One in Messiah Congregation

קָּהָל אֶחָד בְּמָּשִׁיחַ

A part of the Congregation of Israel

עֲדַת יִשְׂרָאֵל


Our website:

27 S. Maple Street, Hohenwald, Tn. 38462


Phone: 615 712-3931




Shabbat Shalom

שַׁבָּת שָׁלוֹם


Today is February 15, 2020

February -- month of Februa

Middle English Februarius
Latin Februarius "of Februa"
Latin Februa(s) "Februa" + -arius "ary (pertaining to)"
Latin Februarius mensis "month of Februa"
Latin dies februatus "day of purification"

Februarius had 28 days, until circa 450 BC when it had 23 or 24 days on some of every second year, until Julius when it had 29 days on every fourth year and 28 days otherwise.

Februa is the Roman festival of purification, held on February fifteenth. It is possibly of Sabine origin.


We acknowledge Yehovah’s calendar:

We are now in the eleventh month, which is the month Sh’vat  שְׁבָט

Day 20

Sh’vat is found in: Zech.1 [7]the eleventh month, which is the month Sebat / Sh’vat

Part of Feb. and March 2020


Today’s Topic:

Word study again

Sometimes: Want means lack and Lack means lack


Below are just a few examples, let’s review:


Want: חָסֵר chacer

Meaning:  1) to lack, be without, decrease, be lacking, have a need 1a) (Qal) 1a1) to lack 1a2) to be lacking


Pss.23 [1] Yehovah is my shepherd; I shall not want.

Pss.34 [9] O fear Yehovah, ye his saints: for there is no want to them that fear Him.

[10] The young lions do lack, and suffer hunger: but they that seek Yehovah shall not want any good thing.

Prov.9 [4] Whoso is simple, let him turn in hither: as for him that wanteth understanding, she saith to him,[16] Whoso is simple, let him turn in hither: and as for him that wanteth understanding, she saith to him, [17] Stolen waters are sweet, and bread eaten in secret is pleasant.
[18] But he knoweth not that the dead are there; and that her guests are in the depths of hell.

Prov.10 [19] In the multitude of words there wanteth not sin: but he that refraineth his lips is wise.

[21] The lips of the righteous feed many: but fools die for want of wisdom.

Prov.13 [23] Much food is in the tillage of the poor: but there is that is destroyed for want of judgment.

[25] The righteous eateth to the satisfying of his soul: but the belly of the wicked shall want.

Prov.14 [28] In the multitude of people is the king's honour: but in the want of people is the destruction of the prince.

Prov.19 [7] All the brethren of the poor do hate him: how much more do his friends go far from him? he pursueth them with words, yet they are wanting to him.

Prov.21 [5] The thoughts of the diligent tend only to plenteousness; but of every one that is hasty only to want.

Prov.22 [16] He that oppresseth the poor to increase his riches, and he that giveth to the rich, shall surely come to want.

Prov.24 [34] So shall thy poverty come as one that travelleth; and thy want as an armed man.

Prov.28 [30] I went by the field of the slothful, and by the vineyard of the man void of understanding;
[31] And, lo, it was all grown over with thorns, and nettles had covered the face thereof, and the stone wall thereof was broken down.
[32] Then I saw, and considered it well: I looked upon it, and received instruction.
[33] Yet a little sleep, a little slumber, a little folding of the hands to sleep:

[16] The prince that wanteth understanding is also a great oppressor: but he that hateth covetousness shall prolong his days.

Ecc.: [15] That which is crooked cannot be made straight: and that which is wanting cannot be numbered.

Ecc.6 [2] A man to whom God hath given riches, wealth, and honour, so that he wanteth nothing for his soul of all that he desireth, yet God giveth him not power to eat thereof, but a stranger eateth it: this is vanity, and it is an evil disease.


