Debunking the Myth
about the name Jehovah.
This, of course,
concerns the myths that have developed since the 1930s through sacred name
groups that are now impacting the Church of God groups in a major way
concerning the sacred name, as they say, Yahweh and Yahshua. As most of you
have experienced, I'm sure, in this fellowship you've come across someone who
has used the name 'Yahweh,' either in your presence or on tape sermon, or
you've heard it on the radio, read it somewhere or you've heard the name
'Yahshua.'
There are those who
have been our Church of God fellowships, but not in our immediate fellowship,
that are Sabbath-keepers, Holy Day-keepers, even though they may be keeping the
Holy Days on different dates who are going to the use of Yahweh now and the use
of Yahshua. One fellow in particular is teaching that we need to be re-baptized
in the name of Yahshua, that the name 'Jesus' is a pagan name, and the name
'Lord' is pagan, and 'Jehovah' they say is a 'monstrous hybrid hideous name
that has come down to us. That it actually is the name of Satan himself, and if
you use the name you're actually praying to Satan.
So, this series is
one that I hope will begin to blunt some of the inroad that these people are
making with our brethren, and help our brethren a means of defending themselves
in a simple way. They can hear what a brother or sister is saying, and retort
in a kind way, a Christian way, with an answer that will begin to blunt the
thrust of this evangelism that's coming into our midst.
I know of some
churches, especially ex-CGI churches that are splitting right down the middle
over sacred name issues. There are older fellowships that have come out of
Worldwide Church of God that going independent and are being affected by sacred
name groups all over the country. I'm sure there are many that I haven't heard
of. There are Canadian churches that are being split, taken over by sacred
namers and the doctrines of some of these groups, such as the Kingdom City
group—the YMCA group out of southern Missouri are not only on the Internet, but
they're very active in evangelizing. There are also Sabbath-keepers, keep the
Holy Days—albeit at different times—and these people are very zealous, and I'm
sure very sincere.
They have put
together quite a body of literature that's now coming into our groups and beginning
to circulate.
Some of these
people who are pushing this information are doing so through organized
committees of Churches of God, especially independent Churches of God that have
left the Church of God International. They're beginning to influence these
groups into studying this material from these sacred names groups.
The way that the
material is written is in a very intimidating and dogmatic way. It sounds, at
first, like they know what they're talking about. They don't know what they're
talking about, and as we will see in this series of studies, the basic
assumptions that they're making can be rebutted, but you have to have some
history and a little help. With that help you can:
· educate yourself
· sharpen your sword
· load your
ammunition
and get ready to take care of the false doctrines that are coming into
the Church!
This sermon is just
part one and it concerns three myths. There are dozens and dozens of myths that
these people are involved with. I have written a few basic points down that
will deal with three of the basic myths that they will throw at you when they
first meet you.
There has to be a
way that we can come back with something that's truthful, yet simple, that will
throw them off their guard and saddles, and when they pick themselves up and
dust themselves off, maybe they'll start to think a little bit. A lot of these
people aren't convinced when they first get into this, but it sounds good. So,
if we can nip it in bud at that time, we can help them a great deal, because
once people are bitten by this spirit it's very hard to get out of it.
I don't know of
anyone in my 40-plus years of being involved with the Churches of God, and as
active in the ministry for a good part of that time, has ever come out and
repented of the sacred names movement. But I have come into contact with
youngsters who have grown up in the sacred names movement who are most
interested—even though they've grown up in it—in seeking for Truth.
If we can help them
and blunt it at that end, there's hope there, we surely can with our own
people. They're just like sheep—not that they're dumb—that are like the
'country boy' in the city. You walk in and see the bright lights and everything
looks good. This is the way that a lot of our brethren are with these false
doctrines. Satan dresses it up to look really good.
The first myth is one that they usually begin their material with. In
fact one of their booklets is entitled The Mistaken 'j'; they teach
that there was no letter 'j' until about 500 years ago. By that they mean there's
no letter 'j.' they're belief is that since there's no letter 'j' the name
Jehovah—transliterated out of the Hebrew by William Tyndale in 1530—and
therefore the name Jehovah is impossible.
The second myth is
tied up with that, and you'll see that there is no 'j' in Hebrew. They make a
big ado about this. They'll get up on their hind feet and dance around and
really intimidate you that there's no 'j' in Hebrew.
Some of the arguments that they use have nothing to do with the Hebrew
at all, the true Biblical Hebrew, and they try to intimidate us by leading us
to believe that the Hebrew of the Bible was Yiddish. It was not! And
also that the Hebrew of the Bible had something to do with German
pronunciation. There's no 'j' sound in German, therefore, there's none in the
Hebrew. That is not true! God did not write the Old Testament in German, and
there is a 'j' sound in the Hebrew.
The third myth that
I will address is the name Jehovah was invented. They will come back and say
that the name Jehovah was in the 1520s, and oddly enough—depending on what
sacred name group you get involved with—they will say that it was invented in
1516, 1518 or 1520.
I wish they'd make
up their minds, because it couldn't have been invented in all three. It wasn't
anyway, but they can't agree amongst themselves as to which date it was
invented.
· Note the following
study papers written by Carl Franklin: Debunking the
Myths of Sacred Namers (parts 1, 2
& 3).
· Note sermon: De-Mythologizing
the Divine Name (Carl Franklin)
God willing when
this gets out it will help draw the line with those getting into it. Even
though it may not help those who are already into it, my purpose for writing it
is not to convert sacred namers, it's to help our brethren. If God adds that as
an extra blessing for them, so be it. This is for you who don't believe in
sacred names, and to be able to help those who do.
I hope, in
Christian spirit, to have some fun with this. There's no reason why we can't
have good Christian fun in the process of exposing some of these errors. Even
though, this is serious business and God has the best sense of humor in the
universe or we He wouldn't put up with us.
Myth # 1: There was no letter "j" until about five hundred
years ago
The letter 'j'
first appeared about the year 800 A.D.—these are round figures—and invented by
French monks to represent a sound.
Sacred namers will
argue that without the symbol there is no sound. Well, without the sound to
begin with, there was no need for a symbol. So, the sound came first and the
symbol came later.
Their argument that
because there's no physical 'j'—as they see it today—since there was no 'j'
before the 1500s it was impossible for the name to be Jehovah. That's one of
the arguments they make.
The sound was there, not in English, but close to the island of England
for almost 300 years before William the Conqueror set foot in England. The
symbol 'j' was there, and you can see it in their writings. These were
Latin-speaking Catholic monks who invented the character 'j' in the 800s.
Because they were Latin-speaking Catholic monks, does that mean the letter 'j'
is pagan? No! No language is sacred, no letter of itself or
sound of itself is sacred or unsacred.
· it's what we do
with it
· it's how we use it
· it's what we teach
· it's what we
believe
· it's how we put
everything together
that makes it good or bad.
But they will argue
that because this came out of Catholicism or out of France or early English
that, therefore, it's pagan and not—as they will argue—the sacred language.
