¿IS THE NAME OF

JESUS DERIVED
FROM THE NAME
ZEUS?
Exposing a popular Sacred Name Movement false
teaching.

DOES JESUS = ZEUS?

INTRODUCTION

Many Sacred Name Movement people believe and openly

propagate the myth that the name of Jesus is in some way connected
with or derived etymologically from the name Zeus. Some believe it,
but know it cannot be substantiated by research and are silent about
it. The more knowledgeable people within the movement openly
deny the truth of it. Some of these seem to want to pretend the myth
was never taught by the early movers and shakers of the movement
and is not now being taught within the movement. These certainly
resent it being brought up and talked about by one outside the
movement.
I have been derisively and insultingly told, “That Eeyaezus [Jesus?]
has nothing to do with Zeus is your greatest intellectual hurdle.” This
is from an otherwise intelligent man who wanted to discuss the
doctrine of the revelation of the Sacred Name with me on a higher
level.

Some Sacred Name people teach this false doctrine; some do not.
Regardless of the position an individual Sacred Name person may
take, this fact remains: a large segment of the movement still believes
this lie. Promoting the Jesus = Zeus myth to new converts is an easy
way to get them away from saying the name of Jesus. It gives them a
reason to look down on, even hate, the name of Jesus. The teachers of
the movement use this lie as an appeal to the need many people have
to possess esoteric knowledge which gives them a superiority over
others. We know more than you know and if you knew where the
name of Jesus came from you wouldn't be using it, are not
uncommon attitudes.

Except in the minds of numbers of Sacred Name people, there is

absolutely no connection between the name Jesus and the name Zeus.
It is easy, however, for SN teachers to pull this doctrinal stuffed
bunny out of the Sacred Name Movement hat and fool people into
thinking it is real. It is not of any substance. It is especially easy to
trick folks who are eager to believe something. Many of them are not
interested in and are trained not to ask for documentation of
research. You may be sure of one thing, when this mythical
connection between Jesus and Zeus is put before a group of people,
the Sacred Name teacher is casting aspersions and disdain on the
name of Jesus.
Let it be stated early and with emphasis that not all Sacred Name
people believe the name Jesus is derived from the name Zeus. It is,
after all, a lie. It has no foundation in any legitimate research. The
teaching is rejected by some; it should be rejected by all Sacred Name
people. This teaching is the product of the fertile imaginations of
Sacred Name teachers.
First, we will show that this doctrine has been taught and
propagated in various Sacred Name publications since the early days
of the Sacred Name Movement. We may be certain that it was taught
from SN pulpits much earlier. It is still being taught both orally and
in print by numerous SN groups. A large majority of Sacred Name
believers subscribe to this false teaching and promote it as though it
were fact.
Second, we will show that the name Jesus has a well grounded and
easily researchable etymological history. It is not now, nor has it ever
been etymological connected with the name Zeus. Sacred Name
people might easily find this etymology, if that were their desire.
Some have done so.

TOP
SECTION ONE:

WHO PROMOTES THIS FALSE TEACHING?

A. B. TRAINA TEACHES IT IN HIS BIBLE

A. B. Traina is the father of the Sacred Name bible. His corruption

of the King James Version was the first such bible. On page five of the
preface of his bible are these words:

“The name of the Son, Yahshua, has been substituted by

Jesus, Iesus, and Ea-Zeus (Healing Zeus).”

