King James Version ONLY?
Part 5
Y to J Issue – Removing the Fog of Religion
Presented by Your servant, Dan Baxley
Email comments to – dan@servantsofyahshua.com
The following is part of an article
taken from one of the major supporters of the KJV Bible ONLY people. Their concept is simple; the KJV was inspired
by God Himself and is therefore His words exactly as He meant them to be
written. This would include all words
and wording that may seem, to some, to be errors. This view means there can be no argument, the
KJV is God spoken and approved and “authorized” by God. Unfortunately, the reference to the KJV bible
as the “Authorized” version is not from the God of Heaven at all but from the
King of England. This version was
“authorized” by the King and is called, in the preface, in the dedications to
the King of England as his version commissioned into creation and by his seal
of approval becomes the “authorized” version among many other version of the
time. In other words, this version,
“authorized” by King James is the only version of the Bible approved by the
Government, the Monarchy of England. If
you can obtain the 1611 AD version you can read this truth for yourself. The whole of the KJV is dedicated to the King
of England.
This twisted deception that the KJV is
God speaking, as opposed to translators working under the guidance and
permission of the King of England lead to the following kind of
statements. Statements not made by the
insane but by a man of great intelligence, a man of letters, and he is not
alone in the opinion he expresses as a truth.
This, for me and for others seeing through this deception proves we must
always keep our guard up, keep our eyes and mind in the Scriptures with prayer
for guidance from our Master Teacher, YaHshua.
The following is presented in the search
for truth. My comments are inserted and
not meant to disparage John Hinton but seeing this is his article and it voices
the opinion and the defense of a false doctrine and view of many others. He is but the example of what many others are
saying and believe.
I will insert my comments along the way in
response to what John Hinton has written in defense of the KJV as God breathed
and his attack on those seeking to restore our Savior’s birth name to their
worship. I hope and pray this will be a
beneficial study and you search out this truth so as not to fall prey to this
“religious fog” – as we progress we can and will remove the fog of religion.
Presented for your consideration:
Email any comments to: dan@servantsofyahshua.com
Ridiculous KJV Bible Corrections:
Who is Yahweh?
by John Hinton, Ph.D.
jhinton@post.harvard.edu
Ex
6:3 And I appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto
Jacob, by the name of God Almighty, but by my name JEHOVAH was I not known to
them.
Ps
83:18 That men may know that thou, whose name alone is
JEHOVAH, art the most high over all the earth.
Isa
12:2 Behold, God is my salvation; I will trust, and not be afraid: for the LORD
JEHOVAH is my strength and my song; he also is become my salvation.
Isa
26:4 Trust ye in the LORD for ever: for in the LORD
JEHOVAH is everlasting strength:
The above quoted verses are the four verses where the name of God is
pronounced in the KJV (as well as the ASV, and a few other English versions).
There is a popular movement to replace the name of God, Jehovah, with the name
Yahweh. This is being pushed especially hard among those in the Identity and
Christian patriot movements, and especially among the
alternative news community prominent on the shortwave, which some Christians
perceive of as being a source of more purer form of broadcasted Christianity.
There are exceptions, but overall this is nonsense because the shortwave
Christian broadcasts are frequently every bit as commercialized (just different
products) and apostate as the "Christianity" that is broadcasted on
TV.
Your servant’s
Comment: From the very
beginning of John Hinton’s article we see a basic error – he assumes the name
JEHOVAH is the correct name for the God of Israel. Why? Because the KJV says so.
In Old English, when the KJV was first translated this name, JEHOVAH was
pronounced different, mainly because the letter “J” was pronounce like a Y, as
in Yod. By not
updating this pronunciations and error is entered in by John Hinton. You have to blindly accept the KJV as the
Word of God over all other translations.
Nearly all biblical scholars, to date, point out the error of the KJV
use of the name JEHOVAH, as it is pronounced today, is
in error and never existed prior to this time.
Even the Jehovah Witnesses admit they were wrong and the English
transliteration for the Name of the God of Israel should be and should have
been YaHWeH, not Jehovah. See Aid to
Bible Understanding, page 884-885, 1971, Watch Tower Society, under, The pronunciation of “Jehovah” and “YaHweh”. If
they, having based their whole work on the name Jehovah, have come to realize
their error then why shouldn’t others?
Even though the Jehovah’s Witnesses admit to their error they still live
in it.
