|
|
We are the New Covenant Israelites, of the faith of Abraham; reconciled through a Spiritual adoption to eternal life through our Messiah Yah'shua, by the grace of Yahweh. |
|||||||||||||||
|
The Natural Congregation of Yahweh is what the secular world, modern traditional 'Christians', and the modern 'Jews', would phrase as, "The Natural Church of God" |
|||||||||||||||
Yah'shua - the proper name of our One and only Messiah
Hebrew "Yh'shw" = English "Yah'shua", the name of our Messiah and Saviour
Unfortunately millions of Christians have been brought up to believe that the Name of the Son of Yahweh is "Jesus". It isn't. "Jesus" isn't His real name at all but it is a corrupt Latin-Greek fabrication of a name that does not carry the meaning ascribed by Yahweh through His angel Gabriel. The Greek for "saviour" is soter and the Latin is salvare. The Son of Yahweh was never called "Jesus" at any time in the original Bibles, either in prophecy or while on earth or in Heaven. Every son anciently bore his father's name. There were no surnames or "family names" anciently, though there were certainly tribal associations. The ancient practice still obtains in many countries around the world. While a mortal, Yah'shua carried the name of his step-father, Joseph, and would typically have been known as He was often referenced as "Yah'shua ben Joseph" (or "Yah'shua bar Joseph") under normal conditions, meaning Yah'shua, son of Joseph. However, His Heavenly Father was His true Father and whose Name we would therefore also expect Him to bear. And indeed He does, and He claimed to do the same, when He said: "I have come in My Father's Name" (Jn.5:43) which means more than simply bearing the authority of Yahweh -- it means that the Father's Name was in His own name, meaning He was "Yah'shua, the Son of Yahweh" (His Father). The true Name of the Man we have come to know as "Jesus" is, in fact, Yah'shua. His Name is even mentioned in the Old Covenant when Moses said: "Yah ("the Lord")...has become my salvation" (Ex.15:2). David echoed him: "Yah ("the Lord")...has become my salvation" (Ps.118:14). This became a common cry of victory: "..Yah ("God")...is my salvation" (Isa.12:2a). The Hebrew for "salvation" is shua; thus Yah'shua in "loosely translated" English means "God of Salvation", or more accurately transliterated, it means, "Yahweh is Salvation" or "Yahweh's Salvation". In the light of what we know about the proper name of Yahweh, what then should be our position regarding "Jesus" and Yah'shua? Unlike the word "Jehovah", which we consider blasphemous, we can find no evidence that "Jesus" falls under a similar category. "Jesus" is not, as we have said, His proper name, and tells us by its definition, nothing about the Man of the Messiah. Clearly Yah'shua is the proper Name that defines "who" the Messiah is, and the one we should begin to get into the habit of using. "Jesus" is derived from the Greek which has no "sh" sound. When originally Yah'shua was translated into the Greek, it probably sounded something like "Eesu-uh" with the suffix "-s" for the correct grammatical ending, making Iesous. This was also the name used in English up to about two-and-a-half-centuries ago when it was written "Iesus", and is still the pronunciation used in Scandinavian countries, even though it is spelled "Jesus", as is the Spanish version which sounds like "Heyzuez". There are some who maintain that "Iesous" or its derivitive "Jesus" is a blasphemous syncretism with the Greek deity Zeus but we find little evidence for that. Iesous is simply the erroneous Hellenic (Greek) version of Yah'shua which later became corrupted into the word Jesus. To say "Jesus" instead of Yah'shua is, in our opinion, no more insulting than someone calling me "Henry" instead of "Jon". However, clearly "Yah'shua" is His proper name and demonstrates not only our respect, but our willingness to be obedient. There is no obstacle to Anglo-Saxon tongues articulating it, thus we should learn to use it. The name "Jesus" is thrice removed from the original Hebrew/Aramaic "ישוע". That said, the Messiah's name is not "Jesus," it is "Yah’shua", nor is it "Yeshua" as others also erroneously claim. "Yah’shua" is a transliteration of the Hebrew ישוע. "Yeshua" is an incorrect transliteration of the Hebrew, more akin to a translation. Yeshua is an incorrectly shortened or contracted form of Y'hoshua יהושוע - the Hebrew equivalent of "Joshua", which is more accurately, “salvation” as opposed to “Yahweh is Salvation”, or "Yahweh's Salvation". Where Y'hoshua is used it is intended to mean "Yahweh Saves" or "Yahweh of salvation", or sometimes simply "salvation". ("Yah" יה being a shortened, Biblical form of the sacred Name of Yahweh יהוה, usually represented in English as YHWH, or sometimes incorrectly as YHVH and commonly misspelled in English as "Jehovah".) The ancient scribes of the Hebrew Scriptures (Masoretes) purposely misspelled (mis-pointed) the sacred Name ("YHWH") to alert readers to avoid its pronunciation, which was superstitiously considered too sacred to utter. All throughout the Scriptures, the Masoretes purposely misspelled (mis-pointed) other names, like "Y'hoshua," for the same reasons - to avoid pronouncing the sacred Name. The Hebrew for "Yah" appears in many places in the Scriptures, including in other names, such as "Yeshayahu" (Isaiah), "Yoshiyahu" (Josiah) and many others where this same form of misspelling did not occur. Since "Y'hoshua" has purposely been misspelled, it should be correctly rendered "Yah’shua" to preserve the "Yah" in the name. Any 5-year-old Hebrew student can easily pronounce what was originally written in the Scriptures, which can only be transliterated correctly as "Yah’shua".
According to
When reading the original Hebrew and in many cases, even the original Greek writings, we must also utilize the proper grammatical structure originally intended. For example, the phrase; "you shall call His name" has been erroneously used in place of; "His name shall be called" in many, if not most modern English translations of the New Covenant. The original writers were attempting in these instances to explain to us what would come to mind, or what we would think of when we heard His name, or in other words, "what His name means" as opposed to "what His name is". The word "called", might be better translated in English as "mean", so that the phrase properly transliterated would read: "His name shall mean". The best example of this is where the same grammar was left intact in the English translations of Isaiah 9:6: "For unto us a Child is born, Unto us a Son is given; And the government will be upon His shoulder. And His name will be called [will mean] Wonderful, Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace." Obviously, these are meant to describe what His name "means" to us, they are not all intended to "be" His names. In this example, it is clear that whatever His "name" would be, it would call to mind, ALL of these things. This also applies to the often misunderstood Hebrew word "Immanuel". The grammar used with the word Immanuel was the same. In other words, when we heard His name called, we would think of "God with us" in English, or "Immanuel" if we were Hebrew speaking (which is translated into the English phrase "God with us"). Our Messiah's name is Yah'shua. Yah'shua's name will be called - it will mean to us, Wonderful, Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace, God with us, or if you are Hebrew speaking, Immanuel, which is the Hebrew equivalent of God with us. We should not be surprised at why Christians "changed" the Messiah’s name when conducting their early Bible translations. Does it not seem obvious that Christians wanted to change names and other key words to gain credibility for their adoption of the false traditional, pagan doctrines still practiced by them today. If not, they would have changed His name from Yah’shua to ‘Immanuel’, not to the totally foreign Greek name, “Ieusis”, which has more recently been altered into the form, “Jesus”. The Messiah has so many names in the Tanakh that if He was to be literally acknowledged by them all, the result would be ridiculous. This fact opened the opportunity for deception by the early Christians. We must be aware that Biblically, names can indicate something of a descriptive nature of the one to whom they belong. For that reason, Abraham, Jacob and others had their names changed to indicate a change of nature or position. Abram, the "exalted father", becomes Abraham; the "father of multitude". The Messiah has many descriptive names; e.g.: ha Tsemach, "the Branch" (Zechariah 3:8); Pele, "Wonderful"; Ya’ats, "Counsellor"; El gibbor, "mighty God" (Isaiah 9:6) etc. It should be obvious that these descriptive names, including lmmanuel speak of His nature, describing who He is, and are not meant to be strictly literal designations as to His actual name/title. What is interesting is that Matthew, while recognizing that Yah’shua is the Messiah – the prophesied Immanuel, relates that it was the angel Gabriel who instructed Miriam as to what her Son’s name would mean [what His name shall be called - meaning what His name shall 'mean', not what His name shall 'be'] (Matthew 1:18-25). TOP ^
Yah’shua (Jesus) was an Israelite and a 'Judean', NOT a Jew
The self-styled modern Jews’ ancestors never set a foot in Judea. They existed at that time in Asia, their true "homeland", and were known as Khazars. In none of the manuscripts of the original Old or New Covenant was Yah’shua or anyone else for that matter, described or referred to as a "Jew". The term originated in the late eighteenth century as an abbreviation of the term Judean and refers to a resident of Judea without regard to race or religion, just as the term "Texan" signifies a person living in Texas, without regard to whether the “Texan” is a Jew, Christian or Satanic worshipper. In spite of the powerful propaganda effort of the so-called "Jews", they have been unable to prove in recorded history that there is even one slight record, prior to that eighteenth century period of Bible translations, of any race, religion or nationality, referred to as "Jew". The religious sect in Judea, in the time of Yah’shua, to which self-styled "Jews" of today refer to as the "Jews", were in fact known as "Pharisees". "Judaism" of today and "Pharisaism" of the time of Yah’shua are one and the same. Yah’shua abhorred and denounced "Pharisaism" and by extension, modern Judaism (“Jews”); which is self-evident by His choice of the words, "Woe unto you Scribes and Pharisees, Hypocrites, Ye Serpents, Ye Generation of Vipers". We know that Saul was the first king of Israel and that John was the first man called Baptist, but who was the first Jew? Neither Adam, Seth or Noah are called Jew. Nor were Abraham, Isaac or Jacob. Moses was not called a Jew and neither were Saul, David or Solomon called Jew. In fact you will not find the word Jew in the first eleven books of even any modern versions of the Bible. The first time Jews are mentioned in the Bible translations, is in II Kings 16:6 (and then only in translations revised in or later than the eighteenth century) where we find Israel was at war with these Khazars [Jews] and drave the Khazars [Jews] from Elath. Isn't it interesting that we can read over five hundred pages of the Bible before we find a Jew anywhere, yet those who call themselves Jews today erroneously claim the first five books of the Bible as their own and call it their Torah!
