Chapter 1

¹ Jude, a slave of Jesus the Anointed One (but the brother of James), to those who are one and loved in God the Father, and in Jesus the Anointed One… those who have been set aside as called ones: ² May you grow in mercy, peace, and love.

³ Loved ones; Although I really wanted to write to you about the salvation we hold in common, I found it necessary to write in order to encourage you to struggle for the faith that the Holy Ones gave you, ⁴ because some men have slipped in among you whose judgment was written about long ago. They are godless men who are turning the caring of our God into something immoral, and they are denying our only owner and Lord, Jesus the Anointed One.

⁵ Despite the fact that you already know everything, I want to remind you that although Jehovah saved people out of the land of Egypt, He thereafter destroyed the ones who didn’t show faith. ⁶ He also locked up the [heavenly] messengers who didn’t keep the position they had long ago and left the place where they lived. So He’s now keeping them in perpetual darkness where they await the judgment of the Great Day.

⁷ The same is true of Sodom, GomorRah, and the cities around them. They became tired of just sexual immorality, and started chasing after other flesh; so they’ve been set before us as examples, since they’ve been condemned to the fire of the age.

⁸ And that’s how you too (those of you who are living a dream) are dirtying the flesh… by not respecting those who have been put over you, and by speaking disrespectfully of the Glorious Ones. ⁹ Why, when MichaEl, the Highest Messenger [of God] had an argument with the Slanderer over the body of Moses, he didn’t dare to judge him by speaking disrespectfully to him. All he said was, ‘May Jehovah give you what you deserve.’

¹⁰ However, these men continue to speak disrespectfully of many things that they don’t really understand. So, like senseless animals (who everyone knows [dirty themselves] naturally), they are messing on themselves [when they do] things like this. ¹¹ Woe to them, because they’re going the way of Cain; they’ve rushed into the wrongs of BalaAm for a reward; and they’re destroying themselves with the rebellious words of KorAh!

¹² At your loving [congregational] meals, they are rocks that are hidden [below water] as they feast beside you. They are fearless shepherds over just themselves… dry clouds that are blown every direction by the wind… fruitless trees in late autumn that have died twice and been uprooted… ¹³ wild waves of the sea that foam shameful things on themselves… wandering stars that have been reserved for the gloom of darkness through the age. 

¹⁴ Why, the seventh man from Adam, Enoch, prophesied about them when he said, ‘[Look!] Jehovah came with His holy ten thousands of ten thousands ¹⁵ to condemn them all and to give all the godless what they deserve for the godless things they’re doing in their worldly ways, and for all the shocking things these godless sinners have said against Him.’

¹⁶ These men grumble and complain about how things work out, but they keep on doing whatever they wish. They do much bragging with their mouths, and they pretend to admire people for their own purposes. ¹⁷ But as for you, loved ones; remember what you were once told by the Apostles of our Lord Jesus the Anointed One… ¹⁸ remember that they used to say to you: ‘In the last days there will be [people] who speak disrespectfully, while they go their own way and do godless things.’ ¹⁹ These are the ones who create divisions! They are fleshly and they don’t have the Breath [of God]!

²⁰ But as for you, loved ones; Build the most Holy Faith in yourselves; Pray with the Holy Breath [of God]; ²¹ Keep yourselves in God’s love while you’re awaiting the mercy of our Lord Jesus the Anointed One and life in the age. ²² Also, be merciful to those who are unsure… ²³ save [them] by snatching [them] out of the fire. But be fearful [when it comes to] showing them mercy, because you must hate the dirty underwear that was spotted by the flesh.

²⁴ Now, to the One who is able to protect you against stumbling and who can put you (without defects and shouting joyfully) within sight of His glory… ²⁵ to our only God and Savior (through our Lord Jesus the Anointed One) be glory, majesty, might, and authority, in front of this entire age and into all the ages.

May it be.

Notes

Highest Messenger

The Greek word that is translated ‘Highest Messenger [of God]’ at Jude 9 is archaggelos. Arch (pronounced ark) means highest (or beginning) and aggelos (pronounced ahn-gell-ose) is the word that we get angel or messenger from.

Who was this ‘highest messenger of God?’ Jude gives his name as MichaEl. However, many Bible scholars think that this is the name of Jesus prior to his coming to the earth. The reasoning behind this is that Jesus is truly God’s highest messenger (see Hebrews the First Chapter), so Jesus and Michael are thought to be one in the same.

The thought that Jesus is Michael is reinforced by Paul’s words as found at 1 Thessalonians 4:16, where we read, ‘Because the Lord himself will come down from heaven and give the command in the voice of the highest messenger (gr. archaggelou) [of God] with God’s trumpet.’

So, since ‘the Lord’ is an obvious reference to Jesus, he appears to be the archangel Michael.

Use your browser BACK button to return to the text you were reading

Spirits in Prison

At 1 Peter 3:19 we read about ‘spirits’ (literally, breaths) who were put into ‘prison’ for the bad acts they committed during the time of Noah. Genesis 6:3 speaks of them as ‘sons of God,’ or ‘[God’s] messengers,’ and it tells of their coming to earth and marrying ‘the daughters of men’ (see the linked scripture and Notes). Then 2 Peter 2:4 says that they were put into ‘Tartarus.’

Peter’s use of the word Tartarus here has long been a cause of concern to thoughtful Bible students. In other Bibles, this Greek word has wrongfully been translated as Hell and Hell Fire. However, the term refers specifically to the place where gods (not humans) were sent. And as the result of past misunderstandings of the meaning of this word, this is where the idea came from that the Slanderer and his demons are in Hell watching over its flames and the torture of human souls.

The question that has so concerned many Bible students is: Why did Peter use this pagan term that came from Greek Mythology to describe the condition of unfaithful messengers of God? The appearance here is that the Bible had its roots in Greek myths. However, the opposite is true.

