More YEA NEWSLETTERS

January-February 2004
(Page One)

BACK TO INDEX

IN THIS ISSUE

AN ANSWER TO:
USING GOD’S SACRED NAME

TEN REASONS FOR REJECTING 
THE YAHWEH DOCTRINE

PRAY FOR THEM

The article in question is written by Mark Jenkins who writes, "Throughout history, great significance has been attached to the name of God, and rightly so."

COMMENT: This statement, of course, is quite correct. A thorough study into what the scholars and even Jewish Rabbis declare about the Sacred Name has been done by this assembly and the resulting article was written entitled "The Scholars and Rabbis Speak Out on the Importance of YAHWEH’S Name." If you haven’t received this article, then you are welcome to write and/or call us to request your free copy of it.

After composing the above mentioned article, we did another thorough Biblical research and composed another article which is entitled, "YAHWEH Speaks Out Concerning the Importance of His Name," which also is available "free" for the asking.

The article continues, "There is only one name by which we can be saved (Acts 4:12)."

COMMENT: Again, a very true statement.

He writes, "In the New Testament, the word name conveys authority. According to Strong’s Concordance, the Greek word for name, onoma, shows authority and character. When we pray "in Jesus’ name," we are actually praying by His authority. In Hebrews 1:4, the Apostle Paul writes, ‘Being made so much better than the angels, as he [Christ] hath by inheritance obtained A MORE EXCELLENT NAME than they.’ On page 8 of the International Critical Commentary, James Moffatt writes that the word name ‘carries the general sense of ‘rank’ or ‘dignity.’’ Jesus Christ has a more excellent name because He is greater in rank and authority. God the Father’s names also have great meaning that He wants each of us to understand. In fact, God wants man to take such special care with His name, that He protected it with one of His ten commandments (Exod. 20:7)."

COMMENT: The Greek word for name is "onoma." Onoma is defined as "a name" (literally or figuratively) (authority, character) [Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance #3686]. In other words, we could ask the question, Whose name is associated with the authority and character of baseball’s first "home run king?" Who possessed that AUTHORITY and CHARACTER for many, many years? Was it Roger Maris? While we know that Roger Maris did hold the title as the "home run king" for a few years, the original holder of that title was none other than Babe Ruth. To bestow the name (character/authority) of Roger Maris for baseball’s first and most beloved "home run king" would be deceit, and error would it not?

Whose name (character/authority) is presently associated with the office of the President of the United States? Is it Bill Clinton? There are many people who would love to have it so, but for anyone to declare that Bill Clinton presently holds the office of the President of the United States would be declaring an "untruth" (lie, deceit).

Whose name (character/authority) is associated with your banking account? Mine is Jerry Healan. If someone signed a check on my account as Harry Jelon, should that check go through? It may, only because of an error, but all I would have to do is point out that error and it would have to be corrected and the amount restored to my account. Notice that Harry Jelon isn’t too far off from my name, but it still isn’t my name.

Do you not begin to understand that it is important for the AUTHORITY and CHARACTER to be associated with the PROPER NAME that goes with it?

Now we ask the question, Do we understand what the Savior meant when He said, "…many shall come in My name (authority and character), saying, ‘I am the Messiah;’ and shall deceive many (Mt. 24:5)? Is it possible that deceit could be promulgated through a name that really isn’t the true name? Isn’t there one in this world called the devil and Satan who continually seeks to steal the honor and glory associated belonging to the Creator YAHWEH and His Messiah to himself? Doesn’t he do this through deceit? In order to come to realize how he accomplishes this, you could request our "free" article entitled, "The Devices of Satan."

The next question concerning this Scripture would be, How do you deceive someone? Well… isn’t deceit the opposite of truth? Doesn’t name mean authority and character? Thus if people and organizations are giving authority and character to a name that isn’t the true name, then hasn’t this Scripture been fulfilled?

The name of the Savior in the original Hebrew is [vwhy. It is shown in all Hebrew lexicons to be pronounced as Yehowshua in the Hebrew, but the English transliteration is Joshua. Now, we do understand that the original English didn’t have a "J" so when we exchange the "J" with a "Y", we get the transliterated English word Yoshua or YAHshua.

Now we have to ask another question, Which name would be the MORE EXCELLENT NAME? The name that is closer to the true name or a name that has been corrupted to the point that there is very little comparison?

Do you remember the games we played when we were children? (I suppose that children still play some of these games even today.) One of those games was called "Pass it around" or "Pass it down." We would form a circle and one child would whisper a word or phrase in the ear of one of the child next to him. This word or phrase would be passed all the way around the circle until it came back to the one who originated it. By the time it got back to the point of origin it would be corrupted beyond belief.

So where do we get the name Jesus? Supposedly, it is transliterated from the Hebrew to the Greek to the English. But according to the Scriptures which are presented in the Greek language the name is "Ihsou/" (Iesou) or "Ihsous/" (Iesous). The Latin Vulgate presents the name as "Iesus." Hmmmm….if we just substitute a "J" for the Latin "I" we get the name "Jesus." So the truth of the matter would be that the name was transliterated from the Hebrew to the Greek to the Latin to the English.

So, let’s compare the name that has been transliterated through the chain of languages with the name that is transliterated directly from the Hebrew (Note: we will utilize the modern day transliterated form for this experiment) Jesus : Joshua. Hasn’t corruption taken place?

Now please allow me to explain something about my past. When I was in nominal Christianity, the name Jesus was so special and so powerful to me. It was so special to the point that if my wife and I had ever had a son or sons, I would never have thought of naming my son by the name Jesus (even though there may be other societies that do so). That name belonged to one person and one person only. It belonged to the Savior. It was His personal name. However I would have had no problem naming a son Joshua. This seems to be a proclivity of the peoples of the English language. I have never met a person of an English, Scot, or Irish background named Jesus, but the name Joshua is a very popular English name. Joshua is a much closer transliteration of the Savior’s name than is Jesus! Evidently, I was not alone concerning the importance I placed on that name (at least in the English speaking world).

But the simple fact of the matter is that the name of the Savior has been corrupted or changed from its original pronunciation. Another simple fact is that men delight more in corruption and darkness rather than purity and light (Jn. 3:19-21). Again, we ask the question, Which name would be the MORE EXCELLENT NAME? ? The name that is closer to the true name or a name that has been corrupted to the point that there is very little comparison?

Mark writes, "In Exodus 6:2, God revealed His name to Moses. ‘And God spake unto Moses, and said unto him, I am the Lord.’ The Hebrew word for Lord in this case is YHWH. It actually means: ‘The One who was, and is, and is to be.’ It is this name that the followers of the ‘sacred names’ doctrine say opens the door to salvation. However, in verse 3 God states, ‘And I appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, by the name of God Almighty, but by my name Jehovah was I not known to them.’ Therefore, if the proper use of the name YHWH is required for salvation, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob – along with everyone else born in the first 2,500 years of human history – are all condemned!"

COMMENT: These people proclaim that they have a tremendous knowledge and understanding of the Scriptures. They proclaim to be great scholars and students of the Bible. Yes, whether Mark Jenkins, the author of this article in question has been to Ambassador College or not, we do know that many of the ministers of this organization including the head of it have been. Ambassador College’s motto was "The Word of God is the foundation of all knowledge."

How is it, then, that such a frivolous statement can be made that the Patriarchs, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob didn’t know the Sacred Name? I suppose that it’s because the ministers and people involved with doing the so-called work (in WWCG) were not to be questioned even when they did make mistakes. To question, was to be placed either on parole (suspended) or disfellowshipped from the church. To be disfellowshipped from the church meant that one was cut off from the Creator and would lose his salvation. Therefore, most feared to question, and those who did weren’t allowed to continue with that group.