Same meaning in the Gospels and letters, here are a few examples:


ὑστέρημα husterema {hoos-ter'-ay-mah} Meaning:  1) deficiency, that which is lacking



Mark.12 [41] And Yeshua sat over against the treasury, and beheld how the people cast money into the treasury: and many that were rich cast in much.
[42] And there came a certain poor widow, and she threw in two mites, which make a farthing.
[43] And he called unto him his disciples, and saith unto them, Verily I say unto you, That this poor widow hath cast more in, than all they which have cast into the treasury:

[44] For all they did cast in of their abundance; but she of her want did cast in all that she had, even all her living.

2 Cor. 11 [9] And when I was present with you, and wanted, I was chargeable to no man: for that which was lacking to me the brethren which came from Macedonia supplied: and in all things I have kept myself from being burdensome unto you, and so will I keep myself.

Phil.2 [25] Yet I supposed it necessary to send to you Epaphroditus, my brother, and companion in labour, and fellowsoldier, but your messenger, and he that ministered to my wants.

Tit.1 [4] To Titus, mine own son after the common faith: Grace, mercy, and peace, from God the Father and the Lord Yeshua the Messiah our Saviour. [5] For this cause left I thee in Crete, that you should set in order the things that are wanting, and ordain elders in every city, as I had appointed thee:

Tit.3 [13] Bring Zenas the lawyer and Apollos on their journey diligently, that nothing be wanting unto them.

Jas.1 [4] But let patience have her perfect work, that ye may be perfect and entire, wanting nothing.


Lack means lack

I am not going to go over this word, I think most people understand this.

מַחְסוֹר machcowr {makh-sore'} or מַחְסֹר machcor {makh-sore'}

Meaning:  1) need, poverty, thing needed 1a) need, thing needed 1b) lack, want 1c) need, poverty


Use all concordances with spiritual caution.

There might be a bias or two here J


Strong's concordance was first published in 1890

James Strong died in 1893

James Strong, LL.D., S.T.D, former professor of exegetical theology at Drew Theological Seminary, spent more than thirty-five years preparing his landmark concordance. First published in 1890 Strong's remains the most widely used concordance and dictionary of Bible words from the King James Version of the Bible.

( LLD Doctor of Laws ) STD Doctor(ate) of Sacred Theology (degree)

Drew Theological Seminary -- Started as a Methodist seminary in 1867 , Drew is today an independent university of distinction with an abiding belief in the liberal arts and the use of technology in support of teaching and learning.

James Strong was a Methodist layman who argued for formal ministerial training and the establishment of a major Methodist seminary in the mid-Atlantic region prior to Drew's founding. He studied at Wesleyan, attained three degrees, and became acting president of Troy University before joining the faculty of Drew as chair of exegetical theology in 1868 . Strong was one of "the Great Five" revered professors who led Drew for decades. He died in 1893 , after serving Drew for nearly twenty-five years.


In the Strongs & Thayer, when looking up a word, always be very careful.

Some of their words are right and some of their words replace the Textus Reseptus words giving a different meaning.

The translators of the KJV 1611 are the most reliable sources of the Koine Greek which we do not have today.

The KJV agrees with the Textus Reseptus Koine Greek which comes from the over 5000 Greek manuscripts which agree with each other approx. 98-99 %

All the other versions of the bible only agree approx. 5%

Which version do you think you should use? The answer is a simple one. 98-99 % sounds much better then 5 %, I know you would agree.

After reviewing even the worst versions of the bible, we see they also say first day of the week.


Let’s go over our Bible

Perfected or Perverted? (byNorman Ward)

Chapter 3: The History of the Gospels and Letters


The "original" Bible


 In discussing the text of the Bible, the revisionists will often use the phrase "according to the original Greek." This leads one to believe that they have access to the original autograph manuscripts.  They do not.  Nobody today has the original writings themselves.  Let me repeat that: The original autographical manuscripts of the Gospels and Letters no longer exist.  They were written on perishable material and it is unlikely that they lasted more than a few years, let alone nineteen centuries!

