New moon “and” “Day” of the new moon.
 
Please read the first little bit of this, and you will not have
to read any more of this article. 
If you don’t get anything else out of what I am going to say, 
remember this one thing, there’s a HUGE DIFFERENCE between the “new moon” (which is a lunar event), and the “DAY” of the new moon (which is a solar event that the lunar event happens "IN"!!! (Ezekiel 46:1).

The new moon is a lunar EVENT that takes place in the sky each month, “it is not a day”, and the day of the new moon, is the solar DAY in which the lunar EVENT occurs “IN”! (Let that soak in)

Ezekiel 46:1 says, “the gate shall be shut the six working days; but on the sabbath it shall be opened, and “IN” the "day" of the new moon it shall be opened.”

The new moon, which is a lunar event (it is when the moon becomes new, and begins to rebuild) and this lunar event takes place each month, and whatever solar day the lunar event is going to happen “in”, that whole day is the day of the new moon, or day in which the moon becomes new in, it is the beginning or HEAD of a new lunar cycle, and the solar day it happens IN, is a very special day! (it commenmorates the first day of the month in Creation)

Also when Jonithan and David said “tomorrow is the new moon”, 
they are talking about a lunar EVENT that is going to take place on tomorrow! The “tomorrow” is the solar day, and the new rebuilding 
or new moon is the lunar event, or new rebuilding.

When the old moon END’S it’s lunar cycle of about 29 and ½ solar days, a new lunar cycle (or new moon) automatically begins immediately after conjunction, and whatever solar day that happen “in”, “that day” is the DAY OF THE NEW MOON (Ezechel 46:1), or day of the new cycle! This is the solar day in which you blow the trumpet “in”! (“in the beginning of your mouths”, Numbers 10:10, which is referring to the day the month begins in, NOT the next day, when the moon is hours old, not new). 

The new moon will not begin at the same time of the day each month, but what ever day it begins in, is the day of the new moon!

The Hebrew definition for new moon is Strong's H2320
From H2318; the new moon; by implication a month: - month ({-ly}) new moon.  

Strong's Definition H2318
A primitive root; “to be new”; causatively “to rebuild”: - {renew} repair.

Whatever day they moon becomes new in, or begins to rebuild or repair in, is the day of the new moon, or day of the rebuilding.   

Somethings are hidden in simplicity.

Since the creation of time even until now, whatever solar day something happens in, is the day of that something, or event.

For example, if you wanted to commemorate the “day” of the crucifixion, which happened on the 14th day of the lunar moon/month, you would go from the 13th evening and go through
the evening of the 14th, and that would be the day of the crucifixion, EVEN though the actual time of the crucifixion would not happen 
until around 3:00 pm on that day, it is still the day of the crucifixion, i.e. from the end of the 13 through the 14th!

The crucifixion is also an EVENT, same as the new moon is an EVENT, and knowing in advance, what day the event you wish to commemorate will occur “in”, you will begin to commemorate from the end of the day before the day in which the event actually 
going to occurs “in”, and then keep the day that the event actually occurs “in”, as the “day of the event”. This gives us a full 24hr 
day to celebrate the event, whether it is the day of ones birth or 
day of ones death.

Once again, there’s a HUGE DIFFERENCE between the “new moon”, and the “DAY” of the new moon!!!

There is a difference between ones birth and the day of ones birth etc.

Everyone should find out what the Hebrew definition of a new moon is, and then find out what solar day it occurs “in” and keep that 
day as the day of the new moon.

www.lunarsabbath.info
 
On the first day of the month in creation, there was a dark New Moon in the heavens, before the light, and everything started moving on the first day of the week. 

There is still a dark New moon today (Day of the new moon), before the first day of the week, nothing has changed.

This dark new moon day commemorates the creation each month, when the Almighty created heaven and earth, before time actually began, with the movements of light across the face of the moon, which happens on the first day of the week, which is the second day of the month, as it did in creation.

 This puts the first seventh day rest of the weekly Sabbath on the "eighth" day of the month/moon  in creation, instead of the seventh day of the moon, same as everywhere you find a pinpointed weekly Sabbath in scripture, and nothing has changed since then. What can be more simpler to understand than that?
 
 
There is a way to correctly tell time by the great lights in the heavens, without having to have a so called two day new moon, and without the weekly Sabbath and the beginning of a new month happening on the same 24-hour day. Here’s how simple it is,
 
The heavens are doing what they do for everyone on earth. The conjunction happens for everyone, the sun sets for everyone, etc. and when we set our calendar to harmonize with nature's cycles, these heavenly cycles flow smoothly around the earth to everyone, with no broken cycles, and no two day new moons, and no Sabbath cycle and day of the new moon happening on the same 24-hour day, etc. here is an example of what we have when we do not interrupt nature.
 
When everyone around the earth observes the day in which the moon is going to become new/dark in, before any “light begins aging” it, as the day of the new moon, everyone around the earth will automatically begin the day of the new moon in the very same 24-hour cycle!
 
Someone will begin this 24-hour cycle, as their sun sets, and this day, in which the moon is going to become dark in, and it will go around to everyone on earth, and all will be in that very same first cycle of the month!
 
Cycle 1 will end, with the one who began it, and then cycle 2 will begin, while everyone else is still in cycle 1 until cycle 2 comes around to them as their sun sets, and then their cycle 1 ends, and they will enter into cycle 2. This process will continue all month.
 
Nature will only allow everyone around the earth to get 29 solar cycles within the 29 ½ day lunar cycle, with ½ day left over. 
 
No one can observe ½ day, but at the end of the second month, another ½ day accumulates, and then there will be a full 24-hour day in between the last Sabbath of the month, and before the next day of the new moon, making that a 30 day month, with no man-made tampering!
 
Nature has now made a 30 day month, without the help of anyone, and when we allow nature to add the 30th day, it is a complete 24-hour cycle that can go around to everyone on earth, and the calendar runs smoothly. No one gets a 30 day month until nature produces one!
 
Also, in addition to the above, there are no broken cycles, and there will “never” be no such thing as a two day new moons [which is not even found in nature], and you never have a last Sabbath of the old month, and the beginning of a new month colliding with each other in the same 24-hour day cycle.
 
I don’t think anyone should feel comfortable, not letting nature do what it’s doing, and adjust our calendar according to what nature is actually doing instead of what we think it should be doing.
 
 Age of the moon

One of the most crucial part of the solar/lunar calendar is knowing WHAT a new moon is!

You must know WHAT it is, in order to know WHEN it is.

The moon orbits the earth once each month, and there is a very definitive point at which it ends it's orbit, and begins a "new" one!

At the end of each month the moon becomes dark at the point when the sun, the moon, and the earth, are in a perfect line with each other. At this point there is no light on either side of the moon, until they slightly begin passing each other.

On one solar day each month the lunar moon becomes new, but for only a brief moment because it is constantly moving.

But the "day" in which the new Moon occurs, or becomes new in, is not a brief moment, but is a full 24 hour day!

That is why the days of the new moon/month are counted from the "day" of the new moon instead of the new moon itself. The "day" of the new Moon is different from the new Moon itself!

Man cannot discern brief moments as well as he can the "day" of the brief moment.

The Hebrew definition of new Moon is to be new, and this happens once every month for a brief moment within a 24-hour day.

A new Moon/month begins the very moment the old one ends, and the old one ends when the light goes away at the dark new moon conjunction.

Again, at Conjunction, the sun, moon, and earth, are in perfect line, and there is no light shinning on "either side" of the moon at that point, because the moon is in perfect line between the sun and the earth, just like in creation, on the first day of the month. Each month we commemorate the day in which that brief moment occurred!

On the very same day of the dark moon conjunction, the sun begins to illuminate the dark moon, as they begin passing one another, and it is at this  point that the moon begins aging again, but not before the light hits it, it remains brand-new until it starts aging with light!


The only way to tell the age of a moon is by the light that is on it!

The longer the light is on it, after conjunction, the older it is! 

When no light is on it, it is brand-new, and it has never been used to reflect light for that new month.

The moon waxes with light until full of light, and then wanes until empty of light!

When the old moon is empty of light, a dark brand-new moon automatically occurs the very moment after the old light ends, and this dark moon happens right "before" the new light begins on it again. Nothing I am saying here is untrue.

The moon, in between waxing and waning of light, is dark for a brief moment at conjunction. In other words, after waning, and "before" waxen, the moon is dark, or brand-new at this point. The "solar day" in which this happens in, is unique, and very special in scripture for worship.

Again, when a moon is brand-new, there is no light on either side of it, just like the first day of the month in creation. This happens every month, and I say it commemorates the first day of the month in creation.

When light came on, after the day/yom of the dark moon (conjunction), the dark new moon conjunction ended, and  the first day of the week began at evening, and then when he rested on the 7th day of the week, it was the 8th day of the month/moon, when counting the day/yom of the dark new moon, just like every where else in scripture. 

Telling time by the moon is similar to telling time by a clock. You have an hour hand and a minute hand and a particular number, which all come in perfect line once each hour.

Let's say a new hour begins at exactly 3 o'clock, when the little hand and the big hand, are in perfect line with the number 3. 

It is not a brand new hour at 2:59, neither at 3:01, because at 3:01, the hour is "one minute old", and everything is not in line, and it is not a brand new hour (3 o'clock) unless everything is in perfect line!

The new hour begins at 3 o'clock, not 3:01, after the long hand has passed the 3 and is no longer in line with the shorthand and the number 3, and therefore it is no longer 3 o'clock, but is one minute after 3. The new hour is one minute old at 3:01!

It is not 3 o'clock one minute "before 3, or one minute "after 3". Neither is it a new moon one minute before conjunction or one minute after conjunction! The dark conjunction point separates the old light and the new light.

The number 3 is between the last minute of the old hour (2:59), and the first minute of the new hour (3:01), same as the dark new Moon is between the last light of the old month, and the first light of the new month.

The new 3 o'clock hour (conjunction) is exactly between 2:59 and 3:01, and only lasts a moment, same as the dark new Moon conjunction lasts only a moment.

You can see the above rule applies to the new month as well as to the clock. There is nothing new after the point or moment that it became new, it begins aging from that moment on.

The whole month can be considered new, relative to the old month, but is only new for a moment in each new month. I believe the above is in line with sound logic.

The reason I used 3 o'clock is because it it would represent the position of sunset in the west, at creation when the light came on, as the day/yom of the new moon was ending, and the first day of the week beginning simontanously. 

According to Psalms 33:9, it appears that there was only a brief moment, in which heaven and earth was created, on the day/yom  of the new Moon in creation.

Psalm 33:1-9 KJV
[1] … Rejoice in the Lord, O ye righteous: for praise is comely for the upright. [2] Praise the Lord with harp: sing unto him with the psaltery and an instrument of ten strings. [3] Sing unto him a new song; play skilfully with a loud noise. [4] For the word of the Lord is right; and all his works are done in truth. [5] He loveth righteousness and judgment: the earth is full of the goodness of the Lord . [6] By the "word" of the Lord were the heavens made; and all the host of them by the "breath" of his mouth. [7] He gathereth the waters of the sea together as an heap: he layeth up the depth in storehouses. [8] Let all the earth fear the Lord : let all the inhabitants of the world stand in "awe" of him. [9] For he "spake", and it was "done"; he "commanded", and it stood "fast".…


Dateline

New dates and days go out west from the dateline, and never east!


Most people do not understand how a date Line works. Neither do they understand that biblical dates always comes to us from west of any Date Line!

If you were standing on the man made dateline and east of the dateline was Saturday, and west of the dateline is Sunday the first day of the week "and" also the first date of the month, it goes around to everyone on earth!

This means that the first day and date of the month began "west" of the dateline and came around to everyone on earth. It is the first day of the man-made month and goes around to everyone.

Each month, when the new moon sets a new biblical Dateline, somewhere on earth, it works the same way. 

Everone west of the heavenly dateline begins the first day or date of the new month on earth, And that day and date of the biblical month goes around to everyone, just like on the man-made Dateline!

The date of the month came to everyone from west of the dateline. And Everyone East of, or behind the dateline, is in the old month. Just like everyone east of the man-made dateline on Saturday is in the old week, and everyone west of the Dateline on Sunday, and in the first day of a new week.

You cannot have a calendar of any kind, without a Dateline to set the boundaries.

The sun is continually rising 24 hours a day, and setting 24 hours a day around the earth, and without some kind of dateline, no one knows where on earth the day begins and ends. (The moon serves this purpose)

You can create a Man made solar only dateline, or you can use the lunar  solar dateline in heaven. 

I don't know how many people has ever thought of this, but the day "always begins west" of "any" dateline whether it's the heavenly dateline, or the one man creates, the days always begins west of it.

Truly the sun rises in the east for everybody, but each new day comes around to everyone, from the west of the dateline.

If you try to begin the day east of any dateline, it will actually wipe out the dateline, (Think about that for a moment) the day must begin west of any dateline, and the day begins at evening, same as in creation.

The only way "any" Dateline will work is to begin the day going forth (west) from the dateline.

Even with the solar only man made dateline, you have Saturday on the east side of the line, and Sunday on the west side, and if you argued that the day begins on the east side of the dateline, it automatically wipes out the Dateline as crosses it. No part of the day can cross the line or it changes to another day, in this case, Saturday would change to Sunday. No part of Saturday can cross over into Sunday, or it destroys the dateline. All days must stop and a new one start at the Dateline, somewhere on earth.

Let me demonstrate.
Because biblical days of the month are by the moon, every month the New moon creates a new dateline somewhere on earth in which to count days from. 

It works in the same way as the man-made Date Line, only it floats and is not fixed like the man made dateline is. This way every place on earth gets the honor to bring in the new month.

For those of us who keep the day in which the moon actually becomes new in, as the day of the new Moon, will begin the day the evening before the new Moon occurs, so the new Moon will be in that day.

In other words, those who are one hour west of the new Moon dateline, will begin their day the evening before, let's say Thursday evening to Friday evening, (if the new Moon happens on Friday) and the New Moon will be in that same day, one hour before sunset.

Those that are east of the new moon dateline, will keep the day in which the new moon happens in, on Friday evening, 23 hours after those that began their New Moon day Thursday evening, on the Roman calendar, But both enter the same New Moon day cycle, As it comes to them.

They will both be in the same "biblical" New Moon 24hr day cycle, which began with those west of the new Moon Date Line, 23 hours earlier, and even though those in the west begin their new moon day on Thursday evening and those in the east began their new moon day on Friday evening, on the Roman calendar, "they are both in the same biblical 24 hr cycle." (biblical day cycles are counted from the new moon, And we should not mix Roman cycles with them.)

It's just the Roman solar only calendar that makes them look like they're on two different days, but those cycles do not count. Remember the biblical cycle days are counted from the new Moon, not 12 midnight on the Roman calendar, or a man-made Date Line.

Biblical days of the month are counted from the moon, and when the moon sets a Dateline on earth (to count from) the first day of that month will begin, and go out from there (West) to to everyone around the earth, and everyone will be enter into the same heavenly cycle!

The New Moon/beginning of the month conjunction can happen between two states, as the sun is setting, and it will be the first day of the month on earth for the one west of this New dateline, and the last day of the month for those east of this Dateline.

It is the moon that determines where the first day of the month on earth will start, and go around to everyone, because biblical days are by the moon. And it can split the day between two cities, just like the traditional man-made dateline splits between two islands in the Pacific Ocean.

Side note:

There is also a snapshot or picture of a new moon in creation. 

The first new moon in creation was a dark moon before light hits it. 

The moment light hits it it is no longer new, but aging from then on, until it becomes new again at dark conjunction.

The new moon in creation was new when it was created dark. He is going to create a new heaven, and a new moon will be in it also according to Isaiah. 

Again, a new Moon is no longer new the moment light hits it, and there is a day each month in which the  moon becomes dark, and it is call the day of the new moon or the day of conjunction. 

It is very important to understand that there is a huge difference between the "day" of the new moon and the new Moon itself. The "day of the new Moon" is the day that the moon becomes dark/new, before she starts receiving light from the sun. The light of the sun ages her and shows us how old she is.

Again, the moon is new at conjunction and immediately after that it is aging or growing old. It was new in creation day while dark. Creation day began before the dark moon, and is the Day we are to commemorate, Because in that day heaven and earth was created, including the dark new moon.

 
None of the days after conjunction fits the Hebrew definition of new moon.
There is ONLY ONE DAY each month that is unique enough to fit ALL the qualification of the Hebrew definition of new moon, and that is the day it becomes new IN!
Remember the definition of new moon is “new month”, taken from the Hebrew word which means, “to be new”, “torebuild”, “to renew”.
The new moon cycle does not become new in any of the days following conjunction day, and therefore they do not fit all the Hebrew definition of new moon and therefore none of them can be the scriptural day of the new moon. It’s that simple.
Although all of the days after conjunction possibly fits PART of the definition, namely, the “rebuild” part, but NOT the “new month” part, or the “to be new” part, or the “renew” part, because the moon is hours old by the time the next day’s begins. The new moon cycle does not “become new” in any of the days after conjunction day, nor does it “renew” in any of them.
The only day that fits ALL the Hebrew definition for new moon, is the evening to evening day it becomes new IN. This alone should solve the so-called New Moon Ministry. 
The prayer of Moses in Psalms 90:12 says, “teach us to number our days, that we may apply our hearts unto wisdom”.
Moses understood the importance of numbering days correctly, and I believe Moses prayer was answered.
Our discussion as to when is the FIRST day of the new moon cycle has led us to the question, should we number the FULL day in which the new cycle actually begins, as the first day of the new cycle, or should we number the next day or some time after the cycle has begun, as the first full day of the new cycle? Are we to look for the full day that the cycle is going to become new in, or for the first full day after the day after the new moon cycle actually became new?
When a new baby is born, that whole day is the day of its birth, no matter what time of the day the new baby is born, it is its birthday. Now the day after the day that the new baby is born in, is the first full 24-hour day of the new baby’s life, BUT it is not the day of its birth, or the day in which the new baby became new!
The same is true with the birth of a new moon, after the old moon has died out at conjunction. The new moon cycle becomes new on the day of conjunction, and the next day is the first full 24 hours of the new moon’s rebuilding, BUT it is not the day in which the moon actually became new, and therefore it is not the day of the new moon!
 If the day after conjunction is the first full day of the new moon, was the day before that day, the actual new moon, being as the day after the new moon is the first full day of the new moon? i.e. in order to have the first full day of the new moon, the new moon has to begin the day before, same as the first full day of the new babies the life, the new baby had to be born the day before!
 How can someone say that the first full day of the new moon comes after conjunction without calling the day of conjunction the new moon! Meditate on that for a while. Again, in order to have a first full day “of” the new moon, the new moon has to have begun before the first full day!
But did Moses count the full day of the conjunction, when the moon actually becomes new, as the first day of the month, or the next full day?
 He certainly counted the conjunction day in creation as the first day of the month, or the Sabbath would not have been on the 8th day.
The prayer of Moses should also be our prayer today, because if we do not know the correct method of numbering days, we cannot find the first day of the month and therefore cannot keep any of his appointments that he commands us to keep.
I know of no one who argues against the Hebrew definition of new moon, which means a new month/cycle, taken from the Hebrew word that means “to be new,” to “rebuild” or “renew”. Combine this with the fact that there is one day each month, the cycle of the moon ends, and a “new month/moon begins”, or “becomes new”, on the very same day at conjunction, and you will have the answer.
I guess the key question would be, can the day of this conjunction be scripturally counted as the FIRST day of the new moon/month, even if the conjunction only happens in part of the day?
The Scripture in Ezekiel 46:1 says for us to worship “in” “the day of” the new moon”. The Phrase “in the day of” is 284 times in Scripture and always refers to the day in which something happens [not the day after], and is always the firstday of the happening, and no matter what time of day it happened, it is counted as a whole day.
This mindset is also confirmed in Philo’s writings, where he describes the conjunction and says that “the law honors the end of the moon’s orbit/cycle, at the point that it began to travel, by having called THAT DAY a feast,” [obviously THAT DAY is referring to the whole day of the conjunction even though the conjunction can happen in part of the day.] THE SPECIAL LAWS,11 verse 142 page 581
Notice Philo is saying that the law honors that day [or conjunction day] by calling it [the whole day] a feast!
Philo lived during the time of our Savior and worshiped on the same new moon day. Philo is not saying that the law honors the HOUR of the conjunction, or new cycle, but the DAY of it, or the whole day in which it happens!
Again, remember the question is would the ancients have counted the day as a whole and as the first day?
 When numbering the days of the new moon/month most people do not want to count the day in which the moon actually becomes new [at conjunction], as the FIRST day of the month, because the conjunction can happen in any part of the day and we don’t think of that day as being a whole first day of the new month, and therefore we wait to the next day in order to get over a whole day into the cycle, which said actually over a whole day in the cycle. But was this the mindset of Moses and the ancient Hebrews, and was this the method they used in numbering the FIRST day? That is the question!
#1.  Starting with the Messiah, how did he number days?
#2. Did the Messiah know or understand how to number days correctly?
#3.  Would the Messiah have counted the day in which the conjunction occurred, at the point that the moon actually became new, as the first full day of the month/new moon?
The answer to the above three question is yes, yes, and definitely yes, and it can be proven from the Messiah’s own words.
The Messiah says that he would be in the heart of the earth for three days and three nights, Mathew 12:40 and in John2:19 He said, “destroy this temple, [speaking of the temple of his body], and in three days I will raise it up”.
We know that he died about the ninth hour [3:00 p.m.], on preparation day, and was laid in a nearby tomb shortly before sunset on the fourteenth of Abib, and the Sabbath drew on. The point I am getting at is that He rose again on the third day, which means that the small portion of the day that he was placed in the tomb [shortly before sunset], was counted as a whole day and was also numbered as the FIRST DAY of the count of the three days!
There you have it! The Messiah himself counted the part of the day [that he was buried] as a whole day, and also numbered it as the FIRST day of the three day to resurrection. He understood that any part of the day that something happened in, was numbered as the FIRST day. He would have counted the whole day that the new cycle of the moon occurred, the day which it became new in, as the FIRST whole day of the new cycle!
The same is true with numbering the days of each new month, you may not agree with this method of numbering, but the evidence shows that is the way they done it. We also do it that way today, because when a child is born [no matter what time of day], we count that day as his birthday, and do not wait until the next full day of his life and count it as the first day of his life because his life began the day before.
 When the Messiah was buried, on the FIRST day [of the three days to resurrection], it was the day of the conjunction point of being placed in the tomb, and it happened shortly before sunset, but this FIRST day, which happened near the end of the 24-hour day, was counted as a whole FIRST day and night of the three-day count to the resurrection!
If the people in the New Testament, including the Messiah, understood that the day in which something BEGAN in, was counted as the FIRST day of it, they would count the day in which the new cycle of the moon began in, as the FIRST day of it also!
This is the Hebrew and Greek mindset of how they numbered days during the time of the New Testament, therefore when they read Ezekiel 46:1, they would have counted the whole day in which the moon became new [at conjunction], as the first day of the new moon/month. This is the conjunction point when the old moon dies and the new moon is born, or begins, which happens in the very same day as the conjunction, and the whole day is known as the day of the new moon, in the Hebrew mindset, and this is in harmony with the historical evidence in Philo.
They did not have to wait until the next day after the moon actually became new, at conjunction, to have a whole day of the new moon, because they counted the day in which it happened as a whole day. And besides that, the moon is hours old on the next day after conjunction, and is not counted as the day of the new moon because it is not the day in which the moon became new. It is the first full day “of”, or belonging to the new moon, but is not the new moon.
If it was the FIRST day, at the conjunction point when a child is born, or of the Messiah being placed in the tomb, why would it not be the FIRST day at conjunction point, when the moon is born or becomes new???
Wouldn’t the conjunction point day of the new moon, be counted as a whole day, and also the FIRST day of the new moon/month, same as the conjunction point day that the Messiah was placed in the tomb was counted as a whole day, and also the FIRST day of the three days to resurrection?
The Hebrew method of numbering the days of an event, whether it be the days of a woman’s uncleanness after she has a child, no matter what time of day the child is born, the day is counted as a whole day and it is also the FIRST day of her uncleanness, regardless of the hour the child was born!
If it is a male child, the new baby is to be circumcised the eighth day and the FIRST day [of the eight days] is the day in which the child is born and is counted as a whole day, no matter if it is born one hour before sunset, the day is counted as a whole day and also numbered as the FIRST day of the eight days!
The same is true when the new moon is born. No matter what time of day the moon becomes new in [at conjunction], it is considered the first whole day of the new moon, and is counted as a whole day and it is numbered as the FIRST day of the month, even if the conjunction happened one hour before sunset, it is still counted as the FIRST full day. This is the Hebrew mindset of numbering days, and remember our original question, would they have counted the conjunction day as a whole day, and the first day of the month/new moon?
I can give over 200 more examples, but can anyone give a single example to the contrary, i.e. where anyone numbered the day after an event as the first day of it???
Bottom line is, the Scripture is speaking of the day of the baby and the new moon’s birth, NOT the hour of it. Furthermore, with this true method of numbering days, the day that the moon becomes new in and the Sabbath day, will never collide or happen in the same 24hr day as is the case when counting from the next day after conjunction day does.
The following scholar is one of many who understands the true Hebrew method of numbering days, explains it very well, in his commentary on the sign of Jonah.
 
John Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible
Matthew 12:40 he writes,
“For as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale's belly,
So shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth. ...
To solve this difficulty, and set the matter in a clear light, let it be observed, that the three days and three nights, mean three natural days, consisting of day and night, or twenty four hours, and are what the Greeks callνυχθημερα, "night days"; but the Jews have no other way of expressing them, but as here; and with them it is a well known rule, and used on all occasions, as in thecomputation of their feasts and times of mourning, in the observance of the passover, circumcision, and divers purifications, that מקצת היום ככולו, "a part of a day is as the whole"3:
 
Note that, according to the mindset of the people in the New Testament, they would have understood the commandment of the Almighty in Ezekiel 46:1, which commands us to worship him in the day of the new moon, to mean that the day in which the cycle of the moon became new would be counted as the FIRST whole day of the new cycle!
The above is not that hard to understand. The hard part is breaking the tradition that we were taught. We tend to be motivated by emotions and feelings of what we think, instead of the facts and evidence as to how they numbered. The Scripture teaches thereIS a way that seems right to a man but the end thereof is the ways of death.
A commandment must be specific or it is not any good. There is no specific command to worship on the next day after the new moon has commenced the renewal cycle. There is a commandment to worship him in the day that the moon becomes new, but NOT the next day after.
Jonathan and David were speaking within a 24-hour day, when they said, “tomorrow is the new moon and I will wait here until the third day”.
Notice that the day they were speaking in, was counted as the FIRST DAY of the THREE days, even though the speaking may have began at any hour of the day, it was counted as a whole day. The same is true with the new moon. The moon begins speaking within a day, and the day she is speaking in is also counted as a whole day and is also counted as the FIRST DAY of the month, same as the day in which Jonathan and David began speaking in is the FIRST DAY of the three days!
You can read chapter 6 of Brother Matthew’s article, The Sign of Jonah for more evidence that any part of the day is counted as the whole. The historical and scriptural evidence presented here shows that the whole day in which the moon actually becomes new [at conjunction], no matter what time of day it happens, is numbered as the FIRST day of the month and is counted as a whole day. We must remember that the Scriptures is not speaking of the hour that the moon becomes new, but the day of it!
I have conclusively proven that the whole day in which the Messiah was laid in the tomb [shortly before sunset] was numbered as the first full day of the three days to resurrection, and that the Messiah himself DID NOT wait until the NEXT day after the actual burial and count it as the first day, in order to get a first full 24hr day in the tomb. The day in which he was buried in was counted as a full day and was numbered as the FIRST of the three days.
 The day in which the moon becomes new in is also numbered as the first full day of the 29 days of the new moon/month, and you do not have to wait to the next day to have the first full day of the new moon/month, when using the correct Hebrew method of numbering days. All of this is in addition to the evidence I have already presented!
So when using the correct Hebrew method of numbering days, the answer to the above question number three,
#3.  Would the Messiah have counted the day in which the conjunction occurred, at the point that the moon actually became new, as the first full day of the month/new moon?
The answer to the above question is definitely YES He would. And my prayer is, O YHWH please teach us to number our days correctly, so that we might be at your gate on the right day to keep your apartments, as you commanded us in Ezekiel 46:1.
NEW MOON MISTRY REVEALED
 
On the Hebrew lunar solar calendar, there is a certain solar day each month, in which the lunar month or cycle ends, and a new month begins, and that certain day is the new month day, or new moon day, i.e. THE DAY OF THE NEW MOON.
 
Ezekiel 46:1, “The gate shall be shut the six working days; but on the Sabbath it shall be opened, and in the day of the new moon it shall be opened.” Ezekiel 46:1, no other day can fulfill the day “of” or “belonging to” the rebuilding or new moon, except the one that it takes place in. There are three, separate, categories of days in Ezekiel 46:1 and they cannot collide or touch each other, and still be separate. In other words, a new moon/month rebuilding, cannot begin in one of the six working days or a Sabbath, and still be a separate day!
 
 Nu 10:10 Also in the day of your gladness, and in your solemn days, and in the beginningsof your months, ye shall blow with the trumpets over your burnt offerings, and over the sacrifices of your peace offerings; that they may be to you for a memorial before your God: I amthe LORD your God
 
The above is referring to the beginning of a lunar month, which begins immediately after conjunction, but in the same day of it, every 29/and 1/2 days. It is a fact that the beginningof a lunar month/moon is the beginning of a new lunar cycle, no matter what solar day it occurs in, and that solar day, the one that the beginning of the month falls in, is the day of the new 

 
New Moon day in creation
Let me start by saying that the very first day of the month in creation began at conjunction, not the day after, and the very first evening to evening day after that, was the first day of the week, NOT the new moon!
You can verify this by reading Genesis 1, where we see that “in the “beginning” [the Hebrew word for “beginning” literally means first or chief, and therefore heaven and earth was created on the chief day] “BEFORE” he said let there be light [at conjunction], and the very first evening to evening day that “followed” this chief day, was the first day of the week, not the first of the month.
The Hebrew word for “were” can mean “followed” the first, or chief day, as was the case in first Kings 16:21, where the same Hebrew word for “were” is actually translated as “followed”.
At any rate, the new moon, or first day of the month in creation began at conjunction, and the first hours of the month were in the first day, NOT on the last day of the month, so why would it begin any different today?
The following shows the lunar month/cycle of the moon for the year 2014 of Pope Gregory’s calendar and how the lunar cycle is corrupted away from the way it is found in nature and the way it was in creation. Below is a chart showing the phases of the moon for 2014, and if it don’t show up you can click on the website.http://society6.com/nicholasacewiinikka/2014-phases-of-the-moon-calendar_stretched-canvas?utm_campaign=1029&utm_source=google&utm_medium=cpc&c_aid=DSAs-US&gclid=COma17_1x8ECFWcF7AodsU0ADA#6=28
Notice how today’s calendar corrupts the lunar cycle count. Notice it ignores the lunar month cycle altogether and counts through the conjunction or beginning of the new moon/lunar month.
There is a way to number our days and scripturally find his appointed times using the lunar cycle as it is found in nature, without corrupting even one hour of it!
When we leave the month in tack, as it is found in nature, it will line up perfectly with the Scripture and the first month in creation. This should be important to all of us.
Just as the above calendar breaks up the lunar cycle, we also can break it up by chopping off the beginning hours of the lunar months and add them back at the end of the month, and count them in with the last day of the month instead of the first day of the month. We do this in order to make our calendar work the way we think it should work, but something is wrong when we have alter nature’ s cycle of the month, even by a few hours. I believe a little leaven leavens the whole lump.
I say we should leave the lunar month cycle in tack, [as found in nature] when numbering our calendar days, and let it begin the same way and place it began in creation instead of causing any part of it to be chopped up like Pope Gregory’s calendar.
The lunar month must not be altered in any way, when following the creation calendar!
We cannot have a full lunar month in tack, as it was in creation, if our count causes it to be disfigured in any way. The whole lunar month cycle must stay intact from beginning to end, i.e. from one conjunction to the next.
If our calendar count causes any part of the “beginning” hours of the new lunar month cycle to be chopped off and added back at the end, or last day of the month, instead of leaving it at the beginning, or first day of the month, as was the case in creation. This is a major corruption of the cycle, and we will miss his appointments!
Why should we do this when there is a scriptural way to use the cycle of the sun and moon to number our days, and find the appointments without altering any part of the lunar cycle?
On the very first day of the month in creation, there was a dark moon in the heavens, and Moses counted the beginning hours of that very first day of the month as the beginning of the month, not at the end, or last day of the month!
There may be explanations as to how the beginning hours of the month wind up being counted at the end of the month today, but it will not line up with the approved example of the new moon in creation?
Is it not a corruption to shift, or alter any part of the lunar cycle that is found in nature?
I believe it is truly a corruption of nature’s lunar cycle when we take the first hours of the new month, and add them to the end of the month, in order to make our calendar work.
Again, the lunar calendar will work perfectly, without having to alter the cycle in any way, and all the days of the month will mimic, or be a carbon copy of the first month of the year in creation. I feel better when I actually see the way I count my month appeared in Scripture.
All the days of the month in creation began at evening except one, and that is the day of the new moon!
Even today, the new lunar month still does not begin at evening. The day of the lunar months/rebuilding does begin at evening, but not the lunar cycle/month itself.
In creation the new moon did not have a specific evening to evening day to begin it, as the other days of the month did. This along distinguishes the day of the new moon, making it unique from all the other days of the month. This pattern is still followed today, when we leave the lunar cycle in tack, as nature intended it.
 In other words, even today, all the days “after” the lunar month cycle begins, still begins at evening, and the beginning of the new moon cycle itself still does not began at evening, when we leave the lunar cycle in tack, which is a perfect example and carbon copy of the creation month.
Even today, the renewing of the cycle, after the old one ends, does not begin at evening, same as there was no evening to begin the new moon day cycle in in creation.
This is why I continually point out the fact that “the DAY of the new moon” is entirely different than the new moon/renewing itself. The day of the new moon does begin at evening, but the new moon/new month does notbegin at evening, it begins immediately after conjunction, no matter what time of day the conjunction happens!
New moon means to re –build, specifically referring to the lunar cycle, and the “solar day” in which this happens “in”, is the day of the rebuilding/new moon, it’s that simple, see Ezekiel 46:1.
At any rate we do not have to use a calendar that corrupts even one hour of the lunar cycle that is found in nature, in order to keep his appointments, and I like that.
The day of the dark new moon commemorates creation, when everything was dark, and is still the chief day, or head of the month, and we should not decapitate the head of his month, in order to make our calendar work the way we think it should work.
The new moon/month is like a beautiful lady, and we should not cut the top of her head off and place it at her feet.
The bottom line is that we can locate his appointed times each month by using the cycle of the moon, and leaving it in tack [Not changing it in any way].
We know he appointed the moon for appointments, and therefore all we have to do is watch the cycle of the moon [instead of changing it] and then follow his instructions as to which days [of the cycle] to worship him on, without altering the cycle of the moon in anyway.
He teaches us to worship him “in” the day of the rebuilding [new moon, or beginning of the new month, Numbers 10:10], and each 7th day after six work days. This simple command can be carried out without adding anything to the command or altering the lunar month in any way.
I acknowledge that the next day after the moon becomes new in, or begins to rebuild in, is the first full day of, or belonging to, the new moon/month, but I also acknowledge it is not the day of the new moon/new re – building, because the moon is already building when that day begins!
The simple command is to worship him “in” the day of the new moon, not the next full day after it.
When we do not add to the command, we do not have to alter the lunar cycle by taking away the “beginning hours” of the month, and placing them on the last day of the month, in order to make our calendar work. The calendar works fine without doing this. 
NEW MOON DAY
New moon means "to rebuild".
I will read Ezekiel 46, and supply new rebuilding for New Moon.

"Thus saith THE Almighty, we are to worship him "on" THE Sabbath, and "in" THE day of the new rebuilding".

Notice: The Sabbath "day" must begin before the worship that occurs "on" it!

Notice also, the New rebuilding "day" must also begin "before" the worship and the rebuilding that occurs on it!

This can only be referring to the very special day of conjunction, because no other day will fit the Hebrew definition for "new" "re"- building!

The Moon is "building" on every day after conjunction, but does not "re"- build in any of them!

There is nothing unique happening on any of the days after conjunction because they all begin and end in an "already building" new moon/month, which began "re" - building after conjunction on the day before, when the old moon/month ended, and the new one began.
 
 It is very simple to find the day of the new moon. All one has to do is find out what day the old moon ends in and by default a new moon will automatically begin simultaneously in that same day, and therefore that day is the day of the new moon. It’s that simple!
In Ezekiel 46:1 – 2, the Almighty commands us to worship him IN the day OF the new moon. The Hebrew definition of new moon is “new month”. A new month begins in the selfsame day that the old one ends in, and as I stated above, that is the day of the new moon/month.
In Numbers 10:10, the Almighty says to blow the trumpet in the day of your gladness, and in the BEGINNINGS of your months! 
The day after the month begins, IS NOT the beginning of the month. The day after the day of the new moon is not the day of the new moon!
Again, the beginning of the month is in the day in which the old month ends and a new one begins, this is an absolute that cannot be intelligently argued against.
 People error when the rush past the simple command to worship IN the day OF the new moon, and allow their emotions and feelings to dictate something contrary to what the command actually says. We must not add to or take away from the commandment, but stay with the evidence instead of emotions and feelings, because there is a way that seems right to a man, but it is not right.
Our opinions and speculations are worthless, UNLESS WE CAN PROVE THEM, because Scripture teaches us to prove all things, and if we cannot conclusively prove something there is no way for us to know for sure that it is right, even though we feel like it is right.
Some things are hidden in simplicity, and they are so simple that we do not see them because we are looking for something more complicated. The Almighty does not give us a command to do something that can be interpreted more than one way, or how else can he judge us?
Again, the Hebrew definition of new moon is “new month”, and all we have to do is find out what day the old month ends in and the new one begins in, and there is nothing else for us to even consider.
 There is a certain 24hr day each month that the moon “becomes new”, and this is the day of the new moon. This is what the Scripture is talking about when it says to worship “in” the day “of” the new moon, i.e. in the day in which it becomes new. There is nothing else to even consider.
 There is ONLY ONE day each month in which the moon “become new” in, and that is the 24hr day in which it actually becomes new when the old moon dies out and the new moon is born at conjunction! This is the day of the new moon and everyone [who is interested] has ways of knowing in advance, which day it happens in. There is nothing else to even consider, and people should not make a mystery out of this simple command in Ezekiel 46:1.
 The Scripture is talking about the cycle of the moon itself, and the 24-hour day in which it becomes new. The Hebrew definition of new moon” is to “be new” or to rebuild. Do people not understand it is talking about the cycle of the moon and the day in which it becomes new? Philo, of the tribe of Levi, who lived during the time of our Savior, certainly did. Philo says that “the law honors the day in which the orbit of the moon ends and the new one begins, by calling that day a “feast”.
 Again, ONLY ONE day can fit the command to worship “in” the day of the new moon, and that is the day in which it becomes new in. The same is true when it says, “on “the” Sabbath and in “the” day of the new moon, Ezekiel 46:1. The Sabbath is one singular day and so is the new moon.
 Ask yourself these questions, what is meant by “new” and when does the moon “become new”? Is the new moon day the day in which it becomes new in? Is the Scripture speaking of the day in which the new moon becomes new in, or another day sometime after that day? Is there something special about the day in which the old moon ends and the new one begins? Is it the only day in which this special astronomical event happens?
 If he had asked us to worship the in the day of the full moon instead of in the day of the new moon, could we understand that the day in which the moon becomes astronomically full [at full moon conjunction] is the day of the full moon?


Think about this
 
Conclusion
 
If the Almighty had commanded us to worship "in the day of" the full moon, instead of "in the day of" the new moon, Ezekiel 46:1, would we still be having a discussion as to when is the full moon?
 
There is only one possible day in which the moon becomes full in, and that is in the day that the full moon conjunction happens BECAUSE from that moment forward, the moon is going down or declining from its fullness, minute by minute, and therefore any day after full moon conjunction day, IS NOT in the day of the full moon! Remember a law or commandment is of no force if it has more than one possible interpretation.
 
The same logic and command applies to the phrase "in the day of the new moon" BECAUSE there is only one possible day in which the moon "becomes new" in, and that is in the day of conjunction, and from that moment forward, the moon ages minute by minute, and therefore any day "after" the moon becomes new in, is not in the day of the new moon, because it is hours old by then!
 
 
When people say that they take the next day after conjunction as the first full 24-hour day of the new moon, this begs the question, when is the new moon???
 
If you are taking the first complete day after it [the day in which the moon became new], in order to have a complete day in it, didn’t the new moon began in the day before the first complete day???
 
When someone says that they take the next day after conjunction, as the first full day, in reality, they are calling the day before, the day in which the moon actually became new, the new moon!
 
How can you say that you take the first complete day of the new month without acknowledging the new month began in the day before the first complete day???
 
Numbers 10:10 teaches that the new moon is in the beginning of the month, in which you blow the silver trumpets, not the next complete day. See also Ezekiel 46:2.
 
Furthermore the definition of new moon is “to be new” NOT the next complete day. The next complete day after the moon became new, is not the day that the moon became new. It is the first 24-hour full day of the rebuilding, but it is not the day of the new moon, in which the month begins. All conjunction plus doctrines is unscriptural.
 
 
The new moon day [conjunction day] is not counted when counting out the weeks, same as was the case in creation.
 
We count the day in which the moon becomes new [at conjunction] as the first day of the new moon. Others count the day in which the moon becomes new [at conjunction] as the 30th day of the month instead of the first, they count it as a Sabbath. This is inconsistent with Scripture and nature.
 
 How can the day in which the new beginning of the cycle occurs, be counted as the last day of the cycle when the Scripture clearly refers to the new moon [to be new] as the first day of the month???
 
We know that in the day in which the conjunction occurs, an old cycle/month ends and a new cycle/month begins simultaneously, but the Scripture does not stress the day in which the old cycle ends, but the day in which the new one begins, see Ezekiel 46:1 and Numbers 10:10. When you count the day of conjunction as the 30th day instead of the 1st, you are stressing the end of the cycle instead of the beginning, contrary to scripture, see Ezekiel 46:1.
 
 


 

 





 
 
My comments in red. I have been so busy looking at the commandment
itself, in Ezekiel 46:1-3, which says,
"Eze 46:1 Thus saith the Lord GOD; The gate of the inner court
that looketh toward the east shall be shut the six working days;
but on the sabbath it shall be opened, and in the day of the new
moon it shall be opened.
 
Eze 46:3 Likewise the people of the land shall worship at the
door of this gate before the LORD in the sabbaths and in the
new moons.” I haven’t done much Historical research, other than
Philo, to see how the ancients understood when the new moon day
was.
 
The flowing Historical info shows that as far back as 300 BC,
conjunction is called the new moon, which was before the destruction
of the Temple, Lamentations 2:6.
 
 Both Berosus, and Aristarchus of Samos, who lived BEFORE Julius
Cesar, agree conjunction is called the new moon, or rebuilding day,
same as Philo, Ezekiel, and even scientist today. They differ in whether
the moon has its own light or not, but otherwise are in agreement that
conjunction day is also new moon day, read the following. So for I
haven’t found anything, during Temple times and backwards, where
the new moon day was known as anything but conjunction!
 
After the destruction of the Temple, when the Almighty caused the
feast days and Sabbaths to be forgotten, lamentation 2:6, we see a lot
of the conjunction plus doctrines, such as conjunction plus seeing a
sliver, conjunction plus next evening to evening etc., the following
shows how it was actually understood by the Ancients.
 
Vitruvius Pollio, The Ten Books on Architecture
(ed. Morris Hicky Morgan) book 9, chapter 2: ... is
consequently hidden and invisible. When she is thus
in conjunction with the sun, she is called the new moon.
 
 
 Marcus Vitruvius Pollio (born c. 80–70 BC, died after c. 15 BC),
commonly known as Vitruvius, was a Roman author, architect, and
engineer during the 1st century BC perhaps best known for his multi-
volume work entitled
De Architectura. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vitruvius#Dewatering_machines
 

Here’s what Vitruvius writes,
 
 CHAPTER II: THE PHASES OF THE MOON

1. ACCORDING to the teaching of Berosus, who came from the state, or rather nation, of
the Chaldees, and was the pioneer of Chaldean learning in Asia, the moon is a ball, one half
luminous and the rest of a blue colour. When, in the course of her orbit, she has passed below
the disc of the sun, she is attracted by his rays and great heat, and turns thither her luminous
side, on account of the sympathy between light and light. Being thus summoned by the sun's
disc and facing upward, her lower half, as it is not luminous, is invisible on account of its likeness
to the air. When she is perpendicular to the sun's rays, all her light is confined to her upper surface,
and she is then called the new moon.
2. As she moves on, passing by to the east, the effect of the sun upon her relaxes, and the outer
edge of the luminous side sheds its light upon the earth in an exceedingly thin line. This is called
the second day of the moon. Day by day she is further relieved and turns, and thus are numbered
the third, fourth, and following days. On the seventh day, the sun being in the west and the moon
in the middle of the firmament between the east and west, she is half the extent of the firmament
distant from the sun, and therefore half of the luminous side is turned toward the earth. But when
the sun and moon are separated by the entire extent of the firmament, and the moon is in the east
with the sun over against her in the west, she is completely relieved by her still greater distance
from his rays, and so, on the fourteenth day, she is at the full, and her entire disc emits its light.
On the succeeding days, up to the end of the month, she wanes daily as she turns in her course,
being recalled by the sun until she comes under his disc and rays, thus completing the count of the
days of the month.
3. But Aristarchus of Samos, a mathematician of great powers, has left a different explanation in
his teaching on this subject, as I shall now set forth. It is no secret that the moon has no light of
her own, but is, as it were, a mirror, receiving brightness from the influence of the sun. Of all the
seven stars, the moon traverses the shortest orbit, and her course is nearest to the earth. Hence
in every month, on the day before she gets past the sun, she is under his disc and rays, and is
consequently hidden and invisible. When she is thus in conjunction with the sun, she is called the
new moon. On the next day, reckoned as her second, she gets past the sun and shows the thin
edge of her sphere. Three days away from the sun, she waxes and grows brighter. Removing further
every day till she reaches the seventh, when her distance from the sun at his setting is about one
half the extent of the firmament, one half of her is luminous: that is, the half which faces toward the
sun is lighted up by him.
4. On the fourteenth day, being diametrically across the whole extent of the firmament from the sun,
she is at her full and rises when the sun is setting. For, as she takes her place over against him and
distant the whole extent of the firmament, she thus receives the light from the sun throughout her
entire orb. On the seventeenth day, at sunrise, she is inclining to the west. On the twenty-second
day, after sunrise, the moon is about mid-heaven; hence, the side exposed to the sun is bright and
the rest dark. Continuing thus her daily course, she passes under the rays of the sun on about the
twenty-eighth day, and so completes the account of the month.
I will next explain how the sun, passing through a different sign each month, causes the days and
hours to increase and diminish in length.