Well, praise YAHWEH, we no longer have to fear being disfellowshipped from that group since that church isn’t even a shell of its former self when it was under the control of Herbert W. Armstrong. No, even the people of this group, the Philadelphia Church of God, are no longer a part of that particular body. And, frankly, the teaching that one had to be a member of the WWCG in order to receive salvation was a false erroneous teaching.

But a simple little study back into the book of Genesis reveals that Abraham, Isaac and Jacob did know the name YAHWEH. "And Abram passed through the land unto the place of Sichem unto the plain of Moreh. (And the Canaanite was then in the land.) And YAHWEH (YHWH) appeared unto Abram, and said, ‘Unto thy seed will I give this land:’ and there builded he an altar unto YAHWEH (YHWH), Who appeared unto him. And he removed from thence unto a mountain on the east of Beth-el, and pitched his tent, having Beth-el on the west, and Hai on the east: and there he builded an altar unto YAHWEH (YHWH), and CALLED UPON THE NAME YAHWEH (YHWH)!" Gen. 12:6-8. (Notice that the Scriptures don’t say El Shaddai [God Almighty as Mark renders it], they say that he called on the name YAHWEH.)

"And he went on his journeys from the south even to Beth-el, unto the place where his tent had been at the beginning, between Beth-el and Hai; unto the place of the altar, which he had made there at the first: and there Abram CALLED ON THE NAME YAHWEH (YHWH)," Gen. 13:3-4. (Notice that the Scriptures don’t say El Shaddai [God Almighty as Mark renders it], they say that He called on the name YAHWEH.)

"Then Abram removed his tent, and came and dwelt in the plain of Mamre, which is in Hebron and built there an altar unto YAHWEH (YHWH)," Gen. 13:18. (Notice that the Scriptures don’t say El Shaddai [God Almighty as Mark renders it], they say that He called on the name YAHWEH.)

"After these things the word of YAHWEH came unto Abram in a vision, saying, ‘Fear not, Abram: I am thy shield, and thy exceeding great reward.’ And Abram said, ‘Sovereign YAHWEH (Adonai YHWH), what wilt Thou give me, seeing I go childless, and the steward of my house is this Eliezer of Damascus?" Gen. 15:1-2. (Notice that the Scriptures don’t say El Shaddai [God Almighty as Mark renders it], they say Adonai YAHWEH.)

"And He said unto him, ‘I am YAHWEH (notice that He didn’t use the title El Shaddai, but rather YHWH) That brought thee out of Ur of the Chaldees, to give thee this land to inherit it. And He said ‘Sovereign YAHWEH (notice that He didn’t use the title El Shaddai, but rather YHWH), whereby shall I know that I shall inherit it?" Gen. 15:7-8.

YAHWEH is addressed as YAHWEH (YHWH) in Gen. 16:2, 5; 18:3, 14, 27, 30, 32; 21:33; 24:3, 7 12, 27, 35, 40, 4248, 50, 51, 52, 56; 25:21, 22, 23; 26:25; 27:20, etc., etc.

I have presented adequate proof that the patriarchs all knew the Creator by His name YAHWEH (YHWH). Therefore, the Scripture referred to (Ex. 6:2-3) should be presented as a question rather than a statement. It should read, "And Elohim spake unto Moses, and said unto him, ‘I am YAHWEH; and I appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, in El Shaddai, but by My name YAHWEH (YHWH) was I not known to them?"

There was no such thing as a question mark in the Hebrew language. Therefore, in all places in the English version of the Hebrew Scriptures where a question mark appears, it has to be done so through a careful study of the statement made. In this case, it is obvious, with a little research into the book of Genesis, that the Patriarchs Abraham, Isaac, Jacob as well as many, many others knew the name YAHWEH and either addressed Him by it or spoke to others about it.

In Gen. 17:1-8 we read, "And when Abram was ninety years old and nine, YAHWEH (YHWH) appeared to Abram, and said unto him, ‘I am El Shaddai; walk before Me, and be thou perfect. And I will make My covenant between Me and thee, and will multiply thee exceedingly.’ And Abram fell on his face: and Elohim talked with him, saying, ‘As for Me, behold, My covenant is with thee, and thou shalt be a father of many nations. Neither shall thy name any more be called Abram, but thy name shall be Abraham; for a father of many nations have I made thee. And I will make thee exceeding fruitful, and I will make nations of thee, and kings shall come out of thee. And I will establish My covenant between Me and thee and thy seed after thee in their generations for an everlasting covenant, to be a Elohim unto thee, and to thy seed after thee. And I will give unto thee, and to thy seed after thee, the land wherein thou are a stranger, all the land of Canaan, for an everlasting possession; and I will be their Elohim."

Isn’t it interesting that this is the first place where the title "El Shaddai" (translated as Almighty God in the English versions) appears in Scripture? As a matter of fact, this very title only occurs six times in the whole of the book of Genesis! Why did YAHWEH utilize this title in reference to Himself?

A little more research could quite possibly give us the answer. The term "El Shaddai" in the Hebrew language is, yD;v; lae. lae (El) is #430 in Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance and is defined as; "strength; as adjective, mighty; especially the Almighty (but used also of any deity)."

yD;v (Shaddai) is #7706 which is defined as; "from 7703; the Almighty." Notice that it is from another Hebrew word which is #7703 in Strong’s Concordance. #7703 is the Hebrew word ddv shadad, which is defined as, "a primitive root; properly, to be burly, i.e. (figuratively) powerful (passively, impregnable); by implication, to ravage."

Interestingly, the very next word #7704 is the Hebrew word hdX sadeh, which is defined as, "or saday {saw-dah'-ee}; from an unused root meaning to spread out; a field (as flat)." Notice the meaning "to spread out."

Now, let’s look at another Hebrew word, which is very close to these. It is #7707 rwaydv Sh@dey'uwr, which is defined as "from the same as 7704 and 217; spreader of light."

Shadey’uwr means "spreader of light." Sadeh means "to spread out, a field (as flat).

What did YAHWEH promise Abram here in this covenant? Wasn’t it to change the name Abram to Abraham? Wasn’t it to cause his seed to be fruitful? Wasn’t it to cause him to be a father of many nations? In other words, YAHWEH, the possessor of heaven and earth, was going to cause the seed of Abraham to spread out into other nations around the world. His seed was to inherit the land of Canaan, but according to the New Covenant, he and his seed were to inherit the whole earth and power over it! YAHWEH’S ultimate goal is to make all who inherit the Kingdom of heaven which will be ruled on this earth the seed of Abraham. That’s why He utilized that title when He appeared to Abram and made His promises to him and His covenant with him.

In other words, the title El Shaddai is the title that gives YAHWEH power over all the earth. YAHWEH then promises to bestow upon those who believe in His name (YAHWEH) power to govern the whole earth. Isn’t that the message of the kingdom of heaven? Those who come to the Father through His Son YAHshua will be made kings and priests over the earth.

Mark writes, "In addition, the true pronunciation of YHWH has been LOST. The Bible prophesied that this would happen: ‘I have heard what the prophets said, that prophesy lies in my name, saying, I have dreamed, I have dreamed. How long shall this be in the heart of the prophets that prophesy lies? Yes, they are prophets of the deceit of their own heart; Which think to cause my people to forget my name by their dreams which they tell every man to his neighbour, as their fathers have forgotten my name for Baal’ (Jer. 23:25-27). History shows that the Jews came to believe that it was blasphemous to use the divine name YHWH."

