ORIGIN OF THE WORD JEW

Near the time of Christ, there once existed a metropolis city, which was a trade center for the then known world. This city of wealth was once destroyed in 146 B.C., and its treasures carried off to Rome. But Julius Caesar restored it a hundred years later, and the Roman colony flourished so much that it soon became one of the most prominent centers in Greece. Some would say that in the 2nd century it was the richest city in Greece.

This city was a city of wealth, of luxury and of immorality. It seemed to have one quality that marked it as a commercial hot spot of its day, for it is said that "Jews flocked to it." That city was ancient Corinth, the chief city in the Roman Province of Achaia. This is the city that Paul spent at least a year and one-half preaching the Gospel and encountering the full force and fury of the "Jews."

Times does not seem to change much do they? The same problem is facing most of the major cities in America today. The commercial cities we have in the United States are fast becoming breeding cesspools of corruption and all manner of evil. Could this be caused by a "Jewish" society and their influence? Many wonder!

Strong's Concordance more or less defines the words "Jew" and "Jews" as: "in the sense of a country, i.e., a Judean." The word "Jew" is used 22 times in the King James Version of the Bible in the New Testament, and the word "Jews" is used 172 times and 170 times of those are from the same #2453 as the above "Jew" definition. There are another 6 times the plural word "Jews'" is used and all but one of these is this #2454. So for the 200 times, the words: "Jew, Jews, and Jews'" are used in the New Testament, at least 197 occasions are referring to a Judean in the sense of from a place, i.e., as from a country.

The question still haunts many and they have often asked just who are these people the Bible calls "Jew, Jews, and Jews'"? Why were these people not just simply called "Judeans," "Israelites," or "Judeans whose religion was Judaism?" This is the age old word problem of society problem that is surrounded with so many, many, lies and deceptions. "THE FEAR OF THE JEWS" syndrome that plagues society today.

Much of it as a result of the so-called holocaust which we have been told 10,000 times 10,000 that the Germans cremated 6-million Jews during WWII. This story has installed a guilt complex in the American people, until the word Jew has become a non speakable word, and if one dares to utter the word except in reverence and humility they will be attacked by both Jews and Christians.

Therefore, we have prepared this study to prove to you and any other thinking American that the bulk of these people called "Jew" or "Jews" in the Bible, were not and are not of the House of Israel or of the House of Judah.

Then who are these people who have plagued the pages of history for so, so very long? The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia defines "Jew" as the same word of Strong's #2453 in the following words: "'Jew' denotes originally an inhabitant of Judah, (2 Kings 16:6 applies to the two tribes of the Southern Kingdom) but later the meaning was extended to embrace all descendants of Abraham." (James Orr, Volume III, page 1675)

The question which faces us here is WHO had the authority and the power that: "extended the meaning to embrace all descendants of Abraham?" Mr. Orr goes on to say in his definition that: "'Jews' (always pl.) is the familiar term for Israelites in the Gospel (esp. in John), Acts, Eph. etc."

This definition only serves to confuse the issue even more, who, how, when and why was such confusion entered into society and the Holy Scriptures? Why, if the term "Jew," refers to Israelites, did they not just simply call them Israelites or Judeans, whose religion was Hebrew?

It is an incontestible fact that the word "Jew" did not come into existence until the year 1775. Prior to 1775 the word "Jew" did not exist in any language on earth. The word "Jew" was introduced into the English language for the first time in the 18th century when Sheridan used it in his play "The Rivals," Chapter 2, p. 1, "She shall have a skin like a mummy, and the beard of a Jew." Prior to this use of the word "Jew" the word "Jew" had not become a word.

Contrary to what most people believe Shakespeare never saw the word "Jew" nor did he ever use the word "Jew" in any of his works, the common general belief to the contrary notwithstanding. In his "Merchant of Venice," V, III, I, 61, Shakespeare wrote as follows "what is the reason? I am a Iewe; hath not a Iewe eyes?" You see there was not even a letter "j" or "J" until the middle of the 18th century. Check any encyclopedia you wish for proof of this.

In the Latin Jerome 4th century Vulgate Edition of the New Testament Jesus is referred to by the Genitive Plural of "Iudaeus" in the Gospel by John reference to the inscription on the Cross, "Iudaeorum." It was in the 4th century that Jerome translated into Latin the manuscripts of the New Testament from the original languages in which they were written.