The idea that Hebrew is a sacred language was invented by Cabalistic
rabbis and first written about in their Targums—their paraphrased comments on
the Old Testament—in the 2nd & 3rd centuries A.D. They were the ones to
first begin calling Hebrew a sacred language, because they believed that their
God made the entire universe out of the Hebrew letter characters. That
it began with four special characters: JHVH, the letters transliterated
Jehovah. That God made the universe and everything out of three Hebrew
characters, from this alphabetic soup.
So therefore, if you can get the name just right out the sacred language
you can call down the powers of the universe and use them. Brethren that is
magic, the magic of Satan the devil himself. When you have a sacred name of any
sort, a sacred language of any sort, you are calling on the higher powers, but
they are the wrong higher powers, the wrong god, calling
on the servants of that wrong god!
As it has been the
experience of some of the rabbis and others—even as it's recorded in the book
of Acts—yes, they've called down these powerful demons and the demons just
about destroyed them because they didn't get the name just right.
So, in their
incantations—that you can read, they've been translated; they have this magical
formula—that if you say it just right, in Babylonian tongues just right, dance
just right and use the right chemicals and herbs just right, in the right cave
with the right lighting and the right time of day or night, you can call down a
spirit and it will do your bidding. If not that spirit can come down and
destroy you.
Brethren who are
getting involved in this do not realize that they're calling upon Satan himself
and his minions. By the time they learn and Satan exposes his fangs to the
sacred namers, it's going to be too late. He'll devour them totally at that
time, because he is 'the god of this world' and he's a vicious god who is out
to destroy all of God's plan if he can.
We have to have
ammunition and a sharpened sword so that we can arm ourselves, and therefore,
defend ourselves.
The letter 'j'
itself, as a small character, came into the English-speaking community at the
time of William the Conqueror. So, the symbol was there—the lower case—and
there was no upper case until the late 1500s or early 1600s.
Does that mean that the sound wasn't there? The sound was there
in the English since the time of William the Conqueror. Maybe the
sound had been there among Anglo-Saxons before, I don't know, but we do know
that it goes back to the French-speaking peoples of the 800s. So, by the time
the capital 'J' shows up, it's already in the early or mid-1600s, and based on
that sacred namers will argue that, therefore, the name Jehovah was impossible.
So, what I've
done—and this is where the fun begins, I believe (in a proper way)—part of
Tyndale's work in Exo. 3:18-23:
from: Debunking the
Myths of Sacred Namers #1 by Carl
Franklin
Myth #1: There was no letter "j" until about five hundred
years ago
Tyndale published
his translation of the Pentateuch in the year 1530 AD.
The following
example of Tyndale's translation is taken from Exodus 5:18-6:3 (the first and
last verses are not completely quoted)…. Notice the use of lowercase
"i" before the vowel "u" in Verse 21 below, and the two
uses of uppercase "I" before the vowels "a" and
"e" in Verse 3 of the following chapter. In each of these words,
"i" or "I" represents the sound of "j".
So, for hundreds of
years, at the beginning of a word followed by a vowel, 'i' represented the
sound of 'j'. If 'i' were followed by a consonant, it represented the sound of
the vowel, like 'Israel.' You'll see this as we go through this material.
"18 sacrifice
vnto the Lorde….
unto is translated out of the Masoretic text by Tyndale using the letter 'v.'
If I were to read this literally, as the sacred namers would have me read it…
…therfore and
worke, for [Fo. IX.] there fhall…
They weren't using
the 's' at that time for the leading 's'; the lower case 's' had just come into
the language because of the printers.
…no ftrawe…
For years the 's'
would look like our 'f': back in Roman times, hundreds of years back, and it
was still in the language.
…be geuen you…
the 'u' was given
for the 'v' sound
Notice you; Tyndale in translating this knew of and used 'y'
with the ya sound. So, he wasn't thinking of Yahovah when he
transliterated it. It was purposely transliterated Jehovah. The 'y' sound was
there; he uses it right here with you.
…and yet fee that
ye delyuer…
I know that Moses
had a lisp, but Tyndale wasn't going to go that far and transposing Moses'
lisp.
…the hole…
I find it
interesting that he didn't use the 'w' at that time
…tale of brycke….
tally of brick
19 when the
officers of the childern of Ifrael…
there's the capital
'I' before a consonant
…fawe [saw] them
filfe in fhrode cafe (in that he fayde ye fhall minyth nothinge of youre dalye
makige of…
20 brycke)
very hard to read
in the English at this point
…than they mett
Mofes [Moses] and Aaro [Aaron] ftondinge in…
I recommend you go
through the King James Version with me so you can follow through and figure it
out.
21 there waye as they came out fro Pharao, and fayde vnto them: The
Lorde loke vnto you and iudge…
judge—here the lower case 'i' is before a vowel, so it's the 'j' sound. Later
on in Acts 6:2-3
The .VI. Chapter
2 AND God fpake vnto Mofes fayng vnto him: I am the Lorde,
3 and I appeared vnto Abraham
Ifaac and Iacob…
Later on the
printers tweaked the bottom and turned it into a 'j' so it represented the
sound that it had all those centuries. That's all they were doing; the sound
came before the character.
an allmightie God: but in my name Iehouah was I not..."
Notice the 'u' and
the capitalized beginning 'Iehouah,' and as we noted before the 'u' was used
for 'v' sounds at that point and shortly after that it was divided up.
Printing came in
and because of the necessity to standardize it the printers then added these
symbols to represent sounds in their language. Any scholar like Tyndale or
Reuchlin, Buechelin, Galatinus—whether they were Catholic, Protestant or
neutral—any Hebrew scholar, regardless of his German upbringing, English
upbringing or Italian upbringing or wherever they were, when they were taught
the Hebrew and how to pronounce it they would imitate the pronunciation of the
teacher.
They wouldn't
pronounce the names as the Germans, or the English did necessarily. In other
words, they were all imitating the same sounds that they heard from the Hebrew
grammarians who came out of Spain.
These were not
Yiddish grammarians. The Yiddish community had just begun a few hundred years
ago and were Cabalistic and Biblical illiterates. In almost all cases they were
Talmudists, and beyond that they were Cabalistic, which is the esoteric part of
Judaism. Actually many of the rabbis were teaching their people in the
synagogue that it was a sin to read the Hebrew as Scripture.
The Sephardic Rabbinical Jews would preserve the Masoretic text for
hundreds of years and were the ones who presented the grammars and gave the
grammars to early Protestant and Catholic scholars. So, the sound came out of
Spain; it didn't come out of Germany, so there was no possibility of the sound
being 'ya' for Hebrew character 'jod.' Impossible! That only
became a possibility at the turn of the century when Jesuit scholars, posing as
Protestant scholars in this country and in Europe—Germany and England in
particular—illegally changed the phonics system. When they introduced it to the
English-speaking world it was though it had been there for the last 400-500
years. They introduced a modified Yiddish system and dumped the Sephardic
system.
This translation by Tyndale shows the double usage of 'i' in the
centuries before the letter 'j' was invented. In those times 'i' before a
consonant, as in 'Israel,' represented the 'i' sound, and 'i' before a vowel as
in judge, Isaac and Jehovah, represented the 'j' sound.