COMMENT: It is true that YAHWEH’S people have forgotten His name for Baal. Baal was known as "the LORD." Not only is this prophecy continuing to be fulfilled for the great overall preponderance of the people, but Mark and his group, the Philadelphia Church of God, and the others like them, go out of their way to fulfill this prophecy by writing articles like his which justify not turning to the true name of the Creator which is the name of Salvation.

His argument that the pronunciation has been lost is the exact same excuse that Sunday observing Christians utilize for not embracing the seventh day Sabbath. When they get pinned down on the truth concerning the Sabbath being YAHWEH’S commanded day of rest, their response is, Well time has been lost. Isn’t it amazing that Mark and his group have no problem identifying which day is the Sabbath since they declare that time hasn’t been lost, but utilize the same lame-duck excuse to justify not embracing YAHWEH’S name.

Herbert W. Armstrong and the Worldwide Church of God proudly proclaimed that they had restored knowledge about the true Sabbath day, but failed to restore the knowledge concerning the true names.

It is also interesting that Mark can quote from Jer. 23:25-27 concerning the false prophets causing His people to forget His name, but then makes the statement, History shows that the Jews came to believe that it was blasphemous to use the divine name YHWH.

Jeremiah reveals the reason why the Jewish people will not speak the Sacred Name today, "Therefore hear ye the word of YAHWEH, all Judah that dwell in the land of Egypt; Behold, I have sworn by My great name, saith YAHWEH, that My name shall no more be named in the mouth of any man of Judah in all the land of Egypt, saying, ‘the Sovereign YAHWEH liveth’," Jer. 44:26. You see, the Jewish people have been led to trust more in the Talmud and Kabbalah than in the Word of YAHWEH. The Talmud is a Babylonian work and the Kabbalah is Egyptian. This has caused them to "spiritually" go into Egypt. The result is that YAHWEH has taken His name out of their mouths. Too bad Mark doesn’t understand this. (The Jews also.)

Mark writes, "According to Theology of the Old Testament, the pronunciation of YAHWEH that is used today is of Samaritan origin. The true pronunciation was lost because no Jew dared to speak it for fear of punishment of death."

COMMENT: No matter what the Theology of the Old Testament proclaims, the Encyclopedia Judaica says that the pronunciation hasn’t been lost and that the pronunciation is YAHWEH. Many, many scholars and scholastic work also uphold this pronunciation.

That being said, I personally sat in the parent church, the Worldwide Church of God for eighteen and one half years (from 1970 – 1988) having been taught many times by the man that the Philadelphia Church of God idolizes, Herbert W. Armstrong. I wonder why they conveniently forget that during the early 1980’s Herbert W. Armstrong commissioned a panel of researchers to look into the name of the Heavenly Father. I remember that I was anticipating the results of the study panel, but it took somewhere around one year to one and half years for the study to be completed. I was sitting in services in Big Sandy, Texas when Herbert W. Armstrong declared, "The study has been completed and we have determined that the name of the Heavenly Father is YAHWEH, but I prefer to call Him the Eternal."

Isn’t it interesting that the one thing that this church, the Philadelphia Church of God, has forgotten concerning what Herbert W. Armstrong had studied into and declared is that the name of the Heavenly Father is YAHWEH? How convenient!

Mark writes, "Some have stated that God’s name should only be pronounced in the Hebrew language. These groups cannot agree, however, on the correct pronunciation of either God or Christ’s Hebrew name. Some say that God the Father should be called YAHWEH. Others say His name is Yahvah or Yah. Christ is called YAHshua, along with numerous other variations."

COMMENT: Mark, Mark, Mark…..Names are transliterated from one language to the next. I find that I must make this point again and again and again with people like you. Have you not heard of Benyamin Netanyahu? Do you call him Benyamin or Benjamin? Whether you do or not, the fact of the matter is that the media always chooses to utilize the name Benyamin publicly when referring to him and not Benjamin. This is called "transliteration," Mark. However, the English name Benjamin is a far sight closer to the Hebrew transliteration of Benyamin than "the LORD" or "God" or "the Eternal" is to the name YAHWEH and Joshua is a far sight closer to the Savior’s name than Jesus is.

How about Francois Mitterand (now deceased)? Did you call him Frank or did you extend him the courtesy of transliterating his name from the French to the English? If you extended this honor to these men (and many, many others), why do you continue to refuse to extend the same honor to your Creator?

Again, we must direct Mark to Herbert W. Armstrong’s own words, who proclaimed that the name of the Heavenly Father was YAHWEH. Herbert W. Armstrong always proclaimed that when the truth comes, we must embrace it, yet, for some reason, he failed to embrace this truth. However, it is truth that must be our ultimate goal and influence, not man.

Mark writes, "Today, some still feel that they MUST pronounce God’s name because it is holy. But the fact is Christ Himself never used the name YHWH. If He had, the Jews would have used that as their reason to sentence Him to death, rather than make false accusations (Mark 14:55-59).

In fact, the pronunciation of the word is of little consequence to us. Jesus Christ set the proper example for us by using the word Father when referring to God. He instructed His disciples, ‘When ye pray, say, Our Father which art in heaven’ (Luke 11:2)."

COMMENT: Has Mark never read the many Scriptures that YAHshua quoted from the Old Testament? For example, "Then saith YAHshua unto him, ‘Get thee hence, Satan: for it is written, ‘Thou shalt worship YAHWEH thy Elohim, and Him only shalt thou serve’," Mt. 4:10.

We would have to ask Mark whether he believes that YAHshua came in the power of the Spirit or not and does He believe that YAHshua would misquote Scripture or delete something out of Scripture simply in order to save His life?

Didn’t He come to fulfill the Scriptures? Don’t the Scriptures warn, "Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it, that ye may keep the commandments of YAHWEH your Elohim which I command you," Dt. 4:2. "What thing soever I command you, observe to do it: thou shalt not add thereto, nor diminish from it," Dt. 12:32. "Every word of Eloah is pure: He is a shield unto them that put their trust in Him. Add thou not unto His words, lest He reprove thee, and thou be found a liar," Prov. 30:5-6.

Aren’t these Scriptures enough proof so that we can know that when YAHshua quoted Scriptures, He quoted them as they were written? He neither added anything to them nor diminished anything from them.

There are ample examples of YAHshua, His disciples, John the Baptist and others, who quoted from the Old Testament Scriptures and we can be guaranteed that when the name YAHWEH was included in those Scriptures, the name YAHWEH was pronounced. YAHshua’s example was to be honest and forthright. He didn’t sidestep any issues. He said what had to be said and, after all, He is the truth; He certainly wouldn’t have been dishonest concerning the Scripture, their quotes, nor their application in His life.

Besides, doesn’t YAHshua say that He declared the Father’s name to His disciples? (Jn. 17:6)

Since you say that the name isn’t important, Mark, how do you interpret Jn. 14:13, "And whatsoever ye shall ask in My name, that will I do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son?" How do you interpret Jn. 15:16, "Ye have not chosen Me, but I have chosen you, and ordained you, that you should go and bring forth fruit, and that your fruit should remain: that whatsoever ye shall ask of the Father in My name, He may give it you?" How do you interpret Jn. 16:23-24, "And in that day ye shall ask Me nothing. Verily, verily, I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall ask the Father in My name, He will give it you. Hitherto have ye asked nothing in My name: ask, and ye shall receive, that your joy may be full?" How do you interpret Eph. 5:20, "Giving thanks always for all things unto Elohim and the Father in the name of our Sovereign YAHshua the Messiah?"

