Cross The Message wrote above the Cross

Join us as we examine what was wrote on the Cross. The turning point in time for all humanity to take notice of what the God of the universe had accomplished for all man-kind that will but believe as Abraham did by faith and receive LIFE in the name of our Saviour. Acts 4:12

"What was wrote above the cross?" Is there any biblical proof that the Saviour's name was ever SPOKEN OR WRITTEN in any language other than Hebrew? Would a singular verse PROVE THAT? Or shall the two or three witnesses be required as in a court of law, or under Moses Law, or according to: Mat.18:16, 2Cor.13:1, 1Tim.5:19, and Heb.10:28.

DISCLAIMER AND WARNING: IF YOU LOVE TRADITION MORE THAN TRUTH... OR CAN'T STAND SATIRE as EliYah used in 1 Kings 18. I'm building an altar here to YaHWeH as well. DO NOT READ THIS AND CONTINUE PEACEABLY IN YOUR TRADITION. YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED.

READERS: IF YOU PLAN TO MAKE A SACRIFICE OF THE TRUTH PRESENTED HERE FOR YOUR TRADITION TO FEAST ON... BE ADVISED, TRUTH RESURRECTS TO BURY TRADITION. Not only that but what would you fight more for? TRUTH or Tradition believed to be truth? That's why tradition does not die very easy. But once, genuine TRUTH is discovered by seeking, praying, asking, being challenged it's worth dying for.

Why was this paper wrote ? Does the cross justify ignoring the Saviour's Hebrew name with the popular English replacement " J esus " that is less than 250 years old. "Jesus" can't fit Heb.13:8 which is timeless, Prov. 30:4 which was asked 700 B.C., the English language didn't even exist, & Acts 7:45 which is the same Greek word, but refers to Joshua, which is YaHshua in Hebrew or fully pronounced YaHWe-shua..

Why do people (claim a faith) that originated in the Hebrew language (from Israel) and Jewish culture and then decide the Hebrew text no longer has any value or authority over "the name of God and HIS son" issue?

And YET only the Hebrew text is unchallenged as completely accurate the basic letters still remaining after over 3,000 years. There is only ONE Hebrew text being printed; no other competing published texts in Hebrew of the O.T.

Now The Greek New Testament text on the other hand has over four different texts --- each claimed by someone to be the correct one from the others.

POINT OF FACT: in Biblical Hebrew and Koine Greek (Biblical Greek) their are NO equivalent letter "J" or "J" sound. And the Latin "I" is the English "Y" sound, not the 1800's NEW English Letter "J" sound.

"American Dictionary of the English Language" by Noah Webster 1828. Someone wondered where Mr. Webster got his words. Some of us should wonder where he got his letters! Under "J" quoting Mr. Webster, "J this letter has been added to the English Alphabet in modern days; the letter "I" being written formerly in words where "J" is now used. It seems to have had the sound of y, and still has in the German. The English sound of this letter may be expressed by dzh, or edzh, a compound sound coinciding exactly exactly with that of "g", in genius; the French "j", with the articulation "d" preceding it. It is the tenth letter of the English Alphabet."

And it's too bad he didn't tell you that was no accident making it SUPPOSEDLY equating the TENTH LETTER IN THE HEBREW ALPHABET, "Y" . Come on people if it sounds like a "G" make it a "G" instead of a Roman Catholic mystical substitution for the real thing, "Y".

PROVE THIS TO YOURSELF. Look up any "J" word in the KJV using Strong's Concordance, then look up it's code number in the lexicon dictionary in the back, and you will find the pronunciation starts with a "Y", not soft "g" or "J". Also these dictionaries show the corresponding English letters to the Hebrew or Greek letters of that language ... and there are no "J"s. Sorry, I know, I wished there was first time I looked too. Just like Santa Claus, we wished there was one, but there is none.

Did you ever wonder WHO HAS AUTHORITY TO NAME? POWER TO NAME? Those interested in TRUTH must honestly ask this question (letting the Bible be the final authority of that question as well). Ask me to write on that after this. Contact Dale Sabin 19591 Kelsay Rd., Barnett, MO 65011 (573) 378-1917

But I know some of you will call the neighbor anything while we have all meet the man who insists on everyone getting "his name" right. I wonder if God has given us some directives in this area? I think so.