Anyone who takes the time to carefully consider Greek Mythology will notice close (but sometimes opposite) parallels to Bible stories told in Genesis Chapters Two through Six. Stories such as Hercules and the Golden Apples, Medusa, immoral Gods who came to earth, etc., seem to closely resemble the stories of Adam and the forbidden fruit, the snake in the Paradise, and the sons of God who came to earth and lived as humans. So it isn’t surprising that they also had a name for the place where these sons of God (the gods) were sent after the downpour. And since this correct idea was common at the time, Peter just used their word to convey what he was talking about to his readers.

Since these ‘sons of God’ who came to earth and assumed human bodies in Noah’s day couldn’t be destroyed by the Downpour (flood) and they had forsaken heaven, they were apparently put into a prison-like state here on the earth, where they are no longer able to roam. This group is specifically referred to as the demons in the Bible.

Demon is a Greek word that seems to be derived from diameno, which means fixed in one place. From other Bible accounts about demons, it appears that this ‘fixing in one place’ means that they must be associated with either living or non-living things, which is referred to as ‘possession.’ In other words, Tartarus appears not to be a fixed place, but rather to a dark condition of earthly imprisonment where they seem to be able to live among things both animate and inanimate.

Use your browser BACK button to return to the text you were reading

A Lesson in Humility

We learn an interesting lesson about humility from the words and actions of Michael, God’s highest messenger, at Jude 9. For there it says (when speaking of the battle he waged with the Slanderer over Moses’ [dead] body), ‘he didn’t dare to judge him by blaspheming him.’

Certainly, if anyone was an ‘apostate,’ it was this one, which other translations call the Devil and Satan, because he turned from his righteous position in the heavens. However, Michael never used any such disrespectful term. He just said, ‘May Jehovah give you what you deserve.’

This lesson should serve as a warning to all Christians against the use of such slanderous terms, no matter what the circumstances. If the term ‘Christian’ means being like or following Jesus, true followers should never use abusive terms (such as apostate) to describe others.

Use your browser BACK button to return to the text you were reading

Called and Chosen

There seems to be quite a bit of difference between these two words (called and chosen) and their implications for the people involved. For, notice what Jesus said as recorded at Matthew 22:14, ‘Many are the called but few are the chosen (gr. polloi eisin gar cletoi, oligoi de eclectoi).’ And this verse could be possibly even be translated as ‘Many are the nominated but few are the elected.’

These words of Jesus seem to put an end to the notion that everyone who is called by God was foreordained to that position before his/her specific birth. Rather, what was determined is that there would be people in general (not specific individuals) who would be chosen. Because, as Jesus makes clear here, not all who are among the called (or the nominated) to this hope are thereafter counted among the chosen (elected). For, why would God call people if He already knew that there was no chance of their being chosen?

Notice how this was stated at Revelation 17:14. There we are told, ‘Then they’ll go and fight against the Lamb. But, because he’s the Lord of lords and King of kings, the Lamb and those who are with him (the called, elected, and faithful) will conquer them.’

So, ‘the called’ also have prove faithful in order to become ‘the elected’ to serve with Jesus.

That was the point of Jesus’ parable at Matthew 22:1-14, which (as Jesus said) was an illustration concerning ‘the Kingdom of Heaven.’ In that parable, many were initially ‘called’ to the banquet of the King, but they didn’t want to come. The obvious reference here is to the Jews who were invited first to become kings in that Kingdom, but who for the most part, rejected the invitation.

The king then ordered his slaves to go out into the streets and ‘call’ anyone who wishes to come to the banquet. These words obviously refer to the calling of people of the nations, or the gentiles (gr. tas ethne – the ethnics).

So, is this parable talking about being called to heaven to rule there with Jesus… for isn’t the wedding banquet for God’s son to be held in heaven, and aren’t those who are invited to God’s banquet the bride who will be with Jesus in heaven? We have always thought so, but notice that the guests in this parable aren’t referred to as virgins (as was the case of those mentioned in Revelation 14:1-4). Rather, they are called ‘both the wicked and the good,’ which is a strange way to refer to the ‘Saints.’

Next, as the parable continues, the king noticed a guest who wasn’t properly dressed for a wedding feast (he didn’t have the required qualities). This guest was then bound and thrown back outside (but not killed). Do as you can see, he was called but not chosen. Now, if we were to assume that this banquet is held in heaven, and since he was already there at the feast, we must ask: was he then kicked out of heaven… and if so, we would also have to ask, then why was he taken there to begin with?

Now, we do know that there are those who are taken to heaven to rule with Jesus, but they are likely the bride at the wedding feast, not the guests (see Revelation 17:7-9). For, notice what Paul said of himself at Philippians 3:11, ‘… so I can somehow be found worthy of the upward resurrection from the dead.’

What was Paul talking about here? It appears as though, when speaking of ‘the upward resurrection,’ he was saying that although he had been ‘called,’ he may not have been ‘chosen’ yet for heavenly life. That this is what he was likely talking about, can be seen from what he said at Philippians 3:12, ‘[I’m not saying] that I’ve made it yet, or that I’m already perfect.’ Then he continued with the words (at Philippians 3:14), ‘I am running toward the goal, the prize of the upward (gr. ano – upward or higher) calling from God through the Anointed One Jesus.’

So, notice that the Bible speaks both of a ‘calling’ and of an ‘upward calling,’ which we assume refers to being called to heaven. And how would Paul know that he had been ‘chosen’ for this lofty reward? It appears as though such a person must first endure incredible suffering for his/her beliefs (as did Jesus), for notice what Paul wrote at Romans 8:17, ‘We have to suffer together so we can also be glorified together.’

