Why “Christ” and not “Messiah”?

Similar to the foregoing component of Sun-worship which had been adopted into the Church, we have yet another proof of the adoption of a pagan word or name, although less convincing of its absolute solar origin. However, we can clearly see that, with the Greeks using both the Greek words Messias (a transliteration) and Christos (a translation) for the Hebrew Mashiach (Anointed), the word Christos was far more acceptable to the pagans who were worshipping Chreston, Chrestos, and perhaps also those worshipping Krista. But we will come to that later.

The Hebrew word Mashiach has been translated in the Old Testament of the King James Version as “Anointed” in most places, but as “Messiah” in two places, namely Dan 9:25 and 26. This word is a title, although it was used as an appellative (name) later on. Thus, this word was faithfully translated as “Anointed” in the Old Testament and only in Dan 9:25 and 26 was its Hebrew character retained in the transliterated “Messiah.”

Likewise, we find that the Greeks also admitted their transliterated form Messias in the Greek New Testament in John 1:41 and John 4:25. Why then did they introduce or use the Greek word Christos in the rest of the Greek New Testament? Even if they had preferred Christos to Messias, why did our translators transliterate the word as “Christ”? Why did they not transliterate the word , as was done in Dan 9:25 and 26, as “Messiah,” seeing that the Greeks had also accepted their transliteration of the word, namely Messias in John 1:41 and John 4:25?

Ferrar Fenton’s translation, The Complete Bible in Modern English, uses “Messiah” instead of “Christ” in most places where the word is used alone, except when used as the combination “Jesus Christ.” In a similar way the New English Bible has used “Messiah” in its New Testament in many places. The Good News Bible has restored the word “Messiah” in no less than 70 places in its New Testament. The New International Version gives the alternative “Messiah” in almost all places, by means of a footnote. Dr Bullinger in The Companion Bible, appendix 98 IX, says, “Hense, the Noun [Christos] is used of and for the Messiah, and in the Gospels should always be translated ‘Messiah’.” Also, Benjamin Wilson in his Emphatic Diaglott has restored the words “Anointed” and “Messiah” in many places.

Our Saviour Himself said in John 4:22, “For salvation is from the Jews” (NASB). Not only was our Messiah born from a Hebrew maiden, but also all of His Saving Message, the teachings, “the root and fatness” (Romans 11:17), the Glad Tidings, “spiritual things” (Romans 15:27), “the citizenship of Israel” (Ephesians  2:12), “covenants of promise” (Ephesians 2:12), “the spiritual blessings” (Romans 15:27, NIV and TEV) – are all from the Jews! The Good News Bible, in its rendering of Romans 9:4-5 added the word “True” to the word “Worship” to make it clearer. Speaking of literal Israel, it reads, “They are Elohim’s people; He made them His sons and revealed His esteem to them; He made His covenants with them and gave them the Law; they have the True Worship; they have received Elohim’s promises; they are descended from the famous Hebrew ancestors; and Messiah, as a human Being, belongs to the race.” Read this passage in the NIV and NEB too.

These New Testament texts irrefutably prove the Jewishness of the Messianic Belief and the Jewishness of our Messiah. That well-known scholar of the Old Testament, as well as the New Testament, Prof Julius Wellhausen, who in all his works expressed his hatred towards Pharisaical Judaism, nevertheless wrote the following bold words, “Jesus… was a Jew. He proclaimed no new faith, but He taught that the Will of God must be done. The Will of God stands for Him, as for the Jews, in the Law, and in the other holy Scriptures that are classed with it.”

Our Saviour could not have been known as Christos among His people. His title was known as Mashiach in Hebrew, and Mesiha in Aramaic – to those who accepted Him as such (Matthew 16:16, John 6:69 etc). This title is easily transliterated as “Messiah,” and is generally accepted, and has been accepted, just like the Greek Messias. Why then have they not persisted with it? Even if they wanted to translate it, why have they not translated it as “Anointed,” as was done in the English translation of the King James Version’s Old Testament?

Our research into this matter has produced some revealing similarities between Christos and certain pagan names and titles. F.D. Gearly, writing in The Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible, vol 1,pp 571-572, says, “the word Christos… was easily confused with the common Greek proper name Chrestos, meaning ‘good’.” He also quotes a French theological dictionary which says, “It is absolutely beyond doubt that Christus and Chrestus, Christiani and Chrestiani, were used indifferently by the profane and Christian authors of the first two centuries of our era.” He continues, “in Greek, ‘e’ and ‘i’ were similarly pronounced and often confused, the original spelling of the word could be determined only if we could fix its provenance [origin]… The problem is further complicated by the fact that the word Christianos is a Latinism… and was contributed neither by Jews nor by the Christians themselves.” He quotes various scholars to support his proposition that the word Christianos was introduced from one of three origins: (a) The Roman police (b) The Roman populace (c) Unspecified pagan providence [origin].

Gearly then proceeds, “The three occurrences of ‘Christian’ in the NT suggests that the term was at this time primarily used as a pagan designation. Its infrequent use in the NT indicates not so much lateness of origin as pagan provenance [origin].”

This almost sensational admission as to the confusion and uncertainty between Christos and Chrestos, Christus and Chrestus, Christiani and Chrestiani, as well as by the Early Fathers: Justin Martyr, Tertullian, Lactantius and others.

This confusion and uncertainty can only encourage and exhort us to return to the only Source of Truth, the Word, the Scriptures, before it was translated into the languages of the pagans. Only then can we find peace in the truth of our Saviour being the Messiah, the Anointed, the One promised to Israel.

Who was this Chrestos or Chreston with which Christos became confused with?

we have already seen that Chrestos was a common Greek proper name, meaning “good.” Further, we see in Pauly-Wissowa, Realencyclopaedie, under “Chrestos,” that the inscription Chrestos is to be seen on a Mithras relief in the Vatican. We also read in J.M. Robertson, Christianity and Mythology, pg 331, that Osiris, the Sun-deity of Egypt, was reverenced as Chrestos. We also read of the heretic Gnostics who used the name Chreistos.