________________________________________________________________________
Y to J Issue
By John
Hinton, Ph.D.
http://av1611.com/kjbp/ridiculous-kjv-bible-corrections/Yahweh-Jehova-YHVH.html
The final issue that must be addressed concerns the conversion of Y to J.
This is such an utterly silly and ignorant criticism that I find it
embarrassing that there are actually Christians that present it as an argument.
Your Servants comment: This is a tactic used by critics of evolution
and of haters of the Bible – calling anyone with a different opinion as
“ignorant”. This means, of course, that
the author is the opposite of the ignorant and has the real truth. As we progress through John’s comments we
will see who is really demonstrating a certain kind of ignorance.
John continues: I
already dealt with the issue in my article on the name of Jesus, but I will
restate some of it here with some additional historical linguistic information
provided by Dr. Riplinger. Y becomes a J in every
name in English, French, and Spanish. In English the J is pronounced like J in
Japan, while in French it is pronounced like S in pleasure, in Spanish it is
pronounced like an H, in German it is pronounced like Y. This is a phonological
and orthographical issue, not a theological one. There is no theological issue
at stake in how one language interprets a certain phoneme.
Your
Servant’s Comment: Dr. Riplinger wrote a book comparing all of the differences
between the NIV (New International Version) and the KJV and called every
updated word or phrase and error.
Why? Because it
disagreed with the KJV and its Old English terminology. Talk about being ridiculous this book by Riplinger caters to the KJV Only people – the blind leading
the blind. No, the Apostles Peter and
Paul did not use the KJV and the only person to “Authorize” the KJV as the
Bible to be read in the Churches was King James, and he is not and was not
God.
John continues: In every case of a name in Hebrew that
begins with a yod (Y) it is pronounced with the
appropriate phoneme for that language. This came about through phonological and
orthographical changes in the developments of those languages. Even Hebrew
itself went through huge phonological and orthographical changes in its long
history.
Your Servant’s Comment: Don’t let the big words throw you. This is some more of that “Religious Fog” I
keep mentioning. Another big word that
is avoided is, “transliteration” and for good reason, as to transliterate a
name kicks the props out from under John’s flawed reasoning here. He is telling you the truth but not the whole
truth. Want to know what he is
saying?
Phoneme – “Any of the abstract units of the
phonetic system of a language that correspond
to a set of similar speech sounds”
Orthographical – “of, relating to – correct in spelling”
Phonological -- “the Science of speech sounds .. “
The
definitions can be much longer. I have
given you the basic and mean interpretations.
What
he means by correctly using all of these big words is that different letters are
used in different languages for a similar or the same sound as that of the
original. He plants the seed of doubt in
the Hebrew by suggesting the Hebrew has gone through several changes. But the real point to using these definitions
is pointing to the producing a like sound with different letters from another
language, and this is called “transliteration”. A transliteration is the reproduction
of a name from a different language into your language. That is all he had to say, but this does not
create the fog he seems to be building.
While the name or word may look different in appearance the
transliteration would produce the same or very similar phonetic sound – the
same sound, not a different sound or pronunciation. This, of course is not what many want you to
believe. Now, that is what he is
supposed to be saying but let’s go further into what he is really trying to
tell you while covering your thinking with the use of terms most are not
familiar with.
John continues: God's
name is not a magic word to be chanted for power as the name cult seems to
suggest for both the names of God and Jesus. My name comes from a Hebrew word
meaning given by God, which begins with a Y in Hebrew. It is Jean (zhan) in French, Juan (hwan) in
Spanish, Giovanni in Italian, Hans in German, Yani in
modern Greek, Ivan (eevan) in Russian, Yahya or Hanna (with a heavy H) in Arabic, and other variations
exist in other languages. They all translate as John and I have no trouble
adapting to any of them within the respective cultures and there is no reason
for me to be insulted by any of these names. On the other hand, being addressed
by a made up name based on a pagan deity would insult me.
Your Servant’s Comment:
Where to start? Wow, the “fog” machine
is wide open. First, John says his name
in Hebrew begins with a “Y”. This is not
true, the “Y” is the English for the Hebrew, not the
Hebrew. Back to the transliterating
of a name, the producing of a sound that is similar or the same as that made in
the original language. John wants to
avoid that by clouding up the issue by suggesting names all change into
something else from language to language.
