Ladies and Gentlemen, if you’ve been following along from our series “All The Jews Fit To Print”, “Paul & the KJV” and “Revelation 1: There are No Jews”, you’ll hopefully understand that this post emerges out of “Sorting The Wheat From The Tares: Parts 1,2 & 3”, but really needed to be it’s own stand-alone post because it’s time to shift our focus from discovering how the corruption ‘Jew’ appeared in the scriptures to begin unravelling the effect this corruption has had and the Book of John affords us decent material to work with in this case. Welcome to “Sorting The Wheat From The Tares, Part 4: The Book of John.”

“And this is the record of John, when the Jews Judeans sent priests and Levites from Jerusalem to ask him, Who art thou?” John 1:19 KJV (Strikethrough mine)

Alas, here we come to it, the sad and unfortunate reality of the desecration of the Book of John vandalised 58 times throughout 21 chapters as it were by the profane graffiti ‘Jew’ scrawled at random with this being the first example midway through Chapter One making an absolute hash of the record of John the Apostle.

Ladies and Gentlemen, I really do hope with everything we’ve uncovered since “The Salary Men of Fake Jews” that you are well on the way by now to seeing through the utterly ridiculous idea of Jews being “God’s Chosen people”? The scriptures are not the story of the Jewish people but of the Israelites, and the Jews are not, nor were they ever, Israelites. Period.

The word ‘Jew’ should simply not exist anywhere in the pages of scripture. Yet it does. Since this corruption ‘Jew’ first appeared in the John Wycliffe translation 1384, it has no doubt caused so much chaos it’s really hard to fathom. Of late, the word ‘nightmare’ comes to mind. Otherwise, I can’t conjure any word, which could capture the monstrous, delusional madness that has ensued; scripture grossly misconstrued left, right and centre by blind guides, political schemers, conspiracy theorists and more – it’s off the charts! This corruption has caused the world to be so deceived the Jews are “Gods’ chosen people”, that even 21^st century “Neo-Nazis” and tub-thumpers for the new state of Israel in Palestine declare the same false and ridiculous base assertion that Jesus was a ‘Jew’. If that isn’t proof enough the Devil is not divided I don’t know what is!

While there is no way to undo the last six hundred and thirty eight years of insanity born of this corruption, nor the monstrosities that have been built upon it, we have nonetheless the opportunity of a whole new understanding opening up before us. That’s pretty mind-blowing and indeed some truly good news! Is that not in and of itself a real reason for hope?

However, as regards rectifying the situation, though it’s easy enough to just simply put the word ‘Judean’ in wherever the word ‘Jew’ is currently written, how many utterly bogus ideas that have literally poisoned the minds of too many since the fraud first saw the light of day will not necessarily be expunged with textual correction? How many wacky ideas and precepts must simply be thrown out; how many bogus historical concepts are heading straight to the tip? I am sure I could not guess, for the minds of mankind are fertile and people can convince themselves of just about any thing.

Starting with verse 1:19 above, let’s just begin putting things to rights by clarifying that no ‘Jews’ were sending anyone to scope out John the Baptist; no homogenous and exclusive racial group of people being ancestors of today’s Jews were unilaterally doing anything of the kind at all. ‘Judeans’ sent priests and Levites and those ‘Judeans’ at that time were a mix of Israelite and Canaanite people, the forerunners of post-resurrection ‘Christians’ and ‘Jews’. To be more specific as the Word has now gone out into the world for the last twenty centuries these ‘Judeans’ were racially entirely different people from one another; Semitic Israelite sons of Isaac (Saacae/Saxon/Christians), and Hamitic Canaanites (Jews).