The confusion, and syncretism, is further evidenced by the oldest Christian building known, the Synagogue of the Marcionites on Mt. Hermon, built in the 3^rd century, where the Messiah’s title or appellation is spelt Chrestos. Justin Martyr (about 150 C.E.) said that Christians were Chrestoi or “good.” Tertullian and Lactantius inform us that “the common people usually called Christ Chrestos.” Clement of Alexandria, in the same age, said, “all who believe in Christ are called Chrestoi, that is ‘good men.’”

The word Christos could even have been more acceptable to the Krishna-worshippers, because the name of Krishna was pronounced, and still is to the present day, as Krista, in many parts of India. Thus, we can readily see that the word Christos was easier to convert the pagans with, than with the word “Messiah,” especially because of the anti-Judaism that prevailed among the pagans.

The syncretism between Christos and Chrestos (the Sun-deity Osiris), is further elucidated by the fact of Emperor Hadrian’s report, who wrote, “There are there (in Egypt) Christians who worship Serapis; and devoted to Serapis, are those who call themselves ‘Bishops of Christ’.” Serapis was another Sun-deity who superseded Osiris in Alexandria.

Once again, we must not falter nor stumble over this confusion among the Gentiles. Rather, we must seek the truth, primarily from the faithfully preserved Old Testament Scriptures – see 2 Tim 3:16, John 17:17, Psalm 119:105, Isaiah 40:8. We must worship the Father in Spirit and in Truth, as well as His Son, Yehoshua the Messiah, who is sitting at His right hand. We do accept the entire message of the New Testament, but we truly desire to return to the original Messianic Scriptures, as far back as we possibly can.

As previously mentioned, the Greeks changed Ěliyahu (Elijah) into Helias in the Greek New Testament, and the Helios-worshipers must have been overjoyed because of their Sun-deity being assimilated to the Ěliyahu (Elijah) of the Scriptures. To avoid the confusion between Helias and Helios, we should abide by the Hebrew “Ěliyahu (Elijah).” Likewise, to avoid confusion between Christos and Chrestos, we should abide by the word Messiah, or Anointed – remembering that Osiris the Sun-deity, amongst others, was called Chrestos. Mithras too, was possibly called Chrestos (see above).

The meaning of Torah and Sin

(This is a short article that complements the previous article. It shows us that the opposite of Torah is sin)

The word torah is derived from the word yarah which means according to the: ‘Analytical Hebrew and Chaldee Lexicon’ (In the form yeereh hreyyi)))) 1) To throw, cast, to shoot as an arrow. 2) To cast, lay a foundation. 3) To sprinkle, to water. In the form horah hr@wOh – 1) To throw, cast, to shoot as arrows; 2) To put forth, as a finger, to point out, show; 3) To teach, instruct; with the acc. of the thing.)

 And according to the Strong’s Concordance: (A primitive root; properly to flow as water (that is, to rain); transitively to lay or throw (especially an arrow, that is, to shoot); figuratively to point out (as if by aiming the finger), to teach: (+) archer, cast, direct, inform, instruct, lay, shew, shoot, teach (-er, -ing), through.)

**           An interesting observation is the first 2 time that the word Torah is mentioned in the scriptures. First in Gen 26:5 “...because Avraham obeyed My voice and guarded My Charge: My commands, My laws, and My Torot¹ Footnote: ¹Torot - plural of Torah.”

            The second is Ex 12:49 “There is one Torah for the native-born and for the stranger who sojourns among you.”

So we can safely deduce that the word Torah means “to shoot straight as an arrow, in other words to hit the mark.”

Let’s look at the meaning of the word chatat ‘Sin’.          

The word is derived from chata  af2j2

According to the ‘Analytical Hebrew and Chaldee Lexicon’:-

in the form yecheta af2jeyE : 1) To miss a scope or aim. 2) To miss ones step, i.e. to stumble, fall. 3) to sin.

And according to the Strong’s Concordance: an offence (sometimes habitual sinfulness), and its penalty, occasion, sacrifice, or expiation; also (concretely) an offender: - punishment (of sin), purifying (-fication for sin), sin (-ner, offering).

So we can see that to sin means to miss the mark and to do Torah means to hit the mark.

To do Torah OR to do chatat?

That is the question.

                                                

There are only two Laws.

(I truly apologize for another long article, I did not intend to make it so long but as I started writing it, I realized that there was so much information on the subject. There is a lot more that I did not put in this article as there is just too much.)

Probably the biggest delusion of the Christian faith is that the Law of YHWH has been done away with or abolished by the death and resurrection of the Messiah. The Church relies almost only upon the teachings of Paul to justify this false doctrine. Does Paul have the authority to change or abolish the Word of YHWH? Did Paul teach against the Torah of YHWH or that we should not adhere to it? No, not at all, In fact, he taught us to uphold the Torah (Law) of YHWH.

Peter told us that the writings of Paul were hard to understand and that those who were untaught and unstable twist what is said in Paul’s letters to their own destruction (2 Peter 3:15-16). Paul is clearly talking of two laws at times. The Christian faith does not make any differentiation between the two, thus creating many false doctrines.

There are only two laws in this world. The one is an everlasting Law that cannot change or be done away with. The other law has been abolished through the death and resurrection of the Mashiyach. Every person on this earth is either doing one or the other, you cannot keep both or not do either, it is impossible. The one law binds and the other sets free.

Let us have a look at which one will never pass away. “For truly, I say to you, till the heaven and the earth pass away, one jot or one tittle shall by no means pass from the Torah till all be done” (Mat 5:18). Here the Messiah Himself is saying that the Torah of YHWH has not passed away, not even until the heaven and the earth pass away. So it is very clear to see that Y’shua did not do away or destroy the Torah of YHWH! “The heaven and the earth shall pass away, but My words shall by no means pass away” (Mat 24:35)

It is also very clearly written that we are to adhere to the Torah (Law) of YHWH, “Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Master, Master,’ shall enter into the reign of the heavens, but he who is doing the desire of My Father in the heavens.  Many shall say to Me in that day, ‘Master, Master, have we not prophesied in Your Name, and cast out demons in Your Name, and done many mighty works in Your Name?’ And then I shall declare to them, ‘I never knew you, depart from Me, you who work lawlessness!’” (Mat 7:21-23) lawlessness = without the “law” – those who do not do the Torah of YHWH.

