Is The KJV Bible the Word of the Almighty?

 When it comes to a belief system that is based on the writings of a Higher Power, the Almighty Himself, we desire to follow His writings alone. But are the writings of the Almighty still His writings when it has been edited and changed by men? Certainly not, in fact, it then becomes the writings of man instead and cannot be trusted as the writings or Word of the Almighty at all any more.

Many Churches and Christians all claim that the King James Bible is the authoritative Scriptures and the Word of the Almighty. They claim that it is by far the best and most accurate English translation of the original Scriptures and that it can be trusted and used as a reference for sound Scriptural doctrine. But is this true? Is the KJV an accurate account or translation of the original Scriptures?

The only way to answer these questions is to actually compare it to the original, or oldest manuscripts in existence today. For the “Old Testament” this is quite easy as the Hebrew text has been preserved from generation to generation and is 100% perfect (this is discussed below). Anyone who can read Hebrew, can therefore, easily compare the KJV or any other translation to the Hebrew text.

The “New Testament” is however a little harder, as the original Scriptures were destroyed or are being kept hidden. The Church claims that the “New Testament” was originally written in Greek, whereas all the facts and evidence point to a Hebrew original (but denied by the Church). This is however a topic on its own which I have covered in a previous post. There are however, ways to identify errors in translation. We do have the very early Greek manuscripts, the Aramaic text and we can compare the teachings to the Hebrew Tanakh (Old Testament) and we know that the Creator is not a liar that He should give instructions to last for 4,000 years and then change His mind.

Let us start with comparing the KJV with the Hebrew Tanakh (Old Testament)

The “Old Testament” of the KJV Bible is admittedly more accurate than the “New Testament” of the KJV Bible. This is because the “Old Testament” is somewhat based on the Hebrew Tanakh, where the “New Testament” is based on the Greek manuscripts which are not very reliable at all (I will explain this in more detail below). There are however still major errors in the KJV’s “Old Testament.”

Firstly, the term “Old Testament” is an incorrect term and is NOT at all Scriptural. Marcion, who is one of the early church fathers, coined the terms Old and New Testament. BUT: It is written that YHWH would bring a Renewed Covenant to His people and therefore the duty was on His people to extend the invitation of the Kingdom of Elohim to the rest of the world. By replacing the word “Covenant” with “Testament” Marcion and other pagan theologians wrestled Jeremiah 31:31-34 away from the foundational teachings of Y’hoshua and the Schlichim (taught ones). Most Christians had no access to the Tanakh (Hebrew Scriptures) and would not have know that Brit Chadashah means “RENEWED Covenant” and that Mashiyach would come to write Torah (Law) upon the hearts of his followers. By replacing the word “covenant” with “testament” and the word “renewed” with the word “new”, Marcion theologically divided the Messiah and his followers away from YHWH the Father and turned him into a self sustained deity that opposed the “Old Testament.” Everyone whoever used the terms “Old and New Testament” can thank Marcion the heretic for implanting such contrary values against the Unified and Eternal Word of the Living Almighty.

Polycarp, referred to Marcion as “the firstborn of the devil.” But, Marcion’s “judenrein” (Jew-free, also a well known phrase of Hitler) all-Gentile churches became very popular among early Gentile Christians, and one of the largest Christian denominations on Earth. Marcion was the inventor and/or the major contributor to dispensationalism, supercessionism, and replacement theology – all of which are altogether unscriptural and extremely popular among the vast majority of Christians today, preached in nearly every church.

The Name of the Almighty

The entire Scripture is full of how important and Set-Apart the Name of the Almighty is. It even goes as far as to say that there is no other name by which we can be saved. The Hebrew Tanakh has the Name of the Almighty written more than 6,000 times.

Now if the King James Translation, or any other translation, is truthful and correct, then it too must have the Name, or at least a transliteration (you can never translate a name) of the Name of the Almighty in the same places as those of the original Hebrew Tanakh. If it does not, then it is not the Word of the Almighty any more but rather the word of evil and corrupt men. The Word of the Almighty says that we are not allowed to add to or remove from what is originally written (Deut 4:2). It is also one of the Ten Commandments that we are not to bring His Name to naught.

Now if you have a look at the Hebrew Tanakh, you will not have to look very far to find the Name of the Almighty. The Name of the Almighty looks like this, “יהוה“, but the first thing you notice when you see His Name, is that it is not an English Name, but rather a Hebrew Name.

