A question for JWs about the use of "Jehovah" in Colossians

Clearly · Jul 14, 2014

OK Spiritandtruth2 : Last chance for relevance and I'm done.

IF, you ARE, somehow, using the Greek, and you feel that your personal translation of Greek New Testament IS, correct, tell us WHICH manuscript or papyri or fragment you are using to create such a strange rendering of this verse.

If you are NOT using a Greek New Testament, but have simply made up the quote because it suits your theology, then you are welcome to do this as well, but, there is a cost to trying to trick other forum readers.

If, you are disingenuous in giving us a quote as though it came from the New Testament if it has, in fact, no relationship to the actual new testament, this will cost you in credibility lost.

For example, you may become irrelevant to other readers. If they realize that you have simply “made up a quote” as though it came from the authentic New Testament, then they may, in perfectly good conscience, skip over and avoid reading your posts because of lack of credibility.

If you do this, then none of us will know when you will “slip in” a non-existent quote and, importantly, none of us has the time to back check all of your claims to see when your posts are truthful and when they might be deceptive.

Each of us has a level of personal Credibility that, like any other resource, may be squandered. It would be silly to squander personal credibility on such a silly thing as a single reference that was an inadvertent mistake.

Good luck in making the right and moral choice Spiritandtruth2. Whatever you choose, I honestly wish you a good journey in this life.

TO OTHER FORUM READERS :

I assure you that I am perfectly correct. The verse that Spiritandtruth2 quoted (matt 4:10), does not exist as she quoted it, in ANY Greek New Testament manuscript, or papyri, or fragment that any known textual critic has ever (EVER) reported. I am confident on this. Because of it's unusual reading in some manuscripts, (υπισο μου - follow me vs get thee behind me is added in many versions), and thus this verse has been very well studied)

If ANYONE on this forum knows ANY authentic greek that has the reading Spiritandtruth2 used, please let me know. It would be an incredibly unusual discovery.

Clear
σετζσιτζω

BelCantoBaptist · Jul 14, 2014

Spiritandtruth the Tetragrammaton (YWH) does not appear in any New Testament manuscripts. Jehovah does not either. Jehovah is actually an invention of superstitious scribes who inserted the vowels for Adonai to prevent blaspheming the divine name.

The WTBS has completely lied to you about everything Bible related.

"No striking or fundamental variation is shown either in the Old or the New Testament. There are no important omissions or additions of passages, and no variations which affect vital facts or doctrines." Reasoning from the Scriptures p. 64

That's from your own WT literature, yet you say that the divine name was removed from the NT! You can't have it both ways.

I suggest you peruse this site: 4jehovah.org and freeminds.org

4x4toy · Jul 14, 2014

BelCantoBaptist said:
Spiritandtruth the Tetragrammaton (YWH) does not appear in any New Testament manuscripts. Jehovah does not either. Jehovah is actually an invention of superstitious scribes who inserted the vowels for Adonai to prevent blaspheming the divine name.

The WTBS has completely lied to you about everything Bible related.

That's from your own WT literature, yet you say that the divine name was removed from the NT! You can't have it both ways.

I suggest you peruse this site: 4jehovah.org and freeminds.org

Exactly , Jesus is the name

Der Alte · Jul 14, 2014

spiritandtruth2 said:
The New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures is not included in this list but did translate the Divine Name, Jehovah, 6973 times in the Hebrew scriptures and 237 times in the Christian Greek Scriptures making a total of 7,210 occurrences. (See NW Translation, Ref. Ed. 1984 p. 6)