“and the enemy who sowed them is the devil. And the harvest is the end of the age, and the reapers are the messengers. As the darnel, then, is gathered and burned in the fire, so it shall be at the end of this age. The Son of Adam shall send out His messengers, and they shall gather out of His reign (The English translations do not have the word “reign”, but “kingdom” which has been taught to mean the “kingdom of Jesus") all the stumbling-blocks, and those doing lawlessness, and shall throw them into the furnace of fire – there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth” (Mat 13:39-42).

 “And because of the increase in lawlessness, the love of many shall become cold” (Mat 24:12).

“Blessed are those whose lawlessness’s are forgiven, and whose sins are covered” (Rom 4:7). This last verse once again shows us that sin is lawlessness. Only those who’s lawlessness has been forgiven are blessed. One cannot be forgiven if that person continues in lawlessness. Repentance is a turning away from sin or lawlessness and not returning to it. Only a dog returns to its own vomit (Prov 26:11)

“Do not become unevenly yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership have righteousness and lawlessness? And what fellowship has light with darkness?” (2 Cor 6:14). Now this verse makes it very clear that those who are lawless are unbelievers and are referred to as darkness. The Torah is light and those who walk in the Torah of YHWH also walk in light. “Let no one deceive you in any way, because the falling away is to come first, and the man of lawlessness is to be revealed, the son of destruction. The coming of the lawless one is according to the working of Satan, with all power and signs and wonders of falsehood” (2 Thes 2:3,9). Once again, this verse speaks of the Anti Messiah as being the man of lawlessness which is according to the working of Satan.

Yes you must have guessed by now what the other law is. It is the law of sin, or better known as lawlessness. Y’hoshua set us free from this law when he died on the torture stake and rose again on the third day. Only by following after YHWH and His Son can we be set free from the law of sin. We are to adhere to the Law of YHWH in order to be set free from the law of sin as sin is lawlessness, “Everyone doing sin also does lawlessness, and sin is lawlessness” (1 John 3:4).

“For the saving Gift of Elohim has appeared to all men, instructing us to renounce wickedness and worldly lusts, and to live sensibly, righteously, and reverently in the present age, looking for the blessed expectation and esteemed appearance of the great Elohim and our Saviour יהושע (Y’hoshua) Messiah, who gave Himself for us, to redeem us from all lawlessness and to cleanse for Himself a people, His own possession, ardent for good works” (Tit 2:11-14). This verse sums up what is known as the Good News (Gospel) of Y’hoshua the Messiah. He came to redeem us from ALL lawlessness so that we can turn away from worldly lusts and wickedness and live righteously to be His own possession, a clean people. We are also to beware and watch so that we do not be led away from the truth by the delusion of the lawless people who twist the writings of Paul and other Scripture too:  “You, then, beloved ones, being forewarned, watch, lest you also fall from your own steadfastness, being led away with the delusion of the lawless” (2 Peter 3:17) “For as many as have sinned without law shall also perish without law: and as many as have sinned in the law shall be judged by the law; For not the hearers of the law are just before Elohim, but the doers of the law shall be justified” (Rom 2:12-13). Only the doers of the Torah will be justified? We are not justified by the Torah, but only those that do the Torah can be justified.

“Do we then nullify the Torah through the belief? Let it not be! On the contrary, we establish the Torah” (Rom 3:31)

“Blessed are those doing His Commands, so that the authority shall be theirs unto the tree of life, and to enter through the gates into the city” (Rev 22:14). Only those who do the Torah of YHWH may enter into the city through the gates and will have access to the tree of life. The Torah truly does set us free. “For the Torah of the Spirit of the life in Messiah יהושע (Y’hoshua) has set me free from the law of sin and of death” (Rom 8:2).

“And the dragon was enraged with the woman, and he went to fight with the remnant of her seed, those guarding the commands of Elohim and possessing the witness of  יהושע (Y’hoshua) Messiah” (Rev 12:17)

“Here is the endurance of the set-apart ones, here are those guarding the commands of Elohim and the belief of יהושע (Y’hoshua)” (Rev 14:12)

Does Paul teach us that we don’t have to keep the Torah of YHWH, or that we must keep it? “Therefore, my brethren, you also were made to die to the Torah through the body of Mashiyach, so that you might be joined to another, to Him who was raised from the dead, in order that we might bear fruit for Elohim, for while we were in the flesh, the sinful passions, which were aroused by the Torah, were at work in the members of our body to bear fruit for death. But now we have been released from the Torah, for we died with Mashiyach, and we are no longer captive to its power. Now we can really serve Elohim, not in the old way by obeying the letter of the Torah, but in the new way, by the Spirit” (Romans 7:4-6)

The heart of this passage is the phrase, “For while we were in the flesh, the sinful passions, which were aroused by the Torah, were at work in the members of our body to bear fruit for death.” Sinful passions have always been aroused by Torah. In the Garden of Eden, Adam and Chawwah came to know sin only when YHWH said “thou shalt not eat” and then after they sinned they tried to cover up their nakedness. In addition the “new way, by the Spirit” is really the old way, of Abraham (Romans 4:2-16), but it became new because by Y’hoshua’s time the “conventional wisdom” of the Pharisees was anything but wise! The consistent point of Rav Shaul, though, is that Torah is the way sin is defined, and yet, just a few lines later he makes it clear that:

“As a result, Torah is Set Apart; and the Commandment is Set Apart, and righteous and good” (Romans 7:12)

Notice that the “old way” was the Pharisees tradition of obeying the “letter of the Torah,” but this is most certainly not an indictment against Torah! Y’hoshua taught that Torah is good, but we are instructed to look at the intent, heart and Spirit of Torah:

“Woe to you, teachers of the Torah and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You give a tenth of your spices – mint, dill and cumin. But you have neglected the more important matters of the Torah – justice, mercy, and faithfulness. You should have practiced the latter, without neglecting the former” (Matthew 23:23)

“Yet a time is coming, and now has come, when the true worshippers will worship the Father in spirit and in truth, for they are the kind of worshippers the Father seeks. Elohim is Spirit, and His worshippers must worship Him in spirit and in truth” (Yehochanan (John) 4:23-24)