When you pray to the Father or ask anything of Him or give thanks to Him do you just say "…in the name of your son?" Or do you say, "…by the authority of your son?" Or do you say, "…by the character of your son?" While I am not a betting man, I would bet you $5.00 to a doughnut that you always, always, always say, "…in Jesus’ name. So are you making a name important? Absolutely!

Since I am on this subject, as I have said, I sat in the Worldwide Church of God for a little over 18 years having been taught personally at time by Herbert W. Armstrong himself. When teaching from John chapter 17, he would refer time and time again to verse 11. He would read the verse, "And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to Thee. Holy Father, KEEP THROUGH THINE OWN NAME those whom Thou hast given Me, that they may be one, as we are." Then he would make the point as to why the church was named the "CHURCH OF GOD." He declared time and time again that the church had to have God’s name inculcated into it. He explained that this was the reason that the church wasn’t named the "Church of Christ," etc. because it had to be kept in the name of God!

Isn’t it interesting that every group that has ever come out of the Worldwide Church of God has always had the word (whether common or proper noun) God incorporated into it? Why is that Mark? Why is that all of you hundreds and hundreds of groups that have come out of WWCG continue to incorporate the name "God" into your group?

Since you may not be honest in your answer, as you haven’t been honest in this article, I will answer this question for you. It’s because you are making to words, two names to be extremely important and that is the name Jesus and the name God. But when challenged to turn to the true names, or at least the names that are much, much closer to the true names, you resist proclaiming that names aren’t important. This is hypocrisy, Mark and all of you Churches of God! By your own actions, you prove that the names are very important, but you resist the truth. How long will you remain to be stiff-necked? When will you cease promoting false names and appropriating the honor and glory of the Creator to false names?

Mark writes, "It is also important to note that the New Testament was inspired by the Holy Spirit in Greek, not in Hebrew. This included the names of God and Christ. If God had wanted His name to be pronounced in Hebrew, He would surely have inspired His servants to write His name in Hebrew. God wants us to use the names for Him and His Son that we understand."

COMMENT: Let’s see, YAHshua was born a Hebrew to Hebrew parents. His disciples that He chose to follow Him were Hebrews and He went primarily to the Hebrews with the message of salvation. According to Josephus and other Jewish authors, the people of the land at that time, didn’t take too kindly to any other languages than their own. Josephus even admits that he simply wasn’t fluent in the Greek tongue.

Now Paul said that the Jew came first and then the Gentile or Greek (Ro. 2:9-10). In accordance with this understanding, wouldn’t the New Testament Scriptures be written to the Jew, the Hebrew first and later to the Greek or Gentile? We do have strong evidence that such was the case and we have published one article concerning this in our Jul.-Aug. 2003 issue of the YEA Newsletter.

You may also see our article entitled, "An Answer to Ten Reasons for Rejecting the YAHWEH Doctrine" wherein we present evidence from the FOREWARD of The Kingdom Interlinear Translation of the Greek Scriptures, which presents a literal word-for-word translation into English under the Greek text as set out in "The New Testament in the original Greek¾The text revised by Brooke Foss Westcott D.D. and Fenton John Anthony Hort D.D." (1948 Reprint) together with the New World Translation of the Christian Greek Scriptures, Revised Edition, ¾1969 C.E. This work does reveal that the true name of the Heavenly Father did appear in the original Greek texts, but was later expunged because of ignorance.

By the way, the Talmud does accuse the Savior of using the Sacred Name in order to perform His miracles.

Have you never read the Book of Maccabees? Don’t you understand that there was antagonism between the Greeks and Hebrews? Didn’t the Greek kings try to stamp out the Hebrew ways? Haven’t you read about what Antiochus Epiphanes did? Didn’t he try to force the people to turn away from the worship of YAHWEH to his deity Zeus? Haven’t you read the history of that area? Haven’t you read that Constantine the Great followed the example of Antiochus Epiphanes by declaring anything Hebrew to be destroyed? He is the one who presented 50 copies of the Scriptures in the Greek language to the churches in Byzantium/Constantinople. Constantine was a Roman Emperor and thus, the head of the fourth kingdom of Daniel chapter 2 and the fourth beast of Daniel chapter seven. Doesn’t this tell you something, Mark?

Did you not know that when Constantine transferred the center of power of the Roman Empire from Old Rome to New Rome (Constantinople), that he did so because it was Greek in language, culture and influence and supposedly pure, not being tainted with the Old Latin influence? You can find these facts in the Encyclopedia Britannica Eleventh or Fourteenth Editions.

How do you explain Zech. 9:12-13, "Turn you to the strong hold, ye prisoners of hope: even to day do I declare that I will render double unto thee; when I have bent Judah for Me, filled the bow with Ephraim, and raised up thy sons, O Zion, against thy sons, O Greece, and made thee as the sword of a mighty man." Don’t the Scriptures reveal that Zion is YAHWEH’S habitation? "Sing praises to YAHWEH, Which dwelleth in Zion: declare among the people His doings," Psa. 9:11. "In Judah is Elohim known: His name is great in Israel. In Salem also is His tabernacle, and His dwelling place in Zion," Psa. 76:1-2.

Jeremiah is inspired to write, "The word that YAHWEH spake to Jeremiah the prophet, how Nebuchadrezzar king of Babylon should come and smite the land of Egypt. ‘Declare ye in Egypt, and publish in Migdol, and publish in Noph and in Tapanhes: say ye, ‘Stand fast, and prepare thee; for the sword shall devour round about thee.’ Why are thy valiant men swept away? They stood not, because YAHWEH did drive them. He made many to fall, yea, one fell upon another: and they said, ‘Arise, and let us go to our own people, and to the land of our nativity, from the oppressing sword’." (46:13-16)

The word "oppressing" is translated from the word "yanah" in the Hebrew Scriptures. But the LXX (Septuagint) which you love and trust the most, renders this word as "Grecian!" The Hebrew word "yanah" is defined as, a primitive root; to rage or be violent: by implication, to suppress, to maltreat in Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance. Evidently the translators of the Septuagint (LXX) understood this sword to be a violent, raging, suppressing GRECIAN sword.

Now let’s look at a couple of other Scriptures which might give us a clue as to which is more important, the Hebrew or the Greek. The Psalmist declares, "I waited patiently for YAHWEH; and He inclined unto me, and heard my cry. He brought me up also out of an horrible pit, out of the miry clay, and set my feet upon a rock, and established my goings," Psa. 40:1-2.

Again the Psalmist declares, "Save me, O Elohim; for the waters are come in unto my soul. I sink in deep mire, where there is no standing: I am come into deep waters, where the floods overflow me," Psa. 69:1-2.

The words "miry" and "mire" are translated from the Hebrew word "yaven" (nwy). "Yaven" is #3121 in Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance and is defined as, from the same as 3196; properly, dregs (as effervescing); hence, mud.

Now the preceding word from Strong’s Concordance is #3120. It is the Hebrew word "Yavan" (nwy) and is defined as, probably from the same as 3196; effervescing (i.e. hot and active); Javan, the name of a son of Joktan, and of the race (Ionians, i.e. Greeks) descended from him, with their territory; also of a place in Arabia.

Both of these words come from #3196, "yayin" which is defined as, from an unused root meaning to effervesce; wine (as fermented); by implication, intoxication. These words are closely related to each other, Mark. They both come from the same root. One "Yavan" is simply a proper noun while "yaven" is a common noun.