The 'j' sound was represented in the English alphabet from the earliest
times. Notice also the use 'v' represented the vowel sound 'u' as in: unto,
us, deliver and drive; and the use of 'u' to
represent the consonant sound of 'v': given, have, favor and Jehovah.
After Tyndale wrote
his translation, the use of 'u' and 'v' was reversed; 'u' came to represent its
present vowel sound, and 'v' its present consonant sound. They both have the
same genealogy and both trace back to symbols through history. Then they begin
to break apart and begin to solidified as a vowel sound or as a consonant
sound.
Sacred namers use
the invention of the letter 'j' to argue is Jehovah is an illegitimate spelling
of the Hebrew JHVH. What you see there in the Hebrew with its vowel pointings
is the name that is in the Hebrew that is actually used this way in more than
6500 cases in the Old Testament.
They view Yahweh,
or however they say it, as the only correct way to spell and pronounce the
Divine name. They are completely ignoring the fact that the English letter 'w'
used in the name Yahweh was invented 200 years later than the letter 'j.'
This the kind of
ammunition that we need. Every now and then you've got to knock on the head and
it set me on the path to write this material so that our brethren can use it.
The same argument
that they use against the name Jehovah could be used even more strongly against
Yahweh. If we're armed with that then you can come back and with the touché and
they're left dead in the water.
Let's take this a
little further. The use of 'y' was not invented until about 1500. The lower
case 'a' was not invented until 1500. the lower case 'h' was not invented until
1500. In it's present form, 'e' went back to 4-500A.D. and the latter part of
the Roman Empire. The capital 'Y' was there from the 300s.
Out of the name Yahweh, only the capital 'Y' and 'e' are legitimate and
you end up with 'Ye.' See how we can take an argument, their
argument, and throw it right back at them, in good Christian humor and
maybe a little bit of 'righteous indignation' depending on how hot they get,
and how hot you get.
I don't know about
you, but I've got enough Scotch/Irish in me and tinged with German and Welsh
and you put them together and you've got a donnybrook sometimes. You get me
cranked up and you can tell I'm getting mad because my ears start to get red in
the lower lobes and it rises to the top. Even though it may not show in my face
it will come out in words.
Even if you get to
that point in the argument, hold your ground, because you're right. Linguists
will testify and we can argue the name Yahweh was impossible before 1500, it
truly was.
Now, we can take
that a step further. I was thinking that wouldn't it be fun to have a 'Wheel of
Fortune' game on this or Jeopardy. Wheel of Fortune seemed to fit; you spin the
wheel and it comes on a certain amount of money and you ask for a vowel or
consonant and you buy it.
Let's take the word 'Yahshua' that they're throwing at all the time in
the context of the capital 'Y' and the rest of the characters. What are the
consonants and vowels in the name in the context of the capital 'Y' and the
rest of the characters. What are the consonants and vowels in the name Yahshua.
It begins with a capital 'Y' and that can be traced back to 114A.D.
The Romans only
used that character when they took a word out of the Greek language and used it
in Latin. They would use the 'Y' to represent the capital letter of that Greek
words, which goes against sacred name argument even there.
The next character
in the word 'Yahshua' is 'a' and came into use in 1500. So, if you were asking
when the name Yahshua legitimate, you would say, 'give me a 'Y' and a lower
case 'a' you’d be bankrupt.
What did we just read about the 'u' being used as a vowel? It
wasn't used that way until after the 1500s! It was still used in 1530
for the 'v' sound. So, there's only one sound and all you end up with is a 'Y.'
The 'u' in the middle of the word was still a 'v' at this particular time.
You can make up all
kinds of names in this; we've got them. We don't have to be afraid or wonder
about this term Yahshua. Mary never heard the word Yahshua. She never heard the
name Yahweh. Gabriel didn't speak to her in that language. By the way, they
were using Greek, not Hebrew, which had not been used for 300-400 years. In
fact, it was more than that, because Ezra had to translate in the 500s—when he
started translating and formalizing the Old Testament—out of the Hebrew into
the Aramaic dialect for the so-called Hebrew-speaking people in the 500sB.C.
They began to use
Greek in the 300s after the time of Alexander the Great, and were using it at
the time of Christ in Galilee especially. They were all raised with Greek—Peter
and all the disciples and Christ—it was the most Greek-speaking part of
Palestine. It was the commercial center. The temple was the bank. But there was
a commercial area where Matthew was sitting, on the commercial routes and
taxing people coming and going. All those records had to be written in Greek.
They were filed that way in Greek.
We don't have run
in terror and we can tell our people a few simple ways to defend themselves.
It's where you're using their speed and their force, that momentum for your
advantage. The next thing you know they're lying on their verbal back. One
minute it's Yahweh, the next it's Ya, and now it's Yahshua.
Myth #2—There is no 'J' in Hebrew
Unlike Yiddish,
which modern Jews speak, the Hebrew language that was spoken by Abraham and
Moses…
I say this
sincerely because this is what all the scholarship going back for a hundred
years verifies.
…and that is
preserved in the Scriptures does have the "j" sound.
So, there is a 'j' as a sound in the Sephardic phonetic system, in
Biblical Hebrew, not Yiddish Hebrew, not Ashkenazic Hebrew. There is no
physical character 'j' in the Hebrew, but there is a character representing the
'j' sound, and that's jod.
The reference for this about Abraham and Moses is from a Baptist
scholar. He published Introduction to the Biblical Hebrew Syntax in
1990. He informs us that tracing the Masoretic text and how it's
preserved: it's consonants and then marked with the vowel sounds in the Semitic
languages—we have records going back to the time of the Tower of Babel, shortly
before Abraham—the best way to preserve a language is to have consonants
without vowel symbols. That preserves better than having the symbols. When you
do tack on the symbols then it's like tacking on a Morse Code, where they're
set in cement forever.
Those symbols can
fit everything about the language, the Semitic languages, and shows that the
sounds cannot have been faked. No one could have come in at any time in history
and stuck the wrong vowel points on their Jehovah and give it what they call 'a
bastard sound.' It would be impossible, because, it wouldn't fit with the
language itself. It's an impossibility to fake it and not have it obvious.
In fact, where they did fake it, God made them leave a little note out
to side: Kilroy was here! You know what I mean; doesn't add up
and fit the language, and anyone knowing the language would know that. So, God
made them leave a little note to tell on themselves and they changed Jehovah to
Adonai, literally taking the character out and switching them around
Yes, they're called
emendations of the Sopherim. They were done in the second century B.C. by the
Levites who had begun to devalue or defame God's name (read Malachi). They're
the ones whom God forced to leave a note for generations to come what their sin
would be, right there in the margins of the Masoretic text.
From ancient times, the "j" sound has been represented by the
letter jod (in ancient Hebrew a backward 'f' and in Biblical
Hebrew ').
That ancient
character, by the way, goes clear back to the time of David. There are records
that go back to David's time, so when you're reading in Samuel about Jonathan
and David, this was the Hebrew that they were using; it had the same sound.
Many of the
characters, by the way, in ancient Hebrew look very much like modern English,
with just a tilt up or turn them around a little bit and they look very much
like modern English characters.
Although Ashkenazi
Jews…
German Jews who
came out of Slavic countries, and that's the basis of their language.