He give all of these examples to prove his
point while ignoring the fact that Old English is different from New
English. His name, for example, in Old
English would have been pronounced as Yawn, which would be the
“transliteration” of his name, John, back into the original pronunciation. Does this change matter to John, no, not
unless he is looking into his genealogy to build a family tree. But does this have any importance when it
comes to the Name of our Savior? You bet
it does –
(Act 4:12) Neither is there salvation in any other: for
there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be
saved.
What is this verse saying? It does not take any special interpretation,
does it? What Name was Peter using when
he said this? What Name were the
Apostles preaching and teaching in and under?
Can we “transliterate” His birth Name in today’s modern languages? Absolutely. In fact, there is a whole book in the English
Bible that is named the Name of our Savior – JOSHUA. This name is with us today and yesterday and
the days before that, it is only men that have refused to use it and have
replace this name, and name given to our Savior at birth, with a false name,
with a bogus name, with a name that never existed until about 400 years ago. So, why use a made up name, or substitute a
different name for the Name that is in our language already and has been all
along. Joshua is the Old English
transliteration for our Savior’s Jewish Name, a common name, a name found among
men, just as Acts 4:12 says and a name by which we MUST BE SAVED. Again, why use any other name? There is no reason – the deception is
strong. There is no excuse, but men like
John Hinton spend a great deal of time dancing around and away from our
Savior’s birth name to support a fictional name made up to replace the name by
which we must all be saved. Remember,
John said the first letter in his name would be a “Y” (The modern English
transliteration for the Hebrew/Aramaic) so if we restore the proper letter for
the proper modern translation to pronounce this Old English transliteration we
can then say the Name just as the Old English said it and as it was said by the
Jews of our Savior’s day – from Joshua to Yoshua – the closer and more correct
in the modern English of today would be YaHshua. This is nowhere near the false name, JESUS,
even if you correct the “J”, it gets closer but is
still off the mark.
This brings up another point. If Yesus would be
more correct then why continue to use the less correct, Jesus? Some in the Messianic groups do use the name,
Yeshua. The defense in not restoring His Name can only
have one source. How can learned men
such as John Hinton go to such lengths to cover up this simple truth. Once again,
the name of our Savior is in the Bible but when it comes to the New Testament
the translators and some very educated men insist on using a bogus name that is
not connected to our Savior’s birth name but is another name all together. Remember the story -- Joshua fought the
battle of Jericho? Also, it was Joshua
that led the people of God into the Promised Land? The name of this individual is the same name
our Savior was named. His name is still
with us, it is in the Bible except when it comes to the New Testament – so, how
changed it? The KJV only people, like
John Hinton will try to tell you that God did.
This would make all references to the Name of our Savior as false.
John continues to cloud the issue: If these name cultists find the J
so objectionable, why don't they refer to Elijah as Elaiyah,
Jeramiah as Yeramaiyah, Jacob as Yakov,
Jonathan as Yanatan, Jerusalem as Yerushaleem,
and so forth. For that matter why don't they use the Hebrew pronunciation for
all of the names in the Bible, such as Dahveed, Moshe
(Moses), Shmu'el (Samuel), Sha'ul
(Saul), Shlomo (Solomon), and so forth, if they
consider the issue to be so important. Since those who
call God by a name that is not even Hebrew at all, and since they do so without
a scrap of evidence to override the very solid evidence to the contrary, why do
they have any constraints at all about inventing whimsical pointings
for other names in the Bible? Why not call David Dahwid,
Duwad, Diwad, or Deewud. Or how about Da'ud
as Arabic pronounces it? Since Yahwe sounds
like an Arabic word (except for the long A) this should go over well. Better yet, why not Dood. After
all, as I have already pointed out, the vav is read
as a long U when there is a dot in the middle of it. The modern translations
that want to relate to the modern youth could spell him Dude. Think of the
great "Christian" rock lyrics that could come from that. While we are
at it why not call Moses Mose instead of Moshe so it
fits the atheist scholars view that his name is related to an Egyptian pharaoh
with a similar name. Moshe could also be Masih
(Arabic for Messiah), Shlomo could be Sulemaw, and Shmu'el could be Smiwal?
Your Servant’s Comment: If John Hinton were
informed in ths matter he would not have written what
you just read. A cursory investigation
into the Sacred Names and the Hebrew Roots Movement, to most vocal on our
Savior’s birth name, would reveal these groups do just that. It has to be these groups he is talking
about, the people he calls “name cultist”.
