Article Index


A. B. Traina is the father of the sacred name bible. His Holy Name Bible is a corruption of the King James Version and was the first such bible. On page five of the preface of his bible are these words:

“The name of the Son, Yahshua, has been substituted by Jesus, Iesus, and Ea-Zeus (Healing Zeus).”


This statement is patently false. Though Traina is deceased, his book is still out there teaching this false doctrine. I am sure, when he pinned and published these words he believed the name of Jesus meant Healing Zeus. I am told, by people who knew him, that he was an earnest and sincere man.

Whatever Traina’s beliefs, sincerity, and ethics, the fact remains that he made a false statement which is not and cannot be backed by any valid research at all. Traina stated it as fact, but did not include any documentation.

This false statement was allowed to remain in the preface of his publication through various editions and printings for over two decades. It serves to show how entrenched this myth is. It also shows how good and ethical scholarship was lightly regarded, perhaps disdained, within the movement during these years.

The Holy Name Bible in my possession, from which the quotation was taken, has a publication date of 1974, some twenty years after the first publication of Traina’s New Testament. I am assured, quite adamantly assured, by a sacred name advocate that this false statement has been allowed to remain in editions of the Holy Name Bible as late a 1983.

[NOTE: The Holy Name Bible on my shelf has a stamp from The Assemblies of Yahweh, Bethel , Pa. I have only word of mouth evidence that The Assemblies of Yahweh promote the Jesus - Zeus connection. I am convinced The Assemblies continue to perpetuate this sacred name lie.]

The lie was propagated from sacred name pulpits in numerous locations for two decades prior to Traina’s bible. However, Traina’s bible gave the myth a legitimacy and credibility which to this date is little diminished.

How many of Traina’s bibles are still out there teaching this false doctrine? Over the years, numbers of sacred name assemblies and individuals who cling to the King James Version have used Traina’s book as their bible. They have also accepted his notes, including the above statement, as true. Many still do. The myth has taken on a life of its own.

It might have been helpful if an explanation and a disclaimer had been put into recent editions of The Holy Name Bible.



Institute For Scripture Research, South Africa and Rhode Island , USA , is publisher of The Scriptures. This is one of the more recent entries into the ranks of sacred name bibles. This group continues to reproduce the Jesus/Zeus connection in print. As a consequence of their stand, it seems shameful that the words research and scripture are included in the name of the organization.

Here is a quotation from the Explanatory Notes section of their bible (1998 printing) under the article Jesus:

“Consider Iesous, rendered as ‘Jesus’ in English versions up to now.  For example the authoritative Greek-English Lexicon of Liddell and Scott, under Iaso:  The Greek goddess of healing reveals that the name Iaso is Ieso in the Ionic dialect of  the Greeks, Iesous being the contracted genitive form! In David Kravitx, Dictionary of Greek and Roman Mythology, we find a similar form, namely Iasus. There were four different Greek deities with the name Iasus, one of them being the Son of Rhea.”


This statement is a prime example of the pseudo scholarship that seems pervasive within the sacred name movement.

The quotation has the name of the Greek goddess of health and healing as Iaso. In Greek, the nominative case of this word is spelled with the Greek letters Iota, Alpha, Sigma, Omega - Iasw. The Greek word Jesus in nominative case is spelled Iota, Eta, Sigma, Omicron, Upsilon, Sigma - IhsouV. Didn't anyone at Institute for Scripture Research notice the different second letters - Alpha and Eta - in the two words?  Sure they did. They just hoped you and I wouldn't notice. We did.

This brings us to the mention and use the Institute makes of the genitive forms of the two words. For Iaso, the genitive, as given by ISR, in Greek letters is IasouV. For Jesus, the genitive in Greek letters is Ihsou. The impression the Institute desires to leave with us and certainly with avid Sacred Name converts who read their bible and its notes is that the words are the same.

However, the words are not at all the same. They are like the English words bell and ball. Consider the genitive forms of these words, bell's and ball's. That one letter makes them entirely different words.

Bell's and ball's may look alike and even sound a bit alike, but that is the end of their similarity. One is not derived from the other. The Greek words IasouV and Ihsou to some may look alike and they, too, sound a bit alike. There ends their similarity. One is in no case derived from the other. The people at Institute for Scripture Research know this.

Add to this, the fact that Liddell and Scott’s Lexicon, at least the one on my book shelves, makes no mention of Iaso being Ieso in the Iconic dialect. Perhaps someone misread it.

Now, we come to the Son of Rhea - Zeus. So, the Institute is attempting to foist off on us the same old sacred name movement absurdity that Jesus equals Zeus.  When in truth, the words are not connected in any way. They only look alike because of the final two letters.