…have changed the pronunciation of jod to the
"y" sound, the Sephardic Jews have retained the original
pronunciation of jod as "j". The Sephardic phonetic
system is acknowledged by scholars as the most accurate representation of the
ancient Hebrew.
Biblical Hebrew!
I'm not referring
to synagogue Hebrew, Yiddish Hebrew—whether just common on the street or used
in the synagogue for liturgical purposes—this was Biblical Hebrew that you
would see when you would look at a manuscript from which Tyndale translated and
the other early scholars.
The grammar that was written concerning that Hebrew is totally different
and the phonic system is totally different. They give a representation of it
{see Debunking the Myths of Sacred Namers #1 at truthofgod.org}
As are all
languages, Hebrew letters are classified according to the organs of speech by
which they are sounded.
Your tongue, your
teeth, your lips. And the passages start and stop as you go through and goes
through the mouth.
Sephardic grammarians have divided the Hebrew letters… [Biblical Hebrew]
…into five classes of sound: gutturals, labials, palatals, linguals,
and dentals.
The one we're
concerned with here is the palatals. That's where jot fits; in this session
we're not talking about the 'w' sound. The 'w' sound changed the 'va' to a 'wa'
and they changed 'jot' to a 'ya.'
When they moved the
Hebrew character like 'jot' out of the classification palatal, they moved it to
a new classification for the English called a sonant. That's where the 'ya'
sound is in the English language.
They moved the
Hebrew character 'va' out of its classification call a labial. In the Sephardic
system they moved that symbol down to the new sonant system and it became 'wa.'
So, they changed
from a labial—'va'—to an English sonant 'wa' where you don't bring your lips
together you just sort of purse them.
So, they moved
those two characters down to justify the illegitimate name 'Yahweh.' Always
before the scholars pronounced it 'Javeh' or 'Java.'
I think you get the
point about the language. Any Hebrew grammarian and Hebraist worth his salt
always pronounced the 'j' sound and the 'v' sound. You find it that way in the
ancient literature going back hundreds of years. You don't find 'y' and 'w'
until very recent times.
That was a
culmination of 300 years of work of Jesuits trying to take over and ruin the
English Bible. They have to destroy the veracity of the English Bible before
they can bring their own Bible in. All the Catholic Bibles now have 'Yahweh';
all of them starting in 1966, published from Jerusalem. They're the Yahwehists,
and you know where they were going from the very beginning.
By the way, the so
called scholars promoted these changes. They have direct links not only to the
Catholic Church and Jesuits, but have links to Cabalists as well, going back
into the occult, calling down demons and taking the doctrines of demons and
bringing them into English-speaking fellowships and services.
They had destroyed the Anglican Church over a hundred years ago. So,
when it was written in the book Lord, What Should I Do? by
Fred R. Coulter, about the destruction of Protestantism, the Jesuits all but
destroyed Anglicanism over a hundred and thirty years ago.
Now they had to set
out to destroy American Protestantism, so they shifted everything at the turn
of the century and published the material in English and began to hit the
American English-speaking peoples with full violence and came down through
Princeton and Harvard. They were the main conduits to come into this country
from Oxford.
They had taken over
Oxford a long time ago! So, through these so-called scholars, this new phonics
system came in, the new push for 'Yahweh' came in—not Yahshua at this time.
They hadn't resurrected that, yet.
The name was
invented back in the 1500s by a fellow names John Reuchlin. That's a different
myth, different story.
But we know that it
came out of Egyptian, Cabalistic… It's like soup, a terrible soup. You take all
the evil of the past and throw it together in one witches brew and these
characters were it. They mesmerized the world and started changing everything
to the point where now most Americans, even though they might be small, little
fellowships, are using the wrong Bibles and they have the wrong scholarship,
wrong commentaries, and wrong Biblical dictionaries. Everything supports this
evil. None of them have stood up to the material that has come down to us. If
they did, it's been destroyed!
So, if God lets
them, this will be destroyed, too. It either gets around and people begin to
see it, and it gains currency among our people and begins to help. Or if God
allows it, because they don't want it to get around, exposing the king without
his clothes. They're naked, they have no clothes.
But they argue as
though they have the pomp and ceremony and the dress of King Henry VIII. But
they're standing there naked before God! But their argument is—the clothes, to
use that metaphor—empty and hollow.
They have all these
idols of literature that's around there and they have oppressed the history, so
our people—or anybody—goes to a library and they have none of this. It took me
four years to dig this out and get to this point.
You'll notice the
'jod' under palatals to begin the second character, the smallest of characters,
so it's like a coma.
Palatals are consonants voiced with the aid of the palate. There are
three different types of palatals: The first type is made when the part of the
tongue just behind the tip is raised against or near the hard palate. The
English y in "yes" or the German ich are
made in this manner.
A second classification of palatal is the fricative sound,
which is made on or near either the hard or soft palate. Fricative palatals produce
the sounds sh and zh.
The third type of palatals is the affricative sound.
The English j and ch are affricative
palatals. Affricative palatals produce a sound by the slow release of a
consonant followed immediately by a fricative. Examples are the sound
of ch in batch and the j sound
in badge.
(go to the next
track)
The third type of palatals is the affricative sound.
The English j and ch are affricative
palatals. Affricative palatals produce a sound by the slow release of a
consonant followed immediately by a fricative. Examples are the
sound of ch in batch…
We use these terms
all the time and never think about it. Why should we? We drive cars and are not
mechanics. We have wire in our houses but at not electricians. We run water but
are not plumbers.
This is our
language that we mimic as youngsters. We hear the sound as tots and begin to
form the sounds imitating our parents and those around us. We don't think
anything of it.
Sounds developed in
a few places in colonial days and spread out westward across the country. You
can trace them; linguists trace them.
We imitate the
sound and the physical character is just as symbol of that imitated sound. All
Hebrew grammarians in Tyndale's day from 1522 to about 1534, before he was
imprisoned. He never completed his work. His translation was completed by his
friend Coverdale.
All Hebrew
grammarians in Tyndale's day used the Sephardic phonics system where the 'jod'
was classified as a palatal. That's why Tyndale gave the 'jod' sound the letter
'j.'
It was no great
conspiracy. All Hebraists at that time used the same sound, especially when we
get into the interesting history of who was Galatinus? Then the real detective
work begins and I'll show you how all of this was covered up. We can trace the
sorded history of the lies that were just passed on from generation to
generation of so-called scholars that were Catholic. So, you know who they
loved and hated. Jesuit Catholics who are out to destroy English Protestantism
and the English language in particular.
I truly believe
that the main reason God gave us America was to keep His promise to Israel, but
in particular his special promise to Joseph. I believe that God preserved His
Word through Joseph and passed it on and amplified it, published it and sent it
around the world through Joseph—Ephraim and Manasseh: Great Britain and the
United States of America. This they have to destroy.
By the way, since the
20s or 30s, perhaps earlier, more Jesuits are produced out of American than any
other country in the world.
Most Jews today
have been taught that the Hebrew alphabet has no letter for the "j"
sound….
They'll argue: 'I
go to synagogue, I've studied the Hebrew a bit and I see the characters here
and they don't have that sound.'
