Part VI of VI
Part VI - More Thoughts
1.a. In the magazine, Biblical Archaelology Review dated November/December 2002, volume 28, number 6, is an article written by Andre Lemaire. The name of the article is "Burial Box of James the Brother of Jesus". On page 28 of this magazine, Lemaire is explaining the inscriptions found on James' ossuary box. (I have a copy of this magazine). The magazine's website (as of this writing) is
Lemaire was explaining that an acceptable way of writing the name of Jesus from that time period (20 BC to 70 AD) was Yehoshua. As you can see, even this scholar has been taught that Yeh is to be used instead of Yah.
Lemaire says that Aramaic script was used, but the letters look like the Hebrew letters that are in my Hebrew books. He even calls the letter ו a waw as I have indicated, instead of a vav. I would like to know if he pronounces God's name in Psalm 68:4 as Yeh or Yah. I suspect that he would agree that it is Yah. Because, as I have pointed out in previous parts, the scholars who translated the King James Bible show that it is Yah and not Yeh.
1.b. What is the purpose for mentioning this article? Because it shows that the exegesis given of the name of Yahowah, and in a subsequent teaching the name of Yahoshua (the Christ), have scholarly support, except for one letter. But as you have seen, this one letter of "a" - instead of an "e" - following the "Y", is consistent with the other names as translated in the King James Bible. I trust my Bible more than scholars who have been taught some grammar rules that obscure God's name. Besides, there are many scholars who teach his name to be Yahweh. They do not teach Yehweh. So, even these scholars agree with my first three letters, and disagree with their peer scholars who replace the "a" with an "e".
1.c. Recently, Sandy came across a Southern Baptist preacher who apparently had studied God's name. This man died in 2002. But we listened to a sermon and he spoke Yahoshua, as the untranslated name of Jesus, very plainly as he was talking about what Joseph and Mary named the Christ child. The preacher's name was Ed Vallowe. I found the sermon (as of this writing) at
Fifteen minutes and four seconds into the sermon, for the next approximately five seconds you can hear him say the name Yahoshua at least twice. He was teaching on Revelation and it was the first in a series of Revelation sermons that he was doing.
2. I never assume, when I hear someone say "lord" or "god" that they are talking about my God, until I get clarification from them. I want to know their god's name, I want to know their lord's name. Because George Harrison is not the only deceiver out there. I come across a lot of them. Even President George Bush says that Allah and the Christian God are one in the same. But then, Bush is no more a Christian than Harrison was. This explains further my motivation for my concerns. And I believe this is why our Father is bringing back His name to more of His children at this time in history.
3. One would properly ask, "Why would God allow such an extreme thing to take place, actually allow His name to be hidden from the view of most for literally thousands of years?" Before I answer this question, please bear with me while I digress to many similar questions. Why would God incite David to take a census in 2 Samuel 24:1 when we are told that this was a sinful thing for David to do? Why would God allow His chosen people to be dispersed twice and the His temple to be destroyed twice? Why would God call for a volunteer lying spirit to speak through the mouth of false prophets, 1 Kings 22:20-23? Why would God allow a righteous Jewish woman to become a member of a pagan king's harem in the Book of Esther? Why do the righteous suffer disease and persecution? Why did our Savior have to suffer and die on a tree? With God all things are possible, surely there must have been an easier way. But our God is a righteous God, He does not lie, nor does He make mistakes. His ways are perfect and beyond searching out. 1 Corinthians 2:16 KJV, "For who hath known the mind of the Lord, that he may instruct him? but we have the mind of Christ." So, the answer is that Yahowah has His good purposes. But since His ways are not our ways, many do not understand, Isaiah 55:8-9 KJV, “8 For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith [Yahowah]. 9 For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts.”
4. About 2,800 years ago, in Hosea 2:16-17 KJV, "16 And it shall be at that day, saith [Yahowah], that thou shalt call me Ishi; and shalt call me no more Baali. 17 For I will take away the names of Baalim out of her mouth, and they shall no more be remembered by their name." This Scripture reveals that the people were calling God "my Baal". God did not say that the people were calling Baal by the name of Baal, instead He says they were calling Him Baal. Baal means lord in Hebrew. So, yes, the people were worshipping the Baals, but they were also confusing the name of God by calling him Baal (lord). It is no different today. As only one example, I spoke to a man just this week that claimed to have a salvation experience with God, but at the same time he keeps his spirit guides handy for when he wants them. King Saul claimed to serve God, but consulted a spirit medium. The dual mindedness of man staggers the imagination. Hosea knew His name. He called Him by the tetragrammaton in verse 16, "saith the LORD". But the tetragrammaton is hidden beneath the translation.
