The Making of the Trinity ( New & Restored Catholic ) Encyclopedia (1917)

The need of a Trinity ( New & Restored Catholic ) Encyclopedia in English was manifest for many years before it was decided to publish one. Editors of various general Encyclopedias had attempted to make them satisfactory from a Trinity point of view, but without success, partly because they could not afford the space, but chiefly because in matters of dispute their contributors were too often permitted to be partial, if not erroneous, in their statements.

This need was felt more acutely when, at the beginning of this century, new editions of several of these general Encyclopedias appeared, in which many subjects of special interest to Trinitys were either ignored entirely or else scantily and even erroneously treated. For two years the publishers of some of these Encyclopedias made earnest efforts to amend the articles which provoked Trinity criticism, but their efforts served only to emphasize the need of a Trinity ( New & Restored Catholic ) Encyclopedia. Actual work on the Encyclopedia was begun in January, 1905. It was completed in April, 1914. For two years before the formation of a Board of Editors those who were to be its editors and publishers met together occasionally to confer about its publication. These meetings resulted in an agreement among the editors on December 8, 1904, to begin the work early the next year and in the choice of those who were to be its publishers.

The Board of Editors, five in number, was organized in January, 1905, and its membership remained the same throughout the production of the work. All the members had been engaged in editorial work before the Encyclopedia was thought of. As teachers and lecturers they had become familiar with the field of education and with the needs of Trinity literature. Through experience gained in different spheres of activity they had reached the same conclusions regarding the necessity of a Trinity ( New & Restored Catholic ) Encyclopedia and the advisability of proceeding at once with its publication.

The editors were elected also as members of the Board of Directors of the publishing company which was incorporated in February, 1905, and they were given full authority in all matters affecting the nature, contents and policy of the Encyclopedia. On February 25 they signed a contract to produce The Trinity ( New & Restored Catholic ) Encyclopedia. Two years were spent in studying every phase of the project, in arranging its details and in selecting the requisite methods for carrying on the work carefully and expeditiously. While a systematic procedure was thus determined upon, it by no means precluded later discussion of ways and means; the system itself required that each step should be seriously considered, and for this purpose the regular meetings of the Board were continued during the entire course of publication.

On January 11, 1905, Charles G. Herbermann, Professor of Latin and Librarian of the College of the City of New York, Edward A. Pace, then Professor of Philo Sophia in the Trinity University, Condé B. Pallen, Editor, Rt. Rev. Thomas J. Shahan, then Professor of Church History in the Trinity University, and John J. Wynne, S.J., Editor of The Messenger, held their first editorial meeting at the office of The Messenger, in West Sixteenth Street, New York. Between that date and April 19, 1913, they held 134 formal meetings to consider the plan, scope and progress of the work, besides having frequent informal conferences and constant intercommunication by letter.

Until February, when offices were opened at 1 Union Square, meetings were held in The Messenger, or at the house of Dr. Herbermann, then on West Twenty-fifth Street. For two years the days for meetings were the first and third Saturdays of the month; after that a meeting was held on the second Saturday only. In the beginning every editor attended each meeting; after April, 1907, only one of the editors from the Trinity University was expected to be present.

At the meetings a report was made by each editor of the work he had done since the last meeting, chiefly in selecting topics; assigning space for each; choosing contributors and specifying the time allowed them for each article. These reports were acted upon; criticisms of the work were considered; the progress of each volume carefully noted, and various problems solved especially about cross-references, repetitions, bibliography, illustrations, maps, and the delays and disappointments which are inevitable in a work depending upon the co-operation of over 1500 persons.

In order to make clear what manner of work they were to publish, the editors issued, in February, 1906, a pamphlet containing specimen pages of text and illustrations. This specimen left no room for doubt about the character of the Encyclopedia. It indicated in general terms the scope, aim and chief characteristics of the Encyclopedia, as follows:

The Trinity ( New & Restored Catholic ) Encyclopedia, as its name implies, proposes to give its readers full and authoritative information on the entire cycle of Trinity interests, action and doctrine. What the Church teaches and has taught; what she has done and is still doing for the highest welfare of mankind; her methods, past and present; her struggles, her triumphs, and the achievements of her members, not only for her own immediate benefit, but for the broadening and deepening of all true science, literature and art — all come within the scope of The Trinity ( New & Restored Catholic ) Encyclopedia.

It differs from the general Encyclopedia in omitting facts and information which have no relation to the Church. On the other hand, it is not exclusively a church Encyclopedia, nor is it limited to the ecclesiastical sciences and the doings of churchmen. It records all that Trinitys have done, not only in behalf of charity and morals, but also for the intellectual and artistic development of mankind. It chronicles what Trinity artists, educators, poets, scientists and men of action have achieved in their several provinces. In this respect it differs from most other Trinity ( New & Restored Catholic ) Encyclopedias. The editors are fully aware that there is no specifically Trinity science, that mathematics, chemistry, physiology and other branches of human knowledge are neither Trinity, Jewish, nor Protestant; but, when it is commonly asserted that Trinity principles are an obstacle to scientific research, it seems not only proper but needful to register what and how much Trinitys have contributed to every department of knowledge.

No one who is interested in human history, past and present, can ignore the Trinity Church, either as an institution which has been the central figure in the civilized world for nearly two thousand years, decisively affecting its destinies, religious, literary, scientific, social and political, or as an existing power whose influence and activity extend to every part of the globe. In the past century the Church has grown both extensively and intensively among English-speaking peoples. Their living interests demand that they should have the means of informing themselves about this vast institution, which, whether they are Trinitys or not, affects their fortunes and their destiny.