Do you not find it rather strange that those who
claim to have written the first five books of the Bible and call themselves Jew,
can't find the word Jew written anywhere in the book they call their own and
claim to have written? Yah’shua the Messiah tells John in
We know that God changed the name of Abram to
Abraham in
By the time of Yah’shua, the word “Edom” or Edomite had been translated by Greek and Latin translators into Ioudaios and Iudaeus meaning a person living in or from Edom. The original King James version of the Bible, 1611, translated Idumaean into Iewes. It wasn't until the revised editions of the King James Bible, that the newly coined word "Jew" appeared. The word Jew does not mean Israel or Israelite, nor Hebrew! We must conclude therefore that the first "Jews" were Canaanite-Edomite-Hittite; commonly "Khazars". It is certain, according to the Bible, that Jews are not, nor never have been Israel. Thus those that truly comprehend themselves to be modern Israelites, are indeed just like their Messiah, NOT Jews! "It is highly provable that the bulk of the Khazars [Jew's] ancestors 'never' lived in Palestine at all, which witnesses the power of historical assertion over fact." Under the heading of "A brief History of the Terms for Jew" in the 1980 Jewish Almanac we read: "Strictly speaking it is incorrect to call an Ancient Israelite a 'Jew' or to call a contemporary Jew, an Israelite or a Hebrew." The World Book omits any reference to the Jews, but under the word Semite it states: "Semite . . . Semites are those who speak Semitic languages. In this sense the ancient Hebrews, Assyrians, Phoenicians, and Cartaginians were Semites. The Arabs and some Ethiopians are modern Semitic-speaking people….The Khazars were once a sub-type of the Mediterranean race, but they have mixed with other peoples until their modern name 'Jew' has lost all racial meaning." There are hundreds of books, mainly Jewish Encyclopedias and histories available for study, which prove that nearly 98% of the “Jews” of the world are not a Semitic people, but few people other than historians ever bother to read them. Following are just a few: The Jews are Not a Race! by Dr. Alfred Lilienthal - "Jewish" historian, journalist, lecturer, and graduate of Cornell University and Columbia Law School. During the Second World War, he served with the US Army in the Middle East. He later served with the Department of State, and as a consultant to the American delegation at the organizing meeting of the United Nations in San Francisco. Since 1947, he has been at the forefront in the struggle for a balanced US policy in the Middle East. He is the author of several acclaimed books on the Middle East, including The Zionist Connection. He now lives in Washington, DC. On December 18, 1993 Dr. Lilienthal celebrated both his 80th birthday and the 40th anniversary of his first book, What Price Israel? Dr. Lilienthal, who is a courageous anti-Zionist Jew, was joined by more than 200 guests who traveled from all over the United States to attend.
The following excerpt is taken from this first
book, What Price Israel? Twelve tribes started in Canaan about thirty-five centuries ago; and not only that ten of them became “lost” and moved away from the original lands of Judea - more than half of the members of the remaining two tribes never returned from their "exile" in Babylon. How then, can anybody claim to descend directly from that relatively small community which inhabited the Holy Land at the time of Abraham's Covenant with Yahweh? The Jewish racial myth flows from the fact that the words Hebrew, Israelite, Jew, Judaism, and the Jewish people have been used synonymously, yet completely erroneously, to suggest a historic continuity. But this is a misuse. These words refer to different groups of people with varying ways of life in different periods in history. Hebrew is a term correctly applied to the period from the beginning of Biblical history to the settling in Canaan. Israelite refers correctly to the members of the twelve tribes of Israel. The name Yehudi [mistranslated as Jew] is used in the Old Covenant to designate members of the tribe of Judah, descendants of the fourth son of Jacob, as well as to denote citizens of the Kingdom of Judah, particularly at the time of Jeremiah and under the Persian occupation. Centuries later, the same word came to be applied to anyone, no matter of what racial or geographic origin, whose religion was Judaism. The descriptive name Judaism was never heard by the Hebrews or Israelites; it appears only with Christianity. Flavius Josephus was one of the first to use the name in his recital of the war with the Romans to connote a totality of beliefs, moral commandments, religious practices and ceremonial institutions of Galilee, practiced by the Khazars, which he believed superior to rival Hellenism. When the word Judaism was born, there was no longer a Hebrew-Israelite state [of land]. The people who embraced the creed of Judaism were already mixed of many races and strains; and this diversification was rapidly growing. . . Perhaps the most significant mass conversion to the Judaic faith occurred in Europe, in the 8th century A.D., and that story of the Khazars (Turko-Finnish people) is quite pertinent to the establishment of the modern State of Judaism. This partly nomadic people, probably related to the Volga Bulgars, first appeared in Trans-Caucasia in the second century. They settled in what is now Southern Russia, between the Volga and the Don, and then spread to the shores of the Black, Caspian and Azov seas. The Kingdom of Khazaria, ruled by a khagan or khakan fell to Attila the Hun in 448, and to the Muslims in 737. In between, the Khazars ruled over part of the Bulgarians, conquered the Crimea, and stretched their kingdom over the Caucasus farther to the northwest to include Kiev, and eastwards to Derbend. Annual tributes were levied on the Russian Slavonians of Kiev. The city of Kiev was probably built by the Khazars. There were Jews in the city and the surrounding area before the Russian Empire was founded by the Varangians whom the Scandinavian warriors sometimes called the Russ or Ross (circa 855-863). The influence of the Khazars extended into what is now Hungary and Roumania. Today, the villages of Kozarvar and Kozard in Transylvania bear testimony to the penetration of the Khazars who, with the Magyars, then proceeded into present-day Hungary. The size and power of the Kingdom of Khazaria is indicated by the act that it sent an army of 40,000 soldiers (in 626-627) to help Heraclius of the Byzantines to conquer the Persians. The Jewish Encyclopaedia proudly refers to Khazaria as having had a "well constituted and tolerant government, a flourishing trade and a well disciplined army." Jews who had been banished from Constantinople by the Byzantine ruler, Leo III, found a home amongst these heretofore pagan Khazars and, in competition with Mohammedan and Christian missionaries, won them over to the Judaic faith. Bulan, the ruler of Khazaria, became converted to Judaism around 740 A.D. His nobles and, somewhat later, his people followed suit. Some details of these events are contained in letters exchanged between Khagan Joseph of Khazaria and R. Hasdai Ibn Shaprut of Cordova, doctor and quasi foreign minister to Sultan Abd al-Rahman, the Caliph of Spain. This correspondence (around 936-950) was first published in 1577 to prove that the Jews still had a country of their own - namely, the Kingdom of Khazaria. Judah Halevi knew of the letters even in 1140. Their authenticity has since been established beyond doubt. According to these Hasdai-Joseph letters, Khagan Bulan decided one day: "Paganism is useless. It is shameful for us to be pagans. Let us adopt one of the heavenly religions, Christianity, Judaism or Islam." And Bulan summoned three priests representing the three religions and had them dispute their creeds before him. But, no priest could convince the others, or the sovereign, that his religion was the best. So the ruler spoke to each of them separately. He asked the Christian priest: "If you were not a Christian or had to give up Christianity, which would you prefer - Islam or Judaism?" The priest said: "If I were to give up Christianity, I would become a Jew." Bulan then asked the follower of Islam the same question, and the Moslem also chose Judaism. This is how Bulan came to choose Judaism for himself and the people of Khazaria in the seventh century A.D., and thereafter the Khazars (sometimes spelled Chazars and Khozars) lived according to Judaic laws – which are non-Biblical. Under the rule of Obadiah, Judaism gained further strength in Khazaria. Synagogues and schools were built to give instruction in the Bible and the Talmud. As Professor Graetz notes in his History of the Jews, "A successor of Bulan who bore the Hebrew name of Obadiah was the first to make serious efforts to further the false Jewish religion of today. He invited Jewish