These so called “name cultist” do exactly what he, John Hinton, say they
do not. This is an out and out lie, or
he is totally uninformed. These “name
cultist” have produced some really good bible translations that have restored
our Savior’s Name to its proper place in the New Testament. From the first sentence all of his examples
mean nothing and only go on to prove his lack of research. Again, John Hinton is trying to muddy the
waters, to throw up a fog of doubt. It
is actually a childish demonstration of throwing dirt in the air. The fact is, some of the Sacred names groups
have restore so many of the English words with Hebrew/Aramaic transliterated
words in their bible restoration works I find them difficult to read as many of
the words are appear so unfamiliar, but they do demonstrate the ability to
“transliterate” names from one language to another. But, and this is big, there is only one NAME
by which we must be saved – so – this is the Name that counts, all else is
secondary only has meaning when it point to HIM, our Savior.
John Continues: For those who still who are still
confused about the phonological issue of sound changes between and within
languages, the following historical-linguistic summary from the World Book
Encyclopedia concerning the Y to J conversion as it relates to English should
be helpful.
"The sound of the Hebrew letter jod came
into English as the letter 'I,' used as a consonant and having the soft 'g'
sound, like today's 'j.' In the past the letter 'I' was used as both a vowel (i) sound and as the consonant 'j' sound. The OED says that
the sound of 'j,' though originally printed as 'I,' was pronounced as a soft
'g' (Oxford English Dictionary, Unabridged, 2nd Edition, Oxford: Clarendon
Press, 1991, s.v. J). The 'JE' sound in JEHOVAH was
spelled 'IE' and pronounced as 'JE.' To distinguish the consonant sound (soft
'g') of the letter 'I' from the vowel sound of 'I,' many scribes in the 1200s
began putting a tail on the soft 'g' 'I',' making it look like our modern 'J.'
The Spanish, in the 1500s, were the first to more consistently try to
distinguish the consonant I (soft 'g') sound as the shape of a 'J.' At that
same time English printers used 'J' and 'I' fonts interchangeably (as
documented elsewhere in this book). During the 1600s, most languages began
consistently using the extended 'I' form, now called a 'J,' to represent the
'j' (soft 'g') sound." [quoted in Riplinger, p. 418]
Servant’s Comment:
This is all true but notice, this is all about
the Old English. If you were living
several centuries back in the past all of this is very sensible, but today this
has not been updated. The demonstration
of the change in letters and sounds and appearance are notable. In today’s language the “Y” is the called the
“Yod”, demonstrating how it is to be pronounced
today, not as the “J” as modern language has change it. If we are to restore the “J” then JEHOVAH
would be YeHovah – do you see? The IE was pronounced first YE then the “I”
changed or was joined by the English change to a “J” letter and for years the
pronunciation of these two letters were the same. Around the time of the KJV translation in one
of the later revisions the “I” was changed to the “J” which had changed in its
pronunciation, no longer following the English Hebrew “Y” or “Yod”. All of what is
quoted above is from an outdated definition and while it is informative it is
not a corrected understanding, unless, of course, you live in the 1500s.
John
Hinton continues to use Riplinger’s work as a
source. For those of you that do not
have a copy of her work let me tell you, she is not the first attempting to
make the KJV Bible the only Bible ever to be trusted, as though it is God
breathed while all other translations are from Satan. I am not exaggerating. If any modern translations corrects, or dares
correct a word error in the KJV they are doing the work of Satan. Even the errors found in the KJV are seen as
truth and not errors because the Holy Spirit inspired the error. No, I am not kidding, this is what they teach
and intelligent men like John Hinton teach.
When you understand this you will then see why the vehement and false
accusations are made against anyone that desires to worship our Lord and Savior
in His true name, His birth Name, YaHshua, or Joshua as it is seen in the Old
English.
John’s Summary
What it boils down to is that modern rebels wish to change the names of
God, eliminate them, malign them, and assimilate them into false religions. It
is more than just a way to puff themselves up as possessing arcane metaphysical
knowledge lacking in others, but as a way to get around the issue of having to
be born again. To these rebels the possession of this Kabalistic knowledge, and
its usual return to the Old Testament law (which they only do in words, not
deeds), replaces repentance and rebirth. Conversion, repentance, and living by
Christian standards has been replaced by using a
mantra that is based upon using a "corrected" name of God, and a
"corrected" name of Jesus (I dealt with his name in RBC #58).