Now when you do a comparison between the Hebrew Scriptures and the KJV translation, you will see that almost every place that the Name of the Almighty is written, the KJV translation uses the word “LORD.” Now is the Name of the Almighty in English, “LORD”? Is the word “LORD” even a name at all? A little research will tell you that it is not a name at all, but a title that is also given to many men too and has a very dodgy pagan origin, where it actually originates from the name of a pagan deity.

So we can already see that the KJV translation has taken the most important Name in the existence of the Universe, the only Name by which we can be saved, out of its translation and replaced it with something that is hated by the Almighty. Is this not taking away from the Word which is forbidden by the Almighty Himself?

God

And what about the name “God”? Once again, the word “God” was not a name at all, but is rather a term used by other pagan beliefs to refer to their own deity. It later on became a name given to a specific pagan deity. Now ask yourself the following question, “can the Almighty be referred to by the same title that originated from the title for pagan deities?”

The Hebrew Scriptures have the word “Elohim” (Mighty One) in the places where the KJV translation has the word “God.” Once again, the KJV is not a correct translation here, where the translators placed their own words that do not mean the same.

In fact, there is a mention of “God” or “Gawd” in the Hebrew Scriptures, “But you are those who forsake יהוה (YHWH), who forget My set-apart mountain, who prepare a table for Gad (Gawd, God), and who fill a drink offering for Meni” (Isaiah 65:11).

Wow, the Scriptures actually say that those who follow after “God” (who is the pagan deity of good fortune) are those who forsake the Almighty. This is not just a translation error, but rather a direct contradiction of the Word of the Almighty. It is also written, “And in all that I have said to you take heed. And make no mention of the name of other mighty ones, let it not be heard from your mouth” (Exodus 23:13).

Let us look at some more errors

There are some more errors in the KJV’s “Old Testament” but none that are as critical as the errors spoken of above but, they are however still errors and are not Scriptural and changes the meaning of the Almighty's Word.

Eze 20:25 (KJV) Wherefore I gave them also statutes that were not good, and judgments whereby they should not live;”

Eze 20:25 (Original) “And I also gave them up to laws that were not good, and right-rulings by which they would not live”

Here the KJV suggests that the Almighty gave the evil statutes to the people, where the original text says that He gave them up to the laws that the people turned to on there own.

There are many more differences between the KJV and the Hebrew text, but I am not going to post every single one of them here as we get the idea and it would be a lot of reading.

Now what about the Brit Chadashah (Renewed Covenant) (New Testament)

Every single scholar of the “KJV New Testament” agrees that it is based on the Greek manuscripts which they ignorantly believe to be the original manuscripts.

The KJV “New Testament” translation has MANY more differences and errors in it compared to its “Old Testament” translation. This is because its “Old Testament” is based, somewhat, on the original Hebrew, where the “New Testament” is based on many many Greek manuscripts (about 13,000) that all differ from one another. The problem with this is that the Greek is not the original as the Renewed Covenant was not originally written in Greek, but rather in Hebrew.

Let us have a closer look at these Greek manuscripts:

Both the Hebrew Torah and the “New Testament” contain approximately the same number of words. Which would you expect to be more successful in preserving the accuracy of a text?... The Christian New Testament, for several reasons of course.

Firstly, the Christian “New Testament” is about 1700 (or even more) years younger than the Torah. Secondly, the Christians haven’t gone through nearly as much exile and dislocation as the Jews. Thirdly, Christianity has always had a central authority (the Vatican) to ensure the "accuracy" of their text.

What are the results? The Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible, a book written to prove the validity of the New Testament, says: “A study of 150 Greek [manuscripts] of the Gospel of Luke has revealed more than 30 000 different readings… It is safe to say that there is not one sentence in the New Testament in which the [manuscript] is wholly uniform.”

Other scholars report there are some 200 000 variants in the existing manuscripts of the New Testament, representing about 400 variant readings, which cause doubt about textual meaning; 50 of these are of great significance which have contradictory meanings to one another.

So how can we know which one, if any, is the correct one? Which one, if any, can we rely on to be the truth?