"TRANSLATION� THE ONLY SCRIPTURAL ARGUMENT for using a Latin-zed, Greek-zed, English name for our Saviour�s Hebrew name today. But according to Luke 23:38 HIS NAME and HOME were not included in the GREEK and LATIN, ONLY the superscription of (HIS CRIME), THE KING OF THE JEWS.

FIRST, "translation" means an equivalent word "BY MEANING" in another language. You must therefore find another word already in existence with THE SAME MEANING. Men love to invent things. Many men have invented many different saviors over the years. And if God didn't give an equal to HIS name in other languages we need to stick with the way it would properly sound in Hebrew, as best as we can determine that with our native accent showing forth our sincere ignorance or incapability. But shall we not give HIM our best effort?

The scripture says, Isaiah 40:25 "To whom then will ye liken me, or shall I be equal ? saith the Holy One." This is the same "Holy One" of Psalm 16:10 whose body wilt not see corruption! So which of the Greek gods, Roman Catholic Trinity, tradition of men, or nick - names will be used as the EQUAL substitute for the God-given authoritative Hebrew name? There are no clones when it comes to the Saviour's Hebrew name of our Messiah, our soon coming King. It was CLEARLY spoken in Hebrew, to the Apostle, by the resurrected "Jewish" MESSIAH. Acts 26:14 "Hebrew tongue" verse 15 "the Hebrew name which - Jesus was a substitution for."

SECOND, "transliterate" means to write "THE SAME SOUND PRONOUNCED" in the symbols of a different language. We do not object to this for proper names, but the key is therefore still the Hebrew not the Greek or Latin and especially not the English. Can you say Hallelu-YaH to that ?

The question of EXACTLY what was written has become of great interest for those which desire to defend TRANSLATING (making different spoken words supposedly EQUAL TO) the proper authoritative given HEBREW name of the Saviour verses TRANSLITERATING (speaking the same pronunciation of the appellation) i.e. the Saviour's Hebrew name. What was wrote above the cross - is the only section of scripture that remotely suggests that the Saviour's name was ever written in (please note not spoken though we will assume if it were written it could as well be spoken) however this would then assume that the N.T. Greek text we have is the correct translation?, or is there a better transliteration of the Hebrew name which was SPOKEN FROM HEAVEN Acts 14:26 Hebrew Tongue ...

obviously the Greek doesn't fit too well if we agree with the majority of Bible commentators and Strong's Exhaustive Concordance that H3091 Yehowshuwa', "Jehovah-saved", or better put today as Daniel said knowledge would increase, "YaHWeH is Salvation" so the Hebrew H3091 for "Joshua" would be YaH-shua or YaHWe-shua properly TRANSLITERATED of that authoritative given Hebrew name, YaHWe-shua as it should also appear in Matthew 1:21, Acts 7:45, Heb.13:8, etc. and WITHOUT A DOUBT WAS ON THE CROSS IN HEBREW LETTERS.

I am not so sure that we can know "for sure" what was written above HIM, because there even appears differing ideas as to the exact words used in the four different gospels. By FAITH each of us will know the best we can know HIM. To some HE will remain LATIN to others HE will remain GREEK to some GERMAN, RUSSIA, KOREAN, and to some ENGLISH. By faith and history HE will REMAIN HEBREW TO ME.

To say it is not as clear as we would like it. I admitted it, will you? Or after reading this will you have so greater knowledge to just insist absolutely that you are right and this paper must be wrong? Contact Dale Sabin 19591 Kelsay Rd., Barnett, MO 65011 (573) 569-0141

They wrote in different lettering style then and who's handwriting was it, Pilate's or his court reporter or the Jerusalem Calvary Tribune? We shall examine this from our English versions:

" THIS IS " is the beginning of both Matthew and Luke. But a close look at the Greek texts will soon show the sincere seeker of truth that this phase, " THIS IS " is not exactly the same, or the placement of it in different Greek manuscript texts. Plus these two words, " THIS IS ", are omitted in the other gospels: Mark and John. Therefore it is the conclusion of this writer that:

1) these two filler words "THIS IS" are not that important as to the conclusion of this matter 2) the primary point being whose head "THE KING OF THE JEWS" was hanged over 3) it can be well argued that these words actually appeared (in Latin) - which the chief priests wanted changed, but in the simpler Hebrew and Greek languages it could be doubtful and can simply be added English narrative in our "ENGLISH" translations.