Now let us look at the other passage where “died to the Torah” appears:

“For when I tried to keep the Torah, I realized I could never earn Elohim’s approval. So I died to the Torah so that I might live for Elohim. I have been nailed to the stake with Mashiyach” (Galatians 2:19)

Shaul realized that he had fallen into the same trap that he now accuses other religious authorities of being in. He gives more details on the method behind that trap here:

“For you have heard of my former way of life in Judaism… I was advancing in Judaism beyond the Jews of my own age and was extremely zealous for the traditions of my fathers” (Galatians 1:13-14)

Notice Rav Shaul does not mention Torah here, but “the traditions of my fathers” (i.e., the fences built by men around the Torah). Here the ritual became so important that it gave birth to regulations that became erroneously identified as sanctification. Instead, the true justification is in the next line:

“But when Elohim, who set me apart from birth and called me to His favor (grace), was pleased to reveal His Son to me so that I might preach Him among the Gentiles, I did not consult any man” (Galatians 1:12-16)

Once again, it is always the faith behind the rituals that really counts.

Here is some more passages that shows that Paul taught us to live by the Torah of YHWH, “For sin shall not rule over you, for you are not under the law but under favour. What then? Shall we sin because we are not under Torah but under favour? Let it not be! Do you not know that to whom you present yourselves servants for obedience, you are servants of the one whom you obey, whether of sin to death, or of obedience to righteousness?” (Rom 6:14-16).

“So that the Torah truly is set-apart, and the command set-apart, and righteous, and good” (Rom 7:12)

If the Law of YHWH has been "nailed to the cross," why does YHWH tell us clearly that when the Mashiyach returns to this Earth to rule, that SAME law will go forth to the rest of the world?

“And many peoples shall come and say, “Come, and let us go up to the mountain of יהוה (YHWH), to the House of the Elohim of Ya’aqob, and let Him teach us His ways, and let us walk in His paths, for out of Tsiyon comes forth the Torah, and the Word of יהוה (YHWH) from Yerushalayim.” (Isa 2:3)

“And many nations shall come and say, “Come, and let us go up to the mountain of יהוה (YHWH), to the House of the Elohim of Ya’aqob, and let Him teach us His ways, and let us walk in His paths. For out of Tsiyon comes forth the Torah, and the word of יהוה (YHWH) from Yerushalayim.” (Mic 4:2)

YHWH repeats this twice by two different people for us and tells us that His Set-Apart Law, which is active today, will continue after Y’hoshua returns, and will go out and be the rule by which the nations are judged and corrected. Today, we would do well to realize that if Y’hoshua’s death truly "did away with YHWH's Laws," then why would they be back, and going out to the physical people and nations after Y’hoshua's return?

YHWH's Law is a reflection of His mind and character, as it is of Mashiyach. We are to be conformed, BY obeying YHWH's LAW, and with YHWH's spirit working in us, into the very image and character of Y’hoshua. The Law of YHWH stands now and will abide forever (in reflection of action and thought) because YHWH abides forever, and YHWH's law simply reflects His mind!

Y’hoshua the Messiah came to be an example for us to live. We are to walk as He walked. Y’hoshua kept the Torah of YHWH perfectly. Should we then also keep the Torah of YHWH? “For to this you were called, because Messiah also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that you should follow His steps” (1 Peter 2:21). 

“He who possesses My commands and guards them, it is he who loves Me. And he who loves Me shall be loved by My Father, and I shall love him and manifest Myself to him” (John 14:21)

If you do not live according to the Torah of YHWH, then you are living according to the law of sin.

So, which Law do you adhere to? Is it the Law of YHWH unto righteousness, or is it the law of sin that leads to destruction?

I will leave you with a part of this beautiful psalm:

“But the kindness of  יהוה (YHWH) Is from everlasting to everlasting Upon those who fear Him, And His righteousness to children’s children, To those who guard His covenant, And to those who remember His orders to do them. יהוה (YHWH) has established His throne in the heavens, And His reign shall rule over all. Bless יהוה, you His messengers, Mighty in power, who do His Word, Listening to the voice of His Word. Bless יהוה (YHWH), all you His hosts, You His servants, who do His pleasure. Bless יהוה (YHWH), all His works, In all places of His rule. Bless  (YHWH) יהוה, O my being!” (Psalm 103:17-22)

Word Survey: Jesus

There is not a single authoritative reference source which gives the name Jesus or Iesous as the original name of our Saviour! All of them admit that the original form of the Name was Jehoshua or Yehoshua. Why then, was it changed from Yehoshua to Jesus?

Many Hebrew names of the Old Testament prophets have been “Hellenized” when these names were rewritten in the Greek New Testament. Thus, Yesha'Yahu (Isaiah) became Isaias, Elisha became Elissaios or Elisseus (Eliseus), and Ěliyahu (Elijah) became Helias in the Greek New Testament. The King James Version has retained some of these Hellenized names. Since the King James Version was published, the newer English versions have ignored these Hellenized names of the Greek New Testament, and have preferred, quite correctly, to render them as they are found in the Hebrew Old Testament, namely: Yesha'Yahu (Isaiah), Elisha and Ěliyahu (Elijah).

Incidentally, the similarity between the Hellenized Helias (instead of Ěliyahu) and the Greek Sun-deity Helios, gave rise to the well-known assimilation of these two by the Church. Dr. A.B. Cook, in his book, Zeus -- A Study in Ancient Religion, Vol. I, pp. 178-179, elaborates on this, quoting the comments of a 5^th century Christian poet and others, on this. Imagine it, Ěliyahu identified with Helios, the Greek Sun-deity!

Returning to our discussion on the reluctance of the translators to persist with all of the Hellenized name in the Greek of the New Testament, one could very well ask: but why did they persist with the Hellenized Iesous of our Saviour’s Name, and its further Latinized form Iesus? It is accepted by all, that our Saviour’s Hebrew Name was Yehoshua. So why did the translators of the Scriptures not retain or restore it, as they did with the names of the Hebrew prophets?