The Renewed Covenant is where the testimony and fulfillment of the prophecy of the Messiah is recorded. Let us have a look at the verse which speaks of the giving of the Name of the Messiah when He was born, “And she shall give birth to a Son, and you shall call His Name יהושע (Y’hoshua) for He shall save His people from their sins” (Mat 1:21). Now the KJV has the same statement but has the name “Jesus” as the name of the Messiah.

The question we need to ask ourselves, if we want to be honest, is if the KJV and all the other English Bibles that have the name of the Messiah as “Jesus” is correct. If so, then the name “Jesus” has to mean something like “for He shall save His people from their sins” as the verse implies.

In order to determine the meaning of the name “Jesus”, we need to go to its origin and find its meaning. Every single scholar admits the fact that the name “Jesus” comes from the Greek “Iesous” which once again originates from paganism, and NOT from the Hebrew Y’hoshua. I have covered this topic in much more detail in a previous post.

The Name Y’hoshua means “YHWH is our salvation” which fits one hundred percent with what is written in Matthew 1:21.

This difference is a major error that is absolutely the opposite of the Will and the Word of the Almighty. 

What about the name “Christ”?

Here is another example of a word being substituted by another that has the total opposite meaning as to what it should be. The Greek text has the word “Messias” for the word “anointed one” in John 1:41 and John 4:25. Why then does the KJV and other English translations have the Greek word “Christos” all the other times where the word “anointed one” appears?

Why does the KJV Bible use the Greek word “Messias” which is a valid Greek word that means “anointed one” in only a very few places, and the Greek word “Christos”, which does not have the exact same meaning, in the rest of the places? One must once again look for the origin of the word “Christos” from which the title “Christian originates from. If you start investigating the origin of the word “Christos” you will quickly find that it comes from “Chrestos” (the Sun-deity Osiris). Read here to learn more on this topic.

Other Errors

There are many other major errors and additions into the Christian Bible that do not even exist in the oldest Greek manuscripts, never mind the original writings. Some of these are, for example, John 7: 53 – 8:11 where it speaks of a woman caught in adultery that was brought to the Messiah. This event never happened and does not appear in the Aramaic text which is much, much older than the Greek, it is not even found in the earliest Greek manuscripts either. This portion was inserted many years later after the original writing of John. And yet, a large portion of the Christian faith is based on this small piece of writing.

How many times have you heard or even yourself quoted the phrase, “He who is without sin, cast the first stone”? This section is NOT Scriptural at all and cannot be found anywhere else in Scripture. Why was it added? In order to justify that adultery is okay and easily forgivable… do yourself a favor and go see what the Almighty thinks of adultery, and then see if the Messiah agrees with His Father on this point in this section.

Another major error in the KJV Bible that is not found in any other English Bible, even though they are also based on the Greek manuscripts, is found in Acts 12:4.

KJV Bible: "And when he had apprehended him, he put him in prison, and delivered him to four quaternions of soldiers to keep him; intending after Easter to bring him forth to the people"

Better Translation: "And when he had apprehended him, he put him in prison, and delivered him to four quaternions of soldiers to keep him; intending after Passover to bring him forth to the people"

Here is a major error that does not even match any of the Greek manuscripts at all. The Greek word used for “Passover” is “pascha”. Every other English translation of the Bible has the word “Passover” here. It is only the KJV that has perverted it and used the word “Easter” instead of “Passover”. Now why did the translators do that? And is it correct? If not, then it is not an accurate translation and NOT the Word of the Almighty, but rather the word of men instead.

Easter is the Saxon's fertility deity called “Eostre”. Now the Passover is a testimony of the Messiah Himself. It is by His blood that we are passed over by the Messenger of death. To substitute this wonderful testimony of our Beloved Messiah, with the celebrations of an evil pagan deity that the Almighty hates, is pure evil. I would have no problem with burning a book that does such a thing.

If you would like to know more about Easter… then click here

Another major addition is that of Mark 16:9-20. If you compare it with that of the oldest Greek manuscripts, you will notice that it does not exist until the more modern Greek manuscripts.

Here is another example of a translation error proving that the translator did not have any knowledge of the Scriptures at all.

Hebrews 4:8-9

KJV Bible: "For if Jesus had given them rest, then would he not afterward have spoken of another day. There remaineth therefore a rest to the people of God"

Better Translation: "For if Joshua (or rather Y’hoshua) had given them rest, then would he not afterward have spoken of another day. There remaineth therefore a keeping of a Sabbath to the people of Elohim"

But even the Greek word for this "rest" is "sabbatismos", which means "Sabbath keeping".