So, now we come to the interesting conundrum that subsequently arises as a result of correcting the corruption ‘Jew’: what role did ‘Jews’ actually play in the history? To put that in proper historical perspective, what role did the Canaanite people living in Judea at the time of Christ play in the events that took place there? That is to say, if this corruption had never occurred and the word ‘Jew’ had never appeared in English Bibles, but only ‘Judean’, might it have actually been more difficult to discern what was really going on in Jerusalem at the time of Christ and thereafter? Would the very existence of a different people neither of Isaac nor Jacob/Israel, a people not of Judah have been so readily evident? In an odd way there has been a gift of sorts with this corruption in the scriptures, at least for those called to The Truth a.k.a Jesus Christ. However, it takes an awful lot of work to break the spell of centuries of erroneous teachings and ensuing compound problems.

So just to clarify folks, as a result of correcting the record we no longer have the ‘Jews’ to randomly blame anymore. Now that we have thoroughly unmasked these people as Hamitic Canaanites, and found the very word ‘Jew’ to be a corruption (ironically one ultimately of Rome via their Oxford priest John Wycliffe), we now only have ‘Judeans’ and ‘Pharisees’ to contend with.

So, which ones were Israelites and, which ones were Canaanites? Unfortunately things are not as cut and dry as some might like it. It is not the simple case that Israelites were Judeans and that Pharisees were Canaanites, but that Israelites and Canaanites were both ‘Judeans’ and ‘Pharisees’.

For example, we know that the great Apostle Paul was both an Israelite and a Pharisee because he told us so himself:

“Though I might also have confidence in the flesh. If any other man thinketh that he hath whereof he might trust in the flesh, I more: Circumcised the eighth day, of the stock of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, an Hebrew of the Hebrews; as touching the law, a Pharisee;” Philippians 3:4,5 KJV

Was Paul the only Israelite Pharisee? Probably not. However, he was the most vehement and determined persecutor of Christ and His Apostles; an Israelite truly going the wrong way. Therefore, we should note that his being picked by Christ would have been a clear message to all Israelites (and to any of you with ears to hear), to get with the programme. However, that was after the crucifixion and resurrection of Christ not before. Here is a quick note on the Pharisees:

“THE PHARISEES WERE MOSTLY MIDDLE-CLASS BUSINESSMEN AND LEADERS OF THE SYNAGOGUES. THOUGH THEY WERE A MINORITY IN THE SANHEDRIN AND HELD A MINORITY NUMBER OF POSITIONS AS PRIESTS, THEY SEEMED TO CONTROL THE DECISION-MAKING OF THE SANHEDRIN BECAUSE THEY HAD POPULAR SUPPORT AMONG THE PEOPLE.”

Here is another quote that correctly identifies the relationship between the Israelites and the Canaanites:

“IF WE ADD IN THE ISRAELITES, WHO WERE ALWAYS IN REBELLION AGAINST THEIR YAH (GOD), UNFORTUNATELY THEY, TOO, DESPISED THE WEDDING INVITATION, NO DOUBT MANY BEING LED ASTRAY BY THE JEWISH PHARISEES AND SADDUCEES.”

So, as regards to who (Israelite & Canaanite), was up to what, we continue sorting the wheat from the tares at yet another exchange several chapters on that shows just how ridiculous and disastrous the corruption ‘Jew’ is:

“Much people of the Jews Judeans therefore knew that he was there: and they came not for His sake only, but that they might see Lazarus also, whom he had raised from the dead. But the chief priests consulted that they might put Lazarus also to death; Because that by reason of him many of the Jews Judeans went away, and believed on Christ.” John 12:9-11 (Strikethrough mine)

Folks, many of the Jews never went away and believed on Christ. None of the Jews believed on Christ. The Canaanite Jews do not and never have followed or believed on Christ. Complete denial and repudiation of Christ as the Son of The Father, and as the Messiah, is the essence of what it means to be a Jew to this day. So, let’s get that fact through our heads and get it through our heads well by noting it one more time: the Jews do not, nor have they ever followed or believed on Christ. Period. You don’t have to take my word on that either. Here it is straight from them:

“Maimonides, in his Mishneh Torah, describes Jesus as the failed messiah foreseen by the prophet Daniel. Rather than redeeming Israel, Maimonides writes, Jesus caused Jews to be killed and exiled, changed the Torah and led the world to worship a false God.”

