricia Mayhew | January 7, 2008 11:51 AM

I have been using the spelling "Yeshua" but, I'm glad that you brought this up since this other spelling has confused me for some time now. I do have a problem w/ using the name "Jesus" ever since I learned that that was the name the Greeks gave Him. It means "little Zeus". I understand the tradition of Christians using "Jesus" and have no problem w/ their use of it. However, I've seen the power of the name "Yeshua" and have been a witness of how it riles up the demonic when it is used.

DTL Replies: Shalom Judah. Thanks for commenting. There is power in the name of Yeshua, but there is no truth to allegation that "Jesus" means "little Zeus." That is a false etymology. The name Jesus is a transliteration of a transliteration of a transliteration. Linguistically it can be traced letter for letter back to the Hebrew/Aramaic Yeshua.

Judah | January 7, 2008 10:03 AM

There is a decent article on the Sacred Name Movement on Wikipedia.

It got started at the beginning of the 20th century with the Seventh Day Adventists.

Steve Petersen | January 7, 2008 12:33 AM


The glossary in the back of the Strong's concordance can be a helpful resource at times, but its treatment of Hebrew is very superficial. It does not replace the need for an actual lexicon and grammar book.

One limitation of that resource that seems to be leading you astray is that the Strong's only lists the lexical form of each word. It does not show how each word changes form when it is used in different contexts.

The Strong's concordance is correct in directing you to the Hebrew names Yehoshua (3091) and Yeshua (3442). If we try to segment these names into their respective etymological roots and then reassemble them, we will not arrive at a more accurate pronunciation because that is not how the Hebrew language works.


Aaron Eby | January 6, 2008 3:49 PM

Is this why some of us Jewish Msessianics want to stay in the traditional shul? We do not have knowledge of such issues because we are Jewish and study Torah which points to HaMashiach. This is very confusing to me, hope not to run into this subject when looking for a Messianic Congregation. Is this a Christian arguement of Yeshua's name. Learn Hebrew!!!

DTL Replies: Yes David, this argument depends upon an ignorance of Hebrew--or just enough knowledge of Hebrew to be dangerous. It does not originally come from Messianic Judaism. It comes from the Sacred Name movement, a radical Christian ideology that has attached itself to sectors of the Messianic movement.

David Roth | January 6, 2008 11:49 AM

Is the Strongs concordance a reliable source? If so when we look up jesus in the greek 2424 it gives us a referance to the the Hebrew 3091 and then gives us two versions of the messiahs name one with yode hay vav shoo ayin,and the second name as yode hay vav sheen ayin. Now the second name gives us that it alone is taken from 3068 and 3467. 3068 being Yode Hay Vav Hay and 3467 being Yasha. If we put these together we get Yahsha. Also strongs suggest that due to the difficulty with the ayin as the last letter in this name it is dropped kind of like we do with the silent "e" in english. Now I am not a member of any sacred name group but do consider myself an Isralite because I have put my trust in the Heavenly Father and His messiah. The only begotten Son. Also if you look up the shua in the name you dont get salvation out of this but crying out or wealth strongs number 7769,70,71. I am only a student and want to learn. I love you all and just want to incourage us all to keep seeking his face and become like him as the day draws near. Love David, Shalom

david | January 6, 2008 11:19 AM

Daniel - Back to your original post. You had asked, "Where does this come from?" I could give you a list of a bajillion websites and teachers promoting this craziness. However, it might be of interested to see what passages they are resting on as their "Ace of Spades." Here are a few:

Jeremiah 16:21 And, behold, I will make them know; this time I will cause them to know My hand and My might; and they shall know that My name is [Yod-Hei with Vav-Hei].

Jeremiah 23:26-27
How long is this there in the heart of the prophets, the prophets of lies; yea, the prophets of the deceit of their own heart? They plot to cause My people to forget My name by their dreams which they tell, each one to his neighbor, even as their fathers have forgotten My name for Baal.

Malachi 1:11
For from the east to the west, My name shall be great among the nations, and everywhere incense shall be offered to My name; and a pure food offering; for My name shall be great among the nations , says [Yod-Hei with Vav-Hei] of hosts.

Isaiah 42:8
I am [Yod-Hei with Vav-Hei]; that is My name ; and I will not give My glory to another, nor My praise to engraved images.

It boils down a few common factors among all of these proponents:

  1. Little to no knowledge of Hebrew
  2. Anti-Semetism or Anti-Judaeophobia
  3. Faith is based on correct magical formulas
  4. Belief that the biblical faith exists in a vacuum

I'm fed up with it as well and would like to see them come to their senses. However, at this time, I think the best we can do is show that we are true disciples of the Master through our genuine love one for another and pray for our brothers and sisters who believe they have the corner on the True biblical faith.

Darren | January 5, 2008 8:13 PM

Hello again Daniel:

In reference to Psalm 105:1: We should proclaim God's deeds to those who desire to know. Plus, it is possible to do the works of Yeshua if we believe; God can do His works through His assembly of believers (John 14:10-12).

Kennard Levi Brown | January 5, 2008 2:47 PM

Hello Daniel:

I am currently studying the book "Names - The Father, the Son and the Importance of Names in the Scriptures" by Todd D. Bennett. You may want to review this book.

Based on scripture, it is important to do the deeds associated with God's name (Psalm 105:1). When you are doing the deeds associated with the name, you are calling upon His name.

Additionally, it is not good to strive about words because it produces envy, strife and evil (1 Timothy 6:4).