This statement is patently false. Though Traina is deceased, his

book is still out there teaching this false doctrine. I am sure, when he
pinned and published these words he believed the name of Jesus
meant Healing Zeus. I am told, by people who knew him, that he was
an earnest and sincere man.
Whatever Traina’s beliefs, sincerity, and ethics, the fact remains that
he made a false statement which is not and cannot be backed by any
valid research at all. Traina stated it as fact, but did not include any
documentation.
This false statement was allowed to remain in the preface of his
publication through various editions and printings for over two
decades. It serves to show how entrenched this myth is. It also shows
how good and ethical scholarship was lightly regarded, perhaps
disdained, within the movement during these years.
The Holy Name Bible in my possession, from which the quotation
was taken, has a publication date of 1974, some twenty years after the
first publication of Traina’s New Testament. I have been assured that
this false statement has been left out of the more recent
printings of this bible. From the point of view of valid scholarship,
this was a necessary step.
[NOTE: The Holy Name Bible on my shelf has a stamp from The
Assemblies of Yahweh, Bethel, Pa. I have only hearsay evidence that
The Assemblies of Yahweh promote the Jesus - Zeus connection.]
However, this action was very late and fell far short of filling the
need. The lie was propagated from SN pulpits in numerous locations
for two decades prior to Traina’s bible. Traina’s bible gave the myth a
legitimacy and credibility which to this date is little diminished.
How many of Traina’s bibles are still out there teaching this false
 doctrine? Over the years, numbers of Sacred Name assemblies and
individuals who cling to the King James Version have used Traina’s
book as their bible. They have also accepted his notes, including the
above statement, as true. Many still do. The myth has taken on a life
of its own.
It might have been helpful if an explanation and a disclaimer had
been put into recent editions of The Holy Name Bible.

INSTITUTE FOR SCRIPTURE RESEARCH

TEACHES IT

Institute For Scripture Research, South Africa and Rhode Island,

USA, is publisher of The Scriptures. This is one of the more recent
entries into the ranks of Sacred Name bibles. This group continues to
reproduce the Jesus/Zeus connection in print. As a consequence of
their stand, it seems shameful that the words research and scripture
are included in the name of the organization.
Here is a quotation from the Explanatory Notes section of their bible
(1998 printing) under the article Jesus:

“Consider Iesous, rendered as ‘Jesus’ in English

versions up to now. For example the authoritative
Greek-English Lexicon of Liddell and Scott, under Iaso:
The Greek goddess of healing reveals that the name
Iaso is Ieso in the Ionic dialect of the Greeks, Iesous
being the contracted genitive form! In David Kravitx,
Dictionary of Greek and Roman Mythology, we find a
similar form, namely Iasus. There were four different
Greek deities with the name Iasus, one of them being
the Son of Rhea.”

This statement is a prime example of the pseudo scholarship that

seems pervasive within the Sacred Name Movement.
The quotation has the name of the Greek goddess of health and
healing as Iaso. In Greek, the nominative case of this word is spelled
with the Greek letters Iota, Alpha, Sigma, Omega - I . The Greek
word Jesus in nominative case is spelled Iota, Eta, Sigma, Omicron,
Upsilon, Sigma - . Didn't anyone at Institute for Scripture
Research notice the different second letters - Alpha and Eta - in the
two words? Sure they did. They just hoped you and I wouldn't
notice. We did.
This brings us to the mention and use the Institute makes of the
genitive forms of the two words. For Iaso, the genitive, as given by
 ISR, in Greek letters is . For Jesus, the genitive in Greek
letters is . The impression the Institute desires to leave with
us and certainly with avid Sacred Name converts who read their
bible and its notes is that the words are the same.
However, the words are not at all the same. They are like the
English words bell and ball. Consider the genitive forms of these
words, bell's and ball's. That one letter makes them entirely different
words.
Bell's and ball's may look alike and even sound a bit alike, but that
is the end of their similarity. One is not derived from the other. The
Greek words and to some may look alike and
they, too, sound a bit alike. There ends their similarity. One is in no
case derived from the other. The people at Institute for Scripture
Research know this.
Add to this, the fact that Liddell and Scott’s Lexicon, at least the one
on my book shelves, makes no mention of Iaso being Ieso in the
Iconic dialect. Perhaps someone misread it.
Now, we come to the Son of Rhea - Zeus. So, the Institute is
attempting to foist off on us the same old Sacred Name Movement
absurdity that Jesus equals Zeus. When in truth, the words are not
connected in any way. They only look alike because of the final two
letters.
If, however, we do as some SNM teachers do and force a twisted
pronunciation of the word Jesus, Gee-zoos, we can make the words
sort of sound alike. For many Sacred Name people, that is enough. It
also seems to be enough for Institute for Scripture Research.
This whole idea given to us by the Institute is gobbledygook,
folderol, and foolishness. It is inserted in the notes of their
publication, The Scriptures, with the calculated intention of leaving
the reader with the idea that the name of Jesus is in some way
derived from and connected with the name of one or more pagan
gods, particularly Zeus.
This is a false impression. It is the impression Institute for Scripture
Research wants to convey to us. Such scholarship, or lack thereof, as
is exemplified by this, brings shame on many who indulge in it.
If the Institute would study the Scriptures a bit more and do some
real Research, they would find this myth to by unworthy of the name
of their institute and the false impression they leave to be unworthy
of an organization claiming any connection at all with the scriptures.

