I can answer it best with some linguistic data, but there is an interesting aspect of translation philosophy to consider at the same time. The question is important because the same name is spelled differently in two places in the NET Bible. Matthew 1:23 contains a citation of Isaiah 7:14. In the Isaiah passage, we translate the name as Immanuel, starting with the letter I, but in the Matthew passage we translate the name as Emmanuel, starting with the letter E.

The different spellings ultimately are because of different vowels used in Hebrew and Greek in this name:

The Hebrew name ‏עִמָּנוּ אֵל is transliterated as 'immanu el. The first vowel in the name is normally regarded as the equivalent of a short i in English.

The Greek name Ἐμμανουήλ is transliterated as Emmanuel. The first vowel in the name is normally regarded as the equivalent of a short e in English.

So each language uses a different vowel to start the name, and we have retained those in our spellings in the NET Bible.

The next question you could ask is, "Why not make it the same?" This gets to a more complicated issue. For a variety of reasons, there are sometimes changes in wording of passages between the testaments. Even in Old Testament passages which are cited directly in the New, there can be differences. Our philosophy of translation seeks to maintain these differences as a matter of accuracy, instead of changing them, so the reader can recognize they are there and make an informed decision about what they mean.

This philosophy is of little consequence in a passage like this, where only a single short vowel is in play, but in other places it can make for important differences in translation and interpretation. We feel it is best to be accurate even when it comes to differences so the reader can understand exactly what is going on in the text.


Lalasticlala and mynd44 what re ur real names?

They are both the same thing, same meaning

Himmler:
They are both the same thing, same meaning

Only that the passage in Isaiah is referring to Isaiah 's son.... Continue reading till 8:18, Isaiah and his sons where signs and potents for the children of Israel....

Not jesus.. Jesus is just a roman invention to make mockery of God.

sonmvayina:


Only that the passage in Isaiah is referring to Isaiah 's son.... Continue reading till 8:18, Isaiah and his sons where signs and potents for the children of Israel....

Not jesus.. Jesus is just a roman invention to make mockery of God.

Jesus was no Roman invention, He was real. And nope I didn't get that fact from the Bible, other historical artifacts and books confirm his existence

Himmler:

Jesus was no Roman invention, He was real. And nope I didn't get that fact from the Bible, other historical artifacts and books confirm his existence

What role is he supposed to play? He is not the messiah God promised the jews..

I don't see his relevance to anything...

sonmvayina:


What role is he supposed to play? He is not the messiah God promised the jews..

I don't see his relevance to anything...

we know who you are
Say no more

sonmvayina:


Only that the passage in Isaiah is referring to Isaiah 's son.... Continue reading till 8:18, Isaiah and his sons where signs and potents for the children of Israel....

Not jesus.. Jesus is just a roman invention to make mockery of God.

How do you know that Jesus is a Roman invention? Can you explain further. Thanks.

Lilisticlili:
we know who you are
Say no more

LOL, laughable to say the least.... No attempt to even clarify anything..

Well I believe in God, the Lord.. The creator of all. I don't worship or reverence created things.. It is idolatry to me..

The God i worship created both light and darkness, good and evil,.. Everything God created are all under God's authority.. The devil is not an exception..

So what is the idol you call jesus saving you or me from?? When God is responsible for everything.. Sin? That could easily be abolished all I need to do is confess and forsake my evil ways and God will remember my sins no more. No sacrifice was needed or necessary..

"come let us reason together, though your heart is as black as coal, I can make them as white as snow"

ElsonMorali:


How do you know that Jesus is a Roman invention? Can you explain further. Thanks.

What role is he playing with regards to the old testament?

The messiah God promised the jews is an ordinary man like you and me.. That God will anoint like Solomon, David, Samuel and Josiah.. Those are messiah in the Jewish concept.. Not a demi God ( half God half man). That is roman/Greeks ideology.. The Messiah the jews are waiting for is coming to rule, not to die, he is coming just once, no second coming arrangements.
He will usher in an era of Peace, no more suffering and death, no oppression

sonmvayina:


What role is he playing with regards to the old testament?

The messiah God promised the jews is an ordinary man like you and me.. That God will anoint like Solomon, David, Samuel and Josiah.. Those are messiah in the Jewish concept.. Not a demi God ( half God half man). That is roman/Greeks ideology.. The Messiah the jews are waiting for is coming to rule, not to die, he is coming just once, no second coming arrangements.
He will usher in an era of Peace, no more suffering and death, no oppression

So lemme get this straight. You believe the old Testament of the Bible but you don't believe the new Testament?

Is this a fair assessment of you?

ElsonMorali:



So lemme get this straight. You believe the old Testament of the Bible but you don't believe the new Testament?

Is this a fair assessment of you?

It is the Christian who call it the old testament, the jews who owns it call it the Tanakh..

God does not make mistakes and certainly does not need 2 testament.. The Romans added their bull shit story about their dying and resurrecting God at the end of the Tanakh, to fulfil Daniel 7:25,as an insult against God almighty making it look like one religion, when it is not.

sonmvayina:


It is the Christian who call it the old testament, the jews who owns it call it the Tanakh..