Yet, to research and correctly discover His Hebrew name and the Messiah's Hebrew name without causing division and strife is acceptable. Until proven otherwise, I use "Yeshua" to refer to Jesus in Hebrew because most of the Messianic community is familiar with "Yeshua."

Lastly, it is important to understand that God desires everyone in the world to know Him and His name (Malachi 1:11). In the 2nd chapter of Acts, God through the Holy Spirit gave the apostles the ability to speak different languages so that the people that were present could understand them. God created the different languages (Genesis 11:6-9) and He desires to communicate in different languages.

Kennard Levi Brown | January 5, 2008 1:21 PM

(I realize I’m on the tail end of a lot of discussion here, but)

The Torah restoration is path where major belief systems are pulled free and floating. It's emotional to find out that God’s personal name isn’t exactly “L-RD,” that no one knows how it is pronounced, and to realize that people at one time used it even greeting each other.

That's tough to deal with in what one (hopefully) considers one’s most precious relationship in life.

I think it is not so hard to understand how this–and the name of Messiah–spins out in the Sacred Name Movement.

Not all of them are as dogmatic about YAHshua as others, however. Some write “Y’shua” and say, “Pronounce it how you are persuaded it should be.” Some write it in Hebrew without vowels for the same reason.

But, obviously, it seems a bit hard to reach a dying world with those type of exclusive technicalities in the way.

I think it’s also notable how strong this Sacred Name business is (though definitely not exclusively) in the “American” speaking world as opposed to other cultures with more international and linguistic exposure.

John Peter | January 5, 2008 12:21 PM

One of the best and most complete Torah commentaries I have found on the name “Yeshua” is the comments of Dr. S. K. Blad on “Shelach Lecha” (Num. 13:8) concerning Hoshea ben Nun.

Scroll to verse 13:8.

Among intersting examples are: the short and long versions of Yonatan’s (ben Shaul’s) name, even in the in the same verse (1Sam 19:1); the usage of the shortened form “Yeshua” before Babylonian/Aramaic influence; comparisons of Yeshua ben Yotzadak in Aram. Ezra, Heb. Ezra, and Haggai; Nehemiah‘s version of the son of Nun. (Neh 8:17)

I reccomend anyone intersted in the topic to read it. It covers most the angles Scripturally and is not very long. I would post all the intersting things, but 150 words is prohibative.

John Peter | January 5, 2008 11:52 AM

Correction. Yes, I meant English titles :)

Dear Richard, ... what you seem to be saying is that UNLESS believers use a correct pronunciation (according to your view) all are following a false messiah - right?

If so, please consider the amount of instruction there is in G-d's word about examination of one's self and having a clean heart before Him as compared to having a pronunciation right.


Scott | January 4, 2008 2:58 PM

I really enjoyed reading your post Richard.
I want to hear more from you.


webbmd | January 4, 2008 2:07 PM

Let me interrupt the conversation here to plug the new forthcoming FFOZ book: "Hallowed by Your Name" by Toby Janicki and Aaron Eby.

This book is not about the Yahshua/Yeshua question, but it addresses the much more difficult and more controversial question of whether or not it is appropriate for disciples of Yeshua to use and pronounce the four letter name of God as it is spelled in the Torah. In other words, is it appropriate or not to pronounce the name (Y/H/V/H) in prayer, conversation, reading, or other contexts. Why or why not? What did the Apostles do? What did Yeshua do and why? What did He tell us to do? Are the Rabbis purposely supressing the pronunciation of God's name? It is part of a conspiracy? Shouldn't we all be proclaiming the Father's name?

Do NOT reply to these questions on this blog thread. This is just a commercial break for the book. As FFOZ Educational Director, I commissioned this book because I saw Messianic communities being torn up by these questions. The book is honest, straightforward and exhaustively researched. I believe it will be a must-have for every Messianic community.

Should be available this spring.

D. Thomas Lancaster | January 4, 2008 2:04 PM

Isn't this fun?

One thing for sure, we have all got a look at the dark side of Sacred Name scatology ...

Steve Petersen | January 4, 2008 1:43 PM

Since none of you seem to care about my insight into the true name of MessiaYAH I will no longer be commenting on this site.


DTL replies: Could you please restate your insight?

Richard Blengie | January 4, 2008 1:28 PM

In light of this discussion, it reminds me how I was taught years ago about about the KJV: It's infallible! It's the only unspotted translation we have and ALL OTHERS are to be sub servant, or thrown out.

I was also taught the Romans road with the pinnacle verse Rom 10:13 "Whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved" But I was surprised to find that this passage seemed to be a quote from Joel 2:32: "And it shall come to pass that whosoever calls on the name of the LORD shall be saved"

At the time, I wasn't aware of a sacred name, Tetragramaton, or YHVH - I just used used the Greek titles G-d, L-rd, and Jesus. I can say that by evidence in my life these last 18 years, G-d did what He said and made me a partaker in His covenant - Blessed is He :) Shalom brothers.

DTL Replies: "God" and "Lord" and "Jesus" are not Greek titles. They are English!