It is generally agreed that our Saviour’s Name is identical (or very similar) to that of the successor to Moses, Joshua. But “Joshua” was not the name of the man who led Israel into the Promised Land. The Greeks substituted the Old Testament “Yehoshua” with Iesous, the same word they used for our Saviour in the New Testament. Subsequently the Latins came and substituted it with Josue (Iosue) in the Old Testament (which became Josua in German and Joshua in English), but used Iesus in the New Testament.

In the Hebrew Scriptures we do not find the word “Joshua.” In every place it is written: Yehoshua. However, after the Babylonian captivity we find the shortened form “Yeshua” in a few places – shortened, because they then omitted the second and third letters, namely: WH. Everyone who sees the names Yehoshua and Iesous will agree there is no resemblance between the names Yehoshua and Iesous or Jesus.

Before we continue with our study of the words Iesous and Iesus, we would like to point out that we have been led to believe that our Saviour’s correct Name is: Yehoshua (It is actually Yahu-shua, but in a conjunction word, the suffix (begining) always shortens its syllables, thus we get “Yehoshua) . Our Saviour said in John 5:43, “I have come in My Father’s Name.” Again, in John 17:11 He prayed to His Father, “Keep them through Your Name which You have given Me” – according to the Nestle-Aland Greek New Testament, the United Bible Societies’ Third Edition, and the Majority Text. Therefore, in John 17:11 our Saviour states That His Father’s Name had been given to him. Again he repeats this irrefutable fact in the next verse, John 17:12, “in your Name which You gave Me. And I guarded them (or it).” Read John 17:11-12 in any of the modern English versions.

So, we have our Saviour’s clear words, in three texts, that His Father’s Name was given to Him. Paul also testified to this in Eph 3:14-15 as well as in Phil 2:9. What then is His Father’s Name? Although most scholars accept YHWH as being “Yahweh,” and many still cling to the older form “Yehowah” (or Jehovah) (Yehowah means: Yah is my calamity or my destruction), we are convinced that the correct form is Yahueh (which is 100% provable)

Two factors contributed greatly to the substitution and distortion of our Saviour’s Name. The first was the un-Scriptural superstitious teaching of the Jews that the Father’s Name is not to be uttered, that it is ineffable, that others will profane it when they use it, and that the Name must be “disguised” outside of the temple of Jerusalem.

Because of the Father’s Name being in His Son’s Name, this same disastrous suppression of the Name resulted in them (? The Greeks) giving a Hellenized, in fact a surrogate name for our Saviour. He did warn us in John 5:43, “I have come in My Father’s Name… if another comes in his own name, him you will receive.”

The second factor was the strong anti-Judaism that prevailed amongst the Gentiles, as we have already pointed out. The Gentiles wanted a saviour, but not a Jewish one. They loathed the Jews, they even loathed the Elohim of the Old Testament. Thus, a Hellenized saviour was preferred. The Hellenized theological school at Alexandria, led by the syncretizing, allegorizing, philosophying, Gnostic-indoctrinated Clement and Origen, was the place where everything started to become distorted and adapted to suit the Gentiles. The Messianic Belief, and its Saviour, had to become Hellenized to be acceptable to the Gentiles.

Where did Iesous and Iesus come from? In Bux and Schöne, Wörterbuch der Antike, under “Jesus,” we read, “JESUS: really named Jehoshua. Iesous (Greek), Iesus (Latin) is adapted from the Greek, possibly from the name of a Greek healing goddess Ieso (Iaso).”

Like all authoritative sources, this dictionary admits to the real true Name of our Saviour: Jehoshua (or as we believe: Yehoshua). It then states, as most others, that the commonly known substitute, non-original, non-real name “Jesus” was adapted from the Greek. We must remember that our Saviour was born from a Hebrew maiden, not from a Greek one. His stepfather, His half-brothers and half-sisters, in fact all His people, were Hebrews (Jews). Furthermore, this dictionary then traces the substitute name back to the Latin Iesus, and the Greek Iesous. It then traces the origin of the name Iesous back as being possibly adapted from the Greek healing goddess Ieso (Iaso).

To the uninformed I would like to point out that Iaso is the usual Greek form, while Ieso is from the Ionic dialect of the Greeks.

This startling discovery of the connection between Ieso (Iaso) and Iesous, is also revealed to us by the highly respected and authoritative unabridged edition of Liddell and Scott, Greek-English Lexicon, p.816. under “Iaso.”

The third witness comes to us in a scholarly article by Hans Lamer in Philologische Wochenschrift, No. 25, 21 June 1930, pp. 763-765. In this article the author recalls the fact of Ieso being the Ionic Greek goddess of healing. Hans Lamer then postulates, because of all the evidence, that “next to Ieso man shaped a proper masculine Iesous. This was even more welcome to the Greeks who converted to Christianity.” He then continues, “If the above is true, then the name of our Lord which we commonly use goes back to a long lost form of the name of a Greek goddess of healing. But to Greeks who venerated a healing goddess Ieso, a saviour Iesous must have been most acceptable. The Hellenization was thus rather clever.”

This then is the evidence of three sources who, like us, do not hide the fact of the Greek name Iesous being related to Ieso, the Greek goddess of healing. The Hellenization of our Saviour’s Name was indeed most cleverly done. To repeat our Saviour’s words of warning in John 5:43, “I have come in My Father’s Name, and you do not receive Me, if another comes in his own name, him you will receive.”

There is no resemblance or identifiability between our Saviour’s Name, Yehoshua, and the Greek substitute for it, Iesous. The Father’s Name, Yah- or Yahu-, cannot be seen in the Greek Iesous or in the Latin Iesus, neither in the English or German Jesus.

In spite of attempts made to justify the “translating” of the Father’s Name and His Son’s Name, the fact remains: A personal name cannot be translated! It is simply not done. The name of every single person on this earth remains the same in all languages. Nobody would make a fool of himself by calling Giuseppe Verdi by another name, Joseph Green, even though Giuseppe means Joseph and Verdi means Green. Satan’s name is the same in all languages. He has seen to it that his name has been left unmolested!

However, let us further investigate the names Ieso (Iaso) and Iesous. According to ancient Greek religion, Apollo, their great Sun-deity, had a son by the name of Asclepius, the deity of healing, but also identified with the Sun. This Asclepius had daughters, and one of them was Ieso (Iaso), the Greek goddess of healing. Because of her father’s and grandfather’s identities as Sun-deities, she too is in the same family of Sun-deities. Therefore, the name Iesous, which is derived from Ieso, can be traced back to Sun-worship.