They don't realize
the history that goes back just a few years before this, and back into the
Sephardic history. Ashkenazi leaders have passed on the myth for a long time
that the Sephardic Jews were the 'hillbillies' of Judaism.
They were the main
scholars, the main preservers of God's Word, those who loved the Hebrew and
preserved it.
So, when God
transferred the Hebrew and the Greek over to the Protestant community, the
Jewish community felt that Christianity was being destroyed and willingly
participated with Catholics hoping that they would destroy Christianity, that
is Catholicism—the only Christianity that they knew.
What happens 10-30
years down the road? All Germany is converted to Lutherism. France is
converted… All the way up into Poland, Hungry and Czechoslovakia, over toward
Russia into the Scandinavian countries and over into England. All that's left
is a part of Italy and Spain. So, the Jews and the Catholics are both horrified.
They joined in the effort now to destroy Protestantism. But the
Protestants now have the grammars:
· they've inherited
the truth of hundreds of years
· they've inherited
the Hebrew Scripture, or it's guardian
· they inherited the
literal Greek
· they have it in
English and German
So, overnight tens
of millions of people out of their control suddenly have the Word in their
laps. Lo and behold some of these fools get on these little ships and go to
America, then it really gets out of hand! These people read the Bible and take
it seriously and found a new country. They kicked out the Brits and became a
new country. And here comes the bashing of Protestantism and then, and only
then, do you have Sabbatarianism beginning to flourish, and it started in Michigan.
That's where it took root and it started to spread.
The Jesuits are
going to retrace their tracks and bring it back through Andrews University and
destroy the remaining elements of Sabbatarianism.
What has God done to Sabbatarian groups? We're one of them. He brought
His wonderful hand down and scattered us. What's happening? They have
no idea who we are, or where we are! Literature is popping up all over
the place. There are groups that are independent fellowships that they can't
possibly get control of. We know and love each other, and we're a Christian
cell:
· we know our fruits
· we know it when we
get up and go to bed
· we know each other
as people
That's the hardest
group to break into on the face of the earth. This is what God is doing to
preserve His Word.
I know that we get
very discourage, all of us do. I have to remind myself that in God's hand on
the other side is great blessing. His Word will be preached regardless of what
these other fools do.
Every time they
think they've 'got them by the throat' they can't. God's Word and His work just
slips out and just spreads all over the place like some kind of spiritual
virus.
This Ashkenazic
pronunciation of 'jod' used by all Jews of German and Polish descent is not the
original pronunciation of this Hebrew letter.
As Gesenius
attests, "The pronunciation of Hebrew by the modern German Jews
[Ashkenazi]…
A great German
Hebraists of Jewish background, a Talmudist, probably a Cabalist. He wrote the
Greek theological works that became the essence of the grammars that we have
inherited today in Lexicons
…which partly resembles the Syriac and is generally called 'Polish',
differs considerably from that of the Spanish and Portuguese Jews [Sephardic],
which approaches nearer to the Arabic. The pronunciation of Hebrew by
Christians follows the latter [Sephardic] (after the example of
Reuchlin), in almost all cases" (Gesenius' Hebrew Grammar).
That was first
written at the turn of the 1800s—1812-14—by Gesenius, whose teacher was in a
university town called Halle, Germany. This teacher defended to his death that
the vowel markings under Jehovah are the accurate markings.
Gesenius picked up
on Judaism and began to write against the vowel markings. Not against the
consonants; there was no evidence given against the consonants until the
1980s-90s. That began to be published out of Germany, just before they
transferred that over here in America.
…(after the example
of Reuchlin), in almost all cases."
Reuchlin was the
father of Christian grammars. He wrote the first Christian grammar in German,
from the Hebrew. He lived at the time of Tyndale, Reuchlin, Galatinus, and
others who were the scholars—Protestant or Catholic.
We have to remember
that up until a good part of that century the Catholics never really viewed
Protestants as Protestants, and Protestants didn't view themselves as
Protestants. Catholics thought the Protestants were Catholics and many
Protestants thought they were still part of the Catholics experience. They
hadn't defined it that well. They knew they were split and there were major
differences and going away from the pope, but they had not yet defined it as we
think of Protestants and Catholics.
As we look back on
history, it was a great period. All these people knew each other and they all
recognized and used the term Jehovah at that time. Even though some grew up as
Italians, some as Germans, some as English, some as Spanish. It was Jehovah to
all of them, because that's the way it marked in the Hebrew.
In the days of Gesenius, no reputable scholar challenged the
authenticity of the Sephardic pronunciation of jod as
"j". Reuchlin, recognized as the leading authority of that era,
followed the Sephardic pronunciation of this Hebrew letter. When Tyndale
transliterated the jod in jhvh with the
"j" sound, to be read as Jehovah, he did so after the example of
Reuchlin.
Myth # 3: The name Jehovah was invented
This the sacred
namers really crow about. I think they do themselves a great disfavor by
crowing 'sold out' as to quote the occult scholars at the turn of the century,
who write that the name of Jehovah is monstrous, is a hybrid name, is hideous,
everything except beastie; although someone has probably written about that.
That is not God's mind! His name was marked from the very beginning of
the pointings pronounced as Jehovah. Does that make Jehovah a sacred
name? No! So, why aren't they arguing on our side for simply
arguing for the name of the God of the Old Testament? It's not sacred, but
there's nothing wrong with the term Jehovah. Nothing sacred about the 'ya'
sound, and nothing sinful about the 'j' sound.
But that's not the
point. When we write about the God of the Old Testament, we have the
responsibility of using God's name properly. At that time the transliteration
out of the Hebrew into English is Jehovah. Nothing wrong with that at all.
On the other side
of the coin, Yahweh is an imposter. It truly is a monstrous name, truly is
hybrid and hideous and should not be used by us, because I have traced it back
through Gnostic records to the time of Christ.
Gnostic Jews and Gentiles alike who claim to be of 'the way of Cain';
remember Jude writing about the 'way of Cain'? They used the name
'Yahveh.' They didn't use the name Jehovah. The Christians were using
the name Jehovah when they referred to the God of the Old Testament.
So, on the one hand
Jehovah is not a sacred name, it's a Divine name. We can use it and we should.
Yahweh, on the other hand, should not be used for the God of the Old Testament,
or Yahshua for the God of the New Testament.
This is what
exposing these myths is all about. So, in an argument against the use of
Jehovah, sacred namers claim that this name was unknown in Biblical times. They
insist that the name of Jehovah is a recent invention, concocted in the 1500s
by a Catholic priest.
Pray tell, how did
Tyndale—who came out of England as a young man in his 20s and was on fire for
God and he's translating—in Germany, running for his life because Martin Luther
had just nailed his 95 Theses to the doors of Wittenberg.
Tyndale spent a
year with Luther at Wittenberg was a hunted man by the Crown of England and now
by the Catholic Church. So, they write that the name Jehovah was invented by a Catholic
priest.