This quote is taken from an article that is as good a ground zero on all the subversive ideas Jews use to advance their war against Christ and Christian civilisation as any I have ever come across. However, there is neither the time nor the space to hit it in detail in this post but perhaps we will get to it another time. (Or perhaps not for what association hath the light with the darkness?)

Now, if a confession straight from the horse’ mouth isn’t enough for you, how about clarification from Christ?

“Why do ye not understand my speech? even because ye cannot hear my word.” John 8:43 KJV

In this exchange Christ is absolutely most indeed sorting the wheat from the tares. He is talking (no doubt for the benefit of the Israelites), directly and specifically to the Hamitic Canaanite Pharisees, the ones, which were steadfast determined to put Him to death. Folks, this truth from Christ is as true today as it ever was. The Hamitic Canaanite Jews do not and have not ever heard His word, nor do they understand it. Nor for that matter does His truth suddenly become no longer true. So, next time you hear a Jewish politician discussing the teachings of Christ you can step out for a cigarette.

Is it any wonder then that Christians are confused about Christ when the book they use is corrupted by junk like this? No, I’m afraid it all makes perfect sense. It also makes perfect sense that John the Apostle identified it was the Pharisees, that cabal of Hamitic Canaanites and wayward Israelites, which, sent the scouts out to investigate John the Baptist whom they no doubt perceived as literally stirring up trouble in the waters of Bethabara beyond Jordan.

“And they which were sent were of the Pharisees.” John 1:24 KJV

So, let’s note right here and now that this cabal is still up and running today in all their Christ-denying, Christ-hating essence. As it was at the time of Christ with Israelites led astray by Canaanites, it remains the same today.

Folks, I hope you have come to realise that just by crossing out the corruption ‘Jew’ and putting in ‘Judean’ it is not quite so simple. What is really going on beneath the surface within these two groups ‘Judeans’ and ‘Pharisees’?

John Chapter Seven opens with a firecracker class in creative writing by none other than John Wycliffe. Here is the Latin Vulgate from which, Wycliffe is said to have translated directly into Middle English:

“post haec ambulabat Iesus in Galilaeam non enim volebat in Iudaeam (a) ambulare quia quaerebant eum Iudaei (b) interficere erat autem in proximo dies festus Iudaeorum (c) scenopegia dixerunt autem ad eum fratres eius transi hinc et vade in Iudaeam (a) ut et discipuli tui videant opera tua quae facis” John 7:1-3 Latin Vulgate (Underlines mine)

Below is the “Chinese Whispers” KJV version, derived as it was no doubt of Wycliffe’s original corrupt translation that we saw in “Sorting The Wheat From The Tares Parts 1,2 & 3”:

“After these things Jesus walked in Galilee: for he would not walk in Jewry, (a) because the Jews (b) sought to kill him. Now the Jews’ feast (c) of tabernacles was at hand. His brethren therefore said unto him, Depart hence, and go into Judaea, (a) that thy disciples also may see the works that thou doest.” John 7:1-3 KJV (Underlines mine)

First, you can see for yourself that the words translated as “in Jewry” and “into Judea” (a), in both cases were “in Iudaeam”. So where did Wycliffe get this “in Jewry” from? Did he just pull it from his laundry pile, pluck it out of thin air or, did he pull it out of somewhere else? Next, you can also see quite clearly that the words “eum Iudaei” (b), translated as, “the Jews” should be, “the Judeans”. Lastly, the words “dies festus Iudaeorum” (c), translated as “the Jews feast” should be translated as “the Judeans feast”, or “the feast of the Judeans”. Folks, is anybody home? Has nobody studied Latin before I came along? Yes, admittedly I was lucky enough to take a year of Latin study before they pulled it entirely from the curriculum (Gee, I wonder why?). Yet, anybody with one half of a working brain cell should be able to see the creative writing proficiency of John Wycliffe; the creation of a people known as ‘Jews’.