We find other related names, all of them variants of the same name, Iasus, Iasion, Iasius, in ancient Greek religion, as being sons of Zeus. Even in India we find a similar name Issa or Issi, as surnames for their deity Shiva. Quite a few scholars have remarked on the similarity between the names of the Indian Issa or Issi, the Egyptian Isis and the Greek Iaso.

In our research on the deity Isis we made two startling discoveries. The one was that the son of Isis was called Isu by some. However, the second discovery yielded even further light: the learned scholar of Egyptian religion, Hans Bonnet, reveals to us in his Reallexikon der agyptischen Religionsgeschichte, p. 326, that the name of Isis appears in the hieroglyphic inscriptions as ESU or ES. No wonder it has been remarked, “Between Isis and Jesus as names confusion could arise. This Isis also had a child, which was called Isu by some. This Isu or Esu sound exactly like the “Jesu” that we find the Saviour called in the translated Scriptures of many languages, eg. many African languages.

Rev. Alexander Hislop, The Two Babylons, p. 164, also remarked on the similarity of Jesus and Isis, “IHS – Iesus Hominum Salvator – But let a Roman worshipper of Isis (for in the age of the emperors there were innumerable worshippers of Isis in Rome) cast his eyes upon them, and how will he read them, of course according to his own well-known system of idolatry: Isis, Horus, Seb.” He then continues with a similar example of “skilful planning” by “the very same spirit, that converted the festival of the Pagan Oannes into the feast of the Christian Johannes.” (The Hebrew name of the baptizer, and that of the apostle as well, was Yochanan or Yehochanan).

Thus, by supplanting the Name of our Saviour Yehoshua with that of the Hellenized Iesous (IHSOUS), which became the Latinized Iesus, it was easy to make the pagans feel welcome – those pagans who worshipped the Greek Ieso (Iaso), of which the masculine counterpart is Iesous (in capitals: IHSOUS), as well as those who worshipped the Egyptian Esu (Isis).

Further evidence of syncretism with the Isis-system is found in A Kircher, Oedipus Aegypticus, wherein the name of the son of Isis is revealed to us as “Iessus, which signifies Issa, whom they also call Christ in Greek.”

Another pagan group of worshippers could also be made to feel at home with the introduction of this surrogate name Iesous (IHSOUS) or Iesus, namely the worshippers of Esus. Jan de Vries holds that Esus was a Gallic deity comparable to the Scandinavian Odin. Odin, of course, was the Scandinavian Sky-deity. This Gallic or Celtic deity, Esus, has also been identified with Mars, and by others with Mercury, and was regarded to be the special deity of Paris.

Just as Iaso, Ieso, Iesous are derived from the Greek word for healing, iasis, we similarly find Isis (more correctly; Esu) and her son Horus (more correctly; Her), regarded as deities of healing as well as cosmic deities, or Sun-deities, by others.

The most disturbing evidence is yet to follow. The abbreviated form of the name Iesous is: Ies or in capitals: IHS, for in Greek the capital for “e” is “H.” This is to be found on many inscriptions made by the Church during the Dark Middle Ages. This fact is also well documented and is generally admitted by scholarly sources and ordinary English dictionaries. These dictionaries bear witness to the fact of IHS (Ies) being an abbreviated form of IHSOUS (Iesous).

Furthermore, the shocking fact has also been recorded for us that IHS was a mystery surname of Bacchus, and was afterwards taken as initials for Iesous, capitals: IHSOUS. We discovered this in a dictionary of mythology and in an encyclopedia of religion.

This revelation was confirmed by a third witness, Dr. E.W. Bullinger, The Apocalypse, footnote p. 396, “Whatever meanings of… IHS may be given, the fact remains that it was part of the name of Bacchus…” We then realized most painfully, that our beloved Messiah was identified with the Greek deity Bacchus, by giving our Saviour the surname or other name of Bacchus, namely: IHS or Ies! Bacchus was well known to be a Sun-deity. Bacchus was also a commonly known name for Tammuz among classical writers. Tammuz, as you will remember, was known to be the young returning Sun-deity, returning in spring. Bacchus, also known as Dionysus, was expressly identified with the Egyptian Osiris, the well known Egyptian Sun-deity. Bacchus was also called Ichthus, the Fish.

So, yet another group, the worshippers of Bacchus, the Sun-deity, alias Ies (IHS), were conciliated, were made welcome, with the foreign-to-the-Hebrew name of Iesous (IHSOUS) or Iesus. The most appalling revelation startled us, indeed. After being enlightened about the solar origin of the word IHS and its fuller form IHSOUS (Iesous), we are no longer surprised to find the ecclesiastical emblem, IHS, encircled by sunrays, commonly displayed on church windows:

No wonder that we read the testimony of the learned Christian advocate, M. Turretin, in describing the state of Christianity in the 4^th century, saying “that it was not so much the [Roman] Empire that was brought over to the Faith, as the Faith that was brought over to the Empire; not the Pagans who were converted to Christianity, but Christianity that was converted to Paganism.”

A further witness to this paganization of the Messianic Belief is that of Emperor Hadrian, who, in a letter to the Consul Serianus, wrote, “There are there (in Egypt) Christians who worship Serapis; and devote to Serapis are those who call themselves ‘Bishops of Christ.’”

Another testimony comes to us from the letter of Faustus, writing to Augustine, “You have substituted your love-feasts for the sacrifice of the Pagans; for their idols your martyrs, whom you serve with the very same honours. You appease the shades of the dead with wine and feasts; you celebrate the solemn festivals of the Gentiles, their calends, and their solctices; and as to their manners, those you have retained without any alteration. Nothing distinguishes you from the Pagans, except that you hold your assemblies apart from them.

Our Saviour Yehoshua, in His final message to us, the book of Revelation, has warned us of this in Rev 17, Rev 18, Rev 19, and also in Rev 13, Rev 14, and Rev 16 – Babylon, Mystery Babylon. The Great Harlot has made “the inhabitants of the earth drunk with the wine of her fornication,” out of the “golden cup” in her hand, “full of abominations and the filthiness of her fornication” (Rev 17:1-5). She is also described as “sitting on a scarlet beast, full of names of blasphemy” (verse 3).