sages to settle in his dominions, rewarded them royally. . . and introduced a divine service modeled on the ancient communities. After Obadiah came a long series of Jewish Chagans (Khagans), for according to a fundamental law of the state only Jewish rulers were permitted to ascend the throne." Khazar traders brought not only silks and carpets of Persia and the Near East but also their Judaic faith to the banks of the Vistula and the Volga. But the Kingdom of Khazaria was invaded by the Russians, and Itil, its great capital, fell to Sweatoslav of Kiev in 969. The Byzantines had become afraid and envious of the Khazars and, in a joint expedition with the Russians, conquered the Crimean portion of Khazaria in 1016. (Crimea was known as "Chazaria" until the 13th century). The Khazarian Jews were scattered throughout what is now Russia and Eastern Europe. Some were taken North where they joined the established Jewish community of Kiev. Others returned to the Caucasus. Many Khazars remarried in the Crimea and in Hungary. The Cagh Chafut, or "mountain Jews," in the Caucasus and the Hebraile Jews of Georgia are their descendants. These "Ashkenazim Jews" (as Jews of Eastern Europe are called), whose numbers were swelled by Jews who fled from Germany at the time of the Crusades and during the Black Death, have little or no trace of Semitic blood, and do not follow Biblically based beliefs, rather man-made "Talmud". That the Khazars are the lineal ancestors of Eastern European Jewry is a historical fact. Jewish historians and religious textbooks acknowledge the fact, though the propagandists of Jewish nationalism belittle it as pro-Arab propaganda. Somewhat ironically, Volume IV of the Jewish Encyclopaedia - because this publication spells Khazars with a "C" instead of a "K" - is titled "Chazars to Dreyfus": and it was the Dreyfus trial, as interpreted by Theodor Herzl, that made the modern Jewish Khazars of Russia forget their descent from converts to Judaism and accept anti-Semitism as proof of their Palestinian origin. For all that anthropologists know, Hitler's ancestry might go back to one of the ten thought-to-be Lost 10 Tribes of Israel; while Weizmann may be a descendant of the Khazars, the converts to Judaism who were in no anthropological respect related to Palestine. The home to which Weizmann, Silver, and so many other Ashkenazim Zionists have yearned to return has in reality, never been theirs. "Here's a paradox, a most ingenious paradox": in anthropological fact, many Christians may have much more Hebrew-Israelite blood in their veins than most of their "Jewish" neighbors, since being Jewish, is merely a man-made set of religious traditions." The History of The Jewish Khazars, by D. M. Dunlop, pp. 4-15: ". . . Our first question here is, When did the Khazars and the Khazar name appear? There has been considerable discussion as to the relation of the Khazars to the Huns on the one hand and to the West Turks on the other. The prevalent opinion has for some time been that the Khazars emerged from the West Turkish empire. Early references to the Khazars appear about the time when the West Turks cease to be mentioned. Thus they are reported to have joined forces with the Greek Emperor Heraclius against the Persians in A.D. 627 and to have materially assisted him in the siege of Tiflis. It is a question whether the Khazars were at this time under West Turk supremacy. The chronicler Theophanes (died circa A.D. 818) who tells the story introduces them as "the Turks from the east whom they call Khazars.". . . A similar discussion on the merits of the different races is reported from the days before Muhammad, in which the speakers are the Arab Nu'man ibn-al-Mudhir of al-Hirah and Khusraw Anushirwan. The Persian gives his opinion that the Greeks, Indians, and Chinese are superior to the Arabs and so also, in spite of their low material standards of life, the Turks and the Khazars, who at least possess an organization under their kings. Here again the Khazars are juxtaposed with the great nations of the east. It is consonant with this that tales were told of how ambassadors from the Chinese, the Turks, and the Khazars were constantly at Khusraw's gate, and even that he kept three thrones of gold in his palace, which were never removed and on which none sat, reserved for the kings of Byzantium, China and the Khazars. In general, the material in the Arabic and Persian writers with regard to the Khazars in early times falls roughly into three groups, centering respectively round the names of (a) one or other of the Hebrew patriarchs, (b) Alexander the Great, and (c) certain of the Sassanid kings, especially, Anushirwan and his immediate successors. A typical story of the first group is given by Ya'qubi in his History. After the confusion of tongues at Babel, the descendants of Noah came to Peleg, son of Eber, and asked him to divide the earth among them. He apportioned to the descendants of Japheth - China, Hind, Sind, the country of the Turks and that of the Khazars, as well as Tibet, the country of the (Volga) Bulgars, Daylam, and the country neighboring on Khurasan. In another passage Ya'qubi gives a kind of sequel to this. Peleg having divided the earth in this fashion, the descendants of 'Amur ibn-Tubal, a son of Japheth, went out to the northeast. One group, the descendants of Togarmah, proceeding farther north, were scattered in different countries and became a number of kingdoms, among them the Burjan (Bulgars), Alans, Khazars (Ashkenaz), and Armenians. Similarly, according to Tabari, there were born to Japheth Jim-r (the Biblical Gomer), Maw'-' (read Mawgh-gh, Magog , Mawday (Madai), Yawan (Javan), Thubal (Tubal), Mash-j (read Mash-kh, Meshech) and Tir-sh (Tiras). Of the descendants of the last were the Turks and the Khazars (Ashkenaz). There is an association here with the Turgesh, survivors of the West Turks, who were defeated by the Arabs in 119/737, and disappeared as a ruling group in the same century. Tabari says curiously that of the descendants of Mawgh-gh (Magog) were Yajuj and Majuj, adding that these are to the east of the Turks and Khazars. This information would invalidate Zeki Validi's attempt to identify Gog and Magog in the Arabic writers with the Norwegians. The name Mash-kh (Meshech) is regarded by him as probably a singular to the classical Massagetai (Massag-et). A. Bashmakov emphasizes the connection of 'Meshech' with the Khazars, to establish his theory of the Khazars, not as Turks from inner Asia, but what he calls a Jephetic or Alarodian group from south of the Caucasus. Evidently there is no stereotyped form of this legendary relationship of the Khazars to Japheth. The Taj-al-Artis says that according to some they are the descendants of Kash-h (? Mash-h or Mash-kh, for Meshech), son of Japheth, and according to others both the Khazars and the Saqalibah are sprung from Thubal (Tubal). Further, we read of Balanjar ibn-Japheth in ibn-al-Faqih and abu-al-Fida' as the founder of the town of Balanjar. Usage leads one to suppose that this is equivalent to giving Balanjar a separate racial identity. In historical times Balanjar was a well-known Khazar center, which is even mentioned by Masudi as their capital. It is hardly necessary to cite more of these Japheth stories. Their Jewish origin is priori obvious, and Poliak has drawn attention to one version of the division of the earth, where the Hebrew words for 'north' and 'south' actually appear in the Arabic text. The Iranian cycle of legend had a similar tradition, according to which the hero Afridun divided the earth among his sons, Tuj (sometimes Tur, the eponym of Turan), Salm, and Iraj. Here the Khazars appear with the Turks and the Chinese in the portion assigned to Tuj, the eldest son. Some of the stories connect the Khazars with Abraham. The tale of a meeting in Khurasan between the sons of Keturah and the Khazars (Ashkenaz) where the Khaqan is mentioned is quoted from the Sa'd and al-Tabari by Poliak. The tradition also appears in the Meshed manuscript of ibn-al-Faqih, apparently as part of the account of Tamim ibn-Babr's journey to the Uigurs, but it goes back to Hishim al-Kalbi. Zeki Validi is inclined to lay some stress on it as a real indication of the presence of the Khazars in this region at an early date. Al-Jahiz similarly refers to the legend of the sons of Abraham and Keturah settling in Khurasan but does not mention the Khazars. Al-Di-mashqi says that according to one tradition the Turks were the children of Abraham by Keturah, whose father belonged to the original Arab stock. Descendants of other sons of Abraham, namely the Soghdians and the Kirgiz, were also said to live beyond the Oxus. . ." Benjamin Freeman, Facts are Facts: "CHAZARS: A people of Turkish origin whose life and history are interwoven with the very beginnings of the history of Judaism [non-Biblical Jewish faith] of Russia . . . driven on by the nomadic tribes of the steppes and by their own desire for