5. About 200 years later the statement in Hosea 2:16-17 and the argument in paragraph four is reinforced by Jeremiah 23:26-27 KJV, "26 How long shall this be in the heart of the prophets that prophesy lies? yea, they are prophets of the deceit of their own heart; 27 Which think to cause my people to forget my name by their dreams which they tell every man to his neighbour, as their fathers have forgotten my name for Baal." It never lets up. The people are still calling Creator God by the name of Baal (lord), and so have their ancestors. And sadly, today, so do we and their progeny.
6. Jeremiah 8:8 TIB, "How do you say, We are wise, and the law of [Yahowah] is with us? Behold, the lying pen of the scribes has certainly worked deceit." Jeremiah speaks of the apostate nature of the Hebrews at this time in history. Yet we know that this people has overwhelmingly been backslidden for about three thousand years, in spite of the few bright spots along the way: Moses, the prophets, some kings (David in particular), and the remnant. The Holy Ghost has constantly spelled out in Scripture that there are lying prophets and false teachers, and here He spells out that even the scribes have lying pens. This really shook me up when I first noticed it. You know how that is, you read it dozens of times before you notice it (before the Holy Ghost quickens it to you).
7. If the scribes have lying pens, then how can I depend upon my Bible? But of course we have Scriptures that warn of the punishment of those that would add to and take away from Scriptures. Why do we have the warnings? The warnings are there for those who would attempt to do this wicked thing, and some have indeed attempted it. But how do we reconcile Jeremiah 8:8 with 2 Timothy 3:16 KJV, "All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:"? Actually it is not difficult at all. The original manuscripts were inspired and as they were relayed and translated through the centuries unintentional scribal errors were introduced; well-meaning footnotes and sidenotes were placed along the way and some of those subsequently found their way into the main text; interpreter bias was occasionally introduced as well; words that had one meaning at first evolved into a different meaning over the centuries; and then there were the deceivers who did their dirty work. But our God is able, in spite of all of this, to preserve the gospel message and history of the text. But it is preserved for those who are determined to lay hold of it (Matthew 11:12), those men who are filled with the Holy Ghost and fire (Matthew 3:11). The enemy is confounded, try as he might, he cannot recognize those things necessary to subterfuge in order to obliterate the truth from God's children.
8.a. What Bible translations do we trust? Those so-called translations that reverse the meaning of Scripture? Go to (as of this writing)
and plug in many different translations just on Matthew 11:12. This has been a difficult passage and opposing meanings are ascribed to it. It is but one example of Scripture in which interpreter bias can creep in. So of course, we do not consider some translations as valid - how about the ones that have now called God father-mother god?
Some schools of thought revere the Septuagint translation because it was the one in common usage when Christ walked the Earth. The claim is that Christ even quoted from it at times. But our God used that which was common to us to teach us. That does not mean He endorsed the Septuagint as the preferred translation of all time. If one studies the textual criticisms, they will find it to be a rather inferior translation.
8.b. My copy of the Septuagint was published by Hendrickson Publishers (originally Samuel Bagster & Sons, Ltd., London, 1851). The editor is Sir Lancelot C. L. Brenton and I have the 5th printing of 1995. Let's look at what Brenton says in his preface. "It is worth noting that the Septuagint differs from the Hebrew Old Testament in certain ways: 1) the Greek text varies at many points from the corresponding Hebrew text." And, "While the majority of the Old Testament quotations rendered by the New Testament authors are borrowed directly from the Septuagint, a number of times they provide their own translation which follows the Hebrew text against the Septuagint." So much for the theory that the Septuagint is inspired because Yahoshua and His apostles quoted from it. Yahoshua did not come to rewrite the current translation, he merely used what was familiar to His listeners. But of course, as His apostles did, He introduced the correct interpretation from the original Hebrew texts that were inspired. I wish we could do that today. Instead, we must do as the Bereans did in 2 Timothy 2:15 KJV, "Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth."