1. King James Version 1611 - Jehovah - Ex.6:3;Ps.83:18;Is.12:2,26:4
2. American Standard Version 1901 - Jehovah - 6823 times (approx..)
3. An American Translation by Smith&Goodspeed 1935 - Yahweh at Ex.6:3;3:15
4. Bible in Living English by Steven T.Byington 1972 - Jehovah 6823 times
5. Holy Scriptures by J.N.Darby 1882 Jehovah - 6823 times
6. Emphatic Diaglott by Benjamin Wilson 1864 - Jehovah - Matthew 21:42 etc.
7. Jerusalem Bible(Catholic) 1966 - Yahweh - 6823 times
8. New English Bible 1970 - Jehovah - Ex.3:15;6:3
9. Emphasized Bible by J.B.Rotherham 1878-1902 - Yahweh - 6823 times
10. Good News Bible -Today's English Ver. 1976 - Yahweh - Ex.3:15 footnote
11. Living Bible 1972 - Jehovah - 313 times, Ps.83:18 etc.
12. Revised Version 1885 - Jehovah - Ex.6:3;Ps.83:18;Is.12:2;26:4
13. M.L.B. - New Berkeley Version - Jehovah - Ps.8:1,9;16:2 Yahweh - Hosea 12:2
14. New Jerusalem Bible - 1985 Yahweh - 6823 times
15. English Version for the Deaf 1987 - Yahweh - Ps.83:18; Is.42:8; Ex.3:15
16. Literal Translation by Jay P.Green 1987 - Jehovah - 6823 times
17. Webster Bible by Noah Webster 1833 - Jehovah - Ex.6:3;Ps.83:18;Is.12:2
18. Holy Scriptures by Jewish Pub.Soc. - Tetragrammaton - Ex.6:3
19. Amplified Bible 1965 - Yaweh - Ex.6:3
20. Young's Literal Translation - Jehovah - 6823 times

All these Bibles that refer to Jehovah's name cannot all be wrong can they?

Reason on the scriptures Lord and God are Titles even Satan is called a God of this system of things

(2 Corinthians 4:3-6) 3 If, in fact, the good news we declare is veiled, it is veiled among those who are perishing, 4 among whom the god of this system of things has blinded the minds of the unbelievers, so that the illumination of the glorious good news about the Christ, who is the image of God, might not shine through. 5 For we are preaching, not about ourselves, but about Jesus Christ as Lord and ourselves as your slaves for Jesus sake. 6 For God is the one who said: Let the light shine out of darkness, and he has shone on our hearts to illuminate them with the glorious knowledge of God by the face of Christ.

All irrelevant! Just because an error is repeated many times does not make it the truth. It is still error. Can all those versions be wrong when they translated John 1:1 as "the Word was God," instead of the NWT "the word was a god?" You can't have one without the other. If the purpose is to address God by His correct name repeating an error just because a lot of people know it does not serve that pupose. So yes all those versions can be wrong. Here is historical evidence for the correct pronunciation, Yahweh.

Names of God-YHWH.

Of the names of God in the Old Testament, that which occurs most frequently (6,823 times) is the so-called Tetragrammaton, Yhwh (יהוה), the distinctive personal name of the God of Israel. This name is commonly represented in modern translations by the form "Jehovah," which, however, is a philological impossibility (see Jehovah). This form has arisen through attempting to pronounce the consonants of the name with the vowels of Adonai (אדני = "Lord"), which the Masorites have inserted in the text, indicating thereby that Adonai was to be read (as a "keri perpetuum") instead of Yhwh. When the name Adonai itself precedes, to avoid repetition of this name, Yhwh is written by the Masorites with the vowels of Elohim, in which case Elohim is read instead of Yhwh. In consequence of this Masoretic reading the authorized and revised English versions (though not the American edition of the revised version) render Yhwh by the word "Lord" in the great majority of cases.

This name, according to the narrative in Ex. iii. (E), was made known to Moses in a vision at Horeb. In another, parallel narrative (Ex. vi. 2, 3, P) it is stated that the name was not known to the Patriarchs. It is used by one of the documentary sources of Genesis (J), but scarcely if at all by the others. Its use is avoided by some later writers also. It does not occur in Ecclesiastes, and in Daniel is found only in ch. ix. The writer of Chronicles shows a preference for the form Elohim, and in Ps. xlii.-lxxxiii. Elohim occurs much more frequently than Yhwh, probably having been substituted in some places for the latter name, as in Ps. liii. (comp. Ps. xiv.).