YISRAYL HAWKINS AND HIS

HOUSE OF YAHWEH TEACH IT
 William Hawkins, who changed his name to Yisrayl Hawkins, is
founder and leader of the House of Yahweh in Abilene, Texas.
Hawkins has the distinction of claiming to be one of the two
witnesses mentioned in The Revelation chapter eleven. His brother,
now deceased, claimed to be the other witness. Hawkins will also
decease without this claim coming to fruition.
House of Yahweh is perhaps the largest single group of Sacred
Name believers in America under the oversight of one organization
and one man. If it is not the largest SN group in America, it most
certainly ranks among the top two or three. It is one of the crown
jewels of the Sacred Name Movement.
Hawkins is well known for his many misfired prophesies, his
deviant teachings, his strange practices (polygamy among them), his
need to sell books, his exclusivity, and his atrociously mangled
revision of the Scriptures - The Book of Yahweh.
On one of the web sites touting the superiority of The Book of
Yahweh, can also be found the House of Yahweh version of the same
old Sacred Name Movement lie, Jesus = Zeus.
The purpose of this web site
[wysiwyg://52http://yahshua.freeserver.com/kjv3.html] is to
explain the “Mistranslations of the King James Version of the Bible.”
This is done from The House of Yahweh point of view.
A chart of mistranslations in the KJV is under the heading: The
Names changed to Condemn us. Jesus is listed as a mistranslation.
No mention is made as to what Jesus may be a mistranslation of.
Yahshua Messiah is listed as the correct translation. By way of
explanation of this so-called mistranslation we are told, “Jesus is
Zeus, the Greek sun god,”.
This is a very typical Sacred Name Movement articulation of the
doctrine. It is generally given without any sort of documentation. It
seems to be a statement that is solidly and firmly believed among this
particular Sacred Name group. No one is expected to question its
validity.
It is simply the continuation of the same old silly idea that because
the words Jesus and Zeus both end with u - s they must be kindred
words. It is a lie, a fabrication. It is another mendacious attempt on
the part of the House of Yahweh to discredit the name of Jesus.
Does the revelation of the doctrine of the Sacred Names need this
kind of help to sustain it? A teaching built on a foundation of lies can
in no case be the truth.
The House of Yahweh and Yisrayl Hawkins need to stop publishing
such nonsense. It is predicted here that they will not stop.
SMALL GROUPS AND INDIVIDUAL SACRED NAME PEOPLE
TEACH IT

A substantial percentage of Sacred Name people are either

members of small groups or individuals who associate with no group
at all. While these people may not be considered by some of the
larger assemblies within the movement to be in the main stream of
the Sacred Name Movement, they surely are part of the independent
minded people who make up the movement. Some of the names they
have chosen to make sacred and cling to are often a bit unusual
compared to those normally found in the Movement. Sometimes
their practices are not in conformity with others in the Movement.
Nevertheless, their published thoughts, opinions, and teachings are
part of the larger cacophony emanating from the Sacred Name
Movement.
As representative of them all, four are here presented for
consideration.

1. Across the River Ministry, Matherville, Ill

2. Bible Revelations - www.revelations.org.za/
3. Qodesh Beyth Yahweh, Flat Rock, NC
4. Tobiyah - members.aol.com/Tobiyah/

Across the River Ministry:

The quotation is from the web site at

www.netins.net/acrossriver/TheirNames.html.

