The Wedding at Kanah
John 2:1-12
In this study, consideration is to be given to its contextual significance, both culturally and spiritually. However, Lindars warns that, although clearly the account features symbology, that reading too much into the symbology (and typology) may detract from the historical veracity of the account (Lindars p. 123).
2:1 – “The third day, there was a marriage in Kanah of the Galil. Yahusha’s mother was there.”
The third day – Much has been written speculating as to what exactly this refers. Bernard suggests that it refers to the third day after the Master Yahusha’s meeting with Piliops. The Talmud specifies that a marriage to take place on the fourth day (known in the West as Wednesday). Tradition holds that the marriage ceremony (nissuin) should take place in the evening (of the Tuesday) (Bernard p. 72).
The common practice was for the groom to come for his bride at any time, so that the bride must be prepared from the morning of the wedding day. The betrothal (eyrusin) period was about a year, after which the bride would anticipate the imminent arrival of the groom. The groom would return, at the command of his father, for his betrothed and the nissuin would take place, and the betrothed taken to the groom’s father’s house (Kasdan p. 51).
“But at midnight there was a cry, ‘Behold! The bridegroom is coming! Come out to meet him!’” (Matt. 25:6). This scenario can clearly be seen in the Parable of the Ten Virgins (Matt. 25:1-13). The word nissuin comes from the root נָשָׂא #H5375 nar-sar that means to carry away, where the groom comes to carry away his wife from her parents to his father’s house.
Subsequent to the nissuin, the wedding festivities would commence and may last up to seven days (Kasdan p. 51). Given this, it would seem likely that third day would refer to the third day of the festivities, and as such, there was more wine consumed than was to be expected, and so began to run out.
The whole account is based upon Covenant and the blood of the Master Yahusha shed at His Crucifixion, it alludes to His Resurrection. Throughout Scripture, any reference to the third day is typical of the Resurrection, as the blood is the Covenant that Yahuah has made with Mankind at the Fall, the acceptance of His sacrifice was the Resurrection and thus this ratifies the Covenant (see also the Maxi Bible Study The Crucifixion).
“It happened on the third day…Moshe led the people out of the camp to meet `Elohiym; and they stood at the lower part of the mountain.” (Exod. 19:16, 17). Hebraic thought would associate the third day reference by Yochanan with the reference to Moshe, bringing to mind the concept of marriage and Covenant.
-1-
…there was a marriage – The whole festivities from the arrival of the groom, the carrying away of the betrothed, the re-affirmation of the eyrusin vows and blessings, and until the end of the marriage supper, are all considered to be the nussuin or marriage ceremony.
Marriage was a covenant between two parties: the groom and the bride. The whole process begins with both parties being introduced, the shiddukhin, and after both are agreeable, then a formal written contract would be drawn up, the ketubah. This stage is known as the eyrusin or betrothal. This document would detail the conditions and requirements that had to be met by both parties. This would usually be in the form of the husband would care and provide for the wife, and the wife would bring a dowry. All the arrangements and details would have been formalised even before the groom and bride have met.
It is my belief that all but the nissuin have been carried out in history, concerning the marriage of the Messiah Yahusha and His Bride, Yisra`el. (For more details upon both believing Jews and believing Gentiles being called Yisra`elites please see p.8 the Mini Bible Study Adoption).
“‘Behold, the days come,’ says Yahuah, ‘that I will make a new Covenant with the house of Yisra`el, and with the house of Yehudah: not according to the Covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my Covenant they broke, although I was a husband to them,’ says Yahuah. ‘But this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Yisra`el after those days’, says Yahuah: ‘I will put my law in their inward parts, and in their heart will I write it; and I will be their `Elohiym, and they shall be my people… for I will forgive their iniquity, and their sin will I remember no more.’” (Jer. 31:30-33 (31-34).
This is the definitive proof text used by Christians to show that for salvation, Torahhas been done away with by a completely different covenant. However, this blasphemous error has come about by the use of two methods of exegesis that contravenes the accepted rules of hermeneutics:
(i) by forming doctrine from a translation;
(ii) by forming doctrine of a single passage, without supplementary support from other passages of Scripture.
This has come about by the mistranslation of a single word: new. In the above passage the Hebrew word חָדָשׁ #H2319 *613a kha-dash – new, from the root חָדַשׁ #H2318 kha-desh renew or repair. Further clarification comes from the Ancient Hebrew ~2151(N) renew or repair from the root חָדַ kha-dal – restoration. “…and they hired masons and carpenters to restore the house of Yahuah…” (2 Chron. 24:12). It is obvious from this verse, that the workmen were not engaged to build a completely new Temple from scratch, but rather to repair and put back the original to its former glory. That is why in all the FGA studies, the Bible is divided into two parts: the Tanakh and the Renewed Covenant.