Scott | January 4, 2008 12:45 PM

In response to Eric, in psalm 23 in the verse that says "your rod and your staff they comfort me" in the hebrew if you start with the last word in that sentence, taking the first letter of every word going backwards and stopping at "emadi" (with me) you get the name Yehoshua, which the shortened version would be Yeshua. BTW, Yeshu is not considered a curse name for the Master, the name Yoski would be what is used as a curse name. Just my two cents.

j.t. | January 4, 2008 11:55 AM

A Few Phonological Comments on the Mystery

For sake of discussion, let's say that Yehoshua' (single quote mark represent ayin) derives from the combination of Yahu plus *yashu'atu (*represents a hypothetical proto-semitic reconstruction of yeshu'ah based on observable linguistics changes), meaning 'the LORD is salvation.' We cannot be certain that yeshu'ah, 'salvation' represents the second element in the name. It may come from a root shw' (shin-vav-ayin), 'to be noble' as opposed to the y/vsh' (yod/vav-shin-ayin) 'to save'; it may also derive from a verbal form of y/vsh, but to do so creates a vocalic problem in the final form of Yehoshua' (deriving a u-class vowel from either an a-class vowel as in yasha' (Qal, 'he saves,' which does not occur in biblical Hebrew) or from an i-class vowel as in yoshia' (Hiphil, 'he saves,' which is the dominant stem in biblical Hebrew based on the root y/vsh').

So how does Yahu + *yashu'atu become Yeshua'? The process is governed by natural phonological changes within the history of the language that are represented by multiple examples of the same phenomena.

*yashu'atu: in the history of Hebrew, accent shift and loss of case vowels (here the final u) allowed apocope of the feminine marker (tav); the feminine -a ending is then marked by heh as a vowel letter. So the form we will begin with is:
1) *yahuyashu'ah: the second occurrence of 'ya' does not represent the divine name; in this hypothetical form, the original a-class vowel has not yet experienced propretonic reduction (in a distant, open syllable) to produce the form we know as yeshu'ah, 'salvation.' Either under the influence of a masculine name or accent change with the addition of the theophoric element, the feminine ending -ah is lost to apocope, and the form is:
2) *yahuyashu': anaptyxis (the insertion of a vowel) occurs between the non-a-class vowel and the final gutteral to produce the form:
3) *yahuyashua': yod as a weak letter experience syncope in its intervocalic environment and the form becomes:
4) *yahuashua': many examples of contraction exist between a short a-class vowel and a heterogeneous (e.g., *yawm > yom, 'day'), so we credit contraction here (albeit, 'wa' instead of 'aw') for the qualitative vowel change that produces:
5) *yahoshua': propretonic reduction in the distant, open ya- syllable reduces the originally short a-class vowel to a sheva, and the form becomes:
6) yehoshua': the form of Joshua that stands in the biblical text; heh is a weak letter and might experience intervocalic synocope, we see this in Yehoram > Yoram and Yehoash > Yoash; instances in which the preceding vocal sheva--the originally short a-class vowel in the theophoric element--is also lost in pronunication,
7) *yeoshua': here is the mystery, by analogy to apocope in Yoram and Yoash, we should get the form:
8) *yoshua': an important note here is that the originally short a-class vowel of the theophoric Yah no longer exists, whether in our *yoshua', or in Yoram or Yoash; the vowel represented is a contraction of the u-class vowel in Yahu. I know of no way, however, to derive the sere of yeshua' from the holem of *yoshua'; hence, I suggest that in the biblical form yehoshua', the loss of the heh is accompanied by the loss of the holem under the influence of dissimilation from the homogenous u-class vowel in the last syllable of yehoshua' and thus the form becomes:
9) *yeshua': here the 'e' represents sheva, a reduction that took place in a distant, open syllable. Now the syllable is no longer distant but is still open, so pretonic lengthening upgrades the vowel to a sere (a common lengthening) and the form becomes
10) yeshua' (with a sere): this form of the name is common place in the Second Temple period as attested by Ezra 2:2, 36, 40; 3:2, 8, 9; 4:3: 5:2; 8:33; 10:18; Nehemiah 3:19; 7:7, 11, 39, 43; 8:17 (an interesting occurrence; check the Hebrew); 9:4, 5; 12:1, 7, 8, 10, 24, 26; 1 Chronicles 24:11; 2 Chronicles 31:15.

We do not know that any of the hypothetical forms represented in the list ever stood in the language, but they are useful to trace the logical linguistic changes from Yahu + yeshu'ah to Yehoshua' to Yeshua'.

Sorry for the length, DTL. yehi chen be'eneicha le'acheicha.

DTL Replies: chein v'shalom.

Steve Lancaster | January 4, 2008 11:30 AM

Interesting comment about reverse engineering "Jesus" back to the Hebrew. Is the Greek "Iesous" not translated as "Joshua" every time in the LXX? Is the same Greek word "Iesous" not translated into "Jesus" from the Greek manuscripts of the Apostolic Scriptures? Or is there a slight variation in the Greek spelling of these names?

DTL Replies: In every instance in both the LXX and NT Greek, Joshua appears as Iesous. There is no variation in the Greek spelling. Therefore, the NT Greek would be misleading us by spelling the Master's name the same way unless it was pronounced the same way.

D. Eric Wilson | January 4, 2008 11:20 AM

The form "Yahshua" is not a word recognized among scholars who make the study of Hebrew, Aramaic, Greek, Semitics, classics, etc. the purpose of their lives. "Yeshua" or even "Yehoshua" are the top candidates for Messiah's name, with most today favoring the former. And, the name Iēsous surely did not come about via some sordid conspiracy. It can easily be shown via the Septuagint. The problem is that too many make assumptions without placing themselves in the Biblical world. And, too many wish to remain uninformed.

If one must interpret Messiah "coming in His Father's name" as involving the Tetragrammaton, based on First Century convention it would be something closer to "Yeshua bar/ben YHWH" than "Yahshua." But, "name" in both a Semitic and even classicial sense carries with it much more significance regarding repute, character, and authority. Yeshua "coming in His Father's name" regards having God's authority on His ministry.