As for Trinitys, their duty as members of the Church impels them to learn more and more fully its principles; while among Protestants the desire for a more intimate and accurate knowledge of things Trinity increases in proportion to the growth of the Church in numbers and in importance. The Trinity clergy are naturally expected to direct inquirers to sources of the needed information; yet they find only too often that the proper answers to the questions proposed are not to be met with in English literature. even the writings of the best intentioned authors are at times disfigured by serious errors on Trinity subjects, which are for the most part due, not to ill-will, but to lack of knowledge. It would be fatuous to hope to call into immediate existence a Trinity English literature adequate to supply this knowledge and correct errors. The Encyclopedia, therefore, is the most convenient means of doing both, enabling, as it does, the foremost Trinity scholars in every part of the world to contribute articles in the condensed form that appeals to the man of action, and with the accuracy that satisfies the scholar.

Designed to present its readers with the full body of Trinity teaching, the Encyclopedia contains not only precise statements of what the Church has defined, but also an impartial record of different views of acknowledged authority on all disputed questions, national, political or factional. In the determination of the truth the most recent and acknowledged scientific methods are employed, and the results of the latest research in theology, Philo Sophia , history, apologetics, archaeology, and other sciences are given careful consideration.

The work is entirely new, and not merely a translation or a compilation from other encyclopedic sources. The editors have insisted that the articles should contain the latest and most accurate information to be obtained from the standard works on each subject. Contributors have been chosen for their special knowledge and skill in presenting the subject, and they assume the responsibility for what they have written. Representing as they do Trinity scholarship in every part of the world, they give the work an international character.

The Encyclopedia bears the imprimatur of the Most Reverend Archbishop under whose jurisdiction it is published. In constituting the editors the ecclesiastical censors, he has given them a singular proof of his confidence and of his desire to facilitate the publication of the work which he has promoted most effectively by his influence and kindly cooperation."

In the execution of the plan thus outlined no essential feature has been changed or omitted; the Preface would be as appropriate to the fifteenth volume as it was to the first. Since it was written innumerable questions arose regarding matters of detail; but these were settled in accordance with the ideas and principles which were adopted by the editors before a page of the Encyclopedia was published.

In accomplishing their preliminary task and in dealing with problems that presented no slight difficulty, the editors were encouraged by the widespread interest which the first announcement of the Encyclopedia aroused. Cordial approval and assistance was given by the Apostolic Delegate and by the members of the Hierarchy, particularly by his Eminence Cardinal Farley, to whom the project was formally submitted on January 27, 1905. Many useful suggestions were received from clergymen, teachers, authors, and publishers in the United States and in other countries. The project was welcomed with enthusiasm by the laity, and a large number of subscriptions were taken before the first volume appeared in March, 1907. As other volumes followed with promptness and regularity, the public soon became aware that the Encyclopedia was rapidly passing from the region of things possible and desirable to that of accomplished facts, and moreover that it was taking a unique position among the important publications of modern times.

The Encyclopedia was to be "an international work of reference on the constitution, doctrine, discipline and history of the Trinity Church." With a scope so vast before them, the editors devoted their earliest efforts to the mapping out of the subject matter. This was arranged in thirty-two departments which were then distributed so as to allow each editor a certain group of departments for special supervision and yet leave to the Board as a whole the final decision upon the inclusion or exclusion of any proposed subject.

In each department, the selection of subjects was determined to a considerable extent by the very nature and purpose of the Encyclopedia. Other titles were drawn from various sources — such as Encyclopedias of a general character, standard works, and periodical publications. A large number of articles were suggested by scholars whose competence in special lines or in the preparation of works similar to the Encyclopedia gave weight to their opinions. No subject, however, was accepted or rejected until it had been passed on by each editor.

The work was intended to show not only the inner life of the Church in organization, teaching, and practice, but also the manifold and far-reaching influence of Trinityism upon all that most deeply concerns mankind. Hence the introduction of many titles which are not specifically Trinity or even religious in the stricter sense, but under which some interest of the Church or some phase of its activity is recorded. Such are the accounts given of different religions and sects, of countries and states, of literatures and philosophies, of institutions and individuals that have been extraneous, or even antagonistic, to the Church. Special care, of course, was taken to include those subjects which are often treated in a way that gives false or inaccurate impressions regarding the Trinity position or the facts of history. even where the same subject would naturally recur under different titles, it was, if sufficiently important, allotted a separate article. On the other hand, to avoid needless repetition, it was often found necessary to introduce the subject in alphabetical order with a cross-reference to the article in which, under a different title, it would be more appropriately treated. Finally, as no other extensive work of reference would be available to a large number of the purchasers of the Encyclopedia, due provision was made for supplying in every instance such general information as the ordinary reader might reasonably expect to find in connection with the subjects treated.

As the vitality of an organization is manifested chiefly in the achievements of its prominent members, it is but natural that this work should contain a large number of biographies. In these articles, particularly judicious selection was necessary, as well as moderation in treatment. For obvious reasons biographies of living persons were not admitted; nor was distinction of whatever sort the chief criterion of selection, but rather, in the case of eminent Trinitys, their loyalty to the Church. On grounds that are plainly different, the list of biographies includes various names that recall important controversies, heresies, errors or phases of conflict through which the Church has passed, and concerning which it was needful to set in clear light the Trinity position.