8.c. Brenton has others things to say about the Septuagint in the introduction on page iii. "The variety of the translators is proved by the unequal character of the version: some books show that the translators were by no means competent to the task, while others, on the contrary, exhibit on the whole a careful translation. The Pentateuch is considered to be the part the best executed, while the book of Isaiah appears to be the very worst." And on page iv: "In consequence of the fact that the New Testament writers used on many occasions the Septuagint version, some have deduced a new argument for its authority, - a theory which we might have thought to be sufficiently disproved by the defects of the version, which evince that it is merely a human work. But the fact that the new Testament writers used this version on many occasions supplies a new proof in opposition to the idea of its authority, for in not a few places they do not follow it, but they supply a version of their own which rightly represents the Hebrew text, although contradicting the Septuagint.
"The use, however, which the writers of the New Testament have made of the Septuagint version must always invest it with a peculiar interest; we thus see what honour God may be pleased to put on an honestly-made version, since we find that inspired writers often used such a version, when it was sufficiently near the original to suit the purpose for which it was cited, instead of rendering the Hebrew text do novo on every occasion."
8.d. In conclusion of this line of reasoning, I emphatically believe that our God uses the weaknesses of men and succeeds and is not thwarted when He does so. And so it is with our Sacred Scriptures and their translations. Some of the translations should rightfully be tossed in the trash, but others are useful in the furtherance of the plan of God.
9. Now I will return to paragraph six above and remind myself of Jeremiah 8:8 and to paragraph seven above, "But our God is able, in spite of all of this, to preserve the gospel message and history of the text." Even though there is some disruption and even corruption in some translations, God has preserved enough of the text so that those who are guided by the Holy Ghost and a heart that seeks truth can still seek out that truth - even if it is temporarily hidden - and find it. The pronunciation of His name is one such disruption from the original manuscripts that can still be sought out and found.
10. "Why is Baal, and every other pagan deity's name, transliterated phonetically into English, but the name of YHWH (the tetragrammaton) is not?" (author unknown). Even Adonai is suspect. Adonai also means lord. Why call our God Adonai, which is only a title meaning lord? Why not call Him by His name? Where did Adonai really come from? Was there not another pagan deity called Adonis? What is the etymology of Adonai? Besides, by some estimates, Adonai was only in use since the third century BCE. What was used prior to that? And why the change? And most importantly, why not just use His untranslated name? I do not agree with the Hebrews. They should not have stopped using the name of Yahowah (sometimes written in English as YHWH or YHVH). They should not have substituted titles and/or pagan names for His name. This hiding of His name is an act of apostasy. In spite of the righteous Jews, the apostates won the day on this issue. I believe God allowed it to happen for His good purposes. But in our generation, He is bringing back the knowledge and power of His name.
11. Here is a sample list of Scriptures that exalt His name.
Exodus 34:5-6 KJV, "5 And [Yahowah] descended in the cloud, and stood with him there, and proclaimed the name of [Yahowah]. 6 And [Yahowah] passed by before him, and proclaimed, [Yahowah], [Yahowah] God, merciful and gracious, longsuffering, and abundant in goodness and truth."
Isaiah 42:8 KJV, "I am [Yahowah]: that is my name: and my glory will I not give to another, neither my praise to graven images."
Isaiah 43:27 TIB, "Your first father sinned, and your interpreters transgressed against Me."
Isaiah 45:5-7 KJV, "5 I am [Yahowah], and there is none else, there is no God beside me: I girded thee, though thou hast not known me: 6 That they may know from the rising of the sun, and from the west, that there is none beside me. I am [Yahowah], and there is none else. 7 I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I [Yahowah] do all these things."
Isaiah 62:6 KJV, "I have set watchmen upon thy walls, O Jerusalem, which shall never hold their peace day nor night: ye that make mention of [Yahowah], keep not silence."
Jeremiah 11:21-23 KJV, "21 Therefore thus saith [Yahowah] of the men of Anathoth, that seek thy life, saying, Prophesy not in the name of [Yahowah], that thou die not by our hand: 22 Therefore thus saith [Yahowah] of hosts, Behold, I will punish them: the young men shall die by the sword; their sons and their daughters shall die by famine: 23 And there shall be no remnant of them: for I will bring evil upon the men of Anathoth, even the year of their visitation."