This translation by Jerome is referred to still today, as the Vulgate Edition by the Roman Catholic Church authorities, who use it today. Jesus is referred to as a so-called "Jew" for the first time in the New Testament in the 18th century editions in the English language of the 14th century first translations of the New Testament into English.

The history of the origin of the word "Jew" in the English language leaves no doubt that the 18th century "Jew" is the 18th century contracted and corrupted English word for the 4th century Latin "Iudaeus" found in Jerome's Vulgate Edition.

Of that there is no longer any doubt.

The available original manuscripts from the 4th century to the 18th century accurately trace the origin and give the complete history of the word "Jew" in the English language. In these manuscripts are to be found all the many earlier English equivalents extending through the 14 centuries from the 4th to the 18th century.

From the Latin "Iudaeus" to the English "Jew" these English forms included successively: "Gyu," "Giu," "Iu," "Iuu," "Iuw," "Ieuu," "Ieuy," "Iwe," "Iow," "Iewe," "Ieue," "Iue," "Ive," "Iew," and then finally the 18th century, "Jew." The many earlier English equivalents for "Jews" through the 14 centuries are "Giwis," "Giws," "Gyues," "Gywes," "Giwes," "Geus," "Iuys," "Iows," "Iouis," "Iews," and then also finally in the 18th century, "Jews."

With the rapidly expanding use in England in the 18th century for the first time in history of the greatly improved printing presses unlimited quantities of the New Testament were printed. These revised 18th century editions of the earlier 14th century first translations into the English language were then widely distributed throughout England the English speaking world among families who had never possessed a copy of the New Testament in any language.

In these 18th century editions with revisions the word "Jew" appeared for the first time in any English translations. The word "Jew" as it was used in the 18th century editions has since continued in use in all the editions of the New Testament in the English language. The use of the word "Jew" was thus stabilized.

The best known 18th century editions of the New Testament in English are the Rheims (Douai) Edition and the King James Authorized Edition. The Rheims (Douai) translation of the New Testament into English was first printed in 1582 but the word "Jew" DID NOT APPEAR IN IT.

The King James Authorized translation of the New Testament into English was begun in 1604 and first published in 1611. The word "Jew" did not appear in it either. The word "Jew" appeared in both these well known editions in their 18th century revised versions for the first times.

Countless copies of the revised 18th century editions of the Rheims (Douai) and the King James translations of the New Testament into English were distributed to the clergy and the laity throughout the English speaking world. They did not know the history of the origin of the English word "Jew" nor did they care. They accepted the English word "Jew" as the only and as the accepted form of the Latin "Iudaeus" and the Greek "Ioudaios." How could they be expected to have known otherwise? The answer is they could not and they did not. It was a NEW English word to them.

When one studies Latin they are taught that the letter "I" in Latin when used as the first letter in a word is pronounced like the letter "Y" in English when it is the first letter in the words like "yes," "youth" and "yacht." The "I" in "Iudaeus" is pronounced like the "Y" in "yes," "youth," and "yacht" in English. In all the 4th century to 18th century forms for the 18th  century "Jew" the letter "I" was pronounced like the English "Y" in "yes," "young," and "yacht." The same is true of the "Gi" or the "Gy" when it was used in the place of the letter "I."

The present pronunciation of the word "Jew" in modern English is a development of recent times. In the English language today the "J" in "Jew" is pronounced like the "J" in the English "justice," "jolly," and "jump."

This is the case only since the 18th century. Prior to the 18th century the "J" in "Jew" was pronounced exactly like the "Y" in the English "yes," "youth," and "yacht." Until the 18th  century and perhaps even later than the 18th century the word "Jew" in English was pronounced like the English "you" or "hew," and the word "Jews" like "youse" or "hews." The present pronunciation of "Jew" in English is a new pronunciation acquired after the 18th century.

The German language still retains the Latin original pronunciation. The German "Jude" is the German equivalent of the English "Jew." The "J" in the German "Jude" is pronounced exactly like the English "Y" in "yes," "youth," and "yacht." The German "J" is the equivalent of the Latin "I" and both are pronounced exactly like the English "Y" in "yes," "youth," and "yacht."