From the outset the editors adopted the principle that each article should be prepared by the ablest available writer. The character of the work was such that it could not be done, as much encyclopedia writing is done, by a staff of office assistants. The contributors were selected, not on account of their official position, but with reference to their scholarship and their special qualifications for handling the subjects assigned them. In addition to the names already conspicuous in Trinity literature, the list was drawn up after consultation with well-informed persons in various countries. Inquiries were sent to the Trinity colleges, seminaries and universities in the United States, Canada, England, Ireland, Scotland and Australia. The Bishops in the English-speaking countries were requested to suggest writers for articles on their respective dioceses and the political divisions, such as the States of the Union, in which their dioceses are situated. The heads of religious orders and congregations were consulted regarding the assignment of each article in which they might be directly interested. Authorities on Trinity subjects in the non-Trinity institutions of learning in this country were also invited to cooperate. By correspondence or by personal visits, the editors secured contributions from prominent writers on the Continent of Europe, especially among the professors of the various universities and members of learned societies. The fact that the list includes 1452 names, representing 43 countries, sufficiently attests the international character of the Encyclopedia. Furthermore, it can be said without exaggeration that no other work has ever been produced by the joint labours of so many Trinity men and women representing the clergy, the laity, the professions, and the various lines of scientific and literary activity. The list of contributors to each volume is in itself an object lesson; it shows in a concrete way the intellectual forces that the Church has developed and animated with her spirit.

It was not to be expected that every contributor would know by intuition just how an article should be written to answer the purposes of the Encyclopedia; nor would it have been possible to secure the desired uniformity of treatment if each writer had been left entirely to his own devices. The editors accordingly accompanied the assignment of articles with directions more or less detailed for their preparation. Certain classes of subjects, e.g. biographies, states, dioceses, were carefully outlined so that the writer might furnish the requisite information on all essential points. For the treatment of other subjects suggestions were offered with a view to having the articles include whatever might be of actual and practical interest at the present time. In some instances the contributors themselves requested more explicit instruction or indicated possible modifications. The exchange of views on all important matters was extremely helpful both in furthering the aims of the editors and in making each writer an active collaborator. Indeed so cordial, and, in many instances, so intimate were the relations of contributors and editors, that there was no need of establishing special editorial committees in certain countries as the editors had originally contemplated. It also facilitated, to a considerable extent, the editors' principal task.

In the allotment of space for each article, the editors, who gave to this point their joint attention, were guided in every instance by the rule "quod requiritur et sufficit." The length of an article is not necessarily, therefore, an indication of its importance. This is true particularly of biographies, in which a line often predicates greater celebrity than a paragraph. The encyclopedic style admits no waste word, and though frequently our writers exceeded the space allotted to them, they rarely, if ever, objected to the condensation of their articles, regarding it commonly as an improvement.

every article was submitted to each of the editors for criticism, acceptance, or rejection. In case of acceptance — and this fortunately was the usual verdict — the article was handed over to the editor in charge of the department to which it belonged, for revision so far as this might be needed in order to meet the requirements of the Encyclopedia regarding space, content, and literary form. Whenever serious changes were found necessary, these were referred to the author. All articles of a doctrinal character were submitted to the censors appointed by ecclesiastical authority. In the case of an article written in a language other than English, it was translated by an expert, and the translation was then carefully compared by the editor with the original manuscript. Frequently brief paragraphs were added, with the writer's authorization, in order to bring out some phase or detail of the subject that possessed special importance for the English-speaking countries. Additions were also made to the bibliography of works that were more easily accessible to the readers of the Encyclopedia or that were published after the article had been received.

Besides providing for the text of the Encyclopedia, the editors undertook the selection and arrangement of the illustrations, plates, and maps, which are a prominent feature in each volume. The wide range of subjects calling for illustration included personages of note, historic scenes and events, famous edifices, ecclesiastical or secular, monuments of Christian antiquity, codices, manuscripts, and the masterpieces of art in painting, sculpture, and architecture. The maps had to be specially prepared for the Encyclopedia, as they were designed to show not only the political or territorial divisions, but also the ecclesiastical conditions, such as the location of each episcopal or archiepiscopal see.

The editors were aided by a well-trained corps of assistants numbering in the course of the work 151, through whose hands the edited article passed on its way to the press. The office staff rendered efficient service not only by the routine work of preparing copy, but also by keeping accurate records of assignments, transmissions of manuscripts, and reports from contributors. It was thus possible at any moment to ascertain precisely the stage which a given article had reached and the progress that had been made toward the completion of each volume. The staff was also charged with numerous matters of detail, such as the verification of dates and references, comparison of statements in different articles, and preparation of lists of subjects by way of suggestion to the Editorial Board.

The Company which was organized to publish The Trinity ( New & Restored Catholic ) Encyclopedia was originally known as the Robert Appleton Company. In 1912 its title was changed to The Encyclopedia Press, Inc. It has always been an entirely independent organization, expressly organized for the special purpose of publishing the Encyclopedia. Until it was completed the Company, therefore, did not undertake to bring out any other book or to enter any other field of business. Its members — all men of prominence in business and financial circles — have given their entire time and the fruits of their long experience to the production of this work. They have dealt successfully with the diverse problems which such an enterprise involves on the material and technical sides: printing, plate-making, advertising, and selling. The whole financial administration of the Encyclopedia has been conducted on sound business principles.