plunder and revenge. . . In the second half of the sixth century the Chazars moved westward. . . The kingdom of the Chazars was firmly established in most of south Russia long before the foundation of the Russian monarchy by the Varangians. . . At this time the kingdom of the Chazars stood at the height of its power and was constantly at war. . . At the end of the eighth century . . . the chagan (king) of the Chazars and his grandees, together with a large number of his heathen people, embraced the false Jewish religion." Encyclopedia Americana (1985): "Khazar, an ancient Turkic-speaking people who ruled a large and powerful state in the steppes North of the Caucasus Mountains from the 7th century to their demise in the mid-11th century A.D. . . In the 8th Century it's political and religious head . . . as well as the greater part of the Khazar nobility, abandoned paganism and converted to Judaism. . ." Encyclopedia Britannica (15th edition): "Khazars, confederation of Turkic and Iranian tribes that established a major commercial empire in the second half of the 6th century, covering the southeastern section of modern European Russia . . . In the middle of the 8th century the ruling classes adopted Judaism as their religion." Academic American Encyclopedia (1985): "Ashkenazim, the Ashkenazim are one of the two major divisions of the Jews, the other being the Shephardim." Encyclopedia Americana (1985): "Ashkenazim, the Ashkenazim are the Jews whose ancestors lived in German lands . . . it was among Ashkenazi Jews that the idea of political Zionism emerged, leading ultimately to the establishment of the state of Israel . . . In the late 1960s, Ashkenazi Jews numbered some 11 million, about 84 percent of the world Jewish population." The Jewish Encyclopedia: "Khazars, a non-Semitic, Asiatic, Mongolian tribal nation who emigrated into Eastern Europe about the first century, who were converted as an entire nation to Judaism in the seventh century by the expanding Russian nation which absorbed the entire Khazar population, and who account for the presence in Eastern Europe of the great numbers of Yiddish-speaking Jews in Russia, Poland, Lithuania, Galatia, Besserabia and Rumania." The Encyclopedia Judaica (1972): "Khazars, a national group of general Turkic type, independent and sovereign in Eastern Europe between the seventh and tenth centuries C.E. during part of this time the leading Khazars professed Judaism . . . In spite of the negligible information of an archaeological nature, the presence of Jewish groups and the impact of Jewish ideas in Eastern Europe are considerable during the Middle Ages. Groups have been mentioned as migrating to Central Europe from the East often have been referred to as Khazars, thus making it impossible to overlook the possibility that they originated from within the former Khazar Empire." The Universal Jewish Encyclopedia: "Khazars, a medieval people, probably related to the Volga Bulgars, whose ruling class adopted Judaism during the 8th cent. The Khazars seem to have emerged during the 6th cent., from the vast nomadic Hun (Turki) empire which stretched from the steppes of Eastern Europe and the Volga basin to the Chinese frontier. Although it is often claimed that allusions to the Khazars are found as early as 200 C.E., actually they are not mentioned until 627 . . . most Jewish historians date the conversion of the Khazar King to Judaism during the first half of this century [A.D.]. . ." The primary meaning of Ashkenaz and Ashkenazim in Hebrew is Germany and Germans. This may be due to the fact that the home of the ancient ancestors of the Germans is Media, which is the Biblical Ashkenaz . . . Krauss is of the opinion that in the early medieval ages the Khazars were sometimes referred to as Ashkenazim . . . The Bible relates that the Khazars (Ashkenaz) Jews were/are the sons of Japheth not Shem: "Now these are the generations of the sons of Noah, Shem, Ham, and Japheth: and unto them were sons born after the flood. The sons of Japheth; . . . the sons of Gomer; Ashkenaz . . ." So the Bible verifies that the Ashkenaz Jews [Khazars] are not the descendants of Shem and cannot be Semitic. About 92 percent of all Jews worldwide, are self-acknowledged to be Ashkenazim! The American People's Encyclopedia for 1954 at 15-292 records the following in reference to the Khazars: "In the year 740 A.D. the Khazars were officially converted to Judaism. A century later they were crushed by the incoming Slavic-speaking people and were scattered over central Europe where they were known as Jews. It is from this grouping that most German, Polish and Hungarian Jews are descended, and they likewise make up a considerable part of that population now found in America. The term Aschenazim is applied to this round-headed, dark-complexioned division." Academic American Encyclopedia Deluxe Library Edition, Volume 12, page 66 states: "The Khazars, a turkic people, created a commercial and political empire that dominated substantial parts of South Russia during much of the 7th through 10th centuries. During the 8th century the Khazar Aristocracy and the Kagan (King) were converted to Judaism." The New Encyclopedia Britannica, Volume 6, page 836 relates: "Khazar, member of a confederation of Turkic-speaking tribes that in the late 6th century A.D. established a major commercial empire covering the southeastern section of modern European Russia . . . but the most striking characteristic of the Khazars was the apparent adoption of Judaism by the Khagan and the greater part of the ruling class in about 740 . . . The fact itself, however, is undisputed and unparalleled in the history of Central Eurasia. A few scholars have asserted that the Judaized Khazars were the remote ancestors of many of the Jews of Eastern Europe and Russia." Collier's Encyclopedia, Volume 14, page 65 states: "Khazars [kaza'rz], a semi-nomadic tribe of Turkish or Tatar origin who first appeared north of the Caucasus in the early part of the third century . . . In the eighth century Khaghan Bulan decided in favor of the Jews and accepted Judaism for himself and for his people..." New Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume VIII, page 173 relates: "The Khazars were an ethnic group, belonging to the Turkish peoples, who, toward the end of the 2nd century of the Christian Era, had settled in the region between the Caucasus and the lower Volga and Don Rivers . . . At the beginning of the 8th century, dynastic ties bound the Khazars more closely to Constantinople, which led to a limited spread of Christianity among them. They also became acquainted with Judaism from the numerous Jews who lived in the Crimea and along the Bosphorus. When the Byzantine Emperor, Leo the Isaurian, persecuted the Jews in A.D. 723, many Jews found refuge in the Khazar kingdom, and their influence was so great that, around the middle of the 8th century, the King of the Khazars and many of the Khazar nobility accepted the Jewish faith." The Cadillac Modern Encyclopedia, page 822, states: "Khazars (khah'-zahrz), a Russian people of Turkic origin, who at the height of their power (during the 8th-10th cent., A.D.) controlled an empire which included Crimea, and extended along the lower Volga, as far E as the Caspian Sea. The Khazar Royal Family and Aristocracy converted to Judaism during the reign of King Bulan (768-809 A.D.) and Judaism was thereafter regarded as the state religion . . ." There are many, many publications we could quote but from the above, we can clearly see that the Jews fully understand their Khazarian heritage as the third edition of The Jewish Encyclopedia for 1925 records: "CHAZARS [Khazars]: A people of Turkish origin whose life and history are interwoven with the very beginnings of the history of the Jews of Russia. The kingdom of the Chazars was firmly established in most of South Russia long before the foundation of the Russian monarchy by the Varangians (855). Jews have lived on the shores of the Black and Caspian seas since the first centuries of the common era [after the death of the Messiah]. Historical evidence points to the region of the Ural as the home of the Chazars. Among the classical writers of the Middle Ages they were known as the 'Chozars,' 'Khazirs,' 'Akatzirs,' and 'Akatirs,' and in the Russian chronicles as 'Khwalisses' and 'Ugry Byelyye.'. . ." The Antiquities of the Jews by Flavius Josephus, XIII ix 1; XV vii 9 instructs us: John Hyrcanus forcibly assimilated the Edomites as a national group and they became "Jews" in about 120BC. The Jewish historian Josephus, who lived just after the time of the Messiah, wrote, "They [Edom] were hereafter no other than Jews'. The Jewish scholar Cecil Roth in his Concise Jewish Encyclopedia (1980) says on page 154, "John Hyrcanus forcibly converted [Edom] to Judaism. From then on they were part of the Jewish people. In the Talmud the name of Edom was applied to Christian Rome, and was then used for Christianity in general".