Moshe pleaded to Yahuah on behalf of the people on the basis of Yahuah’s oath to the Patriarchs. Therefore, the Covenant had to be repaired and restored to its former glory. This was accomplished by placing Torah in the hearts of the people so that they would have no excuse for not complying with all its statutes.
-2-
Therefore, Yahuah took away the Stone Tablets of the Law by removing the Ark of the Covenant (c. 586 BCE), and replaced them with the more fertile ground of a person’s heart, as prophetically given by Yirmayahu (c. 650-570 BCE).
There has only ever been one way (Covenant) of salvation, and there will only ever be one way (Covenant). All the Tanakh and especially Torah point to the sacrificial death of the Master Yahusha. From Adam to Dismas (the repentant thief at Gulgotta), salvation was anticipated, looked forward, to the sacrifice on the Cross and the Resurrection. From the murder of Stephen to the end of time, all will look back in faith to the sacrifice on the Cross. It is all based upon the faith in the efficacy of the shed blood of the Master Yahusha (for more details of the Covenant see p. 15 the Maxi Bible Study Torah).
However, Torah obedience was never meant to bring salvation, but to point to Him who could. In this, it is instruction on how to live a sanctified life. Nevertheless, even this provision of a Heart-written Law would not prevail. At the appointed time, Yahuah sent His Son to show how to live a sin-free life, and later would send Ruach HaQodesh, “But He said this about HaRuach, which those believing in Him were to receive. For the Ruach HaQodesh was not yet given, because Yahusha was not yet glorified.” (John 7:39); “But the Counsellor, the Ruach HaQodesh, whom the Father will send in my name, He will teach you all things, and will remind you of all that I said to you.” (John 14:26). This is what is meant by the ‘second’ Covenant, not unto salvation but unto sanctification, “For by one offering He has perfected forever those who are being sanctified.” “by the way which He dedicated for us, a new and living way, through the veil, that is to say, His flesh;” (Heb. 10:14; 20). Through the one offering of Himself, the Master Yahusha has accomplished the future on-going sanctification of Believers (for further details see the p. 39 Maxi Bible Study The Crucifixion).
Therefore, it can be clearly seen that one of the main attacks of haSatan, is against the very foundation of society, that of the relationship between husband and wife. If this covenant is reduced to an insignificant state, then so is the relationship between husband and wife and thus between Yahuah and His people.
As time passed and the people of Yisra`el failed to comply with the terms of the Covenant, even though it was written on their hearts, the necessity of restoration required a more drastic measure. In order for `Elohiym to walk amongst His people, He, “… emptied Himself, taking the form of a servant, being made in the likeness of men. And being found in human form, He humbled Himself, becoming obedient to death, yes, the death of the cross.” (Phil. 2:7, 8). This He did in the form of Immanu`el, the Master Yahusha HaMashiach.
… in Kanah of the Galil – The location of this small village is close to Natzeret, the home of the Master Yahusha and His family. This first miracle of the Master Yahusha recorded in Scripture, was carried out in the area of Galil, where it was noted that the inhabitants were generally more righteous than those living near the Temple in Yerushalayim. No great multitudes of witnesses or Jewish authorities were present, only a relatively small number of chosen guests.
-3-
Yahusha’s mother was there. – The early introduction to the books of the Renewed Covenant, known as the Monarchian Prefaces, indicates that the groom was Yochanan, the author of this Good News account. It also states that Yochanan’s mother was Salome, the sister of Miryam, the Master’s mother (Barclay p. 81).
2:2 – “Yahusha also was invited, with His disciples, to the marriage.”
Yahusha also was invited – The Master was part of the guest list, not a gate-crasher. The general feeling is that the Master happened to turn up, just at the right time. However, this would seem highly unlikely. The main part of the nussuin was the exchange of vows and rings, the readings of the Tanakh and the sharing of the cups of wine and blessings pronounced by the officiating Rabbi. This took place on the first day, and we know that this was the third day. It may well be that His cousin, Yochanan, had invited the Master Yahusha to act as the Celebrant.
with His disciples – Again, there have been many suggestions as to whom this referred; the four mentioned in John 1:40-51, to the twelve or maybe to these and other unnamed followers. However, it is my opinion that this was referring to only Pilipos and Natan`el bar Tolmai (a resident of Kanah – John 21:2), for only Pilipos was called (John 1:43) and introduced Natan`el to the Master prior to the Master leaving for the Galil (John 1:45-51). It would not be until the Master Yahusha went to Lake Kinneret that Andrai and Shim`on Keefa was called (Matt. 4:18-20). Both of these brothers were witnesses of the testimony of Yochanan HaMatbil (John 1:35-42).