In appearance, Yhwh (יהוה) is the third person singular imperfect "kal" of the verb ( הוה ("to be"), meaning, therefore, "He is," or "He will be," or, perhaps, "He lives," the root idea of the word being,probably, "to blow," "to breathe," and hence, "to live." With this explanation agrees the meaning of the name given in Ex. iii. 14, where God is represented as speaking, and hence as using the first person"I am" (אהיה, from ( היה, the later equivalent of the archaic stem ( הוה). The meaning would, therefore, be "He who is self-existing, self-sufficient," or, more concretely, "He who lives," the abstract conception of pure existence being foreign to Hebrew thought. There is no doubt that the idea of life was intimately connected with the name Yhwh from early times. He is the living God, as contrasted with the lifeless gods of the heathen, and He is the source and author of life (comp. I Kings xviii.; Isa. xli. 26-29, xliv. 6-20; Jer. x. 10, 14; Gen. ii. 7; etc.). So familiar is this conception of God to the Hebrew mind that it appears in the common formula of an oath, "hai Yhwh" (= "as Yhwh lives"; Ruth iii. 13; I Sam. xiv. 45; etc.).

If the explanation of the form above given be the true one, the original pronunciation must have been Yahweh ((יהוה) or Yahaweh (יהוה). From this the contracted form Jah or Yah (יה ) is most readily explained, and also the forms Jeho or Yeho (יהו ), and Jo or Yo (יו contracted from יהו , which the word assumes in combination in the first part of compound proper names, and Yahu or Yah (יהו ) in the second part of such names. The fact may also be mentioned that in Samaritan poetry יהוה rimes with words similar in ending to Yahweh, and Theodoret ("Quæst. 15 in Exodum") states that the Samaritans pronounced the name Iαβέ[yahbay]. Epiphanius ascribes the same pronunciation to an early Christian sect. Clement of Alexandria, still more exactly, pronounces 'Iαουέ [yahway] or 'Iαουαί [yahuai], and Origen, 'Iα. Aquila wrote the name in archaic Hebrew letters. In the Jewish-Egyptian magic-papyri it appears as Ιαωουηε[yahouay]. At least as early as the third century B.C. the name seems to have been regarded by the Jews as a "nomen ineffabile," on the basis of a somewhat extreme interpretation of Ex. xx. 7 and Lev. xxiv. 11 (see Philo, "De Vita Mosis," iii. 519, 529). Written only in consonants, the true pronunciation was forgotten by them. The Septuagint, and after it the New Testament, invariably render κύριος ("the Lord").

Jewish Encyclopedia online

Bongoon · Jul 15, 2014

tezboski99 said:
"I must confess I don't understand what you mean by not cashing in on the promises because it's all too mysterious. The promise of salvation can be understood by children: Jesus Christ, the Son of God, died to pay the price of your sins, and by believing on him and making him your Lord you can receive forgiveness."

Yes the promise of Salvation can be understood...but not the trinity or how it fits with the myriad of illustrations Jesus gave. Basically, Trinity arguments stop just short of their natural conclusion. You want me to have faith in the GOD of the bible and you believe that this means faith in the Trinity? That's great, no problems there. But, in the bible it presents a GOD that want's us to know Him intimately and promises to provide more and more understanding.

So, when I try to get answeres regarding a vast number of passages that don't support the Trinity teachings I'm told to "just believe and have faith". There is no offer of genuine insight or understanding just "mystery" and "have faith". So, I took the next step. I looked for support of the "mystery" and "just have faith" arguments and found none.

So, Trinity offers no real depth of understanding on any level other than just to have "blind faith". This is out of harmony with GOD's promise of more and more understanding don't you think?

Even your presentation on the NT writers use or non use of GOD's name falls short of it's natural conclusion. You believe that Jesus IS Jehovah. Yet you assert that NT writers who personally heard him preach edited his words to exclude the name HE uses as the Father in heaven and revealed to mankind. Thus, the real argument is that the NT writers you want me to put my faith in....edited Jesus own words for content.