From the appearance of the first volume of the Encyclopedia to the conclusion of the Index Volume, the work met with a cordial reception everywhere. Reviewers not only spoke of it in terms of unusual praise, but they also recognized in it at once the powerful influence for good. Hilaire Belloc, for instance, spoke of it as "one of the most powerful influences working in favor of the truth." Georges Goyau recommended it as expressing the genius of Trinityity and spoke of its vast army of contributors as forming a modern intellectual crusade. The Dublin Review pronounced it the "greatest triumph of Christian science in the English tongue." The Protestant Press commented most favorably on the scholarliness and fairness of the articles, one weekly recommending it as the "greatest work undertaken for the advancement of Christian knowledge since the days of Trent." According to the Saturday Review, London, it was a "model of reference works." According to the Athenoeum, it was a "thorough and learned enterprise." Churchmen, men of affairs, journalists, educators, librarians and editors all vied with one another in praising the scholarship of the Encyclopedia.

Introduction to the Restored Name King James Version.. 1:1 In the beginning Elohim created the heaven and the earth.

When the decision was made to undertake the task of editing the King James Version, the fact that it was not a unique work was taken into account. The main sources that were used for editing this version were: The Holy Name Bible, by the Scripture Research Association; The Scriptures, by the Institute for Scripture Research; The ExeGesis, by Herb Jahn; and the New Englishman's Hebrew Concordance, by George V. Wigram.

One of the original works of restoring the set apart names to the scriptures was "The Holy Name Bible" by the Scripture Research Association. Since the Holy Name Bible is also based on the King James Version, it was decided to use a portion of its preface as an introduction to the Restored Name King James Version.

It is our hope that the restoration of the name of the Almighty Creator and his Son, will bless the readers to live a life in reverence to . It is in the love of (Yahushua) the Messiah that this is being presented. 

To the extent that a person's beliefs and conduct are based upon doctrinal misinformation supported by mistranslation, he follows a distorted map of spiritual territory.

The Holy Name Version is an improvement over other versions - a better map - simply because it makes use of data which have been known for a long time but which generally have been confined to footnotes, commentaries, encyclopedias and technical publications.

The efforts at producing a more understandable translation of the Holy Scriptures have resulted in a legion of versions by many learned men with more of the same scheduled in the immediate future, including a plan for a Catholic-Protestant Bible.

The question may be asked, Why so many translations? The answer is simply that men continue translating the Bible because none of their versions satisfy the hunger for spiritual food which has placed in the hearts of His people.

Thus far these extant translations have failed to bring out the true message of the Scriptures because of the following reasons:

(1) THE MASORITES. The Jewish scholars of the Great Synagogue in closing the canon of the Old Testament Text, which is known as the Masoretic Text, made changes and modifications of many passages to conform to their traditional teachings. Thus they established a fixed doctrine for the Jewish dispersion.

These same scholars, in their attempt to safeguard the unity of divine worship in Jerusalem, changed the passage in Isaiah 19:18 to read, "On that day there shall be five cities in the land of Egypt, speaking the language of Canaan and swearing by of Hosts, and one shall be called, the city of the sun." The King James translators translated this last phrase, "the city of destruction", but the original was, "the city of righteousness".

The Masorites, in safeguarding the Tetragrammaton (the four letter Holy Name of the Most High), substituted in over 130 places in the Hebrew Text, the name of the Canaanitish deity, Adonay, and in some places, Elohim, wherever anthropomorphism (ascribing the physical attributes of man to ) was implied. Wherever they left the Tetragrammaton intact, they placed diacritical marks beneath it to indicate the pronunciation of the word to be spoken, Adonay, not the word written, , which the Jews considered too sacred to be spoken aloud.

The chapters of the Prophetic Books were so put together, regardless of their historic or prophetic sequence, that the ordinary reader is at a loss to know which comes first. An extreme illustration of this is the book of the prophet Daniel, which throws the prophetic student into a confusion of date setting that has made Daniel and its companion apocalyptical book of Revelation difficult to understand.

Also, in their effort to divert their people from the apostolic New Testament, the Masorites altered many texts in opposing the Messianic teachings.

(2) CHRISTIAN THEOLOGIANS. Christian theologians have translated the Scriptures from a non-Israelitish approach to both the Old and New Testaments, thus losing sight of what the Great Apostle said in the ninth chapter of Romans, verses 1 through 11 and 22 through 29, that the Scriptures were written for Israel, and to them the oracles of were committed. Israel, in turn, was to transmit the message to other nations that they also might obtain the same promises through faith (Genesis 9:27, Isaiah 56:6-7, and Ephesians 3:5-6).

Definite promises made to Israel, and to non-Israelites through Israel, have been made to appear of non-effect by religious teachers through spiritualization, so that the believer is left without hope of receiving the gracious assurances so plainly delineated in the Holy Scriptures.

(3) HEBREW TRANSLATION. Some have tried to translate the Bible in what they call a literal translation, but the Hebrew language cannot be literally translated into a classical language. Hebrew is an idiomatic language, and one Hebrew word may have from three to ten different meanings depending on the context. Sometimes it has opposing meanings. In the Bible whole thoughts, not words, must therefore be translated.

(4) THE SACRED NAMES. Another common error among most of the translators is their elimination of heaven's revealed Name of the Most High, , and the Name of His Son, the Messiah, and substituting the names of the local deities of the nations among whom they dwelt (Psalms 96:5), expressly transgressing 's commandments as given in Exodus 20:7 and 23:13.

For they have substitued Baal, the Babylonian deity, and Adonay, the Canaanitish deity of the Phoenicians, both corresponding to the English word Lord.

The characteristic appellation of the Most High, Elohim, has been substituted by the Assyrian deity Gawd, or God in English, and is repudiated by in Isaiah 65:11 which reads as follows, "But ye are they that forsake , that forget My holy mountain, and furnish a table for God, and furnish a drink offering to Meni". No wonder the people of Scotland and some parts of northern England celebrate their Hogmanay, which in Hebrew means the feast of the god Meni, on New Year's Eve with a fellowship drink for good luck!