Vitruvius: The Ten Books on Architecture. Vitruvius. Morris Hicky Morgan. Cambridge: Harvard
University Press. London: Humphrey Milford. Oxford University Press. 1914.
The National Endowment for the Humanities provided support for entering this text.
 
 POEM
 
I am the day

On the very first day of the new month in creation the sun moon and earth were in line this is called
conjunction day the beginning of time, this is me, the day of the new moon when everything is in line
just like in creation at the beginning of time

I am the day of the new Moon the beginning of time I commemorate the creation when the sun moon
and earth were all in a perfect line. 

No other day can claim this honor, it was bestowed on me by the creator himself and
In no other day do the planets align therefore no other day commemorates the beginning of time

Even nature itself shows that I am chief day and the beginning of time for in no other day do
the planets align 

I truly am a very special day and it is the creator that made it that way. 

It was in me that heaven and earth were created, and in no other day is this event related, for it was
in me alone the heavens were created and it is from me that even the Sabbaths are dated, Yes I am
the day of the new moon and I deserve honor 

I am the chief day and no other day can take my place because it was in me he began the race. 

Although The sun is a little faster than the moon, one day each month they will come together soon
and it is in me the race begins anew for it is  only in me the planets know what to do. 

No other day can take my place for none of them actually begin the race. In none of them does the
month re-new and therefore do not fit the definition of new Moon in the Hebrew.

 It is only in me the race begins and ends and no other day is given this honor by the creator of days and
we must acknowledge him in all of our ways

Yes, the moon catches up one day each month they get together in me again same as in creation when time
began

The race always begins in me , and that's what makes me special you see, and no other day can take my
place for in me is the beginning of the race

Yes I am a very special day no matter what one might say, all creation began in me and that is why I am
special you see

I am not the new moon, It is a New lunar cycle, but I am the solar day of the New Moon because it begins
in me and that is why I'm special you see

Please don't try to take away the honor he bestowed upon me because I commemorate creation that's the
way it was meant to be

Yes, I am the chief day when the sun moon and earth align just like in creation at the beginning of time

Time begins in no other day and it was The Almighty that made it that way it was his doings and not
our own and I suggest we leave it alone

Yes, I, the new Moon am a very special day I am not like any of the other days of the month for it is in
me one lunar month ends and a new one begins

It is In me when each month becomes new, it also re-builds and re-news in me each and every month
and in me even though all the other days of the month the moon builds, they do not re-build in any of them.

In me the new Moon begins and that's why I am called the day of the new Moon

I am a unique day, unlike all the other days of the month, I commemorate creation when everything was
lined up ready to go

It was dark when I was made, In the beginning when the foundation was laid.

I began and was brought forth before the conjunction of light I still begin before the conjunction each  
month

Again, it is in me that the sun moon and earth aline and in me was the beginning of time

In me each month a commemoration of creation is made because It was in me that the foundations was
laid, I truly am the chief day, And nothing anyone might say can take that away.

No other day of the month is like me , where one month ends and another begins and that is why I am unique
you see, there's no other day of the month like me 

Say what you will but no other day can fit the bill, for in me the month becomes new, In me the month
begins to renew I am a carbon copy of the new Moon day in creation when the Sun moon and Earth were
in line.

It was in me that the trumpets begin to be blown and the angels shouted as he stretch forth the heavens
alone.

The month does not begin in any other day, that is a fact, so what else can I say?
 
From Philo
Philo uses inclusive reckoning when counting from new moon to the end of a 30 day month.
We will see from the following, that he is actually calling the conjunction day, the new moon, and the first
day of the 30 day month.
ON DREAMS,11. [257] page 559 of the FH Colson translation of Philo, Philo states that the word “from”
has two meanings, one where the thing fromwhich what we are describing starts isincluded, the other
where it is excluded.
 For when we say that there are 12 hours from early morning to evening, or30 days from new moon to
the end of the month, we take into our reckoningthe first hours in the former case and the new moon
itself in the later.”
Notice, in order to have 30 days in a lunar month, which is from oneconjunction to the next, the day of
the first the first conjunction [which he calls new moon] must be included in the count, as one whole
day of the 30 day month. And Philo calls “it” [the day of conjunction] the new moon!
He says that one of the meanings of the word “from” is where thing from which what we are describing
starts isincluded, which is a new rebuilding moon cycle at conjunction.
Inclusive Reckoning counting
The conclusion of this whole debate depends on how the ancients numbered the days. It doesn’t matter
what we think concerning counting, but whether or notthey counted the day of the “new” new moon
cycle, as the first day of the rebuilding/new moon cycle, or the next day after the new rebuilding cycle
 had already begun.
It is very easy to prove [by many Scriptures] that the common mode of counting employed in the Bible
is shown to have been inclusive reckoning, that is, counting both the first and the last unit of time
in calculating an interval.
The Messiah said he would rise thethird day, and was placed in the tomb late on the, 14th, before the day
ended, and he numbered that whole day of the 14th, as the first day to the resurrection on the third day.
Another example in first Samuel 20: shows that the partial day in which Jonathan and David were speaking
in, was counted as a whole day, and included in the count to thethird day.
ALL the days of Noah were 950 years”. Genesis 9:29, which included the day of his birth and his death.
This method was also used generally by other ancient nations, as is shown unmistakably by source documents
. An Egyptian inscription recording the death of a priestess on the 4th day of the 12th month relates that
her successor arrived on the 15th, “when 12 days had elapsed.” This shows that they counted or included
the day of her death in with the 12 days. This unmistakably showsinclusive counting [which includes the
day that something happened in] was observed, not only by Hebrews, but by other ancient nations as well.
Greeks also followed the sameinclusive method, same as people today. If the Scripture had said to number
so many days, and used the phrase “in the day of the old moon’s end”, instead of in the day of the newmoon”,
that day would be included with the so many days, same as the new moon, which Scripture does mention, is
included with the number of days of the month.
Here are two websites which gives many Scriptures and other evidence in addition to the above.http://www
.wednesdaycrucifixion.com/inclusive-reckoning.html and
http://www.askelm.com/news/n010501.htm
 
What does all this mean? It means that the ancients counted the day in which the new moon began to rebuild
in, as the first day of the 29½ days of the month. And so should we.
 
 It also means that this ends the debate for those who can accept this undeniable fact, regardless of what they
think,
because it shows
 that the ancients included [inclusive reckoning] the day in which the new moon cycle actually becomes
new in, or
begins to rebuild “IN”, as the first day of the new moon/month, NOT the next day! This is an absolute!
 
All this is in perfect harmony with Ezekiel 46:1, where He says, for us to worship him “IN” the day, [not
the hour] of the new moon rebuilding, which means the new moon day had to begin before the new
moon/rebuilding!
 
Remember, it does not matter what we think, but what they thought! We must go by the facts
and evidence and not by our emotions.
Ps. ALL Scholars are in agreement that this is the way they counted!
 
 Brother Arnold www.lunarsabbath.info Philo
Philo uses inclusive reckoning when counting from new moon to the end of a 30 day month.
We will see from the following, that he is actually calling the conjunction day, the new moon, and
the first day of the 30 day month.
ON DREAMS,11. [257] page 559 of the FH Colson translation of Philo, Philo states that the word
“from” has two meanings, one where the thing fromwhich what we are describing starts 
isincluded, the other where it is excluded.
 For when we say that there are 12 hours from early morning to evening, or30 days from new
moon to the end of the month, we take into our reckoningthe first hours in the former case and
the new moon itself in the later.”
Notice, in order to have 30 days in a lunar month, which is from oneconjunction to the next, the
day of the first the first conjunction [which he calls new moon] must be included in the count, as
one whole day of the 30 day month. And Philo calls “it” [the day of conjunction] the new moon!
He says that one of the meanings of the word “from” is where thing from which what we are 
describing starts isincluded, which is a new rebuilding moon cycle at conjunction.
 
 
 Brother Arnold www.lunarsabbath.info
 
 
-----Original Message-----
From: Brother Arnold <yhwhpeople@aol.com>
To: skyrider262 <skyrider262@juno.com>
Sent: Wed, Oct 1, 2014 8:26 am

Inclusive Reckoning counting
The conclusion of this whole debate depends on how the ancients numbered the days. It doesn’t
matter what we think concerning counting, but whether or notthey counted the day of the “new
” new moon cycle, as the first day of the rebuilding/new moon cycle, or the next day after the
new rebuilding cycle had already begun.
It is very easy to prove [by many Scriptures] that the common mode of counting employed in
the Bible is shown to have been inclusive reckoning, that is, counting both the first and the last
unit of time in calculating an interval.
The Messiah said he would rise thethird day, and was placed in the tomb late on the, 14th, before
the day ended, and he numbered that whole day of the 14th, as the first day to the resurrection on
the third day. Another example in first Samuel 20: shows that the partial day in which Jonathan and
David were speaking in, was counted as a whole day, and included in the count to thethird day.
ALL the days of Noah were 950 years”. Genesis 9:29, which included the day of his birth and his death.
This method was also used generally by other ancient nations, as is shown unmistakably by source
documents. An Egyptian inscription recording the death of a priestess on the 4th day of the
12th month relates that her successor arrived on the 15th, “when 12 days had elapsed.” This
shows that they counted or included the day of her death in with the 12 days. This unmistakably
showsinclusive counting [which includes the day that something happened in] was observed,
not only by Hebrews, but by other ancient nations as well.
Greeks also followed the sameinclusive method, same as people today. If the Scripture had
said to number so many days, and used the phrase “in the day of the old moon’s end”, instead
of in the day of the newmoon”, that day would be included with the so many days, same as the new
moon, which Scripture does mention, is included with the number of days of the month.
Here are two websites which gives many Scriptures and other evidence in addition to the above.http
://www.wednesdaycrucifixion.com/inclusive-reckoning.html and
http://www.askelm.com/news/n010501.htm
 
What does all this mean? It means that the ancients counted the day in which the new moon began
to rebuild in, as the first day of the 29½ days of the month. And so should we.
 
 It also means that this ends the debate for those who can accept this undeniable fact, regardless
of what they think, because it shows
 that the ancients included [inclusive reckoning] the day in which the new moon cycle actually
becomes new in, or begins to rebuild “IN”, as the first day of the new moon/month, NOT the next
day! This is an absolute!
 
All this is in perfect harmony with Ezekiel 46:1, where He says, for us to worship him “IN” the day
, [not the hour] of the new moon rebuilding, which means the new moon day had to begin before
the new moon/rebuilding!
 
Remember, it does not matter what we think, but what they thought! We must go by the facts and
evidence and not by our emotions.
Ps. ALL Scholars are in agreement that this is the way they counted!
 
 Brother Arnold www.lunarsabbath.info
   
 

 Enter s

THE WEEKLY SABBATH IS NOT SATURDAY OR SUNDAY!      

The true weekly Sabbaths are determined by the phases of the moon, not a carnal count of one through seven. (Genesis 1:14 and Psalms 104:19 compared to Leviticus 23:2-3). Let's take a look at the creation Sabbath also known as Lunar Sabbaths.  

The Lunar Sabbath is one of the most provable doctrines found in scripture and one of the hardest to get people to take an honest look at. Lunar Sabbaths not only can be conclusively proven from Scripture, but Mathematically, Historically, Scientifically, and from Nature itself.  

The very first time the word Sabbath is mentioned in scripture is when YHWH made it known to Moses in Exodus 16. It was connected to the moon on the 22nd, which by default causes the 8th, 15th, and 29th to also be Sabbaths. (Day of the month, not date.)   

The evidence provided here will prove that the true weekly seventh day Sabbath of the scriptures is always observed on the same days of the Moon each month, and that is on the 8th, 15th, 22nd, and 29th day. The author will pay $10,000 to anyone who can pinpoint a weekly Sabbath on any other day than by the moon.

We have pinpointed (in Scripture), seventy-two (72), weekly Sabbath days, observed by holy men of old, and everyone of them is on either the 8th, 15th, 22nd, or 29th day of the Moon, without exception. The reason is that they never counted the New Moon worship day when counting out the six workdays.       
  In examining the evidence set forth in this work, you will see the true Sabbath comes after the six workdays of the week, and the New Moon worship day is not one of the six ordinary work days, no more than the Sabbath day is. A new week always began after the New moon worship day or the weekly Sabbath worship day; they are both worship days, and not one of the six work days. 
 Ezekiel 46:1 says, "Thus saith YHWH; The gate of the inner court that looketh toward the east shall be "shut" the "six working days;" but on the "Sabbath" it shall be opened, "and" in the day of the "new moon" it shall be opened.   YHWH describes 3 categories of days, BOTH New moon and Sabbaths, as different than ordinary work days; they are BOTH worship days, and the 1st day of the week begins after the New moon or Sabbath worship day. 
 Isaiah 66:23 "...that from one New moon to another, and from one sabbath to another, shall all flesh come and worship before me, saith YHWH." This and the following explains why the Sabbath days written in the scriptures are always on the 8th, 15th, 22nd, and 29th of the month, without exception. It is exciting to read the examples set forth in this work based on the oldest history book in the world, and the only inspired one. 
 Please click on the article "The Only Saving Name!" The calendar is important but the NAME More So!
 It might pay every-one to find out what a Scriptural 7th day is, even though you might think you know. Go to http://lunarsabbath.info/id19.html or copy and paste links on Definition of 7th day at the very bottom of this page.
 
 An additional thought is the fact that during Biblical times of old, there existed no such calendar as the Gregorian Calendar that hangs on your wall today! They used  Lunar cycles for all of their day/date keeping! The Lunar cycle has NEVER changed! (Think carefully about this fact.) anyone  can call me at 678 300 8676 or  E-mail  Yhwhpeople@aol.com  
 Please click on the article "The Only Saving Name!" The calendar is important but the NAME More So!
 
Live broad at http://wwcr.gsradio.net:3863/index.html?sid=1 at 7:30 Pm est Sat and 7:00 Pm est Sun and click on arrow at bottom
 
Also click on  http://www.wwcr.com/listen.html and click under # 1 for for broadcast Tuesday at 7:00 pm est and under # 2 for Thursday broadcast at 4:00 pm
 

The True Weekly Sabbath is NOT Saturday or Sunday! 
 
 An additional thought is the fact that during Biblical times of old, there existed no such calendar as the Gregorian Calendar that hangs on your wall today! They used  Lunar cycles for all of their day/date keeping! The Lunar cycle has NEVER changed! (Think carefully about this fact.) anyone  can call me at 678 300 8676 or  E-mail  Yhwhpeople@aol.com  
 Please click on the article "The Only Saving Name!" The calendar is important but the NAME More So!
 
Live broad at http://wwcr.gsradio.net:3863/index.html?sid=1 at 7:30 Pm Sat and 7:00 Pm Sun and click on arrow at bottom.
 
Also for Tuesday broadcast at 7:00 pm est click  http://www.wwcr.com/listen.html and then click under # 1 and for Thursday at 4:00 pm est click under # 2

       

Both LORD and CHRIST

(This is saying that he is BOTH YHWH and Christ (anointed Son).

It would not make sense to me if he is saying that He made him "both" "master" and Christ, because they already knew that Christ is master, but they didn't know that he was "both" YHWH and Christ. See Acts 2:36, which teaches that when they heard that he was "both" YHWH "and" Christ, they immediately asked what must they do, and the reply was to repent and be baptized in "one" "singular" name, (Not three)  which is the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, which is in obedience to the command in Matthew 28:19.)

He is both LORD and Christ and the Scripture teaches that "both" poured out the Holy Spirit.

Mark 1:8 KJVS
[8] "I indeed have baptized you with water: but "he" (The Messiah) shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost."

Acts 2:33  "Therefore being by the right hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, "he" hath shed/poured forth this, which ye now see and hear."

Then after explaining that the Son poured out the Holy Spirit in verse 36, Peter explains that "he" (singular) is both LORD and Christ, or God and man.

Joel 2:27-28 "And ye shall know that "I am in the midst of Israel", and that "I am the LORD (YHWH) your God", and none else: and my people shall "never be ashamed."
[28] "And it shall come to pass afterward, that "I" will pour out my spirit" upon all flesh; and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, your old men shall dream dreams, your young men shall see visions:"

Notice Joel 2:28 says that God will pour out His spirit, and Acts 2:33 teaches the Son poured it out, and Mark 1:8 teaches the Son will baptize with the Holy Spirit. (Who poured it out?)

John 14:16-18,25-26,28 KJVS
[16] And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you "another Comforter", that he may abide with you for ever; [17] Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for "he dwelleth with you", and "shall be in you". (Who dwelleth with them, and shall be in them?) [18] I will not leave you comfortless: "I" will come to you" (is the Messiah going to come to them in another  form, as the Holy Spirit?)... [25] These things have I spoken unto you, being "yet present with you". [26] But the "Comforter", which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in "my name", he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you... [28] Ye have heard how I said unto you, "I" go away", and "come again" unto you. If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because I said, "I go unto the Father": for my Father is greater than I." (Is he going back to the Spirit/Father, who is greater than the Son/flesh, and then coming back as the comforter, Who can then get in everyone?)

Notice it appears that the Son is going away and is coming back to them in a different manifestations or form.

Another comforter, is coming, which is greater than himself as the Son, and unless he goes away the Comforter will not come.

John 16:7 KJVS
[7] Nevertheless I tell you the truth; It is expedient for you that I go away: for "if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you"; but if I depart, I will send him unto you."

John 2:19,21 "Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple, and in three days "I" will raise it up... [21] But he spake of the temple of his body."

(this is obviously the Father speaking of the Son, or His undefiled temple that he is livening in, A temple made without hands.)

Isaiah 9:6 describes him as "both" God and man, or Father and Son.

Isaiah 9:6 "For unto us a child is born, unto us a "son is given": and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, "The mighty God", "The everlasting Father", The Prince of Peace."

God "in" Christ.

2 Corinthians 5:19 "To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation."

When you see the Son, you see the Father, because the fullness of the Father is in the Son.

John 14:7-10 "If ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also: and "from henceforth ye know him, and "have seen" him". [8] Philip saith unto him, Lord, shew us the Father, and it sufficeth us. [9] Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known "me", Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then , Shew us the Father? [10] Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but "the Father that dwelleth in me", he doeth the works."

(These verses needs no explanation, the Father is in his Son, therefore he is "both" God and man.)

(Him being "both" God and man, is a great Mystery, but revealed in these last days.)

1 Timothy 3:16 "And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: "God was manifest in the flesh", justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory."

This is the exact same thing that John spoke of in John 1:1-14.

John 1:1,14 "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God (YHWH), and "the Word was God (YHWH)"... [14] And the "Word (YHWH) was made flesh", and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth."

(God is his word and was made flesh and dwelt among us, just like the Prophets said he would.)

Isaiah 35:4-6 "Say to them that are of a fearful heart, Be strong, fear not: behold, "your God will come" with vengeance, even God with a recompence; "he" will come and save you. [5] "Then" the eyes of the blind shall be opened", and "the ears of the deaf shall be unstopped". [6] Then shall the lame man leap as an hart, and the tongue of the dumb sing: for in the wilderness shall waters break out, and streams in the desert."

(This is obviously saying that when "God comes", the lame will walk, blind eyes will be opened, etc. and when John heard in the prison, that the Messiah was doing these works, he sent two of his disciples to ask the question "are you Him", that is to come, or do we look for another? The answer was obviously, yes, the lame walk, the blind see, etc. I am God in my Son, doing these works, don't look for another, I am "both" God and man. See Matthew 11:2-6.)

Luke 7:16 "And there came a fear on all: and they glorified God, saying, That a great prophet is risen up among us; and, That "God hath visited his people."

(The anti-Christ spirit can not confess that Yahweh is come in the flesh.)

1 John 4:2-3 "Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus (YHWH) Christ is come in the flesh is of God: [3] And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus (YHWH) Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world."

2 John 1:7,9 "For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus (YHWH) Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist. [9] Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath "both" the Father and the Son."

(if you believe in the true doctrine of Christ, you have "both", the Father and the Son.)

1 John 5:20 "And we know that the Son of God is come, and hath given us an understanding, that we may know him that is true, and we are in him that is true, even in his Son Jesus Christ. This is the "true God", and eternal life."

(The one true God, and Eternal life dwells in His Son.)

When it says that the world was made by him etc. they are speaking of him as God Almighty in the flesh of His Son.

When they wrote letters to the church and said "greetings from God the father and the master Messiah Christ, they could be referring to him, Messiah (singular), because they understood Him to be BOTH.

Thomas actually calls him God.

John 20:28 KJVS
[28] And Thomas answered and said unto him, My Lord and my God.
Strong's Definition of "manifest" in flesh 
From G5318; to render apparent (literally or figuratively): - appear manifestly declare (make) manifest (forth) shew (self).
Thayer's Definition

1. to make manifest or visible or known what has been hidden or unknown, to manifest, whether by words, or deeds, or in any other way
   1. make actual and visible, realised
   2. to make known by teaching
   3. to become manifest, be made known
   4. of a person
      1. expose to view, make manifest, to show one's self, appear
   5. to become known, to be plainly recognised, thoroughly understood
      1. who and what one is

Both Lord and Christ is also seen in Zachariah 14:4 compared with Revelations 14:1, Zachariah teaches us that YHWH himself stands on Mount Zion and Revelations teaches us the Lamb is the one standing on Mount Zion, which shows he is "both", just like he is "both" the root and offspring of David!

In other words he was David's creator and he was David's descendent, making him "both" LORD and Christ!