Here is what it should say:

“After these things, Yahowsha was walking in Galilee, for he did not want to walk in Judea, because the Judeans were seeking to kill him.” John 7:1 Aramaic Bible in plain English

Now, I know what some people want me to do and that is to blame everything on the Hamitic Canaanite Jews and declare that they are solely responsible for the death by crucifixion of our Messiah Jesus/Yahowsha The Anointed Christ. However, I can’t conclude any such thing at all. What is rather obvious is that there were any number of Israelites demanding His death. (Pontius Pilate was probably a descendant of Isaac himself, unaware of his own lineage and no doubt just exactly whom he was dealing with.)

How do we know this? We know it because we are told right in the first opening verses of the Book of John:

“He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not. He came unto his own, and his own received him not.” John 1:10, 11 KJV (Underline mine)

Folks, if we are going to acknowledge that His own were the Israelite people (the descendants of Isaac through Jacob/Israel), then we have it straight and clear right here from John the Apostle that any number of His own rejected their own Messiah; the Israelites rejected their Messiah. This ladies and gentlemen is a truth that is going to be very hard for some to accept, but that can’t be helped. Does the following make any sense?

“Then said Jesus/Yahowsha to those Jews which believed on him, If ye continue in my word, then are ye my disciples indeed; And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.” John 8:31,32 KJV (Edit mine)

Of course it doesn’t! Have you ever heard any Jew declare: “The truth shall make you free”? Of course you haven’t. The Jews have never believed on Him. Only the Israelites were divided about Him and only Israelites would go on to follow Paul thereby leaving the Hamitic Canaanite Jews with the Old Testament to this day. Therefore we know this verse should be rendered as:

“Then said Jesus/Yahowsha to those Jews Judeans which believed on him, If ye continue in my word, then are ye my disciples indeed; And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.” John 8:31,32 KJV (Strikethrough & edit mine).

So, how about this verse?

“There was a division therefore again among the Jews for these sayings.” John 10:19 KJV

Nope. It’s more of the same corrupt rubbish and should be rendered as:

“There was a division therefore again among the Judeans for these sayings.” John 10:19 HBTS Version

Now that we have a clear picture of the jumbled mess that was Jerusalem at the time of Christ, what other verses from John the Apostle clarify the situation? Well, how about 12:19?

“The Pharisees therefore said among themselves, Perceive ye how ye prevail nothing? behold, the world is gone after him.” John 12:19 KJV

The Pharisees knew it was already too late, yet nonetheless determined that Christ should die in a futile attempt to maintain their hegemony and rule over the people. As it is today this earthly cabal still seeks to keep the people from The Truth.

How about verses 12:42,43

“Nevertheless among the chief rulers also many believed on him; but because of the Pharisees they did not confess him, lest they should be put out of the synagogue: For they loved the praise of men more than the praise of God.” John 12:42,43 KJV

Here we come to the crux of it. As John makes clear there were many, which believed Jesus/Yahowsha, but wouldn’t go against the officials for fear of being bullied; they couldn’t go against the high priests because they feared being cast out. It is unfortunately just the same today throughout the religious (and other), institutions. So, who exactly were these intimidating bullies that were so feared? While it is no doubt true there were Israelites, which rejected Him, there were also Israelites, which accepted Him. Would there have been any Hamitic Canaanites that would have accepted Him? Do pigs fly? No. No, no and no. So, we have therefore identified the bullies among the Pharisees: the Hamitic Canaanites that would go on to become known as ‘Jews’. To confirm that straight from the top let’s look at what is perhaps the most crucial verse in the Book of John:

“Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.” John 8:44 KJV

Folks, this is the very sorting of the wheat from the tares. It is right here that the fine dissection between Hamitic Canaanite and Israelite co-mingled in Jerusalem is made. It is right here that Jesus/Yahowsha is talking specifically to the Hamitic Canaanites and no one else. (For more on this please see “Hu Are You?”)