Such suffering must be much more than what is typical of the suffering and death of mankind. Does this ‘suffering’ require a dying a martyr’s death? That seems to be the gist of the prophecy at Revelation 6:9-11, which says, ‘When he opened the fifth seal, I saw the lives of those who had been slaughtered because of the Word of God and because of the testimony that they gave, underneath the altar ... Then they were each given a white robe and they were told to take it easy just a little while longer, until the full number of their fellow slaves and brothers was filled (who were going to be killed, as they were).’

But, in the case of Jesus’ words found Matthew 22:14, (‘Many are called but few are chosen’), we would have to conclude that God calls many people from among mankind to become His faithful slaves and to thereafter attend the wedding banquet of the Lamb (whether in heaven or earth is not stated), but not all who are called are found worthy.

Use your browser BACK button to return to the text you were reading

Fire of the Age

In Jude Seven, we read of how the people of Sodom, Gomorrah, and their surrounding cities were condemned to the fire of the age (gr. pyros aioniou). This term has long been translated as (and understood to mean) Hell Fire. Is that the fate of such bad people?

The problem with teaching that people don’t die but are tortured eternally for their sins, is that they must first have an immortal soul, or something that doesn’t die. However, the Greek word for immortality (athanasia or undying) only appears in the Bible three times (at 1 Corinthians 15:53, 54 and 1 Timothy 6:16), and there you will find that Jesus is immortal, and that God offers immortality as a reward to the faithful. So, sinners are never given immortality.

What is the fate of unrepented sinners? For the answer to that question, we must return to the words of God when He warned the first human of what would happen if he should sin. At Genesis 2:17 He told Adam, ‘You must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of Good and Bad. Because, on whatever day you eat from it, your life will end and you will die.’

However, did God later create a Hell Fire and give men immortal souls so they could thereafter be tortured forever for their sins? No, for God’s warning is repeated at Romans 6:23, where we read, ‘For the wages that sin pays is death; but God’s gift is life in that age, by the Anointed One, Jesus our Lord.’

So, God gives life (gr. zoe) and (in some case) immortality (gr. athanasia) as a gift to the righteous. But the wages of unrepented sin is death (gr. thanatos).

Then what did Jude mean when he spoke of the people of Sodom and Gomorrah as receiving ‘the fire of the age?’ The answer to this is found at Revelation 20:14, where we read, ‘The lake of fire symbolizes the second death.’

So, dying without the hope of a resurrection was the fate of those gross sinners that were killed by God when He rained fire down on them from the sky. And like Adam, Eve, the people that God destroyed in the downpour, those who are destroyed during ‘the great time of difficulty’ and at ‘Armageddon,’ the wicked sons of God who left their place in heaven, and those gross sinners in the First-Century Christian Congregation, they will be gone forever… burned through the ages, so to speak. That’s what the Bible teaches us.

For more information see the attached link, Is there a Burning Hell?

Use your browser BACK button to return to the text you were reading.

Fornication or Sexual Immorality?

The Greek word porneia means much more than copulation between individuals who aren’t married to each other. The term literally means that which is sold (by prostitutes). So it includes all the types of services that might be sold by a prostitute, not just copulation.

It also just refers to acts between unmarried persons (which is what happens in prostitution). This includes such actions between unmarried ‘consenting adults,’ although there may be no exchange of money, because, where porneia is found in the Greek Septuagint, the Hebrew Law shows that it involves intimate relations between unmarried persons.

Because the English word fornication carries the nuance of just copulation between unmarried persons, we have used the broader term sexual immorality here to indicate the full range of the term.

Use your browser BACK button to return to the text you were reading

Breath

The Greek word pneuma (as in pneumonia, a breathing disease) means breath or wind – the movement of air. In other Bible translations, this word is often translated as spirit or ghost – as in Holy Spirit or Holy Ghost. However, spirit is just a shortened form of the Latin word spiritu, which just means breath in Latin. And ghost conveys another meaning altogether.

The most common use of the word pneuma in the Bible is to imply an unseen force (such as breath or wind). And the problem with translating it as spirit or ghost is that many people have started believing that the unseen force that is called [God’s] Holy Breath herein, is another God-like person and part of a Divine ‘Trinity.’ This can’t be true, because the only scripture that can be used to support this theory (that is, where the Father, the Son, and the Holy Breath are supposed to be ‘one’) is found at Matthew 28:19, which simply says that baptism should be done ‘in the name of’ (or, in recognition of) these three. All other scriptures that are used to prove the Trinity theory fail to mention the Holy Breath as part of that group. And the King James wording of 1 John 5:7 (which was used for years to attempt to prove the Trinity) is spurious (something that was added to the Bible). In fact, the reference to the Holy Breath at Matthew 28:19 may also be spurious, and if so, then there are no actual Bible references that mention God’s Holy Breath along with the Father and the Son.

So to prevent confusion, the Greek word pneuma is frequently translated as breath herein. However, there are exceptions, as in instances where the Bible refers to demons as ‘spirits.’ Translating pneuma as breath in these cases, although correct, might just be confusing. There are also places where we have left pneuma translated as spirit, when the word implies a person's tendency (or spirit). And, since the nuance implied by the word Spirit in the English language (an unseen power) is correct, we recently changed back to translating pneuma as Spirit in several places, when referring to God’s Holy Spirit. However, recognize that pneuma is often best defined by calling it [God’s] Holy Breath. For an example, see the Note Worshiping God In Spirit and Truth.

Another important use of the word pneuma is in the phrase, ‘Breath of Life.’ This phrase means more than just breathing; it refers to the entire mechanics of life itself. It’s the unseen force of life for all creatures… it’s what makes each cell alive. However, nowhere does the Bible describe the ‘pneuma’ as immortal, nor is it the same as the soul (a breathing thing), so it can (figuratively) ‘return to God’ at death,’ because all hope of future life depends on God and His promise of a resurrection.