Having glanced through some of the comments made thusfar, I would urge some caution. There does seem to be a tendency to want to "provoke" the Yahshua advocates. Experience has taught me that the Sacred Name Only crowd are some of the most vehement people you will ever meet. They bring division, hatred, and gross instability into just about any Messianic group they enter--leaving destruction in their wake. It is best to minimize these people as much as possible, and not acknowledge their actions as it concerns the Divine Name and that of our Lord Messiah.

DTL Replies: Thanks. I really don't want to provoke the Sacred Name people. I have actually been heavily editing some of the rhetoric by the anti-Sacred Name posters. I would like them to state their case and present some evidence though. I am interested in the educational opportunity here. I think the days of tolerating foolishness in this movement need to end.

J.K. McKee | January 4, 2008 10:33 AM

Shalom Daniel,

I am totally convinced, Daniel, that the name of the Master is pronounced Yeshua (Yeyshoo'a) with a tsere under the yod and not a sh'va or a segul and accent on the second syllable. In addition, the name Yeshua is a shortened version of the Hebrew name Yehoshua similar to Bill for Willam and Bob for Robert in English. The root of his name is salvation or deliverance. That being the case, the English version of the Master's name would be Joshua! What a beautiful picture also! As Joshua, son of Nun, led the Israelites into the Land of Promise, our Master, Yeshua, leads all people, if they choose to be led, into the Kingdom of God.

In my opinion, the poorly transliterated "Jesus" is not really a name and has no meaning. The pronuniciation of Jesus in English comes from the transliteration into Greekof the Hebrew name Yeshua, modified futher by the Latin, and further corrupted by English pronunciation. Oy vey! How far has this been removed from the wonderfully Biblical name of the Master.

Thank you, Daniel and everyone at FFOZ, for all of your hard work. You have helped us all tremendously understand the Word of HaShem more than ever before. Todah rabah!


Reuven Ehrenshaft | January 4, 2008 10:30 AM

We should and preserve the LORD's name, for it is holy, and the name above all names. Yeshua (or if you prefer YAHshua) says people would know that we were his disciples if we "love one another, as I have loved you" (John 13:34-35) If Love is the fullfillment/aim of the Torah, truly (Romans 13:10), whether it be "Jesus" or "Yeshua" or even "YAHshua", we are to be know by the internal character of Messiah"s Spirit that dwells within us. Sadly, these kinds of arguements are common in Messianic circles, as well as the rest of the Body. I"m up for discussion on the Name, but never exault the Gift over the Giver. Shalom!

David Niles | January 4, 2008 10:28 AM

Mr. Lancaster,

My apologies for the lenghty note. I appreciate your opinion, and I appreciate and respect your knowledge and understanding of the Scriptures and other writings. You have invested much time in seeking the truth.

I believe in the inerrancy of the Scriptures as originally documented, and I think we have a few very good translations that have preserved most of it throughout time. My only point with the name is that Messiah is not mentioned by name in the Tanach or the LXX, as these were before His appearance. Sure, the name "Yeshua" and "Yehoshua" are there as interpreted today, only not referring specifically to Him. Is it not possible that His name was a slight variation of "traditional" Hebrew names?

DTL Replies: The conventions of transliteration from Hebrew to Greek are fixed and well established long before the writing of the Gospels. It is therefore possible to reverse engineer the Greek Jesus back to its Hebrew equivalent without any uncertainty. If the name Yeshua was pronounced with a slight variation, that should have been somehow noted in the Greek. As it stands, it would be the equivalent of a deliberatly rendering your name as Wallson instead of Wilson and expecting everyone to know that it was actually, originally supposed to be pronounced Wilson.

D. Eric Wilson | January 4, 2008 10:21 AM

I've never been a proponent of the Yod Hey spelling of the beginning of Yeshua's name. The fact that the Ossuary of Yaakov (James) doesn't spell it with a Hey tends to confirm my feelings on this matter. Likewise, in looking at the various Hebrew manuscripts of Matthew that are still extant we find that the Angelic annunciation in Matt 1:21 is spelled as Yod Shin Vav Ayin.
Though I will admit in advance that everywhere else in these Hebrew manuscripts the Ayin at the end has been removed presumably to turn His name into an insult. However, there are some who claim that the Yeshu abbreviation represents the Galilean pronounciation which frequently dropped the "a" sound off the end of words. But I'm not enough of a linguist to comment on such things.
Another varient might be to not place a Hey as the 2nd letter, but to place a kametz or patach under the Yod which would still give us a similar pronounciation of Yashua. On occasion I see someone spell it as Yeishua with a tsere under the Yod. But the most common spelling which I have seen is to place a Shva under the Yod, which we should (following the standard rules) transliterate as Y'shua. But then the apostrophe is looked upon (by some) as being there for the same reason the dash is used in "G-d".
This obscuring of Messiah's name might have some validity in practice as well since we tend to obscure the Divine Name, so why not obscure Messiah's name as well? Yes, we are to do things in His (Messiah's) name, but does that mean pronounce it? We are told to proclaim the Divine Name among the nations, and yet we don't pronounce it even in private. So I can see another entire branch of the Messianic Movement arising that refuses to pronounce the name Yeshua, since it is as Divine as the 4 Letter Name is.
The fact that "Yeshuah" (with a Hey on the end) is used a great many times in Tanakh is, to me, a tremendous witness for the "Yeshua" pronounciation. Especially the verses that say "HaShem has become my Yeshuah" - which is exactly what we believe. Obviously, we have to drop the Hey off the end since Yeshuah would be a feminine name. The removal of the Hey from the end turns it into a masculine name.
From my perspective it would seem like Yahshua would be diminishing who He is - changing Him into an object owned by HaShem rather than a personification of HaShem. Yahshua would be "Y-h's salvation" rather than simply being Salvation personified. Much like the difference between "my hat" and "my arm". My hat is not me, but my arm certainly is part of me. (Obviously I use this allegory because of Yeshua being the Arm of HaShem in Isaiah 53:1).
So, for all these reasons, I support the "Yeshua" pronunciation of Messiah's name rather than the others.
May Yeshua draw all of us into unity where we are not fighting about minor issues. There is a war going on out there where people are walking into congregations and opening fire. We need to hang together so that we don't hang seperately.(But, be prepared for death in any case.)