Terrible judgments against Edom are made in most
of the prophecies of the Old Covenant. For instance,
"Why are your garments red, as if you had trodden the winepress?" "I have trodden the winepress alone: and of the people there was none to help Me. In My anger I trod them down, trampled them in My wrath. Their blood splattered My garments, and all My clothes are stained. For the day of vengeance is in My heart, and the year of My redeemed has come. . . I will tread down the people in My anger, and bring their blood upon the ground". These verses refer to Revelations chapter 19:11-21, when the Word of Yahweh destroys His enemies: "And I saw heaven opened, and behold a white horse: and He that sat upon him was called Faithful and True. . . His eyes were as a flame of fire, and on His head were many crowns, and He had a Name written that no man knew but Himself. And He was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood, and His Name is called The Word of Yahweh. . . and He trod the winepress of Yahweh’s fierce anger". Yahweh, God of the Old Covenant "hated Esau (Edom), against whom He has indignation forever" (Malachi 1:2-4). If Yah’shua will destroy Edom when He returns, then Edom is present today, and obviously evil, anti-Biblical, and anti-Semitic. The Bible confirms Israel will be dominated by non-Semitic Jews until the consummation: Genesis 27:39-41, "Isaac prophesied to Esau his son, Yours will be no life of ease and luxury but you shall hew your way by your sword. For a time you will serve your brother, but when you break loose you shalt have the dominion. So Esau hated Jacob because of the blessing with which his father had blessed him: and Esau said to himself, The days of mourning for my father are approaching; then will I slay my brother Jacob".
Also see
In summary, Jewish faith; namely Judaism, is a modern word for a man-made religion that is based upon hundreds of extra-Biblical rules and regulations, similar to the Pharisaic faith that our Messiah described as being "unfruitful", and promoted by a “brood of vipers – hypocrites and evil doers”, and it is this false religion that traditional “Christians” equally falsely believe to be the roots of their own adulterous faith. TOP ^
There are quite literally hundreds of
Scriptural examples clearly demonstrating the absolute “oneness” of the
Almighty-Creator-Yahweh. We will not repeat all of them here. When asked
“which is the first commandment of all, Yah'shua answered:
This should be simple to understand, but Satan-inspired, carnal-minded man has confused it for many. This confusion stems from a hidden purpose of Satan, which will become clear as we progress through this short study. Think of Satan’s involvement as you would a magician on stage. Like the magician, Satan creates his myriad illusions for one simple reason, which is to distract you from the truth. Satan does not care what you believe so long as he can distract you from Yahweh’s plain truth.
Confusion is often fostered by many
Biblical verses which are taken out of context by Satan’s armies of deceived
[false] ministers. For example, these verses can easily be mis-construed:
We could conclude here that there was more than one personification of Yahweh being described, or that two "Gods" were present, yet we are told there is only one God! After Adam rebelled against Yahweh (Elohim – in this instance this means the one and only Almighty Creator Yahweh), notice what Elohim said: “And the Lord Yahweh said, ‘Behold, the man is become AS ONE OF US, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever’” (Gen. 3:22). Here, the one and only Yahweh not only says “us”, He says “as one of us”!
These verses are often erroneously
understood to imply that there were two "Gods" around at the re-creation of life
on earth. In reality, there was not. There only was one God - Yahweh. Yahweh was
always the only Creator, who created all things by Himself! According to
In the Biblical example, it must be understood that angels had already been granted Yahweh's free moral agency to determine right from wrong, hence, when Yahweh said; "‘Behold, the man is become AS ONE OF US, to know good and evil'", that is precisely what He meant - He meant, in His discussion with the angels that were present, that man had in direct contradiction to Yahweh's instructions, "taken" his own ability to determine right from wrong, which is something that the Yahweh and the angels already fully grasped. This is the aspect of "becoming as one of us" Yahweh is referring to, not the aspect of becoming a God or a Co-Creator. "Christendom" today has degenerated to a belief in many gods. Generally speaking, Catholics believe in four gods; three good ones and one evil one, or in some cases, they believe in five gods, having added a "Mother of God" who is in their system of belief, purported to be the supreme deity. These are all bolstered by a host of demi-gods, one for every day of the year (and more), all of which mythical and man-invented deities are worshipped and prayed to, contrary to Biblical teaching. The simple truth as to who and what Yahweh is, does not need to be a mystery, in spite of the apparent inconsistencies depicted above. It is in fact, very clearly, and simply set forth in the pages of your Bible, if that Bible is read in context of its true intent and with proper respect for translation between the original languages and modern English. If we begin our focus by accepting the underlying purpose for Satan’s deceptions, then the various “illusions” he has created fall apart. That underlying purpose is to destroy the Gospel of the Messiah - that of the Kingdom, or Family of Yahweh.
In
How then should we translate verse 1? "In the beginning was the spoken word, and the words were from Yahweh, and the words were Yahweh’s. It was in the beginning from Yahweh. All things were made through Yahweh’s word, and without it nothing was made that was made. In Yahweh’s word was life, and the life was the light of men” is believed to be the most accurate suggestion. The Greek word translated "God" is "theos." The Greek does not have a different word to show possession. Therefore, theos can be translated "Yahweh" or "Yahweh's." The possessive form makes this verse so clear and in harmony with the phrase "the word was with Yahweh." According to these verses, before the universe, before the angels, before the pre-human history of life and before man, something called “Yahweh” existed. This single personification of Yahweh is revealed and confirmed in this earliest account in the Bible. There is no mention of His Holy Spirit at this stage, nor any other God-Family members.