How in the world
did this poor man Tyndale, before he died, running through Europe, being driven
from pillar to post in Germany had to flee out of the printers of Germany as
the Crown was coming in the front door they were going out the back with their
materials, getting on a ship, quickly paying for passage and going up the Rhine
to a main Jewish area for the Sephardic Jews where he studied a bit of Hebrew
and continuing his work in other places. Mainly in the city of Marburg where
the Saxon Duke was protecting him.
One of the
interesting stories there is that many of dukes, after the Bible was translated
and printed, lost their power, money and their little kingdoms. They were just
there to transmit God's Word 'through the pass before the Indians cut
everything off.'
How he could have
gotten in touch with any Catholic on to pass the word 'Jehovah' on to him when
it wasn't even an issue at that time.
Why would Tyndale
accept this mess from any Catholic at this point, especially an agent of the
pope. Galatinus was the pope's confessor, meaning they would get in a little
box and the pope told Galatinus how his golf game was going. I mean that
seriously in one sense, because the pope at that time was Giovanni DeMachi. The
most liberal folks of the era would walk down the streets with their mistresses
and sometimes their misters, they had both, and openly flaunting all this sin
before the people of Rome, their own people. Of course, this pope was one of
the main leverages for the Reformation.
They quote well-known Biblical writers and editors who support this
view. These were Catholic Jesuits who were professing to be Protestants.
Remember, the Jesuits will lie and pretend to be anything and do
anything, and will commit any sin to do the will of their god! This
is the vow that they take.
In the introduction to The Emphasized Bible, editor Joseph
Rotherham writes:
"The pronunciation Jehovah was unknown until 1520, when it was introduced
by Galatinus; but was contested by Le Mercier, J. Drusius, and L. Capellus,
as against grammatical and historical propriety' (pp. 24-25)" (The
Mistaken J, p. 17).
I brought the Rotherham Bible with me; this is a sacred
name Bible. This is what they use. It was Rotherham that first wrote that God's
name in the Old Testament—the Divine name—was sacred. It had been oppressed and
was finally liberated and His name was Yahweh, and that we must correct
hundreds of years of defiling God's name. He went to the Great text of Westcott
and Hort who were occultists, Jesuits and Protestant professing scholars who
led the scholarly world away from the Greek of the King James Version.
They also professed
the perverted Hebrew of the synagogue of the rabbinic Hebrew and began to
rewrite the Masoretic text. He does it in this Bible. So, this is truly
monstrous as a Bible, truly a hybrid version. This is where they get it and
it's the main Bible of the sacred namers. They quote him over and over again.
They started their work in 1930 in Detroit and the sacred name movement has
spread and spread and is now affecting our people in a major way.
Sacred namers believe that they have the real facts concerning the name
Jehovah because a number of sources support this view. Among these sources is
the Jewish Encyclopedia, which states, "The reading Jehovah is a
comparatively recent invention. Jehovah is generally held to have been the
invention of Pope Leo the 10th's confessor, Peter Galatin…" (De
Arcanis Catholic Veritates 1518, Folio XLIII)…
He's defending the
truth of the ancient Catholic Church—that's simply what it means. It was
actually published in 1816 and the Jewish Encyclopedia has it around 1518 and
later they say 1520. So, they can't make up their mind.
…who was followed in the use of this hybrid form by Fagius
Drusius. Van de Driesche, who lived between 1550 and 1616, was
the first to ascribe to Peter Galatin the use of Jehovah, and this view has
been taken since his days" (vol. 7, s.v. "Jehovah").
Is it true that the
name Jehovah was invented by a Catholic priest named Galatin or Galatinus? Or
is this view of scholars itself an invention? Let us examine other historical
and Biblical sources to shed more light on the subject.
This is where it
really gets interesting. Believe me, this has been an incredible detective
story and as this thing unfolded I couldn't believe my eyes. The hypocrisy,
deception and the lies that have been passed down. How easy it is to deceive
people who don't check the records. How easy it is to bury the records to the
point where they're almost lost.
I believe that the
remaining records that we have in the Protestant world will be allowed to
disintegrate into dust, burned or destroyed, and just taken out of the
libraries in the next few years.
For several years I
researched it at the library at Andrews University. I've notice that the main
library is going downhill, falling apart. They're not keeping the books up, and
these are books from which I got this information, among others. The
Encyclopedic works that were written at the end of the 1800s and the beginning of
the 1900s that go back into the German and English literature and verify these
things, when those works go we will have none of this.
We're in a 'gnat's
blinking of an eye' to those works being destroyed, unless somebody preserves
them on disc or copies them.
Debunking the
Myths of Sacred Namers Part 1 by
Carl Franklin
Who was Galatinus?
I had a little fun
with the pronunciation of the name Galatinus. And someone wrote me and totally
misunderstood and thought I had not seen the quote. I had seen the quote and I
know that the invention of the name is attributed to Galatinus. I wanted to know
who he was; no sacred namer had ever told me or gave me any source to which I
could go, other than that this man had invented the name. I wanted to know more
about him and I did; what a story!
The real name of
Peter Galatin, or Petrus Galatinus, was Pietro Colonna Galatino.
The Colonna
family—you can go to the Catholic Encyclopedia 1912 edition, and under the name
Colonna you will find they were a very wealthy merchant family, very powerful
politically and religiously, and there was no difference at that time. Here's a
very powerful man, not a backwoodser; he's at the top of the heap of the
hierarchy of the world at this time and even becomes the confessor to Pope Leo
X.
Here is a brief
summary of his life and work as stated in the Catholic Encyclopaedia: "Galatino,
Pietro Colonna [alias Petrus Galatinus]…
These people go by
Italian names, Greek names, Latin and German names. They had four or five
aliases. It was common at this time.
This is not one of
the myths that I'm attacking or exposing, but sacred namers will tell you that
God's name is a personal name and all names, when they're transliterated into
another language they remain the same and never change. If it's Joe in one
language, it's Joe in all languages. They use this same argument for Yahweh, and
that God's name is personal, which it isn't, and it's transliterated literally.
If that would be
so, why can't you find anybody in history that did that? So, it's another myth
and this is another way of exposing it.
…Friar Minor,
philosopher, theologian, Orientalist…
This man was a
well-educated person; he had been schooled. He did not just walk out of the
barn the day before.
…b. at Galatia (now
Cajazzo) in Aplia; d. at Rome, soon after 1539; received the habit as early as
1480, studied Oriental languages in Rome and was appointed lector at the
convent of Ara Coelie; he also held the office of provincial in the province of
Bari, and that of penitentiary under Leo X. Galatino wrote his chief work 'De
Arcanis Catholicae Veritatis'…
Catholic teaching!
…at the request of
the pope, the emperor…
Maxmillian of
Germany
…and other
dignitaries, in 1516, at which time, owing mainly to John Reuchlin's…
Remember we
mentioned the fellow who was the first Christian grammarian? This is the father
of Christian grammarians and he received this information from Sephardism.
'Augenspiegel', the famous controversy on the authority of the Jewish
writings was assuming a very menacing aspect. Galatino took up
Reuchlin's defence. Resolved to combat the Jews on their own ground, he turned
the Cabbala against them, and sought to convince them that their own books
yielded ample proof of the truth of the Christian religion, hence their
opposition to it should be branded as obstinacy. He gave his work the
form of a dialogue….