DTL Replies: Thanks for your thoughts. Please keep the posts shorter.

Daniel | January 4, 2008 9:41 AM

I am not a member of the so-called “sacred name” movement. I, like most of you, am someone who is truly seeking the face of the One True God. Here is the problem: we all know in part (I Cor 13:12). No man will be able to figure everything out before Messiah returns. If we could, then there is no need for the Restoration of All Things that Peter refers to in Acts 3:21. I believe that Messiah will return and restore us to true worship. We cannot know what all of that will contain, because so many things have been lost over time. We are so corrupted by the traditions of men (Christian and Rabbinical) that we often cannot separate the truth from the tradition. In spite of what some may think, I do not believe there is any group of people who have perfectly preserved what the Father revealed to the forefathers of our faith. This is why we need Messiah.

As to the name: I prefer to write “Yahshua”, because it reminds me of who He was (One who came from Yah, who brings Salvation from Yah). We cannot know how His name was truly spelled, because we do not have a document where He wrote His own name with His own handwriting, and because we do not have “originals” of the inspired documents (at least to my knowledge).

Let me give an example: The name I go by is “Eric”. It can also be spelled: “Erik” and “Erick”. Neither of these is correct for my given name, but both sound the same, and I would respond to someone “saying” my name with the “wrong” spelling when they are speaking to me. In a similar way, “Yahshua” and “Yeshua” sound pretty much the same when you say them. By the way, I also had a sixth grade teacher who pronounced my name “EE-ric” (long E sound at the start). I responded to her too, when she called on me in class, even though she is the only person who has ever pronounced my name that way. I knew she was speaking to me. I think much the same is true of Messiah.

References have already been made to the Greek spelling of “Jesus” vs. “Joshua”. This is much the same as I am attempting to illustrate. The references in Acts 7:45 and Hebrews 4:8 are for “Joshua”, the servant of Moses. Yet, the name is identical to what is translated as “Jesus” everywhere else in the Apostolic writings. In fact, the 1611 King James translated every occurrence of this name as Iesus (Jesus) in the Apostolic writings, while the name of “Joshua” was translated as Ioshua in the Tanach. By the way, it is the same Greek word used in the Septuagint for “Joshua” that is used in the Apostolic writings for “Jesus”. Who was right? Perhaps in English He should be “Joshua”, not “Jesus”. Regardless, I think the Messiah knows when you speak His name, as long as it comes from the “heart” (innermost being).

DTL: Mr. Wilson, I disagree with your premise that we cannot know how the name Yeshua was rendered. We have clear documentary evidence between the Tanach, the LXX and the Greek manuscripts of the Gospels. Just because some people have different opinions and preferances or poor language skills does not mean that we cannot make a solid conclusion based on empiracal evidence. PS. Let's keep the comments more concise.

D. Eric Wilson | January 4, 2008 8:17 AM

---Quoting Richard: In the book of Yochanah it says that he has reviled the Name unto the disciples---

I didnt know He reviled the Name:P

No seriously Richard, come on man, you dont really mean what you wrote right? This would mean that for about 1900 years people have been calling upon a false Messiah and consequently not been saved, could the Blessed One be this cruel? I doubt it. Furthermore should an issue like this really divide brothers? I do not think its really worth it, and besides, doesnt the Master instruct us that we should show each other love instead of this kind of condemning language?

I wish you a good Shabbat,


PS Does the Zohar mean that one should inherit his fathers name in a literal sense? That sure would spread some confusion having all these people with the same names;)

DTL Replies: Actually, I think that the core sentiments behind the Yahshua movement such as a repudiation of Judaism, an anti-Semitic conspiracy premise and a heretical soteriology are worth dividing and breaking fellowshipping over.

Daniel K | January 4, 2008 8:10 AM

Here is something interesting in response to Richard's statement that Yeshua is a Rabbinic suppression of Messiah's name.

I know a man whose father gave him the Hebrew name Yoseph Yeshua. Yeshua was given to him because his father believed it to be descriptive of the messiah he believed was yet to come and was a good, righteous name. He did not know of that being the name of the Messiah who has already come as he only knew the name Jesus in reference to Him.

This man was born and raised in Rabbinical Judaism. Surely he would have known or learned of such a name being used as described by Richard before giving it to his son.

Nancy | January 4, 2008 12:36 AM

Come on now Richard - no one is saying that YOU are following a false messiah because you think it is should be 'Ya' and not 'Ye'.

Scott | January 3, 2008 11:37 PM

You reference (Richard) to the Zohar seems bizarre since you seem to be against Rabbinics so much.