I do understand your argument fully. It just undermines faith in the bible instead of building it.

Monotheism with a twist, courtesy of the adversary, i think. Y'shua prayed to Adonai, as his God, not as his equal. Do you worship Adonai alone as God?

Bongoon · Jul 15, 2014

Oh by the way are you Polish?

spiritandtruth2 · Jul 15, 2014

Clearly said:
OK Spiritandtruth2 : Last chance for relevance and I'm done.

IF, you ARE, somehow, using the Greek, and you feel that your personal translation of Greek New Testament IS, correct, tell us WHICH manuscript or papyri or fragment you are using to create such a strange rendering of this verse.

If you are NOT using a Greek New Testament, but have simply made up the quote because it suits your theology, then you are welcome to do this as well, but, there is a cost to trying to trick other forum readers.

If, you are disingenuous in giving us a quote as though it came from the New Testament if it has, in fact, no relationship to the actual new testament, this will cost you in credibility lost.

For example, you may become irrelevant to other readers. If they realize that you have simply “made up a quote” as though it came from the authentic New Testament, then they may, in perfectly good conscience, skip over and avoid reading your posts because of lack of credibility.

If you do this, then none of us will know when you will “slip in” a non-existent quote and, importantly, none of us has the time to back check all of your claims to see when your posts are truthful and when they might be deceptive.

Each of us has a level of personal Credibility that, like any other resource, may be squandered. It would be silly to squander personal credibility on such a silly thing as a single reference that was an inadvertent mistake.

Good luck in making the right and moral choice Spiritandtruth2. Whatever you choose, I honestly wish you a good journey in this life.

TO OTHER FORUM READERS :

I assure you that I am perfectly correct. The verse that Spiritandtruth2 quoted (matt 4:10), does not exist as she quoted it, in ANY Greek New Testament manuscript, or papyri, or fragment that any known textual critic has ever (EVER) reported. I am confident on this. Because of it's unusual reading in some manuscripts, (υπισο μου - follow me vs get thee behind me is added in many versions), and thus this verse has been very well studied)

If ANYONE on this forum knows ANY authentic greek that has the reading Spiritandtruth2 used, please let me know. It would be an incredibly unusual discovery.

Clear
σετζσιτζω

I think you need to read if you can get a hold of it

Archaeological Discoveries and the New Testament - Camden M Cobern

It really helps to see what changes the Greeks made to the interpretation of the New Testament.

I think if we look at the Greek Orthodox Church very closely it gives testimony to that, but that's another story.

In the rendering of honor to the saints of the Greek Orthodox Church, we find obvious traces of the strong influence that pagan religion had.

Qualities that were attributed to the Olympian gods before [people] were converted to Christianity were now ascribed to the saints. From the early years of the new religion, we see its adherents replacing the sun-god (Phoebus Apollo) with the Prophet Elijah, building churches on, or next to, the ruins of ancient temples or shrines of this god, mostly on the top of hills and mountains, at every place where the ancient Greeks honored the light-giver Phoebus Apollo. . They even identified the Virgin-goddess Athena with the Virgin Mary herself. Thus, the gap that was created when the idol of Athena was torn down was eliminated within the soul of the converted idolater.”—Neoteron Enkyklopaidikon Lexikon (New Encyclopedic Dictionary), Volume 1, pages 270-1.

Bongoon · Jul 15, 2014

The temerity with which you titled this post with shocked me. Relevance? What about the fact that you insist the least used Name of God is the most important, replacing many other names for this one. The one translation you keep referring to is aberrant in its replacement of Adonai, with Jehovah. Jehovah is now believed to be derived from The Tetragrammaton, the full pronunciation of which is longer. Yodh Heh Vav Heh, is what some would keep secret to themselves. You insisting others use the words you sect has told you to insist on, is dark. I don't listen to sacred name advice from you guys. The very fact that your bible
is so different, yet claims are made by your sect to the contrary is suspicious. I mean accusing others of making up quotes, is hypocrisy, considering how many alterations your lot have made. Take a hike bozo! Your lot are cultists, and they shall be exposed for the abuses they indulge in behind closed doors.