The Roman Empire, as you know, is the fourth kingdom of Daniel chapter 2 and the fourth beast of Daniel chapter 7. It is first depicted in Daniel chapter 2 as a kingdom of iron, but feet are part of iron and part of clay. The iron would represent the peoples who originated the Roman Empire, but the clay represents Israel as the prophet declared, "But now, O YAHWEH, Thou art our Father; we are the clay, and Thou our Potter; and we all are the work of Thy hand. Be not wroth very sore, O YAHWEH, neither remember iniquity for ever: behold, see, we beseech Thee, we are all Thy People. Thy holy cities are a wilderness, Zion is a wilderness, Jerusalem a desolation," Isa. 64:8-10.

Historically, the Romans founded the city of Rome which eventually became the Roman Empire. Later Israel, the clay, was inculcated into the empire. This began under the hand of the famous Roman General and dictator Julius Caesar who warred against the Celts, Gauls and Goths, defeated most of them and brought them into the empire. It even appeared that certain Celts and Goths defeated the Romans and sacked the city of Rome, but they, themselves generally remained and became a part of the empire.

Then Daniel shows that the toes became part of iron and part "miry" clay (chapter 2, verse 41). Of course, the Romans had inculcated Greece into the empire also, but Constantine is the one who moved the center of the empire from Old Rome to New Rome (Constantinople) declaring the eastern part to be Greek. So now we have the western half Latin (iron) and the eastern half Greek (miry clay).

Now I know that the word for "miry" in Dan. 2 is "tiyn" not "yaven". But the word utilized is Aramaic, not Hebrew. Even though they are sister languages and many words are the same, other words for the same thing are different. We can demonstrate this even in the English language. We speak English and so do the people of England. But we use the word "truck" for a truck. They use the word "lorry" for a truck.

The history lesson is that Rome was originally founded by the Romans (iron). It later became infused with descendants of Israel and was thus Roman (iron) and Israelite (clay). Still later, it became infused with the Greek culture and was part iron (Roman) and miry clay (Greek).

According to a very careful study of the Scriptures, the claim that the New Testament Scriptures were originally inspired in the Greek is false. A careful study of secular history along with a comparison of Biblical history also supports your claim to be false.

Mark, there is one in this world who has an agenda and that agenda is to exalt and honor himself. In doing this, he must remove you (and everyone) from truth and the true Savior so that you will extend that honor to him. He is very subtle and seeks to deceive you. He will even take the Scriptures, remove the true names of the Father and Son from them and appropriate them to himself and his messiah.

You have been deceived to give the honor of the Scriptures to another rather than the true Messiah. If it doesn’t matter whether we utilize the name of the Father and Son in Hebrew or Greek, then please answer this question. In the book of Acts chapter 26 Paul is recounting the time when the Savior appeared to Him. Remember that Paul declares that the Savior spoke to Him in the Hebrew tongue. When Paul asked Him who He was, what answer do we read in the English Scriptures available to us in today’s world? "He said, ‘I am Jesus Whom thou persecutest," Acts 26:15 (KJV).

Since you have declared that Jesus is a derivative of the Greek, why is the Greek derivation utilized here? Why isn’t His name directly transliterated from the Hebrew since that is the language that He spoke? Why don’t we read the modern day transliteration Joshua here? If there is no agenda to take away the true names, then wouldn’t we see the names Jesus and Joshua interspersed throughout the Scriptures? When Hebrew was spoken the name would be rendered as Joshua and when Greek was spoken or written the name Jesus would be OK. Right? If such were the case, then I wouldn’t believe that there is a hidden agenda.

Again, I must ask, if the Scriptures that we have available to us today are translated from the Greek, even the Old Testament being translated from the Greek Septuagint (LXX), then why is the son of Nun still referred to as Joshua? Why did they transliterate the same name in the Old Testament to the closer form of Joshua and the New Testament as Jesus? I do have the Septuagint on my computer and they render the name of the son of Nun as Iesous just as the New Testament but it is transliterated as Joshua in the English. Is this a good question? Am I being fair?

Mark writes, "Jesus Christ set the proper example for us by using the word FATHER when referring to God. He instructed His disciples, ‘When ye pray, say, Our Father which art in heaven.’ (Luke 11:2)….We have seen that "God" is a family name. When we pray, it is to OUR FATHER in heaven, according to the instruction of our Savior."

COMMENT: Didn’t we just read in the book of Isaiah where that prophet addressed YAHWEH as Father? (Isa. 64:8-10) But in Isaiah chapter 63 he also declared, "Doubtless Thou art our FATHER, though Abraham be ignorant of us, and Israel acknowledge us not: Thou, O YAHWEH, art our FATHER, our Redeemer; Thy name is from everlasting," (v. 16).

Even Moses wrote, "Do ye thus requite YAHWEH, O foolish People and unwise? Is not He thy FATHER that hath bought thee? Hath He not made thee, and established thee?" Dt. 21:6.

Here are two great men of the Scriptures that have utilized both his name and acknowledged Him as their and our Father.

But YAHshua, Himself, said, "I have manifested (made known, declared) Thy name unto the men which Thou gavest Me out of the world: Thine they were, and Thou gavest them Me; and they have kept Thy word," Jn. 17:6.

Didn’t Yashua ask Him, "Holy Father, keep through Thine own name those whom Thou hast given Me that they may be one, as We are," Jn. 17:11.

Doesn’t your own church have the name God incorporated into it so that this Scripture may supposedly be fulfilled? Your own works, the works of your church and all people like you believe that the name of the Father is God. Whether you believe it or not, Mark, this is a disastrous error.

Have you never read Rev. 14:1, "And I looked, and lo, a Lamb stood on the mount Sion (not the Greek Olympus), and with Him an hundred forty and four thousand, HAVING HIS FATHER’S NAME WRITTEN IN (or on) THEIR FOREHEADS!"

What would you think is written on their foreheads, Mark; the name of the Father which your own mentor and the mentor of your leaders (Herbert W. Armstrong) declared to be YAHWEH in the early 1980’s or is it just the word Father? If you think that it is the word Father, then you are even more deceived than I think you are. No, Mark, they have His Father’s name written on their foreheads because the name YAHWEH is the true name of the true family of Elohim.

Mark writes, "There is also only one name by which we can be saved. That name was written in the same language as the rest of the New Testament, and we should speak that name in the same language that we read our Bibles. For English-speaking peoples, that name is Jesus Christ of Nazareth."

COMMENT: Mark, I have proof that the greater majority of New Testament was written in Hebrew, not Greek. I have proof that even the original Greek copies of the Scriptures (which were copied from the Hebrew), both Old and New Testaments had the Sacred Name of the Father in the original Paleo Hebrew language. (Read my accompanying article entitled "An Answer To Ten Reasons For Rejecting the YAHWEH Doctrine.")

I am sending copies of both articles to you for your perusal. If you are a true scholar and disciple of the Savior, if you truly love him, then you will study these things out. I expect you to do a good and thorough study on these things. When you come to the knowledge of the truth, I expect you to admit your error and to recall your article "Using God’s Sacred Name."

Here is a prophecy for you, Mark. The time is coming when you will either have to embrace the true names or you will be shut out of the kingdom of heaven. For those who are wise, who can humble themselves, admit their mistakes and errors turning to the truth, HalleluYah! But please be advised that there are those who do appear to be wise and know much about the Scriptures. However, they unwisely resist the truth about the Sacred Names. They will lose their part in the kingdom of heaven.