Peace, Jeremiah

Jeremiah | January 3, 2008 9:25 PM

May Yah save your poor soul (I want use the full name because you are so against it and would rather see it in the can then on a website) YAHSHUA is the MEssiYAH!! Not Yeshua, Yeshua is Rabbinic Suppression of the name, it should not surprise you that I do have the revelation of the name because I reject the rabbis who hide the name. You bow to there every whim, which is why you call upon the false MEssiYAH Yeshua not to the real one YAHSHUA!! Here are some proofs that YAHSHUA is the true name of the MESSIYAH

In the book of Yochanah it says that he has reviled the Name unto the disciples

And the Zohar also says that the name of the father is upon the son. See? Woe unto you blind Daniel!! Call upon YAHSHUA and be saved!!!


DTL: That's more like it.

Richard Blengie | January 3, 2008 7:12 PM

I'm surprised that nobody here seems to know where the "Yahshua" pronounciation comes from. I'm not surprised that most disagree with it (it is a minority view), but I thought this was one of those things everybody knew, even though they don't agree (like knowing the verses that people use to claim that the Law is invalid). Well, here it is for those who want to know:

And I am no more in the world, and these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep them in thy name which thou hast given me, that they may be one, even as we are. (John 17:11)

Some versions have that verse a little different, so "thou hast given me" refers to "them" and not His name. But, based on this translation, which is found in some versions, the Father gave the Messiah His name. Therefore, the Messiah's name must contain the Father's name.

I don't know Hebrew, so I looked up the name Joshua on www.babynames.com. They say that it means "God is salvation". If that's right, then the yod-heh in Yehoshua is a short form of God's name. The same reasoning therefore applies to Yehoshua as to Yahshua. Yeshuah, however, doesn't contain God's name. Personally, I prefere Yehoshuah, both because of the reason stated above and because there is a precident for translating it as Jesus - the book of Joshua in the Septuagint (or, so I've been told).

You may still not agree with it, but now you know what it's based on.

Dtl Replies: Thanks. That helps! I don't understand the John 17:11 passage's relevance though. Anyone named Yeshayahu or Yermiyahu has the same theophoric element in their name. Even if the name Yeshua was voclaized that way , it would not make the name any more sacred or mystical than the name Jeremiah.

Kristinn | January 3, 2008 6:30 PM

Daniel, in all sincerity, I really think all the mulling over of scripture isn't producing enough for a reasonable rebuttal.

Here's something I thought of. You know the passage in Hebrews 4:8 For if Jesus had given them rest, then would he not afterward have spoken of another day.

We all know this is talking about Joshuah right? Well, in Hebrew, Joshuah's name does begin with the Yood and Hey - but any of these proponents won't dispute the fact that we are all pronouncing it correctly as Yehoshua rather than "Yahoshua".

Scott | January 3, 2008 5:44 PM

I am a little disappointed by this blog thread. I was hoping that the proponents and defenders of the "Yahshua" pronunciation would have contributed. I know from the volume of feedbacks and mail that I receive that it is not a small minority of Messianic-type people who cling to that pronunciation.

D. Thomas Lancaster | January 3, 2008 5:24 PM

The more I read here about the different experiences people have had - especially the post about the man whos wife died and was told that just because he didn't use the sacred name in prayer is the reason she died, the more I realize that there is no debating with such folks.

I have also come to realize that sound thinking is absent in such people. They are in tune with their esoteric knowledge and out of tune with their brain. It is like making G-d out to be a big furry rabbit's foot - all you have to do is rub it right!

Scott | January 3, 2008 5:01 PM

It is too bad that this is such a splitting issue. When you consider the fact that the Holy Name of the Father is in the Bible over 7,000 times (so I've heard), it really makes me, for one, a little unsettled over the issue. I do not feel totally comfortable anymore using the common terms Lord and God, but on the flip side, far be it from me to start using The Name as if He was right there in the room, because He is not. To be sure, I do feel 100% comfortable calling Him my Father, or the Father, that is for sure.

I guess the disturbing issue, and maybe someone at FFOZ has a good handle on this, is that the Father says many times not to add or take away from His Word, which would imply not changing it. Would then submitting a common substitute for His Name thousands of times in our English translations be understood in some way to changing the Word, or at the very least, slightly misleading the reader?

It is a very difficult issue to sort through. Especially now that I know His Name in Hebrew, I think, "why should I not read it when I come across it in the Bible?" I know that many people are all over the board on this, and FFOZ's position to my limited knowledge is a very reverent and respectful one, which is good, and maybe somehow through this forum and the upcoming resource, we can truly grasp a unified understanding and respectful approach on this issue.

Like my last post (should be above), perhaps it is good to remember what Authority (Name) we are calling upon, and that is the King of the universe, no matter what sounds we end up forming with our mouths to do so.

Shalom to all

DTL Replies: The question of why we do not pronounce God's name as it is spelled is another issue. I want to limit this forum to the question of how we pronounce Yeshua's name. However, FFOZ is about to release a book which deals with the entire question of pronouncing God's Name. It is called "Hallowed Be Your Name" and should be out in a few months. It is written by Toby Janicki and Aaron Eby, and they handle the entire questions thoroughly, with grace, tact, clear logic and historical information.

Cliff | January 3, 2008 4:50 PM

I echo Daniel Ks question... will you be producing a book on the Sacred Name that is non-confrontational in tone? There is plenty of scholarly work about the Sacred Name which shows what Daniel (DTL) and Aaron discuss above, but perhaps what is still needed is a resource that counters the emotionally-based pro-Sacred Name, or pro-Common Name, teachings.