The German "Jude" is virtually the first syllable of the Latin "Iudaeus" and is pronounced exactly like it. The German "Jude" is the German contraction and corruption of the Latin "Iudaeus" just as the English "Jew" is the contraction and corruption of the Latin "Iudaeus." The German "J" is always pronounced like the English "Y" in "yes," "youth," and "yacht" when it is the first letter of a word. The pronunciation of the "J" in German "Jude" is not an exception to the pronunciation of the "J" in German.

The earliest version of the New Testament in English from the Latin Vulgate Edition is the Wiclif, or Wickliff Edition published in 1380. In the Wiclif Edition Jesus is there mentioned as One of the "iewes." That was the 14th century English version of the Latin "Iudaeus" and was pronounced "hew-weeze," in the plural, and "iewe" pronounced "hew-wee" in the singular.

In the 1380 Wiclif Edition in English the Gospel by John XIX.19, reads "ihesus of Nazareth kyng of the iewes." Prior to the 14th century the English language adopted the Anglo-Saxon "kyng" together with many other Anglo-Saxon words in place of the Latin "rex" and the Greek "basileus." The Anglo-Saxon also meant "tribal leader."

In the Tyndale Edition of the New Testament in English published in 1525 Jesus was likewise described as One of the "Iewes."

In the Coverdale Edition published in 1535 Jesus was also described as One of the "Iewes." Also in the Coverdale Edition the Gospel by John, XIX.19, reads "Iesus of Nazareth, kynge of the Iewes." In the Cranner Edition published in 1539 Jesus was again described as One of the "Iewes."

In the Geneva Edition published in 1540-1557 Jesus was also described as One of the "Iewes." In the Rheims Edition published in 1582 Jesus was described as One of the "Ievves."

In the King James Edition published in 1604-1611 also known as the Authorized Version Jesus was described again as one of the "Iewes." The forms of the Latin "Iudaeus" were used which were current at the time these translations were made.

The translation into English of the Gospel by John, XIX.19, from the Greek in which it was originally written reads "Do not inscribe 'the monarch of the Judeans' but that He Himself said 'I am monarch.'"

In the original Greek manuscript the Greek "basileus" appears for "monarch" in the English and the Greek "Ioudaios" appears for "Judeans" in the English. "Ioudaia" in Greek is "Judea" in English. "Ioudaios" in Greek is "Judeans" in English. There is no reason for any confusion.

If the generally accepted understanding today of the English "Jew" and "Judean" conveyed the identical implications, inferences and innuendoes as both rightly should, it would make no difference which of these two words was used when referring to Jesus in the New Testament or elsewhere. But the implications, inferences, and innuendoes today conveyed by these two words are as different as black is from white. The word "Jew" today is never regarded as a synonym for "Judean" nor is "Judean" regarded as a synonym for "Jew."

When the word "Jew" was first introduced into the English language in the 18th century its one and only implication, inference and innuendo was "Judean."

However during the 18th, 19th and 20th centuries a well-organized and well-financed international "pressure group" created a so-called "secondary meaning" for the word "Jew" among the English speaking peoples of the world. This so-called "secondary meaning" for the word "Jew" bears no relation whatsoever to the 18th century original connotation of the word "Jew."

It is a misrepresentation presented to the world deliberately by this well organized and well financed "pressure group" to deceive Christians. (Facts Are Facts, by Benjamin H. Freedman, pp. 15-20) (And to claim a heritage that is not theirs). This sure seems to be the more correct terminology. It appears from all our readings that the Jews of all ages, always do best what their father, the devil does - and that is lie. (John 8:44)

The Greek words used for "know and knowledge" seem to carry somewhat of a different context or concept than todays English words do. In both the Hebrew and Greek tongue these words carried the connotation - "to know fully."

"Knowledge strictly is the apprehension by the mind of some fact or truth in accordance with its real nature...Knowledge is distinguished from 'opinion' by its greater certainty. The mind is constituted with the capacity for knowledge, and the desire to possess and increase it.

“The character of knowledge varies with its object. The senses give knowledge of outward appearances; the intellect connects and reasons about these appearances, and arrives at general laws or truths; moral truth is apprehended through the power inherently possessed by men of distinguishing right and wrong in the light of moral principles; spiritual sympathy...