The Master then sought out two more fishermen, Ya`akob and Yochanan benei Zavdai (Matt. 4: 21, 22). If the Monarchial Prefaces are correct, then this Yochanan was the groom in the wedding passage. He, his brother and his father, would all have been witnesses to this miraculous event, only a few days before. Therefore, when the two cousins of the Master were called to follow Him, they had already witnessed His glory.
2:3 – “When the wine ran out, Yahusha’s mother said to Him, ‘They have no wine.’”
When the wine ran out – Wine is a symbol of joy, “Wine that makes glad the heart of man, Oil to make his face to shine, And bread that strengthens man’s heart.” (Psa. 104:15). Bernard quoting Pesakhim 109a, states that ‘Without wine there is no joy’ (Bernard p. 73). Wine is also an important constituent of the nissuin. At the ceremony itself, there were blessings spoken over shared cups of wine, but that was at the very outset of festivities. The passage states that the wine was running out, not that there was no wine, again strengthening the argument that this took place on the third day of activities.
Yahusha’s mother said to Him, ‘They have no wine.’ – It is a tradition that the only logistical responsibility that the groom had, was to supply the wine. Therefore, when it ran out, not only would the festivities come to and end, but shame would come upon the groom’s house. The greatest disgrace, however, would be upon the groom. The ketubah would state how the groom promises to provide for his wife. If he could not provide wine for the nissuin, how could he be trusted to provide for his wife and future family? This would explain why Miryam would have been informed of the shortage, and took control of the situation.
-4-
2:4 – “Yahusha said to her, ‘Woman, what does that have to do with you and me? My hour has not yet come.”
Yahusha said to her, ‘Woman, what does that have to do with you and me?’ – At first sight, this may seem to be a harsh rebuke. However, for Him who knew no sin (2 Cor. 5:21) would not have disrespected His mother as commanded, “Honour your father and your mother, that your days may be long in the land which Yahuah your `Elohiym gives you.” (Exod. 20:12). Instead, Bernard suggests ‘Lady, do not worry; you do not quite understand what is going on, leave things to me and I will settle it in my own way’ (Bernard p. 83).
Miryam knew who and what her Son was.
“The angel said to her, ‘Do not be afraid, Miryam, for you have found favour with `Eloakh. Behold, you will conceive in your womb, and bring forth a Son, and will call His name ‘Yahusha’. He will be great, and will be called the Son of Ha`Elyon. Yahuah `Elohiym will give Him the throne of His father, Dawid, and He will reign over the house of Ya`akob forever. There will be no end to His kingdom.’” (Luke 1:30-33). He would be the Messiah: even before conception, she was told that He would be given an everlasting Kingdom. “For there is born to you this day in the city of Dawid a Saviour, who is the Messiah, the Master.” (Luke 2:11). She was given this information by the attending shepherds. “It had been revealed to him by the Ruach HaQodesh that he should not see death before he had seen Yahuah’s Messiah.” (Luke 2:26). Confirmation was given at the Master’s B`rit Milah.
“He said to them, ‘Why were you looking for me? Did you not know that I must be in my Father’s House?’” (Luke 2:49), and she knew that the Master Yahusha knew of His destiny.
“But Miryam kept all these sayings, pondering them in her heart.” (Luke 2:19). The moment at which the Master declares publicly would surely have been discussed by Miryam, Yosef and the Master Yahusha, but the Master was waiting for the Father to release Him.
Many commentors take the view that the Master was reluctant to act, as His ministry had not yet begun, and was unconcerned with the plight of the groom. This could not be further from the truth.
“Do you say of Him whom the Father sanctified and sent into the world, ‘You blaspheme,’ because I said, ‘I am the Son of `Eloakh?’ If I do not do the works of my Father, do not believe me. But if I do them, though you do not believe me, believe the works; that you may know and believe that the Father is in me, and I in the Father.’” (John 10:36-38). This scenario is according to the will of the Father, and is orchestrated and not some accidental incident, but is part of the divine plan to reveal Yahusha as the Son of `Eloakh. “Therefore, Yahusha did many other signs in the presence of His disciples, which are not written in this book; but these are written, that you may believe that Yahusha is the Messiah, the Son of `Eloakh, and that believing you may have life in His name.” (John 20:30, 31).