   This is why the doctrine of Divine preservation is so vital.  If God has not preserved His word (Psalm 12:6-7), then it was irrevocably lost on thousand nine hundred years ago.  That would mean that no Bible is existence today is any more inspired that a Harold Robbins novel and Yeshua the Messiah is a liar (Matt. 24:35)!     

   Often, the same people who refer you to the "original Greek" will also refer you to the "Original Bible."  There was no "original Bible." At no time did the original autographical manuscripts of the twenty-seven books of the Gospels and Letters ever reside between the covers of one particular book.  To say, "I believe in the verbal plenary (absolute) inspiration of the "original Bible" is to say you believe in nothing, for no such book ever existed!  (The TaNaKh existed).

   The Gospels and Letters were not written as a book, per se. It was written by eight or nine different men, in a variety of locations and circumstances, over a period of about sixty years.  Generally speaking, the Gospels and Letters were originally letters which were written to certain churches or individuals.

   These letters were written on papyrus in a particular kind of Greek called "Koine" Greek.  Koine Greek was the language of the common man at that time.  It is important to remember that the Gospels and Letters were originally written in Koine Greek because later on we are going to encounter manuscripts written in classical Greek. 

   As the Gospels and Letters were circulated from church to church, each church would make a copy of the letter before passing it on.  Eventually, each church had its own collection of letters.  It was only natural that these collections of letters would eventually be put together in book form.

   It is a this point that our story begins, for it is at this point that the development of the bible splits into two separate lines of Ascension.

   We will examine first the line of ascension which culminates in the A.V. 1611 and then we will examine the line which gives to rise to the the modern versions.


The Textus Receptus

   The underlying Greek text of the A.V. 1611 is called the “Textus Receptus” or the “Received Text.”  It is also called the “Majority Text” because ninety-five percent of all manuscript evidence supports this text.  Let me emphasize that: Ninety-five percent of all manuscript evidence comes from the same line of ascension that the A.V. 1611 comes from.  NINETY-FIVE PERCENT!   In other words all the manuscripts were almost exact copies of each other.

   This text originated in Antioch where the disciples were first called Christians (Messiah Followers) (Acts 11:26).  It was written on papyrus in Koine Greek as were the original letters.  There is no evidence that anyone at Antioch ever tampered with this text.

   This text traveled from Syria, through the Balkans to Germany and, thence, to England.  It was the text the Messiah Followers used.


Milestones in the development of this text include:

1.  The Syrian peshito and the old Latin (first and second centuries),

2.  Papyrus readings of the the Receptus (150-400 A.D,

3.  The Uncial readings of the Receptus (500-1500),

4.  The Latin Bibles of the Waldensians (1100-1300),

5.  The Latin Bibles of the Albigenses (1380-1550),

6.  The Latin Bibles of the Lollards (1300-1500),

7.  Martin Luther's Bible (1530), and

8.  The Receptus of 1615, 1534, 1550, and 1565.


English Versions included:

1.  Tyndale's (1525),

2.  Coverdale's (1535),

3.  Matthew's (1537),

4.  The Great Bible (1539)

5.  The Geneva Bible (1560),

6.  The Bishops Bible (1568), and

7.  The Authorized Version (1611)


The Line of Corruption

   We will now examine the second line of ascension, the line that supports the modern versions.

   This line of ascension begins in Alexandria, Egypt, the Land of Bondage.  From there it moves to Rome, the City of Mystery Babylon, the Great Whore and the Roman Catholic Pope.

   This line of text is written on vellum in classical Greek.  Remember, the Gospels and Letters were written on papyrus in Koine Greek.

   It is important to note the difference between classical Greek and Koine Greek foe three reasons:

1.      Since the Gospels and Letters were written in Koine Greek, a manuscript copy in Koine Greek is apt to have a closer reading.

2.    There are some 500 works in Koine Greek which are used in the Gospels and Letters which cannot be translated into classical Greek.

3.    The majority of early Messiah Followers accepted manuscripts in Koine Greek in preference to manuscripts in classical Greek.