In fact how lame your last parting shot, to 'clearly' illuminates how shaky you feel about this whole thing. you could not say that there was such a document, because you knew this guy knew his greek manuscripts. Take your intrigues elsewhere

Bongoon · Jul 15, 2014

BelCantoBaptist said:
Spiritandtruth the Tetragrammaton (YWH) does not appear in any New Testament manuscripts. Jehovah does not either. Jehovah is actually an invention of superstitious scribes who inserted the vowels for Adonai to prevent blaspheming the divine name.

It should do though. The Lord is his name. His name is to be feared and worshipped through all generations.

That's from your own WT literature, yet you say that the divine name was removed from the NT! You can't have it both ways.

Oddly enough what you said to our door knocking snake oil salesperson here, is true. The Divine name was removed for modern theology's sake and that was the Romans. Adonai sent Y'sua. Y'sua prayed to Adonai as his Elohim. Quite simply though, the name Jehovah is not neccesarrily supposed to be used all the time in worship. This seems to be what they are up to. I hate facism.

Der Alte · Jul 15, 2014

spiritandtruth2 said:
I think you need to read if you can get a hold of it

Archaeological Discoveries and the New Testament - Camden M Cobern

Who is Camden Cobern and what are his Archaeological credentials? When, where and by whom was this published? Have you actually read it or did you just copy/pste information from a WBTS publication?

Qualities that were attributed to the Olympian gods before [people] were converted to Christianity were now ascribed to the saints. From the early years of the new religion, we see its adherents replacing the sun-god (Phoebus Apollo) with the Prophet Elijah, building churches on, or next to, the ruins of ancient temples or shrines of this god, mostly on the top of hills and mountains, at every place where the ancient Greeks honored the light-giver Phoebus Apollo. . They even identified the Virgin-goddess Athena with the Virgin Mary herself. Thus, the gap that was created when the idol of Athena was torn down was eliminated within the soul of the converted idolater.Neoteron Enkyklopaidikon Lexikon (New Encyclopedic Dictionary), Volume 1, pages 270-1.
.

The name Neoteron Enkyklopaidikon Lexikon suggests this was printed in Greek. When, where and by whom was it published? By whom was it translated into English? What historical evidence does this publication cite in support of the assertions in this article? Without such credible, verifiable, historical evidence anything quoted is worthless although this publication calls itself an encyclopedia. Have you actually read this encyclopedia or did you copy/paste this from a WBTS publication?

Clearly · Jul 15, 2014

Clearly in post # 309 said:
Spiritandtruth2 said “For example, when prodded to do an act of worship to the Devil, Jesus said: “It is Jehovah your God you must worship, and it is to him alone you must render sacred service.” (Matthew 4:10)” Post # 293

I did not have much interest in entering this discussion but wanted to offer a specific point of correction –
No Greek NT manscripts have the quote Spiritandtruth2 is offering.

Not one use the term “It is Jehovah your God you must worship…”.

Instead, all known significant texts in critical texts read “Κυριον τον θεον...” (i.e. “The Lord God” or “Lord, the God” ) which Jesus says one must worship (Codex Bezae / D leaves out the word "God"). There is no “Jehovah” in this sentence in any variants.

Spiritandtruth2 :

1) The issue of trust
The point is, IF anyone is willing to lie to forum members about a text of the bible, then we cannot trust ANY other data that person offers us as being true.

2) The issue of efficient and relevancy inside communication
This willingness to offer an incorrect claim and unwillingness to be corrected also creates very inefficient communication. At least 15 posts have been spent on this subject since I pointed out your single and specific error that I had issue with and you still offer irrelevant data in your replies. No one wants to have an irrelevant or petty discussion with a poster.

3)Blatant Dishonesty is counterproductive to any theological cause
If you want credibility and you want people to believe you then it is counterproductive to offer obviously false information and thereby lose the credibility which underlies authentic influence. What you are doing is forming bias against yourself and your religious theology. If one becomes known to be habitually dishonest, then others lose the motive to read or believe that persons posts. I for one, simply skip over the posts from certain posters that I believe are irrelevant or who offer bad data.