Revelation 22:6,16, [6] "And he said unto me, These sayings are faithful and true: and "the Lord God of the holy prophets sent his angel" to shew unto his servants the things which must shortly be done.... [16] "I" Jesus (YHWH) have sent "mine angel" to testify unto you these things in the churches. "I" (YHWH) am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star."

Notice verse 6 teaches Yahweh the father, God of the Holy prophets, "sent his angel", and then in verse 16 he repeats again, that he sent his angel, and adds that He is "both" the Root and offspring of David.

This shows that the name Yahweh belongs in verse 16, where we see the name Jesus!

The name Jesus is only there because of the tradition not to say the name Yahweh, and  therefore hides the fact that it is Yahweh himself that is "both" the Root and offspring of David. Same as John 1:1 shows that He is both God and his Word.

Revelations 5:5 teaches the Root of David is the Lion of Judah that prevailed to open the book, and verses 6 and 9 teaches  the Lamb opened the book!

This teaches us that he is not only "both" the Root and offspring of David, but is also "both" the Lion, and the Lamb, that opened the book. 

Yahweh the Father, the powerful Lion, used His humble Lamb, Yahweh the Son, to open the book and lose the seals thereof, Because he is both God and man, or Father and Son, or LORD and Christ.

When they substituted the name Yahweh for name Joshua, it confuses us who must confess that Yahweh is come in the flesh. Why confess that the Son is come in the flesh, when the Son is flesh?

1 John 4:2 "Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus (YHWH) Christ is come in the flesh is of God:"

YHWH Christ come in the flesh, not Joshua Christ is come in the flesh.

Because of the tradition not to say the name Yahweh, people are confessing that the Son, who is flesh, come in the flesh, and are being deceived into following the Anti YHWH Christ spirit, which cannot believe he is "both".

Side Note: God manifested in the flesh served another purpose. It allowed God himself to be touched with the feelings of our infirmities. Otherwise we could accuse God of not knowing how it is to be flesh and tempted with sin.
 
John 3:18 and Romans 10:14, with many other Scriptures teach that if you do not know the Son's name, you cannot be saved!!!!
 
David call's the Son YHWH!

In Peter's sermon about the Messiah, in Acts 2:25, says that David spoke concerning him (the Son), and said that "I (David) foresaw YHWH (the Son) always before my (David's) face, for he is on my (David's) right hand that I (David) should not be moved:" 

Psalm 16:8 says the exact same thing which conclusively proves that it is YHWH the Son, that is on David's right hand, not YHWH the Father, as Peter so eloquently points out, when he says, "for David spoke concerning him", ("him", referring to YHWH the Son)

This exact quotes comes from Psalm 16:8, where David clearly calls the the Son YHWH! And this same name belongs not only in verse 25, but in verses 32, 36, and 38, instead of the name Jesus which was substituted because of the tradition of not saying the name YHWH!!!

John the Baptist also teachers the Son's name is YHWH, and there is none greater than John the Baptist, who introduced the Messiah to the world and most surely knew what his name was!

The Father YHWH, through the prophet Isaiah, prophesied that John the Baptist would come on the scene and preach to prepare the way of The Messiah YHWH the Son of the All Mighty, Isaiah 40:3.

John the Baptist was the forerunner of the Messiah, and prepared his way, and called him YHWH, and would have introduced him to the world, by the name YHWH, according to the scripture found in Isaiah 40:3, Compare that with Mark 1:3.

Mark 1:3 speaks of the gospel (good news) of someone's name (King James has Jesus, but should be YHWH), who is the Son of God, and follows up by saying, "As it is written in the prophets, Behold, I (YHWH the Father) send my (Father 's) messenger (John the baptist) before thy face (Son's face), which shall prepare thy way (Son's way) before thee (the Son) [3] The voice (John's voice) of one crying in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the LORD (YHWH the Son), Mark 1:1-3.

The Prophet Isaiah teachers John was preparing the way of YHWH the Son, because the word LORD is in all capital letters in Isaiah 40:3.

From the above, it is obvious that Mark understood that YHWH the Farther sent his servant John to prepare the way of YHWH the Son, and actually calls him YHWH, which is in perfect harmony with Jeremiah 23:6, which says to call him YHWH. Why is this undeniable fact so hard to accept???

We know this is talking about YHWH the Son, because we know John was preparing the way of the Son of The All Mighty (Who is called YHWH in Isaiah 40:3), because scripture made reference to the shoes the Son wore, and John says was unworthy to unloose them. This proves that John is referring to preparing the way of YHWH the Son of the Almighty and is calling him YHWH, which is in perfect harmony with Jeremiah 23:6, which teaches to call his Son YHWH!

It is a scriptural fact that the Heavenly Father specifically teaches to call "his Son" YHWH, Jeremiah 23:6! This is not a suggestion, but a lawful command!

It is also a fact that  the Heavenly Father  specifically said that "in the last days", whosoever calls on the name YHWH, (in the last days), will be delivered, or saved! See The prophecy in Joel 2:33, and it's fulfillment in Acts 2:21. This is a promise and is "exactly" what they were doing in the "last days" in Acts 2:16 -38, please read it for yourself, and see that the early church were fulfilling the prophecy of Joel, and absolutely were calling on YHWH the Son for salvation, just like Joel's prophecy said they would do.

It truly came to pass, and the early church saints were calling on the name of YHWH the Son for salvation, but most bibles has the name Jesus/Joshua (because of the tradition not to say the name YHWH, and therefore call on another name, in which there is no salvation, Acts 4:12.), and is contrary to the name YHWH that Joel spoke of. 

It is obvious that someone followed the tradition of not saying the name YHWH, in the New Testament, and therefore hid the name YHWH behind the name Jesus in the New Testament, because the Son had the Father,s name YHWH, and they hid it, just like they hid the name YHWH behind the name Jehovah in the Old Testament. 

 
Proverbs 18:10 says, "The name YHWH is a strong tower: the righteous runneth into it, and is safe." I personally want to be safe.

If the sons name is Yeshua or any form thereof, then it would be found in the Old testament Scriptures! No matter what his name is it should be found in the Old Testament.

Remember the Son's  name is very important, and it should and have been brought forth unless it was a name that someone wanted to hide, like the name YHWH, in the Old and New Testament.

Should we believe what the Holy prophets said about the Son's name, or the New testament manuscripts that do not date back to the time of the New Testament?

The question is, concerning the name YHWH, should we believe the prophecies of the prophets which date back to before the tradition of not saying the name, or the New Testament manuscripts which were written after the tradition of not saying the name, which do not even date back to the time of the Messiah.

There are many places in the New Testament where the apostles were persecuted for the name of the Son, and were commanded not to preach or teach no more in that name. (read the book of Acts)

The evidence shows that the Father's name was hid behind titles like LORD, GOD, and even Jehovah, in the Old Testament, and LORD, GOD, and even Jesus, in the New Testament.

Everyone who has done even the least study of the name YHWH, correctly realizes that the Bibles we have today and the earliest manuscripts from which they were translated from, cannot be trusted concerning the name YHWH, and that is because they do not date back far enough, and were written after the tradition of not saying the name, and that is an undeniable fact, you cannot trust them in this matter!

It is prophesied, in Jeremiah 23:6, that the Branch, or descendent of David (Son) would be called YHWH! 

We know that he is our righteousness.

The Scripture teaches that without knowing the saviors name, you cannot call upon it, and therefore if you cannot call upon it, then you cannot be saved! (Romans 10:12-14)

There is a scriptural way to know 100% what the Son's name is, and that is to believe the Scriptures (as written) without trying to put a private interpretation on what it says, according to 2nd Peter 19-21, and Jeremiah 23:6 is a good place to start, which teaches to call him YHWH.

I see no reason NOT  to believe what the prophet Jeremiah says in Jeremiah 23:6, or to put a private interpretation on it, I.e. call him YHWH, pure and simple.

The elect of the Almighty is not called to try to disprove what the Prophets clearly says but to believe it and verify it to others. 

John the Baptist teachers the Son's name is YHWH, and there is none greater than John the Baptist, who introduced the Messiah to the world and most surely knew what his name was!

The Father YHWH, through the prophet Isaiah, prophesied that John the Baptist would come on the scene and preach to prepare the way of The Messiah YHWH the Son, Isaiah 40:3.

John the Baptist was the forerunner of the Messiah, and prepared his way, and called him YHWH, and would have introduced him to the world, by the name YHWH, according to the scripture found in Isaiah 40:3, Compare that with Mark 1:3.

Mark 1:3 speaks of the gospel (good news) of someone's name, who is the son of God, and follows up by saying, "As it is written in the prophets, Behold, I (YHWH the Father) send my messenger (John the baptist) before thy face (Son's face), which shall prepare thy way (Son's way) before the (the Son) [3] (John was) The voice of one crying in the wilderness, (John) Prepare ye the way of the LORD (YHWH the Son), Mark 1:1-3.

From the above, it is obvious that Mark understood that the Farther sent his servant John to prepare the way of his Son, and is calling him YHWH. 

We know this is talking about YHWH the Son, because we know John was preparing the way of the Son of The All Mighty (Who is called YHWH in Isaiah 40:3), because scripture made reference to the shoes the Son wore, and John says he was unworthy to lose them. This proves that John is referring to preparing the way of the Son of the Almighty and is calling him YHWH, which is in perfect harmony with Jeremiah 23:6, which teaches to call his Son YHWH!

It is a scriptural fact that the Heavenly Father specifically teaches to call "his Son" YHWH, Jeremiah 23:6! This is not a suggestion, but a lawful command!

It is also a fact that  the Heavenly Father  specifically said that "in the last days", whosoever calls on the name YHWH, (in the last days), will be delivered, or saved! See Joel 2:33. This is a promise and is "exactly" what they were doing in the "last days" in Acts 2:16 through Acts 2:38, please read it for yourself, and see that the early church were fulfilling the prophecy of Joel, and absolutely were calling on the Son's name, YHWH, for salvation, just like Joel's prophecy said they would do.

It truly came to pass, and the early church saints were calling on the name YHWH for salvation, but most bibles has the name Jesus/Joshua (because of the tradition not to say the name), which is contrary to the name YHWH that Joel spoke of. 

It is obvious that someone followed the tradition of not saying the name YHWH, and therefore hid the name YHWH behind the name Jesus in the New Testament, just like they hid the name YHWH behind the name Jehovah in the Old Testament. 

I can share my notes, which prove that the tradition of hiding the name YHWH carried over into the New Testament, for anyone who is interested.

Acts 4:12 clearly teaches that there's "only one name" in the world (under heaven) for men's salvation, or to be saved by!

The scripture clearly teaches that the Son is the Saviour of the world, and the above verses alone, proves that the Son has the Father's saving name (YHWH).

Acts 10:43 Teaches that All the Prophets said that if we believe on him "through his name", we shall receive remission of sins.  And while Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Spirit fell on all them which heard the word. Acts 10:44. Hopefully the same will happen to someone who read or hears these same words.

There is a certain name that will hook you up with the one who shed his blood for you, and it's the only name that you can call on that will do that. We must believe on that certain name.

John 3:18 says that we are condemned already if we do not believe in the name of the Son of the All Mighty!

The apostle Paul confirm the above, by teaching that there is no difference between Jews and Greeks, but whosoever calls on the name YHWH (quoting from the same prophet Joel), shall be saved. But Paul goes on to teach that if you do not know the name, you cannot call on it and cannot be saved! Romans 10:14.

Read the following and you will also see that the Son himself claimed that he had the Father's name, and the apostle Luke teaches that there is no other name under heaven that you can be saved by. Acts 4:12.

The apostle Paul also quotes Joel 2:32, Romans 10:13, same as Peter, Acts 2:21, and insinuates  that if you do not know his name you cannot be saved, Romans 10:14.

John 3:18 specifically says that people are condemned because they do not believe in the name of the only begotten son of the All Mighty. Are you one of those? How can you believe in the name of the Son, if you don't know his name?

The Father and his Son has the very same name (YHWH)!

YHWH himself is very specific when he says to call his son YHWH, Jeremiah 23:6.

If there were many gods with the name YHWH, which one created heaven and earth?

But if there was only one YHWH and his name one, it would separate him from all the others and give him glory for everything!

If our Savior was named Joshua, and there were many people with the name Joshua, which one died for our sins?

Only one person had the son's name (YHWH), and that is the son of YHWH the Father! 

 There is only one name under heaven and there cannot be two names under heaven! For salvation!

There cannot be several people with the son's name, no more than there can be several gods with the Father's name! 

Only 1 name of one person will hook you up with the one who shed his blood for you!

The glory and praise can only go to one Being with one name or else it will not work!

The only sure way for that being to get the glory for anything, is for him to have a name above every name and no one else can have that name, or there is confusion!

The Almighty is not the author of confusion! 

Name Baptized Singular 

To be baptized calling on the right name is very important!

It is also very important to believe on him through his name, in order to get you sins remitted.

Acts 10:43,
"To him give all the prophets witness, that "through his name" whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins."

Mark 16:16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.

Luke 7:30 "But the Pharisees and lawyers rejected the counsel of God against themselves, being not baptized of him."

Luke 24:45-47 The messiah opened his disciples understanding and told them to "begin at Jerusalem", and preach repentance and remission of sins in his name (singular)!

[45] "Then opened he their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures, [46] And said unto them, Thus it is written, and thus it behoved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day: [47] And that repentance and remission of sins should be preached "in his name" among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem.

He is not contradicting himself when he says in Matthew 28:19, "baptizing them in the name (singular) of the Farther, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit."

Acts 2:38 shows they began at Jerusalem, and how the apostles interpreted the command and carried it out, i.e. in one "single name".

Acts 2:38 "Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name (singular) of Jesus (YHWH) Christ for the "remission of sins", and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost."

The apostles were commanded in Matthew 28:19 to baptized in the name (singular) of the Father, and of the Son. Where is the Father's name in the above? Did the apostles disobey the command by baptizing in only one name? Or is there one single name of the Father and Son, like Matthew 28:19 says?

Acts 2:41 "Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls."

Acts 8:12 "But when they believed Philip preaching the things concerning the kingdom of God, and the "name" of Jesus (YHWH) Christ, they were baptized, both men and women."

Acts 8:16 "For as yet he was fallen upon none of them: only they were baptized in the "name" (singular) of the Lord Jesus (YHWH)."

Acts 8:38 "And he commanded the chariot to stand still: and they went down both into the water, both Philip and the eunuch; and he baptized him"

Acts 9:18 "And immediately there fell from his eyes as it had been scales: and he received sight forthwith, and arose, and was baptized."

Acts 10:48 "And he commanded them to be baptized in the "name" of the Lord (YHWH)."

(again, we see only one (singular) name.) there is absolutely no evidence whatsoever of anyone ever baptizing in more than one name, and yet the apostles baptized in the name (singular) of the Farther and of the Son, or else they disobeyed the command in Matthew 28:19, therefore the Farther  and the Son has to have the same name YHWH.)

Acts 16:33 "And he took them the same hour of the night, and washed their stripes; and was baptized, he and all his, straightway."

Acts 19:3-5 "And he said unto them, Unto what then were ye baptized? And they said, Unto John's baptism. [4] Then said Paul, John verily baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying unto the people, that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus (YHWH). [5] When they heard this, they were baptized in the "name" of the Lord Jesus (YHWH)."

Acts 22:16 "And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the "name" of the Lord (YHWH)."

Romans 6:3 "Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus (YHWH) Christ were baptized into his death?"

1 Corinthians 1:12-13 "Now this I say, that every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ. [13] Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized in the "name" of Paul?"

Galatians 3:27 "For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ."

Galatians 3:28 "There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus(YHWH)."

Revelation 14:1 "And I looked, and, lo, a Lamb stood on the mount Sion, and with him an hundred forty and four thousand, having his "Father's name" written in their foreheads."

Noticed that they had the name YHWH in their foreheads.

Revelation 22:4 "And they shall see his face; and "his name" shall be in their foreheads."

Acts 2:25 name YHWH


On the day of Pentecost in the second chapter Acts, Peter explains how about 120 people were not drunk as accused, but was filled with the Holy Spirit spoken of by the prophet Joel, Verse 16 through 21.

Peter sums up Joel by saying that whosoever calls on the name YHWH shall be saved in verse 21.

Peter goes on to explain how that they crucified the Messiah and that the almighty raised him up, And explains what David said about him in verse 23 through 27, which I will come back to in a moment, Especially verse 25.

Peter continuous saying how that David has not ascended into the heavens but the Messiah has, and that the Almighty made him both Lord and Christ.

After hearing all this, the people asked what must they do?

Peter tells them that everyone of them must repent and be baptized in a certain name. Acts 2:38.

Most bibles has the name Je-sus there but it is evident that the name YHWH belongs here, not only because Peter has already quoted Joel, telling them that the saving name to call on in the last days was YHWH, but verse 25 actually proves that David said the Messiah's name was YHWH!

Peter says that David spoke concerning him, and quotes Psalm 16:8, Which clearly shows that David called the messiah YHWH, And this is the name that belongs in verse 38!

Romans 10:9-16 clearly explains that the son's name is YHWH

Name

The Son had the fathers name, not because the sons name had a form of the fathers name mixed with the word for salvation in it, but because the son "was" the Saviour/deliver. 

In other words he is The Almighty's Savior for the people. The prophets had a name that "meant" something but Son had the name and "was" that something. He "was" his name I.e. SAVIOUR!

All the prophet's names that had the short form of the father's name in it, was not names above every name.

Acts 15:26 KJV
[26] Men that have hazarded their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ.

Not only is the son to be named after the father but also a mountain of that Abraham was on and also a city and I believe it all.

I have a business that is called by my name and I also have a son that is called by my name what's wrong with having two things called by your name?

If we can believe that a city is call by his name and A mountain call by his name why not the son of the Almighty called by his name?

My name is Arnold I have a septic company called Arnold's septic, I have a son named Arnold just because I have a company named Arnold's doesn't mean my son name is not on that same 

Why was the mountain named that and why was the city named that?
Those who have not denied my name revelations


Whose name alone is holy! Psalms 148:13 says his name alone is excellent! Psalm 8 also!

The name is not in the power but the power is in the name


You could argue that the name Joshua is in the New Testament, Before it was Jesus


The same translators mistranslated the fathers name, in the same  New Testament, so why not the sons name deceitfully


The Father had to have a different name to separate him from other gods and the Son had to have a name different than ever name that is named under heaven to separate him from other men!!!!!!!!

Try to imagine three or four other gods with the same name as the true God YHWH, and you wanted to give the true one praise, honor, and glory, through his name, or sing a song of praise to him, how could you do it???

The same is true with the Son of Elohim. If there were 3 men with the same name as the Son, then which one died for us, and which one is the Son of Elohim??? Suppose all of them had the common name of Joshua, etc.

I believe when you get out of the name the chain is broken. You might not want it to be, but the chain is broken to the one who shed his blood for you. The Son prayed to the Father, asking him to keep them in his name (The Father's name YHWH), he says it is the name that the Father gave to him, John 17:11.

John 17:11 reads different in some Bibles but according to Adam Clark and others, the genuine reading is that the Messiah is asking the Father to keep the disciples in his own name (The Father's name YHWH), the name that he also gave to him.

This is in perfect harmony with Jeremiah 23:6 (and other Scriptures) which teaches the Messiah or Son's  name would be called YHWH.

The rulers of the day, did not like that, and Acts 9:14 says Paul had letters from the chief priest to bind all that call on thy name! Acts 9:15 -16 shows Paul must suffer for his name sake, and carry his name to many people.

The quote, "If my people which are called by my name" 2 Chronicles 7:14
"If my people, which are called by my name, shall....I will forgive their sins".

Isaiah 43:6-8 .."bring my sons from far, and my daughters from the ends of the earth; [7] Even every one that is called by my name:"

shows that his people are call by the name Yahweh, same as his son and the whole family of YHWH, that Paul spoke of!


Psalms 118:26 says blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord (YHWH), and the little children quoted this scripture when he came riding on the donkey. He truly came in his Father's name, see John 5:43.

Acts 4:17 they beat them and said speak no more in this name.


When you're in the truth you do not have to write volumes trying to explain away what Scripture clearly says, and I like not having to do that!

Yahshua, Joshua, etc, did not die for you.

You might say it doesn't matter what you call him, But if that is true, then you could call him by any name! If there is nothing wrong with calling him so-and-so and there's nothing wrong with calling him Jesus.

You can't believe in the only begotten son without knowing his name!!!!

Suppose there are many men out there in the world, with the same name, and one of them died for your sins, and you wanted to give glory and honor to him, there would be no way to do it. This is why the Savior had a name that no one under heaven had except him (Acts 4:12).

Suppose there was one person out there who had a different name from everyone, a name that is above every name that is named, in this world, and the world to come, and this name is the name of the one who done so many miracles etc., He would not give the glory and honor to anyone else.

The prayer of the Messiah was, our Farther, who art in heaven, HALLOW be thy name!

Maybe I should list all the many Scriptures about the name and challenge anyone to try to explain each one of them away

They commanded the people to speak no more in this name (YHWH).

The Son's name (YHWH) is not mentioned in the New Testament, which is the very same name as the Father's name, according to Jeremiah 23:6.


There is proof that the tradition of not saying the Name YHWH was carried over to the New Testament, and therefore if the Son really did inherit the same name as the Farther (YHWH), the name that is above every name (Hebrews 1:4 and Philippians 2:9), this would explain why the name Joshua is used is used in the New Testament, instead of the name YHWH, the name that the Father gave to his Son, because they had no problem using the name Joshua, but they did have a problem using the name of the Father and his Son (YHWH).

We understand they had a tradition not to say the Father's  name YHWH, but why did they forbid anyone to speak the sons name? Could it be because it was the same name as the father, (Jeremiah 23:6)???


There is sufficient evidence in the book of Acts, that the name of the Son (YHWH) was not to be spoken, taught, or used, even though notable miracles were done in that name. The the tradition not to speak the name, was stronger than anything else, Including the miracles that was done in that name.

Part of his mission was to make the Father's name known back to the people. (John 17:6 "I have manifested thy name unto the men which thou gavest me out of the world:").

During the time of the New Testament there was a tradition not to speak the Father's name, and the people had forgotten it, but all through the book of Acts, we see that they did not want the name of the Son spoken either, could it be be because they had the same name???

Had the saviors name been any other name other than the Father's   name (YHWH), I don't believe they would have any problem saying it!

The son could not have been called Joshua, or any form of it, because if that was the case they would not have commanded to people not to speak that name, because that was a common name, and there was no prohibition against speaking it!

1 John 5:13 KJV
[13] "These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God; that ye may know that ye have eternal life, and that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God."

The Scripture says you must believe on him through his name to receive remission of sins.

John 20:31 "But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus (YHWH) is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name.

All the prophets gave witness that you must believe on him through his name

Acts 10:43 "To him give all the prophets witness, that through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins."

It appears that if you don't believe in the true name of the son of God through his name, you do not believe in the son of God, and you will not call on him through his name.