Note in particular how the term Breath is used at Job 27:3, where Job spoke of God’s Breath or Spirit. For there he asked, ‘Does the Breath of the Divine One remain in my nose?’ As you can see from his application of this word, pneuma obviously referred to God’s Breath in this case, not to a person or to an unseen force. He was talking about that which comes from God and caused him to breathe… the Breath of Life.

It is interesting that at Genesis 6:3 God says, ‘I won’t allow My Breath to stay with these men through the the age, for they are fleshly.’ In Greek that reads, ‘Ou me katameine to pneuma mou en tois anthropois toutoiseis ton aiona, dia ai einai autous sarka,’ or, ‘Not not should stay the Breath Mine with these men the age through, their being flesh.’

While the words Breath Mine (pneuma mou) here can refer to God’s Holy Breath, it seems more likely that He is referring to the breath of life that he gave Adam. So it appears as though what He was saying here is that the breath of life (of the people of that age) would be removed prematurely. However, since God referred to it as ‘My Breath,’ there may be a link implied between God’s Holy Breath and the breath of life. For more information, see the attached link ‘The Powers of God’s Holy Spirit.’

However, when Jesus died (as the words recorded at John 19:30 say), ‘he hung his head and quit breathing’ (gr. kai klinas ten kephalen paredoken to pneuma, or, and inclined his head giving/up the breath).

Use your browser BACK button to return to the text you were reading

Amen

Amen is a Hebrew word that was never really translated into English; it was just Anglicized. In Greek it is pronounced, ah-main. The reason why it was never translated is that ancient scholars were afraid to change this supposed ‘magical’ word that ensures God will listen to the prayer. There is no record in the Bible of anyone ending prayers with amen, although it was likely said. And the fact that others who were present said amen at the end of prayers to show that they agree, is indicated by Paul’s words at 1 Corinthians 14:6.

In addition, amen isn’t said in the Bible just at the end of a Prayer. Paul used the word frequently in his writings to affirm that what he was writing was, or would be, true. And that’s the literal meaning of amen as it is rendered here, ‘may it be.’

So, should Christians end their prayers with the word amen, or with the phrase, may it be? It really makes no difference. In fact, neither really has to be said for God to hear the prayer, or for Him to understand that it is concluded.

The problem with saying amen is that most people really don’t know what it means today. They think of it as just a word that you end prayers with. However, saying amen (or may it be) at the conclusion of a prayer indicates that the one praying assumes the things that were asked are as good as done – and he or she should also believe that.

In several places we have left the word amen unchanged, for example, at Revelation 3:14, where Jesus was referred to symbolically as ‘the Amen,’ or, he who ‘causes things to be’ (under the direction of God).

Use your browser BACK button to return to the text you were reading

Undeserved Kindness or Caring?

The Greek word caris is where we derive the English word care or caring. However, the Greek word carries a slightly different meaning. Old English Bible translations have rendered caris as grace. However, the nuance that grace implies (smooth and flowing) totally distorts the meaning of this term in contemporary American English.

Most Bible dictionaries prefer to see caris translated as undeserved kindness. However, this phrase, which may or may not make some minor technical difference in the meaning, adds wordiness, and that distracts from the ease of reading. So you will find it translated as care, caring, or kindness herein, depending on the setting.

Use your browser BACK button to return to the text you were reading

The Day of the Lord

Throughout the Bible, we find references to ‘the Day of Jehovah,’ and ‘the Day of the Lord.’ Are both of these references to the same time, and if so, how do we know?

There is no conflict between the two Days; in fact, they appear to be the same. Notice what we are told in the Revelation, when it is speaking of the beginning of that Day (at Revelation 12:10), ‘This is the moment when the salvation, the power, the Kingdom of our God, and the authorization of his Anointed One began.’

As you can see, the purposes of that Day are tied together. For, the establishment of God’s Kingdom (with the battle in heaven and the ouster of the Opposer and his messengers) and the authorization for Jesus (the Lord) to rule appear to begin at the same time.

So, does the Lord’s Day begin when the things spoken of in the Revelation start to happen? It appears to be so, because it starts out with John’s words (at Revelation 1:10), ‘Through the Breath [of God] I found myself in the Lord’s Day.’

What are some of the features of that Day? Well, they appear to start with the ouster of the Opposer and his messengers from heaven (See Revelation 12), which is followed by the destruction of ‘Babylon the Great’ (See Revelation 17, 18). Then in rapid succession there comes the ‘marriage of the Lamb’ (acceptance of the rest of the Anointed ones to heaven?), the Battle of Armageddon, the abyssing of the Opposer and his messengers, and the resurrection (see Revelation 19, 20). And finally, the Opposer is released for a short time, which precipitates the battle against Gog of Magog, and which is thereafter followed by the descent of ‘New Jerusalem’ to the earth, and the making of the ‘new earth and sky’ (see Revelation 21).

Also, in the prophecy found at Joel 2:1-12, ‘the Day of the Lord’ appears to start with the destruction of Jerusalem by worldly armies (the destruction of Babylon the Great?), and this is followed by the destruction of the worldly armies, in Joel Chapter Three (Armageddon?). And in between these two events, we read of the marvelous outpouring of God’s Breath upon His faithful servants (Joel 2:28-32).

Peter wrote in length about this period, and at 2 Peter 3:7 he wrote: ‘It was also promised that; What’s [now] in store for the earth and sky is fire, which [will come] during the Judgment Day, when godless men will be destroyed.’ And although many misinterpret these words as describing just the destruction of the wicked at Armageddon, the context shows that he was looking at a much longer period of time, the total ‘Lord’s Day’ or ‘Judgment Day’… the ‘thousand-year’ period spoken of at Revelation Chapter Twenty. For what he said about the burning of the earth and sky and of the ‘new earth and sky’ corresponds exactly with the end of the thousand years and the promises found at Revelation 21:1.

