Esau, Y'shua, Eesho, & Eesa
Since the FTMecca included the article on the historicity of the Messiah of the Christo-Islamic folklore, a number of pages have popped up where Christians and Muslims debate the alleged historicity of their version of Jesus. All of the Muslim sites offer great deals of circumstantial evidence, and attempt to argue that Jesus/Isa/Eesa was a historical character based simply on his name. Three such sites that discuss the alleged "historical accuracy" of the name given to Jesus in the Qur'an are:
The third site is the root of the other two. The first two sites take a great deal of their scholarship from our good buddy Shibli Zaman, who is the author of the third site. Regardless, all three sites attempt to reconcile the error made by Ahmed Deedat, claiming that there is no connection between the Esau of the Jewish folklore and the Eesa/Isa of the Qur'an. The sites go on further to try and argue that the name Jesus is given in the Qur'an is historically accurate in light of Jesus' Aramaic name: Eesho. There are a few objections we'd like to raise in light of these sorts of arguments...
(1) The assumption that Jesus spoke Aramaic.
It is based on a very naive type of scholarship that anyone can lead themself to believe that Jesus spoke Aramaic. Therefore, to assume that his Aramaic name is the authentic one is to commit a fallacy. This assumption is reached by information found in the New Testament, a book that is NOT reliable in any sense. If we assume that Jesus was a man living in Palestine in the first century, then we can assume that he might have spoken Aramaic, as all the wretched Jewish peasants living in that area at that time often spoke Aramaic. Unfortunately, this is a fallacy in that this sort of logic begs the question "did Jesus live in 1st century Palestine." It has not been proven that Jesus spoke Aramaic, nor has it been proven that this is even a historical character!
(2) Shibli Zaman and the name game.
Shibli Zaman is a very intelligent individual with a command of Semitic languages that many people would envy. However, sometimes we think his knowledge of Hebrew is shaky, as he has shown a tendency to come to some rather creative conclusions with regard to characters from the Biblical folklore (as can be seen in his arguments that Songs 5:16 is referring to Muhammad[1]). Regardless, this is a mild ad-hominem on our part, as Shibli's alleged inability to speak Hebrew has yet to be demonstrated. It was Shibli who originally argued
that the Aramaic Eesho (
) is closer to the Qur'anic
Eesa (
) than it is to the Hebrew Y'shua
(
); the other two sites just followed Shibli's claims
without checking them for themselves.
While all three sites claim to be doing their study through proper etymology, they really aren't. The reality is that in terms of etymology, Y'shua is closer to Eeesho than Eesa is. Consider the following facts:
- Eesa () is spelled ayn-yaa-seen-yaa/fatHa.
- Eesho () is spelled yodh-sheen-waw-aih.
- Y'shua () is spelled yod-shin-vav-ayin.
Aramaic and Hebrew are very close to one another, and Eesho and Y'shua are spelled
*EXACTLY* the same. The Hebrew equivalent of Eeesho ()
is Y'shua (). If one is going to commit to this absurd
notion that Eesho is the most historically accurate name for Jesus, then we would
have to conclude, in the spirit of true etymology, that Y'shua is more historically
accurate than Eesa.
The first two cited pages refer to Shibli Zaman as "a scholar who had studied the Bible for 15 years in its original languages[.]" Despite this claim, the fact that Eesho is etymologically and linguistically closer to Y'shua than Eesa cannot be escaped. The only arguments I've seen to get around this (and Mr. Zaman sort of took this route) is to claim that Eesho *SOUNDS* more like Eesa than Y'shua. In response to that, I would like to parrot a quote of Shibli found on one of the aforementioned sites, and say that "[t]his word play is for school children and illiberal people but has no place in any scholarly discussion."