If the Father and the Son   does not have the same name, then the apostles did not obey the Saviour's command in Matthew 28:19, where he told them to baptize in the name (Singular) of the Father, and of the Son, because they always baptized in only one single name.

Out of the many places in Scripture, that the apostles interpreted and carried out this command to baptized in the Father and Son's name, it was always done in only one Single name!

If that one single name of the Father and Son was Joshua, then that means the Father's name was Joshua also.

If that one single name of the Father and Son was YHWH, that means the Son's name was YHWH also, and is in harmony with Jeremiah 23:6, and Matthew 28:19.

I had rather believe the prophets and believe that the Son had the Father's name YHWH, than believe the New Testament, that the Father's and Son's name is Joshua.

That one single name in Matthew 28:19, has to be the Single name of the Father and Son, or else the apostles did not obey the Saviour's very specific and important command in Matthew 28:19, because they only baptized in one name, and there is no approved examples of them baptizing anyone in more than one name. 

Where does the two names doctrine fit into Matthew 28:19???

Can you find one example where anyone was baptized in two names?

Can you show where someone was baptized in the name of the Father, unless the Father's name is Joshua? 

We know Joshua is not the name of the Father and Son, and if they baptized in the name of Joshua, then something is very wrong, because we know the Father's name is not Joshua. Again, I had rather believe that the Son's name is YHWH, than believe that the Father's name is Joshua.

Jeremiah 23:6 does not teach to call his name Joshua, but instead it teaches to call his name YHWH, after his Father, And therefore the name of the Father and of the Son is YHWH, and this explains why the apostles interpreted Matthew 28:19 the way they did, and only baptized in One single name. They obviously believe the prophet Jeremiah.
 
Go to BOTH God and man http://lunarsabbath.info/id52.html  

There is a reason that scholars cannot agree on the sound of the sacred name, which is really a sacred sound, even though they have been studying this very thing for hundreds of years, and are still not 100% sure of the sound/name, even though the scripture teaches we can know 100% for sure what the sound/name is.

The difference between the choices between the Yeh, the Yah, and the Yuh sound is that two of them has an uninspired e and a vowel added between the Y and H, by a group of uninspired men called Masoretes which added them to the inspired Hebrew text. 

This causes the reader to make a different sound than they would normally have made when reading the unadulterated inspired YH as written by the inspired prophet Moses and other holy men that were also moved by the Holy Spirit.

There is a reason why the scholars have not conclusively proven the sound of the sacred name, and therefore they have simply made their best guess from their studies, and when all is said and done, it is still just a GUESS. 

The scholars have been studying and debating this for hundreds of years, and not one of them, that I know of, claims to know 100% for sure. How could they know, because ones GUESS is as good as another one’s. There is absolutely positively no way that they could know for sure, when using an uninspired vowel point system!    

One of the reason is because they are looking in the wrong place, and working from my false premise that the sacred four letters needed some outside help in how to pronounce the sacred name. 

Remember, these same men that added these vowel points followed the tradition of not saying the sacred name and therefore they would add a vowel between the Y and H, and the W and H, to make you say or sound something different, thinking they are doing good by protecting the sound, which is actually  the sacred name, because the sacred name is a sacred sound!

They should be looking for the sound that the sacred four letter name YHWH makes without without adding more letters!

Noticed that I gave you two of the options, the Yeh, and the Yah, which has the uninspired vowels between the YH and between the WH, but what about the unadulterated YH or Yuh sound?

There is a super big (major) HUGE difference between the Yeh, and the Yah sound which you get when reading the man-made vowels into the text, and the Yuh sound that comes naturally when just reading the unadulterated YH, without any man made vowels! 

You will automatically get an involuntary vowel sound when sounding the inspired YH (Yuh), like the sound of the Father’s name In Hallelujah, which is handed down to us from our ancestors. You DO NOT add the u sound or anything to the inspired word, it is built in with the YH, and it will come out when pronouncing or sounding the YH as it was written by Moses, and that without any outside vowels, and the sacred sound will be just as fresh and clear as the day Moses captured the sound of the sacred name (Exodus 3:15) with the four letters that equals our English YHWH letters and it is sounded (Yuh Wuh) when sound the inspired letters without adding to them, and when you put it in front  BABES that ay learning to read, they will say the same thing, and then you will hear for yourself. 

Mathew 21:16 says, “Out of the mouth of BABES and sucklings thou hast perfected praise?” And there’s another scripture that teaches that somethings are hid from the wise and prudent (Possibly scholars), and revealed unto BABES, Mathew 11:25.

The Hallelu means praise, and the Yuh is the sound of his Mighty name YH, Psalms 68:4!

In order to find the truth, we must find and accept the facts, and that in itself is a fact.

# 1. In order to change a name, you must change the sound, because a name is a sound, that is a fact.

It is also a fact that the same people who added the vowels points to the inspired word, are the same people who followed the tradition not to say the sacred name, therefore they would add vowel points in order to change the sound of the sacred name to make you say something else. And when you change the sound of a name, you change the name, no matter how slightly you change it. Remember a name is a sound!

These people’s tradition taught the sacred name was too Holly and too sacred for people to say, which is contrary to the scripture. 

They for the most part were successful in this, but there was one thing they could not do, and that was change the sound that had already went into all the earth through the word hallelujah (Yuh) and through the sound of the Father’s name that he placed in his prophets.

Example: they added an “e” vowel into the original inspired YH sound of the Father’s name in the name YH hoo daw to make you sound something different, because of the tradition not to say the sacred name (why wouldn’t they?), but the original sound of the tribe of YH hoo daw, without this added vowel had already been established, same as the sound of hallelujah today, and many unto this day still pronounce YH (Yuh) hoo daw from the original sound/name YH (Yuh) as in HalleluYuh! The ones that don’t, add the man made vowels to a name that already consisted of four vowels, according to Josephus who lived back then.

I believe this is why the All Wise Father put the sound of his name in the prophets, and Hallelujah (Yuh) etc and handed it down to us from our ancestors, because a sound is much more reliable than changeable vowel pointed letters!

Vowels Deceitful 

How do we explain why some pronounce or sound the YH in YH hoo daw as Yuh, same as in Hallelu Yuh, and some sound the YH as Ye, Ye hoo daw as in Yehovah?

Remember it is very important to understand that whatever sound the YH makes, is the Father’s name. Is it Yeh, Yah, or Yuh? 

I personally don’t believe his name is YEH, or Yah, but that’s the sound you have when you add these uninspired vowel points. But if you leave it alone, a babe will pronounce it Yuh as in hallelujah, the sound that was handed down to us from our ancestors, and is an international praise to YH/Yuh!

What is wrong with pronouncing it as written by the inspired prophet Moses and others?

I believe the reason for the two pronunciations is that some added to the scripture, the uninspired vowels when reading, and obviously some stayed with the sound of the tribe of YH hoo daw and Hallelujah that was handed down to them from their ancestors. Obviously the ones that stayed with the original sound, paid no attention to the man made vowels, because they knew it was wrong and they trusted and stayed with the sound of the the name of YH hoo daw that was handed down to them from the tribe of YH hoo daw.

I know of no other logical explanation, and any child learning to read will make the same exact sound today when seeing the YH, Yuh, in YH hoo daw if you do not add the e or any other letter, but it you add the e, it is a whole new ballgame, they will pronounce it also.

The inspired YH did not need a vowel added to make it say Yeh or an a to make it say Yah, which I believe to be a corruption of the Father’s name, his name is Yuh as in Hallelu Yuh which means praise YUH, which is the sound of his name YH.

I guess the bottom line is whether or not you believe that the added vowels should be applied to the four letter sacred name, which already consist of four vowels, according to a scholar named Josephus, who lived during the time that the temple was still standing. The War of the Jews, Book 5. 5. 7.)

http://wwcr.gsradio.net:3863/index.html?sid=1 at 7:30 Pm est Sat and 7:00 Pm est Sun and click on arrow at bottom

Also click on  http://www.wwcr.com/listen.html and click under # 1 for broadcast Tuesday at 7:00 pm est and under # 2 for Thursday broadcast at 4:00 pm and click on arrow below

How to pronounce the Sacred Name YHWH 

Absolutely the most important subject in the world!

Below is positive proof that “BEFORE” the uninspired vowels were added into the sacred name YHWH, the sound of the name of our Creator was pronounced “Yuh wuh”, as in Hallelu Yuh!

One way the sound of the sacred name was preserved is in word Hallelu Yuh which Hallelu means praise and “Yuh” is the name of the one who is praised.

Mal 3:16  says, “Then they that feared the LORD (YHWH) spake often one to another: and the LORD (YHWH) hearkened, and heard it, and a “book of remembrance” was written before him “for them” that feared the LORD (YHWH), and that “thought upon his name”.

Mal 3:17  And they shall be mine, saith the LORD (YHWH) of hosts, in that day when I make up my jewels; and I will spare them, as a man spareth his own son that serveth him.”

(How would you like to be in that book of remembrance?)

Psa 91:14  “Because he hath set his love upon me, therefore will I deliver him: I will set him on high, “because” he hath “known my name”.
Psa 91:15  He (he that knows name) shall call upon me, and I will “answer him”: I will be with him in trouble; I will “deliver him”, and honour him.
Psa 91:16  With long life will I satisfy him, and shew him my salvation.”

The above promises are said to be referring to the Messiah, but I believe they are also extended to all the children of YHWH that “know his name” to call on it. 

And he will also be with us in time of trouble; And He will also deliver us, “because” we know his right name to call on it. 

We have scripture showing that these promises can apply to us also, who live Godly in the Messiah and “call on his name”. But how can we call on his name if we don’t really know it? (Romans 10:13-14)

There is a way to conclusively prove what “sound” the Father’s name carried “BEFORE” the uninspired man made vowel points were added to change the sound, which we can do, because the short form of his name is recorded in many of his prophets name, long “before” the man made vowel points were added, like Elijah (Yuh), which means my God is “Yuh” and is pronounced Eli-Yuh in the Hebrew, and also in the international praise of Hallelu Yuh, which means praise Yuh, and is in all the earth and goes all the way back to Exodus, see (Ex-9:16 and Romans 9:17!

The sound of Hallelujah is handed down to us from my ancestors and is said the same throughout the whole earth.

The Father’s name is in the name Elijah (Eli Yuh), the YH (Jay) in Elijah’s name in Hebrew is definitely sounded or is pronounced “Yuh”, as in Hallelu Yuh, which is the sacred sound that is handed down unchanged to us today from our ancestors. 

Even though we have the “jah” in Hallelu jah and the jah in Eli jah, it is the YH and is still sounded and pronounced “YuH”, with a natural involuntary “u” vowel sound which comes naturally when pronouncing or sounding the YH (try it).

I prefer the natural occurring “u” sound far above the forced man made vowels “a” or “e”, that were added into the inspired YHWH by men who followed the tradition not to say or sound the sacred name YHWH as it was originally written, and try to cause us to do the same, which happens if we follow the tradition of these men, and it could possibly make our worship vain (calling on the wrong sound/name), if we are following the comments of men not to say the right name, and by doing so, calling on a different name/sound all together. 

Remember, it is undeniable that a name is a sound, and if we change the sound, we change the name, and no one knew this any better than the men who added the vowels into the original YHWH, for that very purpose!

When placing the uninspired “a” or “e” between the Y and H, it creates the Yah or Yeh sound, and if this was the right sound/name, these men would have been going against their own tradition of not to say the sacred name, which is NOT in keeping with their tradition not to vocalize it. 

“If” adding the “a” and “e” vowels were correct, which causes us to say Yahweh or Jehovah, they would have vowel pointed the name with something besides the “a” or “e”, in order to keep us from sounding it right!

Therefore if we depend on either of these added vowels, adding them into the sacred name, changing the sacred sound, we will not have the same sound/name that Moses captured with only four letters (which were vowels themselves, according to Josephus who lived back then).

Elijah or Eliah = “my God is YHWH.

H452   (Strong)
אֵלִיָּהוּ    אֵלִיָּה
'êlı̂yâh    'êlı̂yâhû
ay-lee-yaw', ay-lee-yaw'-hoo

Notice that these men (who followed the tradition not to say the sacred name) vowel points an “a” vowel to go between the Y and H, to make you sound Yah, instead of YH (Yuh), BUT this was done “AFTER” the sound of the sacred name “Yuh” was well established in Eli-Yuh the prophet’s name, and that sound will never change in the Hebrew language because the sound of his name was and is so well known. 

Remember, this man Elijah (Eli-Yuh) was very great in the earth, and could even shut up the heavens that it rain not.   Who could ever forget the sound of his name so quickly? Remember, the sound of the Creator’s name YH/Yuh was well recorded in Eli-Yuh’s name “BEFORE” the added vowels came along, and therefore the added vowels had no affect on the Yuh “sound” of the YH in his name.

Click here to hear it correctly pronounced or sounded in Hebrew, without the man made vowel “a” added to it. 

https://forvo.com/search/Elijah/he/

​You can clearly hear the Yuh sound, same as in Hallelu Yuh and other names with iah or jah in them!

Remember Elijah’s name in Hebrew was so well-established “BEFORE” the added vowels, and therefore the vowel points could not change that which was already established.

How wise is our All Mighty Creator to do that, record his name in the names of so many, that it will continue as long as the sun?

Psa 72:17  “His name shall endure for ever: his name shall be “continued” as long as the sun: and men shall be blessed in him: all nations shall call him blessed.”

His name is “continued” through his children, sons and daughters who are in the family of YHWH.

He actually recorded the sound of his name in such a way that is even better than the best of any man made tape recorder that can be, manipulated, stolen, rotten, etc, and the recorded sound is absolutely more reliable than written letters that is salted with vowels that are added not just by men, but by religious men who strictly followed a strict tradition not to say the sacred name, who well knew that a name is a sound and can be changed by adding only one vowel, which they did in order to keep people from reading the original name of YH-WH.

Names like Jecon-iah also has the Father’s name in them, as many of the prophets and others whose name ends or begins in iah or jah, which is pronounced YH (Yuh), “BEFORE” the uninspired vowels were added by men who followed the tradition not to say or sound the sacred name of YH (Yuh) as in hallelujah or the YHWH (Yuh Wuh) when the YHWH is sounded as written, by anyone who can read. Just sound those letters that are equal to the Hebrew letters, without adding any vowels, and the right vowels will come automatically! 

These uninspired men forced an “a” or “e” between the Y and H to make some pronounce Yah, as in Yahweh or Yahwah and the “e” to make others say Yeh as in Jehovah or Yehowah etc, because of their tradition. Ask yourself which camp you are in, the Yahweh or Jehovah?

Jecon-iah equals or means “Jehovah (YHWH) will establish” (according to Strong) and the iah (YH) on the end is clearly pronounced “Yuh”, same as in the international praise Hallelujah, sounded “Hallelu Yuh”. Hallelu means praise, and “YuH” is the name of the one to be praised, it’s that simple!
Click below to hear the iah (YH) of Jeconiah’s name pronounced in Hebrew.

https://forvo.com/search/Jeconiah/  

Another man’s name that has the Father’s name/sound in it is “Judah”, which = “praised Yuh Wuh”, which sound goes all the way back to Gen-29:35, which is also “BEFORE” the man made vowel point system was added, and the YH sound in it is also “Yuh”, as in Hallelu Yuh and Eli Yuh etc.

Click here to hear it pronounced in Hebrew 
https://forvo.com/search/Judah/he/  

I believe the reason that the wise and prudent scholars can’t agree and have not been able to conclusively prove one way or the other, is because they are not tracing the “sacred sound” back far enough, “before the added vowels”, and trusting in YHWH, but instead, they are trusting in the arm of flesh and putting confidence in man, Psalms 118:8, running after the letters instead of the sacred sound, remember a name is a sound! We are fearfully and wonderfully made and can hand down a sound better than any recorder.

The YH in Joshua also makes the Yuh sound, as in Hallelu Yuh, etc. 

Joshua equals Yuh ho shua which means YHWH saved.

H3091   (Strong)
יְהוֹשֻׁעַ    יְהוֹשׁוּעַ
yehôshûa‛    yehôshûa‛
yeh-ho-shoo'-ah, yeh-ho-shoo'-ah
From H3068 and H3467; Jehovah-saved; Jehoshua (that is, Joshua), the Jewish leader: 

Click here to hear it pronounced in Hebrew 

https://forvo.com/search/Joshua/he/ 

Even the name of the city Jerusalem is brought over sound for sound, because names are transliterated, not translated!

H3389   (Strong)
יְרוּשָׁלַיִם    יְרוּשָׁלַםִ
yerûshâlaim    yerûshâlayim
yer-oo-shaw-lah'-im, yer-oo-shaw-lah'-yim

Even though there’s an e (:) between the “Y” and “R” in Jerusalem, the Hebrew “yod” (Y in English), still Carries the Yuh R sound, not a Ye sound because it is the name of a city, Jerusalem, and is transLITERated, not translated, the literal sound for sound of the letters!

Click here for the Hebrew sound
https://forvo.com/search/Jerusalem/he/ 

When you remove the man made vowels or vowel points from other names , like Joshua, Isaiah, Jerusalem, etc, it still has the same sounds, and if we pull the added vowels back out of the sacred name, it should also still sound the same, and it will if we sound the YHWH as written!

If the sacred sound of the sacred name YHWH is Jehovah or Yahweh and we we pull the man made added vowels from the YHWH, it should still make the sound of Yahweh or Jehovah, but it don’t, it makes the YuH WuH sound, with the natural involuntary “u” sound!

Now if the sacred name/sound is YuH WuH, and when we pull the natural involuntary “u” vowels out of the YHWH, it still makes the same sound when pronouncing the YHWH, just like other names because the natural involuntary “u” vowel sound comes back every time. 

The “u” vowel sound is built or baked in and when pronouncing the YHWH, it comes in automatically!

Again, the above is also consistent with the sacred sound/name in the word Hallelujah (Yuh) that is handed down to us from our ancestors, which means praise Yuh!

They are not being consistent with the transliterated YH sound! 

Joshu wuh and Joshu Way  
יְהוֹשֻׁעַ    יְהוֹשׁוּעַ
yehôshûa‛    yehôshûa‛

If they were hiding the sound of the sacred name, by putting the E or “A” between the Y and H, what was the sound they was hiding “without” the “E” and “A”, or “before” they added the “E” or “A”???

In other words, is there no way of knowing what the YHWH sounded before the man-made vowels???

In other words, what sound would the YHWH have made without adding an “a” or “e” vowel to the sacred sound/name which already consisted of four vowel? 

What sound was the inspired YHWH making by itself, that the uninspired men wanted to hide, by adding more vowels to change or hide the true original inspired sound?

I believe most modern day scholars know that putting an “e” between the YH in order to make a Yeh sound, is not correct, because it never carries that sound in any of the prophets names or the word hallelujah, how can we trust that putting an “a” between the YH in other places to make the sound of Yah is correct either? 

People do not say Hallelu Yee, or Eli-Yee etc.

After all, the same men that followed the tradition not to say (or sound) the sacred name of the YH in the long form (YHWH), by adding an e between the Y and H, were the same men who added an a between the Y and H in the prophets names and other places!

Even if we can not accept the handed down sound of Yuh, with the natural involuntary “u” sound verses the forced man made “a” or “e” sound, which is added by men who would not even vocalize the name, because of their tradition, it is still a far better choice to go with the Yuh sound and the YHWH and sound it as written.

Why go with Yuh? First and foremost, is because that is what is written and that is the unmistakable sound it makes when we read it, and we have many witness to this sacred sound of Yuh that has been handed down to us unchanged, from our ancestors. The name was declared throughout the whole earth, and handed down to us from generation to generation in Hallelu Yuh. It is an international praise, and said the same in all major languages throughout the whole earth, Chinese, Russian, English, German etc. Hallelu means praise and Yuh is the name of the one to be praised.

Many new comers to the sacred name movement are told to say Hallelu YAH, but that is not the name that they previously used and neither did all their ancestors. They correctly said Hallelu Yuh, and the same with the prophets names that has been handed down, having the YH (Yuh) sound in their name.

Just read the YHWH and sound it as written, same as you do with all the other words and names of prophets and cities etc.

Just like the city Jerusalem with out the vowels 
Y  r  s  l  m

City of Bethlehem
B  thl  h  m

The name Judah 
 Y d  h 

To the Church in Philadelphia
Rev 3:7  And to the angel of the church in Philadelphia write; These things saith he that is holy, he that is true, he that hath the key of David, he that openeth, and no man shutteth; and shutteth, and no man openeth;
Rev 3:8  I know thy works: behold, I have set before thee an open door, and no man can shut it: for thou hast a little strength, and hast kept my word, and “hast not denied my name (sound)”.

These men that followed the tradition not to say the sacred name, placed an “e” between the Y and H in the full form of the name YHWH approximately 7,000 times, causing the “Yeh” sound as in Yehovah.

These same men placed an “a” between the Y and H in the short form of the sacred name approximately 50 times, causing it to make a “Yah” sound, as in Yahweh or Yahwah or Yahway, which ever. 

You would think that later day scholars would choose the “Yeh” sound above the Yah sound, because of the long form of the name and it written that way so many more times than the short form.

I believe that many of the scholars could not bring themselves to choose the “Yeh” sound, even though you have so many more “Yehs” (app 7,000), in the YHWH, than the Yahs, and they could have made this choice because they knew that none of the prophets names ever made the “Yeh” sound, and they knew the prophets has the YH sound in their name! 

And neither did any of them sing Hallelu Yeh in the assembly.

Therefore they went with the Yah sound, possibly because they didn’t know the sacred name already consisted of four vowels, and didn’t need any more.

If we can’t trust the “e” between the Y and H in YHWH (over 6,000), how can we trust the “a” between the Y and H (50 times)? 

The same men that followed the tradition not say the sacred name also added the “a” between the Y and H, which no more right than the added “e” !

יָהּ The “T” looking mark under the YH equals an “a” vowel between the Y and H, making a Yah sound as his name. If Yah truly was the sound of the name in Psalms 68:4 and the prophets names etc, why did they vowel point it correctly, and thus or therefore causing the reader to pronounce the sacred name correctly, when the tradition they followed forbids this??? 

The same thing in many of the prophets names like Isaiah יְשַׁעְיָה 

Which means YHWH has saved or YHWH saves. Again, why give away the sound of the sacred name, which goes against their tradition?

When we do not add more vowels to the sacred name, and pronounce it as written, the name YH is sounded Yuh as in Hallelu Yuh, Eli-Yuh, and IsaYuh etc.

The ancient Paleo Hebrew has no vowel points, and to my knowledge, there has never been any artifacts uncovered with vowel points and neither does the Dead Sea Scrolls writings have vowel points. 

Before the vowel points, they just sounded the YHWH as written, and what ever needed vowel came automatically.

The uninspired vowels can also  change words to mean something different than what is written, making the user of these vowels the interpreters of scripture with their own private interpretations.

Peter reminds us that the scripture of old came to us without the vowel points, which can be “manipulated” by the will of man, and thereby creating a private interpretation.