This verse above actually proves two very important points. Firstly, the translator was not very well versed in the Scriptures at all. He did not know of the second point which is that “Joshua’s”  name in the Hebrew Tanakh is actually spelled as “יהושע” which is the exact same spelling and pronunciation of the Name as that of the Messiah, which is pronounced as Y’hoshua. The above verse is speaking of Y’hoshua son of Nun, where the translator ignorantly put in what he believed to be “Jesus”.

There are so many other errors in the KJV “New Testament” that it would take a very long time to record them here.

There are also many words that have been changed that originate from paganism rather than from the original writings, some of these words and names are, “Christ, holy, grace, glory, church and even the cross” which are all an abomination to the Almighty.

How many errors can be found in the Hebrew Torah?

 

Now for interest sake, we had a look at how many Greek variations existed in the “New Testament” above. Now if we are to compare the Greek “New Testament” with that of the Hebrew Torah, we can start to see which one is the most accurate of the two. Keeping in mind that the Greek “New Testament” contains over 200 000 different variations.

The Hebrew Torah contains approximately the same number of words as the “New Testament.” How many letters are there in the Hebrew Torah? There are 304 805 letters (or approximately 79 000 words).

If you were to guess, how many letters of these 304 805 do you think are in question (or questionable)? (most people guess anywhere from 25 to 1 000 letters.)

Maintaining the accuracy of any document as ancient and as large as the Torah is very challenging even under the best of circumstances.

But, consider that throughout history, Jewish communities were subject to widespread persecutions and exile. Over the last 2000 years, Jews have been spread to the four corners of the world, from Yemen to Poland, from Australia to Alaska.

Other historical factors make the accurate transmission of the Torah all the more difficult. For example, the destruction of the Temple 1900 years ago saw the dissolution of the Sanhedrin, the Jewish central authority which traditionally would unify the Jewish people in the case of any disagreements.

Let’s investigate the facts as we have them today. If we collect the oldest Torah scrolls and compare them, we can see if any garbling exist, and if so, how much.

The fact is, that after all the trials and tribulations, communal dislocations and persecutions, only the Yemenite Torah scrolls contain any difference from the rest of world Jewry. For hundreds of years, the Yemenite community was not part of the global checking system, and a total of nine letter-differences are found in their scrolls.

These are all spelling differences. In no case do they change the meaning of the word. For example, how would you spell the word “colour”? in America, it’s spelled C-O-L-O-R. But in England (and South Africa), it’s spelled with a “u”, C-O-L-O-U-R.

Such is the nature of the few spelling differences between Torah scrolls today. The results over thousands of years are remarkable. And these differences are only found in the Yemenite Torah Scrolls.

The Torah has nine spelling variants – with absolutely no effect on the meaning of the words. The Christian Bible has over 200 000 variants and in 400 instances the variants change the meaning of the TEXT.

These letters of the Hebrew Torah were employed by the Almighty in creating the world, and it is through them that He sustains it. The deletion of even one letter of this sustaining force therefore threatens the existence of the world.

Carefully guarding the words of the Torah has been a Jewish priority throughout the centuries.

Writing a Torah Scroll

To eliminate any chance of human error, the Talmud enumerates more than 20 factors mandatory for a Torah scroll to be considered “kosher”. This is the Torah’s built-in security system. Should any one of these factors be lacking, it does not possess the sanctity of a Torah scroll, and is not to be used for a public Torah reading.

The meticulous process of hand-copying a scroll takes about 2000 hours (a full-time job for one year). Throughout the centuries, Jewish scribes have adhered to the following guidelines:

• A Torah Scroll is disqualified if even a single letter is added.
• A Torah Scroll is disqualified if even a single letter is deleted.
• The scribe must be a learned, pious Jew, who has undergone special training and certification.
• All materials (parchment, ink, quill) must conform to strict specifications, and be prepared specifically for the purpose of writing a Torah scroll.
• The scribe may not write even one letter into a Torah scroll by heart. Rather, he must have a second, kosher scroll opened before him at all times.
• The scribe must pronounce every word out loud before copying it from the correct text.
• Every letter must have sufficient white space surrounding it. If one letter touched another in any spot, it invalidates the entire scroll.
• If a single letter was so marred that it cannot be read at all, or resembles another letter (whether the defect is in the writing, or is due to a hole, tear or smudge), this invalidates the entire scroll. Each letter must be sufficiently legible so that even an ordinary schoolchild could distinguish it from other, similar letters.
• The scribe must put precise spaces between words, so that one word will not look like two words, or two words look like one word.
• The scribe must not alter the design of the sections, and must conform to particular line-lengths and paragraph configurations.

