jaziasha wrote: "Yahweh and Jehovah are two very different things, and Yahshua was not created at the council of Nicene."

Actually Yahweh and Jehovah are the same people. There wasn't a letter 'J' until recently... meaning the letter 'j' did not exist in the time of the ancients. J is the same as Y.

YHWH is the same as JHVH. The letters 'Y' and 'V' are interchangable with the letters 'Y' in representation of 'J' and the letter 'W' is interchangable with the letter 'V'.

In the modern Hebrew/Yiddish language the letter 'V' is taken in place of 'W'. So in essence the letters 'YHWH' and 'JHVH' are exactly the same. Jehovah and Yehoweh.

Now in concerns with Y'shua let use do some exploring on his subject. Y'shua was not mentioned in the writing of the Dead sea scroll which is the older then the writings of the first bible ever produced. These are the men that was supposed to be around this Y'shua character. I will post a little text that I have from a different site:

Most people do not know that the only basis for the Virgin Birth doctrine is in the Old Testament. It is based solely on one scripture in Isaiah 7:14, and this was translated INCORRECTLY. The James Moffatt translation of the Bible has the corrected translation which reads: "Behold a YOUNG WOMAN is with child and shall bear a son." [align=justify]When St. Jerome translated the entire Bible from the Greek into Latin in 400 A.D. (almost 500 years, mind you, after the Messiah's birth), he admitted that he had changed "young woman" to "VIRGIN" in the Latin Vulgate translation. Thus, Isaiah 7:14 in the Vulgate Bible reads: "Behold a VIRGIN shall conceive and bear a son." The Vulgate Bible was adopted (after a few changes) by the Roman Catholic Church in 750 A.D.[/align] According to Christian history the first bible was writing in 405 by St Jerome called the Latin Valgute. Never the less it has been concluded that none of the Gospel writers were the supposed disciples. The Septuagint was was a documentation of the Tanakh but the NT was composed of a different book.

• Old Syriac Version. Contains the Four Gospels, copied about the fourth century. Two copies exist today.
• Syriac Peshitta. This was the standard Syrian Version, created about 150-250 AD. More than 350 copies of it exist today.

Now first and foremost the quote Hebrews were already dead, the supposed authors of the NT gospels. What does that mean? That means that the NT was composed by Christians of that date. There are no true authentic scriptures dealing with Y'shua in the time that he supposedly lived...

What historians such as myself have been able to find that his story Y'shua is exactly like 16 other saviors of the world. I will comprise a list of them if you would like but there is not historical proof that he ever existed. The virgin birth story and so forth was totally taken out of context when they were trying to institute there mordern philosophy. In the geneology of the Christ (i.e. Chrishna) they placed a man in there that was cursed not have children by the Most High. You have to do your historical reseach on the man that they called Yahshuah and please understand that there is not one scripture in the Tanakh that verify his coming or is a prophecy of this man coming to earth. The scriptures say that the Most High is savior and Savior alone. I will post the scriptures sooner or later but let it be known that the scriptures verify what I proclaim.

jaziasha wrote:

"So what should we call him? Shaddai is not a name. The Bible states on many occasions that the father did certain things for his name sake and that he saved people because of his name. So then what is his name not his title. "

That is the case my sista... we should not be calling the Most High any name because there was none before his to give him a name. In referrence to Abraham, Isaac and Yacab they did not call the Most High by a name as I have referenced above. That would be blasphemy on the grandest level. He was referred to by attributes such as 'The Most High', 'Almighty', 'That Which Is',' and many other attibutes that I wouldn't have space enough to write down, but our ancient forefathers knew better then to call him a specific name.

I would like for you to consider the thought that if a man cannot even look upon the Most High least he fall dead, what greater is the man that should say his real name if there was one to say?

The All in All is above a name. The true of the matter is that the bible have a lot of contradiition which I hate to be the one to say, but there was nothing that the Most High did for his name sake. It is blasphemy to even consider that the thought of the Most High having to prove his name sake to little old us is not logical. Why would that which created the Universes of Universes have to prove his name sake to us? He has destroyed the world several of times over... caused great flood (Nile river flood) because of the wicked nation of man, do you really think that he has something to prove to us???? The arrogance of man is disturbing to say the least.

Even the Jews who are not the original Hebrews Ysraelites know better then to address the Most High by a name. The will say Ha`Sham, Adonai, and everything else before they try to call the Most High a name or what they think to be the name of the Most High. There is no name to which the Most High can be justly called. We assume names thus we try to brand our Most High with a name.