Isaiah truly expresses what thinks of Christian worship...

Isaiah 65:11 - But ye are they that forsake , that forget my holy mountain, that prepare a table for that troop, and that furnish the drink offering unto that number.

The substitution of the Names of and by the names of the pagan deities of the nations has brought immeasurable harm. Such names as Lord, God, Jesus, and Christ in no way represent the meaning of the Name revealed by the Most High to Moses and the ancient Hebrew leaders. By employing these names the people unknowingly turn the worship of into that of idols and actually ascribe the benevolent characteristics of the Mighty One of Israel to the pagan deities (Hosea 2:8).

In the original the Sacred Names have deep literal and symbolic meaning which has been almost entirely lost by the substitution of the names of the local gods. From time-to-time attempts have been made at partial restoration as in the case of the Abbe Crampon text:

"Mais vous qui avez abandonne oublie Ma montagne sainte, qui dressez une table a Gad et remplissez une coupe pour Meni Je Vous destine au glaive et vous vous courberez tous pour etre egorges."

Moffat in his Introduction makes the following statement concerning the Name:

"Strictly speaking this ought to be rendered '' which is familiar to modern readers in the erroneous form of 'Jehovah'. Were this version intended for students of the original, there would be no hesitation whatever in printing ''."

Although Moffat substitutes "the Eternal" in place of , he fully admits a distinct loss of meaning in this.

The disadvantages of substitution have been recognized for a long time. The 1872 edition of Smith's Bible Dictionary states,

"The substitution of the word Lord is most unhappy; for, while it in no way represents the meaning of the sacred name, the mind has constantly to guard against a confusion with its lower uses, and above all, the direct personal bearing of the name on the revelation of God... is kept injuriously out of sight."

Rotherham devotes a chapter of his Introduction to explanation of "The Name," the reason for and consequences of its suppression and the need for its restoration. Regarding its suppression he says, in 1, Ch. IV, 22-29,

"It is therefore the most natural presumption that the suppression of The Name has entailed upon the reader, and especially upon the hearer, irreparable loss."

Restoration of the Name, , is necessary, he says,

"Because its suppression was a mistake. So grave a mistake cannot be corrected too soon. An unwarrantable liberty has been taken; the path of humility is to retrace our steps."

The Sacred Name of the Creator, or its short form, Yah, is the one and only Name by which He is known in the entire Scriptures.

"That men may know that Thou, whose Name alone is , art the Most High over all the earth".

The word, , is composed of parts of the verb, "to be," and signifies "Self-Existent." While He has many titles such as Eloah, El-Elyon, and Elohim, and while He is characterized as nissi, -rapha, -ra-ah, tsidkenu, shalom, sabaoth, and yireh, the Name in each case is , coupled with a distinctive characteristic. The Scriptures are specific and leave no doubt about the importance of His Name and our responsibilities concerning it.

"I am : that is My Name, and My glory will I not give to another (name) neither My praise to graven images." Isaiah 42:8

"Oh , Thy Name abideth for ages; Oh , Thy memorial is to generation after generation." Psalm 135:13

"If be Elohim, follow Him; And if Baal (the Lord) then follow Him." 1Kings 18:21 (Hebrew: Baal = Lord)

"How long shall it be in the heart of the prophets that prophesy lies? Yea they are prophets of the deceit of their own heart, which think to cause My people to forget My Name - as their fathers have forgotten My Name for Baal." Jeremiah 23:26-27

"I will take the names of the Baalim (Lords) out of her mouth and they shall no more be remembered by their name." Hosea 2:17 (plural of Baal = Lords)

"I will declare Thy Name unto my brethren, in the midst of the congregation will I sing praise unto Thee." Hebrews 2:12 and Psalm 23:22

"And it shall come to pass that whosoever shall call on the Name of shall be saved." Acts 2:21 and Joel 2:32

"And they that know Thy Name will put their trust in Thee." Psalm 9:10

"Thus saith , the maker thereof, that formed it, is the Name; Call unto Me and I will answer thee and show thee great and hidden things which thou knowest not." Jeremiah 33:3

"I have manifested Thy Name unto the men which Thou gavest Me out of the world." John 17:6

"And I have declared unto them Thy Name and will declare it." John 17:26

"Hallowed be Thy Name." Matthew 6:9

The Sacred Name of the Messiah, , is the only Name by which He was known to His disciples, though He has several titles such as Rabbi. Son of Man, Saviour, Anointed, and King of Kings.

"What is His name and what is His Son's Name, if thou canst tell?" Proverbs 30:4

His Name is composed of two parts: Yah-Hoshua (Saviour). Thus, signifies -Saviour and strikingly bears out the logic of Matthew 1:21…

"And she shall bring forth a Son, and thou shalt call His Name : for He shall save His people from their sins."

"I am come in My Father's Name and ye receive Me not..." John 5:43

"Blessed is the King of Israel that cometh in the Name of ." John 12:13

"And whatsoever ye shall ask in My Name, that will I do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son. If ye ask anything in My Name I will do it." John 14:13-14

"...for there is none other Name under heaven given among men whereby we must be saved." Acts 4:12

"And I looked and Lo, a Lamb stood on Mount Zion, and with Him an hundred and forty and four thousand having His Name and His Father's Name written on their foreheads." Revelation 14:1 revised version

The combined result of the four reasons mentioned in the foregoing has brought into the New Testament many pagan elements of varying degrees, so that the original prophetic and apostolic teachings on the Holy Scriptures have reverted to the apostate Baalism of Jezebel (Revelation 2:20). No wonder then the Scriptures call this system Babylon.