A Torah scroll in which any mistake has been found, cannot be used, and must be fixed within 30 days, or buried.

Which one can then be considered the Word of the Almighty?

Now the Christian church is based mostly on the supposed teachings of “Paul”. The Church claims that Paul taught that the “Gentile Believers” do not have to keep the Torah of the Almighty anymore. They claim that the Torah of the Almighty was nailed to the “cross” which is a gross perversion and is proof that they are totally ignorant of the Scriptures and the writings of Paul.

So let us see what “Paul” considers to be Scripture and what he teaches about it, “and that from a babe you have known the Set-apart Scriptures, which are able to make you wise for deliverance through belief in Messiah יהושע (Y’hoshua). All Scripture is breathed by Elohim and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for setting straight, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of Elohim might be fitted, equipped for every good work” (2 Tim 3:15-17)

Now what are these Set-apart Scriptures that he is speaking of in this verse? Did the “New Testament” exist when he wrote this letter? Is it even possible that he could be referring to the “New Testament” or even any of his own letters, which make up the majority of the “New Testament” as Scripture? Absolutely not!

Paul stated above to the people that from when they were very young, they have known the Set-apart Scriptures. He is referring to the Hebrew Tanakh which is the only book that can ever be considered as the Word of the Almighty. Let us have a look at another letter that Paul wrote, “For whatever was written before was written for our instruction, that through endurance and encouragement of the Scriptures we might have the expectation” (Rom 15:4).

Paul is once again making it very clear that the Hebrew Tanakh are the Scriptures and is there for our instruction. The fact of the matter is that the Scriptures (Hebrew Tanakh) teaches us how to love the Almighty, it also teaches us how to love one another. The Hebrew Tanakh teaches us who the Messiah is and also what His role and duty is, “יהושע (Y’hoshua) said to them, “Did you never read in the Scriptures, ‘The stone which the builders rejected has become the chief corner-stone. This was from יהוה (YHWH), and it is marvellous in our eyes?” (Mat 21:42). It teaches us everything we need to know in regards to Salvation and the forgiveness of sins.

Notice above how the Messiah Himself refers to the Hebrew Tanakh as “the Scriptures” and how it refers to Him. Here is another verse that shows the Messiah referring to the Hebrew Tanakh as the Scriptures, “And יהושע (Y’hoshua) answering, said to them, “You go astray, not knowing the Scriptures nor the power of Elohim”” (Mat 22:29).

I could go on and quote all the places in the “New Testament” and all the people therein who testify that the Hebrew Tanakh is the Scriptures, but that would take too much time and space here.

The fact of the matter is that the “New Testament” is not considered to be Scripture at all, but is rather just a testimony of the fulfillment of prophecy and letters of encouragement to fellow believers, who have been scattered, for them to stay in the study of the Scriptures.

Therefore, the Word of the Almighty is the Hebrew Tanakh and the Hebrew Tanakh alone. Anyone who speaks otherwise is speaking evil and denying the Word of the Almighty.

And anyone who does not subject themselves to the Instruction of the Hebrew Tanakh does not love the Almighty and there is no truth in them.

Church, the origin of the word

This is the word used in most English versions as a rendering of the “New Testament’s” Greek word ekklesia. This word really means “a calling out,” a meeting or a gathering. Ekklesia is the Greek equivalent of the Hebrew qahal, which means an assembly or a congregation. Neither ekklesia nor qahal means a building. Tyndale, in his translation, uniformly translated ekklesia as “congregation” and only used the word “churches” to translate Acts 19:37 for heathen temples!

Where does the word “church,” come from then? Ecclesiastical sources give the origin as kuriakon or kyriakon in Greek. However, to accept this, one has to stretch your imagination in an attempt to see any resemblance.