Of real importance and the most probable reason for the writing over his head was possibly tradition for notorious lawbreakers to be put at notice to others which might think of doing such crimes. I have not studied the historical factor to prove or disprove this THEORY but would be interested in any findings. None the less, we know it was done this time. It is stated "his accusation" which according to Strongs is "HIS CRIME" that of being "THE KING OF THE JEWS" therefore an unlawful rival to Caesar, i.e. Latin Roman.

This section is agreed upon by all the gospels and attested to by the chief priests in John 19:21.

This FACT we should all be able to agree upon. Now for the not so easy explanation of :

Matthew being the Gospel to the Jews, and the Jews by now all knowing where the MESSIAH was from perhaps did not find it that compelling to write "OF NAZARETH" or was the Holy Spirit thinking "OF HEAVEN"? Considering the Roman Government covered the known world, it is very possible that the NAME and HOME of a CRIMINAL was given and recorded in THE CRIMINAL'S LANGUAGE which:

3) in the case of the Saviour his physical appearance was not recognizable since
"his visage was so marred more than any man" Isaiah 52:14.

Write: Dale Sabin 19591 Kelsay Rd., Barnett, MO 65011 (573) 569-0141Copyright 2000 Dale Sabin Permission is granted to reprint in full with authors name, address, phone without edit provided free distribution without charge to the Glory of YaHWeH.

There were many men with the Saviour's given name, in the days of Messiah, for Israel was looking for the Messiah to come and they knew "the Hebrew name" HE would come in from Proverb 30:4, the sixth book in their scriptures, "Joshua" Acts 7:45. Therefore many children were given the proper name "Joshua" or better "YaHWe-shua" in hopes that he would be that promised one, the Saviour, or the Deliverer. This is another reason why " OF NAZARETH " could have been added, if it were not the Roman custom to list where the criminal was from. "YaHWe-shua of Nazareth" pin points which "YaHWe-shua" is being spoken of. Just as the denomination : Church of the NAZARENE , nicely used Nazarene.

Since we do not believe in different placards for the four gospel writers, we do conclude that they all saw the same thing. Therefore we are reading the four different accounts from four different perspectives. Not four different writings! Hence, I will attempt to harmonize the two different gospels which list the languages represented on the "superscription" ; Luke 23:38 And a superscription also was written over him in letters of Greek, and Latin, and Hebrew, THIS IS THE KING OF THE JEWS. Let that sink in what was recorded for our reproof, for correction, for instruction. 2 Timothy 3:16

How many of us have taught, heard preached, and accepted systematic teaching based upon word order; as to priority, importance, and order. Now if you're not going to accept it here. Don't go being a HYPOCRITE doing it again in the future. Furthermore reject all those past teachings using "word order" priority. And always argue against it in the future as the devil's advocate.

As already noted "THIS IS" is probably filler words for the English reader, but with out a doubt the words: "THE KING OF THE JEWS" were written according to Luke 23:38 as "HIS CRIME" was
first wrote in GREEK,
                       LATIN second,
            and HEBREW Last.

Next, the only gospel that lists both (1) the languages wrote on the Cross and (2) THE NAME of the Saviour, is JOHN. This gospel's language order is similar to Luke's but puts HEBREW first, then GREEK before the LATIN. Could it be that this writer as Luke's writer did listed the languages in order as given for the text which the writer recorded. I think so. Luke only reported HIS CRIME and listed the languages in order that HIS CRIME was written in. But JOHN having listed the name and home of the SAVIOUR started his list with the language of the name and home they were written in. Since he had already listed Hebrew as the first language there was no need to list it again after GREEK and LATIN.

At this point we have harmonized Luke and John but will it fit with the other Gospels? I want to remind you that many multi-language signs which contain a trademarked logo or name DO NOT always REPEAT the name or logo IN EVERY LANGUAGE WITH DIFFERENT SYMBOLS. Just as President Bush's name was not "translated" Bush "as a small tree" during Desert Storm verbally. We saw Arab's which perhaps can't speak English giving thumbs up and saying nothing but, "BUSH" - in heavy accent right on the TV screen.