Herbert W. Armstrong taught that when the truth comes, we must recognize it, repent of our error and embrace it. I have shown you the truth, Mark. Herbert W. Armstrong admitted the truth about the name YAHWEH, but wouldn’t embrace it. Not long after he declared the truth about the name YAHWEH and subsequently refused to employ it, he died. Not only did he die, but the work that he had been utilized to raise fell into the hands of those whose purpose was to destroy the truths out of it. The first message I ever heard HWA’s successor give stunned me and caused me to declare to some of my confidants that that man was there to destroy the church.

It will be much better for you to repent, Mark, turn to the true names and walk in newness of life. Oh, I know that your peers will make it difficult on you, but you will find YAHWEH’S and YAHshua’s true people. In that, you will be greatly blessed.

Time and time again there are those who can’t comprehend and accept the Sacred Names. Many of them strike out at YAHWEH’S people using all kinds of excuses to forego using the Names. We are publishing two such articles in this newsletter along with my comments and responses to what has been said. Most of them are striking out because they feel threatened. Maybe some of them are striking out because they feel they have lost a loved one or loved ones or friends, etc.

Most are simply ignorant of the truth or just haven’t studied and thought it out very well.

The article above is in response to an article that appeared in the Royal Vision, a magazine published by the Philadelphia Church of God.

The Philadelphia Church of God is an off-shoot of the Worldwide Church of God, an organization that I am quite familiar with since I spent the better part of 18-1/2 years in that group.

It truly saddens me that these people can have so much knowledge and understanding, but can’t embrace the truth about the names.

The other article is in answer to a Pentecostal magazine that is published somewhere in Tennessee. It seems that the Pentecostal hierarchy utilizes the same type power tactics over their people that Worldwide did, so I can understand how the people feel threatened to begin accepting any doctrine that doesn’t belong to those groups. Scare tactics are utilized by the ministry to keep the sheep under control. Thus, truth isn’t truth until the leaders say it’s truth and lies can be held as truth as long as the leaders uphold them as truth. We hope you enjoy this issue.

Many of our people have been getting extremely close to Rabbinic Judaism. Some time ago, it was even on the mind of this author that it would be important to be able to explore the Jewish mind-set in order to see what they had to say concerning the Scriptures, since my own Christian background had been riddled with so much falsified information. Since that time, I have come in contact with various and sundry elements of the Jewish faith and have found that they, like Christianity, Islam and other faiths are generally divided concerning what they do believe. However, the modern-day Rabbinic Judaism which rejects the Savior of the New Testament Scriptures is a system that should be avoided, but one would also be surprised as to what many of the Messianic Rabbis believe concerning non-Hebrews.

When I began to read the above book, I logged onto the Internet, entered Rabbi Akiba and Rabbi Akiva into the search engine and found that there are myriad’s upon myriads of Jewish websites who religiously publish facts, statements, ideas, beliefs, etc. concerning this man. He is held in high esteem throughout much of Rabbinic Judaism, especially Orthodox Judaism, but also in many of the Messianic groups as well.

I want to publish many of the quotes and facts of this book so that you, our readers will be able to be forewarned and forearmed with the truth concerning this man and his false system. The excerpts are below. I may make comments and if I don’t have enough space in this newsletter, I will follow up in the next, YAHWEH willing.

"A full history of Akiba, based upon authentic sources, will probably never be written, although he, to a degree beyond any other, deserves to be called the father of rabbinic Judaism.’ Gershom Bader expresses the view of many when he says, ‘The highest place of honor among all of our national heroes undoubtedly belongs to Rabbi Akiba ben Joseph.’ Higher than David. Higher than Moses. Higher than Abraham.

Throughout the Talmud, Rabbi Akiba is given the highest parse. Rabbi Tarfon exclaimed, ‘Akiba! Whoever departs from thee is as though he departed from life!’…To say that ‘R. Akiba had twelve thousand [12 x 1000] pairs of disciples’ is to say that all who came after him were his disciples. They have all been taught by him. To say that ‘the world remained desolate until R. Akiba’ is to compare his creative work with that of God in the beginning. To say that his disciples ‘revived the Torah’ is to say that they breathed life back into God’s dying revelation.

The Talmud regards the death of Akiba as a loss almost beyond measure. ‘When R. Akiba died, the glory of the Torah ceased.’ ‘When R. Akiba died, the arms of the Torah ceased and the fountains of wisdom were stopped up.’… ‘Our Mishnah comes directly from Rabbi Meir, the Tosefta from R. Nehemiah, the Sifra from R. Judah, and the Sifre from R. Simon; but they all took Akiba for a model in their works and followed him. (Sanh. 86a)’ We are told that, ‘All are taught according to the views of R. Akiba." (pp. 24-25)

"In rabbinic Judaism, the Rabbis stand at the opposite pole. Here the Rabbis themselves, at least the leading scholars among them, are the judges, prophets, priests, redeemers, and lawgivers. They exercise authority over the king. They have ultimate authority, an authority which even extends to the world to come. Not even God can contradict them.

They are to be the most honored and the most obeyed. Failure to honor the Rabbis leads to excommunication from the community of Israel, destruction, and eternal punishment.

The Talmud speaks very clearly on rabbinic authority and position. For example, it speaks of a descending scale which determines the importance of different individuals in life or death situations, or in situations of lesser danger: ‘A scholar takes precedence over a king of Israel, for if a scholar dies there is none to replace him while if a king of Israel dies, all Israel are eligible for kingship. A king takes precedence over a High Priest...A High Priest takes precedence over a prophet…’A priest takes precedence over a Levite, A Levite over an Israelite, an Israelite over a bastard, a bastard over a nathin [a descendant of the Gibeonites,] a nathin over a proselyte, and a proselyte over an emancipated slave. This order of precedence applies only when all these were in other respects equal. If the bastard, however, was a scholar and the high priest an ignoramus, the learned bastard takes precedence over the ignorant High Priest.’...There is greater reward for one who feeds and supports a scholar than for one who houses the ark of the Tabernacle… ‘A scholar, if he has obtained his money by force from the debtor, is allowed to retain it; but an ordinary person is compelled by the court to return it.’ "The Rabbis have power to expropriate.’

That is so because, ‘The disciples of the sages increase peace throughout the world…’ ‘Thus, the masters of the Talmud were, so to speak, as essential to Israel as bread itself.’ They sustained life in this world, and their teachings provided the way of entry into the world to come."

"Because of the greater importance assigned to the lives of certain rabbis, protecting or prospering them could even guarantee an individual a place in the world to come. Such great rabbis could provide the guarantee themselves.