God does not make mistakes and certainly does not need 2 testament.. The Romans added their bull shit story about their dying and resurrecting God at the end of the Tanakh, to fulfil Daniel 7:25,as an insult against God almighty making it look like one religion, when it is not.

I see. So you don't have any proof that the events recorded in the New Testament of the Bible are false except for your own prejudice and mere conjectures?

O.K. At least, can you tell me the name of the Roman scholar that in your opinion formulated the story of Jesus the Christ? I'd be interested in researching deeper.

ElsonMorali:


I see. So you don't have any proof that the events recorded in the New Testament of the Bible are false except for your own prejudice and mere conjectures?

O.K. At least, can you tell me the name of the Roman scholar that in your opinion formulated the story of Jesus the Christ? I'd be interested in researching deeper.

Emperor Constantine and the council of Nicea..,
Google "the forged origin of the new testament" by busby

sonmvayina:


Emperor Constantine and the council of Nicea..,
Google "the forged origin of the new testament" by busby

And who or what is busby? A credible historian or a conspiracy theorist? Lmao.

Ok, ok. I'll check it out. Everybody always goes back to Emperor Constantine. Poor chap must be rolling in his grave. I'll get back to you after I've read it.

@Modified.

So I've read it. I must say I'm not impressed.

All I read there were conjectures, suppositions and guess work.

Tony Bushby is a conspiracy theorist. Not even a historian. A conspiracy theorist whose obvious hatred of the Christian faith is hardly disguised.

He says there were no Christian text until the 4th Century when Constantine supposedly ordered the writing of the Bible.

Indeed. All those letters of Paul to the Christians in Corinth, Galatia, Thessalonica and so on are fake too abi?

Please come up with something concrete to refute the veracity of the Gospel narrations other than the words of a man who was born this century.

sonmvayina:


Emperor Constantine and the council of Nicea..,
Google "the forged origin of the new testament" by busby

heresey

Like I wrote earlier, "I know u"

ElsonMorali:


And who or what is busby? A credible historian or a conspiracy theorist? Lmao.

Ok, ok. I'll check it out. Everybody always goes back to Emperor Constantine. Poor chap must be rolling in his grave. I'll get back to you after I've read it.

@Modified.

So I've read it. I must say I'm not impressed.

All I read there were conjectures, suppositions and guess work.

Tony Bushby is a conspiracy theorist. Not even a historian. A conspiracy theorist whose obvious hatred of the Christian faith is hardly disguised.

He says there were no Christian text until the 4th Century when Constantine supposedly ordered the writing of the Bible.

Indeed. All those letters of Paul to the Christians in Corinth, Galatia, Thessalonica and so on are fake too abi?

Please come up with something concrete to refute the veracity of the Gospel narrations other than the words of a man who was born this century.

So tell me, what is the importance or relevance of jesus?
Let assume you are a jew leaving at the time of the prophet Malachi, what kind of messiah will you be looking forward to, with only the Tanakh (old testament) at your disposal

My wife bears Rachel some others Rachael . Does it really matter? No!
You will just need to maintain the way you write it from the Primary school to University. Because any Changes in spelling might give you prolems.

sonmvayina:


So tell me, what is the importance or relevance of jesus?
Let assume you are a jew leaving at the time of the prophet Malachi, what kind of messiah will you be looking forward to, with only the Tanakh (old testament) at your disposal

Jesus

sonmvayina:


So tell me, what is the importance or relevance of jesus?
Let assume you are a jew leaving at the time of the prophet Malachi, what kind of messiah will you be looking forward to, with only the Tanakh (old testament) at your disposal

What's the importance or relevance of Jesus? So you don't even have the foggiest idea about what Christianity is all about but you feel good attacking it just the same? This is the information age. Find out yourself.



The people of the old Testament expected the Savior. There were those who thought the savior would come and save them from the rule of the hated Romans, and those who believed this were in the majority.


Yet when the Messiah came they didn't recognize him because the Kingdom he came to establish and rule over wasn't a physical one.


During the time of the prophet Isaias there wasn't Roman rule. So what would they need a Messiah for?


It's difficult having this discussion with you because you don't believe in God and you don't believe in sin.


To you truth is relative.


The New Testament is a fulfilment of the Old.


First, God made a Covenant/Testament with an individual, Abraham.

Then He extended the Covenant to a family, Isaac's.

Then He extended the Covenant to include a clan, the families of Jacob, his twelve children.

Then He extended the Covenant to cover a nation/kingdom. The nation of Israel.


Then God revealed Himself in the flesh and He perfected His covenant by extending it to cover the entire human race. Whosoever believes in Him would have eternal life. That is the Covenant, the fulfillment of the Testament. It wasn't to come and save the Israelites from Roman rule.


This covenant as contained in the New Testament was perfected by Jesus (also known in Aramaic as Yeshua/Joshua) the Christ who is also God the Divinity with His Blood on the Cross in place of the blood of calves and sheep that have been sacrificed in times past which were grossly inadequate but a foreshadowing of the Real Sacrifice that would be offered for all time to come.