Unfortunately for them, God's Word tells them in John
3:3 that ". except a man be born again, he
cannot see the kingdom of God." We are also told the same thing in John
3:7 and 1
Peter 1:23:
Servant’s comment:
Again John Hinton demonstrates his lack of knowledge when it comes to
those desiring to restore our Savior’s birth name to their worship that are not
following some Kabalistic (Jewish Mysticism) cult. There are many different groups and while it
is true some are trying to restore the Old Covenant, mistaking this knowledge
of our Savior’s birth Name as a call to return to the Jewish side of our
Christian beginnings.
John Hinton and others want to deny the
Jewish branch of Christianity, forgetting the first converts to our Savior were
all Jewish. Some misguided people see this
truth in His Name and the Name of the God of Israel and seek to return to
the Jewish roots of the Christian faith.
To call brothers and sisters of the Word evil names is counterproductive. John Hinton and many other leaders and
teachers make false accusations and work to discredit sincere seekers of the
truth, while they proceed in their own ignorance, just as this article by John
Hinton demonstrates. What Name does John
Hinton call on, pray to and say you must be baptized into? What name is it that John Hinton and others
say you must be saved in? What name is
it John Hinton and others say you must confess or you are of the
antichrist? Do you see, all of the
accusations they make concerning those wanting to restore our Savior’s Name are
on their own heads. These accusers say
not to use His Birth Name but to use the name they say is HOLY, the name they worship
and baptize under, the name they treat as having magical powers -- for healings
and miracles. Do you see what John
Hinton and others are doing? Their
accusations fall on their own heads. It
is they that are calling on a name of fantasy, a made up name, a name our
Savior never heard and the Apostles never taught in – a name that never existed
until some 1,600 years after our Lord went to the cross for us. Again, why are
they so against restoring His Birth Name to the scriptures? Why are they and why were the translators of
the KJV against restoring His true Identity when His Name was and is in the
Bible? I must as this question again,
and again, because they have no answer for this question -- The Name JOSHUA is
the Old English transliteration of our Lord’s Name and it is found in the Old
Testament the KJV translators translated, so why did they use a different name
in the NT they translated? Why do men of
letters, remember, it is John Hinton PhD (PhD means Doctor of Philosophy), like
the educated of our Lords day on earth whom He had words with, men of high
educational backing that He confronted, the Pharisees of His days in the flesh that
pretended to know so much but understood so little that our Lord corrected
again and again. Again, and again I will
ask this question, Why use a different name when His Name is present and
available in the Bible?
In
the very beginning of his (Dr John Hinton, PhD) summary he accuses the so
called “rebels” of changing things for a religion they want to create. However, if we were to go back in time we
would find the name Joshua (pronounced Yahshua) being used, that would
be the sound we would hear in our ears when our Lord was called on and it is the
name His disciples would have been using, not the name JESUS, a totally
different name. So, who is it that
rebelled and changed His name? First the
Greeks and then the Roman Catholic Church but even they kept His true name in
some of their services and only recently said they would stop using HIS NAME
out of respect for the Jews -- http://www.yahshuaservant.com/catholc-church-banning-the-use-of-sacred-name.htm. The Greeks first attempted a transliteration
of His rightful Name and this is where the “I” came from and in today’s
language this would properly be transliterated as the English “Y”. In other words the Greek “I” in the first
century AD produced a sound that relicated the
Hebrew/Aramaic sound of their letter for the first letter in our Savior’s
Name. Hundreds of years later the
sounding out of this letter changed.
Also, the Greeks and the Latins had a habit of
making things they accepted as their own.
This is where the “s” sound comes from, and we see this “s” added to
many names of words from the Greeks and the Latins,
the Romans. His true Name has never been
lost and has always been in your Bible, the translators merely decided to use a
different name, another name, but not His Name.
The
Romans followed the Greeks in this and as the language changed in its
pronunciation they kept the “I” then the English came along and transliterated
the Name as Iesus. This changed name is
found in some of the earliest translations of the Bible of 1611 as Iesvs and Iesus. It
was not until later revision of this KJV Bible it was changed to the “J” or
Jesus. Today we have this bogus name in
most of the English translations. So,
who is it that is changing the Name? It
is not the Hebrew Roots people and it is not the Sacred Names people and it is not people
like me that believe what the word says when it comes to His Name.