If, however, we do as some teachers do and force a twisted pronunciation of the word Jesus, Gee-zoos, we can make the words sort of sound alike. For many sacred name people, that is enough. It also seems to be enough for Institute for Scripture Research.

This whole idea given to us by the Institute is gobbledygook, folderol, and foolishness. It is inserted in the notes of their publication, The Scriptures, with the calculated intention of leaving the reader with the idea that the name of Jesus is in some way derived from and connected with the name of one or more pagan gods, particularly Zeus.

This is a false impression. It is the impression Institute for Scripture Research wants to convey to us. Such scholarship, or lack thereof, as is exemplified by this, brings shame on many who indulge in it.

If the Institute would study the Scriptures a bit more and do some real Research, they would find this myth to by unworthy of the name of their institute and the false impression they leave to be unworthy of an organization claiming any connection at all with the scriptures.



William Hawkins, who changed his name to Yisrayl Hawkins, is founder and leader of the House of Yahweh in Abilene , Texas . Hawkins has the distinction of claiming to be one of the two witnesses mentioned in The Revelation chapter eleven. His brother, now deceased, claimed to be the other witness. Hawkins will also decease without this claim coming to fruition.

House of Yahweh is perhaps the largest single group of sacred name believers in America under the oversight of one organization and one man. If it is not the largest group in America , it most certainly ranks among the top two or three. It is one of the crown jewels of the sacred name movement.

Hawkins is well known for his many misfired prophesies, his deviant teachings, his strange practices (polygamy among them), his need to sell books, his exclusivity, and his atrociously mangled revision of the Scriptures - The Book of Yahweh.

On one of the web sites touting the superiority of The Book of Yahweh, can also be found the House of Yahweh version of the same old sacred name movement lie, Jesus = Zeus.

The purpose of this web site [wysiwyg://52]  is to explain the “Mistranslations of the King James Version of the Bible.” This is done from The House of Yahweh point of view.

A chart of mistranslations in the KJV is under the heading: The Names changed to Condemn us. Jesus is listed as a mistranslation. No mention is made as to what Jesus may be a mistranslation of. Yahshua Messiah is listed as the correct translation. By way of explanation of this so-called mistranslation we are told, “Jesus is Zeus, the Greek sun god,”.

This is a very typical sacred name movement articulation of the doctrine. It is generally given without any sort of documentation. It seems to be a statement that is solidly and firmly believed among this particular group. No one is expected to question its validity.

It is simply the continuation of the same old silly idea that because the words Jesus and Zeus both end with u - s  they must be kindred words. It is a lie, a fabrication. It is another mendacious attempt on the part of the House of Yahweh to discredit the name of Jesus.

Does the revelation of the doctrine of the sacred names need this kind of help to sustain it? A teaching built on a foundation of lies can in no case be the truth.

The House of Yahweh and Yisrayl Hawkins need to stop publishing such nonsense. It is predicted here that they will not stop.



A substantial percentage of sacred name people are either members of small groups or individuals who associate with no group at all. While these people may not be considered by some of the larger assemblies within the movement to be in the main stream of the sacred name movement, they surely are part of the independent minded people who make up the movement. Some of the names they have chosen to make sacred and cling to are often a bit unusual compared to those normally found in the Movement. Sometimes their practices are not in conformity with others in the Movement.  Nevertheless, their published thoughts, opinions, and teachings are part of the larger cacophony emanating from the movement.

As representative of them all, four are here presented for consideration.

  1. Across the River Ministry, Matherville , Ill
  2. Bible Revelations -
  3. Qodesh Beyth Yahweh, Flat Rock, NC
  4. Tobiyah -


Across the River Ministry:

           The quotation is from the web site at

“Well, wouldn't it be OK to keep using the name Jesus? The meaning of IEOUS in the Greek is ‘the son of Zeus, or the son of the most high god known to the Greeks as Zeus.’ Now we know that Zeus was the main Greek god and head of the pantheon of Greek gods’ by Sister Dawn”

It seems likely that this teacher has gotten the Jesus/Zeus myth from Sister Dawn. It seems likely he has never done any research for himself to ascertain the truth of falsity of the statement he has made.

Probably without even knowing it, he is just parroting the same old lie that his spiritual forbears parroted before him.


Bible Revelations:

The quotation is from the web site at

“Exactly the same as the pagan influence changed YAH’SHUAH to ‘Y’Zeus’ - (‘Jesus’ - phonetically ‘Jezus’), so also Luke 4:27 reflects the change of ‘Eli’Shuah’ to’Eli’Zeus’ (My God is Zeus’)!”

