[In the Coffin Texts, the deceased proclaims that he "knows the one who is small on the second day of the month and big on the fifteenth, it is Thot", referring to the waxing moon of the first half of the lunar month.Like the two most important other lunar gods, Iah,(Yah) whose name simply means "moon", and Khonsu, whose name "the wanderer" refers to the cycles of the moon, Thot is very closely associated with the calculation of time in specific and arithmetic in general. As the master of passing time, he is called "the scribe who counts the years".As a lunar god, he was responsible for completing the moon during its cycle, that is to say, to make sure that time passes as it is supposed to. He is thus often called "the one who completes (the moon)" or "the one who counts the things that are brought (to him)", where "the things that are brought (to him)" refers to the pieces of the wounded lunar eye (the moon). The waning and waxing of the moon were explained in mythology as the eye of the moon being wounded (waning) and healed (waxing), and Thot was the god who took care of the healing.As such, Thot becomes much more than just a lunar god. He is the guardian of the moon, the healer of the lunar eye and, together with the sky god Shu,

    Around 1567 Genebrardus came up with the name "Iahve, Jahve" (Chronographia, Paris, 1567 (ed. Paris, 1600, p. 79 seq).  How did Genebrardus invent this new translation of the tetragrammaton?  Actually he borrowed from Clement of Alexandria (a Platoist Gnostic early Catholic) the Greek spelling IAOVE (Zeus), which is universally known as JOVE (Roman Jupiter), and converted JAOVE to YAOVE adding the H and dropping the O, hence YAHVE!  Yahve would then be none other than Zeus or Jupiter! Do you see how this ‘pagan’ language trap is a problem? All religions sprang from a form of the truth and then some went astray by ascribing YHWH’s power and holiness upon the created things rather than the creator (For example Sun-worship attributed the deity of YHWH to the created thing i.e. sun; so they had some basic premises of truth but were led astray by their idolatry. They made the sun a god.) Is it any wonder that some similar names and titles might be found in other cultures?

     At least these name abductions of Yahve and Yah-shua are true, but the Jesus-from-Zeus myth is totally unfounded and should be abandoned by anyone seeking to walk in the truth. Consider that even the so-called pagan myths have their roots in original truths.

The true titles of God were used by the other nations, albeit with their own language spin on them.

• Yah is the moon god of fertility of Babylon:  [1.50] as a worshipper of Nebo, Yav and Istar,  [4.56] in Borsippa I erected: [4.57] to the god Yav who confers [4.58] the fertilizing rain upon my land, [4.59, 60] his house (also) in Borsippa I strongly built: [4.61] to the Moon-god who upholds …
• Lydus expressly asserts that "the Chaldeans called their god Yaho". A Babylonian text reads "The god Ib is my god Yau" (Briffault 3:108). 
• A stele from pagan Byblos, specifically cites Yaveh-Melek, 'Yahweh the King', [who] worships the Queen of Heaven. 

These examples are not to deter your faith but to restore it to the proper gospel. Your salvation does not depend on a pronunciation.

It may depend on how you treat brethren over such arguable doctrines. Be very careful – be like Him. Do not judge brethren by the names they call God but how they act under His headship.

     After the tower of Babel, nine men could point toward heaven at the same time.  One could utter "El"; another could utter "Neter"; another could utter "Theos"; another could utter "Deus"; another could say "Adonai"; another could say "Neb"; another “Jehovah,” another could say "Moryo"; another could say "Kurios"; and yet another say "Dominus."  All were speaking of the same being, the same God, the same LORD.  It is when these names and titles are stolen by the profane and used to designate their gods that these carry a stigma of rebuke and shame. The biblical text proves to us that the language(s) of ALL the earth was confounded – not all the earth except for the portion God let speak Hebrew.

     So we see and know as fact that God created all languages and wants all men to call upon Him. Who is it that is bold enough to cause them to stumble by requiring only one certain language? New Testament Greek or Hebrew?

Another Myth of Sacred Name Movement: The New Testament was originally written in Hebrew.

     Jesus spoke Aramaic and Greek, Luke was a Greek physician, John wrote his Gospel to non-Hebrews.