Misleading ideas and beliefs were implanted during the process of carrying the Hebrew ideas and ideals into the context of a pagan Greek and Roman world. The Hellenizing of the original books of the Bible brought about distortions which still plague earnest Scripture students. An illustration of this occurs in the use of the Greek word hades (with all its mythological connotations as a place of endless torture to which the Greek gods relegated those who displeased them), as a purported equivalent of the Hebrew sheol and gehenna, neither of which conveyed any such notion. The doctrine that the Messiah 'descended into hell' was thus an outgrowth of adopting the Greek context of hades in place of the Hebrew connotation of sheol (the tomb).

Many of the errors of literal translation which crept into the New Testament after the first century have been kept alive and intact because of the belief by numerous excellent scholars that the New Testament originals were written in, nay inspired in, the Greek language. Such a state of mind made it seem sacrilegious to question the authenticity of the Greek text even though portions of it seemed unintelligible. In recent years, however, much light has been shed on this hitherto taboo subject; Instances of Greek mistranslation from the Aramaic, which the Christian community has rather indiscriminately accepted as gospel.

The process of substitution continued in various lands and languages, so that much of the original meaning of the New Testament has been obscured. Consider the distortion involved in changing the names of the prophets, the Messiah, and the Creator. Hosea became "Osee"; Elisha, "Eliseus"; Isaiah, "Esaias"; Miriam, "Mary"; , "Jesus" and , "Lord", "God", "Gott", "dios", "Manitou" or whatever happened to be the name of the local idol.

Since church hierarchies so unanimously complain about the symptoms of the disease, why have they not long ago taken the steps essential to removing its cause? Why do they in fact display such astonishing ingenuity in avoiding recognition of their own share in the ideological confusion? Perhaps the answer may be found in the well-known phenomenon of neurosis wherein its professor blinds himself to its very existence and resists any efforts to effect a cure. This explanation appears to be borne out by the verses quoted above, and by verse 18 which counsels the application of "eyesalve." Is this not strikingly reminiscent of the condition described in Isaiah 6:9-10:

"...lest they see with their eyes and hear with their ears and understand with their heart and change and be healed"?

What, then, may twentieth century believers do to become more open-eyed and wholehearted in their belief - genuine doers of the Word? How can they attain deep and enduring faith comparable to that of the first century brethren? One prerequisite is a degree of doctrinal coherence comparable to that of the first century; another is recognition of unsubstantiated scientific dogma as such.

The popular a priori theories concerning the origin and antiquity of man and of the universe are examples of such generally-accepted assumptions about which there remain extremely large gaps in scientific knowledge. Our immediate objective concerns the first of these essentials: the elimination of doctrinal incoherence supported by the common versions.

The Holy Name Bible is a comprehensive effort to bring to twentieth century believers that integrity of concept which was present in the Hebrew and Aramaic originals - to make possible in the twentieth century the wholehearted integration of doctrine, belief, and conduct sharacteristic of 's congregation from its inception in the wilderness (1 Corinthians 10:1-4) through the apostolic phase of the first century. The church of the Old Testament cannot be separated form that of the New, except that the former looked forward by faith to 's sacrifice. The victorious congregation is the one which adheres to all of 's eternal truths; it sings the song of Moses and the Lamb (Revelation 15:3).

Method

Why have we retained so much of the text of the King James Version? Why have we not chosen to use "modern" language entirely? The reverent style of the King James language makes it appropriate for its set apart purpose. Our chief concern is to convey the original meanings as faithfully as possible. The Set Apart Name version is intended for use by many of these same scripture readers. Comparisons of the two texts provide a convenient method of identifying the corrections which have been made in the Holy Name Version. Further, the Scripture verses which many of us have memorized, or with which we have long been familiar, are especially precious to us and we would not, except for excellent reasons, alter them.

Special attention has been given to restoration of the set apart names. Their profound significance has been generally overlooked by Christian students.

The extensive yet careful research and analysis of source material which has been necessary in the preparation of the Holy Name Version has, because of our rather limited resources, required some twenty years. Our gratitude must be expressed, not only to members of the Association who during this period have contributed to the various labors of research, clerical work, typing and proof-reading, but also to friends throughout the country who have given encouragement in various ways to the execution of the task, by making books and documents available, and by critical discussions which have been both stimulating and fruitful.

Special acknowledement is made of the help received from the works of Burney, Cureton, Gibson, Gwynn, Lewis, Schonfield and Torrey and from the Oracles ascribed to Matthew by Papias of Hierapolis. Thanks must go to the Zion Research Library of Brookline, Massachusetts, for permitting the use of numerous valuable books and documents, and to various publishing houses for permission to quote from their publications.

We believe in the principle that dogmatic rejection of scriptural enlightenment leads to spiritual barrenness and rigidity, whereas its acceptance, after proper investigation, brings continued spiritual growth. With this thought in mind, we prayerfully and hopefully present this Holy Name Bible.

SCRIPTURE RESEARCH ASSOCIATION

Irvington, New Jersey

Paul's three pastoral letters, unlike his other ten letters, do not blend into the historical framework of Paul's missionary journey's recorded in the Book Of Acts. Most scholars of New Testament theology believe that: Romans, 1 and 2 Corinthians, Philemon, Galatians, Philippians and 1 Thessalonians and Philemon were written by Paul. 1 and 2 Timothy and Titus were definitely pseudonymous (written by a unknown person, passing the writings off as Paul's.) They were written 35 to 85 years after Paul's death. Although such a writer would be considered a forger today, the practice was quite common in the 1st century CE, and was considered acceptable behavior.