Based on the style
of Plato and Aristotle and the other Greek writers.
…The two
conflicting Christian parties were represented by Capnio (Reuchlin) and the
Inquisitor Hochstraten, O.P….
Out of Germany. He
was the inquisitor for the Inquisition out of Spain.
…In conciliatory
terms, Galatino responded to the queries and suggestions of the former, and
refuted the objection of the latter….
He was on
Reuchlin's side and refuted the work of the Inquisition.
…He had borrowed largely from the 'Pugio Fidei' of the Dominican
Raymond Martini, remodelling, however, the material and supplementing
it with copious quotations from the 'Zohar' and the 'Gale Razayya' "(1912
ed., s.v. "Galatino").
So, these men were
familiar with the Catechism, with the Talmud and with the writings of the
Catholic Church.
In 'Pugio Fidei' written in the 1200s out of Spain, the
word Jehovah as it appears—all by the ending 'h' in Tyndale's
transliteration is in those writings. The point is that Galatino himself uses
the word Jehovah that he copied from 'Pugio Fidei,' Martini's
work of 1280-something.
How could he have
invented the word? It's as simple as that. Now that we have learned more about
Galatinus, let us look at the name Jehovah.
Now that we have learned more about Galatinus, let us look at the
assertion that he invented the name Jehovah. If Galatinus had invented the
name, Jehovah would not have been known before his time. Yet it is a historical
fact that the name Jehovah was known and used centuries before Galatinus
finished his De Arcanis Catholicae Veritatis. Notice:
What they're saying
here is that this man also knew of the form Jehovah. So, from the top of the
Catholic, Protestant, Jewish—the Sephardic—the form Jehovah was being used.
"But the writers of the sixteenth century, Catholic and
Protestant (e.g. Cajetan [Tommaso de Vio Gaetani, died August 7, 1547,
alias Cajetan Toledo…
Not only a great Reformation scholar, but the leading toward the end of
the time period of the end of the 1500s as they finalized the King
James Bible of 1611. It was his work that was most influential in
deciding on the Greek and the Hebrew and the various touchy places where the
translation was to be used.
This was known all
over Europe; they knew the Scripture and the Hebrew and Greek. This man had
written earlier, but his work was used later. In other words, at the time of
Galatino this man was known as a Protestant out of Switzerland, I believe, and
was a scholar of the highest repute. So, the:
—best known for his dealings with Luther; see Kingdon, Execution
of Justice in England and Defense of English Catholics, p. 144] and
Theodore de Beze [a great Reformation scholar], are perfectly familiar
with the word [Jehovah]. Galatinus himself ('Arcana cathol.
veritatis', I, Bari, 1516, a, p. 77) represents the form as known and
received in his time. Besides, Drusius (loc. cit.,
351) discovered it in Porchetus…
The man Drusius is
extremely interesting in the Jesuit connections later on.
…a theologian of the fourteenth century. Finally, the
word is found even in the 'Pugio fidei' [Dagger of Faith] of Raymund
Martin, a work written about 1270 (ed. Paris, 1651, pt. III,
dist. ii, cap. iii, p. 448, and Note, p. 745). Probably the introduction of the
name Jehovah antedates even R. Martin" (Catholic Encyclopaedia, 1912 ed.,
s.v. "Jehovah").
I have references
of scholars today who say it probably goes back to the 900s that fits perfectly
with the Masoretes coming out of Palestine at the time of the first Crusade
across North Africa by ship, showing up in Spain and setting up shop; bringing
with them the already pointed Hebrew text, preserving it, letting the grammars.
All that was inherited by the time of Tyndale into the Protestant world.
Historical records clearly demonstrate that the name Jehovah was known
centuries before the time of Galatinus. How, then, did the myth develop that
Galatinus invented the name? Let's take a closer look at this claim as
presented in the Jewish Encyclopedia: "The reading Jehovah is a
comparatively recent invention. Jehovah is generally held to have been the
invention of Pope Leo the 10th's confessor, Peter Galatin (De
Arcanis Catholic Veritates 1518, Folio XLIII) who was followed in the use of
this hybrid form by Fagius Drusius. Van de Driesche, who lived
between 1550 and 1616, was the first to ascribe to Peter Galatin the
use of Jehovah, and this view has been taken since his days" (vol. 7,
s.v. "Jehovah").
Yes, it has,
because the Catholic and Jesuit and the Protestant Jesuits have perpetrated and
resurrected these quotes and hidden the truth.
In this article,
the Jewish Encyclopedia states that a man named Van de Driesche was the first
to link the name Jehovah to the works of Galatinus. But at the same time, the
use of Jehovah was supported by a man named "Fagius Drusius." Who
were these men, and what shaped their views?
When we delve into
historical records of the time, we find that the Jewish Encyclopedia has
mistakenly combined the names "Fagius" and "Drusius," and
that these names actually belong to two different men.
So much for the scholarship! We need to read these things
with open eyes and a little bit of concern, because they pass these things onto
us and we just believe it's true that they've done their scholarship, and
indeed, they've given us a snow job!
The man who was
known by the Latin name Paulus Fagius was the German scholar Paul Buechelin.
The man known as Drusius, also known as Van Der Driesche, was the Dutch
theologian Johann Clemens. Both men lived in the 1500's, but Fagius died a year
before the birth of Drusius….
Reincarnation? Yes!
…Let us examine the
lives of these two men to learn the circumstances that shaped their opposing
views of the name Jehovah.
Fagius—Paulus Fagius Paul Buechelin (1504-1549)
As you can see, he
didn't live very long, but he was a personal friend of Reuchlin and Luther and
was a famous German scholar. He was raised a German but supported the
pronunciation of Jehovah, although the 'J' sound is not in his native language.
As the
Encyclopaedia Judaica relates, Fagius, whose real name was Paul Buechelin, was
a professor of Hebrew who had studied under the great Elijah Levita. Notice:
Levita was the last
and the greatest of all the Sephardic grammarians. He took all of the work of
the previous 500 years and passed it onto the Protestants. He was from Spain.
He worked with Buechelin in Buechelin's printing shop in Germany.
"Fagius, Paulus (Paul Buechelin; 1504-1549), Hebraist. Born at
Rheinzabern, in the Palatinate, Germany, he was professor of Hebrew first at
Strasbourg and later at Cambridge. He learned Hebrew from Elijah
Levita…
I believe Levita
really means Levite.
…whom he invited to supervise the Hebrew press he established in Isny
(Bavaria). He translated the following Hebrew books into Latin: Elijah
Levita's Tishbi (Isny, 1541; Basle, 1557) and Meturgeman (Isny,
1542); the Talmud tractate Avot (Isny, 1541). He edited a
Hebrew version of the book of Tobit with a Latin translation (Isny, 1542);
the Alphabet of Ben Sira (Isny, 1542), and David Kimhi's
commentary to Psalms 110 (Constance, 1544). He edited several chapters of
Targum Onkelos (Strasbourg, 1546)…
These are written
in Aramaic and they are paraphrases. In other words, expressing their opinion
of what the Hebrew means in the Jewish community at any given time.