So, from the periods described in the Revelation, near the end of Jesus’ thousand-year reign there will be a judgment of the wicked (those who join with Gog of Magog) and they will be destroyed. Then there will be a ‘new earth and sky.’ What does that really mean? Perhaps we’ll all have to live to see it to be sure.

Use your browser BACK button to return to the text you were reading

Anointed

Notice that in this Bible translation, 2 Corinthians 1:21, 22 (for example) says, ‘The One who guarantees that we all belong to the Anointed One, and He who anointed us, is God.’

So, why didn’t these translators just go ahead and render the word (Anointed) as Christ – as countless other translators have done? For two reasons:

1. Because Christ has almost totally lost its meaning to most Bible readers today, and most have come to believe that ‘Christ’ was part of Jesus’ name. It wasn’t.

2. Because Christ is word that was made up by early Bible translators and is only used in that form when they think that the Bible was speaking of Jesus. In other places it is correctly translated as anointed.

If you look at the above verse in Greek, you’ll see that it reads, ‘Ho de bebaion hemas syn hymin eis Christon kai chrisas hemas Theos,’ or, ‘The of stabilizing us with you into Anointed and anointing us God.’

You will notice here that Christon (Christ or Anointed) and chrisas (anointed) are both derived from the same root word, which by the way, is Greek for olive oil. Why olive oil? Because, that substance was traditionally poured over the heads of those who God chose to be kings over Israel. For example, David and Solomon were both anointed (oil was poured over their heads) in proof of the fact that they had been chosen by God to be kings over Israel.

So, the word means anointed. But if you prefer the word Christ, then David and Solomon were Christs, for you can’t have it both ways.

Such a physical anointing with oil appeared to picture receiving God’s Holy Breath, which happened to Jesus at his baptism, to 120 of Jesus’ disciples at Pentecost of 33-C.E., and to other First-century Christians. So Jesus didn’t really become the Christon (Christ, Anointed, or Chosen One) until he was anointed with Holy Breath at his baptism (when the ‘dove’ came down on him).

If you understand this nuance, you get the true meaning of the word Christ (Anointed) as it applies to Jesus; it means that he was the one who God chose to be king over His people. Also, Paul was telling the Christians in Corinth that they too would be anointed… become ‘christs.’ For when they were ‘anointed’ and sealed in their hearts by God’s Holy Breath, they were selected to be ‘kings over the earth’ (Revelation 5:10).

Also, notice what can be learned from a proper understanding of the Greek words by looking at Matthew 24:24. For what he actually said was, ‘Because false Anointed ones and false prophets (gr. pseudo christon kai pseudo prophetai) will arise and they will perform great signs and omens to mislead (if possible) even the elected.’

So, Jesus wasn't necessarily saying that people would come claiming to be him, but people would come falsely claiming to be the anointed and prophets.

At Exodus 29:29 we find that Aaron and his sons were to be ‘anointed’ as Priests to Jehovah, and that this action would make them ‘holy,’ or clean. It also signified that had been ‘chosen’ to this office by God. And in Leviticus, when we read of the ‘anointed’ Priest, the reference seems to be to the one who had been chosen for the special office of what later became known as the High Priest, which gives credence to our translating Christos as Anointed One, rather than Christ, in the Christian Era Scripture (NT) portion of this Bible. However, at least in the case of Aaron and his sons, fragrant herbs were added to the oil to give it a pleasing odor. This is implied at Exodus 25:7 where the Israelites were asked to donate ‘fragrances for anointing oil.’ And we find the exact formula for the anointing oil at Exodus 30:34, where we read that it was to be made of ‘sixteen pounds of choice myrrh flowers, eight pounds of sweet-smelling cinnamon, eight pounds of sweet-smelling calamus, sixteen pounds of cassia (for the Holy Place), and a gallon of olive oil.’

Use your browser BACK button to return to the text you were reading

Age, Eternal, Perpetual, Everlasting, Immortal, or Forever?

Two words imply infinity in the Bible; one is the Greek word athanasia (undying), which is only found in two places, 1 Corinthians15:53, where it mentions resurrected ones as clothing themselves with immortality, and at 1 Timothy 6:16, where Paul speaks of Jesus as having received it. The other Greek word is aidios, which is used at Romans 1:20 to describe God’s Power and Might as eternal, and at Jude 6 when speaking of the perpetual state of gloomy darkness that rebellious angels have been confined to.

However, the Greek word aionos (pronounced ai-on-oss), which is used throughout the Bible and is often translated as forever and everlasting, is what the English word eon is derived from. It means an indefinite period, and there is no exact English word to translate it. The best equivalents are age(s) or era(s). Where the plural form of the word (ages) is used, it refers to a long time… at least multiple generations. However, where the singular form is used (age or era), this appears to mean a much shorter period, such as a lifetime, generation, or era. And where the term ages of ages is used (such as at Ephesians 3:21), which is usually said in reference to God, we would assume that this truly means forever.

It is noteworthy that aionos is the word that is used in the Greek Septuagint in place of the Hebrew word ohlam, which is also translated as forever and time indefinite in popular versions of the Ancient Scriptures of Israel. So this one word (aionos) is translated as forever, everlasting, eternal, system of things, time indefinite, [end of] the world, long ago, from of old, etc. Obviously, something is very wrong here, because the word can’t mean a period having a definite end in one place and infinity in another.

Take for example, the unique way that aionos is used in the question that Jesus’ Apostles asked him, which is found at Matthew 24:3, ‘What will be the signs when you are near and this age will come to its conclusion?’ You can see that the word aionos obviously doesn’t mean forever, everlasting, or eternal in this case, nor did it mean world or system of things. It simply meant the age or, the time before the end would come. And for them, that meant the age when God’s Temple at Jerusalem would be destroyed, because that’s what Jesus had just told them.