Here is something else to consider. The book of the Revelation is written "to the seven churches which are in Asia." All seven churches are in Greek cities. The Roman province of Asia is today's Turkey. Before the Romans controlled that area, Greek people had lived there for centuries. John received and likely wrote the Revelation while in exile on a Greek-speaking island just off the coast of Asia.  The people to whom John wrote were Greek. There is no reason why John would have written in any language other than Greek.  Furthermore, John wrote Jesus' words, "I am Alpha and Omega." That is Greek.

      Historians agree that Greek was the language that united people in the Roman Empire. The Jewish historian Josephus shows in his writings that the Greek language was understood well by Jews living in and out of Palestine.

 In fact, the Talmud shows there were synagogues in which the Jewish law permitted the Greek language to be spoken: "May be read in foreign tongue to them that speak a foreign tongue" (Megillah 2:1). And it further permitted: "That the books [the law, the writings, Psalms, etc.] may be written in any language."  However, at the time of Christ these books were "only permitted to be written in Greek" (Megillah 8b)

     You and I can know by this that the New Testament was written in Greek. We can trust Jesus. He is honest. He is the faithful witness. I believe His testimony that He is the Alpha and Omega. I also believe those words are Greek. John wrote to the seven churches that reside in Greek-speaking provinces. I am compelled to conclude that most of the New Testament was written in Greek.

 Here is something to consider:

1.)     There are over five thousand Greek manuscripts of the New Testament.

2.)     There are exactly zero manuscripts of a Hebrew New Testament.

There are hand-written ‘copies’ (translated from the Greek) of the New Testament in Latin, Coptic, Syriac, and Arabic, amongst others. Every translation in each of these languages is a translation from Greek. Greek manuscripts do exist. They can be examined. That is empirical evidence. There is something tangible to put your hands on. There is something to see.

     Either whole or in part, there are over five thousand manuscripts of the Greek New Testament (5,686 to be exact). These are not translations; they are direct copies of the originals. Any other ancient book does not approach this number. Manuscripts of the works of Josephus, a Jewish historian born about A.D. 37, number only a handful. Other ancient writers cannot be found in even as large a number as that. But, of the New Testament there are five thousand plus manuscripts, all in Greek. This is an impressive amount of evidence.

     To the five thousand plus Greek manuscripts, we add more than ten thousand biblical quotations by ancient writers written in the Greek. That is a staggering sum of witnesses to the Greek New Testament. It is especially impressive because advocates of a Hebrew/Aramaic New Testament can find exactly zero evidence of manuscripts to support their theory. If you were setting about to prove something, think of how you would feel if you had exactly no evidence.

What is the Score?                           Original Greek New Testament ...........15,000 +                     Original Hebrew New Testament..................0

      Please also consider that most of the quotations in the NT from the OT are not direct translations from the Hebrew Scriptures, but quotes from the Septuagint (LXX) translation of the OT. Even Jesus quoted from the LXX. Just one example to prove this is Jesus' quotation of the OT in Matthew 15:8-9. Had He been quoting the Hebrew Scriptures, the force of His argument would not stand (In the Hebrew it says that the fear of God was taught by the commands of men, whereas the LXX says that men are teaching the commands and doctrines of men). He was basing His argument from the LXX translation, which was commonly used by the Jews in the first century. The NT writers not only had knowledge of Greek, but also wrote all of the NT books exclusively in Greek.

Language is a Key

     What language was the New Testament Bible written in? Sacred Namers might say all in Hebrew. Even one Scripture can destroy that myth, such as in John 5:2  “Now there is at Jerusalem by the sheep market a pool, which is called in the Hebrew tongue Bethesda, having five porches.” Now why would the apostle have to say what the pool is called “in the Hebrew tongue,” if everything he wrote was in Hebrew? It is evident that John’s gospel account was written to non-Jews by his constant attribution of things as belonging to the Jews (i.e., the Jew’s Feast of Tabernacles; the Jew’s Passover, etc.--John 2:13; 5:1; 6:4; 7:2; 11:55). There are many other proofs that the NT was written in Greek.

     Now what if I told you that the modern Hebrew text and pronunciations Namers favor today are not even the same alphabet and pronunciations as the ancients used? 