Now, John the Apostle didn’t just put any old random whatever in his book. He made it quite plain that capturing the totality of the life and times of The Word come in the flesh would not be possible:

“And there are also many other things which Jesus/Yahowsha did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written. Amen.” John 21:25 HBTS Version

So, we should realise that everything he put in his book was put in for a reason and that John the Apostle was no doubt all too aware of the importance of Jesus’/Yahowsha’ tour through Samaria he details in Chapter Four:

“He left Judaea, and departed again into Galilee. And he must needs go through Samaria.” John 4:3,4 KJV

Samaria was the old stomping ground of the lost House of Israel, the ten northern tribes having been captured to Assyria 750 years prior. However, there were still Israelites left in the land. The woman with whom Jesus/Yahowsha has the encounter at the well is no doubt one. How do we know that? We know that because she tells us herself:

“Art thou greater than our father Jacob/Yacob, which gave us the well, and drank thereof himself, and his children, and his cattle?” John 4:12 HBTS Version

The father Jacob/Yacob in question would of course have been Esau’s brother Jacob/Yacob that became Israel, the one for whom all the Israelite people were named; the grand patriarch.

So, Jesus/Yahowsha is having a sit down chat at Jacob’s/Yacob’s well with a true Israelite. Folks, if Jesus/Yahowsha were a Hamitic Canaanite, would He waste five seconds with this gal? Of course not. So does the following make any sense?

“Ye worship ye know not what: we know what we worship: for salvation is of the Jews. ” John 4:22 KJV

Of course it doesn’t! It’s just more corrupt garbage. It should be rendered as:

“Ye worship ye know not what: we know what we worship: for salvation is of the Judeans.” John 4:22 HBTS Version

Or should it? What is going on in this exchange? What sense does it make for Jesus/Yahowsha to be telling an Israelite that salvation is of the Judeans? Surely Jesus cannot be telling one of His own people that there is no salvation for her? Of course not. Was Jesus mocking the uppity, snooty, elitist Judeans with this carefully placed statement “salvation is of the Judeans”, as it might have been the very kind of statement that self-righteous, legalist Judeans would have spat in the face of the idolatrous Samarians? Well, that may well depend upon how colourful your thinking be. Laying that question aside, what probably makes the most sense is that Jesus/Yahowsha was referring to His lineage as the lion of the tribe of Judah. So, the verse should probably be rendered, or at least understood as:

“Ye worship ye know not what: we know what we worship: for the saviour is of Judah/the saviour is of the Judahites.” John 4:22 HBTS

However, I can find no record of any such thing at all, but, just for the record, here is the Latin Vulgate:

“vos adoratis quod nescitis nos adoramus quod scimus quia salus ex Iudaeis est” John 4:22 Latin Vulgate

So, “Judeans” it is.

Now, ladies and gentlemen, before we wrap this post up, if you truly want to comprehend the complete stranglehold the Jews have on the spiritual outlook of Christians today, just look up John 4:22 on Biblehub. There is not one variation in any translation. They all say the same thing: “Jews”. Please also note right down at the bottom centre in the section for Early Modern they all say the exact same thing: “Iewes”. This is of course already incorrect owing to translation errors from Aramaic to Greek to Latin to English (For more on how the names of Elohim were corrupted please see ‘What In Gods’ Name’.)

“Nevertheless among the chief rulers also many believed on him; but because of the Pharisees they did not confess him, lest they should be put out of the synagogue: For they loved the praise of men more than the praise of God.” John 12:42,43 KJV

Not much has changed now has it? Sadly no, not much has changed and for this reason we must consider that perhaps far too many Christians are still Old Testament in their thinking no doubt because their leaders defer to the Jews as ‘Gods’ chosen people’.

So, to bring this post to a close we’re going to haul out good ol’ Jerome’s Latin Vulgate one more time:

“scripsit autem et titulum Pilatus et posuit super crucem erat autem scriptum Iesus Nazarenus rex Iudaeorum” John 19:19 Vulgate (Underline mine)

Which means we can finally rid the world of some outright rubbish and establish what should rightfully be there:

“And Pilate wrote a title, and put it on the cross. And the writing was, JESUS/YAHOWSHA OF NAZARETH THE KING OF THE JUDEANS.” John 19:19 KJV