We are the created thus the creator have rights to name each and every last one. He who has no creator cannot be limited by a object that he created called a name. For the scriptures tell us, nothing was before him. Is there 1 single name that you can think of that can describe ever single thing on the face of this earth, mars, venus, sun, moon, this gall...cy or the billions of others out there. I mean can you think of a name covers every single space, 1 trillions of a trllions of a trillionth of and inch? All that is is he, thus he cannot be summed up by letters that are not even the first and last laters of the Hebrew alphabet. He is supposed be called by a discription which is the best description that our minds can comprephend and Abraham, Isaac and Jacob knew this. That is why Elyon, Shaddai and so for is what they said.

jaziasha wrote:

"Sobecause aKing desided to name himself after Yahaweh then that means that is notthe true name of the creator. Many kings named themselvesafter the god they worshiped. "

Once agian you must reference what I wrote. There is no king that could actually take a name of the Most High because he cannot be named or numbered. It is impossible. Yah as I once said is the same name of the Moon God Yah of the Egyptians. The Babylonians had a Moon God name IAH which is the same as Yah. The Sumerians had a deity by the name of Enlil and Enki. En in the Sumerian tongue is the same as Iah/Yah/Yahweh. He was the god that saved man in the Flood story of Noah (Nao in Egypt). All of these gods with the name Yahweh.

jaziasha wrote:

" And please learn me on this information. "

Ok since you asked! There were 2 great periods in our history that we were captured and taken into slavery. The first period was during the Babylonian period and the second period was during the Grecian Roman period. It was during the first period that we assumed the God name Yah/YHWH. The babylonian deity named Iah was a moon deity. As you will find according to Ezra who wrote the Torah/5 books of laws, he insituted a who different philosophy then what Abraham, Isaac , Jacob and the 12 tribes of Israel followed.

There was no mention of a Shabbot/Sabbath day or Sabbath day worship to the Hebrews prior to Moses. In one section of the Tanakh it says that we must rest on the sabbath day because the Most High rested on the Sabbath day and then in a second part the scriptures say the Sabbath day was created because he brought us out of Egypt. Yet if one does his/her historical research you will find that the ancient Babylonians had a 7th day stay in the house tradition and not work. It was within this period that we pictured up on a alot of the worship of the Babylonians.

Pre-Islam had a god that they called Allah. Allah is the same as IAH/YAH, but because of semantics many haven't caught that. The Hebrew in that day wrote in Aramaic while the pre-Muslims read in Arabic. Thus the lettering system was slightly different. This IAH was the Moon God and his name was Allah. The pre-Islamic Arabs/Babylonians prayed to the east like we were instructed to do in the scriptures. We have the feast like they do and the lunar calendar celebration like they do. Modern Muslims have this same celebration, pray the same and so forth. It was in that time that we picked up on a lot of the worship and even the Deity name of Yah/IAH/YAHWEH. Our forefathers didn't know of a deity by the name of Yahweh/or Yah. Thus many of our traditions are liken to the traditions of the pre-Muslims. We just didn't serve many gods, yet we believed that there were may goes. The first of the 10 commandment verify this "And though shall not serve any other god beside me". That statement along verifies a belief in multiple deities. Deities which we did not serve.

Now let us take a 500 year jump into the future and land in the times of the Romans and Grecians. This also was another terrible period for the Hebrews (note: I don't believe the Hebrews were in the land at that time because the scriptures prove different). The so called Hebrews of that era were enslaved to the Romans and because Paul was a roman citizen he was well learned in the ways of the Romans. History also tells us that Paul was a Priest but we know that from the scriptures that was not right because he was from the tribe of Benjiman that that was not given to that tribe, but to the tribe of Levi. That was the first mistake in the Paulian doctorine.

Secondly, if you read through the teaching of Paul or the Gospels you will be able to see that the Romans played a very big part in the destruction of the Original Hebrew teachings. During the Amarna period (The 18th Dynasty kings 'second note who were all Hebrew kings) the ancient writings were destroyed and thus the true teaching of the Hebrews were and have been lost for thousands of years. Yet the Romans knew that there were certians that still have a basic knowledge of the scriptures of old through verbal tradition. Those that came... the 72 men (Septuagint) only gave what they could remember and that is why you have the P, J E and another type of Tanakh. They were confused on the true history of the Yisraelites so we have contraditions in the scriptures today. When the 72 scribes went back home, they left these writings at the disposal of the Romans and Grecians and to this today we have the New Testament.

History proves itself and I will go into more detail about this but right now my time has run short.