Jesus Was Not Christ’s Name

The name “Jesus” is one of the most recognized names in the world today, but its origin and linguistic evolution are often misunderstood. Jesus, the central figure in Christianity, was born in first-century Palestine, where the spoken language was primarily Aramaic, not Hebrew. While the name “Jesus” comes from the Greek Iēsous, the original name of Jesus, given by his mother, was likely Isho in Aramaic. Similarly, in Arabic, the Quran refers to him as Isa, a name very similar to the Aramaic Isho but adapted to Arabic pronunciation. These linguistic nuances are critical to understanding the true identity of Jesus, unencumbered by theological modifications in later Christian tradition.

1. Jesus’ Real Name in Aramaic: Isho (ܝܫܘܥ)

Jesus, a first-century Jewish man from Galilee, would have spoken Aramaic as his primary language, not Hebrew. While Hebrew was used in religious and scholarly contexts, Aramaic was the common language of the Jews in Palestine during the time of Jesus. This means that the name used by his contemporaries and followers was Isho in Aramaic, not the later Yeshua in Hebrew or Iēsous in Greek.

Linguistic Evidence:

The name Isho (ܝܫܘܥ), found in Aramaic and Syriac sources, is derived from the same Semitic root as the Hebrew Yeshua (ישוע), meaning “salvation” or “Yahweh saves.” Isho and Yeshua are essentially the same name, with the former being the Aramaic pronunciation. However, it is crucial to emphasize that Jesus was never referred to as Yeshua by his contemporaries in the context of his life. Yeshua is simply a translation of the Aramaic Isho into Hebrew, and it was not the name that Jesus’ followers used to address him.

The name Isho was a common name in first-century Judea, consistent with naming practices of the time. In fact, Yeshua appears in the Hebrew Bible (Old Testament) as the name of several individuals, such as Joshua (Yehoshua), but Yeshua itself was not the name that Jesus’ followers used in the Aramaic-speaking milieu. This distinction is important in understanding the true historical identity of Jesus.

One of the earliest sources confirming the name Isho is the Syriac Peshitta, an ancient Aramaic translation of the Bible, which refers to Jesus consistently as Isho. The Peshitta is one of the oldest Christian texts and was likely translated in the second century, long before Greek theological influences were dominant.

Dr. Sebastian P. Brock, a prominent scholar of Syriac studies, confirms that the name Isho was widely used in early Christian traditions. In his work The Syriac World (2017), Brock writes that the name Isho was the common form of Jesus’ name in early Syriac Christian texts, and this form is linguistically consistent with the spoken language of the region at the time.

2. Jesus’ Name in Arabic: Isa (عيسى)

In the Quran, the name of Jesus is rendered as Isa (عيسى), which is the Arabic form of the same name. The Quran references Isa as the son of Maryam (Mary) numerous times, particularly in Surah 3 (Aali ‘Imran) and Surah 4 (An-Nisa). The name Isa is derived from the same Semitic root y-sh-ʕ (ישע), meaning “salvation.”

The Arabic adaptation of the name Isho to Isa reflects the natural phonetic adjustments made when the name is pronounced in Arabic. Arabic does not have the “sh” sound found in Aramaic, so the name changes slightly in form, but it is still clearly related to the Aramaic Isho and the Hebrew Yeshua.

Dr. Khalil Samir, an expert in Islamic studies and Arabic language, in his book The Bible and the Qur’an: A Comparison (2007), writes that the name Isa is directly derived from the Aramaic name Isho, and there is no theological reason for the change—simply a linguistic adjustment to fit Arabic phonetics.

3. The Importance of a Name: Identity and Legal Identity

A name is not just a label; it is a core component of a person’s identity. Names carry meanings, history, and associations that are deeply tied to a person’s background, family, culture, and even religious significance. In many cultures, changing someone’s name—whether through translation, adaptation, or force—can affect the very essence of their identity. This is particularly true when the name has religious or cultural weight, as in the case of Jesus.