The word aionos (which we have translated as age here) is also translated as world (KJ) and as system of things (NW) in other Bibles. However, if the Apostles had meant any of those words, they would have used the Greek word cosmos, not aionos for world or system of things.

The ancient Hebrews viewed everything (and rightly so) as having a beginning and an end. For that reason, you will only find three places in the Bible where words are used that imply no end and none that imply no beginning. An interesting possible insight on the reason for this can be found at Hebrews 1:10-12, which says: ‘Long ago, O Lord, you laid the foundation of the earth and your hands made the heavens. They will destroy themselves, but you will remain. They will grow old just like clothes do. Then, as [you would do to] a robe, you will wrap them up and repair them like clothes. Yes, you are the one, and your years will never run out.’

The problem with most Bible translations is that when they encounter the word aionos in all its different tenses, they interpret it according to accepted doctrine, not according to the way that Jesus and his disciples used it. So the common renderings forever, eternal, and everlasting are used even when the word is in its singular forms (aioni, aiona, aionos, aionion, aionian, aionios, aioniou), and this totally distorts the meaning of the text.

Take for example, the scripture at John 5:24, where Jesus said, ‘I tell you the truth; the one who hears what I say and believes in the One that sent me will have life in this age. He won’t have to be judged, but has crossed over from death to life.’

Most Bibles translate Jesus as saying that those who believe in the One who sent him will have everlasting life (or the equivalent). However, the words that Jesus used there were, zoe aionos (life age – singular), not zoe aionion (life ages – plural).

Notice how Jesus explained the meaning of these words with his next statement, ‘He won’t have to be judged, but has crossed over from death to life.’

So what Jesus was saying here, wasn’t that they would have everlasting life, but that they in their current life would be considered among the living, not among the dead (see Revelation 20:12).

This doesn’t necessarily mean that they won’t live forever… it’s just that Jesus wasn’t really saying that. What we find (from consideration of the evidence found in the bulk of Jesus’ words about life) is that he never taught the hope of ‘life eternal,’ ‘everlasting life,’ or ‘immortality,’ in those specific words. However, the concept is still there. What he taught was that righteous people will receive ‘life in the age,’ or be considered worthy of (possibly everlasting) life by God during their current lifetimes… that their names would be written in ‘the scroll of life,’ and that they would not have to be judged, but will have already ‘crossed over from death to life,’ as Jesus said at John 5:24.

Yes, we know that this is a difficult concept to understand, but it’s what Jesus actually said.

For more information, select the linked documents, The Hereafter and Does the Bible Promise Everlasting Life?

Use your browser BACK button to return to the text you were reading

The Book of Enoch

At Jude 1:14, 15, this half-brother of Jesus wrote, ‘The seventh man from Adam, Enoch, prophesied about them when he said, [Look!] Jehovah came with His holy ten-thousands of ten-thousands to condemn them all and to give all the godless what they deserve for the godless things they’re doing in their worldly ways, and for all the shocking things these godless sinners have said against Him.’

This verse has amazed many Christians, for it mentions a writing that is not considered to be part of the Bible canon, the Book of Enoch, which is considered to be an uninspired secular work. Yet, if it truly was written by Enoch (an early man of faith who was so loved that he was ‘transferred’ by God), then why would we consider it uninspired? And if it was a fake, then why would Jude have quoted from it?

If you read the Book of Enoch through (a copy can be found at Sacred-Texts.com), you’ll see that it appears as though Jude’s otherwise unique description of the condition of the fallen messengers of God (as described in verse 6) is based on the information found in this book.

Although ancient copies of the Book of Enoch were thought to have been lost, more modern copies have been found in Ethiopia and in some Slavic countries, which have been translated into English (for more information, see the link Book of Enoch). And after reading one copy of these texts through, we were surprised to find how much of this supposedly pre-Christian document is very much in harmony with the words of Jesus and the book of Revelation, although it has numerous errors that indicate mistranslation and centuries of added words (as does the Bible, by the way). In fact, the wording of the entire book heavily reflects the religious doctrines, views, and words of the Middle Ages; so if the current available copies were ever inspired, they are totally corrupted today. And it is possible that the book was so corrupted by the time of the Jew’s return from captivity in Babylon (c. 537-B.C.E.) that the Scribe Ezra didn’t include it among the Sacred Writings. However, some scholars point to these quotations from the book of Enoch to prove that the book of Jude is itself a spurious addition to the Bible.

For example, in Chapter Ten of the Book of Enoch you’ll find a traditional, graphic description of Hell Fire. Yet, by removing just a few words you will see that the description reads much like Revelation 20:10. So it is apparent that the problem here is more one of twisted translating or copying to reflect the then-current religious views of the Middle Ages, than a text that was originally misleading and incorrect.

You will also find mention of the City of Sodom in the Book of Enoch, which we believe came long after the lifetime of Enoch. However, it was suggested by an advisor that Sodom could have been a far more ancient city that was repopulated after the Downpour. And since the people of the whole earth were so bad during that pre-flood time, it may have been a center of wickedness in the lifetime of Enoch also. Yet, this mention could also indicate the forgery of these verses. Of course, that word could also be part of the added corruptions of the text.

So, we urge you to be extremely cautious when reading the Book of Enoch, but it does provide some interesting descriptions of significant events, names, and dates that aren’t found in more accepted Bible texts, and they would be extremely important if they are true. Also, the words (if those we have were written before the First Century) seem incredibly in line with the Bible books that were written thereafter.

Use your browser BACK button to return to the text you were reading

Jehovah

Although there are no existing ancient Christian Era Scripture (New Testament) manuscripts that contain the full name Jehovah, there are four reasons why we (and other Bible scholars and translators) believe that it existed in the original text. They are:

1. The Name is found in many of the Hebrew Scripture texts that are quoted by Jesus and his disciples

2. Jesus mentioned God’s having a Name in ‘The Lord’s Prayer,’ and at John 5:43, 10:25, 12:13, 17:26, and in numerous other places

3. The Name still appears in a combined form in Revelation where the word hallelujah is used (Hallel means praise, u implies second person, and Jah is a shortened form of Jehovah.)