Square Hebrew  or YHWH/JHWH   -- Paleo-Hebrew  or YHWH/JHVH

     I have shown you in times past the text on the Los Lunas Stone in New Mexico circa 1000 BC and told you that the experts say that it is “Paleo-Hebrew.” In other words it is the language that predates the square text Hebrew that Ezra and the scribes used to rewrite the scrolls of the Old Testament. It more closely resembles the ancient Phoenician language – which is closely related to the ancient Greek.

     It is fact that a few chapters of the books Ezra (ch. 4:8-6:18; 7:12-26) and Daniel (ch. 2:4 to 7:28), one verse in Jeremiah (ch. 10:11, and a word in Genesis (ch. 31:47) are written, not even in ancient paleo-Hebrew, but in Aramaic. Daniel and Ezra referred to the Creator in these chapters with the Aramaic word 'ELAH' seventy-eight different times.  Aramaic is about as closely related to Hebrew as Spanish is to Portuguese. However, the differences between Aramaic and Hebrew are not those of dialect, and the two are regarded as two separate languages

     So we understand that the earliest “Hebrews” spoke paleo-Hebrew, not modern (or what’s known as ‘biblical Hebrew’), but we may never know if the patriarchs had the Torah's Paleo-Hebrew Aleph-Bet (alphabet), which bears little resemblance to the ancient hieroglyph alphabets of the Middle East.

     The Modern Hebrew aleph-bet as used presently in Israel today and the standard Hebrew aleph-bet used in today’s Hebrew Bible is, in fact, derived from the Aramaic alphabet. The square Aramaic-Style Hebrew was used by Israel at the time of their Babylonian captivity when the common language was Aramaic. The original pre-paleo-Hebrew aleph-bet is pictographic and quite similar to Egyptian Hieroglyphs and most assuredly contained diverse pronunciations from the Paleo-Hebrew and even more so from the later Hebrew.

     Brethren! Look at some changes to the English language “Ye” to “you,” or even “thee” to “you.” In Old English, “Jesus Christ” would be written as “Iesus Chrift.” What is my point? Without exception, all languages evolve over time. James Barr, a leading philologist (language expert), claims that most languages lose/change 25% of their content/form every 400 years (The Philology of the Old Testament). Did you understand that?  Greek and Hebrew are no exception.

     The way in which Hebrew words were written and pronounced CHANGED over the centuries. The early Hebrew alphabet (Paleo-Hebrew) looked more like the other Semitic languages that evolved around the same time (Phoenician and Ugaritic). Over time it added new letters, dropped other letters, changed sounds, and changed the appearance of most others. This means that there is no universal, non-changing spelling or non-changing pronunciation of Hebrew that we can be sure of. How are we to spell the Messiah's name if it changed over the centuries when the language changed? Are you willing to condemn brethren on a guessed pronunciation?

Still unsure? Would you believe the Jews then?     "The Hebrew language is very old: but even in the oldest portions of the Bible, written more than three thousand years ago, it is fully a literary vehicle. No language, however, can remain unchanged over so long a period. Hebrew was subject to change, though for almost half of its existence it was preserved only in writing...It is impossible to determine clear phonological rules for each type of accentuation since the situation in Hebrew is a result of a complicated development, not all of which is clear today." (Encyclopedia Judaica, Vol. 8, Hebrew Grammar, pp. 77, 95)

    "Hebrew possessed guttural (aleph, he, ayin, het) and emphatic (tet, koph, tzade) consonants and long and short vowels. Most of the gutturals disappeared in Europe and in the traditional pronunciation of Samaritans. In Europe, “Sh” and “s” were confused until c. 1100 A.D. The Yemenite pronunciation has continued the Babylonian tradition whereas the Ashkenazi and Sephardi pronunciations reflect the Tiberian and Palestinian pronunciations respectively. Each has numerous subvarieties…The Israel pronunciation has the vowel sounds of Sephardi Hebrew…the consonants of Ashkenazim…Modern Hebrew is a combination of all previous stages of Hebrew, though it has taken over from each only elements that suit it." (The New Standard Jewish Encyclopedia, article: Hebrew Language)

     Concerning vocalization, it is also known that there were several different dialects of Hebrew. (Just like German dialects today, or as found in the different American dialects from North to South, from New York to California, from suburban town to inner-city ghettos. A distinct example is found in the black gangland subculture lingo which has developed into a distinct language with numerous new words, changed meanings of existing words, and altered pronunciations of some words to the point that some people can’t even discern the rap as English.) 