   This corrupt line of ascension accounts for only five percent of manuscript evidence.  Let me repeat that:  Only five percent of manuscript evidence supports this line of text.  FIVE PERCENT.  In other words does not agree with the original copies of the Gospels and Letters.

   The story of this corrupt line starts with a man named Origen.  Origen lived about 185-251 A.D.  He was an Ebionite (one who accepts the moral teachings of Messiah but denies the doctrine of salvation).  He believed in infant baptism.  He believed in universal salvation (that is, that all men would be saved rather than should be saved.  He believed that sin was forgiven through communion.  He did not believe that Messiah was our High Priest.  He did not believe in physical resurrection.  He did not believe in the second coming of Messiah.  There is no record of his ever winning anyone to Messiah.  He could not tell you where, when, how, or why he is saved.

   By his own admission, he amended the Gospels and Letters whenever and wherever he felt like it.  It is on the work of this man that the whole line of the corrupt texts exists.

In the fourth century, Emperor Constantine of Rome converted to Christianity. The sincerity of his conversion and his motivation for converting have come under serious question.  At any rate, he asked a fellow named Eusebius to make him fifty copies of the bible.     

   Unfortunately, Eusebius was the wrong man to ask.  He was an Arian (one who denies the Deity of Messiah) and he did not believe in literal interpretation of the bible. Worst of all, he was a great admirer of Origen.  As a result, the fifty copies of the Bible that he made up for Constantine were based on the corrupt works of Origen.

   The next step in the corrupt line was Jerome's Latin Vulgate written about 400 A.D.   It was based primarily on the work of Origen and Eusebius.  For the next thousand years, this was the standard Bible of the Catholic church.

   The last stop before the modern versions is the Rheims-Douay Bible completed about 1610.  It is the current Bible of the Catholic church.  Of course, it reflects the work of Origen, Eusebius and Jerome.

   The most cursory examination of this line of Bibles reveals the fact that it has Roman Catholic heritage.  It should be noted that the Catholic church has tradionally been opposed to laymen reading the Bible.  At times, the Roman Catholic church has even forbidden ownership of the Bible by the common man.  The corrupt nature of these Bibles and the attitude of the church which promoted them helps to explain why none of these Bibles were ever popular.


   In short, the KJV was directly written from Koine Greek to English.  The corrupt line was from Koine Greek, to Modern Greek, Latin (with changes from Origen), and then to English.


Westcott and Hort



   On February 10, 1870, the Southern Convocation of the Church of England passed a resolution expressing the desirability of revising the Authorized Version of 1611 (KJV).  The clear intent of the Southern Convocation can be noted in the following quote::

   We do not contemplate any new translation of the Bible or any alternation of the language, except, when in the judgment of the most competent scholars, such changes are necessary.

   What actually happened is quite another story.  Instead of being a revision of the A. V. 1611, the Revised Version was actually a whole new Bible that threw out entirely the time-tested, God-honored, fruit-bearing, life-changing, Messiah-exalting A. V. 1611.

   The story of the Revised Version (and all subsequent modern Bibles) is really the story of two men, B. B Wescott and F.J A. Hort.  Westcott and Hort were two well know Greek scholars who dominated the Revision Committee.

   Westcott and Hort were not Bible believers.  As a matter of fact, they detested the A. V. 1611 and the Greek text on which it was based.  Their expressed purpose was to “Rid the Church of that Vile Text”.

   Westcott and Hort had no desire to simply revise the A.V. 1611 as the Southern Convocation had authorized, nor would they be satisfied with a fresh translation from the existing Greek text.  Why they insisted upon was a brand new translation based on a brand new Greek text.

   Where was this text to come from? Why, it just so happened that Westcott and Hort had composed a Greek text that they felt was perfectly suitable for the job?  This man inspired text was the basic text used by the Revision Committee (after the committee had been sworn to secrecy by Westcott and Hort), and it was published within days of the Revised Version.

   The new Greek text of Westcott and Hort, and especially their theories, have had an unwholesome and devastating effect on the Gospels and Letters textual criticism.  Almost every Bible published today has been tainted by their poison.