4. The fact that Christians who lived in Jerusalem were still worshiping at the Temple of Jehovah late in Paul’s ministry proves that they still viewed Jehovah as their God (see Acts 21:20-26).

So, this Bible is one of two that we are aware of that uses God’s Name in the Christian Era Scriptures, which makes it quite unique. However, you will see that we have avoided using it in places where the Greek words ho Kyrios could have been speaking of Jesus, using the Name Jehovah mostly in quotations from Hebrew texts which were clearly speaking of The God.

That the Name Jehovah (which means, He who Causes to Be, or, The Creator) was originally in the Bible, is documented in all ancient Hebrew texts. And it is most likely that the Septuagint translation which Jesus and his Apostles used (most quotations they gave seem to have come from an ancient Septuagint) carried that Name, but probably in the four Hebrew characters that represent the English consonants YHWH.

Notice this comment by Robert Hanhart, who contributed the Introduction to ‘The Septuagint as Christian Scripture.’ He stated therein that, ‘All Greek biblical texts of Jewish origin found to date, whether from pre-Christian or Christian times, transmit the name יהוה Jehovah not in the form κύριος [Lord] encountered in all the LXX [Septuagint] manuscripts of Christian origin, but in some form of the Tetragrammaton.’ (See: ‘The Septuagint as Christian Scripture,’ 2002, book, p.7, by Martin Hengel. Introduction by Robert Hanhart, published by Baker Academic. ISBN 0-8010-2790-X).

You will see how in the book of Isaiah, for example, God is often referred to in Greek as Kyrios ho Kyrios, or, Lord the Lord (see Isaiah 48:16 LXX). And these are obvious examples of texts where God’s Name was omitted, for such sentences should clearly read Jehovah the Lord, or Lord Jehovah.

Since the words God and Lord both seem to have been substituted in the text wherever God’s Name originally appeared, it is difficult to know where to reinsert the Name in place of the titles. We could refer to the Hebrew texts and insert it wherever the Name appears there, but that would be out of harmony with the purpose of presenting this translation of the Septuagint on its own merit. So, wherever the term the Lord appears in obvious reference to God, we have decided to insert the Name Jehovah.

The rule that other translators have adopted for inserting God’s Name is to simply use it wherever the Tetragrammaton (יהוה) appears in the oldest existing Hebrew texts (which aren’t that old). However, it can be proven that these texts and such insertions are unreliable. For example, there is the instance when Abraham was talking to three ‘men,’ one of whom he referred to as the Lord (יהוה). In this case, Abraham was obviously speaking to a messenger from God (likely His representative, Michael), because, as God told Moses, ‘No man can see God and live.’ So in such instances we have left the term ‘Lord’ unchanged, because that is likely the actual word Abraham used.

Also, in the writings of many of the Prophets, you will notice that they were often spoken to by God’s messengers, who the Prophets referred to as the Lord. And these messengers (angels) thereafter went on to give them messages from Jehovah. For example, notice the wording of Jeremiah 2:1: ‘Then the word of the Lord came to me saying, Go and yell in the ears of Jerusalem! Tell them that thus says Jehovah …’ So in this Bible you’ll see an interspersing of the term the Lord, when it appears to be referring to the angel messenger, and as Jehovah, when it appears to be referring to God.

Notice again the wording of Amos 4:13, where the one who gave the message to that Prophet (the Lord) definitely put Jehovah in the third person (though he is apparently saying that he did much of the work of creating) for there he said: ‘{Look!} I brought the thunder and I made the wind; and I report to men of His caring. For He produces the dawn and the fog, and is mounted on the heights of the earth… His Name is Jehovah God the Almighty!’

Then look at the words of Zephaniah 1:9, where the Prophet wrote: ‘And I asked, What are these, O Lord? And [God’s] messenger replied (he who was speaking to me), I will show you what all these things mean.’

So, it appears as though the Greek word kyrios should be translated as Lord or the Lord when it is referring to the angel who was speaking, and as Jehovah in many cases when it is speaking of God… regardless of how modern Hebrew texts may read, for from the context you can clearly see that these verses are quoting someone other than God.

However, the Lord (kyrios) would also have been used by Hebrew writers when speaking of God in poetry, where the previous or following verse uses the Name Jehovah; for the rule for a following verses is to use a simile.

Another important place where it appears as though the term the Lord should be used instead of the name Jehovah, is where people do something in His Name, as in James 5:10, which speaks of ‘Prophets who spoke in the name of the Lord.’ For, since Jehovah is God’s Name (in English), they would not be speaking in the Name of Jehovah (which is His Name), but in the Name of the Lord (Jehovah). Yes, this could be an arguable point, but where there is some question and the understanding isn't changed, we believe it is better to take a cautious approach.

Probably the most striking and confusing reference to the Lord is found at Hebrews 1:10-12, which says: ‘Long ago, O Lord, you laid the foundation of the earth, and you made the heavens with your hands. But they’ll pass away while you still remain. For like clothes they will grow old. Then, as [you would do to] a robe, you will wrap them up and repair them. Yes, you’re the one and your years will never expire.’

As you can see, the reference to the Lord here appears to be speaking of God (Jehovah). And if you go back to the scripture Paul was quoting (Psalm 102:25-27), you’ll see (from the context of the surrounding verses) that it appears to be speaking of Jehovah there also, and this is the conclusion of many, because the Tetragrammaton (יהוה) appears there in both the ancient Hebrew and Greek texts. Yet, the entire First Chapter of Hebrews is discussing Jesus and his special position before God. And Paul is clearly quoting Psalm 102:25-27 to make the point that Jesus made the heavens and the earth, that he will remain through the ages, and that he will eventually rebuild (repair) them after they grow old.