I am not as concerned about any other names in
the Bible finding their Hebrew roots because it is HIS NAME the Name given to
Him at birth, a Name that not only defines who He is but also points toward our
Heavenly Father, but the Name by which all that come to salvation are to be Saved,
today or tomorrow, that Name of Salvation, pointing to HIM cannot and has not
change. Scripture says there is “no
other name found among men by which we must be saved”,
so it is our responsibility to be sure we have and are calling on the correct
Name. A Name that is found among men, so
what Name would that be? During the time
of the creation of the KJV His name was present in the form of JOSHUA and it
was ignored and changed to JESUS in the NT, why? This question cannot be asked too often
because it give you the answer and exposes the false
name men and women that are sincerely seeking Him are being sidetracked and
deceived.
(Php 2:9) Wherefore
God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every
name:
(Php 2:10) That at
the name of ____________ every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things
in earth, and things under the earth; KJV
Fill in the blank – “that at the Name of YaHshua
(Joshua) every Knee should bow …” When Philip was inspired to write this
as a revelation to us the name JESUS did not exist, but the name JOSHUA,
did. So, which name did Philip say “every
knee should bow…”? Philip knew his Lord’s
Name and it was not and is not JESUS. Like
the Pharisees of old men seeing themselves as possessors of great knowledge,
calling themselves Doctor and other titles like, Pharisee, leading thousands
down the wrong path of worldly understanding ignoring what is, many times so
plain – in effect, ignoring the true Savior and the True God by calling on
another.
The name JESUS is not an equivalent and it is
not a transliteration, it is a completely different name. So, again, who is it that changed the name
and should be called the “cult” of JESUS. The flimsy arguments fall back on the critics
in their vain attempts to protect a name that is pronounced HeyZeus
by much of the world, others actually pronounce this false name, JESUS as ISIS
while the English speaking people say GEEZUS, which is not a god at all, not
even a pagan god, it is a different god altogether – a name our forefathers in
the faith did not know, had never heard.
They had heard of Zeus and of ISIS but not Geezus
(Daniel 11:38 – some identify this as the coming Beast). Is knowing His Name
that important? It seems that our Savior
thinks it is and even foresaw what people would do.
(John 5:43) I am come in my Father's name, and ye receive me
not: if another shall come in his own name, him ye will receive. KJV
(John 5:43) I
have come in my Father's name, and you do not accept me; but if someone else
comes in his own name, you will accept him. NIV
John Hinton continues:
Joh
3:7 Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born
again.
1Pe
1:23 Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the
word of God, which liveth and abideth
for ever.
What is amusing is that those who make a big deal out of the conversion to
J, and who contradict the Bible by calling God Yahweh while still calling
themselves Bible-believers generally know about as much about Hebrew as the
average Australian aborigine knows about Lithuanian. It troubles me how very few
people realize that the god that they now worship, named Yahweh, is derived
from a storm god created by atheist scholars following in the steps of the late
19th century skeptics, and that these atheists are feeding them much of their
theology (although this was the last thing that any of them intended).
Servant’s Comment:
John Hinton’s reasoning and accusations are so infantile as to be hardly
worth a response. By the statement he
makes here it is difficult not to accuse him of be used or influenced by some
outside force. His remarks are insane
and hardly worth a debate. He has not idea what he is talking about and if he does then he is
in the depths of deception and desire company or he is a volunteer of those
spiritual forces trying to destroy the people being called to the true God, to
the one true Savior. It is John Hinton
and those of his kind that are following myth and made
up things. The name JOSHUA has been
around for thousands of years the mythical name JESUS has only been around for
the last 400 years. The transliterated
name the Apostles taught and baptized in was JOSHUA. The modern English transliteration is
YaHshua. The false name JESUS is treated
as a magical name with more power and authority than the real Name our Lord and
Savior was given at birth.