Jeremiah 16:19-21 KJV, "19 O [Yahowah], my strength, and my fortress, and my refuge in the day of affliction, the [nations] shall come unto thee from the ends of the earth, and shall say, Surely our fathers have inherited lies, vanity, and things wherein there is no profit. 20 Shall a man make gods unto himself, and they are no gods? 21 Therefore, behold, I will this once cause them to know, I will cause them to know mine hand and my might; and they shall know that my name is [Yahowah]."
As you can see, everywhere I find LORD or GOD in all capitals, I change it to Yahowah, because that is where the tetragrammaton is and that is His name. This knowledge opens up Scriptures like someone has opened a window to Heaven. It is refreshing. It is a breath of fresh air from the Holy Ghost. It is glorious and uplifting, just as His name is glorious.
12. Please do not forget how important this is, to you personally and spiritually. (The following is from His Name, Part II - Why We Need To Know, Paragraph 1a). Psalm 91:14 KJV, "Because he hath set his love upon me, therefore will I deliver him: I will set him on high, because he hath known my name." Malachi 3:16-18 KJV, "16 Then they that feared [Yahowah] spake often one to another: and [Yahowah] hearkened, and heard it, and a book of remembrance was written before him for them that feared [Yahowah], and that thought upon his name. 17 And they shall be mine, saith [Yahowah] of hosts, in that day when I make up my jewels; and I will spare them, as a man spareth his own son that serveth him. 18 Then shall ye return, and discern between the righteous and the wicked, between him that serveth God and him that serveth him not." Malachi 4:2 KJV, "But unto you that fear my name shall the Sun of righteousness arise with healing in his wings; and ye shall go forth, and grow up as calves of the stall."
13.a. Here is another reason that we need to know God's name. And here is a good reason to know who our brothers and sisters in Christ are. Catholics are not Christians. Please read the following article (as of this writing).
“Christians Fight for Right to Use Word ‘Allah’ for God; Malaysia Court Set to Give Ruling, Morgan Lee (“The Christian Post,” August 20, 2013).
“Malaysia’s Catholic Church will argue that Christians should be able to use the word “Allah” when referring to their God in print in the Court of Appeals on Thursday. The Church is currently locked in a battle with authorities, who believe that Muslims should have exclusive rights to the name.
“The Wall Street Journal is reporting that the Church will be asking the Court of Appeal to dismiss the government’s appeal of the Church’s previous victory; though it seems likely that the case will be decided by the Federal Court, the country’s highest.
“According to the government, “Allah” is a sacred term. However, the Church highlights the fact that “Allah” has historically been used by Christians and furthermore, is the only proper translation for God in the Malay language.
“Much of the argument has come to a head as the Herald, a Catholic newspaper that reaches 100,000 Malaysians weekly, has used “Allah” in its publication for years, despite government warnings as far back as 1998. After the newspaper refused to stop using the name, the government banned all publications from using Allah and the Church filed a lawsuit.
“Over 60 percent of Malaysia’s population is Muslim, while close to 10 percent of the population is Christian, 1 million of whom identify as Catholic.
“The case has raised tensions between various Muslim and Christian groups in the country, and although most Christians and Muslims in the country have been able to live alongside one another peacefully, in the aftermath of the court’s initial ruling in favor of the Catholic Church, confrontations have turned more violent. In 2009 when a court first ruled that the Catholic Church constitutionally could use “Allah” 10 churches were vandalized in subsequent weeks and a church office was burned.”
13.b. We have been shown here, that a major world religious organization, is stirring up a firestorm. Even though they are not Christian, most of the world thinks that they are. The firestorm includes lawsuits, violent confrontations, and an unhealthy stirring of emotions - and it is all a deception. Allah is not the name of the Self-existing One. And the argument that Allah is the only word available in the Malay language that can be used for God is bogus. There is no doubt in my mind that the proper combination of letters in Malay could sound out the true name of the true God - Yahowah.
14. We welcome constructive input supported by Scriptures from the Bible. Please contact us by our email address firstname.lastname@example.org. Copyright © 2010 Richard Douglas Mauck and/or Sandra Faye Mauck. All rights reserved. This material is copyrighted to protect the integrity of this work. Permission is hereby granted to copy this treatise in its entirety as long as no editing is done, no charge is made to those with whom it is shared, and full credit is given to the authors.