“The highest knowledge possible to man is the knowledge of God, and while there is that in God's infinity which transcends man's power of comprehension, God is knowable in the measure in which He has revealed Himself in creation, and supremely in Jesus Christ who alone perfectly knows the Father, and reveals Him to man..." (The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, pages 1815-1816)

The problem with knowledge is that it can "enlarge" a man's ego. St. Paul, who is said to have authored the book of 1st Corinthians, penned these words in the 8th Chapter verses 1 and 2:

"...we know that we all have knowledge. Knowledge puffeth up, but charity edifieth. And if any man think that he knoweth any thing, he knoweth nothing yet as he ought to know." 

In these passages, Paul was addressing, primarily, the pagan ritual of things offered to idols and their influence upon Christian fellowship with the heathen community, but the concepts of knowledge are for general application. Paul shows that a conceited knowledge is not a good thing.

But the man who understands that love is for more important than knowledge has a handle on "knowing" and the limits contained therein. True love for you neighbor (fellow Israelite) has a real concern that consults the interest of others. There can be found a common evidence of ignorance in a person and that evidence is a conceit of knowledge. That is why Paul said, "if any man think that he knoweth any thing, he knoweth nothing as yet he ought to know."

Many believe that Paul used these words here, because of the arrogance and forcefulness of the Jews, whose religion was Judaism (Traditions of the Elders - at that time in history) and their attitudes towards the "goyium," i.e., White Israelites. These Jews always want to be in control and more or less run the show.

The person who knows most, is the one who best understands his own ignorance and the imperfections of human knowledge. The vain and conceited person, that "thinks" he knows everything, is drunk on his own imagination, a real Jewish trait.

He should examine himself to see if he really knows any thing alright. It surely is one thing to know truth and another thing to know truth as it ought to be known. When truth is known alright it will duly improve our knowledge. For God said: "My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge (why?) BECAUSE THOU (you) HAST (have) REJECTED KNOWLEDGE (therefore God will), I will also reject thee..." (Hosea 4:6)

The man or woman who truly knows the YHWH of True Israel are taught and guided into knowing truth aright, and so must the living of his/her life accordingly. The man or woman who has a vain and conceited opinion of him/herself is impeding the leadership and/or guidance of the Holy Spirit.

This kind of knowledge can not be bought or sold. True wisdom does not come from books or personal experience, but rather from YHWH, His son and His Holy spirit. If the "Jew" word problem and society problem had never been introduced into society things might have been different, but it is there, it is a real live issue of today, for you and I. We have to obtain truth aright from Scripture, history, both secular and Biblical, and from letting the Holy Spirit guide us into all truth, see John 14, "Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them." (Matthew 7:20)

Now, let us return to the wicked, commercial and immoral city of Corinth, that according to scholars, "Jews flocked to this trade center." (Acts 18:1-18; Romans 16:21; 1 Corinthians 9:20) In Acts 18 we find that Paul encountered the Jewish problem first hand.

1). There were some Jews (and/or Judeans) there, along with some Greeks.

2). Paul reasoned with them, some opposed him and blasphemed and he said their blood would be on their heads.

3). Some Judeans believed in Christ. Jews lived among Israelites and Greeks in Corinth.

4). Upset Jews rose up in insurrection against Paul in strife.

5). The Jews instilled fear and silence in Corinthians, making them afraid to speak the truth.

6). The deceived Jews (Judeans) had to have a teacher (Paul) to show a more perfect knowledge of YHWH and Christ.

7). Apparently all Jews did not worship God.

8). Paul is accused by Jews before the Roman court.

9). The court cleared Paul of any wrong.

10). The Jews took their contempt out on another person.

There are many people who live in Texas and are called Texans. But all these Texans are not of the same race, region, or religion. There are some True Israelites (Hebrews) in Texas. We are sure that there are some Jewish Texans also. How can one tell one from the other.

There is probably no way one can, unless, they tell you who they are or what they are or we can see their fruits which produce evidence. If a person is asked if he is Jewish or an Israelites, we feel that a true Israelite would tell all he knows about his religion.

But Jews, back then and even today, are almost always afraid of the truth. John 8:44 says that the father of the Jews is the devil and a liar. Apparently the real nature (part of the definition of know, supra) of the Jew is trickery, deception and lies. True Israelites know that it is wrong to lie instinctively. (Taken, in part, from Facts or Facts by Benjamin Freedman)