     No one knows exactly how ancient Hebrew was pronounced. Paleo-Hebrew had vowels but the handed down Hebrew is a consonantal language, having no vowels. It was not until the Masoretes got involved in the 9th through 10th centuries that we find vowel points added to the Hebrew language. Borrowing from the Aramaic style, the Masoretes inserted small dots and dashes in order to protect the oral tradition of the vowels used to pronounce the words, and the accents of the words. The closest idea, then, of how to pronounce biblical Hebrew comes from those who lived some 2300 after the earliest Hebrew Scriptures and some 1300 years after the latest biblical Hebrew writings.

    The realization of truth sobers one’s mind. The fact is phonetic sounds or pronunciations, as well as written characters of language, change by an estimated 25% every 400 or so years. How can any rational spirit-led mind be deceived to think that the Hebrews spoke the exact same language from the time of Babel through the Egyptian captivity of over 400 years, up to and through the multiple invasions and captivities by the Assyrians, up to and through the Babylonian captivities, and also considering all the mingling with other peoples? The fact is the language changed and it is virtually impossible to know how words were pronounced back to the time of Moses. This is another revealing truth that crushes the imaginations of the Sacred Name proponents.

ONE NAME FOR SALVATION: PRONUNCIATION OR MEANING?

Acts 4:10-12 Be it known unto you all, and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom ye crucified, whom God raised from the dead, even by him doth this man stand here before you whole. This is the stone which was set at nought of you builders, which is become the head of the corner. Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.

     The meaning of Acts 4:12 is that there is no other being in whom men can find salvation other than Jesus Christ. There is a fundamental assumption by Sacred Name advocates that we must place a great emphasis on the way the Messiah's name is spoken. This assumption is not truth. Upon what basis is this doctrine founded? Why should we stress something that even God Himself did not stress?

     There is no place in the Bible where God stressed that His name, or the name of the Messiah must be pronounced in a certain way. He only declared that His name was “ehyeh asher ehyeh” (I AM THAT I AM), and later, YHVH (or JHVH). YHWH is the third person singular form, most likely coming from the old Hebrew word hayah (He is), which has the meaning of "to be." The name for God was not a special name that was not part of the Hebrew vocabulary, but was actually words they were already familiar with. In other words, when God declared who He was through the use of the Hebrew language, He was trying to portray who He was, i.e. the "self-existing one." God only said "YHVH" because He was speaking to the Hebrews. There is nothing in the OT that would lead us to believe that if God would have spoken to any other non-Hebrew, that He still would have said YHWH was His name. God's name is not language-specific, nor is it dependent on the right pronunciation. There is no Scripture that can be shown to teach otherwise—such simply does not exist. No one can bring forth one that will.

     What makes salvation effective, or prayer effective, is not the pronunciation of the Messiah's name, but FAITH in the Messiah. His name is not mystical. To teach such is kabbalism. There is nothing about His name that has the ability to save in and of itself. This is a misunderstanding of the ancients' concept of a name, particularly the Hebrew concept. To a Jew, one's name signifies their person, worth, character, reputation, or authority. EXAMPLE: When the Scripture says that the "name of the Lord is a strong tower" it does not mean that there is a tower shaped in the letters of Lord that the righteous run into, but that the person of YHWH is like a strong tower wherein lies safety. The focus is on the person, not the name.

     Another example is found in Revelation where John said that there were "a few names in Sardis who have not defiled their clothes" (Revelation 3:4). John clearly had people in mind, not names. Because a person's name does represent them, however, when one uses that name, they carry the person's authority, character, and reputation along with it. The focus must always be seen on the person, and not the actual pronunciation of the name.

How did the bible use the concept of a "name”?"

Was Tabitha offended in Acts 9:36 when she is also referred to as Dorcas ???  Both mean "gazelle" so why would she be?

Was Peter (Petros) offended when Christ called him that and also called him Cephas (Joh 1:42)? "Both mean "rock" so why would he be offended?

The disciple Andrew did not seem to mind using the Hebrew title for (Actually the Aramaic form of the Heb. Mashiach) Messiah with the Greek in John 1:41  He first findeth his own brother Simon, and saith unto him, We have found the Messias, which is, being interpreted, the Christ.