“Well, wouldn't it be OK to keep using the name Jesus?

The meaning of IEOUS in the Greek is ‘the son of Zeus,
or the son of the most high god known to the Greeks as
Zeus.’ Now we know that Zeus was the main Greek
god and head of the pantheon of Greek gods’ by Sister
Dawn”

It seems likely that this Sacred Name teacher has gotten the
Jesus/Zeus myth from Sister Dawn. It seems likely he has never done
any research for himself to ascertain the truth of falsity of the
statement he has made.
 Probably without even knowing it, he is just parroting the same old
lie that his spiritual forbears parroted before him.

Bible Revelations

The quotation is from the web site at

www.revelations.za/

“Exactly the same as the pagan influence changed

YAH’SHUAH to ‘Y’Zeus’ - (‘Jesus’ - phonetically
‘Jezus’), so also Luke 4:27 reflects the change of
‘Eli’Shuah’ to’Eli’Zeus’ (My God is Zeus’)!”

Where did this Sacred Name teacher get his research? He does not
bother to tell us. He cannot tell us; he didn't do any. He has simply
put his own spin, and not a very well thought out spin at that, on the
same trite and worn out Sacred Name Movement fiction.
He has no regard for the facts and the use made historically of the
Greek word Forging ahead, in Sacred Name Movement
fashion, he tips his hand by using the word “phonetically.” Here he
has told us the basis for his teaching; Jesus sounds like Zeus.
The sound alike theory, Jesus sounds like Zeus therefore it is
derived from Zeus, is pretty much the single and major basis for this
SNM lie ever being taught. Our teacher in this instance has, by some
Sacred Name Movement standards of research, done well.
He could be complimented on adding an interesting new twist,
Eli’Zeus = My God is Zeus. His reference is to Luke 4:27 in the KJV
where Elisha is spelled Eliseus. It just sounds too much like Zeus for
our teacher. He jumps at the chance to use his phonetically-like-Zeus
theory. His jump takes him off a cliff. His smash up leaves him in
ruins. The word Eliseus has nothing whatsoever to do with the word
Zeus. Just as the word Jesus has nothing whatsoever to do with the
word Zeus.
However, it was a beautiful dive until he hit the bottom.

Qodesh Beyeth Yahweh

The quotation is from the web site at

www.qodeshbeythyahweh.org/html/dispersion.html
 “But, for the Christian ’religion,’ the name of the
Adversary's son is.. Ge-Zeus, Son of Zeus ...”

This teacher is vehemently against the Christians. He blames them

for most, if not all, the problems facing the society of America and the
world. He is so over zealous for his position that he is willing to use
anything available to him to make these “Christians” look as bad as
possible.
He doesn't bother to explain himself, but seems to indicate that
Zeus is the same as Satan and Ge-Zeus (Jesus) is his son. If this is
what he is actually stating, then his conclusion would be that
“Christians” worship the son of Satan. That is a very strong
statement, especially since no documentation is presented with it. It
is apparently what at least one Sacred Name teacher promotes.
He could have made the Christians look bad by just telling the
truth. There are many false doctrines among them. History and
today's newspaper tell us that Christians are killing each other as
well as their perceived enemies. Christians already look pretty bad;
there was no need to resort to this Sacred Name Movement lie for
that. Sad.

Tobiyah

The quotation is from the web site at

http://members.aol.com/Tobiyah/clouds.html

“The name JESUS is derived from the Latin words GE

ZEUS, meaning THE FISH.” “The christians today still
blindly worship this false god. That is where the sign of
the fish has been adopted today as the sign of the
believer.”