Throughout this event, there are many allusions of the Covenant, the Master Yahusha’s part in the Covenant, and to His death. All He did was to glorify His Father, “Whatever you will ask in my name, that will I do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son.” (John 14:13).
-5-
My hour has not yet come – This was not the beginning of the Master’s ministry. After the Master Yahusha’s trials in the wilderness (Luke 4:1-13), “Yahusha returned in the power of HaRuach into the Galil, and news about Him spread through all the surrounding area.” (Luke 4:14). This miracle took place in order to further reveal the Son, who had come to reveal and glorify the Father. “Therefore, when Yahusha saw His mother, and the disciple whom He loved standing there, He said to his mother, ‘Woman, behold your son!’ Then He said to the disciple, ‘Behold your mother!’ From that hour, the disciple took her into his own home.” (John 19:26, 27). However, the ultimate act of glorifying the Father took place on the Cross. “When the devil had completed every temptation, it departed from Him until an opportune time.” (Luke 4:13). HaSatan must have thought that its hour of victory had come: but it was the Master Yahusha’s hour that had come.
Yet again, this was not the end of the ministry of the Master Yahusha. “‘Let us rejoice and be exceedingly glad, and let us give the glory to Him. For the marriage of the Lamb has come, and His wife has made herself ready.’ It was given to her that she would array herself in bright, pure, fine linen: for the fine linen is the righteous acts of the set apart ones. It said to me, ‘Write, ‘Blessed are those who are invited to the marriage supper of the Lamb.’’ It said to me, ‘These are true words of `Eloakh’” (Rev. 19:7-9). The goal of all that the Master Yahusha HaMashiach accomplished, is to bring His Bride to this hour, when His Bride presents, by faith, herself spotless to her Groom (Lu p. 127).
2:5 – “His mother said to the servants, ‘Whatever He says to you, do it.’”
His mother said to the servants – Miryam was not offended by her Son’s reply. Similarly, the servants were not offended by receiving instructions from Miryam, so it is probable that the servants mentioned were household servants. This strengthens the argument that Miryam was closely associated with the groom’s family.
Whatever He says to you, do it. – Miryam could not possibly have known what the Master Yahusha was about do in this situation. Nevertheless, she did have complete faith in that He would come up with a workable solution (Barclay p. 87).
2:6 – “Now there were six water pots of stone set there after the Yehudim’ manner of purifying, containing two or three ephahs apiece.”
Now there were six water pots of stone – Suggestions have been made as to the significance of the number six, but it may be just a statement of fact. These were probably for the use of the household and guests only, not communal vessels. Woman servants would go to the local well at first light and fill up the cisterns for the day’s use. However, with such a feast as a nissuin, these may have been frequently topped up.
set there after the Yehudim’ manner of purifying – This statement is obvious given for a non-Jewish audience, to explain the reason of the large volume of water. These large cisterns of water from which pitchers of water were taken for ceremonial washing of feet and hands. The roads were dirt tracks and travellers’ feet would be caked in dust or mud. When the guests arrived, the lowliest servants would wash their feet (cf John 13:5). This was common practise in the orient, and not specific to Judaism. However, the washing of hands before and between meals, was peculiar to Judaism.
-6-
containing two or three ephahs apiece – A pitcher of water was taken out of the main supply and taken to the guests. At a wedding ceremony this would require a lot of water. An ephah is approximately 9 imperial gallons or 40 litres, making an approximate total of over 50 imperial gallons or 240 litres. Edersheim states that the number and capacity of the cisterns has no significance (Edersheim p.248).
It is of vital importance to consider the context of any passage in Scripture. It is unfortunate that the modern Bible has been ‘split up’ by chapters and verses. Take these away, and this passage follows on immediately after the immersion of the Master Yahusha and Yochanan HaMatbil’s declaration when, “…he saw Yahusha coming to him, and said, ‘Behold, the Lamb of `Eloakh, who takes away the sin of the world!.. I have seen, and have testified that this is the Son of `Eloakh.’” (John 1:29, 34).
Yochanan further affirms in this testimony that, “I did not recognize Him, but He who sent me to immerse in water, He said to me, ‘On whomever you will see HaRuach descending, and remaining on Him, the same is He who immerses in the Ruach HaQodesh.’” (John 1:33).