John continues: Some
may wonder why I know so much about these Bible-scoffing atheists of the
scholarly community. It is because I used to be one of them. This familiarity
is a byproduct of years of intense comparative religion study without the Holy
Spirit to guide me. The Bible cannot be understood without spiritual
discernment, no matter how deeply one studies philology, archaeology, history,
and allied fields of scholarship. Like other secular scholars I studied Hebrew
with intensity in order to understand the Bible from the perspective of a
historian and philologist. I did the same thing with cuneiform languages
(Akkadian, Sumerian, and Hittite), Arabic, Sanskrit, and Greek, and their
associated religious traditions. I was given numerous fellowships,
scholarships, and awards as a student, so I was quite successful in their
world, but one thing separated me from my colleagues, which was an awareness that something was wrong with the whole
endeavor. It is one-sided, spiritually empty, misguided, destructive, without
merit, grossly naïve, ignorant, and void of anything resembling value, and even
from an atheistic point of view it is without value (what could have value in a
Godless universe?). After a while I could no longer consider my work to be a
worthy labor, and I was unable to justify anything that I was doing at all.
Only after I came to the point that I could no longer take serious the acquisition
of knowledge for knowledge's sake alone, and face the truth of my own miserable
and sinful nature and my need for salvation, did the Lord, whom I had
previously denied and blasphemed, call on me to humble myself before him and
seek his forgiveness and guidance. It was only after I responded that I began
to really read the Bible and to understand it. I also knew immediately that the
KJV was the only Bible that I could use, because it was the only one that was
attacked by the atheist and apostate Christian crowd that I had come to know so
intimately, and it was the only one that had the power of God upon it. Reading
the NIV, RSV and so forth, were like drinking Kool Aide with aspartame instead
of fresh squeezed fruit juice, or like listening to a recording of Britney
Spears instead of a Bach Cantata. Reading the Anchor Bible, the favorite of
many "higher" critics, was like drinking antifreeze instead freshly
squeezed fruit juice, and Black Sabbath instead of a Bach Cantata. I no longer
tried to view God as a local Near Eastern storm god (or plague deity), or as a
god with similarities to Varuna or Rudra of the Rigveda, because I am no longer blind. Today,
I find it mind boggling that many who have been calling themselves Christians
for years use a name for God that is derived from the world that I left behind,
not the one that I entered upon when I got saved.
I will end this essay with three questions addressed to those Christians
who abuse God's word by perverting the name of God. (1) Why would you allow
yourself to be influenced by Bible-scoffers who treat the Bible as a book of
mythology instead of as Scripture? (2) Where did you get the authority to
change both the English and Hebrew texts of the Bible when neither one of them
is ambiguous in the least? (3) Do you think that God is going to honor you for
doing so?
Servant’s Comment:
John Hinton’s confession of faith is admirable and we all have our
story. The three questions he asks are
misplaced and aimed in the wrong direction.
Question #1 – all of the Sacred Name people I know would agree with this
question and ask anyone in the Christian community the same question especially
to those of the KJV Only people, such as John Hinton, the one asking this
question. Question #2 – again those of
the Sacred Name, identifying our Lord by His Birth Name would as John Hinton
and the others this same question, Where did you get the authority to change
His Name to JESUS, when in fact, His Name, the Name He was given is present in
the Scripture but has been changed in the New Testament by the KJV
translators? Question #3 Will the God of
the Bible honor those who worship Him by His rightful name? Or will He honor those who have changed it to
something else?
I hope that those of you who call God Yahwe who
really do want to be Bible-believing Christians are not so proud and arrogant
that you feel that you cannot repent of a clear error that you have made in
ignorance. As for those of you who choose to continue to slander the Lord now
that you can no longer claim ignorance, I will dust off my sandals.
Servant’s Comment: Dito -- right back at you.
How can the KJV Only people, such as John Hinton be so arrogant? Is our Savior’s true name in the Bible or
not. Is it a Name that is found among
men, even to this day? Yes it is, the
Old Testament has one whole book in the very Name our Savior was named at
birth, JOSHUA, (Old English transliteration) but the translators changed His
Name to JESUS. Was this name in
existence when our Savior was born?
NO! That false name was not
around until some 400 years ago. The
name JOSHUA, or YaHSHUA in the modern transliteration
was around, at least, from the time of Moses and the composition of the Torah,
the first Hebrew Writings and when the Name YaHWeH was revealed to Moses. Later Moses would take on a young man as his lieutenant,
JOSHUA, a young man that would lead the Chosen people into the Kingdom – and interesting
parallel to what our Lord is to do.
If
you want to follow John Hinton and others in their misrepresentation of
Scripture then I have included his sources, from him, below.