‘R. Gamaliel was condemned to death….Thereupon the officer went up secretly to him and said, ‘If I save you will you bring me into the world to come?’ He replies: ‘Yes.’ He then asked him, ‘Will you swear it unto me?’ And the latter took an oath. The officer then mounted the roof and threw himself down and died."...Has it not been taught: Why were the bazaars of Beth Hini destroyed? Because they based their actions upon Scripture, [disregarding Rabbinical law.]’...The preeminent role assigned to the Rabbis and to the system that surrounded and supported that role must be attributed to Akiba. Under Akiba’s leadership, the Rabbis became an elite revolutionary party which transformed itself from a group of unauthorized outsiders into the holders and/or guardians of all authority in heaven and earth." (pp. 30-32)

"In the Talmud, the Rabbis generally do not claim that their law is either a separate revelation given to Moses or that it is an interpretation of the written Torah. The Rabbis do claim, however, that they have the authority to forbid what the Torah permits, and to permit what the Torah forbids." (p. 51)

"The oral law is a fence around the written Torah…In sum, the Rabbis made themselves the creators and administrators of an Oral Law claimed to be given to Moses. The basis of their claim is a peculiar interpretation of the phrase al pe/yp l[, one which is contradicted by the grammar, words, and teaching of the Torah. Neither the Torah nor Tanakh as a whole provide any basis for the doctrine of an Oral Law...When then did the Rabbis begin to speak about an ‘Oral Law’? ’As has been noted, the picture of Moses’ oral formulation and transmission of traditions was certainly held by rabbinic masters from Judah b. Ilai onwards, hence ca. A.D. 150. So between ca. A.D. 100 and ca. 150 the process described in b. ‘Eruvin 54b probably took shape.’ ‘While the process may have begun with Joshua and Eliezer, it was probably ‘Aquiba who fully developed them, for it was he who set forth the foundations of the Mishnah, and it was in his time hat the institution of the Tanna, or reciter, is first referred to.’...When words have normal meaning and usage, there is no evidence in Tanakh of the existence of any rabbis or any oral law. The text actually precludes the possibility of there having been either authoritative rabbis or oral law throughout the time encompassed in the canon.

The Scriptures themselves denied to the Rabbis any legitimate authority or role. The Scriptures themselves were therefore the greatest barrier standing in the way of Rabbi Akiba and his desire to create a system of rabbinic authority." (pp. 33, 58, 60, 62)

"Who controls the past,’ ran the Party slogan, ‘controls the future: who controls the present controls the past.’…’What is the meaning of the verse, ‘This is the book of the generations of Adam?’ It is to intimate that the Holy One, blessed be He, showed him [Adam] every generation and its thinkers, every generation and its sages. When he came to the generation of Rabbi Akiba, he [Adam] rejoiced at his learning but was grieved at his death, and said: How weighty are Thy friends to me, O God.’

All of God’s work from Creation on is said to have reached its glory in Akiba. The descendants of Noah after the flood are said to have studied the rabbinic writings. ‘What does [the name] Babel connote? - R. Johanan answered: [That the study of] Scripture, Mishnah and Talmud was intermingled [therein].’

At the time of the Tower of Babel, the ‘Scripture’ could only have consisted of the first 10 chapters of Genesis. Nothing else had happened yet. Abraham was not born. Moses would not be born for another 600 years. It would be 700 years before the covenant of the Law was given at Sinai. It would be more than 2000 years before the first rabbi appeared.

What Mishnah and Talmud (I.e. Gemara) could there have been? If it was given at Sinai seven centuries later, how could it have been orally handed down backwards from Moses? Who among that generation which rebelled against God at Babel would have been studying it? The revisionist effort makes no sense in terms of the text, but I does serve to redirect Israel’s focus to rabbinic teaching….Just as the Rabbis revised the past, so they revised the future. ‘Even of more relevance to the Rabbis was the role of the Messiah as Pharisee par excellence. He would unravel their problems and interpret Biblical verses with clarity and precision.’ When Messiah came, he would come in their image and likeness. (pp. 73-75)

"As Talmudically revised, God Himself studies the teachings of the Rabbis, for sometimes they are wiser then He. He is ‘Ribbono shel Olam,’ the Master or Rabbi of the world. But as ‘Ribbono shel Olam,’ God is only one rabbi among many. In matters of halakha, He must follow the majority. He submits to them, and learns from them.

Each day he learns something new about the Law He has given. Apparently He is not omniscient.

The teaching that God was defiled is a monumental departure from ‘Holy, holy, holy is the Lord of hosts…’ In this revision, God Himself is no longer the standard of holiness. There is an external standard to which He must submit.

None of these claims for rabbinic authority can be seen in the text of Tanakh without the revisionist lens. Where even that is not sufficient, the rabbinic teaching becomes a tradition which is granted equal authority with Torah. Eve more, whereas Torah is limited to what the Rabbis say it says, their teaching has no limits. Talmudic revisionism is the means by which the Rabbis attain the legitimacy and authority that Scripture denies them, but that only Scripture can bestow….Another important aspect of Talmudic Revisionism is the consistent pattern of replacement and substitution. Rabbinic practices and decrees were substituted for Biblical ones. Usually these were related to the void created by the destruction of the Temple and the cessation of the sacrifices. Where would Israel find atonement?

The Rabbis presented numerous alternative means of atonement. Among them were circumcision, exile, death, burial, and giving to the Rabbis. Even hospitality was said to bring atonement. Looking to the description of the future Temple presented in Ezekiel, R. Johanan and Resh Lakish noted the proximity of the altar and the table. From this they concluded: ‘At the time when the Temple stood, the altar used to make atonement for a person; now a person’s table makes atonement for him.’

The most prominent substitutes were study and prayer. ‘R. Huna said: ‘If you study the laws about sacrifice, that is to me as if you had offered them.’ ‘Whoever occupies himself with the study of the torah needs no burnt offering nor sin-offering, no meal offering nor guilt offering.

Reading the scriptures on sacrifices was equivalent to offering the sacrifices...The Rabbinic house of study became a substitute for the Temple. For this form of atonement, the Rabbis replaced the priests." (pp. 77-79)

"Only the leading rabbis could qualify to serve on the Sanhedrin. ‘R. Johanan said: None are to be appointed members of the Sanhedrin, but men of stature, wisdom, good appearance, mature age, with a knowledge of sorcery, and who are conversant with all the seventy languages of mankind, in order that the court should have no need of an interpreter. Rab Judah said in Rab’s name: None is to be given a seat on the Sanhedrin unless he is able to prove the cleanness of a reptile from Biblical texts.’

To qualify for the Sanhedrin, a rabbi had to be, literally, a ‘master of sorcery’. In other words, he had to e a master of what the Torah expressly forbids: ‘Let no one be found among you who…practices divination or sorcery, interprets omens, engages in witchcraft, or casts spells, or who is a medium or spiritist or who consults the dead. Anyone who does these thins is detestable to the LORD, and because of these detestable practices the LORD your God will drive out those nations before you.’

To qualify for the Sanhedrin, a rabbi also had to be able to prove from the Bible that reptiles—which the Bible explicitly declares to be unclean—are clean. In other words, he had to be able to use the Scriptures to prove the exact opposite of what they actually teach.

The entire rabbinic system was based upon the authority of the Rabbis to declare that ‘right is left and left is right." (p. 127)

"It would have been possible for Akiba to anoint ben Kosiba as king without proclaiming him the Messiah. But, had he done that, the Talmidei Yeshua (Disciples of YAHshua) could still have fought in the war. Once Akiba declared ben Kosiba the Messiah, the Talmidei Yeshua had to withdraw from the battle. For them, it would have been apostasy to fight under the banner of the false Messiah. Such a war would be doomed to destruction...There are four practical consequences of Akiba’s Messianic proclamation. 1. It made the war (without the approval of the Sanhedrin) in which everyone was required to fight. 2. It made it impossible for the Talmidei Yeshua to fight in the commanded war. 3. It made the Talmidei Yeshua guilty of a capital crime. 4. It fully empowered the Sanhedrin to put them to death without public opposition.

Could these have been unintended, unexpetced, fortuitous results for R. Akiba? No. These were the obvious, foreseeable effects of his decision...He consciously sought to eliminate the non-rabbinic option presented by the Talmidei Yeshua. There were no other reasons for proclaiming Simeon ben Kosiba the Messiah. Even under the name Bar Kokhba, he did not qualify." (pp.173-174)

"The Rabbis believed that their laws brought both temporal and eternal life to themselves, their followers, and all Israel. Consequently, they were not reluctant to prescribe death for a rebellious elder, a deceiver, or anyone who might draw others away from rabbinic teaching and authority.