Where did this sacred name teacher get his research? He does not bother to tell us. He cannot tell us; he didn't do any. He has simply put his own spin, and not a very well thought out spin at that, on the same trite and worn out fiction.

He has no regard for the facts and the use made historically of the Greek word IhsouV. Forging ahead, in sacred name movement fashion, he tips his hand by using the word “phonetically.” Here he has told us the basis for his teaching; Jesus sounds like Zeus.

The sound alike theory, Jesus sounds like Zeus therefore it is derived from Zeus, is pretty much the single and major basis for this sacred name lie ever being taught. Our teacher in this instance has, by some sacred name movement standards of research, done well.

He could be complimented on adding an interesting new twist, Eli’Zeus = My God is Zeus. His reference is to Luke 4:27 in the KJV where Elisha is spelled Eliseus. It just sounds too much like Zeus for our teacher. He jumps at the chance to use his phonetically-like-Zeus theory. His jump takes him off a cliff. His smash up leaves him in ruins. The word Eliseus has nothing whatsoever to do with the word Zeus. Just as the word Jesus has nothing whatsoever to do with the word Zeus.

However, it was a beautiful dive until he hit the bottom.


Qodesh Beyeth Yahweh:

The quotation is from the web site at

“But, for the Christian ’religion,’ the name of the Adversary's son is.. Ge-Zeus, Son of Zeus ...”


This teacher is vehemently against the Christians. He blames them for most, if not all, the problems facing the society of America and the world. He is so over zealous for his position that he is willing to use anything available to him to make these “Christians” look as bad as possible.

He doesn't bother to explain himself, but seems to indicate that Zeus is the same as Satan and Ge-Zeus (Jesus) is his son. If this is what he is actually stating, then his conclusion would be that “Christians” worship the son of Satan. That is a very strong statement, especially since no documentation is presented with it. It is apparently what at least one Sacred Name teacher promotes.

He could have made the Christians look bad by just telling the truth. There are many false doctrines among them. History and today's newspaper tell us that Christians are killing each other as well as their perceived enemies. Christians already look pretty bad; there was no need to resort to this sacred name movement lie for that. Sad.



The quotation is from the web site at

“The name JESUS is derived from the Latin words GE ZEUS, meaning THE FISH.” “The christians today still blindly worship this false god. That is where the sign of the fish has been adopted today as the sign of the believer.”


Here is one other sacred name movement teacher who sees the necessity of sharing his research with us. He gives us a nice picture of a page from a Latin Dictionary. Of course, he fails to tell us what Latin Dictionary it is. We look in our own Latin dictionary (D. P. Simpson, Cassell's New Latin Dictionary, Funk and Wagnalls, N Y, 1968) and find under article Zeus : “a kind of fish.”

Perhaps our teacher does not know that just quoting a book of some kind does not necessarily prove your point. It certainly does not prove your point unless it mentions your point. In this case, the Latin Dictionary does not even hint at this teacher's point.

The quotation from the Latin Dictionary says not a single word about Jesus being derived from Zeus. The Latin dictionary gives us nothing about Ge Zeus. It does not tell us the name Ge Zeus means the fish. Didn't this sacred name teacher notice this? Probably not. The Latin dictionary says only that there is a kind of fish called Zeus. What is most amazing about all this is that our teacher should imagine he has by this means proven his point.

This sacred name teacher has made a giant leap to conclude that GE ZEUS means THE FISH in Latin. He wanted so badly for it to be so, therefore, in his mind, it has become so. He is then delighted to connect this to people displaying a fish on their car, their desk, their refrigerator, their person, and etc. For him, this just reinforces his point as proven.

Sacred name people write me and call me to express astonishment that I should say the sacred name movement has pseudo scholarship in it. This man's logical process and his conclusion do not even make good nonsense. Calling it pseudo scholarship is giving it a compliment.

In his attempt to preach this lie of long standing, he has only succeeded in showing how little studying he has done and how little of that he has even understood.

A number of sacred name people seem to think this false doctrine is not taught among them anymore. In fact, the Jesus = Zeus theory is still very much alive. From the beginning of the movement, shoddy research was the basis for much of the teaching, particularly the doctrine of the sacred name itself. That heritage is in no place more manifest than in the doctrine of the name Jesus being connected with the name Zeus.

All these witnesses have been given in order to show how rife the sacred name movement is with this teaching. It is a fact that a very large majority of assemblies and individuals in the movement are believers of this lie.