Emmanuel: Matthew 1:21-25 And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall save his people from their sins.  Now all this was done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying, Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us.  Then Joseph being raised from sleep did as the angel of the Lord had bidden him, and took unto him his wife: And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name JESUS.

     Now did they call Yeshua/Jesus “Emmanuel” or “Immanuel”? In what manner did they do so? So again we see the true meaning of the term “name.”  Immanuel means “with us is God” and that is who Jesus was!  The name signified the character or reputation of the individual. This did not mean a pronunciation of the name.

     You are saved – not by pronouncing a name – but the righteous life works and sacrificial death our Savior and Master – The Lord Jesus Christ.

     One who deeply studies Sacred Names literature rapidly becomes aware of one thing: Scriptures are misinterpreted and literalism is used excessively to force Scriptures beyond the limits of context in order to substantiate their doctrine. Most Sacred Names adherents are absolutely locked into the concept that the word 'name' can only mean one thing - the correct pronunciation of the Tetragrammaton. This is connected directly to Kabbalism or mystic Judaism – which dwell in the depths of Satanism.

MANY TO COME IN HIS NAME

     Jesus says that many will come in His name (i.e., using His name) and deceive many (Matt. 24:4-5). The Savior came in His Father's name, not His own (Jn. 5:43). There are over 20,000 various church organizations that call themselves 'Christian', and they all differ from each other in their doctrine. How many have come in the names pronounced ‘YHWH’ or ‘Yahshua’ (sic)? Could ‘Yahshua’ then be His name? Or was He talking about something else? Should we only consider groups that pronounce the Name correctly to be these ‘many that come in his name’? Ridiculous, isn’t it?

     If the phonetic sound of God the Father's name were extremely important to Him, it would also be important to his Son who is our Savior. But was this phonetic sound important to our Savior when He taught his Father's way to salvation?

     In Mark 15:34-35, just before his death:

"Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani? which is, being interpreted, My God, my God, why have you forsaken me? And some of them that stood by, when they heard it, said, Behold, he calls Elias."

     These verses in Mark show the prophetic fulfillment of Psalm 22:1-2:

"My God, my God, why have you forsaken me? why are you so far from helping me, and from the words of my roaring? O my God, I cry in the day time, but you hear not; and in the night season, and am not silent."

     Even the Lamsa Bible, translated from the ancient Aramaic Peshitta text, quotes Mark 15:34: "Eli, Eli, lemana shabakthani." IF one must use only the proper phonetic sound of the proper name when addressing the Supreme Sovereign of all that exists THEN our Savior used the WRONG NAME during the most critical moment of his life. These words, 'Eli, Eli, shabakthani,' are not even Hebrew, but are of Chaldean-derived Aramaic.

 

SALVATION BY WORKS OR BY GRACE?

     One name by which men may be saved. The whole point of Acts 4:10-12 is not that a name saves anyone. The point is that salvation can only be obtained through the sacrifice, authority, and office of the Savior.

     A commonly taught doctrine of "sacred nam-ism," is that we are required to address the Father by the tetragrammaton, and not by titles.  Was this the practice and teaching of Messiah?

Matt 6:9 After this manner therefore pray ye: Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be Thy name. 10 Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven. 11 Give us this day our daily bread. 12 And forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors. 13 And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil: For Thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever. Amen.

     It is by this title of endearment and relationship ("Father") that Messiah taught, both by word and example, that we should address His God and our God---the Father in Heaven.  In His most trying moments, nearing the time of His trial and crucifixion, He cried out to the Father in prayer.  Did He call Him 'Yahweh' then?  No.

Mark 14:36 And He said, Abba, Father, all things are possible unto Thee; take away this cup from Me: nevertheless not what I will, but what Thou wilt.

     Read also Jesus' longest recorded prayer to the Father (John 17) and find wherein He never addressed the Father as "Yahweh." He continually called Him "Father." As we previously showed, even when He was drawing His final breaths of life, did He not exclaim "Yahweh," but rather: "Eli, Eli..." = My God, My God.

    Do you know a more perfect way than the Messiah?