…and wrote an exegetic treatise on the first four chapters of Genesis,
('Exegesis sive expositio dictionum hebraicarum literalis in quatuor
captiula Geneseos,' Isny, 1542). He was the author of an elementary Hebrew
grammar (Constance, 1543) and of two books, Liber Fidei seu
Veritatis and Parvus Tractulus, in which he endeavored,
with reference to Jewish sources, to prove the truth of Christianity….
Mistake! You go to the Hebrew and Greek and the English from those to do
that.
…He began the republication of a revised edition of the
concordance Me'ir Nativ. After his migration to England, where he
died, this work was completed by Reuchlin (Basle, 1556)" (vol. 6, s.v.
"Fagius").
We find additional information about the life and work of Fagius, or
Beuchelin, in The New Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge, which
states that he also studied under the renowned Reuchlin. Fagius was a
"German theologian; b. at Rheinzabern (9 m. s.e. of Landau), Rhenish
Bavaria, 1504; d. at Cambridge, England. Nov. 13, 1549. He studied at
Heidelberg (1515) and at Strasburg (1522), where Capito [Johann
Reuchlin] taught him Hebrew…
So, he studied
under Capito and Reuchlin, the two greatest scholars of the time.
…he became rector
of the school at Isny, 1527…
Ten years after the
Reformation began. This was in Germany, a Protestant theologian, a native
German.
…was a student of theology at Strasburg, 1535; returned as Evangelical
pastor to Isny, 1537; and became pupil in Hebrew of Elias Levita; he
succeeded Capito as pastor and theological professor in Strasburg, 1542.
Violently opposed to the Interim…
a tract that was written
…when it was introduced (1549), he accepted Cranmer's invitation to come
to England and became professor of Hebrew at Cambridge and
soon died of a fever. Under Queen Mary…
A Catholic English queen of Scotland
…his and Butzer's
bones were exhumed and burned (Feb. 6, 1557) and their university honors were
taken from them; but Queen Elizabeth ordered that the university formally
restore to them their honors (July 22, 1560)" (vol. IV, s.v.
"Fagius").
The Fagius of
history was the German Hebraist Paul Buechelin, a Reformation scholar and a
Protestant theologian! Buechelin was one of the leading Hebrew scholars of his
generation, having studied under the greatest Christian Hebraist of all, Johann
Reuchlin. He had also studied Hebrew under the greatest of all the Sephardic
Hebraists, Elias or Elijah Levita. Beuchelin's expertise in Biblical Hebrew was
acknowledged by all Protestant scholars of his day, and his qualifications are
still unquestioned by the scholarly community today.
We don't know who
Faguis is, yet. But for this fellow to say that this man just came along and
was willy-nilly in favor of Jehovah, a hybrid name invented by Galatinus, is
really quite something to say. Besides being a lie, it's quite a bold lie. It
was picked up by Catholic scholars and passed on, even though Drusius,
supposedly a Protestant.
We haven't gotten
to Drusius, yet; but Drusius was of the area of Flanders. That's the kind of
Dutch he was. At the time Drusius lived, King Philip II of Spain controlled the
Netherlands.
Under William
LaVorgna in the late 1500s they began to revolt and break away, but that took a
good many years before that was fully complete. Some of the main ports broke
away, but the lower part of Holland, that is today Holland, was made up of a
section that is known in France today as Belgium. And part of that came modern
Netherlands.
That part was still
controlled by Philip of Spain, and by the Spanish Crown until way late in the
1600s. Some of the greatest brutality was in this area, and this was where the
Jesuits were working the most feverishly.
The Jesuits of this
area were writing the Douay-Rheim version of the Bible. They were also
masterminding the planning for the Spanish Armada. So, the pope—through the
Jesuits of this region, right across from Britain—were masterminding a twofold
attack through a new Bible and through the Spanish Navy coming up and
recapturing England, coming in with a new Bible and taking everything back.
Based on the teaching he had received from the learned Reuchlin and the
great Elias Levita, Buechelin--or Fagius--supported the use of Jehovah as the
true pronunciation of the Hebrew name jhvh. No one could convince
this leading Protestant scholar that the name Jehovah was invented, because he
had been taught by the most knowledgeable Hebrew scholars of his day. He was
thoroughly familiar with the letters of the Hebrew alphabet and the
pronunciation of every consonant and vowel marking. His expert knowledge of the
Hebrew language formed a solid basis for his use of the name Jehovah as a
legitimate pronunciation of the divine name.
No invention here!
Historical records
confirm that the man known as Fagius--in reality, Paul Buechelin, leading
German scholar and professor of Hebrew—was eminently qualified to evaluate the
legitimacy of the name Jehovah. However, soon after the death of Fagius,
another man came on the scene, promoting a very different view of Jehovah. This
man, known by the Latin name Drusius, was none other than the Dutch theologian
Johann Clemens—also known as Van Der Driesche. As quoted earlier in an article
from The Jewish Encyclopedia, it was Van Der Driesche who first claimed that
the name Jehovah was invented by Galatinus.
Was this view of
the name Jehovah based on unbiased scholarship and careful consideration of the
historical facts, or was it the result of outside influences and glossing over
the records of history? Let us investigate the life of Van Der Driesche, or
Drusius, to find the answer.
Drusius: Van Der Driesche
Johann Clemens (1550-1616)
Jesuits were
picking up steam from 1534—that's when they were chartered—and they were
gaining pockets of great influence in certain areas, from with Drusius came.
The Encyclopaedia
Judaica states the following: "Drusius (Van Der Driesche), Johann Clemens
(1550-1616). Dutch theologian, Hebraist, and Bible scholar….
I think they're
being generous here. How are we going to find out how good these people are?
All they have to do is state that these are great men and pass it on through
history and bite that hook, line and sinker and we're dead. They've setup a
'straw man,' an artificial scholar.
…A native of
Oudenarde (East Flanders), he was professor of oriental languages at Oxford
(from 1572) and later in Leiden, Ghent, and Francker. Drusius wrote…
He was the present
theologian. But that means nothing at this time, because the Jesuits would willingly
come in and lie, claiming to be Protestants, work their way in and then take over
the institution and begin to influence the writing and all the literature that
came out.
…several books on Hebrew grammer, including Alphabetum ebraicum
vetus (1587) and Grammatica linguae sanctae nova (1612). Nomenclator
Eliae Levitae, a book on Elijah Levita's works (1652), was written in
collaboration with his son Johann and many other scholars. He wrote several
works on biblical exegesis" (vol. 6, s.v. "Drusius"). Note:
Either the editors of the Encyclopaedia Judaica erred in their dates, or
Drusius worked on his book on Elijah Levita's works posthumously. Drusius died
in 1616.
Referenced:
· Study Papers: Debunking the
Myths of Sacred Namers (parts 1, 2
& 3) by Carl Franklin
· Sermon: De-Mythologizing
the Divine Name (Carl Franklin)
· Books:
· Introduction to the
Biblical Hebrew Syntax by Bruce Waltke and Michael O'Connor
· Lord, What Should I
Do? by Fred R. Coulter
· Emphasized Bible, editor Joseph
Rotherham
No comments:
Post a Comment