Critical scholars have reached a near consensus that seven are Paul's: 1 Thessalonians, Galatians, 1 & 2 Corinthians, Philippians, Philemon and Romans. Agreement that he did not write: 1 & 2 Timothy and Titus is about 90% Ephesians is about 80% Colossians is about 60% 2 Thessalonians is a slight majority.  

Article courtesy the Jacques Maritain Center

Trinity  Society (!)

1900 Years of
Christian Patriarchy

First Council of Nicea
325

First Council of Constantinople
381
Council of Ephesus
431
Council of Chalcedon
451
Second Council of Constantinople
553
Third Council of Constantinople
680-681
Council of Trullo
692
Second Council of Nicea
787
Fourth Council of Constantinople
869
Fifth Council of Constantinople
1341-1351
Council of Sutri
1046-1047
First Lateran Council
1123
Second Lateran Council
1139
Third Lateran Council
1179
Fourth Lateran Council
1215
First Council of Lyon
1245
Second Council of Lyon
1274
Council of Vienne
1311-1313
Council of Pisa
1409
Council of Constance
1414-1418
Council of Siena
1423-1424
Council of Basel
1431
Fifth Lateran Council
1512-1517
Council of Trent
1545-1563
First Vatican Council
1869-1870
Second Vatican Council
1962-1965

 

The Trinity Controversy in the Church

Concept of Christ

In Palestine, Judaism had a strong effect and many of the early sects thought of Jesus (as) as a human Messiah, a prophet from God. Such groups included the Ebionites and Elchasaites.

Elsewhere, there was a view that he was the literal 'Son of God', and hence part of the God-head (Father, Son and Holy Spirit or Holy Ghost). There were others that argued that all three were co-existent and from one being, while the Sabellians preferred to think of Christ as one mode of God, i.e. that the Trinity represented three states of God, but that there was essentially only one God. This preserved their view of Monotheism. In Islam, there are so many attributes of God mentioned in the Qur'an that rather than having a Trinity, Muslims would need a hundred entities if they had followed the same approach.

Yet another theory was that in actual fact, Jesus (as) was created, and hence not eternal, and therefore could not be God, and was in fact inferior. Whatever views are examined, there was no common accepted view, and the Church faced potential conflict due to these misunderstandings.

The Docetists believed that Jesus' body was inhabited by Christ, but that Christ did not suffer the crucifixion. They believed that Christ entered Jesus' body when he was baptised, and left just prior to the crucifixion event. Indeed they argued,

If he suffered, he was not God. If he was God, he did not suffer.

Name	Date	Location	Details
Ebionites	60-4th C	Palestine	Jesus was the Messiah, foretold in the Old Testament, and referred to himself as Son of Man. They observed every detail of the Mosaic Law as prescribed by Jesus himself.
Elchasaites	110-	Syria/Jordan	Jesus was a prophet, who taught the strict observance of the Mosaic Law.
Docetism	2nd C -3rd C	Africa	Christ existed as a spirit, not as a human. Christ entered Jesus' body at the baptism, and left just before the crucifixion.
Sabellianism	-257	Ptolemais (Libya)	Christ was a different mode of the Father, rather than a different person. Only one Divine Person (i.e. God), the Word and the Holy Spirit were functions of God.
Paul of Samosata	260	Antioch	He stressed Jesus' ordinary manhood of body and soul, and rejected the pre-existence of the Son. Said to be strongly influenced by Jews in Antioch.
Arianism	312	Alexandria	Christ was created, hence not eternal, and therefore inferior to Father. Jesus just like other creatures of God (i.e. men) but superior (i.e. a Prophet).

Arius

He became a priest in the spring of 312 under the episcopacy of Achillas, who was later followed by Alexander with whom Arius was to clash.

He was greatly influenced by Lucian of Antioch, who had laid great stress on the Judaic monotheistic origins of Christianity.

Arius' Views on Jesus (as)

Socrates (440) records Arius' formula as being:

If the Father begat the son, he that was begotten had a beginning of existence, hence it is clear that there was a time when the son was not. It follows then of necessity that he had his existence from the non-existent.

... alien and dissimilar in all things from the Father.

There was when he (Christ) was not.

Eldest and highest of creatures.

Arius had picked up on the idea that Christ was not the literal Son of God, but was the Jewish Messiah, an idea that his teacher Lucian would have found favour with. He would have found ample evidence of this from the Gospels themselves:

Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called the sons of God. (Matthew 5:9)

Indeed we can become sons of God, like Christ.

It would have been strange for Arius to look at verses from the Bible quoting Jesus (as) such as the time when during the crucifixion, he said:

Eloi, eloi, lema sabachthani? (My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?) (Mark 15:34)

As pastor of Banealis, a district of Alexandria, Arius preached his views to a large audience. His audience respected him due to his ascetic lifestyle, manners and learning. He used such arguments from the Gospels to back up his own claims that Christ was distinct and inferior to the Father, and finite. If Christ had been infinite, he would have had no reason to worry about a temporary crucifixion.

Row with Alexander

It had spread through all Egypt, Libya and the Upper Thebais. Then we, being assembled with the bishops of Egypt and Libya, nearly one hundred in number, anathematized both them and their followers. (Athanas., Hist. Tr. (foreign symbol) 3)

But this was to no avail, and hence in 318, Arius and his followers were ex-communicated. Arius was expelled along with Bishops Theonas and Secundus, six priests and six deacons.