Also, because kuriakon means a building (the house of Kurios = Lord), and not a gathering or meeting of people, as the words ekklesia and qahal imply, therefore this explanation can only be regarded as distorted, even if it is true. Our common dictionaries, however, are honest in revealing to us the true origin. They all trace the word back to its Old English or Anglo-Saxon root, namely circe.

And the origin of circe? Any encyclopedia, or dictionary of mythology, will reveal who Circe was. She was the goddess-daughter of Helios, the Sun-deity! Again, another form of Sun-worship, this time the name of the daughter of the Sun-deity, had become mixed with the Messianic Belief.

Some interesting facts emerge from the study of the word circe. The word is related to “circus,” “circle,” “circuit,” “Circean,” “circulate,” and the various words starting with “circum-.” Latin rules of grammar demands a pronunciation of “sirke.” The Old English word circe could have been pronounced similarly to “kirke,” or even “sirse.”

However, Circe was in fact originally a Greek goddess where her name was written as: Kirke, and pronounced as such – just as in numerous similar cases of words of Greek origin, e.g. cyst and kustis, cycle and kuklos, cylinder and kulindros. The word “church” is known in Scotland as kirk, and in German as kirche and in Netherlands as kerk. These words show their direct derivation from the Greek Kirke even better than the English “church.” However, even the Old English circe for “church,” reveals its origin.

Let us rather use the Scriptural “assembly” or “congregation,” and renounce the word that is derived from Circe, the daughter of the Sun-deity!

(Article from a book called: "Come Out of Her My People" by Chris Koster)

Be Perfect as your Father in heaven is Perfect

The Torah reading for this past Shabbat was very much about purging the evil out of Israel and to be perfect before YHWH our Elohim. By the mouth of two or three witnesses, those who are guilty of the evil must be put to death. What is this evil that is being spoken of here? Disobeying the Torah of YHWH is evil. Although not all evil acts are punishable by death, many are, for example, adultery, murder, magic, sorcery, idolatry and a few others.

Does this really sound like the character of the Almighty (or the 'love of Jesus'), killing those that disobey His Commands? Only those who believe in human rights and other humanistic religions, like Christianity, do not think that this is His Character. They believe that everyone should have “the love of Jesus” forgiving everyone’s iniquities and evil deeds continuously. The fact of the matter is that the Messiah came to do the Torah of His Father. Christianity has been based on humanistic man-made doctrines that do not in anyway resemble the true Messiah. Even the Bible has been fabricated (mistranslated in many places) to promote the anti-Messiah doctrines that the Church teaches. A really good example of this is the story about the woman caught in adultery found in John 8:1-11, where “Jesus” just happened to forgive her evil sin that should have been punished by death. The problem with that story is that it never happened according to the Aramaic New Testament and even the earliest Greek translations. You can read more on that topic here. The church uses this passage to justify the evil works of their members.

Let us have a look at a few verses from the Living Word of the Almighty from this Torah reading,

“Follow righteousness, righteousness alone, so that you live and inherit the land which יהוה (YHWH) your Elohim is giving you” (Deut 16:20). Now when one does a study ofTorah and the prophets, you will notice that everything works in cycles and are signs and shadows of things still to come. One of the most obvious examples is that of entering into the promised land of Israel signifying entering into the Kingdom of YHWH at the end of days. The Torah is spoken of as “the Living Words” in Acts 7:38. It is the Instruction for us, to teach us how we are going to be able to inherit and enter into the Kingdom of YHWH just as it was instruction for the Hebrews on how to inherit the Land that YHWH was giving them.

“When there is found in your midst, in any of your cities which יהוה (YHWH) your Elohim is giving you, a man or a woman who does what is evil in the eyes of יהוה (YHWH) your Elohim, in transgressing His covenant,
and has gone and served other mighty ones and bowed down to them, or to the sun or to the moon or to any of the host of the heavens, which I have not commanded,
and it has been made known to you and you have heard, and has searched diligently. Then see, if true: the matter is confirmed that such an abomination has been done in Yisra’ĕl,
then you shall bring out to your gates that man or woman who has done this evil matter, and you shall stone to death that man or woman with stones” (Deut 17:2-5)

If one does a little research on the origin, practices and traditions of Christianity, you will find that it all comes from Sun-worship. Easter, Christmas, Jesus, God, Lord, Holy, the cross and many more names and traditions all stem from Sun-worship! Are these things not abominations? Did the Messiah come to declare what was once an abomination in the eyes of Him and His Father, now okay and acceptable? Certainly not! 