In conclusion the name and home was ONLY IN HEBREW (the Saviour's nationality of birth, language and national language, HEBREW) while the crime was also written in the two primary languages of the general secondary culture (GREEK) and then the legal ruling government (LATIN) so all people passing by could understand HIS CRIME of the one they didn't know anyway and thought they had no reason to know his name or home, though the beginning and ending language would give them his nationality, HEBREW. Kind of wrap it all up together.

Kind of like a multi-lingua direction sign, with the brand name always the same.

Still we do not have any scriptural proof that the name or home was in any other language than Hebrew which by the list of languages given in JOHN does make it surely known that the name and home were given in Hebrew letters.

IF the WHOLE STATEMENT NAME, HOME, AND CRIME were complete in each language Hebrew first, Greek second, and Latin last; as most people suppose without any study into this issue.
HEBREW   YaHWe-shua of Nazareth THIS IS THE KING OF THE JEWS
GREEK    YaHWe-shua of Nazareth THIS IS THE KING OF THE JEWS
LATIN    YaHWe-shua of Nazareth THIS IS THE KING OF THE JEWS
this would make John's gospel at odds with that wrote by Luke as to language order with Greek first, Latin second and Hebrew last (INSTEAD OF FIRST). Why wouldn't the scriptures agree in these only two place? NO HARMONY. If you are going to hold to this view and call Luke confused, never should you ever use word order as a biblical proof for any emphasis in the future, ever. Because you are discounting the simple answer and solution to this mystery to hold to your tradition.

HARMONY HERE: But with THE NAME AND HOME wrote first AND ONLY IN HEBREW, then followed by HIS CRIME in Greek first, then Latin, ending with THE CRIME IN HEBREW, all the gospels are in harmony and do not fight with each other - though wrote by four different men at four different times from four different perspectives. But yet they all read the same sign and this explanation works for all the gospels together in harmony. Matthew concerned with only the Hebrew language for the Gospel to the Jews ( YaH-hoo-dee-s ) the people being called by HIS NAME, YaHWe, or YaHWeH.

Pardon me for a little intermission and point of possible interest. If this rabbit trail will break your concentration on the subject, just skip the next paragraph. Contact Dale Sabin 19591 Kelsay Rd., Barnett, MO 65011 (573) 569-0141. If we are going to be called by HIS NAME, did you ever wonder where cooties (Ku'te)s came from. According to the World Book 1991 Encyclopedia Dictionary which gives the original language and origin of a word. The origin of this word, "unknown." Could it be the Jews were not too long ago persecuted and know by their Hebrew term, "YaH-hoo-dee-s" and as slang no child wanted to get "Cooties" especially if Hilter's in town. If you have other evidence I would be open to hearing the origin of the word, "Cooties". But this hit me. Please give any references to the contrary.

If you don't do any thing else with HEBREW, the answer to Proverbs 30:4, the name of God and HIS SON is a Hebrew answer and we dare not deny that question asked 700 years before Christ came to the earth to walk as a man.

		Name & Home Town	HIS CRIME written over HIM
Matthew 27:37	is the Gospel to the Hebrews	THIS IS YaHWeshua	THE KING OF THE JEWS
Mark 15:26			THE KING OF THE JEWS
Luke23:38	Greek, Latin, & Hebrew	THIS IS	THE KING OF THE JEWS
John19:19-20	Hebrew, Greek, Latin	YaHWeshua of Nazareth	THE KING OF THE JEWS
John19:21	The Chief Priest said -		THE KING OF THE JEWS

The Jews always refuse to say HIS name out of their tradition.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Proposal of what was written over HIM, read down the columns for the language recorded in that Gospel, by order, read side ways as to what was wrote in that language.