Just my two pennies,

Tami | January 3, 2008 2:56 PM

When I first came to Messianic Judaism I found an online messianic siddur. This one used also the sacred name and YAHshua.
In their introduction they wrote: ...we at x ministries, believe that failure to use Y/A/H/W/E/H's Name when praying to Him and worshipping Him is tantamount to NOT praying to Him and worshipping Him. (dashes mine)

I guess they see us as idolators and in need of redirection to the right way. Its a pity, because this kind of errant views destroy many relationships.

Btw is the Sacred Name book going to be an apologetic or in such way that you could actually give it to a sacred namer, without offending him?


Daniel K | January 3, 2008 10:54 AM

I once new a man with a very large family, the youngest still a baby, whose wife died from cancer, despite the prayers of many people.

A sacred-namer told the widower that his wife was not healed because he had not prayed using the "sacred name".

I have found these folks to be "one trick ponies" doctrinally and among the strongest proponents of every weird anti-government conspiracy theory out there. Some are even involved in the militia movement. Among those I have encountered, these folks base their very salvation on the sacred name concept. There is no balance.

I advise extreme caution when dealing with these folks. Get a thorough understanding of exactly what they believe and teach before getting involved with them. If they question your salvation or baptism over a name issue, run for the exit and brush the dust off your shoes on the way out.


MJ Belko | January 3, 2008 8:12 AM

It seems to me that those who insist on inserting Yah into Messiah's name have an over dose of Greek thinking. A=B=C, therefore C=A. It is hard not to think in terms of Greek logic for all of us but some seem to work hard to stay with it than to get past it. I could be wrong but it does have the appearance of Greek logic to me.

Nancy | January 2, 2008 10:54 PM

YAH sure, you betchYAH!

webbmd | January 2, 2008 10:43 PM

I feel like I am blog-hoggin here :)

Daniel, I had no idea there was such a thing as 'Jewish Masoretic priests around the 6th century A.D., who created the name Jesus by changing the vowel point from the letter “a” to “e” in the Tetragrammaton YHWH.'

This seems to totally relate to what we're discussing here and maybe this is one those 'internet-scholars' you were referring to earlier :)


Scott | January 2, 2008 8:58 PM

Hey Cliff that was very refreshing - thank you for sharing that. I have come to find Hebrew-thinking as the removing of the mask from G-d's face placed by men. Btw, Daniel, was this fella also implying a small clue that maybe he even thinks the Hebrew word for messiah also contains Yood and Hey as well? I have never seen 'messiah' spelled: "MESSYAH". Maybe he made a typo.

DTL Replies: Not a typo. I am pretty sure we are talking about YAHshua the MessYAH, king of YAHudah and YAHrushalyaim. I am not being sarcastic or punchy here. I have seen all of these.

Scott | January 2, 2008 8:32 PM

It's just for the cool factor.

DTL Replies: Hmmm. I had not thought of that.

Jeremiah | January 2, 2008 7:13 PM

Thanks Daniel
My experience is that is a way someone exerts control and demostrates they are in charge and you are ignorant. I had a man explain who believes KJV is authorative word of G-d and that we should say the name and etc. etc. My understanding of languages is irrelevant: he reads neither Hebrew or Greek. He just knows what he knows, he spends no time working at it or studing it through. He had vision and I have to accept his vision. I am polite and have simply refused to share with them except at distance. They cannot understand why I do not accept His authority. Many people prefer someone who says "I know" regardless of his knowledge base over someone who will say "I do not know" and invites them to learn with them. Not all are like this it is just my expereince with people who uses those words thoughtlessly. I have no understanding of how this developed, though the above post from Araron is great help.
Thanks to all FFOZ for their great leadership


Warren Nyack | January 2, 2008 5:25 PM

I think that this thinking you are referring to Daniel of being baptized in the messiah's name 'ONLY' is predominant in many Christian denominations labeled as "Apostolic". I believe it is primarily based around the apostolic passage "There is no other name under heaven where by men must be saved..." I don't mean to shift the focus of the topic - just responding to your response to Steven. :)

Scott | January 2, 2008 4:27 PM

What does a name represent? Perhaps in english we can be fine with a name simply being an identifier of a person, however, with Hebrew being entirely based on verbal roots and concrete associations and meanings, a name is much more. It is the character, attributes, and authority of a person.

Consider the verse quoted down below. In English, we read "you shall call His name Jesus, for He will save His people from their sins." So, we should ask, What does the name 'Jesus' have to do with saving people from sins, since that is why He was named? It may be fine in the Greek-Western culture of thoughts and ideas by making the abstract connection between Jesus and saving from sins. But in the Hebrew-1st century-Jewish-Israeli culture, this name would not signify anything for them.

In the Hebrew Bible, the base word 'yesha' means "liberty, deliverance, or saving." If you add a 'vav' and a 'hey' on the end, you get yeshuah (Strong 3444), meaning "something saved, deliverance, prosperity, aka salvation."

If you drop the 'hey' ending, the word changes from feminine connotation to a masculine one, and forms the same word Yeshua; however, this form is more commonly used as a name, and there were other people named Yeshua recorded in Chronicles and Nehemiah, etc.

So the following verse would thus make sense to the Hebraic/Aramaic Jew in the 1st century.

"She will bear a son, and you shall call His name Yeshua (salvation!) [yod-shin-vav-ayin], for He will yesha (save!) His people from their sins." -Matthew 1:21

Yeshua (salvation) is what Yeshua is all about. It is this name or authority that we call upon to be delivered/rescued, from our sins before the Father.

That is my understanding right now.

Cliff | January 2, 2008 3:47 PM

Do you suppose it may have magical overtones? There seems to be a component of 'deliverance' things attached to it with some people. It would be interesting to know how many Sacred Name folks come from Pentecostal backgrounds.