So, either Paul misapplied this scripture, which seems unlikely, or both Hebrew and Greek versions of Psalm 102 have been badly corrupted through the years, which our research proves is possible. As the result (because the answers are unclear), we have deviated from our rule of capitalizing the first letter of the words You and Your in many places in Psalm 102 and Hebrews 1, and from inserting the Name Jehovah where its use may be in doubt. However, this opens another can of worms, for it brings into question the accuracy of major portions of the Hebrew text and the use of the Tetragrammaton rule altogether.

It has also been suggested that since Jesus ‘shines with the same glory, is the exact image of His (God’s) being, and is responsible for everything that’s said through His power,’ as we were told at Hebrews 1:3, anything that is said about God also applies to Jesus… perhaps.

Of course, the easy answer to why Paul used Psalm 102 in reference to Jesus, is because Jesus is actually Jehovah, as many theologians claim. But this is proven untrue by the other words in the same First Chapter of Hebrews. For notice the following verses:

• Hebrews 1:3 ‘He sat down at the right hand of the Great One in the highest places.’
• Hebrews 1:4 ‘He has become so much greater than the [other] messengers [of God] and so different, that he has inherited a [special] name among them.’
• Hebrews 1:5 ‘For example, to which of His [other] messengers did He ever say, You’re my son. Today I’ve become your Father. Or, I will become his Father and he will become My son.’
• Hebrews 1:9 ‘You loved righteousness and hated wickedness. That’s why God (your God) anointed you with the oil of great joy among those who are your partners.’
• Hebrews 1:13 ‘And to which one of His messengers did He ever say, Sit here on My right until I set your enemies as a stool for your feet?’

(For more information on this subject, please see the linked document Who Was Jesus?)

The word that is translated lord (gr. kyrios) is found throughout the Bible in Greek texts and is usually used as a term of respect for men, such as a king, governor, or homeowner… and it is also frequently translated as master. So, whenever you see the term master used in the Bible, recognize that it is translated from the same Greek word as lord. And as translators, it’s easy to see how inappropriate it is to always refer to God as ‘the Lord.’ This was something that was started by later Jewish copyists, and the custom was adopted in English Bibles in the Fifteenth Century. Yet, even then the translators showed where God’s name once appeared in the Hebrew text by capitalizing all the letters, as in LORD (see Exodus 6:1). And in the King James Bible, the name Jehovah still does appear in four texts (see Exodus 6:3).

Some have objected to putting the name Jehovah in the Greek text, for they say that that use of the Name would have been offensive – and might have resulted in stoning – if Jesus and his disciples had actually spoken it. Yet, the Name had to be used when preaching to the Gentiles, or they simply wouldn’t have known which Lord the disciples were talking about (remember, they were polytheistic). And to call God the Lord when most gods (and many men) were also called lord, would have been very confusing to everyone that Jesus’ disciples preached to, both Jews and Gentiles. So we question whether the use of God’s Name was considered as offensive prior to Jerusalem’s destruction by the Roman armies (70-C.E.).

The reason why the Name was removed from later copies of the Ancient Scriptures of Israel was because Jewish Scribes had become so awed with God’s Name that they refused to write it or say it, so, they started substituting the term ‘the Lord’ (the Master) wherever His Name was found. And since all existing versions of the Septuagint come from the Second Century or later, it isn’t surprising that God’s Name has been omitted from such modern texts. The fact that the name Jehovah was once there is well substantiated from ancient Bible manuscripts, both Hebrew and Greek. In fact, a verse in the Jewish Talmud claims that Jesus received his miraculous powers because he had sewn the Holy Name (Jehovah) into his skin, which indicates both their (his enemy’s) recognition of Jesus’ miraculous powers and the common view of God’s Name.

Forgetting God’s Name is a practice that has had a long history with the Jews, for apparently they were trying to do this during the time of the Prophet Jeremiah (sometime in the early Seventh Century B.C.E.), for we read at Jeremiah 23:27: ‘They’ve devised ways to forget My Name, then they use their dreams to describe to their neighbors, how their fathers were the ones who’ve forgotten My Name, and turned to the service of Baal.’

What about the Christian Era Scriptures? Recognize that most early Christian Congregations (and especially those in Judea) were predominantly made up of Jews, and their traditions seemed to have had a strong negative effect on Christian conduct and doctrine throughout the world. For example; almost all of Paul’s letters (Romans through Hebrews) contain strong references to Judaizers in the congregations, and this influence likely led to substituting Lord for God’s Name in Christian writings after the deaths of the Apostles.

Perhaps Christians would more deeply appreciate the need to use the name Jehovah, rather than the title ‘Lord,’ when referring to God, if they understood that the term ‘the Lord’ in the language of the Canaanites was ‘Baal’ or ‘Beel.’ And the same term in modern-day Arabic is ‘Allah.’

Then, what of those who prefer a more exact Hebrew pronunciation of the Name, which can be Yahweh (yah-h’-Wĕh), Yahwah (yah-h’-Wah), or Yehwah (yĕh-h’-Wah)? That is commendable if their reasons are consistent. For, if their concern is to properly pronounce Bible names (not a hatred for God’s name as it is pronounced in English), they will also be found promoting the proper Hebrew pronunciation of His son’s name, Ieshuah (Ye-Shuah), or Iehoshuah (Yĕ-h’-shuah)… or at least the proper pronunciation of his name in Greek, Iesous (Yay-sous).

But then they would also have to start changing hundreds of other Bible name containing a J (such as John, Jeremiah, Jonah, Jerusalem, etc.), and they would find that almost every other Bible name is currently mispronounced in the English language.

Use your browser BACK button to return to the text you were reading

Home Page