2:7 – “Yahusha said to them, ‘Fill the water pots with water.’ They filled them up to the brim.”
Yahusha said to them, ‘Fill the water pots with water.’ This simple command implies that the Master Yahusha knew exactly how His Father was going to deal with the situation from the very outset, as it was instigated by Yahuah for His glory through His Son.
They filled them up to the brim. – Bernard suggests that this was done in order to have no space left to add anything, preventing anyone from making the allegation that something other than a miracle was about to happen.
2:8 – “He said to them, ‘Now draw some out, and take it to the ruler of the feast.’ So they took it.”
He said to them, ‘Now draw some out – The servants would have used a small drinking cup, ladle or small ewer, as no one would want to drink from the pitcher used for washing feet and hands.
and take it to the ruler of the feast – The governor of the feast was the person who organised all the logistics of the festivities, such as seating arrangements, food and drinks. He may or may not have been a member of the family or a family friend. It would be the governor who first became aware of the lack of wine.
So they took it. – Whatever the utensil was used, the servants showed no sign that they recognised the water having been changed into wine. Up to this point, there seems to have been no miraculous event.
-7-
2:9 – “When the ruler of the feast tasted the water now become wine, and did not know where it came from (but the servants who had drawn the water knew), the ruler of the feast called the bridegroom,”
When the ruler of the feast tasted the water now become wine – The grammar of this phrase cannot differentiate between the water turning to wine immediately after the water had been drawn out before tasting, on transit to the governor or at the actual tasting. It is my belief that the miracle took place at the tasting. “When this sound was heard, the multitude came together, and were bewildered, because everyone heard them speaking in his own language.” (Acts 2:6). At the first Shavu`ot after the Resurrection, known as Pentecost, all the pilgrims that heard the disciples talking, but miraculously heard them speaking in their native tongue. Some think that it was the disciples speaking in languages, foreign to themselves. However, the passage clearly states that the disciples were talking to one another and not preaching, and it was this conversation that was miraculously translated in the listeners ears.
Likewise, it would be when the wine touched the governor’s tongue, that the miracle occurred. This is vitally important when the wine is associated with the shed blood of the Master Yahusha, “Oh taste and see that Yahuah is good. Blessed is the man who puts his trust in Him.” (Psa. 34:8). The Psalmist dies not say to ‘taste and see if Yahuah is good’ but that He is good. The Master Yahusha did not have to wait for the governor’s approval of the wine, to know that it was the best.
Therefore, it would be when each individual tasted the drink, that it had turned to wine. As with accepting Eloakh’s offer of salvation through the shed blood of the Son of `Eloakh, the forgiveness of sins only takes place on an individual basis.
It has been said that the water was symbolic of Torah for justification and the wine as the Law of Grace (Edersheim p. 243). However, there is nowhere in Torah or even in all of the Tanakh, that proscribes this kind of ceremonial washing, and even more so of salvation by ritualistic Torah obedience. In the Oral Law, there are whole swathes of regulations on how and when to wash for meals, likewise (in error) how salvation can come by Torah.
and did not know where it came from – The groom would have given all the supplies needed for the festivities over to the governor to use as and when required, before the festivities began, so as not to bother the groom later on. Therefore, he was unaware of another supply having been brought in.
It is sad to note what Sha`ul said, “For I am not ashamed of the Good News of the Messiah, for it is the power of `Eloakh for salvation for everyone who believes; for the Jew first, and also for the Greek.” (Rom. 1:16). Salvation had come to the Jews, represented by all the participants in this scene, in the Master Yahusha, but was not recognised from whence He came: His Father.
(but the servants who had drawn the water knew) – It was water that the servants drew out and gave to the governor and must have wondered at the governor’s reaction.
-8-
the ruler of the feast called the bridegroom, – as he wanted to know the source of the new supply. Only the Master Yahusha, Miryam and the servants knew that a miracle had taken place.
2:10 – “and said to him, ‘Everyone serves the good wine first, and when the guests have drunk freely, then that which is worse. You have kept the good wine until now!’”
As with most of the accounts of the Master Yahusha’s encounters with people, there is no ending and leaves the audience in suspense. In this passage, the natural follow-on question surely must be ‘What was the groom’s reply?’ As the wine was running low, did the governor inform the groom that the wine was running out and was astonished that a ‘new’ supply was found? Was the groom in ignorance of this fact, but was amazed that the governor came to him because the groom had already given over all the supplies and thus does not know of what the governor was talking? This suspense is a major teaching tool of the Master Yahusha via the Good News narratives, as it causes the audience to think things through for themselves.