Here is one other SNM teacher who sees the necessity of sharing his
research with us. He gives us a nice picture of a page from a Latin
Dictionary. Of course, he fails to tell us what Latin Dictionary it is.
We look in our own Latin dictionary (D. P. Simpson, Cassell's New
Latin Dictionary, Funk and Wagnalls, N Y, 1968) and find under
article Zeus : “a kind of fish.”
Perhaps our teacher does not know that just quoting a book of some
kind does not necessarily prove your point. It certainly does not
prove your point unless it mentions your point. In this case, the Latin
Dictionary does not even hint at the Sacred Name Movement
 teacher's point.
The quotation from the Latin Dictionary says not a single word
about Jesus being derived from Zeus. The Latin dictionary gives us
nothing about Ge Zeus. It does not tell us the name Ge Zeus means
the fish. Didn't this sacred name teacher notice this? Probably not.
The Latin dictionary says only that there is a kind of fish called Zeus.
What is most amazing about all this is that our teacher should
imagine he has by this means proven his point.
This Sacred Name Movement teacher has made a giant leap to
conclude that GE ZEUS means THE FISH in Latin. He wanted so
badly for it to be so, therefore, in his mind, it has become so. He is
then delighted to connect this to people displaying a fish on their car,
their desk, their refrigerator, their person, and etc. For him, this just
reinforces his point as proven.
Sacred Name people write me and call me to express astonishment
that I should say the Sacred Name Movement has pseudo scholarship
in it. This man's logical process and his conclusion do not even make
good nonsense. Calling it pseudo scholarship is giving it a
compliment.
In his attempt to preach this lie of long standing, he has only
succeeded in showing how little studying he has done and how little
of that he has even understood.
A number of Sacred Name people seem to think this false doctrine
is not taught among them anymore. In fact, the Jesus = Zeus theory is
still very much alive. From the beginning of the movement, shoddy
research was the basis for much of the teaching, particularly the
doctrine of the sacred name itself. That heritage is in no place more
manifest than in the doctrine of the name Jesus being connected with
the name Zeus.
All these witnesses have been given in order to show how rife the
Sacred Name Movement is with this teaching. It is a fact that a very
large majority of assemblies and individuals in the movement are
believers of this lie.

TOP

SECTION TWO:

THE NAME OF JESUS

HAS A REAL
ETYMOLOGICAL HISTORY
 In spite of a preponderance of fictitious drivel advanced by the
Sacred Name Movement, the name Jesus has a very distinct and
traceably history. The fact that many sacred name people cannot
seem to find out the root of the name of Jesus, in no way diminishes
the truth about the name. We do not need to rely upon guess work
and supposition to find out about his name.

NOT ALL SACRED NAME PEOPLE BELIEVE THE JESUS = ZEUS

LIE

Some of the sacred name people have done research with an open
mind and are convinced they should no longer promote the Jesus =
Zeus falsehood. One former sacred name believer who is not a
christian and still has a great deal of love for the people in the
movement comments to me this way on the Jesus = Zeus myth: “As
you probably know, this doctrine is simply not true.” He encourages
SNM publishers to remove this false teaching from their literature.
Another sacred name teacher who is well known among the sacred
name internet community, says he has come to believe that Jesus is
not derived from Zeus. He now thinks that , Jesus, is a very
poor attempt to transliterate the name Yahshua into Greek.
These men and others within the movement have come to realize
that promoting this lie simply makes them, the movement itself, and
other teachings of the movement suspect. It shows that they have not
done and perhaps do not know how to do quality research. The more
astute and better informed sacred name people have stopped or are
in the process of stopping the propagation of this lie. All Sacred
Name Movement people and assemblies should take a page from
their book.

WHERE DID THE NAME JESUS COME FROM?

A little research will inform us as to the derivation of the name of

Jesus. Dictionaries will help those with a willingness to learn. These
kinds of books are at hand for most people. There is no excuse. There
is absolutely no excuse for the continued propagation of this lie.
We can research the Old Testament, apocryphal writings, the New
 Testament, and secular writings from the period of time relevant to
our study.

THE DICTIONARY

Dictionary entry for Jesus:

“ME. [a. L. Iesus, a. Gr. ' , ad. late Heb. or Aramaic Jeshua,
for earlier Jehoshua or Joshua (explained as ‘Jah (or Jahveh) is
salvation’), a frequent Jewish personal name.”