   Some versions such as the Revised Version and the American Standard Version are based directly on the Westcott and Hort text.  Other version are based on texts which are either revisions fo the Westcott and Hort text, or ones which utilize the theories of Westcott and Hort, for example: Nestle's text (the basic text for the new American Standard Version) and the Bible Society's text (the basic text for the New international Version).  Every bible published Today, except the A.V. 1611 is Based on the work of Westcott and Hort.

   This is the crux of the difference between the various versions.  On one side stands the A.V. 1611 (KJV) which is based on the Textus Receptus, an historically transmitted Greek text, supported by the vast majority of manuscript evidence (95 percent).  On the other side stands virtually every other version based on a text invented in the nineteenth century and support by only a handful of manuscript evidence.   (the New King James Bible and KJV II claim to be base on the Textus Receptus but have serious defects).


Be aware of the Aramaic Scriptures.

In the Aramaic manuscripts as, 'Eli, Eli, lemana shabakthani' (My God, My God, for this I was spared [this was my destiny.) THIS IS WRONG!!!

NEW TESTAMENT ORIGIN, Dr. George Lamsa states, 'Not a word of the Scriptures was originally written in Greek...the Scriptures were written in Aramaic.' THIS IS FALSE!!!!

He must have missed the over 5000 Greek manuscripts

In the ancient text of the Peshitta, written in Jesus' native Aramaic language, 'lama sabachthani' is REPLACED by 'lemana shabakthani'. 'Lemana' means 'for this purpose', and 'shabakthani' means 'spare, keep, or reserve'. So you see that Jesus did not say "why hast thou forsaken me", but "for this purpose was I spared", or "this is my destiny". THIS IS WRONG!!!

Psalm 22: 1 -- My God, my God, why hast thou let me to live? And yet thou has delayed my salvation from me, because of the words of my folly. [Aramaic Translation] FALSE TRANSLATION - Please read the HEBREW for correct text from whence it comes.

KJV is correct in the Psalm 22 and

Pss.2 [1] My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me? why art thou so far from helping me, and from the words of my roaring?

אֵלִי אֵלִי, לָמָה עֲזַבְתָּנִי;    רָחוֹק מִישׁוּעָתִי, דִּבְרֵי שַׁאֲגָתִי

sabachthani is not replaced here in our Bible

Matt.27 [46] And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani? that is to say, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?


You should go over some of these links below; it is for your benefit.

Just hold down the ctrl key and click to go to the link, simple


The ESV is a Updated Version Of The RSV corrupt bible

The History Of The Gospels And Letters 8/5/2017 - 5th month, 12th day

Flesch - Kincaid grade level evaluation info and Bible version corruptions

James Strongs delusion, click here

No word Yahusha in the Hebrew Bible - Kittle’s Nazi connection - His Greek New Testament Dictionary/Lexicon of the New Testament

Many differences between the KJV and the ISR98, Scriptures 1998 bibles, there is much more, Scriptures 2009 is about the same thing

the Complete Jewish Bible, translated by David H. Stern is very BAD!!!

All 17 of these verses are missing from the NIV, there are more...

Compare the NIV with other bibles

The NIV says the morning star is satan

NIV - Virginia Mollenkott testified, My lesbianism has always been a part of me

NKJV in not the KJV

Who was James Strong?

Westcott and Hort, enemies of the True Word

Kittle,Carlo Martini, Eugene Nida, Kurt Aland, and Bruce Metzger and more

Truth about the real Old Testament Text

Truth about the APOCRYPHA and the SEPTUAGINT

Septuagint uninspired

Beware of the Septuagint, Lxx

The NKJV not a KJV

KJV translators

ALLEGED KJV ERRORS: The Johannine Comma (1 John 5:7)

In closing:

2Tim.2 [15] Study to show yourself approved unto God, a workman that needs not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.


Shabbat Shalom

שַׁבָּת שָׁלוֹם

[Click Here to Print]