As in the Bible, the use of the word “man” on this site is not always gender specific. The word “man” in most cases refers to all “mankind” both male and female. Only in cases where the context is obviously referring to an actual man (such as Yahshua the Messiah) is the word specific to the male gender. For our women readers, please feel free to substitute the word “woman” where it may apply.
One of the most difficult things to imagine is: ”how would God act if he were a man?” Or “how would a man act if he was like God?”
Would he be the most loving person? What would that look like?
Would he always be giving thanks and praising his Father and the good he saw in those around him? Would he be expressing joy even while suffering?
Would he communicate with complete and total peace even when others are reacting and accusing him?
Would he have endless patience for those who could never seem to “get it”?
Would he be kind to every one, never making anyone feel like he thought he was better?
Would he be the most generous – giving you the shirt off his back for no apparent reason?
Would he be the most faithful and loyal? A man of his word, doing what he said he would do even if it killed him? Would he be true to his heart and to his word? Would he stand by you as a friend even if he knew you were going to betray his friendship?
Would he be the kind of friend who still loved you when you were down, and down-right unlovable, and brought to your attention the things you did that were hurtful to others? Would he be the kind of man who really listened to what everyone had to say, encouraging what was good and never promoting his own good ideas?
Would he show honour and sincere respect to all women; never making them feel unsafe or worthless, never charming, flirting or degrading?
Would he show interest in children and youth, encouraging them to speak while guiding them with words of wisdom? Would he never be foolish with them, always expecting the best, believing in them while over-looking there maturity?
Would he have a gentle way about him even when sternly correcting someone who was doing something really bad?
Would he be strict with himself, never eating more than he needed or taking anything for himself other than what he needed? Would he deny himself so he could focus on caring for others?
When he prayed, would he pray for others?
Would he never fight back or resist his circumstances, but resist his own urge to seek his own justice?
Would he always be honest but never hurtful?
Would he be more concerned about where your heart was at than whether you did something right or wrong?
Would he be just as forgiving the tenth time you did the same thing wrong as he was the first time you did it?
Would he never blame anyone else, but take the blame even when he didn’t do it?
Would he love you, believe in you, have hope for you and teach you how to be like him?
Would his name be Yahshua?
Would you do what he said?
REAL. That’s the word you would use to describe him. He wasn’t playing a game. He wasn’t projecting some image, trying to get people to look up to him. If ever you asked him to tell you about himself, he might say something like, “I am who I am.”
That would be a pretty good description. There wasn’t a speck of deceit in him. He didn’t have anything up his sleeve. He was exactly what he appeared to be. He said exactly what he meant. And that’s why people loved him. Or hated him.
Some people promise you the moon, but he wasn’t like that. There was sub-stance to what he said. He talked about real things. Like greed. And fear. And selfishness. Things that are inside everybody. Things that phonies don’t want to admit and cowards don’t want to face up to.
But he wasn’t gloomy and depressing. He was full of joy and full of hope. He knew a way out. That’s why he talked about those real problems: because he knew that those things were taking people to death, and he didn’t want them to go to death. He wanted them to be full of life — life that would never end.
He talked about love — real love — not some word you hear in a song that makes you feel good until the song ends, and not some plastic religious pretense. The love he talked about was the love he lived. Love that costs you something. Love that costs you your life.
That’s why he didn’t just give people the same old song and take off, leaving them in the dust. His life wasn’t his own. He got right down there in the dust with them and healed their hurts and helped them through their hard times and dealt with the stuff inside them that was taking them to death.
And he didn’t just help people out for a while and then go home, either. He didn’t have a home of his own. The only home he had was the people that he loved. They were his everything. He loved them so much that he wanted them to be with him. He called them to follow him, to leave behind homes and families and possessions and, of course, self, and embark with him on a radical life of loving the same way he loved.
It was a high calling. Just think about it: actually caring for others at the expense of your own interests. Who could live such a life? Many have tried and failed. But to those who are needy and desperate and trust in him, he gives the power to do what would naturally be impossible.
We follow this man Yahshua.1 How could we do anything else? He proved his love for us by taking our place in death. We never knew love like that before — a love that is stronger that death. He is the one whom death could not hold. He is our everything.
If you look in an old King James Bible, you will find the name Jesus in these two passages:
Which also our fathers that came after brought in with Jesus into the possession of the Gentiles, whom God drave out before the face of our fathers, unto the days of David… (Acts 7:45, KJV)
For if Jesus had given them rest, then would he not afterward have spoken of another day. (Hebrews 4:8, KJV)
However, if you look in any modern translation of the Bible, including the New King James, you will find that in place of the name Jesus they use the name Joshua, for in the context it is clear that it is speaking of Moses’ successor and not the Son of God. But in the Greek manuscript the name in both verses is Iesous.
You see, Joshua is the popular English transliteration of the Hebrew name of Moses’ successor, which meant, “He will save.” This name looks forward to the name of the Son of God, for Joshua was the prophetic forerunner of the Messiah, bringing Israel into the Promised Land and leading them to victory over their enemies. But since the translators obviously know this fact, why do they only translate Iesous as Joshua in these two verses, and as Jesus everywhere else?
The NIV New Testament even has a footnote supporting this fact under Matthew 1:21 — “Jesus is the Greek form of Joshua.”
But the fact is, the name of God’s Son was not even written or pronounced as Jesus in English until the 1600s, simply because there was no “J” sound or letter in English before then.2 The modern letter “J” evolved from the letter “I” which began to be written with a “tail” when it appeared as the first letter in a word. So in Old English the name now written as Jesus was actually written and pronounced much like the original Greek Iesous. Eventually the hard “J” sound crept into the English language to accompany the different way of writing the initial “I” in the name.
You may also find it interesting that in Acts 26:14-15, it says that the Apostle Paul heard the name of the Son of God pronounced “in the Hebrew tongue” by the Son of God Himself, so he certainly didn’t hear the Greek name Iesous or the English name Jesus, but rather the Hebrew name, the name above all names — Yahshua.3