At the same time that the Rabbis were establishing themselves, increasing numbers of Jews were believing the message of the Talmidei Yeshua. The confrontation, as described in both rabbinic and early Christian sources, was a bitter one.

The Rabbis decreed that the Talmidei Yeshua should be ostracized from public life. Their legal rights were taken away. Their books were burned. They were turned over to the Roman authorities to be put to death. It was lawful to cast them into a pit to die. As Rabbi Akiba emphasized, ‘one is deserving of death for disobeying the rulings of the Sages.’...Would Bar Kokhba have commanded the Talmidei Yeshua to deny Yeshua as the Messiah? Of course. Would Akiba have commanded them to do so? No question. Would Akiba and Bar Kokhba have put them to death if they refused? There is no basis for any doubt." (pp. 175-176)

Akiba taught that the Law was not in heaven, but entrusted to the Rabbis. Even if God contradicted from heaven, Akiba maintained that God was in error. The Rabbis had the authority to decide what was right and what was wrong, what was true and what was false." (p. 192)

I have given you a great deal of excerpts out of this very important book, and I hope that you can see how grossly errant Rabbinic Judaism is. While the Rabbis didn’t proclaim themselves to be Pharisees, their own works admit that the Pharisees were the forerunners to their system. However, we should especially be able to tie these Rabbinical scholars with the "SCRIBES" since they were the ones who were able to read and write not only in YAHshua’s and His disciple’s day, but in the days of Israel. This would make them the learned, the scholars, the scribes. In the New Testament Scriptures, the Pharisees and scribes are certainly linked as close companions.

Concerning the Scribes and Pharisees, YAHshua said, "But all their works they do for to be seen of men: they make broad their phylacteries, and enlarge the borders of their garments, and love the uppermost rooms at feasts, and the chief seats in the synagogues, and greetings in the markets, and to be called of men, Rabbi, Rabbi.

But be not ye called Rabbi: for One is your Master, even the Messiah; and all ye are brethren," Mt. 23:5-8.

It is very distressing that there are increasingly those in the faith who seek to be addressed as "Rabbi" which is contrary to the very words of the Messiah. However, the modern-day Rabbis, following the example of their first and chief master Rabbi Akiba, are able to manipulate the Scriptures and events to their own taste and thus, justify utilizing this very term for themselves and others are eagerly following their example.

Many are also skillful at justifying the use of the Kabbalah and Talmud in their teachings.

There are many, many other things that we could comment upon in this book, but space limits us from being able to do so. We would suggest that you purchase a copy of this book and read and study it for yourselves. Especially compare it to the Scriptures.

Once again, the name of the book is "Rabbi Akiba’s Messiah" by Daniel Gruber. You may obtain a copy by writing to YAHWEH’S Assembly in Messiah, 401 N. Roby Farm Rd., Rocheport, MO 65278. The current price is $12.80. You might include $3.00 to $5.00 for shipping and handling.

On Nov. 28th—29th Elder Jerry and Sister Frances Healan were able to travel to Beeville, Texas in order for Elder Healan to visit with the men at the McConnell Unit. Attempts had also been made to try to get into the Stevenson Unit at Cuero, but they weren’t able to accommodate us at this time.

The meeting at Beeville took place from 8:00 a.m.—10:00 a.m. It was a very spirited and fruitful meeting. Elder Healan spoke on the Iron Furnace, a message that is currently being made into an article.

Following the message, five (5) men were baptized into the saving name of YAHshua. They were Mark Perez, Oziel Cantu, Joseph Mereno, Garland Epting and William Dudrow.

Following the meeting, the Healans left for New Braunfels in order to meet with the brethren from the San Antonio, New Braunfels area. Again, we had a very spirited and fruitful meeting and message. Elder Healan spoke on YAHWEH’S Heavenly Theme of Salvation, another message that will soon be converted into article form.

Following the message, we proceed to a creek where Brother Roosevelt Edwards was baptized. The temperature was quite cool and the water was also cold but the spirits of the brethren were warm. We returned to the meeting hall, dried ourselves, donned dry clothing and then we had the laying on of hands.

Many of us then retired to the home of Jesse and Marilyn Vicknair for more fellowship, food, etc. It was so uplifting to be able to meet with all of these brethren. We pray that YAHWEH will continue to bless them and we truly look forward to more fellowship meetings in the future.

We are happy to report that Judy Williams and Alvin Pyle have exchanged nuptial vows. They were married on Oct. 19, 2003.

Judy has been living in Paris, Texas where she manages the Spanish Oaks apartment complex. She will be retiring in March. She and Alvin will be residing at Alvin’s home in Powderly, Texas.

Judy was widowed by the death of her first husband Howard in June of 2001.

Judy has two sons, Mike and Steve. Mike and wife Adelia have provided her with two grandchildren Rachel and Eric. They reside in Detroit, Texas.

Congratulations and may YAHWEH shower His blessings upon Alvin’s and Judy’s marriage and upon the family.

In our last newsletter under the prison ministry section, we posted Michael Fegans’ number as #79087. His name and number are Michael Fegans #79097. His address is P. O. Box 600 Grady, AR 71644-0600.

PRAY FOR THEM

Prayers have been specifically solicited for the following: Calvin Amos & Family, Sharon Amos, Gina Baez, Leah Baird, Bruce Balfour, Mona Baylon & Family, Sheleah Bradley, Nadine Brown, Evelyn Cooper, John I. Cox, Serena Cusson, Elaine Daniel, Dana Davis, Ennis Dewayne Davis, Fern Davisson, John & Loretta Dellipizzi, Emaleigh DeVaney, Michael J. and Marie Fegans and family, Alice Findling, Brad & Christine Folford, Stephen Farrell, Lisa Haufler, Frances Healan, James Hobson & Mother, Elder G. D. U. Intong & Family, Paul and Mary "Jolene" King, Elder George & Clara Kinney, Wendy Kinney, Evelyn Kacos, Dirk R. Lemcke, Odie & Penny Lohman’s Grandson, Norene Looker, Pete Markunas, George McKenzie Jr., Rodney Miles, Marjorie L. Moore, Ben Nelms, Margaret Nogales & Family, Jesus Oñate, George Paña & Family, Danny Perkins, Mona Perry, Jim Thompson, Floy Rynard, Mary Schimke, Terry & Jennifer Walburn, Mary Warren, Harold & Gayle Watkins, Ethel Watson, Farris Wilks, Judy Williams, Mike & Adelia Williams family, and Stephen Yeakel.

Please remember these brethren in your daily prayers, lifting their names before YAHWEH’S throne of grace and mercy for the intervention that is needed in each case.

While we do not know the specifics in each and every case, there are some whose condition we do know of and would like to enlist the specifics of their problems here so that your prayers for them can be broken down a little smaller and more specifically. Pete Markunas suffers from diabetic neuropathy and fibromyalgia. Evelyn Kacos suffers from diabetic neuropathy and has recently broken a foot. Michael Fegans is in prison and is suffering persecution for seeking to walk in the strait and narrow way. Marie Fegans is suffering from Hepatitis. Odie & Penny Lohman’s Grandson (7 yrs. Old) was hit by a golf cart, lost use of his arms.

Back to the top of the page

Back to YEA Newsletter Index

Back to YEA Homepage at AOL

Back to YEA Homepage at COX

Hits on this page since 1/22/04