“Prove all things; hold fast that which is good.” — 1 Thessalonians 5:21 (KJV)
For more than a decade, I have collected, studied, and shared information concerning the Divine Names and the transmission of the Messiah’s name through Hebrew → Greek → Latin → English.
My research included circulated charts, memes, Strong’s Concordance references, Hebrew word studies, historical claims, and teachings from within the Sacred-Name movement.
Some of that information helped me ask important questions.
Some of it did not withstand closer examination.
And because I have taught these matters publicly, I believe any significant correction should also be made publicly.
⚖️ WHAT I GOT WRONG
After returning to the linguistic and historical evidence with greater scrutiny, I need to correct something clearly:
I previously spoke with more certainty—and at times more harshly—about the Messiah’s name than the available evidence justified.
For that, I apologize.
I previously treated Yahusha/Yahushua as though the evidence established one of these forms as the exclusive, demonstrably original pronunciation of the Messiah’s Hebrew name.
I also dismissed forms such as "Yeshua," "Yehoshua," and "Jesus" too aggressively.
The evidence is more nuanced than I previously represented.
Yehoshua (יהושע) and Yeshua (ישוע) are directly attested Hebrew forms. By contrast, forms such as Yahusha/Yahushua, as commonly argued in modern Sacred-Name discussions, depend upon additional linguistic and theological reconstruction.
That distinction matters.
If I am going to tell others to “prove all things,” then I must be willing to apply the same standard to my own teaching.
“Prove all things; hold fast that which is good.” — 1 Thessalonians 5:21 (KJV)
🛑 WHAT THIS CORRECTION DOES NOT MEAN
Please understand what I am NOT retracting.
I am not apologizing for questioning the traditions of men.
I am not withdrawing my teaching concerning the Sabbath; religious holidays and customs with alleged pagan influence; clean and unclean foods; obedience to Yahuah’s commandments; or claims concerning whether His law was abolished.
Those are separate questions.
Each must be examined on its own merits through Scripture, language, history, and evidence rather than accepted or rejected merely because of the religious tradition with which it is associated.
Likewise:
Correcting my research concerning the Messiah’s Hebrew name does not require me to embrace every doctrine historically or traditionally taught under the English title “Jesus Christ.”
The name question and the doctrine question overlap in some discussions, but they are not identical questions.
That distinction will become an important part of this study series.
👑 WHY I WILL STILL USE “YAHUSHA”
Within TRP Biblical Studies™ and my Hebrew Realm teaching, I will continue to use Yahuah and Yahusha as my preferred terminology.
But I need to be much more precise about what that means.
Yahusha is my preferred theological and teaching convention; I will no longer present its exact pronunciation as though it has been historically demonstrated beyond reasonable dispute.
There is a difference between the following:
the terminology I choose to use within my theological framework
and
what surviving linguistic and historical evidence can actually demonstrate.
Responsible study requires me to acknowledge both.
I can prefer Yahusha without claiming more historical certainty than the evidence permits.
I can investigate Yeshua without assuming that accepting its historical attestation requires accepting every later religious tradition associated with the name Jesus.
And I can investigate the transmission of Hebrew → Greek → Latin → English without turning normal linguistic development into evidence of conspiracy unless the historical record actually demonstrates one.
That is the standard I intend to follow going forward.
🔎 WHY I AM DOING THIS PUBLICLY
Because I taught some of these claims publicly.
Therefore, I believe the correction belongs in public too.
I would rather correct myself openly than continue defending something I can no longer demonstrate with the degree of certainty I once claimed.
That does not mean abandoning discernment.
I am still going to test tradition.
I am still going to test doctrine.
I am still going to examine Hebrew language claims.
I am still going to investigate historical assertions.
And I am still going to compare what men teach with what Scripture actually says.
But there is another side to discernment that is sometimes harder:
We must be willing to test the teachings we already agree with.
Restoration movements are not exempt from error simply because they challenge mainstream traditions.
Sacred-Name teachings are not automatically correct simply because they sound Hebrew.
A meme is not a primary source.
A Strong’s number is not a complete linguistic argument.
A Paleo-Hebrew pictograph is not, by itself, proof of ancient pronunciation.
And repeating a claim for years does not transform it into historical evidence.
That standard applies to everyone—including me.
👑 CORRECTION IS NOT COMPROMISE
There was a time when I might have interpreted changing my position as weakness.
I no longer see it that way.
If stronger evidence requires a correction, refusing to make that correction merely to preserve appearances would place pride above truth.
Correction is not compromise.
Correction is part of pursuing truth.
And humility is not the enemy of leadership.
True leadership requires enough humility to say the following:
“I taught this. I believed this. I examined it again. The evidence did not support everything I previously claimed. Therefore, I am correcting it.”
That does not erase the journey.
It demonstrates that the search for truth is still alive.
“Study to shew thyself approved unto Yahuah, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.” — 2 Timothy 2:15 (KJV)
So this series is not merely about determining whether someone should say Yehoshua, Yeshua, Yahushua, Yahusha, or Jesus.
It is also about something much larger:
How do we distinguish Scripture from tradition?
How do we distinguish historical evidence from theological reconstruction?
How do we recognize when a popular argument has been repeated more often than it has been proven?
And perhaps most importantly:
Are we willing to correct ourselves when the evidence requires it?
I am.
Prove all things. Hold fast that which is good.
Series: TRP Biblical Studies™ → Language & Discernment → The Name of the Messiah
Study: 02 of 15
Status: Final / Authoritative
📚 CONTINUE THE TRP BIBLICAL STUDIES™ SERIES