William Little, et al., eds. , The Oxford Universal Dictionary on

Historical Principals,
(London: Oxford University Press, 1955).

Here, the English Jesus can be seen to have derived from the Latin,
Iesus. Iesus then, is from the Greek , which is in turn from
the late Hebrew or Aramaic Jeshua. Jeshua was derived from the
earlier Hebrew Jehoshua - our English Joshua.

THE BIBLE DICTIONARY

From The Westminster Dictionary of the Bible, entry Jesus:

“(je’zus) [Lat. From Gr. Iesous, which is for Heb. Jeshua, a late
form of Jehoshua or Joshua...]”

John D. Davis, The Westminster Dictionary of the Bible,

(Philadelphia, The Westminster Press, 1944).

The average Sacred Name teacher can quote nine kinds of research
attempting to prove his doctrine. Why can they not simply read the
dictionary about the derivation of the name of Jesus. It is not derived
from the word Zeus.

THE SPELLING CHANGED OVER THE YEARS

In view of the fact that The New Testament was not written in
either Hebrew or Aramaic, no ancient New Testament manuscripts in
these languages exist. Sacred Name teachers are therefore compelled
to go to the Old Testament in an attempt to recover a Hebrew name
 which our Savior might have been called. They go, of course, to the
name of Joshua.
Disregarding the approximately four hundred year gap between
the writing of the last book of the O.T. and the birth of the Messiah
these teachers expect us to believe that the Hebrew spelling and
pronunciation of the name of Joshua remained static during these
years. None care to address the three spellings and pronunciations
for Joshua’s name during the time of the O.T.
There are three different spellings for the name Joshua in the Old
Testament. Yeshua in both early Aramaic and modern Hebrew is
iwhy.The spellings for this name evolved, along with the Hebrew
language, over a period of about one thousand years, the time of the
writing of the Old Testament.
The variations in spelling the name of Joshua have come down to
us in square Hebrew letters. The square Hebrew letters are in truth
the Aramaic alphabet. This is much like the English alphabet which is
simply the Roman alphabet with slight variations. The Jews forsook
their own alphabet and began to use the Aramaic after the
Babylonian captivity.
The spellings are written iwvhy, iwhy, and ivwvhy. Scriptural
references for these three biblical ways for spelling and pronouncing
the name of Joshua the son of Nun are:

* Nehemiah 8:17 iwhy

* Numbers 13: 16 iwvhy

* Judges 2: 7 ivwvhy

It would be a good idea, for anyone sufficiently interested, to check

the Hebrew text of the O.T. for these references. It is not commonly
acknowledged among Sacred Name Movement folks that there are
three spellings for Joshua's name. The reason for this is that for the
Messiah's name, many of them arbitrarily pick one spelling and
pronunciation at the exclusion of the other two.

THE TRANSLITERATION OF
THE NAME JOSHUA IN THE SEPTUAGINT

Perhaps, the first recorded use of the Greek name Jesus, ,

among the Jewish people is a transliteration for the Hebrew name
iwvhy - Joshua - is in the Septuagint. The Septuagint is sometimes
 referred to as the LXX. This translation of the Old Testament from
Hebrew into Greek began about 270 B. C. E. and continued for some
years afterward. When the Hebrew name is in the text, without fail, it
is transliterated into Greek as , Jesus.
The question SN teachers, who propagate this Jesus=Zeus lie, need
to address is how and why Jewish scholars would have chosen a
word which means son of Zeus to put for the name of the great hero
of their past.
These Rabbis did not make the name of that great Israelite hero into
the Son of Zeus, Healing Zeus, and certainly not Ie-Zeus. This seems
obvious to everyone except the SN people who still propagate this
lie. Many of them have given it up. More will do so.

THE NAME JESUS IN THE APOCRYPHA

The apocryphal book of Ecclesiasticus, also called The Wisdom of

Jesus the son of Sirach, was likely written early in the third century B.
C. E. Originally written in Hebrew by one Joshua son of Sirach, it was
translated into Greek about 132 B.C.E.
Read this short passage from the introduction written by Joshua’s
grandson who translated the work into Greek.

