as WITNESSED by...



The Witness of IaHUChaNaN (known in the World as John), is the most Trustworthy of the Four Gospels. Most important is that his is the ONLY eye witness account.
IaHUChaNaN is that disciple whom IaHUShUA' Loved... This is not to say that IaHUShUA' didn't Love the others. The reason IaHUShUA' Loved IaHUChaNaN was because IaHUChaNaN was perhaps the only of the Apostles who Understood at that point.
IaHUShUA' indicated, that whoever had this Understanding (and acted upon it) would be given more... and who did not hold this Understanding and live by it, would lose even what they thought they had.
It has been said that IaHUChaNaN, in referring to himself as such was "puffing up", but in fact he wanted to direct the readers attention to IaHUShUA's Love rather than to himself.

While MaTiTIaHU (Matthew), did record the Teachings of IaHUShUA' with accuracy, the book was a later compilation based on these Teachings with an added (anonymous) narrative borrowed from Mark and using a source document (Q, which stands for "source" is probably the original MaTiTIaHU) in common with Luke.

Despite the fact that Luke gives such a high recommendation of himself as a historian, he can hardly be considered a credible witness. Even though he did have excellent sources, he twisted the Truth to fit his Amalgamated GREEK belief structure. Luke is the only "New Testament" writer who is totally Greek. While he is a "Disciple" of Paul, he goes to great lengths to misrepresent him (in an effort to "make him look good"?)

John(IaHUChaNaN ) Mark was also at one point associated with Paul, until a disagreement occurred and he went to Ierushalem and got his account, primarily, from the testimony of KePha (Peter). Neither Mark, Luke or even Paul were eye witnesses to the events, and it is doubtful that they ever even saw IaHUShUA.

We know that what they did record was based on the real event and that the sources used, do tend to agree on many points. Together these provide a sort of "second witness" (though not admissible in a court of law) to IaHUChaNaN's Testimony.
However the Second Witness we TRULY rely on is
IaHUeH's SPIRIT of TRUTH... Which we wouldn't even Know about without IaHUChaNaN's Witness of IaHUShUA's TESTIMONY!

It is interesting (and a bit frightening) to note that this important Testimony was almost left out of the "Canon", it is reported that it's inclusion and especially Revelation's, caused dissention.


The importance of the Given Names of the Saviour and the ONE that sent Him, are stressed throughout the Scripture. IaHUChaNaN reveals a Clear understanding of this Importance.

Our Saviour's Name in Hebrew is (read from right to left). This is a contraction of two words; IaHU (the short form of IaHUeH) and HUShUA (Salvation). The Hebrew spelling can be found in Strong's Exhaustive Concordance.
In ancient Hebrew there were letters that made vowel sounds as well as consonantal. Among these were the Iod, He and the Uaw; making the short i or ee, ah or eh, and oo or o sounds respectively.
Thus Iod He Uaw He would be pronounced ee ah oo eh. IaHUeH. "Yahweh" is a good phonetic spelling but "IaHUeH" is most accurate.

Coincidentally? Out of all the 22 letters of the Hebrew AlephBeth, the equivalents of these three letters are the most confused.
For example in the 1611 printing of the King Iames Uersion... "Love" is spelled "Loue", "Joshua" is spelled "Ioshua" (no "J"s occur), "unto" is "vnto", I find cases where "Jerusalem" is spelled "Hierusalem", and "i"s and "y"s are somewhat interchangeable etc...
We were moved by IaHUeH's Spirit to find the closest representation of the original letters.
The Iod is the root of both the "I" (iota) and modern "Y" as well the "J". We believe the "I" is a more correct translation, being closer to the original.
It is impossible to pronounce the "Y" as in year without first making an almost imperceptible "I" sound as in it or machine. It is likewise impossible to pronounce the "W" as in winter without first making an almost imperceptible "U" as in tune or "O" as in own.
The Uaw is the root of the "U" "V" and "W". We believe the "U" is a more correct translation, being closer to the original.

While we were at it we restored many of the other Hebrew names, rendering them closer to their ancient pronunciations.

Dating the Original Writings...