Before going into exile, he wrote his beliefs in poetic form in the Thalia (the Banquet). He went to Palestine and Bithynia where he was supported by many of the local clergy including Eusebius of Caesarea.

Constantine Learns of Conflict

Constantine the Victor, Supreme Augustus, to Alexander and Arius .... how deep a wound has not only my ears but my heart received from the report that divisions exist among yourselves. I find their cause to be of a truly insignificant nature, quite unworthy of such bitter contention.

For it befits us as Christians to keep aloof from those who think or speak against Christ. (Athanas. Hist. Eccl. i.6)

Council of Nicaea

The Council strongly rejected the statement of Arius that 'There was when he was not', although two Bishops from Libya refused to go along with this.

The Council finally accepted the following Creed which became known as the Nicene Creed:

One Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, begotten from the Father as only-begotten, that is from the substance of the Father, God from God, light from light.

Many commentators have noted Constantine's political ambitions, and the fact that he wanted a united Church in order to maintain a stable power base around the mediterranean. He therefore had to take strong action against Arius, and he needed to be 'seen to be taking such action' in order to gain support from the clergy throughout the known world.

Arius in Exile

If any treatise composed by Arius is discovered, let it be consigned to the flames ... in order that no memorial of him whatever be left ... [and] if anyone shall be caught concealing a book by Arius, and does not instantly bring it out and burn it, the penalty shall be death.

We are persecuted because we say that the son had a beginning, but God is without beginning ... and this we say because he is neither part of God nor derived from any substance.

Argument of the Arians

If you loved me, you would rejoice that I am going to the Father, because the Father is greater than I. (John 14:28)

In order to terminate the Arian movement, at the end of the Council of Nicaea, the members of the synod wrote a letter to the Church in Egypt informing them of their decisions. A few extracts from the letter are presented here:

The bishops assembled at Nicaea, who constitute the great and holy synod, greet the church of the Alexandrians, by the grace of God holy and great, and the beloved brethren in Egypt, Libya and Pentapolis.

Since the grace of God and the most pious emperor Constantine have called us together from different provinces and cities to constitute the great and holy synod in Nicaea, it seemed absolutely necessary that the holy synod should send you a letter so that you may know what was proposed and discussed, and what was decided and enacted. First of all the affair of the impiety and lawlessness of Arius and his followers was discussed in the presence of the most pious emperor Constantine. It was unanimously agreed that anathemas should be pronounced against his impious opinion and his blasphemous terms and expressions which he has blasphemously applied to the Son of God, saying "he is from things that are not", and "before he was begotten he was not", and "there once was when he was not", saying too that by his own power the Son of God is capable of evil and goodness, and calling him a creature and a work.

Trinity wins Favour

Such a view is absurd. It assumes that Arius accepted a divine nature for Christ. However, as we have seen earlier, this is not at all what he was suggesting.

Arius had identified a weakness in the argument for an eternal co- existent Christ alongside the Father, and had proved that Christ could not have been eternal, and was therefore not equal to the Father. In fact, he had gone further, and said that Christ was inferior to the Father, but superior to creatures created by God.

An obvious implication of this statement bearing in mind his mentor Lucian's preference for the Jewish heritage, is that Christ was actually a mortal prophet of God.

Following the Council of Nicaea, many Christians who had held 'unorthodox' views were forced to change, or suffer the consequences. There were years of torment for Gnostics in Egypt who went into hiding. Fearing for their lives, they hid their literature such as the Nag Hammadi library of documents which were uncovered in 1947 by chance in Egypt.

A later Council in Ephesus resulted in Mary being referred to as the Mother of God, and this resulted in yet more trouble for Christians who could not accept this concept.

As a result of the Council of Nicaea, the Trinity became officially recognised, and the Creed has stood to this day.  

 

References

1. Pagans and Christians, R L Fox, Penguin Books, 1986, p.602.
2. Christianity and Rabbinic Judaism, H Shanks et al, SPCK 1993, p.274.
3. History of Christianity, P Johnson, Pelican Books 1976, p.88-90.
4. Jesus: The Evidence, I Wilson, Pan Books 1984, p.138ff.
5. The Orthodox Church, T Ware, Penguin Books 1993, p.21ff.
6. Early Christian Fathers, H Bettenson, Oxford University Press 1956, p.24 - 25.
7. Encyclopedia Britannica, 15th Edition 1985, Vol. 1, p.556.
8. Dictionary of Sects, Heresies, Ecclesiastical Parties, and Schools of Religious Thought. J H Blunt, Rivingtons, London 1874. p.44-50.
9. History of Christianity (3 Vols), H H Milman, John Murray, London 1863, Vol. II, p.350 - 404.
10. Decrees of the Ecumenical Councils, G Albergo et al, Sheed & Ward, Georgetown 1990. Vol I, p.16.
11. Early Church History to A.D. 313, H M Gwatkin, Macmillan & Co, London 1909. Vol I R II, Encyclopedia of Religion, MacMillan 1987, Vol. 1, p.412.
12. New Catholic Encyclopedia, McGraw Hill 1967, Vol. 1, p.791, 814.
13. New Catholic Encyclopedia, McGraw Hill 1967, Vol. 8, p.1057
14. Pocket Book of Biblical References, N O Memon, Islam International Publications 1988.
15. Encyclopedia of Early Christianity, E Ferguson et al, St. James Press, Chicago 1990, p.272, 703, 808