“ Anyone who values learning should be able to help others by

what he himself says and writes. That is why my grandfather Jesus
devoted himself to reading the Law, the Prophets, and the other
books of our ancestors.”

The grandfather's name is iwvhy, Joshua. His grandson translated

the book into Greek, the language which many of the Jews learned
from childhood. At the same time, he transliterated the name of his
grandfather into Greek as , Jesus. It should be understood
that at this time in history, not all Jews spoke Hebrew. Perhaps it
would be well to read from Acts chapter two.

Acts 2:5. And there were dwelling at Jerusalem Jews,

devout men, out of every nation under heaven. 6. Now
when this was noised abroad, the multitude came
together, and were confounded, because that every man
heard them speak in his own language. 7. And they
were all amazed and marveled, saying one to another,
Behold, are not all these which speak Galileeans? 8.
And how hear we every man in our own tongue,
wherein we were born? 9. Parthians, and Medes, and
 Elamites, and the dwellers in Mesopotamia, and in
Judaea, and Cappadocia, in Pontus, and Asia, 10.
Phrygia, and Pamphylia, in Egypt, and in the parts of
Libya about Cyrene, and strangers of Rome, Jews and
proselytes, 11. Cretes and Arabians, we do hear them
speak in our tongues the wonderful works of God.

As today, so also in that day, not all Jews speak Hebrew. As a

matter of fact most Jews do no t speak Hebrew. Hebrew was not the
tongue of the Jews of the diaspora. Hebrew was not the language of
the Jews of Judea. It had ceased to be so many years before Joshua,
son of Sirach, wrote his book of wisdom. Therefore, his grandson saw
the need to translate his work into Greek. The Hebrew Old
Testament had already been translated into Greek for the same
reason.
Sacred Name folks who still cling to the Jesus = Zeus doctrine,
expect us to believe that the translator chose a Greek word meaning
Son of Zeus and used it for his grandfather's name.
That anyone should believe such nonsense, is absurd and simply
not the case. He actually transliterated the Hebrew name quite well.
It has been used for centuries since.

[NOTE: To translate means to bring, as nearly as possibly, the

meaning of a word from one language to another. An example is the
Greek word , ballo. The English translation of this word is
THROW.
To transliterate means to bring, as nearly as possibly, the sound of a
word from one language to another. For instance, the English word
BAPTIZE is a transliteration of the Greek word , baptizo.
(The translation would be immerse.) So that in the new language the
word sounds the same or nearly the same.]

An interesting observation is that while SN people are quick to

inform us that they do not believe in an inspired translation of the
Bible, they certainly do believe in inspired transliterations of the
sacred names. These, of course, are always their own transliterations
and ones sanctioned by them.

THE NAME OF JESUS IN THE NEW TESTAMENT

Our Savior's name was given from heaven some four to eight years
B.C.E. It seems obvious that he was given the same name as was born
 by the great leader of Israel, Joshua he son of Nun. We do not know
and cannot know how his name was written or spoken in Hebrew.
The name may never have been written in Hebrew at all, but in
Aramaic.
However, even if his name were written in Hebrew or Aramaic, we
have no record of it. Sacred Name teachers tell us that his name had
to have been spoken in Hebrew. More likely it was Aramaic. Whether
one or the other, there is still no record of it.
We do have the historical record. It is the New Testament. In every
case where the writers of this book transliterated the Messiah's name
into Greek they chose , Jesus, as the correct transliteration.
When Jesus was born into the mixed Hebrew, Greek, and Roman
culture of Judea and Galilee, it was already known how his name
should be transliterated into Greek. That had been settled about three
hundred years before. That Jesus lived in a mixed culture is shown,
among other things, by the sign above him at his death. It was in
three languages, Hebrew, Greek, and Latin. Bear in mind that Galilee,
because of Gentile (Greek) dominance, is called in Scripture, Galilee
of the Gentiles. The area had been under Greek domination since
Alexander the Great, centuries before Jesus was born.
The transliteration of iwvhy (or whatever spelling of the Messiah's
name may have been used at that time), made by the apostles and
apostolic men when they wrote the New Testament, is ,
Jesus. No Healing Zeus. No son of Zeus. No Ie-Zeus. Just Jesus.
Here is a question for all of us. Will we trust the transliteration
done by SN teachers or will we trust the transliteration done by the
men who wrote the New Testament? I believe I will hold to the New
Testament book and its writers. One is able to see that on this point
as well as numerous others, Sacred Name teachers are left in a
position of shame.