John 19.20	Luke 23:38	Wrote above the Cross	LETTERING STYLE
Hebrew		YaHWeshua OF NAZARETH	Wrote in Hebrew letters
Greek	Greek	THE KING OF THE JEWS	Wrote in Greek letters
Latin	Latin	THIS IS THE KING OF THE JEWS	Wrote in Latin letters
	Hebrew	THE KING OF THE JEWS	Wrote in Hebrew letters

Matthew 27:37 is the Gospel to the Hebrews Zech.9:9
"THIS IS YaHWeshua THE KING OF THE JEWS"

I am assuming that this author was only interested in the Hebrew content of the message (which contains the complete message) with the exception of his home town. Being wrote by a Hebrew perhaps it was so common knowledge at this point to the Jews that it was really not necessary for the Jews (the Hebrews) to know which town HE was from but that HE was INDEED KING of ALL the Jews. The phrase, YaHWe-shua of Nazareth is only used in the gospels and book of Acts; no where else in the N.T.

Besides; when the chief priests approached Pilate (John 19:21) their concern seems to be only limited to HIS CRIME, not HIS NAME and home. Now assuming his name and home would have also been in Greek and Latin following, would not have Luke's Gospel agreed with John's and the chief priests would have said the complete message: YaHWeshua OF NAZARETH THE KING OF THE JEWS ?

Instead they only said: "THE KING OF THE JEWS" because his name and home were not written in Greek and Latin for everyone to read. Besides If the message always included the name and home in all languages THEN THE LANGUAGE ORDER GIVEN IN LUKE AND JOHN WOULD AGREE, and they don't - therefore letting us know that the name and home were not in Greek or Latin over HIS head ONLY IN HEBREW BECAUSE HE WAS A HEBREW and HAD a HEBREW NAME, NOT A LATIN NAME, NOT A GREEK NAME, AND NOT A MIXTURE OF THE TWO BEING ENGLISH "IESU" "S" ending. Then in the 18th century started some more substituting in the front with "J" this time.

But when the Saviour walked on this earth, in flesh, HE never heard himself called, "Jesus." Can you say, Amen? If he did you wouldn't be reading this. The scriptures pertaining to this matter:

Matthew 27:36 And sitting down they watched him there; Matthew 27:37 And set up over his head his accusation written, THIS IS YaHWeshua THE KING OF THE JEWS.

Matthew 27:38 Then were there two thieves crucified with him, one on the right hand, and another on the left.

Mark 15:24 And when they had crucified him, they parted his garments, casting lots upon them, what every man should take.
Mark 15:25 And it was the third hour, and they crucified him.
Mark 15:26 And the superscription of his accusation was written over, THE KING OF THE JEWS.
Mark 15:27 And with him they crucify two thieves; the one on his right hand, and the other on his left.

Luke 23:35 And the people stood beholding. And the rulers also with them derided [him], saying, He saved others; let him save himself, if he be Christ, the chosen of God.
Luke 23:36 And the soldiers also mocked him, coming to him, and offering him vinegar,
Luke 23:37 And saying, If thou be the king of the Jews, save thyself.
Luke 23:38 And a superscription also was written over him in letters of Greek, and Latin, and Hebrew, THIS IS THE KING OF THE JEWS.
Luke 23:39 And one of the malefactors which were hanged railed on him, saying, If thou be Christ, save thyself and us.

John 19:17 And he bearing his cross went forth into a place called [the place] of a skull, which is called in the Hebrew Golgotha:
John 19:18 Where they crucified him, and two other with him, on either side one, and YaHWeshua in the midst. John 19:19 And Pilate wrote a title, and put [it] on the cross. And the writing was, YaHWeshua OF NAZARETH THE KING OF THE JEWS.
John 19:20 This title then read many of the Jews: for the place where YaHWeshua was crucified was nigh to the city: and it was written in Hebrew, [and] Greek, [and] Latin.
John 19:21 Then said the chief priests of the Jews to Pilate, Write not, The King of the Jews; but that he said, I am King of the Jews.
John 19:22 Pilate answered, What I have written I have written.

Contact Dale Sabin 19591 Kelsay Rd., Barnett, MO 65011 (573) 378-1917
Copyright 2000 Dale Sabin Permission is granted to reprint in full with authors name and this statement complete without edit including advertisement below provided free distribution without charge to the Glory of YaHWeH.

According to Hebrews 13:8, John 5:43, Acts 7:45, Romans 10:13, Acts 2:21, Joel 2:32 in answer to Proverbs 30:4

Mini-studies coming available on the internet soon if hyperlinked, just click on them now:

1)      Why isn't the word, Hallalu-YaH in your King James Version Bible?
         If you think the four places "Alleluia" in Revelation is all,
         there are over thirty places "Hallalu-YaH" belongs in the Old Testament.
         Do you know where they belong? Click here and find out.

