Is it correct that when He was on earth, Jesus would have been known as Yeshua-ben-Yohosef?

Update:

Sorry spelling error should have been Yehosef, not Yohosef.

11 Answers

Relevance
  • 1 month ago
    Favorite Answer

    His name would have been stated in Hebrew, not English. There wasn't even the letter 'J' in the English alphabet until the early 1500s! Ha-shem, the name of God, is in the name of Jesus, once you revert back to ancient Hebrew. When Jesus is written in Hebrew, it is Ye'shua and here's how it works. Jesus is a variant of Joshua. Joshua's original name was Hoshua which means salvation, but Moses changed his name. He prefixed Y' to Hoshua, making the new name, Y'hoshua, and thereby declaring that Yahweh is Salvation - Numbers 13:16.

     

    Y'hoshua has been contracted to Ye'shua (the post-exilic form of the name.) And this is the name given to Mary's first-born son. She had married Joseph (Yehosef in Hebrew) who was Jesus' adoptive parent, not his biological one. The meaning of Ye'shua is the same as Y'hoshua - Yahweh is Salvation. The Y' in both names stands for Yah. Thus the short form of the Father's name is in the name of Ye'shua. That is the explanation given in this book - The Name Above All Names by Don E. Stanton (Maranatha Revival Crusade, 2008). I don't know if Hebrew linguists would agree.

    http://www.maranathaMRC.com  http://www.prageruniversity.com/Religion-Philosoph... 

  • patty
    Lv 5
    1 month ago

    I think Mary was told by the angel Gabriel to call him Jesus

    • mrh-slos
      Lv 7
      1 month agoReport

      the name Jesus is an anglicisation of the hebrew name Yeshua.

    • Log in to reply to the answers
  • Rick
    Lv 7
    1 month ago

    He was Yeshua-ben-Yehosef not just know as Yeshua-ben-Yehosef.  The Bible says that Jesus is the son of Joseph.

    John 1:45

    Luke 3:23 (you may have to read about proper use of parentheses)

    • mrh-slos
      Lv 7
      1 month agoReport

      Joseph was not the biological father of Jesus, who was Gods incarnate Son and so had no biological father - He was conceived by the Holy Spirit and born of the Virgin Mary [Christian Creed]. However, for Jewish official and legal purposes, He would have been regarded as Joseph's son.. 

    • Log in to reply to the answers
  • 1 month ago

    Probably "bar" instead of "ben." The Jews spoke Aramaic more than Hebrew at the time.

    • Log in to reply to the answers
  • What do you think of the answers? You can sign in to give your opinion on the answer.
  • Tommy
    Lv 5
    1 month ago

    Does that translate to Joshua?

    • Log in to reply to the answers
  • 1 month ago

    Probably Yeshua Ben Yosef/Yehosef

    • Log in to reply to the answers
  • Joe
    Lv 5
    1 month ago

    No, there is no indication for that in the Bible.

  • “Jesus son of Joseph”==Yeshua Ben Yohosef

    He would have been called that before His ministry, not much after his ministry. His followers called Him Son of God, the messiah, Son of Man. Jesus son of Joseph would have been more like his legal name, not a fitting name after knowing His divinity.

    • mrh-slos
      Lv 7
      1 month agoReport

      I know Jesus was not the biological son of Joseph, but would have been presumed the son of Joseph by His jewish neighbours. Neither Mary nor Joseph would have shouted about the fact that Joseph was Our Lords foster father, and was presumed to be Josephs son by Jewish Law.

    • Log in to reply to the answers
  • Rico
    Lv 5
    1 month ago

    No,  the romanised spelling of the name of the man thought to be his father, by his contemporaries is 

    Yosef

    • Log in to reply to the answers
  • 1 month ago

    That is a possibility

    but

    scholars are not in agreement.

    So: we just don't know (for sure).

    • Log in to reply to the answers
Still have questions? Get answers by asking now.