The Word in
We know that Yahweh is eternal and we know that Yahweh is “Spirit”, hence “Spirit” is also eternal. We also know that the spirit in man is temporarily gifted to man from Yahweh’s eternal Spirit; hence the spirit in man is also eternal. This does not mean automatic eternal life for man, it simply means that the spirit in man is an eternally existing spirit; hence man has been blessed with the possibility of eternal life through this spirit. We also know from our Bibles that when a man dies in the flesh, that man’s “spirit will return to Yahweh who gave it” Ecc. 12:7. So if we believe the Messiah’s own words, these verses will all easily reconcile themselves. The Great Yahweh-Almighty, created all things through His spoken word. Yahweh’s Spirit impregnated Mary, hence a portion of Yahweh’s eternal Spirit was with the unborn Christ – a portion of Yahweh’s Spirit that was pure and undefiled by man’s sinful nature. Obviously, before Impregnating Mary with His Spirit; Yahweh and His angels were capable of carrying on conversation with one another. This does not mean that some Divine being divested Himself of His glory as a Divine Spirit being to be begotten as a human man. A portion of Yahweh’s Spirit – impregnated Mary which resulted in the Messiah, who was thus made Yahweh’s Son. The Messiah was begotten, or sired by the Power of Yahweh and then born of the virgin Mary as a "man", and upon His resurrection he was born in His Holy Spirit as the “firstborn Son of Yahweh”. This is no great mystery - that the Creator of the entire universe could very easily use this same “creative” POWER – His Spiritual-creative-will-power to impregnate the virgin Mary!
For Him, “all things were made” (v. 3). How did
Yahweh create all things?
At the time of
The Messiah was not mistaken when He stated that there is one God! When we begin to understand what the Bible reveals about Yah'shua the Messiah being resurrected as the firstborn of many brethren, and more specifically, about our own ultimate potential, then the importance of the Bible teaching on the Family of Yahweh becomes quite clear. The word “son” is used in the New Covenant 422 times, about half of which refer to the Messiah - the Son of Yahweh the Father. The word “father” is used 352 times, over 250 of which refer to Yahweh the Father. Father and Son - the beginning of our eternal Family!
In
Recall this Biblical quote: ”Before I formed you
in the womb, I knew you”
In the flesh, the Messiah was also of Yahweh (1 Tim. 3:16). While Yahweh's Spirit was in Him, He was also in the flesh (mortal human - subject to death), and He died for us. “Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he [the Messiah] also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy [annul] him that had the power of death, that is the devil” (Heb. 2:14). This does not mean that the Messiah was not a man, it simply means that the Messiah had the Spirit of Yahweh dwelling in Him – hence he “was Yahweh” in His Spirit, while He “was man” in the flesh. Yahweh’s plan is literally to reproduce Himself with the human Family. We are to become His Family and we will inherit “all things” - the universe, as joint heirs with Yahweh's firstborn Son, the Messiah. the Messiah is the firstborn of many “brethren”. “For as many as are led by the Spirit of Yahweh, they are the sons of Yahweh” (Rom. 8:14). Yahweh called Yah'shua His Son - and He calls us His sons - in other words, His Family! “And because YE ARE SONS, Yahweh hath sent forth His Spirit as of being his son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father” (Gal. 4:6).
We can go to Yahweh our Father, just as the
Messiah did. The Bible is replete with evidence of a Family relationship. The
word Trinity, on the other hand, is nowhere in the Bible! In
John wrote: “And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free” (8:32). If what you hear is indeed the truth, you can be sure that you will be able to easily understand it. Yahweh’s truth is not delivered obscurely, while surrounded in some clouds of mystery like the false “Trinity” doctrines so common in churches today. Yet most of these same churches agree that the Trinity is the most difficult doctrine to explain. This difficulty, stems largely from the mythology that His Holy Spirit is some type of personal deity, that together with Yah'shua and Yahweh the Father, form one “God”. We have already seen ample Bible proof that Yahweh the Father, and Yah'shua the Son, are two separate beings, with the Son being under the authority of the one and only Yahweh, God-Almighty. Now we will see what the Bible teaches about His Holy Spirit. His Holy Spirit simply put, is the power of Yahweh. It is the impersonal power, or force, or Will of Yahweh. We find very early in the New Covenant, revealed understanding of His Holy Spirit. “...for that which is conceived in her is of His Holy Spirit” (Matt. 1:20). Right away we see that Yah'shua was begotten of the virgin Mary, by Yahweh’s Holy Spirit - Yahweh’s Will. When Mary was told that she would conceive and bare a son, she asked: “How can this be, since I do not know a man?” (Luke 1:34). And the angel answered: “His Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the POWER of the Highest will overshadow you; therefore, also, that Holy One who is to be born will be called the Son of Yahweh” (v. 35). Here we are told simply, that the power of Yahweh - His Will - called His Holy Spirit would impregnate Mary. Just as we are begotten (impregnated) physically by our fathers through the sperm cell, so the Will of Yahweh - His Holy Spirit impregnated Mary and Yah'shua the Messiah was begotten. Truly converted Israelites are also begotten of His Holy Spirit, SPIRITUALLY (James 1:18). Our physical birth began when we were conceived in the womb. Our Spiritual birth began when we were baptized by His Holy Spirit – when our minds were fertilized with a small portion of Yahweh’s Holy Spirit - His “Will” combined with ours.
Notice
Notice 1 Cor. 2:11: “For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? Even so the things of Yahweh knoweth no man, but the Spirit of Yahweh”. The spirit of man - man’s will, makes known the things of man. Likewise, the Spirit of Yahweh - Yahweh’s Will, makes known the things of Yahweh. How simple and plain is Yahweh’s Word! Our spirit within us is not a distinct being or entity - it is merely the power that enables us to think, reason and to accomplish things. The Spirit of Yahweh is the POWER that enables Yahweh to accomplish things. According to Yahweh’s Will, His Spirit reveals the things of Yahweh to us; His plan of salvation, the potential of man, and yes, even the very nature of Yahweh! “But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of Yahweh: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, BECAUSE THEY ARE SPIRITUALLY DISCERNED...But Yahweh hath revealed them unto us BY HIS SPIRIT: for His Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of Yahweh” (1 Cor. 2:10,14). So we see that man, without the help of His Holy Spirit, is lost - unable to discern these important Biblical truths. That is why the Bible and these basic Bible truths, seem like so much “foolishness” to so many people and why they go to such great lengths to support their carnally-minded illusions of who and what Yahweh might be. Simply put, without the help of Yahweh’s Spirit, our puny little minds do not have the power to comprehend what the Bible teaches.
The Catholic (and many other) churches concede
that the Trinity doctrine is “beyond our finite understanding”. That we should
merely accept it as truth! I would rather hold on to what is provable, plain and
simple, according to Yahweh’s command to “prove all things” (1 Thess. 5:21).