2)      FOURTY Biblical proofs that the name, "YaHWeH" belongs in the New
         Testament at least FOURTY TIMES FOR SURE. Perhaps even 55 times and if
         that is so, perhaps it was substituted out completely just as it was
         substituted out of the Old Testament over 6,800 times.

3)      Copies of 1380, 1534, 1560, 1599, 1611 King James Version Bibles as
         Historical PROOF, Bible photocopies PROVING, "Jesus" spelled with the
         "J" was NOT the Saviour's name before 1750 A.D. making it a new hybrid
         nickname just as Jehovah was exposed as being a hybrid name by James
         Rotherham in the preface of his 1902 Emphasized Bible - first Bible to
         print Yahweh the 6,800 plus times Yahweh belongs in the Old Testament.

I'm in search for ANY BIBLE printed before 1800 AD with the "J" letter
starting the name of Jesus. Can you help me find any, I can't. Thank You.

9)      GENERIC "OVER-DOSE" 37 original text words ALL TRANSLATED, lord or god
          in the KJV with a KEY CODE, I call it the KING JAMES O.T. NAME CODE.
       Many preachers don't even know it, shame on you. The translators knew
          it, devised it, and continued the suppression plan of "the name."

10)    "What was wrote above the cross?" Is there any biblical proof that
          the Saviour's name was ever SPOKEN OR WRITTEN in any language other
        than Hebrew? Would a singular verse PROVE THAT? Or shall the two or
          three witnesses be required as in a court of law, or under Moses Law,
          or according to: Mat.18:16, 2Cor.13:1, 1Tim.5:19, and Heb.10:28.

11)     If you can do any sincere study and find a good systematic rebuttal
          of these findings --- I'm all ears. But frankly, the more I look, and
          once this truth is opened up and you come out of your box of man-made
          tradition... you will begin hearing, seeing, and finding many more
          materials which collaborate with these truths.

Unfortunately, there is a lot of mis-information out there about "the name" also.
Cover-up attempts, those which want to treat the truth as a nice discovery but
really of little relevance - they will come in line and continue in tradition, for traditions sake.
Do you seek the praise from above or beneath?

Everyone wants to know why did God allow it to happen if the name is so important of an issue?

Proverbs 25:2 "It is the glory of God to conceal a thing; but the honor of kings is to search out a matter."

If the church would start studying the word of God to show itself approved unto God instead of church leaders, elders, seminary, teachers, denomination, ordination board, and the traditions of men... we would start a revival.

But man rather be filled with "man" than the Holy Ghost and HIS word, as it is spoken in heaven and from heaven. Acts 26:14 HEBREW TONGUE.

Our Father, Hollowed be thy name,.... thy will be done in earth (our bodies) as it is in heaven...

Psalm 119:152 "Concerning thy testimonies, I have known of old that THOU hast founded them for ever."

Psalm 145:21 "My mouth shall speak the praise of YaHWeH: and
let all flesh bless HIS Holy Name for ever and ever."

That hasn't come to an end yet has it? Or did some Greek translation end it? If that's the case it happened 250 years before MESSIAH came the first time, when the Greek O.T. was the first text to SUBSTITUTE making "Kurios" equal with YaHWeH... I find that curious... don't you?

Micah 4:5 "For ***ALL*** people will walk every one in the name of his god, and we will walk IN THE NAME OF YaHWeH our God for ever and ever."

Psalm 83:18 "That men MAY KNOW that THOU, whose name ALONE is YaHWeH ,
are the most high over all the earth."

Well, we can know it, or substitute it, which will it be for you? Praise to above or praise to men's traditions below? It's a decision each of us will have to make individually because we will be judged individually by YaHWeH. Praise HIS holy name, YaHWeH.

"The Message wrote above or on the Cross" You can see this with an explanation later.

3) in the case of the Saviour his physical appearance was not recognizable since "his visage was so marred more than any man" Isaiah 52:14.

3) in the case of the Saviour his physical appearance was not recognizable since
"his visage was so marred more than any man" Isaiah 52:14.