Tammuz, alias Bacchus, has a surname: Ies or IHS. He was also known as the Fish (Ichthus), and had the Tau, the cross, as his sign. These three (Ies, the Fish, and the cross) have survived, and are still with us!

In Acts 4:12 we read, “Nor is there salvation in any other, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved.” This verse clearly tells us that there is only one Name whereby we can be saved – there is none other. It cannot be Yehoshua as well as Jesus, Iesous, Iesus, or Ies (Bacchus). There is no resemblance between the names Yehoshua and Jesus. The one is correct and the other one a substitute. The one contains our Father’s Name and the other one not. Yehoshua has said that He came in His Father’s Name (John 5:43). In the newer translations of the Scriptures, we read in two places (John 17:11 and 12), that Yehoshua said that His Father’s Name was given to Him. If we believe the Scriptures, if we believe our Messiah, if we believe what is written in Acts 4:12, we cannot be satisfied with any substitute name. We must believe, accept, and be baptized into the only saving Name: Yehoshua.

In the end-time, according to Joel 2:32, calling on the Name of Yahueh will be necessary for salvation and deliverance. By believing in, calling on, and being baptized in the Name of Yehoshua, we do “call on the Name of Yahueh,” through His Son, who had His Father’s Name given to Him, by His Father. “I have come in My Father’s Name, and you do not receive Me; if another comes in his own name, him you will receive” (John 5:43).

The writer of Proverbs challenges us in Prov 30:4, “What is His Name, and what is His Son’s Name, if thou canst tell?” KJV. A very interesting alternate rendering for Psalm 72:17 is given to us in the centre column of the Reference King James Version, speaking about the promised Messiah. “His Name shall be as a Son to continue His Father’s Name for ever.”

As I have stated, there is no resemblance between the Name Yehoshua abd the name Jesus. Neither is there any resemblance between their meanings. Yehoshua means: “the Salvation of Yah or Yahu.” “Jesus” is derived from Iesus, derived from Iesous (IHSOUS), obviously derived from the Greek goddess of healing, Ieso or Iaso. Her name was derived from iasis, which means “healing.” Further, the short form, or original source of the name Iesous (IHSOUS) is Ies (IHS), the very surname of Bacchus, the Sun-deity.

Therefore, the two names differ completely in their origin, and in their meaning. And more important: Our Saviour’s Name contains the Name of His Father, which the substitute name does not. Further proof of the Father’s Name being in the Son’s Name is found in Eph 3:14-15, “For this reason I bow my knees to the Father… from whom the whole family in heaven and earth is named.” Surely, if His family receives His Name, His only begotten Son will also have His Name.

Another proof is Rev 14:1, which in the Textus Receptus based translations read somewhat differently to what is found in the newer versions. Rev 14:1-5, in Green’s Interlinear Translation reads, “And I saw, and behold, a Lamb standing on the Mount Zion! And with Him a hundred and forty-four thousand, having the Name of His Father written upon their foreheads… These are those who were not defiled… These are those following the Lamb wherever He may go. These were redeemed… first-fruit to Elohim… And no guile was found in their mouth, for they are without blemish before the throne of Elohim.”

The Nestle-Aland test reads, “having His Name and the Name of His Father written on their foreheads.” Do we wish to be part of this first-fruit company? Then we are to make quite certain that we have the Father’s Name and the Lamb’s Name on (or in) our foreheads. The similarity between their Names is obvious. Whether it will be just one Name, Yah, or whether it will be both Yahueh and Yehoshua, is not clearly indicated, and is less important – as long as we have the essential part of the Name, Yah, which transmits its etymological concept of life, ever-lasting life. Verses 4-5 warn us against defilement – spiritual defilement – the lies that we have inherited, including the lies about the Names, “O Yahueh,… the Gentiles shall come to you from the ends of the earth and say, ‘Surely our fathers have inherited lies…’ Therefore behold, I will this once cause them to know…; and they shall know My Name is Yahueh” (Jer 16 19-21), a prophecy for the end-time.

“Therefore My people shall know My Name” (Isa 52:6). “I will bring the one-third through the fire, will refine them as silver is refined, and test them as gold is tested. They will call on My Name, and I will answer them. I will say, ‘This is My people’; and each one will say, ‘Yahueh is my Mighty One’” (Zech 13:9). “For then will I restore to the peoples a pure language, that they all may call on the Name of Yahueh, to serve Him with one accord” (Zeph 3:9). “And Yahueh shall be King over all the earth. In that day it shall be – ‘Yahueh is one,’ and His Name one” (Zech 14:9). He will no longer be called by all those hundreds of names, by which He is known today. His Name will be “one.” And His Son, in whose Name the Father’s Name is contained, will subject Himself to His Father in that day (1 Cor 15:28).

(This is an excerpt from the book "Come out of her my people" by Dr. Chris Koster)

Word Survey: Glory

No fewer than 25 Hebrew words are rendered by doxa in the Septuagint, the Greek translation of the Hebrew Old Testament. Of these 25 words, 7 are more common, the most important being kabod. This Greek word doxa of the Greek translation of the Old Testament, and the doxa of the New Testament, are usually rendered “glory” in the English versions, a translation of the Latin gloria. If we first look at the Hebrew Old Testament, we find that kabod has usually been rendered “honour” when applied to man, but rendered “glory” when applied to our Heavenly Father.

Je-Zeus with a halo

Why were they so keen to apply the word “glory” to our Mighty One? What is the meaning of the word “glory”? Funk & Wagnalls, New Standard Dictionary of the English Language, under “glory,” gives the religious symbolic meaning, “In religious symbolism, the complete representation of an emanation of light from the person of a sanctified being, consisting of the aureole and the nimbus;” and further on, “The quality of being radiant or shining; brilliancy; brightness; luster; as the glory of the sun;” and further on, “A sunburst; any ring of light; a halo.”