2Pe 1:20  says, “Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.
2Pe 1:21  For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.”

There are many scriptures that teaches that we are to sing praise to his name, as in Hallelu Yuh, or praise YH (Yuh), and that way it will be handed down from our ancestors through song. 

Psa 91:14  “Because he hath set his love upon me, therefore will I deliver him: I will set him on high, “because” he hath known my name.
Psa 91:15  He shall call upon me, and I will answer him: I will be with him in trouble; I will “deliver him”, and honour him.
Psa 91:16  With long life will I satisfy him, and shew him my salvation.”

I believe that scripture can be correctly interpreted from scripture along, without the extra vowels that were added by men. 

It is like they are saying that the name/sound can not be known apart from the added vowels!

There is a reason that scholars cannot agree on the sound of the sacred name, which is actually a sacred sound, even though they have been studying this very subject for hundreds of years, and are still not 100% sure of the sound/name, even though the scripture teaches we can know 100% for sure what the sound/name is.

People don’t realize it, but they subconsciously believe that if the vowels had never been added, no one would ever have a chance of knowing the sound of the sacred name, from scripture along, but the truth is the opposite. With vowels, no one can possibly know, because none of us lived back then, and all they can do is make the best GUESS they can, from their studies, but it is still just a GUESS, and no one can ever be for sure, using the man made vowel point method!

What evidence do we have for Yah?

Is there any audible evidence recorded for Yah?

One thing the scholars have proven, after hundreds of years of diligent study, is that they can not conclusively prove the sound of the sacred name by the method they are using, or they would all agree, instead of saying there is no way of knowing for sure, which is actually contrary to scripture.

What in the world would we do without the uninspired vowels that they added, would anyone ever know the sacred name, that the scripture teaches we can know???

“They are tradition and “sounds handed down unchanged” from The All Mighty to the patriarchs to the present day.”

Some things we are commanded to teach to our children and children’s children, such as the law which specifically says to  praise YHWH, or to Hallelu (praise) YH (Yuh).

Deu 4:10  Specially the day that thou stoodest before the LORD thy God in Horeb, when the LORD said unto me, Gather me the people together, and I will make them hear my words, that they may learn to fear me all the days that they shall live upon the earth, and that “they may teach their children”

The different choices between the Yeh, the Yah, and the Yuh sound is that two of them has an uninspired “e” and “a” vowel sound forced between the Y and H, by a group of uninspired men called Masoretes which added them to the inspired Hebrew text, thus changing the name/sound.

This causes the reader to make a different sound than they would normally have made when reading the unadulterated inspired YH as written by the inspired prophet Moses and other holy men that were also moved by the Holy Spirit.

Remember, they observed the tradition that the sacred sound of the sacred name was too Holy to pronounce, so don’t think it strange that they would change the true sound of the YH (Yuh) to Yeh or Yah, by placing one of their vowels between the Y and H (vowels), changing the original sound and in turn, changing the name!

There is a reason why the scholars today have not conclusively proven the sound of the sacred name, and therefore they have simply made their best guess from their studies, and when all is said and done, it is still just a GUESS. This problem goes away when we follow the “sound” of the sacred name that is handed down to us from generation to generation from our ancestors.

The scholars have been studying and debating this for hundreds of years, and not one of them, that I know of, claims to know 100% for sure. How could they know, because ones GUESS is as good as another one’s. There is absolutely positively no way that they could know for sure, when using an uninspired vowel point system!     

One of the reason is because they are looking in the wrong place, and working from a false premise that the sacred four letters needed some outside help in how to pronounce the sacred name. 

Remember, these same men that added these vowel points followed the tradition of not saying the sacred name and therefore they would add a vowel between the Y and H, and the W and H, to make you say or sound something different, thinking they are doing good by protecting the sound, which is actually  the sacred name, because the sacred name is a sacred sound!

They should be looking for the sound that the sacred four letter name YHWH makes without without adding more letters!

Noticed that I gave you two of the options, the Yeh, and the Yah, which has the uninspired vowels between the YH and between the WH, but what about the unadulterated YH or Yuh sound?

There is a super big (major) HUGE difference between the Yeh, and the Yah sound which you get when reading the man-made vowels into the text, and the Yuh sound that comes naturally when just reading the unadulterated YH, without any man made vowels! 

You will automatically get an involuntary vowel sound when sounding the inspired YH (Yuh), like the sound of the Father’s name In Hallelujah, which is handed down to us from our ancestors. You DO NOT add the “u” sound or anything to the inspired word, it is built in with the YH and WH, and it will come out when pronouncing or sounding the YH or WH as it was written by Moses, and that without any outside vowels, and the sacred sound will be just as fresh and clear as the day Moses captured the sound of the sacred name (Exodus 3:15) with the four letters that equals our English YHWH letters and it is sounded (Yuh Wuh) when sound the inspired letters without adding to them, and when you put it in front  of BABES that ay learning to read, they will say the same thing, and then you will hear the right sound for yourself. 

Mathew 21:16 says, “Out of the mouth of BABES and sucklings thou hast perfected praise?” And there’s another scripture that teaches that somethings are hid from the wise and prudent (Possibly scholars), and revealed unto BABES, Mathew 11:25.

The Hallelu means praise, and the Yuh is the sound of his Mighty name YH, Psalms 68:4!

In order to find the truth, we must find and accept the facts, and that in itself is a fact.

# 1. In order to change a name, you must change the sound, because a name is a sound, that is a fact.

It is also a fact that the same people who added the vowels points to the inspired word, are the same people who followed the tradition not to say the sacred name, therefore they would add vowel points in order to change the sound of the sacred name to make you say something else. And when you change the sound of a name, you change the name, no matter how slightly you change it. Remember a name is a sound!

These people’s tradition taught the sacred name was too Holly and too sacred for people to say, which is contrary to the scripture. 

They for the most part were successful in this, but there was one thing they could not do, and that was change the sound that had already went into all the earth through the word hallelujah (Yuh) and through the sound of the Father’s name that he placed in many of his prophets and others.

Example: they added an “e” vowel into the original inspired YH sound of the Father’s name in the name YH hoo daw to make later day scholars sound something different, because of the tradition they had to not to say the sacred name (why wouldn’t they?), but the original sound of the tribe of YH hoo daw, without this added vowel had already been established BEFORE, same as the sound of hallelujah today, and many unto this day still pronounce YH (Yuh) hoo daw from the original sound/name YH (Yuh) as in HalleluYuh! The ones that don’t, add the man made vowels to a name that already consisted of four vowels, according to Josephus who lived back then.

I believe this is why the All Wise Father put the sound of his name in the prophets, and Hallelujah (Yuh) etc and handed it down to us from our ancestors, because a sound is much more reliable than changeable vowel pointed letters!

Vowels can be deceitful 

How do we explain why some pronounce or sound the YH in YH hoo daw as Yuh, same as in Hallelu Yuh, and some sound the YH as Ye, Ye hoo daw as in Yehovah?

Remember it is very important to understand that whatever sound the YH makes without added vowels, is the Father’s name. Is it Yeh, Yah, or Yuh? 

I personally don’t believe his name is YEH, or Yah, but that’s the sound you have when you add these uninspired vowel points. But if you leave it alone, a babe will pronounce it Yuh as in hallelujah, the sound that was handed down to us from our ancestors, and is an international praise to YH/Yuh!

What is wrong with pronouncing it as written by the inspired prophet Moses and others?

I believe the reason for the two pronunciations is that some added to the scripture, the uninspired vowels when reading, and obviously some stayed with the sound of the tribe of YH hoo daw and Hallelujah that was handed down to them from their ancestors. Obviously the ones that stayed with the original sound, paid no attention to the man made vowels, because they knew it was wrong and they trusted and stayed with the sound of the the name of YH hoo daw that was handed down to them from the tribe of YH hoo daw.

I know of no other logical explanation, and any child learning to read will make the same exact sound today when seeing the YH, Yuh, in YH hoo daw if you do not add the e or any other letter, but it you add the “e”, it is a whole new ballgame, they will pronounce it also.

The inspired YH did not need a vowel added to make it say Yeh or an a to make it say Yah, which I believe to be a corruption of the Father’s name, his name is Yuh as in Hallelu Yuh which means praise YUH, which the YH sounds when being pronounced as written!

I guess the bottom line is whether or not you believe that the added vowels should be applied to the four letter sacred name, which already consist of four vowels, according to a scholar named Josephus, who lived during the time that the temple was still standing. The War of the Jews, Book 5. 5. 7.)

For live broadcast, Click on
http://wwcr.gsradio.net:3863/index.html?sid=1   at 7:30 Pm est Sat and 7:00 Pm est Sun and then click on play arrow at bottom

And for Tuesday and Thursday click on  http://www.wwcr.com/listen.html   and click under WWCR # 1 for broadcast Tuesday at 7:00 pm est and under # 2 for Thursday broadcast at 4:00 pm and click on the play arrow at bottom.

The name YH (Yuh) in all the earth 

A name is a sound. When we are in search of the “true name”, we are really in search of the “true sound”, because a name is a sound, and we actually have the sound as it was handed down to us from our ancestors, which sound/name is YH (Yuh) as in Hallelu YH or YH (Yuh) hoo daw.

We must not add more man made vowels to the sacred sound that the four letter name makes, which will change the sacred sound/name that the inspired Moses captured with only four vowels when he heard it and wrote it down. 

We must pronounce or make the sacred sound/name AS WRITTEN by Moses, and the YH will make the sound of YH, as in Hallelu YH (Yuh), and the WH will make the sound of WH, as in Joshua. Joshua or Jehoshua = “Jehovah (YHWH) is salvation” H3091 in Strong’s, or  Isaiah or Jesaiah or Jeshaiah = “Jehovah (YHWH) has saved” H3470 in Strong’s, both having the WH sound for salvation in them.

YHWH wanted his name declared throughout all the earth (Ex-9:16 and Rom-9:17), but was he able to accomplish what he wanted, and how did he accomplish it??? 

Is his name still in all the earth today, and if not, where did it go, or did the All Mighty fail to get it into all the earth???

I believe he did get his name into all the earth and the sound of his name is still in all the earth in Hallelu YH (Yuh), because that means praise YH, which is his name (Psalms 68:4), and is said the same in every church service throughout the whole earth and in every language on earth. It is the sound YH, that makes his name, not YAH.

Not only in Hallelu YH, is the Fathers name/sound, but it is in many of the prophets and righteous men in the Bible. Men like YH (Yuh) hoo daw (Judah) H3063 in Strong’s, which means YH praised, Gen-29:35.

If the sound of the sacred name was handed down to us in Hallelu YH, why would we change the sound of Hallelu YH to Hallelu YAH? 

Again, if we are commanded to say Hallelu YH, why change the sound of that name to YAH, by adding more vowels to the inspired name YHWH, through Moses, wrote down?

Bottom line is that the sound of the creator’s name of YH which is in many of the prophets name, like YH hoo daw (Judah) H3063 in Strong’s, which means YH praised, Gen-29:35, and it always carries the sound of the name of God as YH (Yuh), and NEVER YAH! 

Also the phrase “praise ye the LORD/YH”, which equals Hallelu YH, also carries the sound of YH which is handed down to us from our ancestors as YH (Yuh), not YAH, same as the YH in YH hoo daw, or YH (Yuh) hoo daw. Remember a name is a sound, and the sound of the Father’s name is handed down to us from our ancestors as YH (Yuh), NOT Yah, no matter what the wise and prudent scholars say. 

What matters is what YHWH through the inspired prophet Moses says! 

We must pronounce the sacred name as written, no more and no less!

There’s no denying that the sound of the Fathers name in the prophets names and Hallelu Yh is the Yuh sound, and there’s no way around it, and even the little children that is learning to read, will sound it that way!
 
 How to pronounce the sacred name YHWH.
 
We must first confess that a name is a sound, and if we change that sound, we change that name, even if we slightly change it, it is still changed.
 
Some things are hidden in simplicity. We must sound the name *as written* by the inspired Moses (Exodus 3:15), its that simple.
 
A name is a sound, and all you have to do is sound the four Enghish letters YHWH which equals the sound of the four Hebrew letter name, yod he wah he, and you will have the same sound that Moses captured with the four Hebrew letters of his alphabet. The yod is a y sound in Hebrew and the Hebrew letter he is a h sound, and YH in English.
 
People throughout the whole earth were commanded to praise the “self existing one” by the name YH, which means “self exist”, and only one being can claim this name whose name alone is YHWH (Psalms 83:18), and he alone self exists, and he accomplished this through the phrase Hallelu YH! Hallelu meaning praise, and YH is the name, or sound to be praised, NOT Yah.

After showing his great power through the mighty acts when bringing the children of Israel out of Egypt so that the sound of that name would never be lost even to this day, through the word Hallelujah/HalleluYH.

I can see how that the name YH (Psalms 68:4), is throughout all the earth in the sound of Hallelujah, and is sounded the same in every language on earth, even to this day. Even though it is written Hallelujah, the “jah” still makes the YH sound, not the jah or YAH sound, even unto this day in every language on earth. 

How could this have possibly happened???

It is a miracle. In Exodus 9:16, speaking of Pharaoh, It says,  “And in very deed for this cause have I raised thee up, for to shew in thee my power; and that my name (sound) may be declared (speak, talk, tell), throughout all the earth.” The apostle Paul repeat this verse again in Romans 9:17, and I believe that is how Hallelujah is in all the earth today, and it still carries the YH sound of his name in every language, and the sound of the YH is still correct in all the earth!

I believe he succeeded and got the sound of his name into all the earth and it is still there, and the correct sound is said the same in every language, and that’s no coincidence!

And the sound hasn’t changed from YH to YAH.

Think about this, the parents of the children in every language on earth and millions of people in each language, has passed the same sound of the name (YH) which is in Hallelujah down to their children from the time of leaving Egypt (app 6,000 years ago) to this very day, and to my knowledge, not one of the many many languages on earth has dared to change the sacred sound of the YH to YAH, they never missed a beat.

The name YHWH in the short form YH is written at least 49 times, and in

Psalm 102:18-19 KJVS, and seems to be saying that people in the future will be saying HalleluYH, it says,


[18] “This shall be written for the generation to come: and the people which shall be created shall “praise the Lord” (or HalleluYH). [19] For he hath looked down from the height of his sanctuary; from heaven did the LORD (YHWH) behold the earth; …”

The word “Lord” in the above is the name YH and the phrase “praise the Lord”, sounds like it could be saying that future people (who are in spiritual bondage) will be saying HalleluYH when gathered together in church, verse 20 - 22, like they are doing today. Of course most don’t even know what they are saying. Hallelu means praise, and the YH is the one to praise or Hallelu.

You can take the sound of the sacred name which is stored in letters, which sound can later be pulled out and heard by others, and the sound would be as plain, clear, and fresh as if the name was just spoken to them. Remember a name is a sound!

The sound of the sacred name was actually recorded and the recorded sound is handed down to us today by the YH in many of the prophets and other righteous men’s name, and the word Hallelujah/HalleluYH.

Again, there’s absolutely no way that the sound of the YH could have ever gotten lost, because the sound of the name is recorded throughout all the earth in the name Hallelujah, and in many of the prophets names.

The Bible says that we are fearfully and wonderfully made, and our minds can record and store such an important sound of our creator’s name and hand it down from generation to generation. 

It would take a miracle for thousands upon thousands of proud people to forget the sound of their tribal family name (Judah which means praise YH, and which has the sound of YH in it), and imagine a child, that hears the sound of their name called out thousands of times when growing up, to forget their name, and if they did, the parents would remind them, same as the thousands of a tribe would remind someone of the family tribal name if they somehow could forget it.

The sound of the name YHWH was stored in tables of stone, writing with the finger of YHWH himself, in the Ten Commandments.

The reason the YH sound, or shortened form of the name YHWH was stored in the names of many of the prophets, was to make sure it would never be lost, because the sound of their names were heard every day for years and correctly handed down to us and thereby by naming their children after them it would be impossible to loose the sound/name.

The name Judah says it all, and it has the sacred name stored in it, which name means praise YH and the YH is pronounced YH, not YAH.

Gen 29:35  “And she conceived again, and bare a son: and she said, Now will I “praise the LORD” (YHWH): therefore she called his name “Judah”; and left bearing.”

H3063  (Strong)
יְהוּדָ
yehûdâh
yeh-hoo-daw'
From H3034; celebrated; Jehudah (or Judah), the name of five Israelites; also of the tribe descended from the first, and of its territory: - Judah.
Total KJV occurrences: 820 times.”

Remember the Hebrew is read from right to left and the יְה (YH) is on the right side of the Hebrew name but English is read from left to right, YH- hoo-daw, and we don’t need those two little dots under the “Y”, telling us to add an “e” between the Y and H.

Who could ever forget the sound of the sacred name that is stored in the tribe that our Savior comes from, the tribe whose name means praise YH, (YH- hoo-daw)?

https://forvo.com/languages/he/ 
is a website that will pronounce names in Hebrew.

Four vowels were used to make the sacred name!!!

When the four letters of the sacred name is transliterated, literally brought over sound for sound into English letters, NOT translated, we simply sound the sacred name as written by Moses.

Who says that we have to supply more vowels letters to the sacred four letter name (which all ready consist of four vowels), and what vowels should we add to the sacred name that Moses wrote down with only four letters?

While we are at it, why not throw in a few consonants also?

It makes sense to me, to just find out what sound those four letters carries, and just pronounce it as written by Moses, whose job it was to capture the sound, which he did, with only four letters, no more, and no less.

It doesn’t even matter whether the four letters are vowels or consonants, but what matters is what sounds they make all by themselves, as written by Moses. It is not our job to edit God’s word or his name, but to believe what is written, as written.

Again a name is a sound, and the short form of the sacred name (YH) is preserved in many of the prophets names, also in the word Hallelujah, and is pronounced Hallelu YH, not YAH. The name Isaiah, Jeremiah, Nehemiah, and many other names, and the iah, and jah, equals the Hebrew YH sound. The “i” was originally a “y” which can be verified in the World Book Encyclopedia etc, and you do not need the vowel “a” in between the “i” and “h”, which makes the YH sound of the sacred name, and you do not need an “a” between the “WH” either. 

It appears to me that the bottom line is that each of the four letters that make up the sacred name of the Almighty carriers a certain sound which should not be polluted with any other vowels or consonants letters that changes that sound! It could be that simple. Remember that a name is a sound, and when you change the sound, you change the name. 

If you have any problem sounding the YH, just get a child that is learning to read, and listen to them, for out of the mouth of “babes”, he shall prefect praise, because he hid some things from the wise and prudent, and revealed it unto “babes”

Remember also that Moses was a very educated man in Egypt, who was tough to read and write and was more than able to capture the sacred sound of the sacred name with only four letters, No More and No Less, each carrying a specific sound. 

Anyone else could have done the same thing as Moses, as long as they knew what sound the letters of their alphabet carried and could read and write, they would have captured the exact same sound of the sacred name by using the same four letters.

Those of us who can read and write can also repeat the process, making the same sound that Moses made, with the sound of the same four letters, when we know the equivalent of what sound the four letters of their alphabet makes in our alphabet. We do not have to change the sound or add extra letters, only know what sound the the same letters carry in our alphabet, and then pronounce or sound it, and that same sound that is preserved in those four letters, will be just as fresh and clear as the day Moses captured it and preserved it with those four letters, much like preserving fresh organic vegetables from the garden, and opening the gar in the winter, and it is as fresh and good as it was in the spring, HalleluYH.

Remember a name is a sound, and I don’t understand how these 4 ancient Hebrew letters, which were used to capture the full sound of something so important as the sacred name, could ever change. The four letters still makes the same sound, or how else can anyone know for sure the sound of the sacred name??? 

Psa 72:17  says, “His name (name is a sound) shall endure for ever: his name shall be continued as long as the sun: and men shall be blessed in him: all nations shall call him blessed.

Psa 72:18  Blessed be the LORD (YHWH) God, the God of Israel, who only doeth wondrous things.

Psa 72:19  And blessed be his glorious name (sound) for ever: and let the whole earth be filled with his glory; Amen, and Amen.”

Someone could deliberately add to the sacred 4 letter name, and change the sound of it, bringing that name to naught, and thereby creating another name or sound, otherwise the name will remain the same forever, as long as no one messes with the letters that makes the sound. Just leave it alone.

I can see how that someone can take his name in “vain” by crashing it or falsifying it by changing the sound. The Egyptian picture hieroglyphics of the word “vain” shows crashing or falsifying something, desolate, vain, vanity, false, lying lies, and this could be what happened when they try hiding the name by adding more vowel points to the name to change the sound, which already consisted of four vowels, and thereby crashing or falsifying it by changing the sound, and thereby changing the name itself. And the scripture says in exodus 20:7,

“Thou shalt not take the name LORD (YHWH) thy God in vain; for the LORD (YHWH) will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain.” See also Deuteronomy 5:11

Once someone learns to read, by learning what sound each letter of their alphabet carried, they would be able to write letters to someone else, and describe events and relate the sound of names etc to another person who spoke the same language. Or why even learn to read and write?

Moses said in Deu 32:3  “I will publish the name LORD (YHWH): ascribe ye greatness unto our God.”

Moses would write down what he heard, without any vowel points, and if he were to publish a news paper, I wonder could someone else who could read, understand what he was saying, and even understand the sound of names of people, cities, and the name of The All Mighty?

I would think that when the Ancient Paleo Hebrew writing was changed to modern block Hebrew writing, the sound of the alphabet letters never changed, only the style of writing, for convenience, much like cursive writing versus printing.

If every language in the world were to bring the sound of the Hebrew letters over into their language and pronounce the letters as written, it seems that they would produce the same sound, much like Hallelujah (HalleluYH), no matter if written in Chinese, etc. They would not necessarily Know what the sound means, unless it was the sound of a familiar city etc, but it seems they would have the correct sound in their language, even if they did not know the meaning. 

Perhaps that is why YHWH, in exodus 3:14, told Moses to tell them that the one who causes “to be” (I AM) or the “self existing one” has sent me, giving them some insight into what the sound of the name YHWH means, the name that he was about to reveal in Exodus 3:15.

Even if our English letters of YHWH were carried over to Chinese letters or back to the Hebrew equivalent letters, it seems to me that their children in each language would pronounce or sound it the same way that our children would pronounce or sound it. 

Perhaps YHWH never intended to have vowel points in the first place, because the Hebrew has it’s own vowels, which scholars were not aware of for years, or perhaps Moses would have had them on top of the three vowels that make up the sacred name, but they were added by men. At any rate, if they had not been added, we would not be having this discussion, and EVERYONE would be saying the name the same, because they would be making the same sound sounding the vowels or consonants in their language. If the sacred name consisted of four vowels, as Josephus said (The War of the Jews, Book 5. 5. 7.), why add more vowels to it, and change the sound???

Once someone learns to read, after learning the sound of the alphabet of a particular language and what sound each letter of the alphabet makes, then they can communicate by mail, with anyone who has also learned to read that language.
 