Further, the truth, if it is in fact the truth, MUST be revealed in the Bible on
any and every subject, as in
The Biblical concept of Messianism, understood as the collective expression of the historical hope of a people on its way, can become one of the most important sources for a theology of liberation. The idea of the Messiah carried with it the belief in a divinely appointed person who would deliver Israel and bring about the consummation of the divine plan with its corollary of peace, freedom and justice, in reality the belief in progress and hope. The Zealots were expecting a warrior as Messiah; and the school of Shammai a legalist; and the Essenes an ascetic; and the philosophic schools some divine vision. But Yah'shua reveals to them another King. Yah'shua seems to want to conceal his Messiah ship, even though the confession of Yah'shua as the Messiah is essential to man's salvation. If Yah'shua had publicly announced that He was the Messiah, or allowed his disciples to do so, the Hebrew people would have assumed - wrongly - that he was putting himself forward as a king in the political, nationalistic sense, and the universal outreach of the gospel would have been obscured. Let's now look at the difference between the "Messiah", Yah'shua the Messiah the "Man" as our Bibles refer to "Him", and to the rest of us as "men". The Messiah was born of the flesh as were each of us. The Messiah grew in stature and in wisdom as [hopefully] do the rest of us. The Messiah was subjected to physical and spiritual temptation and sin just like the rest of us. Strictly referring to being in the flesh, the Messiah was not different than the rest of us. A first difference between the Messiah and the rest of us, is that the Messiah was able to resist all fear and temptation and to thereby overcome sin in the flesh. A second difference is relative to "why", or more specifically, to "how". The Messiah's capacity to resist temptation came from Yahweh - as all good things do. His ability was directly related to His being "born of the Spirit of Yahweh" while concurrently being born of the flesh "of the virgin Mary". The rest of us are "born of fleshly father and mother". The "Power" or Spirit of Yahweh was the Messiah's Father. This "Power" or Spirit of Yahweh is eternal as Yahweh is eternal and Yahweh is Spirit. Let's now try to explain the significance of this "eternal" existing Spirit. Purely for demonstration purposes, let's imagine a snow man made of "eternal snow" that will not disappear or diminish in volume. Even if you remove a handful of it, the total volume somehow remains the same. Now let's pretend we call the snow man, Father, and we remove a handful of snow to build a second snow man from, and we call this second snow man, Son. Remember that the qualities of the snow are eternal, hence they do not change when moved from place to place or from snow man to snow man. We could say then, that in the beginning, was the Son, and the Son was with the Father, and the Son was [part of the] Father. The Son was in the beginning with the Father. We could also say that the Father snow man knew the qualities and characteristics of the Son snow man before the Son snow man was made, because the snow that He was made from was the Father's. Just like the Spirit that the Messiah was sired from, was the Father's Spirit. Yahweh knows His Spirit - His Will perfectly. Let's take our pretense back to Spiritual realities. We know that Yahweh is Spirit and that Yahweh is Love, hence we know that the Perfect Spirit of Yahweh is Perfect Love. We also know that Perfect Love casts out all fears or temptations, hence the Perfect Spirit of Yahweh that WAS made into His Messiah by siring Him in the flesh, enabled the Messiah to overcome all fears or temptations. The "knowing" of the Messiah that Yahweh refers to does not refer to knowing Him in the flesh any more than knowing any of the rest of us in the flesh. Yahweh eternally knew the Spirit of His Messiah because the Spirit of His Messiah was a portion of Yahweh's own Spirit, thus He foreknew that His Messiah could and would resist and overcome all fear and temptation. In this sense Yahweh knew His Messiah before He was formed in the womb of Mary, just like He says He knows each of us and knew each of us before we were formed in the womb. He knows us "Spiritually", not physically as in the flesh. Yahweh knew that He could separate a perfect portion of His own perfect Spirit to sire His Messiah with, such that His Messiah would retain all of the Father's Perfect Spiritual characteristics while living in the flesh. Yahweh also knows that the "spirit" that is in man - the rest of us, has been seduced and therefore defiled by sin and that although it originated from Yahweh, it no longer retains its perfect characteristics. Our hope of eternal life, is that we may "yet overcome"!
Logos
When the apostle John speaks of the Word here, it is the Greek word Logos. The word "Word" in the Bible is translated from two Greek words, Logos and Rhema. Logos is a word denoting collecting or a collection and also used to describe the reason of Yahweh, as expressed in or by the "spoken word". As you collect your thoughts, you are using the gift of reason that Yahweh has given you, which is part of the divine nature that Yahweh has given to all of us, "created in His image". The Spoken Word of Yahweh, His "Logos" is His creative tool such that He is able to speak His very own thoughts into the reality we can see and into the reality we cannot see, yet believe in due to His specific words, or "Rhema". Those that describe the Word of Yahweh as the Bible are only being partially correct. To be more precise, the Bible is a collection of the Words of Yahweh as revealed to men through His written Word, and His prophets and recorded, provided of course, it is a Bible that has maintained the originally inspired Words, not the artificial man-crafted, copy-righted wording. By the time John was ready to start his gospel, the term Logos was the common way of referring to Yahweh's revelation of Himself. The philosophy of Philo, current at the time, was so compelling that it was getting more attention than the message of Yah'shua. The thinking world was using the term Logos to indicate the revelation of the "unknown God", so he seized it as a terrific opportunity to present the truth of Yahweh. John began his gospel with "in the beginning was the spoken word" (Logos). Without any apology John states bluntly in effect: This Logos people are referring to is a person. He is a specific person, and I am going to identify him for you. He is none other Yahweh, our Creator, who offers us eternal life through Yah’shua, who became His firstborn Son by Yahweh’s resurrection of His life from the dead. There were two meanings of Logos; “reason and speech”, plus “thinking and speaking”. From the beginning, there has been Yahweh. And always there has been another aspect of His Spirit with Him, who is to Yahweh what a man's word and thought are to a man. It is through this Logos, or Word, that Yahweh acts and how Yahweh expresses Himself to man who has fallen from His grace. It is Yahweh’s Logos, or spoken word that causes His creative thoughts to be turned into reality. TOP ^
Nazirites: A Peculiar People!
Sedition; is a term of law to refer to covert conduct such as speech and organization that is deemed by the legal authority as tending toward insurrection against the established order. Sedition often included subversion of a constitution and incitement of discontent (or resistance) to lawful authority. Sedition may include any commotion, though not aimed at direct and open violence against the laws. (Ibid.) INSURREC'TION, n. [L. insurgo; in and surgo, to rise.] 1. A rising against civil or political authority... It is equivalent to sedition, except that sedition expresses a less extensive rising of citizens. - Webster's 1828 American Dictionary of the English Language This "less extensive rising of citizens" were, and are, the "called out ones", i.e. the true congregation, or ekklesia, a political term, if you will forgive the expression, as opposed to a religious one. In Yahweh's Kingdom there is no separation of any alleged church and state.. Sedition differs from rebellion, for the latter [rebellion] expresses a revolt, or an attempt to overthrow the government, to establish a different one or to place the country under another jurisdiction. (Ibid.) This is a very important distinction, since we are not attempting "to overthrow the government", nor are we trying to "place the country under another jurisdiction", but rather we have simply been "called out" from, and have left, the governments, i.e. jurisdictions, of men, and have been translated [or moved, transported] into another jurisdiction. “Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the Kingdom of his dear Son…” KING'DOM, n. [king and dom, jurisdiction.] – Webster’s 1828 American Dictionary of the English Language Paul joined this “rising” and was, as a consequence, also accused of sedition. ‘…we have found this man a pestilent fellow, and a mover of sedition among all the Ioudaios throughout the world, and a ringleader of the sect of the Nazoraios…” This “sect of the Nazoraios” was not, and to this day is not, a sect of people from a place called Nazareth (the guarded one), it is exactly what Joseph Thayer defines it as in his Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament, Nazarite = “one separated”, though the worldly ones [PERSONS belonging to the STATE] may do everything in their power to try con-vince us into believing otherwise.