The reason that YHWH divorced the majority of Israel was because they did not heed His Command not to learn to do according to the abominations of the Gentiles. “When you come into the land which יהוה (YHWH) your Elohim is giving you, do not learn to do according to the abominations of those gentiles” (Deut 18:9). It is very evident that the church is following these abominations and is therefore abominable to YHWH. Again you have to ask yourself, is what was abominable before, now made good?

One thing that the Church really hammers on is that it is impossible to keep the Torah or be perfect. The Torah itself teaches us that we are to be perfect before YHWH, “Be perfect before יהוה (YHWH) your Elohim” (Deut 18:13). Why would YHWH command this if it was impossible to do? This is because it is not impossible and the church is lying to us. 

Let us read of a few characters in the Scriptures, “This is the genealogy of Noah. Noah was a righteous man, perfect in his generations. Noah walked with Elohim” (Gen 6:9). “There was a man in the land of Uts, whose name was Iyoḇ. And that man was perfect and straight, and one who feared Elohim and turned aside from evil” (Job 1:1). “There was in the days of Herodes, the sovereign of Yehuḏah, a certain priest named Zeḵaryah, of the division of Aḇiyah. And his wife was of the daughters of Aharon, and her name was Elisheḇa. And they were both righteous before Elohim, blamelessly walking in all the commands and righteousnesses of יהוה (YHWH)” (Luke 1:5). These are but a few examples of people who were perfect and righteous before YHWH.  Now let us see what the Messiah Himself taught what we are to do, “Therefore, be perfect, as your Father in the heavens is perfect” (Mat 5:48).

So according to the Living Word of YHWH and by the teaching of the Messiah, we are to be perfect before YHWH walking in all the Commands of YHWH. We are not to learn to do as the pagan Gentiles do. Should we not then search out to see whether we are doing as the pagans are doing or are we following the Word of the Almighty?

Word Survey: Lord

The Name YHWH has been substituted in our translations of the Scriptures with the title “Lord” some 6823 times. The short form, Yah, has also been substituted 48 times with “Lord,” and only in one place was it retained as: Yah, in Psalm 68:4, in the older and more literal translations. Further, wherever we read “GOD” in capital letters, that too is a substituted for “YHWH.” This title, “Lord,” is applied to all heathen deities, if the word “god” is not used for them. In most cases “lord” and “god” are used interchangeably for pagan idols. For instance, Hare Krishna is popularly known as “Lord,” and nowadays we hear much about “Lord Maitreya.”

In 1 Cor 8:5 Paul says, “as there are many mighty one’s and many masters.”So, who then, do we worship? Surely there is only One that we should worship, with His Son sitting on His right side. “…What is His Name, and what is His Son’s Name, if you know?” (Prov 30:4). Why have Their Names been hidden from us?

Let us investigate this most common substitute for the Name YHWH, namely “Lord.” What is its etymology? Dictionaries tell us that it originated from the Old English “hlaford,” which in turn came from “half-weard” = loaf-keeper. This may be true, but you do have to stretch your imagination to see a connection between “lord” and half-weard.

Nevertheless, even if we do accept this explanation, I would like to propose that, in accordance with the spirit of syncretism, i.e. making your deity acceptable to others, we can readily see how the worshippers of three pagan deities with names similar to “lord,” were accommodated by means of compromise. These three pagan deities were “Larth”, “Loride” and “Lordo.” The Church, which evolved after Constantine fused the Messianic Belief with Sun-worship, was enthusiastic to win as many followers as they could, even if it meant compromise or assimilation.

Let us do some research on these three idols:

(1) LARTH: There was an Etruscan house deity whose name was Lar, which signified “Lord,” also know as Larth, who later on became very popular in Rome and became known as Lares (plural), because as idol statues they were usually in pairs. This deity was invoked together with Janus, Jupiter, Mars, Quirinus and Bellona. The Greek equivalent of this name was Heros, which was another name for Zeus. A feminine form was known as Lara, who was the beloved of Mercury, the Sun-deity. Another name for Zeus was Larissaeus, which also was another name for Apollo. Zeus was also known as Larasios or Lariseus, while Larasios was also a surname of Helios, Typical of the syncretism and polytheism of those days, we read of Emperor Alexander Severus (222-235 C.E.) who “had images of Abraham, Christ and Alexander the Great among his household Lares.” These Lares are to be found in the East as well, seen in niches in Hindu houses.