John Hinton --
For Further Reading
Gill, John (1697-1771). A Dissertation Concerning the
Antiquity of the Hebrew Language, Letters, Vowel-Points and Accents.
Riplinger, Gail. In Awe of Thy Word: Understanding the King James Bible, Its Mystery
and History, Letter by Letter, 2003.
The preceding is part of a series
of examples of KJV verses that arrogant would-be scholars have tried to correct and
showed themselves to be fools. These examples are for the benefit of those who
would like more ammunition to defend God's Word against the attacks of the
arrogant Bible "correcting" modernists. I hope that some of you find
them useful.
Your servant in Christ,
John Hinton, Ph.D.
Bible Restoration Ministry
A ministry seeking the translating and reprinting of KJV equivalent Bibles in
all the languages of the world.
Servant’s Final Comment: It is ironic and a deception in itself by the
title of his work – Bible Restoration Ministry”. What is it they are attempting to
restore? The Christian World has
accepted the bogus name JESUS as have those of the KJV Only people. Apparently they do not want you to read His
Word in a clear language but prefer you stay in the Old English. If you have ever tried to read the KJV 1611
version, the one they say is God Breathed then you are in for a treat and you
will find that even their teachers deviate from the actual 1611 AD version
because it is nearly unreadable. This I
believe is their power stroke – if the common reader cannot understand it, as
it is written in the Old English, then you have to have their teachers explain
it to you, and this, then, solidifies their power over you. Pick up a modern translation at your nearest
Bible store and put the archaic and hard to be understood KJV of 1611 behind
you. I use the latest revision of the
KJV as a study bible as many of the word study sources are based on this
version. Beside this version I have
several modern translations, including a bible called the Names of God Bible published
by Revell,
a recognized publisher. This version can
be found in most Christian book stores or online at Amazon. Revell is
preparing a KJV with the Holy Name restored which is due out in November.
http://www.amazon.com/GW-Names-God-Bible-Hardcover
This
knowledge is not hidden but it is being suppressed by the KJV Only crowd trying
to keep you in the dark. Scripture comes
to life when you begin reading your Bible, no matter what version, especially when
and by restoring His Holy Name to the pages your read. When you see JESUS, read it as YaHshua or
even Joshua and you will see what I mean.
The world has been deceived and the deception is strong. Remove the fog of these religious men and
women.
Please
use this presentation to further your knowledge about our Lord and about the
devious works out to destroy and keep covered his Glorious Name, a Name that
leads to the Father. Above all, believe his words over the words of men, me
included. His word and
the words of His true and only Apostles (the Twelve) over the words of others.
(John 5:43) I am come in my Father's name, and ye receive me
not: if another shall come in his own name, him ye will receive. KJV
.
(John 17:26) And I have declared unto them thy name, and will
declare it: that the love
wherewith thou hast loved me may be in them, and I in them. KJV
(John 17:11) And now I am no more in the world, but these are
in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep through thine own name
those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one,
as we are.
KJV
(John 17:20) Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also
which shall believe on me through their word; KJV
I did not write these words, they are a copy of
what our Lord said, and this copy is right out of the KJV. What Name was
YaHshua, our Lord and Savior talking about?
The name the Christians use today and the name the KJV Only people
insist on using did not exist, in writing or in any language at the time our
Lord spoke these words. Restore His name
and see how the scriptures come to life.
(1Jn 2:22) Who is a liar but he that denieth
that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son. KJV
But wait! Now restore His Name, the Name of His Birth,
the Name delivered to Mary and Joseph to name Him, the Name the Apostle John
wrote and spoke in.
(1Jn 2:22)
Who is a liar but he that denieth that YaHshua
(Joshua) is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son. (Restored KJV)
Now, who is or who are the antichrists? Now we know why the Name was changed.
(1Jn 4:3) And every spirit that confesseth
not that YaHshua (Joshua) the Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already
is it in the world. (KJV name restored)
(2Jn 1:7) For many deceivers are entered into
the world, who confess not that YaHshua the Christ is come in the flesh. This
is a deceiver and an antichrist.
Who does Dr John Hinton confess? Who is it the KJV Only people confess? They confess a name that never existed when
the New Testament was first written.
They do not confess the same Savior as did the Apostles. Who will you confess as your Lord and Savior?
Email comments or questions to – dan@servantsofyahshua.com