So, what would the early Believers take from this account?
If, as it most likely seems, the wine is symbolic of blood, what later blood was superior to the former blood?
“But the Messiah having come as High Priest of the coming good things, through the greater and more perfect Tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this creation, nor yet through the blood of goats and calves, but through His own blood, entered in once for all into the Most Set Apart Place, having obtained eternal redemption.” (Heb. 9:11, 12) (For further details see the seven times sprinkling of blood in the Maxi Bible Study The Crucifixion). The sacrifice of the Master Yahusha and His shedding of blood was accepted as full propitiation when, after He was raised up, the Messiah Yahusha entered into the Qodesh Qodeshim.
It was not that the shedding of the blood of the sacrificial animal was wrong. Indeed, this was part of Yahuah’s commandments. Nevertheless, this was only meant to be a type of the blood of the Master Yahusha, pointing to the more efficacious blood. The blood of animals was always only ever a temporary means of atonement that could only be appropriated by faith in the anti-type blood of the Master Yahusha.
2:11 – “This beginning of His signs Yahusha did in Kanah of the Galil, and revealed His glory; and His disciples believed in Him.”
To whom was this miracle addressed? Was it to the wedding guests who had no idea what had just taken place? Or was it for the disciples? “The two disciples heard him speak, and they followed Yahusha.” (John 1:37). If there were any lingering doubts upon Yochanan HaMatbil’s declaration to his disciples in their minds, this settled matters.
Or was it for the groom, Yochanan, who was to feature so heavily in the narrative of the Master Yahusha’s ministry (John 2:11), crucifixion (John 19:30), resurrection (John 20:8),
-9-
glorification (Rev. 1:13), exaltation (Rev. 5:12), and to our fully understanding the accomplished work of the Master Yahusha HaMashiach ben `Eloakh (1 Jn. 1:1)?
Yahuah bless you and keep you,
Yahuah make His face to shine upon you and be gracious unto you,
Yahuah lift up His face toward you and give you peace.
All glory be to Yahuah,
Ameyn.
References and Credits
In using these references, it is in no way agreeing to or condoning the theological viewpoint of the authors.
Barclay W. (1960) The Gospel of John, Vol I, Saint Andrews Press, Edinburgh.
Benner J.A. (2005) The Ancient Hebrew Lexicon of the Bible,
(denoted by ~) virtualbookworm.com Pub., College Station, TX.
Edersheim A. (2016) The Life And Times Of Jesus The Messiah, Hendrickson, Peabody, Mass.
Bernard J.H. A Critical And Exegetical Commentary On The Gospel
Most Rev. & Rt. Hon. According To St. John Vol.I, T&T Clark, Edinburgh.
Harris R.L., Archer Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament, Moody, Chicago,
G.J. Jr., Waltke B.K.(1980) Il.
(denoted by *)
Henry M. (1991) Commentary on the Whole Bible, Hendrickson, Peabody, Mass.
Kasdan B. (1996) God’s Appointed Customs, Lederer Books, Baltimore, Maryland.
Lindars B. (1982) The Gospel of John, Eerdmans, Grand Rapids, Mich.
Lu C.H. (2024) Declaring The End From The Beginning – From The
Tabernacle Of Creation To The Temple Of The Apocalypse,
Hebrew the Living Word Pub., U.S.A.
Mathews D. (2015) The Rainbow Language: The Sight, Sound & Color of the
Holy Tongue, CCB Publishing, B.C., Canada.
Strong J. (1994) Strong’s New Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible, World
(denoted by #H or #G) Bible Publishers Inc., Madison.
-10-
Strong J. (1996) The New Strong’s Complete Dictionary of Bible Words,
(denoted by #H or #G) Thomas Nelson, Nashville.
CJB – Complete Jewish Bible – David H. Stern – Jewish New Testament Pub., Clarksville, Maryland, U.S.A.
Adoption – First Generation Assembly
The Crucifixion – First Generation Assembly
Sin – First Generation Assembly.
Torah – First Generation Assembly
17 U.S. Code § 107 – Limitations on exclusive rights: Fair use
Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include—
(1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for non-profit educational purposes;
(2) the nature of the copyrighted work;
(3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
(4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.
The fact that a work is unpublished shall not itself bar a finding of fair use if such finding is made upon consideration of all the above factors.
-11-
First Generation Assembly 