John Ogilvie, The Comprehensive English Dictionary, under “glory,” explains it as, “splendor, as of the sun.” Similar statements are made by The Oxford English Dictionary and Webster’s New International Dictionary. The latter states, “glory is the general term of the aureole and the nimbus” - aureole being the halo or ring round the sun, and the nimbus being the sun-disc.

This meaning, as well as the word itself, would be acceptable if the commonly used Hebrew words of the Old Testament, and the Greek word doxa, have had the same meaning of sun-radiance or circles of light. However, we do not find any trace of sun-radiance or emanation of light in the most common word used in the Hebrew text, namely kabod, or in the Greek doxa.

Once more we are rudely awakened to the fact of the adoption of Sun-worship into the Church, the merger of Sun-worship with the Messianic Belief. In the Dictionaries, encyclopedias and ecclesiastical books, we find many illustrations of our Saviour, the Virgin, and the saints, encircled with radiant circles or emanations of light around them.

Kabad literally means to be heavy or to make weighty, and esteem in its figurative sense, and its noun is kabod. The Greek word doxa simply means opinion, estimation, esteem, repute, coming from the verb dokeo, which means “to seem.”

Thus, the ecclesiastical symbolic meaning of the word “glory,” being that of radiance or emanation of light as from the sun, is strong evidence of the Church’s solarization of our Messiah and of his Father. The Church identified Elohim with the Sun-deity, which was the prevailing deity of the Roman emperors, the Roman capital and its empire.

However, not only does the concept of “glory” stem from Sun-worship, but we also find proof of “glory” (Gloria) as having been a Roman goddess, discovered in the form of an icon personified by a woman, the upper part of her body almost naked, holding a circle on which are the zodiac signs.

Pauly-Wissowa also defines Gloria as a personification of fame, the word being found very frequently on the coins of Constantine and his successors. Besides the frequent occurrence of the word Gloria on the coins, the image of this goddess is found on two coins, one of Constantius II and one of Constantine II.

We should therefore eliminate the word “glory” from our religious vocabulary for three reasons:

1.      We have been commanded in Exodus 23:13 to “make no mention of the names of other mighty ones, nor let it be heard from your mouth”- especially in our worship, applying these names to the One we love, and His Son.

2.      The concept of the word “glory” in religious symbolism, as we read in Funk @ Wagnalls Dictionary, is that of the emanation or radiance of light, as of the sun. This is proof of the solarization of our beloved Saviour, identifying Him, as well as His Father, with the Sun-deity.

3.      The Hebrew word kabod as well as Greek word doxa, do not carry the meaning of sun-radiance or sunlight at all. Therefore, the word “glory” is an incorrect rendering of those words.

What then should we use instead of the word “glory”? Simply when the Hebrew words and the Greek word mean: “esteem,” or “high esteem” or “repute.” These words carry the meaning of the Scriptural words and do not stem from the names of deities as far as we know, and should be used wherever our versions have “glory.”

(This is an excerpt from the book "Come out of her my people" by Dr. Chris Koster)

Word Survey: Amen

The Hebrew of the Old Testament reveals to us that the Scriptural Hebrew word (which means: so be it, or verily or surely) is “Amein” and not “Amen.” Likewise, the Greek equivalent in the Greek New Testament is also pronounced: “Amein.” Anyone can check on this in Strong’s Concordance, No, 543 in its Hebrew Lexicon and No. 281 in its Greek Lexicon, or in Aaron Pick’s Dictionary of Old Testament Words for English Readers. Why then, has this Scriptural word “Amein” been rendered as “Amen” in our versions? Again we can see how the pagans have been made welcome, how they were appeased, by adopting the name of a pagan deity into the Church.

The Egyptians, including the Alexandrians, had been worshiping, or been acquainted with, the head of the Egyptian pantheon, Amen-Ra, the great Sun-deity, for more than 1,000 years, B.C.E Before this deity became known as Amen-Ra, he was only known as Amen among the Thebans.

This substitution of “Amen” for “Amein” was greatly facilitated by the fact that this Egyptian deity’s name was spelt in Egyptian hieroglyphic language with only three letters: AMN, just as we find a similar paucity of vowels in the Scriptural Hebrew, which prior to its vocal-pointing by the Massoretes, also only spelt its AMEIN as: AMN. However, with the vocal-pointing by the Massoretes the Scriptural word has been preserved for us as: AMEIN. On the other hand, the Egyptian deity AMN is rendered by various sources as AMEN, or AMUN, or as AMON. However, the most reliable Egyptologists and archaeologists, such as Sir E.A. Wallis Budge, Dr. A.B. Cook, Prof. A. Wiedemann, Sir W.M.F. Petrie, and A.W. Shorter, as well as some authoritative dictionaries, all render the name of this Egyptian deity as AMEN.

Originally this AMEN was the Theban “hidden god who is in heaven,” “the hidden one, probably meaning hidden sun.” Funk and Wagnalls, Standard College Dictionary, describes it, “AMEN: In Egyptian mythology, the god of life and procreation… later identified with the Sun-god as the supreme deity, and called ‘Amen-Ra’.”

James Bonwick, Egyptian Belief and Modern Thought, repeatedly and frankly calls the Sun-deity of Egypt by its correct name: AMEN. He states on pg. 123-125, “AMEN… is in a sense, the chief deity of Egypt – supreme divinity. Whatever else he be, he must be accepted as the sun… the hidden god, the solar aspect is clear… there is the dist of the sun… the sun Amen… His identification with Baal… establishes him as a solar deity…”

Smith’s Bible Dictionary expresses AMEN as, “an Egyptian divinity… He was worshipped… as Amen-Ra, or ‘Amen the Sun.’” Herodotos recorded for us how the Greeks identified their Zeus with Amen-Ra.

Our Saviour Y’hoshua calls himself “the Amein” in Rev 3:14. Substituting a title or name of our Saviour with the name of the great hidden Sky-deity or the great Sun-deity of the Egyptians, Amen, is inconceivable! The difference is subtle, but it is there. By ending our prayers with “Amen” instead of “Amein,” one could very well ask: Have we been mislead to invoke the name of the Egyptian Sun-Deity at the end of our prayers?

(This is an excerpt from the book "Come out of her my people" by Dr. Chris Koster)