Jesus’ original name, Isho in Aramaic, would have reflected his cultural identity as a first-century Jewish man. It was not just a name but a symbol of his mission and the theological significance of his life. This is emphasized by scholars like Dr. James D. Tabor, professor of religious studies at the University of North Carolina, in his book The Jesus Dynasty (2006). Tabor argues that the name Isho was not merely a coincidence but was deeply connected to the theological context of his time: salvation and the hope of Israel.

Names are also legal identifiers. In the ancient world, as today, a person’s name was part of their public identity. In a legal or communal setting, Jesus would have been identified by the name Isho (or Yeshua in Hebrew). By changing a name, we often disrupt the link between the individual and their heritage, their history, and their community.

4. The Confusion Between Jesus and Isa: A Result of Name Changes

One of the main sources of confusion between Christianity and Islam comes from the different names used for Jesus in their respective scriptures. Christians refer to Jesus by the name Jesus, derived from the Greek Iēsous, while Muslims use the name Isa (عيسى), derived from the Arabic phonetic adaptation of Isho. The similarity between Isho and Isa is clear, but the difference in names has caused many people to mistakenly believe that the figures of Jesus and Isa are different individuals.

The linguistic shift from Isho to Isa is not a theological difference but a reflection of the languages involved—Aramaic, Greek, and Arabic. The theological significance of Jesus and Isa is where the real differences lie, particularly in the way each tradition views Jesus’ nature and role. However, the confusion regarding their names often stems from a misunderstanding of their linguistic and cultural contexts.

Dr. John Esposito, a leading scholar of Islamic studies, in his book Islam: The Straight Path (2011), notes that “The name of Jesus in the Quran, Isa, and in Christian tradition, Jesus, though they sound different, refer to the same historical figure. The variations in names are simply due to the languages and cultures in which the figure is being referenced.”

5. The Bible’s Statement: A Factually Incorrect Notice

The Bible, specifically in John 19:19, states:

“Pilate had a notice prepared and fastened to the cross. It read: ‘Jesus of Nazareth, the King of the Jews.'”

This statement is factually incorrect for two important reasons. First, the name Jesus is a translation of the Aramaic Isho and does not reflect the name Jesus would have been known by at the time. The notice, had it been written accurately, would have referred to Isho—the name that Jesus would have answered to in his native Aramaic. By using the name Jesus, a later translation of the name into Greek, the identity of the crucified man is obscured. The fact that Pilate’s notice says Jesus instead of Isho is an example of how translating a name can change the facts and distort historical accuracy.

Secondly, Pilate’s inscription also confirms the presence of a man called Jesus being crucified. However, historically, the person named Jesus (in the form “Jesus”) did not exist in the exact way that the translation portrays. There was no one by the name of Jesus (as rendered in Greek) in the context of the first century in Palestine. The translation of Isho into Jesus adds an additional layer of confusion in understanding the historical reality of the figure in question.

The translation of a name has consequences, and in this case, it distorts the very identity of the person being crucified. The person in question was not known as “Jesus” in his time; he was known by his original name, Isho.

6. Conclusion: The Rightful Name of Jesus

It is only right and historically accurate for us to refer to Jesus by his original, given name, Isho, rather than the translated name Jesus. By changing Isho’s name to Jesus we are also disrespecting God who gave Isho’s name, Mary his mother and Isho himself.  Names carry profound significance, and using the correct name preserves the integrity of historical and religious identity.

The confusion caused by the translation of Isho into Jesus has led to misunderstandings not only within the Christian tradition but also between the Christian and Islamic perspectives on this central figure. Therefore, for accuracy and respect for the historical context, it is appropriate to refer to Jesus by the name he was given at birth: Isho. Let us show the due respect to Isho by start using his real name.�

References:

• Brock, S. P. (2017). The Syriac World. Routledge.
• Samir, K. (2007). The Bible and the Qur’an: A Comparison. American University in Cairo Press.
• Tabor, J. D. (2006). The Jesus Dynasty. Simon & Schuster.
• Esposito, J. L. (2011). Islam: The Straight Path. Oxford University Press.