Cc 
Bcc 
Slideshow
 
Pronouncing the Sacred Name Yhwh as written!


We must remember that A NAME IS A SOUND and if we change the SOUND, we change the name!


When we pronounce the sacred name as written, we get a totally different sound/name than if we add more vowels (uninspired) to it!


The sacred name Yhwh is the most important subject in the world, because there is salvation, healing, deliverance, and prosperity, etc in it!


Did you know that the  scripture teaches that we are wonderfully made, Psalms 139:14, therefore most of us can remember sounds or names that are important to us, like the name of our Creator, or even the name of our spouse.


Even though we can receive information in many ways, “hearing” is the more ordinary and natural way of receiving information!


Ask yourself the question, can and should the sacred name be pronounced as written, Yhwh, without adding any outside uninspired vowels into the sacred name, which absolutely changes the original sound/name of Yhwh to a different sound/name, or should we simply pronounce the name as written, Yhwh, and get a natural involuntary “u” sound between the Yh and Wh, making the sound/name Yuhwuh.


Again, if we read the inspired Yh as written, we get an involuntary “u” sound between the Y and h, making the sound of Yuh, as in hallelujah (Hallelu Yuh), which means praise Yuh.


Now if we choose to add an uninspired “a” or “e” between the Y and h, we get a totally different sound/name, remember a name is a sound, and we do not want to give glory to another name.


The evidence shows that this is where the names Yah, as in Yahweh, and Yeh, as in Yehovah comes from.


I believe we are unwittingly falsifying the original sound/name by adding the uninspired vowels, because when we do, it changes the sound/name, from the original sound, that Moses heard, which he captured with four letters, NOT six or seven, when adding the uninspired vowels to the inspired four vowels, changing the sound, and therefore changing the name!


The sound of the Yh in the prophets names and the word Hallelu Yuh that was handed down to us from our ancestors, is very compelling evidence, but is not our strongest point, our strongest point is the inspired 4 vowel, which makes the sound of the sacred name Yuhwuh, when read as written, without adding anything to it, and it is a fact that the uninspired vowels will change that sacred sound/name, when added to it.


You can look up Jehovah in the encyclopedia, and it explains how the vowels from Adonai/master were never intended to be added to the name Yhwh, but to remind the reader not to read the Yhwh as written, because they said it is too holy, hundreds of years later, in the 1500 ders, a man named Peter Gaddis did it any way, probably not understanding what the vowel points were there for in the first place!


What about evidence!


There is absolutely no evidence to support the name Yahweh or Jehovah and the very foundation of what evidence that some claim, is based on the uninspired vowel points of Adonai being added up into the inspired four letter sacred name, thereby changing the sacred sound and in turn changing the sacred name! What evidence is that?


That is the only evidence they have, which is not evidence at all, because it is based on man made vowel points added to the inspired Yhwh which alters the sound of the sacred sound that Yhwh originally makes when pronounced as written.


Again, there is absolutely no credible evidence to support the pronunciation of Yahweh or Jehovah because BOTH rely on the added uninspired man made vowel points!


When reading the whole article, I present positive proof that “BEFORE” the uninspired vowels were added into the sacred name of Yhwh, the sound of the name of our Creator was pronounced as written, “Yuhwuh”, as in Hallelu Yuh, which is the sacred sound that went into all the earth and was handed down to us from our ancestors!


Another way the sound of the sacred name was preserved and handed down to us other than in the word Hallelu Yuh, which Hallelu means praise and “Yuh” is the name of the one who is to be praised, and the Yh is found in many biblical names, and is pronounced Yuh in Hebrew.


  The sound that the Yh originally made, Yh begins the short form of Yhwh, is preserved in many of the prophets names like Eli-Jah which means my God is Yuh-Wuh, and is pronounced Eli-Yuh in Hebrew. The name Judah, is actually Yuh-hoo-daw in Hebrew, and is another one of the more glaring proofs of the sound that the YH originally carried, “before” the uninspired vowel letter "a' was forced in-between the Y and H.


Why would anyone want to add the uninspired vowels to the inspired sacred four letter name of Yhwh, which already consisted of four vowels, and change the sound of the sacred name of Yhwh (Yuh wuh) to Yahweh or Jehovah???


I have never been presented with any conclusive proof of the Yahweh or Jehovah pronunciation.


Again , when we add an uninspired “e” between the Y and H, we get a Yee sound as in Jehovah and when we add an uninspired “a” in between the Y and H, we get a Yah sound, as in Yahweh, but when pronouncing it as it was originally written, we will get an involuntary “u” sound as in hallelu Yuh, the sound that went into all the earth back then, and is all the earth today. (Exodus 9:16 and Romans 9:17).


Again, there is absolutely no conclusive evidence to support the name Yahweh or Jehovah as being the sacred sound or sacred name. If I have missed it, I would like to see or hear it. Hallelu Ye or Isaia Ye was never handed down to us.


Whether deliberate, in order to keep us from saying the name, or through an honest mistake, we have been lied to.


Jer 16:19 says,  “O LORD (Yuhwuh), my strength, and my fortress, and my refuge in the day of affliction, the “Gentiles” was shall come unto thee from the ends of the earth, and shall say, Surely our fathers have “inherited lies”, vanity, and things wherein there is “no profit”.

Jer 16:20  Shall a man make gods unto himself, and they are no gods?

Jer 16:21  Therefore, behold, I will this once cause them to know, I will cause them to know mine hand and my might; and they shall “know that my name is The LORD (Yuhwuh).”


NOTICE how that the inherited lies, is connected with not knowing the correct name, which he will eventually cause us to know!


Notice also that he will cause them to know that his name is “Y h w h”, NOT

Y a h w e h, Y e h o w a h, or any other name with more than four letters!


His name has been forgotten, Jeremiah 23:27.


Click Here for Audios

https://www.sacrednamesound.com/audio.html


Rom 10:9  “That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus (Yhwh), and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved…..


Rom 10:17  “So then faith cometh by “hearing”, and “hearing” by the word of God.

Rom 10:18  But I say, Have they not “heard”? Yes verily, their “sound” went into all the earth, and their words unto the ends of the world.” (Read Roman’s 10:9-18 and see the connection between the name (Yhwh) in verse 9 and the sound in verse 18)


The above is speaking of “hearing” and calling upon Yhwh in the flesh of his son!!!


Even though we can receive information in other ways, “hearing” is the more ordinary and natural way of receiving information. Especially during the biblical times when there was no printing presses.


People “heard” the sound of the sacred name that was declared throughout the whole earth (Ex-9:16), and handed that sound/name down to us, from generation to generation.


Even though most people have forgotten what hallelu-Yuh even means, they are still saying or “sounding” it the way it was passed down to us, in all languages, from our ancestors. This is no coincidence.


The “sound” of the sacred name is recorded in many of the prophets like Eli-Yuh, which means my God is Yuhwuh. Who could ever forget the sound of his name, a man that could shut up the heavens that it rain not?


Also names like Yuh hoo daw (Judah), which means praisers of Yuh wuh, the tribe that the Messiah is from, which sounds are also handed down to us in the Hebrew.


We receive this information by “hearing”, which is far more reliable than the uninspired vowels that men, who followed the tradition not to say the sacred name, added into the inspired four vowels of the sacred name, changing the sacred sound of it.


It is an undeniable fact, that adding an “a” or “e” to the sacred name will change the sacred sound away from the sound it will make if pronounced as written.






Mal 3:16  says, “Then they that feared the LORD (YHWH) spake often one to another: and the LORD (YHWH) hearkened, and heard it, and a “book of remembrance” was written before him “for them” that feared the LORD (YHWH), and that “thought upon his name”.

Mal 3:17  And they shall be mine, saith the LORD (YHWH) of hosts, in that day when I make up my jewels; and I will spare them, as a man spareth his own son that serveth him.”


(How would you like to be in that book of remembrance?)



Psa 91:14  “Because he hath set his love upon me, therefore will I deliver him: I will set him on high, “because” he hath “known my name”.

Psa 91:15  He (he that knows name) shall call upon me, and I will “answer him”: I will be with him in trouble; I will “deliver him”, and honour him.

Psa 91:16  With long life will I satisfy him, and shew him my salvation.”


It is said that the above promises are referring to the Messiah, but I believe they are also extended to all the children of YHWH that “know his name” to call on it.


And he will also be with us in time of trouble; And He will also deliver us, “because” we know his right name to call on it for deliverance, Joel 2:32.


We have scripture showing that these promises can apply to us also, who live Godly in the Messiah and “call on his name”. But how can we call on his name if we don’t really believe and know it? (Romans 10:13-14)


There is salvation, healing, deliverance, prosperity etc in the name Yhwh.


There is a way to conclusively prove what “sound” the Father’s name carried “BEFORE” the uninspired man made vowel points were added to change the sound, which we can do, because the short form of his name is recorded in many of his prophets name, long “before” the man made vowel points were added, like Elijah (Yuh), which means my God is “Yuh” and is pronounced Eli-Yuh in the Hebrew, and also in the international praise of Hallelu Yuh, which means praise Yuh, and is in all the earth and goes all the way back to Exodus, see (Ex-9:16 and Romans 9:17!


The sound of Hallelujah is handed down to us from our ancestors and is said the same throughout the whole earth.


The Father’s name is in the name Elijah (Eli Yuh), the YH (Jah) in Elijah’s name in Hebrew is definitely sounded or is pronounced “Yuh”, same as in Hallelu Yuh, which is the sacred sound that is handed down unchanged to us today from our ancestors.


Even though we have the “jah” in Hallelu jah and the jah in Eli jah, it is the YH and is still sounded and pronounced “YuH”, with a natural involuntary “u” vowel sound which comes naturally when pronouncing or sounding the YH (try it).


I prefer the natural occurring “u” sound far above the forced man made vowels “a” or “e”, that were added into the inspired YHWH by men who followed the tradition not to say or sound the sacred name YHWH as it was originally written, and try to cause us to do the same, which happens if we follow the tradition of these men, and it could possibly make our worship vain (calling on the wrong sound/name), if we are following the comments of men not to say the right name, and by doing so, calling on a different name/sound all together.


Remember, it is undeniable that a name is a sound, and if we change the sound, we change the name, and no one knew this any better than the men who added the vowels into the original YHWH, for that very purpose!


When placing the uninspired “a” or “e” between the Y and H, it creates the Yah or Yeh sound, and if this was the right sound/name, these men would have been going against their own tradition of not to say the sacred name, which is NOT in keeping with their tradition not to vocalize it.


“If” adding the “a” and “e” vowels were correct, which causes us to say Yahweh or Jehovah, they would have vowel pointed the name with something besides the “a” or “e”, in order to keep us from sounding it right!


Therefore if we depend on either of these added vowels, adding them into the sacred name, changing the sacred sound, we will not have the same sound/name that Moses captured with only four letters (which were vowels themselves, according to Josephus who lived back then, (The War of the Jews, Book 5. 5. 7.)

).



  Elijah or Eliah = “my God is YHWH.


H452  (Strong)

אֵלִיָּהוּ    אֵלִיָּה

'êlı̂yâh    'êlı̂yâhû

ay-lee-yaw', ay-lee-yaw'-hoo


Notice that these men (who followed the tradition not to say the sacred name) vowel points an “a” vowel to go between the Y and H, to make you sound Yah, instead of YH (Yuh), BUT this was done “AFTER” the sound of the sacred name “Yuh” was well established in Eli-Yuh the prophet’s name, and that sound will never change in the Hebrew language because the sound of his name was and is so well known.


Remember, this man Elijah (Eli-Yuh) was very great in the earth, and could even shut up the heavens that it rain not.  Who could ever forget the sound of his name so quickly? Remember, the sound of the Creator’s name YH/Yuh was well recorded in Eli-Yuh’s name “BEFORE” the added vowels came along, and therefore the added vowels had no affect on the Yuh “sound” of the YH in his name.


Click here to hear it correctly pronounced or sounded in Hebrew, without the man made vowel “a” added to it.


https://forvo.com/search/Elijah/he/


You can clearly hear the Yuh sound, same as in Hallelu Yuh and other names with iah or jah in them!


Remember Elijah’s name in Hebrew was so well-established “BEFORE” the added vowels, and therefore the vowel points could not change that which was already established.


How wise is our All Mighty Creator to do that, record his name in the names of so many, that it will continue as long as the sun?


Psa 72:17  “His name shall endure for ever: his name shall be “continued” as long as the sun: and men shall be blessed in him: all nations shall call him blessed.”


His name is “continued” through his children, sons and daughters who are in the family of YHWH.


He actually recorded the sound of his name in such a way that is even better than the best of any man made tape recorder that can be, manipulated, stolen, rotten, etc, and the recorded sound is absolutely more reliable than written letters that is salted with vowels that are added not just by men, but by religious men who strictly followed a strict tradition not to say the sacred name, who well knew that a name is a sound and can be changed by adding only one vowel, which they did in order to keep people from reading the original name of YH-WH.



Names like Jecon-iah also has the Father’s name in them, as many of the prophets and others whose name ends or begins in iah or jah, which is pronounced YH (Yuh), “BEFORE” the uninspired vowels were added by men who followed the tradition not to say or sound the sacred name of YH (Yuh) as in hallelujah or the YHWH (Yuh Wuh) when the YHWH is sounded as written, by anyone who can read. Just sound those letters that are equal to the Hebrew letters, without adding any vowels, and the right vowels will come automatically!


These uninspired men forced an “a” or “e” between the Y and H to make some pronounce Yah, as in Yahweh or Yahwah and the “e” to make others say Yeh as in Jehovah or Yehowah etc, because of their tradition. Ask yourself which camp you are in, the Yahweh or Jehovah?


Jecon-iah equals or means “Jehovah (YHWH) will establish” (according to Strong) and the iah (YH) on the end is clearly pronounced “Yuh”, same as in the international praise Hallelujah, sounded “Hallelu Yuh”. Hallelu means praise, and “YuH” is the name of the one to be praised, it’s that simple!

Click below to hear the iah (YH) of Jeconiah’s name pronounced in Hebrew.


https://forvo.com/search/Jeconiah/  


Another man’s name that has the Father’s name/sound in it is “Judah”, which = “praised Yuh Wuh”, which sound goes all the way back to Gen-29:35, which is also “BEFORE” the man made vowel point system was added, and the YH sound in it is also “Yuh”, as in Hallelu Yuh and Eli Yuh etc.


Click here to hear it pronounced in Hebrew

https://forvo.com/search/Judah/he/


I believe the reason that the wise and prudent scholars can’t agree and have not been able to conclusively prove one way or the other, is because they are not tracing the “sacred sound” back far enough, “before the added vowels”, and trusting in YHWH, but instead, they are trusting in the arm of flesh and putting confidence in man, Psalms 118:8, running after the letters instead of the sacred sound, remember a name is a sound! We are fearfully and wonderfully made and can hand down a sound better than any recorder.


The YH in Joshua also makes the Yuh sound, as in Hallelu Yuh, etc.


Joshua equals Yuh ho shua which means YHWH saved.


H3091  (Strong)

יְהוֹשֻׁעַ    יְהוֹשׁוּעַ

yehôshûa‛    yehôshûa‛

yeh-ho-shoo'-ah, yeh-ho-shoo'-ah

From H3068 and H3467; Jehovah-saved; Jehoshua (that is, Joshua), the Jewish leader:


Click here to hear it pronounced in Hebrew


https://forvo.com/search/Joshua/he/



Even the name of the city Jerusalem is brought over sound for sound, because names are transliterated, not translated!


H3389  (Strong)

יְרוּשָׁלַיִם    יְרוּשָׁלַםִ

yerûshâlaim    yerûshâlayim

yer-oo-shaw-lah'-im, yer-oo-shaw-lah'-yim


Even though there’s an e (:) between the “Y” and “R” in Jerusalem, the Hebrew “yod” (Y in English), still Carries the Yuh R sound, not a Ye sound because it is the name of a city, Jerusalem, and is transLITERated, not translated, the literal sound for sound of the letters!


Click here for the Hebrew sound

https://forvo.com/search/Jerusalem/he/


When you remove the man made vowels or vowel points from other names , like Joshua, Isaiah, Jerusalem, etc, it still has the same sounds, and if we pull the added vowels back out of the sacred name, it should also still sound the same, and it will if we sound the YHWH as written!


If the sacred sound of the sacred name YHWH is Jehovah or Yahweh and we we pull the man made added vowels from the YHWH, it should still make the sound of Yahweh or Jehovah, but it don’t, it makes the YuH WuH sound, with the natural involuntary “u” sound!



Now if the sacred name/sound is YuH WuH, and when we pull the natural involuntary “u” vowels out of the YHWH, it still makes the same sound when pronouncing the YHWH, just like other names because the natural involuntary “u” vowel sound comes back every time.


The “u” vowel sound is built or baked in and when pronouncing the YHWH, it comes in automatically!


Again, the above is also consistent with the sacred sound/name in the word Hallelujah (Yuh) that is handed down to us from our ancestors, which means praise Yuh!


They are not being consistent with the transliterated YH sound!


Joshu wuh and Joshu Way 

יְהוֹשֻׁעַ    יְהוֹשׁוּעַ

yehôshûa‛    yehôshûa‛


If they were hiding the sound of the sacred name, by putting the E or “A” between the Y and H, what was the sound they was hiding “without” the “E” and “A”, or “before” they added the “E” or “A”???


In other words, is there no way of knowing what the YHWH sounded before the man-made vowels???


In other words, what sound would the YHWH have made without adding an “a” or “e” vowel to the sacred sound/name which already consisted of four vowel?


What sound was the inspired YHWH making by itself, that the uninspired men wanted to hide, by adding more vowels to change or hide the true original inspired sound?


I believe most modern day scholars know that putting an “e” between the YH in order to make a Yeh sound, is not correct, because it never carries that sound in any of the prophets names or the word hallelujah, how can we trust that putting an “a” between the YH in other places to make the sound of Yah is correct either?


People do not say Hallelu Yee, or Eli-Yee etc.


After all, the same men that followed the tradition not to say (or sound) the sacred name of the YH in the long form (YHWH), by adding an e between the Y and H, were the same men who added an a between the Y and H in the prophets names and other places!


Even if we can not accept the handed down sound of Yuh, with the natural involuntary “u” sound verses the forced man made “a” or “e” sound, which is added by men who would not even vocalize the name, because of their tradition, it is still a far better choice to go with the Yuh sound and the YHWH and sound it as written.


Why go with Yuh? First and foremost, is because that is what is written and that is the unmistakable sound it makes when we read it, and we have many witness to this sacred sound of Yuh that has been handed down to us unchanged, from our ancestors. The name was declared throughout the whole earth, and handed down to us from generation to generation in Hallelu Yuh. It is an international praise, and said the same in all major languages throughout the whole earth, Chinese, Russian, English, German etc. Hallelu means praise and Yuh is the name of the one to be praised.


Many new comers to the sacred name movement are told to say Hallelu YAH, but that is not the name that they previously used and neither did all their ancestors. They correctly said Hallelu Yuh, and the same with the prophets names that has been handed down, having the YH (Yuh) sound in their name.


Just read the YHWH and sound it as written, same as you do with all the other words and names of prophets and cities etc.


Just like the city Jerusalem with out the vowels

Y  r  s  l  m


City of Bethlehem

            B  thl  h  m


The name Judah

                  Y d  h


To the Church in Philadelphia

Rev 3:7  And to the angel of the church in Philadelphia write; These things saith he that is holy, he that is true, he that hath the key of David, he that openeth, and no man shutteth; and shutteth, and no man openeth;

Rev 3:8  I know thy works: behold, I have set before thee an open door, and no man can shut it: for thou hast a little strength, and hast kept my word, and “hast not denied my name (sound)”.


These men that followed the tradition not to say the sacred name, placed an “e” between the Y and H in the full form of the name YHWH approximately 7,000 times, causing the “Yeh” sound as in Yehovah.


These same men placed an “a” between the Y and H in the short form of the sacred name approximately 50 times, causing it to make a “Yah” sound, as in Yahweh or Yahwah or Yahway, which ever.


You would think that later day scholars would choose the “Yeh” sound above the Yah sound, because of the long form of the name and it written that way so many more times than the short form.


I believe that many of the scholars could not bring themselves to choose the “Yeh” sound, even though you have so many more “Yehs” (app 7,000), in the YHWH, than the Yahs, and they could have made this choice because they knew that none of the prophets names ever made the “Yeh” sound, and they knew the prophets has the YH sound in their name!


And neither did any of them sing Hallelu Yeh in the assembly.


Therefore they went with the Yah sound, possibly because they didn’t know the sacred name already consisted of four vowels, and didn’t need any more.


If we can’t trust the “e” between the Y and H in YHWH (over 6,000), how can we trust the “a” between the Y and H (50 times)?


The same men that followed the tradition not say the sacred name also added the “a” between the Y and H, which no more right than the added “e” !



יָהּ The “T” looking mark under the YH equals an “a” vowel between the Y and H, making a Yah sound as his name. If Yah truly was the sound of the name in Psalms 68:4 and the prophets names etc, why did they vowel point it correctly, and thus or therefore causing the reader to pronounce the sacred name correctly, when the tradition they followed forbids this???


The same thing in many of the prophets names like Isaiah יְשַׁעְיָה


Which means YHWH has saved or YHWH saves. Again, why give away the sound of the sacred name, which goes against their tradition?


When we do not add more vowels to the sacred name, and pronounce it as written, the name YH is sounded Yuh as in Hallelu Yuh, Eli-Yuh, and IsaYuh etc.


The ancient Paleo Hebrew has no vowel points, and to my knowledge, there has never been any artifacts uncovered with vowel points and neither does the Dead Sea Scrolls writings have vowel points.


Before the vowel points, they just sounded the YHWH as written, and what ever needed vowel came automatically.


The uninspired vowels can also  change words to mean something different than what is written, making the user of these vowels the interpreters of scripture with their own private interpretations.


Peter reminds us that the scripture of old came to us without the vowel points, which can be “manipulated” by the will of man, and thereby creating a private interpretation.


2Pe 1:20  says, “Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.

2Pe 1:21  For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.”


There are many scriptures that teaches that we are to sing praise to his name, as in Hallelu Yuh, or praise YH (Yuh), and that way it will be handed down from our ancestors through song.


Psa 91:14  “Because he hath set his love upon me, therefore will I deliver him: I will set him on high, “because” he hath known my name.

Psa 91:15  He shall call upon me, and I will answer him: I will be with him in trouble; I will “deliver him”, and honour him.

Psa 91:16  With long life will I satisfy him, and shew him my salvation.”


I believe that scripture can be correctly interpreted from scripture along, without the extra vowels that were added by men.


It is like they are saying that the name/sound can not be known apart from the added vowels!


There is a reason that scholars cannot agree on the sound of the sacred name, which is actually a sacred sound, even though they have been studying this very subject for hundreds of years, and are still not 100% sure of the sound/name, even though the scripture teaches we can know 100% for sure what the sound/name is.