DTL: I have heard proponents of the "YAHshua" pronunciation claim that unless one is baptized in that name with that pronunciation, the person must be rebaptized.

Steve Petersen | January 2, 2008 3:06 PM

Yes, wash and worsh doesn't drive wedges like this topic can.
When someone says Yashua or Yehoshua - I know who their talking about even though I refer to messiah as Yeshua. I respect other people's views... but not the emphatic pushing of some who treat it as though it is a doctrine. One bit of information that I try to keep in mind when it comes to this topic is when Moses asked G-d His name, G-d did not say, "It's such and such - get it right!" It seems G-d is more interested in proving Himself. Isn't this the whole idea behind a name anyway? "A GOOD name is rather to be chosen than great riches.." Shalom brothers :)

Scott | January 2, 2008 1:46 PM

I would have to say that in my experience, individuals whom I've come across who drive the name issue into the ground, not only with Yeshuah's name, but also G-d's eternal name (YHVH), seem to have an agenda; there's no room for debate - your wrong and their right. It's childish and it's like having a debate over 'wash' or 'worsh'. We all know wash is correct :)

DTL Replies: I have had the same experiences, and I concur that there definitely is an agenda. The agenda is not nearly as innocuous as a question of "worsh" or "wash" though. As you know, it is not a matter of dialect or regional accent, it is a question of the actual name of the Messiah and it entails significant theological implications for the adherents of the Yahshua movement.

Scott | January 2, 2008 11:56 AM

The Silent Vav?

OK, here's the weird thing. Supposedly YAHshua proponents identify the Hebrew spelling of YAHshua as יהושע, which is conventionally pronounced "Yehoshua."

But oddly, YAHshua proponents assert the vav (ו) in the middle of the word is somehow silent. (In the pronunciation "Yehoshua" it is represented by the O.)

A notable sacred name web site explains this anomaly by citing an archaic Hebrew textbook:

Thus we have (yod-heh-waw-shin-ayin). This name is correctly pronounced YAH-SHU-A, since the letter waw in this compound is silent, just as The Hebraic Tongue Restored, by Fabre d'Olivet, pages 112-113, tells us.

Conjunctive or Convertible Article.--This article in uniting nouns, causes the movement of nothingness, of which the character W becomes the sign, as we have seen: in making actions pass from one time to another, it exercises upon them the convertible faculty of which this same character is the universal emblem. Its conjunctive movement can be rendered by: and, also, thus, then, afterward, that, etc. But its convertible movement is not expressible in our tongue and I do not know of any in which it can be expressed. In order to perceive it one must feel the Hebraic genius.

Emphasis in the above quote was added by the author of the sacred name web site.

The author of the site does not understand the archaic and technical language employed by the author of the grammar. The textbook is talking about a particular use of the letter vav as a conjunction, not simply the letter vav falling in the middle of a person's name. And he is not saying that it is unpronounced, but that its semantic value cannot be translated accurately into English.

The other predominant argument for the "silent vav" is that it is the result of Moses "slow speech." But Moses having slow speech does not explain why he would write an extra letter in someone's name. And if it did, it does not explain why he didn't randomly drop letters into other words he said. And if his speech was "slow," you would think an extra letter would actually be pronounced, rather than skipped over.

I don't intend to be demeaning, but it is hard to engage on a scholarly level with people that are quite so passionately misinformed. If they do not understand their native English language, then they certainly have no business being dogmatic about Hebrew.

The silent vav is a real problem that can't just be ignored. And in fact, a number of former YAHshua people have changed their position based on that fact.

Aaron Eby | January 2, 2008 11:40 AM

I have been studying from a "Hebraic" point of view for a very short time. FFOZ is a site that I believe to be trust worthy and based on the Word of G-d. -- I am awake now and no longer blindly except what one leader or another has to say about G-d. I did have someone explain to me that YAHshua was correct because that was a name "in the name of YHVH." ??? Seems that the same person was the one that told me halleluYAH was correct.??? I have not put this info in my folder marked "Truth" yet. I thought it was interesting though. I feel like I've gotten it wrong for the last 43 years so if I can not verify it based on the Word of YHVH I sort of put it on a shelf. Since the teachers and authors I've been reading write Yeshua that is the way I have spelled it. Your blog as now pulled this topic from the shelf and I am interested to see what others have to say.

DTL: Great. I'm interested in what others have to say too. Your friend is correct. Hallelujah is a contraction of two Hebrew words: "Hallelu" (Prasie ye) "Y-H" (HaShem). The problem is that the Yahshua proponents seem to have mistaken almost every instance of the Hebrew letter Yod as a short version for God's name.

Roni | January 2, 2008 10:43 AM


I am not sure where this teaching is coming from, but I have some theories.

Personally, I would like to say that pursuing a restoration of Jewish context regarding Biblical interpretation and practical application (Discipleship) and learning new faith insights, for me anyway, also carries with it a certain amount pleasure and satisfaction.

One risk/danger is that for many this sense may escalate beyond contentment - which is appropriate - into a spirit of pride, even - regrettably - Gnosticism with respect to this issue of pronouncing The Master's name.

South Dakota

DTL Replies: Yes, it is always fun to "know" better than someone else. It makes us feel superior to others. Disciples have to gaurd against the subtle pride of religious snobbery and elitism.

webbmd | January 2, 2008 10:22 AM

Search in Blogs...

Browse through Blogs



Use this RSS feed to track our blogs in your favorite reader.

The FFOZ Blogs RSS Feed


Blogs by Category


Blogs by Author


More Recent Posts


Select a Previous Month