THE NAME JESUS IN SECULAR DOCUMENTS

The transliteration of the Hebrew and Aramaic name of Joshua the

son of Nun into Greek as during the time both before and
after the Savior lived is attested to by manuscript evidence. These are
available for study at any major university library. In these also we
can find no Zeus connection in the name of Jesus.
Might I suggest one manuscript for consideration. It is 5/6 Hever
Babatha Archive, Greek Document 2 (5/6 HevBA 2).
A copy of the manuscript on film, with all its tears, damage, and
other imperfections, can be found in The E. L Sukenik Memorial
Volume (1889 - 1953), editors N. Avigad, et. al., Israel Exploration
 Society, Jerusalem, 1976.
A non manuscript copy set in modern type (it is easier to read) can
be seen in the book, Eretz-Israel, Archaeological, Historical and
Geographical Studies, Volume Eight, The Hebrew University of
Jerusalem, The Shrine of The Book, et. al., pg. 50. This copy has both
the Aramaic and Greek texts.
Another copy in modern type is on page 162 of A Manual of
Palestinian Aramaic Texts, (Second Century B. C. --- Second Century
A. D.), ed. Joseph A Fitzmyer, S.J., et. al., Biblical Institute Press,
Rome, 1978. This copy has only the Aramaic section, lines 11, 12, and
13. It has a nice English translation on the facing page.
This interesting if somewhat unusual manuscript was found at
Nahel Hever. It certainly is poignant to our discussion of the
transliteration of our Saviors name into Greek in the first and second
centuries of the common era.
The document bears the date August 19, A. D. 132. It is a receipt
given by Babatha to the Jewish guardian of her son for payment of
six denarii for food and clothing for her son, Jesus. It is written in
both Aramaic and Greek.
On line 12, in the Aramaic portion, twice repeated is the boy's
name, iwhy. This is the shortened form of the name commonly used
during this period. On line 16 of the Greek portion, is the
transliteration, . In secular documents, the name Jesus is
the transliteration for the name Joshua.

TOP

CONCLUSION

"IT'S A LIE"

In this study, we have found that many Sacred Name Movement

assemblies and individuals have over the years promoted the false
teaching that the word Jesus is in some way connected to the word
Zeus. We have studied who teaches it and how and where they teach
it. Many within the Movement still believe and promote this
teaching.
We have further studied the historical derivation of the name of
Jesus. It is the English form of the Greek of our Savior's name used by
the Writers of the New Testament.
Many have been the errors of the Sacred Name Movement since its
inception in the early second quarter of the twentieth century. There
 are some serious and pivotal errors taught within the movement.
Adherents to and promoters of the Jesus = Zeus theory are some of
the most fanatical and harsh people within the movement.
No teaching of this religious persuasion is more obviously false
than this one. When I was in grammar school, children would say of
any falsehood, “That is just a bare faced lie.” The Sacred Name
Movement teaching that the name Jesus is in some way connected
with or derived from the name of the Greek idol god Zeus is just
exactly that, a bare faced lie.

Note: Quotations from Sacred Name sources and others have been
edited for spelling.

TOP

CONTACT US

If you have comments or questions; if you are in a sacred name assembly; if you
came out of a sacred name assembly; if your story would help someone else, contact
us.
Our efforts are focused on one goal, getting a single person out of the Sacred
Name Movement.

YOU MAY CONTACT US EITHER OF THESE WAYS.

-- E-MAIL -- -- US MAIL --
Gary Mink
2723 Heights Circle Road
Gary Mink, Editor Greenbrier, TN 37073