    Many who hold the "sacred name" doctrine also say that we must call the Son "Yeshua," Yahshua," or some other such Hebrew (or psuedo-Hebrew) term. What I find interesting is that although I can find reference to His disciples addressing Him as "Lord," "Master," "Rabboni," (as well as "the Christ, the Son of the living God") I see no such place that any one of them is recorded as addressing Him by His "proper name"

    Granted, the demon-possessed men, as well as a few blind and leprous, are recorded as having addressed Him as "Jesus, Son of David," or "Jesus, Son of God," but if it was required of us to use His proper name and not a title, why do we not find His disciples following such?

John 13:13 Ye call Me Master and Lord: and ye say well; for so I am.

     Let us conclude this lengthy subject and take it in prayer to the Father.

     Forgiveness of sin is not an act of man, it is an act of God. A name cannot save us. It is the Savior who saves us. It is the result of his action, not ours. Salvation does not come to humans by the act of pronouncing a name or making a phonetic sound. If knowing and using the Savior's name could get us salvation, it would come by the works of people, not by the grace of God through the sacrifice of the Savior. From Sacred Names literature, it is apparent that they believe salvation is gained by works (i.e., the pronunciation of the Tetragrammaton). It is the result of what they do, not what God is doing through the Savior. This assumption shows a lack of faith in the grace of God the Father and the power of his Son's sacrifice, which allows us to gain salvation without works.

     This document is by no means meant as a "final authority," nor is it completely in-depth. It is meant as a basic background to get you started. If it really fascinates you, check deeper on your own.

     To close, there is a need to reiterate our love and devotion to you as brother and sister in Christ. Have your hearts been seared to the point that you do not remember the things you have witnessed? Were all the healings you heard of and witnessed all done by the power of the ‘name’ of a false god? [identity omitted], You worshipped Jesus Christ with us when you were healed of tumors. Was your healing (and you were indeed healed by miracle) by the power of a false god? Is it true that since renouncing the name in which you were anointed your body has again been stricken?

     Have you had any conversion since your original baptism “in the name of Jesus?” Have you been all these years worshipping a false god? Or are you being deceived by this present time by the seducing doctrines of men? Could the name of a false god have any converting effect on you? To renounce Jesus with a ‘salvation by pronunciation of a name’ doctrine is to also claim that you have not had a shred of conversion in your entire ‘religious walk.’

    Much time, research, and prayer has been spent in this letter. The brethren of the assembly have all contributed to bring you this message. There is nothing for anyone in the assembly to gain by telling you anything false. You started your conversion in the spirit … now you are deceived into thinking your salvation is by works. Oh, you will not admit it in those words, but the matter is none-the-less true. I tell you the Father wants you to love Him and others. I suspect your first reaction to this letter may be (or already has been) carnal, but please persevere beyond that to be willing to receive the truth.

     ITS OKAY TO USE NAMES: Use what names you like, but do not distance yourself from Him by acting improperly, as if you ‘have one up’ on other believers. Do not place yourself in the position of the Judge, for you will be usurping a position that does not belong to you. Please recall that the measure you use to judge others will be used to judge you (Matt 7:1,2). If you condemn to Gehenna those who do not refer to our Father in the “proper” Hebrew term, consider what judgment awaits you since no one today actually knows the “proper” ‘Hebrew’ pronunciation, nor does the Word of God teach such Kabbalistic doctrine. This doctrine is of men—not of God—and has caused many little ones to stumble. Recall also what Messiah said of those who would cause His little ones to stumble (Matt 18:6-10). Show you are His by acting in love, gentleness, and peace always.

James 3:13 Who is a wise man and endued with knowledge among you? let him shew out of a good conversation his works with meekness of wisdom. 14 But if ye have bitter envying and strife in your hearts, glory not, and lie not against the truth. 15 This wisdom descendeth not from above, but is earthly, sensual, devilish. 16 For where envying and strife is, there is confusion and every evil work. 17 But the wisdom that is from above is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, and easy to be intreated, full of mercy and good fruits, without partiality, and without hypocrisy. 18 And the fruit of righteousness is sown in peace of them that make peace.

[end excerpt of truthontheweb.org letter]

Authored by Kenneth M. Hoeck & Brian C. Hoeck

?2008 Truth On The Web Ministries: All the articles originated by Kenneth M. Hoeck and/or Brian C. Hoeck may be freely distributed or mirrored as long as presented in their entirety (including this statement), attributed to Truth on The Web, and proper author credit given.

BACK TO: LIBRARY

www.truthontheweb.org