People don’t realize it, but they subconsciously believe that if the vowels had never been added, no one would ever have a chance of knowing the sound of the sacred name, “from scripture along”, but the truth is the opposite. With the added vowels, no one can possibly know, because none of us lived back then, and all they can do is make the best GUESS they can, from their studies, but it is still just a GUESS, and no one can ever be for sure, using the man made vowel point method!


What evidence do we have for Yah?


Is there any audible evidence recorded for Yah?


One thing the scholars have proven, after hundreds of years of diligent study, is that they can not conclusively prove the sound of the sacred name by the method they are using, or they would all agree, instead of saying there is no way of knowing for sure, which is actually contrary to scripture, which conclusively teaches that his people will know his name!


What in the world would we do without the uninspired vowels that they added, would anyone ever know the sacred name, that the scripture teaches we can know???


“We have tradition and “sounds handed down unchanged” from The All Mighty to the patriarchs to the present day.”


Some things we are commanded to teach to our children and children’s children, such as the law which specifically says to  praise YHWH, or to Hallelu (praise) YH (Yuh).


Deu 4:10  Specially the day that thou stoodest before the LORD thy God in Horeb, when the LORD said unto me, Gather me the people together, and I will make them hear my words, that they may learn to fear me all the days that they shall live upon the earth, and that “they may teach their children”



The different choices between the Yeh, the Yah, and the Yuh sound is that two of them has an uninspired “e” and “a” vowel sound forced between the Y and H, by a group of uninspired men

called Masoretes which added them to the inspired Hebrew text, thus changing the name/sound.


This causes the reader to make a different sound than they would normally have made when reading the unadulterated inspired YH as written by the inspired prophet Moses and other holy men that were also moved by the Holy Spirit.


Remember, they observed the tradition that the sacred sound of the sacred name was too Holy to pronounce, so don’t think it strange that they would change the true sound of the YH (Yuh) to Yeh or Yah, by placing one of their vowels between the Y and H (vowels), changing the original sound and in turn, changing the name!


There is a reason why the scholars today have not conclusively proven the sound of the sacred name, and therefore they have simply made their best guess from their studies, and when all is said and done, it is still just a GUESS. This problem goes away when we follow the “sound” of the sacred name that is handed down to us from generation to generation from our ancestors.


The scholars have been studying and debating this for hundreds of years, and not one of them, that I know of, claims to know 100% for sure. How could they know, because ones GUESS is as good as another one’s. There is absolutely positively no way that they could know for sure, when using an uninspired vowel point system!   


One of the reason is because they are looking in the wrong place, and working from a false premise that the sacred four letters needed some outside help in how to pronounce the sacred name.


Remember, these same men that added these vowel points followed the tradition of not saying the sacred name and therefore they would add a vowel between the Y and H, and the W and H, to make you say or sound something different, thinking they are doing good by protecting the sound, which is actually  the sacred name, because the sacred name is a sacred sound!


They should be looking for the sound that the sacred four letter name YHWH makes without without adding more letters!


Noticed that I gave you two of the options, the Yeh, and the Yah, which has the uninspired vowels between the YH and between the WH, but what about the unadulterated YH or Yuh sound?


There is a super big (major) HUGE difference between the Yeh, and the Yah sound which you get when reading the man-made vowels into the text, and the Yuh sound that comes naturally when just reading the unadulterated YH, without any added man made vowels!


You will automatically get an involuntary vowel sound when sounding the inspired YH (Yuh), like the sound of the Father’s name In Hallelujah, which is handed down to us from our ancestors. You DO NOT add the “u” sound or anything to the inspired word, it is built in with the YH and WH, and it will come out when pronouncing or sounding the YH or WH as it was written by Moses, and that without any outside vowels, and the sacred sound will be just as fresh and clear as the day Moses captured the sound of the sacred name (Exodus 3:15) with the four letters that equals our English YHWH letters and it is sounded (Yuh Wuh) when sound the inspired letters without adding to them, and when you put it in front  of BABES that ay learning to read, they will say the same thing, and then you will hear the right sound for yourself.


Mathew 21:16 says, “Out of the mouth of BABES and sucklings thou hast perfected praise?” And there’s another scripture that teaches that somethings are hid from the wise and prudent (Possibly scholars), and revealed unto BABES, Mathew 11:25.


The Hallelu means praise, and the Yuh is the sound of his Mighty name YH, Psalms 68:4!


In order to find the truth, we must find and accept the facts, and that in itself is a fact.


# 1. In order to change a name, you must change the sound, because a name is a sound, that is a fact.


It is also a fact that the same people who added the vowels points to the inspired word, are the same people who followed the tradition not to say the sacred name, therefore they would add vowel points in order to change the sound of the sacred name to make you say something else. And when you change the sound of a name, you change the name, no matter how slightly you change it. Remember a name is a sound!


These people’s tradition taught the sacred name was too Holly and too sacred for people to say, which is contrary to the scripture.


They for the most part were successful in this, but there was one thing they could not do, and that was change the sound that had already went into all the earth through the word hallelujah (Yuh) and through the sound of the Father’s name that he placed in many of his prophets and others.


Example: they added an “e” vowel into the original inspired YH sound of the Father’s name in the name YH hoo daw to make later day scholars sound something different, because of the tradition they had to not to say the sacred name (why wouldn’t they?), but the original sound of the tribe of YH hoo daw, without this added vowel had already been established BEFORE, same as the sound of hallelujah today, and many unto this day still pronounce YH (Yuh) hoo daw from the original sound/name YH (Yuh) as in HalleluYuh! The ones that don’t, add the man made vowels to a name that already consisted of four vowels, according to Josephus who lived back then. (The War of the Jews, Book 5. 5. 7.)



I believe this is why the All Wise Father put the sound of his name in the prophets, and Hallelujah (Yuh) etc and handed it down to us from our ancestors, because a sound is much more reliable than changeable vowel pointed letters!


Vowels can be deceitful


How do we explain why some pronounce or sound the YH in YH hoo daw as Yuh, same as in Hallelu Yuh, and some sound the YH as Ye, Ye hoo daw as in Yehovah?


Remember it is very important to understand that whatever sound the YH makes without added vowels, is the Father’s name. Is it Yeh, Yah, or Yuh?


I personally don’t believe his name is YEH, or Yah, but that’s the sound you have when you add these uninspired vowel points. But if you leave it alone, a babe will pronounce it Yuh as in hallelujah, the sound that was handed down to us from our ancestors, and is an international praise to YH/Yuh!


What is wrong with pronouncing it as written by the inspired prophet Moses and others?


I believe the reason for the two pronunciations is that some added to the scripture, the uninspired vowels when reading, and obviously some stayed with the sound of the tribe of YH hoo daw and Hallelujah that was handed down to them from their ancestors. Obviously the ones that stayed with the original sound, paid no attention to the man made vowels, because they knew it was wrong and they trusted and stayed with the sound of the the name of YH hoo daw that was handed down to them from the tribe of YH hoo daw.


I know of no other logical explanation, and any child learning to read will make the same exact sound today when seeing the YH, Yuh, in YH hoo daw if you do not add the e or any other letter, but it you add the “e”, it is a whole new ballgame, they will pronounce it also.


The inspired YH did not need a vowel added to make it say Yeh or an a to make it say Yah, which I believe to be a corruption of the Father’s name, his name is Yuh as in Hallelu Yuh which means praise YUH, which the YH sounds when being pronounced as written!


I guess the bottom line is whether or not you believe that the added vowels should be applied to the four letter sacred name, which already consist of four vowels, according to a scholar named Josephus, who lived during the time that the temple was still standing. (The War of the Jews, Book 5. 5. 7.)


For live broadcast, Click on

http://wwcr.gsradio.net:3863/index.html?sid=1 at 7:30 Pm est Sat and 7:00 Pm est Sun and then click on play arrow at bottom


And for Tuesday and Thursday click on  http://www.wwcr.com/listen.html and click under WWCR # 1 for broadcast Tuesday at 7:00 pm est and under # 2 for Thursday broadcast at 4:00 pm and click on the play arrow at bottom.










The name YH (Yuh) in all the earth


A name is a sound. When we are in search of the “true name”, we are really in search of the “true sound”, because a name is a sound, and we actually have the sound as it was handed down to us from our ancestors, which sound/name is YH (Yuh) as in Hallelu YH or YH (Yuh) hoo daw.


We must not add more man made vowels to the sacred sound that the four letter name makes, which will change the sacred sound/name that the inspired Moses captured with only four vowels when he heard it and wrote it down.


We must pronounce or make the sacred sound/name AS WRITTEN by Moses, and the YH will make the sound of YH, as in Hallelu YH (Yuh), and the WH will make the sound of WH, as in Joshua. Joshua or Jehoshua = “Jehovah (YHWH) is salvation” H3091 in Strong’s, or  Isaiah or Jesaiah or Jeshaiah = “Jehovah (YHWH) has saved” H3470 in Strong’s, both having the WH sound for salvation in them.


YHWH wanted his name declared throughout all the earth (Ex-9:16 and Rom-9:17), but was he able to accomplish what he wanted, and how did he accomplish it???


Is his name still in all the earth today, and if not, where did it go, or did the All Mighty fail to get it into all the earth???


I believe he did get his name into all the earth and the sound of his name is still in all the earth in Hallelu YH (Yuh), because that means praise YH, which is his name (Psalms 68:4), and is said the same in every church service throughout the whole earth and in every language on earth. It is the sound YH, that makes his name, not YAH.


Not only in Hallelu YH, is the Fathers name/sound, but it is in many of the prophets and righteous men in the Bible. Men like YH (Yuh) hoo daw (Judah) H3063 in Strong’s, which means YH praised, Gen-29:35.


If the sound of the sacred name was handed down to us in Hallelu YH, why would we change the sound of Hallelu YH to Hallelu YAH?


Again, if we are commanded to say Hallelu YH, why change the sound of that name to YAH, by adding more vowels to the inspired name YHWH, through Moses, wrote down?


Bottom line is that the sound of the creator’s name of YH which is in many of the prophets name, like YH hoo daw (Judah) H3063 in Strong’s, which means YH praised, Gen-29:35, and it always carries the sound of the name of God as YH (Yuh), and NEVER YAH!


Also the phrase “praise ye the LORD/YH”, which equals Hallelu YH, also carries the sound of YH which is handed down to us from our ancestors as YH (Yuh), not YAH, same as the YH in YH hoo daw, or YH (Yuh) hoo daw. Remember a name is a sound, and the sound of the Father’s name is handed down to us from our ancestors as YH (Yuh), NOT Yah, no matter what the wise and prudent scholars say.


What matters is what YHWH through the inspired prophet Moses says!


We must pronounce the sacred name as written, no more and no less!


There’s no denying that the sound of the Fathers name in the prophets names and Hallelu Yh is the Yuh sound, and there’s no way around it, and even the little children that is learning to read, will sound it that way!



How to pronounce the sacred name YHWH.


We must first confess that a name is a sound, and if we change that sound, we change that name, even if we slightly change it, it is still changed.


Some things are hidden in simplicity. We must sound the name *as written* by the inspired Moses (Exodus 3:15), its that simple.


A name is a sound, and all you have to do is sound the four Enghish letters YHWH which equals the sound of the four Hebrew letter name, yod he wah he, and you will have the same sound that Moses captured with the four Hebrew letters of his alphbet. The yod is a y sound in Hebrew and the Hebrew letter he is a h sound, and YH in English.


People throughout the whole earth were commanded to praise the “self existing one” by the name YH, which means “self exist”, and only one being can claim this name whose name alone is YHWH (Psalms 83:18), and he alone self exists, and he accomplished this through the phrase Hallelu YH! Hallelu meaning praise, and YH is the name, or sound to be praised, NOT Yah.


After showing his great power through the mighty acts when bringing the children of Israel out of Egypt so that the sound of that name would never be lost even to this day, through the word Hallelujah/HalleluYH.


I can see how that the name YH (Psalms 68:4), is throughout all the earth in the sound of Hallelujah, and is sounded the same in every language on earth, even to this day. Even though it is written Hallelujah, the “jah” still makes the YH sound, not the jah or YAH sound, even unto this day in every language on earth.


How could this have possibly happened???


It is a miracle. In Exodus 9:16, speaking of Pharaoh, It says,  “And in very deed for this cause have I raised thee up, for to shew in thee my power; and that my name (sound) may be declared (speak, talk, tell), throughout all the earth.” The apostle Paul repeat this verse again in Romans 9:17, and I believe that is how Hallelujah is in all the earth today, and it still carries the YH sound of his name in every language, and the sound of the YH is still correct in all the earth!



I believe he succeeded and got the sound of his name into all the earth and it is still there, and the correct sound is said the same in every language, and that’s no coincidence!


And the sound hasn’t changed from YH to YAH.


Think about this, the parents of the children in every language on earth and millions of people in each language, has passed the same sound of the name (YH) which is in Hallelujah down to their children from the time of leaving Egypt (app 6,000 years ago) to this very day, and to my knowledge, not one of the many many languages on earth has dared to change the sacred sound of the YH to YAH, they never missed a beat.


The name YHWH in the short form YH is written at least 49 times, and in


Psalm 102:18-19 KJVS, and seems to be saying that people in the future will be saying HalleluYH, it says,


[18] “This shall be written for the generation to come: and the people which shall be created shall “praise the Lord” (or HalleluYH). [19] For he hath looked down from the height of his sanctuary; from heaven did the LORD (YHWH) behold the earth; …”


The word “Lord” in the above is the name YH and the phrase “praise the Lord”, sounds like it could be saying that future people (who are in spiritual bondage) will be saying HalleluYH when gathered together in church, verse 20 - 22, like they are doing today. Of course most don’t even know what they are saying. Hallelu means praise, and the YH is the one to praise or Hallelu.


You can take the sound of the sacred name which is stored in letters, which sound can later be pulled out and heard by others, and the sound would be as plain, clear, and fresh as if the name was just spoken to them. Remember a name is a sound!


The sound of the sacred name was actually recorded and the recorded sound is handed down to us today by the YH in many of the prophets and other righteous men’s name, and the word Hallelujah/HalleluYH.


Again, there’s absolutely no way that the sound of the YH could have ever gotten lost, because the sound of the name is recorded throughout all the earth in the name Hallelujah, and in many of the prophets names.


The Bible says that we are fearfully and wonderfully made, and our minds can record and store such an important sound of our creator’s name and hand it down from generation to generation.


It would take a miracle for thousands upon thousands of proud people to forget the sound of their tribal family name (Judah which means praise YH, and which has the sound of YH in it), and imagine a child, that hears the sound of their name called out thousands of times when growing up, to forget their name, and if they did, the parents would remind them, same as the thousands of a tribe would remind someone of the family tribal name if they somehow could forget it.


The sound of the name YHWH was stored in tables of stone, writing with the finger of YHWH himself, in the Ten Commandments.


The reason the YH sound, or shortened form of the name YHWH was stored in the names of many of the prophets, was to make sure it would never be lost, because the sound of their names were heard every day for years and correctly handed down to us and thereby by naming their children after them it would be impossible to loose the sound/name.


The name Judah says it all, and it has the sacred name stored in it, which name means praise YH and the YH is pronounced YH, not YAH.


Gen 29:35  “And she conceived again, and bare a son: and she said, Now will I “praise the LORD” (YHWH): therefore she called his name “Judah”; and left bearing.”


H3063  (Strong)

יְהוּדָ

yehûdâh

yeh-hoo-daw'

From H3034; celebrated; Jehudah (or Judah), the name of five Israelites; also of the tribe descended from the first, and of its territory: - Judah.

Total KJV occurrences: 820 times.”


Remember the Hebrew is read from right to left and the יְה (YH) is on the right side of the Hebrew name but English is read from left to right, YH- hoo-daw, and we don’t need those two little dots under the “Y”, telling us to add an “e” between the Y and H.


Who could ever forget the sound of the sacred name that is stored in the tribe that our Savior comes from, the tribe whose name means praise YH, (YH- hoo-daw)?


https://forvo.com/languages/he/ is a website that will pronounce names in Hebrew.


Four vowels were used to make the sacred name!!!


When the four letters of the sacred name is transliterated, literally brought over sound for sound into English letters, NOT translated, we simply sound the sacred name as written by Moses.


Who says that we have to supply more vowels letters to the sacred four letter name (which all ready consist of four vowels), and what vowels should we add to the sacred name that Moses wrote down with only four letters?


While we are at it, why not throw in a few consonants also?


It makes sense to me, to just find out what sound those four letters carries, and just pronounce it as written by Moses, whose job it was to capture the sound, which he did, with only four letters, no more, and no less.


It doesn’t even matter whether the four letters are vowels or consonants, but what matters is what sounds they make all by themselves, as written by Moses. It is not our job to edit God’s word or his name, but to believe what is written, as written.


Again a name is a sound, and the short form of the sacred name (YH) is preserved in many of the prophets names, also in the word Hallelujah, and is pronounced Hallelu YH, not YAH. The name Isaiah, Jeremiah, Nehemiah, and many other names, and the iah, and jah, equals the Hebrew YH sound. The “i” was originally a “y” which can be verified in the World Book Encyclopedia etc, and you do not need the vowel “a” in between the “i” and “h”, which makes the YH sound of the sacred name, and you do not need an “a” between the “WH” either.


It appears to me that the bottom line is that each of the four letters that make up the sacred name of the Almighty carriers a certain sound which should not be polluted with any other vowels or consonants letters that changes that sound! It could be that simple. Remember that a name is a sound, and when you change the sound, you change the name.


If you have any problem sounding the YH, just get a child that is learning to read, and listen to them, for out of the mouth of “babes”, he shall prefect praise, because he hid some things from the wise and prudent, and revealed it unto “babes”


Remember also that Moses was a very educated man in Egypt, who was tough to read and write and was more than able to capture the sacred sound of the sacred name with only four letters, No More and No Less, each carrying a specific sound.


Anyone else could have done the same thing as Moses, as long as they knew what sound the letters of their alphabet carried and could read and write, they would have captured the exact same sound of the sacred name by using the same four letters.


Those of us who can read and write can also repeat the process, making the same sound that Moses made, with the sound of the same four letters, when we know the equivalent of what sound the four letters of their alphabet makes in our alphabet. We do not have to change the sound or add extra letters, only know what sound the the same letters carry in our alphabet, and then pronounce or sound it, and that same sound that is preserved in those four letters, will be just as fresh and clear as the day Moses captured it and preserved it with those four letters, much like preserving fresh organic vegetables from the garden, and opening the gar in the winter, and it is as fresh and good as it was in the spring, HalleluYH.


Remember a name is a sound, and I don’t understand how these 4 ancient Hebrew letters, which were used to capture the full sound of something so important as the sacred name, could ever change. The four letters still makes the same sound, or how else can anyone know for sure the sound of the sacred name???


Psa 72:17  says, “His name (name is a sound) shall endure for ever: his name shall be continued as long as the sun: and men shall be blessed in him: all nations shall call him blessed.

Psa 72:18  Blessed be the LORD (YHWH) God, the God of Israel, who only doeth wondrous things.

Psa 72:19  And blessed be his glorious name (sound) for ever: and let the whole earth be filled with his glory; Amen, and Amen.”


Someone could deliberately add to the sacred 4 letter name, and change the sound of it, bringing that name to nought, and thereby creating another name or sound, otherwise the name will remain the same forever, as long as no one messes with the letters that makes the sound. Just leave it alone.


I can see how that someone can take his name in “vain” by crashing it or falsifying it by changing the sound. The Egyptian picture hieroglyphics of the word “vain” shows crashing or falsifying something, desolate, vain, vanity, false, lying lies, and this could be what happened when they try hiding the name by adding more vowel points to the name to change the sound, which already consisted of four vowels, and thereby crashing or falsifying it by changing the sound, and thereby changing the name itself. And the scripture says in exodus 20:7,


“Thou shalt not take the name LORD (YHWH) thy God in vain; for the LORD (YHWH) will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain.” See also Deuteronomy 5:11


Once someone learns to read, by learning what sound each letter of their alphabet carried, they would be able to write letters to someone else, and describe events and relate the sound of names etc to another person who spoke the same language. Or why even learn to read and write?


Moses said in Deu 32:3  “I will publish the name LORD (YHWH): ascribe ye greatness unto our God.”


Moses would write down what he heard, without any vowel points, and if he were to publish a news paper, I wonder could someone else who could read, understand what he was saying, and even understand the sound of names of people, cities, and the name of The All Mighty?


I would think that when the Ancient Paleo Hebrew writing was changed to modern block Hebrew writing, the sound of the alphabet letters never changed, only the style of writing, for convenience, much like cursive writing versus printing.


If every language in the world were to bring the sound of the Hebrew letters over into their language and pronounce the letters as written, it seems that they would produce the same sound, much like Hallelujah (HalleluYH), no matter if written in Chinese, etc. They would not necessarily Know what the sound means, unless it was the sound of a familiar city etc, but it seems they would have the correct sound in their language, even if they did not know the meaning.


Perhaps that is why YHWH, in exodus 3:14, told Moses to tell them that the one who causes “to be” (I AM) or the “self existing one” has sent me, giving them some insight into what the sound of the name YHWH means, the name that he was about to reveal in Exodus 3:15.


Even if our English letters of YHWH were carried over to Chinese letters or back to the Hebrew equivalent letters, it seems to me that their children in each language would pronounce or sound it the same way that our children would pronounce or sound it.


Perhaps YHWH never intended to have vowel points in the first place, because the Hebrew has it’s own vowels, which scholars were not aware of for years, or perhaps Moses would have had them on top of the three vowels that make up the sacred name, but they were added by men. At any rate, if they had not been added, we would not be having this discussion, and EVERYONE would be saying the name the same, because they would be making the same sound sounding the vowels or consonants in their language. If the sacred name consisted of four vowels, as Josephus said (The War of the Jews, Book 5. 5. 7.), why add more vowels to it, and change the sound???


Once someone learns to read, after learning the sound of the alphabet of a particular language and what sound each letter of the alphabet makes, then they can communicate by mail, with anyone who has also learned to read that language.


CLICK HERE  http://wwcr.gsradio.net:3863/index.html?sid=1 for live brodcast Saturday at 7:30 pm estern standard time and Sunday at 7:00 pm est.


Also  click http://www.wwcr.com/listen.html and click under # 1 for brodcast Tuesday at 7:00 pm est and for Thursday broadcast at 4:00 pm est click under # 2


Click Here for Audios

https://www.sacrednamesound.com/audio.html




Rev 3:8  I know thy works: behold, I have set before thee an open door, and no man can shut it: for thou hast a little strength, and hast kept my word, and hast not denied my name.
End end

CLICK HERE  http://wwcr.gsradio.net:3863/index.html?sid=1 for live brodcast Saturday at 7:30 pm estern standard time and Sunday at 7:00 pm est.
 
Also  click http://www.wwcr.com/listen.html and click under # 1 for brodcast Tuesday at 7:00 pm est and for Thursday broadcast at 4:00 pm est click under # 2
​