As the actual dates are even still impossible to ascertain, I base my (wide range) guesses upon the collective guesses of the "Scholars".

IaHUShUA' was Offered Up around the year 30 C.E.
Paul's Letters probably range between 50 and 65 C.E.
Mark wrote between 65 and 75 C.E.
The book called Matthew (MaTiT-IaHU) was written between 75 and 90 C.E.
Luke wrote between 75 and 100 C.E.
Tradition places IaHUChaNaN's work at around the turn of the first century, when it surfaces... translated into Greek from the Hebrew/Aramaic original composed any where between 60 and 90 C.E.

Why were these Records not written sooner?

Even though the Kindren may have erroneously supposed, that IaHUShUA' would immediately return, the chief reason that accounts of the life and teaching of IaHUShUA' and His Immediate followers, weren't written sooner is because at that time the Kindren had fully received of IaHUeH's Spirit... they didn't need to write it down... The SPIRIT of TRUTH was leading them into ALL Understanding...
bringing to mind everything that IaHUShUA' spoke and did... it wasn't till later, after the
"error" had crept in that they needed to write... to warn us... so that in this Time we could figure it out With the aid of IaHUeH's SPIRIT of TRUTH...

Do you KNOW what Time it is? Dear friend!

About the many translations ALREADY available today...

At present our library contains no less than eight-teen different translations of the Scriptures. These include both Greek and Hebrew Interlinear and we obtain more as we find them. Even though I am thankful to have most... I am not satisfied with any one of them. But together and with the Concordances, Lexicons and other dictionaries (like the Oxford English) and IaHUeH's SPIRIT to guide... I promise a much clearer understanding.
I would recommend this process to the anyones out there who are serious about Understanding IaHUeH's WORD.

The Process

This work is the result of a Critical word for word translation comparing the English word choices of other Translations, Lexicons and dictionaries.
Since it is more than probable that the original text was Hebrew/Aramaic then translated word for word into Greek, I have often resorted to the English translation of the Hebrew word for a clearer rendering.
There are subtle but quite meaningful differences.

I have omitted the Greek footnotes, as in "which in the Hebrew tongue means..." and the account of the woman taken in adultery at the beginning of chapter Eight... (which is a fragment of some other unidentified writing) as did Charles Cutler Torrey in his The Four Gospels a new translation, first copyrighted in 1933.
Where possible I have retained the Greek sentence structures (which some distinctly remind me of Hebrew). It helps replace some of the poetic quality lost by removing the Archaic English (which I am actually, still fond of, but...). The reader must think more about what the sentence says! I believe a fuller meaning can be achieved in this way.

I was actually quite surprised to find so many meanings obscured and points so ignorantly glossed over by the previous Translators, and was thankful to have at least the Greek to go back to. Of course they did the best that probably any one could have done at the time, and they were probably more than a little bit nervous, about possibly offending Pope or King.


I have retained the standard verse numbers to aid in comparision (please do!). However the sequential order having been some how previously disrupted ... has been helped by James Moffats Translation which followed the reportedly well researched work of H. von Soden (Berlin). This sequence makes more sense (and even though I am not sure exactly of the how or why it became disordered), it did not seem to take away from the meaning or context to restore it. So I did.
Normally 14 comes before 15, but not in this book. Here 14 is after 16, this is the biggest difference.

7:15-24 is at the end of Chapter five.. 7:24 comes after 7:14

Since the last Chapter (21) is apparently added by a later translator... I have included it in italics.

Oh! and yes this is STILL a work in Progress... started in 1995 .. now 2010 I see I need to go through it again...

Chapter One Chapter Eleven
Chapter Two Chapter Twelve
Chapter Three Chapter Thirteen
Chapter Four Chapter Fifteen
Chapter Five Chapter Sixteen
Chapter Six Chapter Fourteen
Chapter Seven Chapter Seventeen
Chapter Eight Chapter Eighteen
Chapter Nine Chapter Nineteen
Chapter Ten Chapter Twenty
Chapter Twenty-One

Or back to the Home page...


"To Seek out that which was Lost..."