Let it be noted that we here at the Freethought Mecca acknowledge that the theory that Eesa is from Esau is a bit groundless (let the Christians push this tired polemic, we were merely poking fun at Ahmed Deedat's blunder). Obviously, if we're going only by sounds, Eesa sounds more like Esau than Eesho. If we're siding with etymology, then Y'shua is closer to Eesho than Eesa is. The Muslims cannot have it both ways.
(3) Sefer Matityahu: Matthew in Hebrew.
To add further support to the name Y'shua while working within the Christian paradigm, let us turn to a Hebrew translation of Matthew 1:21. Now, admittedly, the earliest fragments of Matthew that include verse 1:21 are all in Greek, but the style of the verse has long pushed scholars to theorize that this is actually a greek reworking of a Hebrew original. Indeed, Eusebius (Historia Ecclesiasticus, V, x-xi) spoke of Pantaenus allegedly finding copies of Matthew in Hebrew. Epiphanius' Panarion makes a similar claim about a Nazarene sect of Christianity.
The above mentioned Islamic sites seem to put heavy weight on the Peshitta, but the Peshitta's version of Matthew 1:21 is as incoherent as it is incoherent as the Greek and English versions. The verse only makes sense when read in Hebrew. Consider the following:
V'hee yoledet ben, V'qarata et-shemo Y'shua, ki hu yoshia et-amo mechatoteihem.
"And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his
name Jesus, for he shall save his people from their sins."
(4) Oldest Arabic Inscription Mentioning Jesus.
Finally, it is interesting to note that information on the oldest Arabic inscription mentioning Jesus does not name him Eesa, but may shed some light on a possible evolution from Y'shua to Eesa. The inscription basically spells Jesus' name ya-sheen-ayn-ya, which makes a sort of transitional fossil in the world of etymology. The inscription was written underneath a circular Christian symbol some time near the turn of the century, and was in Thamudic, an archaic form of Arabic. Consider the following from a popular Orientalist journal:
"Mr. G. Lankaster Harding, Chief Curator of Antiquities Hashimite Kingdom of Jordan, kindly sent me copies of a little more than five hundred Thamudic inscriptions. [...] It is the inscription [Harding No. 476] that interests us here. [...] Below the circle there are four letters: a y, a sh, a c, and again a y."
[Enno Littman, "Jesus in a Pre-Islamic Arabic Inscription," Muslim World, (1950, vol. xi) p. 16.]
The author goes on to state that y-sh-c represents "the ancient Arabic name of Jesus" [ibid. p. 18], and further states that "Inscription Harding No. 476 is the oldest native document of Christianity of Northern Arabia known so far" [ibid.]. One might assume that this is the name of Jesus in transition from Yasua/Y'shua to Eesa. Littman speaks briefly on the possible move to this point and the etymology behind a transition from Y'sua to y-sh-c:
"These letters are so placed that they can be read from right to left or from left to right y-sh-c, probably pronounced Yashac, and this name is the same as Yashuac, the Hebrew form of the name of Christ. It is known that Yashuc, is the later pronunciation of Yehoshuac or Joshua; it was used after the Exile in order to avoid the immediate sequence of two dark vowels (o and u). Of course, it is well known that the Christians whose language is Arabic commonly use the form Yasuac[.]"
[ibid. p. 16]
(5) Conclusion.
As far as the Freethought Mecca is concerned, this debate is now closed. Even while working within the Christian paradigm, which the Muslims need so desperately to prove their point, the evidence is not in favor of al-Muttaqeen. The Muslims may want to continue with their faulty logic in an attempt to prove the existence of the historical Eesa Ibn Maryam, but we prefer solid proof. There is no real evidence for Jesus' existence, and there is even less evidence for the Islamic Jesus. These name games are a real bore, and we have to conclude that the Islamic Jesus is nothing more than a myth.
NOTES
(1) For Shibli's arguments as well as arguments against such claims, see the following:
| Home | Sign
Guestbook | View Guestbook |
Last Updated:
Monday, August 13, 2001
[email protected]
If for FTMecca Eyes Only
specify in the e-mail