We find two different
words being used for Nazareth in the phrase “Yah’shua [Jesus <sic>] of
Nazareth”. First we find Nazaraios at Mattith’yahu 26:71 and the second
one is Nazarenos, found at
Behold, the days come, saith Yahweh, that I will raise unto David a righteous Branch (tsemach), and a King shall reign and prosper, and shall execute judgment and justice in the earth. We believe, for the sake of accuracy, that the Ibriy [Hebrew] word tsemach, Strong’s Hebrew and Chaldee Dictionary number H6780, should have been translated “sprout” since Yah’shua is the Son of perpetuity (nun), (See Matt. 28:20) in the sense of, “to resprout, that is, propagate by shoots; figuratively, to be perpetual”. “And there shall come forth a rod out of the stem of Jesse, and a Branch (netser) shall grow out of his roots: and the Spirit of Yahweh shall rest upon him, His Spirit of wisdom and understanding, His Spirit of counsel and might, His Spirit of knowledge and of the fear of Yahweh; And shall make him of quick understanding in the respect of Yahweh: and he shall not judge after the sight of his eyes, neither reprove after the hearing of his ears: But with righteousness shall he judge the poor, and reprove with equity for the meek of the earth: and he shall smite the earth with the rod of his mouth, and with the breath of his lips shall he slay the wicked.” Netser, Strong’s number H5342, is “always figurative” for descendant. It is not, as far a we have been able to ascertain, from the Ibriy root word natsar, as both Strong’s Hebrew Dictionary and Brown-Driver-Briggs’ Hebrew Lexicon indicate. (We believe it can be demonstrated that BDB merely followed James Strong’s lead on this point.) Natsar pronounced naw-tsar, according to Brown-Driver-Briggs’ Hebrew Lexicon, means: 1) to guard, watch, watch over, keep; 1a) (Qal) - 1a1) to watch, guard, keep; 1a2) to preserve, guard from dangers; 1a3) to keep, observe, guard with fidelity; 1a4) to guard, keep secret; 1a5) to be kept close, be blockaded; 1a6) watchman (participle). We will admit the possibility that Nazareth may have come from this Ibriy word, natsar, since its existence may have been specifically ordained for the sole purpose of guarding, with fidelity, His chosen descendant of David. In fact, Thayer’s Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament seems to confirm it. G3478: Nazareth / Nazaret Thayer Definition: Nazareth = “the guarded one” However…We see in both Strong’s Greek Dictionary and Thayer’s Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament that G3478 is, “of uncertain derivation". Our antennae goes up! It is written, …”he came and dwelt in a city called Nazareth [G3478]: that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophets, He shall be called a Nazarene” [G3480]. It will be noted here that Joseph Thayer says that Nazoraios, G3480, means, “one separated”. If this is true it would mean that it came from the Ibriy word nazar, Strong’s number H5144, which means: nazar BDB Definition: 1) to dedicate, consecrate, separate 1a) (Niphal) to dedicate oneself, devote oneself 1b) (Hiphil) to keep sacredly separate 2) (Hiphil) to be a Nazarite, live as a Nazarite Therefore, we as modern Israelites, are not nazarites, we are nazirites; we are naziyr, pronounced naw-zeer, which means: H5139 naziyr/nazir BDB Definition: 1) consecrated or devoted one, Nazarite <sic> 1a) consecrated one 1b) devotee, Nazarite <sic> 1c) untrimmed (vine)
This would help to
explain why the Iews of about 2,000 years ago accused Yah’shua of being a wine
drinker. (See Matt. 11:19;
James Strong, in his Hebrew and Chaldee Dictionary, makes an interesting observation concerning the Ibriy word naziyr [H5139]: ...separate, that is, consecrated (as prince, a Nazirite). When we remember that the italicized words are what he believes to be the English synonyms for the Ibriy word he is defining we find that the first one is simply separate, like, “come out from among them and be ye separate (naziyr)”. We also note that second word italicized is prince, consecrated as prince. A Prince (a sovereign) is the son of a King (the supreme sovereign) and the first-born prince is heir to his Father’s Kingdom. [‘the King of Israel, even Yahweh, is in the midst of thee”] King: Is in Scripture very generally used to denote one invested with authority, whether extensive or limited.…The Hebrew kings did not rule in their own right, nor in name of the people who had chosen them, but partly as servants and partly as representatives of Yahweh [Jehovah <sic>], the true King of Israel. – Easton’s 1897 Bible Dictionary. And, consecrated, of course, means, “separated (nazar) from a common…use”. We find further evidence in our Webster’s 1988 New World Dictionary of American English, Third College Edition, on page 905, that the root of “Nazarite or Nazirite” is the Greek Nazaraios, and it further informs us that Nazaraios is the Greek word “for the Heb nazir < nazar, to separate, consecrate”, while Nazarenos is the Greek word for, “the Nazarene”, or “of Nazareth…” Furthermore, in the Webster’s New Collegiate Dictionary, copyrighted 1916 through 1960, we read this under the heading Nazarite, n. Also Nazirite …2. Now Rare. A (or the) Nazarene, that Nazarite was sometimes mis-translated as Nazarene. …He shall be called a Nazarene (G3480 Nazaraios), and as we can see from the above etymologies this would mean that it was prophesied, “He shall be called a Nazirite” (better transliteration of the Heb naziyr), which appears, to us, to be precisely the prophecy that was fulfilled. “…the child shall be a Nazirite (naziyr) to Yahweh from the womb to the day of his death.” Virtually all those who searched the Scripture for the prophecy that he would be called a Nazarenos, i.e. an inhabitant of Nazareth, had basically the same outcome that Jay P. Green Sr., author of the Literal Translation of the Holy Bible, had, i.e. “No OT passage”. However, as you can readily see, when we are looking for the right word, the outcome is quite different. Some people might now say, “So what?” The “so what” of it is this: If we are to emulate (imitate, follow, copy, try to be like) Yah’shua, the Anointed Prime Minister of the Kingdom of Yahweh, also known as the commonwealth of Israel, (not to be confused with the man-made STATE OF ISRAEL), it would then stand to reason that we too should come out from among them (nazar) and be separate (naziyr), as it is written. We are because we have been proclaimed to be, a ‘Peculiar People unto Yahweh’ – we are His Natural Israelites indeed. We are not of the many man-made factions of false ‘Jews’ or of those that claim Israelite or ‘Jewish’ lineage based upon their equally false man-made religious traditions. We are, as is our religion, unadulterated by traditions and doctrines of men, thus we are as Natural as when we were created by our Father and our being separated or consecrated by our Father as Nazirites, confirms this. We did not, nor do we choose to separate of our own accord; rather we believe, thence we have faith that our Father has separated and consecrated us in His own manner of Natural selection. Thus we have become as dead with the Messiah from the rudiments of the world and in such condition [civilly dead] are not subject to the ordinances [statutes] after the commandments and doctrines of men. We do not profess or pledge allegiance to any secular government(s). We are fellow citizens of the commonwealth of Israel, as it is written. Our Supreme Sovereign is Yahweh, and the Anointed Prime Minister [High Priest] of our government is our Messiah, Yah’shua the Nazirite. We live with no marks of servitude of any species from any secular government. “O Yahweh ‘Elohiym (God = Ruler, Judge) of Iisrael, which dwellest between the cherubims, thou art the ‘Elohim (Ruler, Judge), even thou alone, of all the kingdoms of the earth; thou hast made heaven and earth.”
JUDGE,
noun 2. The Supreme Being. “Shall not the Judge of all the earth do right?”
“Now therefore, if ye
will obey my voice indeed, and keep my covenant, then ye shall be a
peculiar treasure unto me
from all people: for all the earth is mine: and ye shall be unto me a kingdom of
priests, and an set apart nation. These are the words which thou shalt speak
unto the children of Israel.” -
“For thou art an holy
people unto Yahweh thy 'Elohim, and Yahweh hath
chosen thee to be a peculiar people
unto himself, from all the nations that are upon the earth.”
-
“Who gave himself for
us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and
purify unto himself a peculiar people...”
-
“But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people...” - 1Peter 2:9 PECU'LIAR, a. [L. peculiaris, from peculium, one's own property, from pecus, cattle.] 1. Appropriate; belonging to a person and to him only. 4. Belonging to a nation, system or other thing, and not to others. - Webster's 1828 Dictionary Thus, in our unique “Peculiarity”, we are Yahweh’s chosen Congregation; chosen of His Naturally made Israelites. Following our Messiah, we are not of Nazareth, yet we are indeed, Nazirites, consecrated as belonging to Yahweh and to Him alone!
The Devil and the Creation of Man?
|
There
is no more prophetically important Name than the Name of the Son of Yahweh whom
the world has come to know as "Jesus". In the Bible we are told its meaning:
"..Yahweh sent the angel Gabriel...and said (to Mary)...You will...give birth to
a son, and you are to give Him the Name Yah'shua...because He will save His
people from their sins" (Lk.1:26-31; Mt.1:21). 
During
Yah’shua’s lifetime, no people were described as "Jews" anywhere on the planet.
That fact is supported by theology, history and science. When Yah’shua was in
Judea, it was not the "homeland" of the ancestors of those who today style
themselves as "Jews". (Remember the letter "J" did not exist in any alphabet
until about the 17th century AD!)