However, what is the analogy between Larth (Lar) and Lord? Firstly, all sources agree, that this Lar or Larth means: Lord. Secondly, it is well documented that “th” and “d” were virtually interchangeably used, varying from nation to nation. Thirdly, in Old English and Middle English it was common to find the “o” and “a” interchangeably used too.

In the Middle English Dictionary, editor S.M. Kuhn, we read that lord was earlier spelt lard; that lor became lord; that lor was spelt lar in Old English (meaning: the action or process of teaching or preaching); that Lore-fader was also spelt Larfaderr or Larefadir or larfadir (meaning: teacher); that lorspel was lar-spel in Old English (meaning: that which is taught in religion); and that lor-theu was previously also spelt lar-theow, lardewe, lardewen, lauerd, lordeau (meaning: teacher or spiritual or theological teacher). Thus we can easily see the ease of identifying Lard, Lord, Larth, Lor, Lar, Lortheu, Lartheow, Lardewe with one another. In fact, it is easier to trace the origin of “Lord” according to this well documented evidence, rather than the commonly held belief that it originated from half-weard.

(2) LORIDE: Thor was the well-known Teutonic war-deity. He was also known as a Sun-deity. His surname was Hlorridhi, as recorded in the Edda. This name or surname was also spelt Hloridi or Loride, the latter also taken to be Thor’s son, who had a wife with the name “Glora.” This Loride could easily have been contracted to the form “Lord,” or perhaps it could only have served to establish religious syncretism with Larth, and Lortheu, and Lard, and Lordeau, and Lord.

(3) LORDO: Lordo, or Lordon, was another deity or daimon, the daimon of “lordosis,” the curvature of the spine of body, which also had a sensual meaning.

If all this evidence is considered, one can resolve that, apart from the various names which contributed towards the assimilation or syncretism, the most likely origin of the word “Lord” is from Larth (Lard) and Lortheu (lardewe, lordeau, lauerd).

Thus, although the word “Lord” is not so clearly related to, or originated from, frank Sun-worship, we have enough evidence to trace its roots back to idolatrous worship in the form of Loride, being a surname for Thor (the Sun), and also Lortheu or Lardewe or lordeau (connected with theos or deos or deva), as well as Larth or Lar which was somehow linked with Mercury (the Sun-deity) and Zeus, the Sky-deity who later on became the Sun-deity.

As a confirmation of the conclusion to which we came, we afterwards discovered the following findings of the scholar of English names, Robert Ferguson, in his Surnames as a Science. In pp 157 and 189 he emphatically states that “Lord” could not have had its origin from hlaford, which was said to come from half-weard. Like us, he states that the origin of “Lord” is from lar, lore, and Loride.

What then, should we use instead of “Lord”? The word “Master” is an exact rendering of the Hebrew Adonai (actually the ‘ai’ at the end of the word means ‘my’ so Adonai means ‘my Master’) and the Greek Kurios. If we love the Name of YHWH, as is expected from us (Ps 69:36, ps 119:132, Isa 56:6), can we be content with this word “Lord” which many have dared to substitute His Name with? Can we say with David in Ps 5:11, “But let all those rejoice who put their trust in You… let those also who love Your Name, be joyful in You.”

Elohim’s end-time prophecy of Isa 56:6-7 could mean a blessing, or an exclusion to us, “Also the sons of the foreigner, who joined themselves to YHWH, to serve Him, and to love the Name of YHWH, to be His servants – everyone who keeps from defiling the Sabbath, and holds fast My Covenant – even them I will bring to My Set-Apart Mountain, and make them joyful in My house of prayer.”

Again, He prophecies about this time in Hosea 2:16-17,”’And it shall be, in the day’ says YHWH, ‘That you will… no longer call me: My Baal; for I will take from her mouth the names of the Baals, and they shall be remembered by their name no more.’”

The prophecy of Zeph 3:9 must be fulfilled, “For then I will restore to the peoples a pure language, that they all may call on the Name of YHWH, to serve Him with one accord.”

(Article from a book called: "Come Out of Her My People" by Chris Koster)