In any case. I wish you a good journey in this life as you learn and experience whatever it is God wants us all to learn and experience.

Clear

Der Alter

I honestly have no problems with suggestions to read any specific religious movements data.

The problem I have with this specific point of offering us a known error in a biblical text is that creating KNOWN errors seems hypocritical and creates an incorrect and untrustworthy text.

If the complaint is that the name of God was taken out of texts where it should have been, then it seems just as hypocritical and error prone to introduce the name into the text where it never was. Both types of mistakes create an incorrect and unreliable text and incorrect theology by EITHER subtracting from OR adding to the text.

Clear
σετωσεειω

BelCantoBaptist · Jul 15, 2014

I think you should read the book A Question of Canon by Michael J. Kruger and learn what honest scholarship looks like instead of the WTBS's quote mining, etc.

Der Alte · Jul 15, 2014

Clearly said:
. . .
Der Alter

I honestly have no problems with suggestions to read any specific religious movements data.

The problem I have with this specific point of offering us a known error in a biblical text is that creating KNOWN errors seems hypocritical and creates an incorrect and untrustworthy text.

If the complaint is that the name of God was taken out of texts where it should have been, then it seems just as hypocritical and error prone to introduce the name into the text where it never was. Both types of mistakes create an incorrect and unreliable text and incorrect theology by EITHER subtracting from OR adding to the text.
text.

Clear
σετωσεειω

I don't see that these responses address anything I have said.

spiritandtruth2 · Jul 15, 2014

Clearly said:
Spiritandtruth2 :

1) The issue of trust
The point is, IF anyone is willing to lie to forum members about a text of the bible, then we cannot trust ANY other data that person offers us as being true.

2) The issue of efficient and relevancy inside communication
This willingness to offer an incorrect claim and unwillingness to be corrected also creates very inefficient communication. At least 15 posts have been spent on this subject since I pointed out your single and specific error that I had issue with and you still offer irrelevant data in your replies. No one wants to have an irrelevant or petty discussion with a poster.

3)Blatant Dishonesty is counterproductive to any theological cause
If you want credibility and you want people to believe you then it is counterproductive to offer obviously false information and thereby lose the credibility which underlies authentic influence. What you are doing is forming bias against yourself and your religious theology. If one becomes known to be habitually dishonest, then others lose the motive to read or believe that persons posts. I for one, simply skip over the posts from certain posters that I believe are irrelevant or who offer bad data.

In any case. I wish you a good journey in this life as you learn and experience whatever it is God wants us all to learn and experience.

Clear
σετωσεειω

• Recognized Bible translators have used God’s name in the Christian Greek Scriptures. Some of these translators did so long before the New World Translation was produced. These translators and their works include: A Literal Translation of the New Testament . From the Text of the Vatican Manuscript, by Herman Heinfetter (1863); The Emphatic Diaglott, by Benjamin Wilson (1864); The Epistles of Paul in Modern English, by George Barker Stevens (1898); St. Paul’s Epistle to the Romans, by W.Rutherford (1900); The New Testament Letters, by J.W.C. Wand, Bishop of London (1946). In addition, in a Spanish translation in the early 20th century, translator Pablo Besson used “Jehová” at Jude14, and nearly 100 footnotes in his translation suggest the divine name as a likely rendering. Long before those translations, Hebrew versions of the Christian Greek Scriptures from the 16th century onward used the Tetragrammaton in many passages. In the German language alone, at least 11 versions use “Jehovah” (or the transliteration of the Hebrew “Yahweh&#8221

in the Christian Greek Scriptures, while four translators add the name in parentheses after “Lord.” More than 70 German translations use the divine name in footnotes or commentaries.

• Bible translations in over one hundred different languages contain the divine name in the Christian Greek Scriptures. Many African, Native American, Asian, European, and Pacific-island languages use the divine name liberally. The translators of these editions decided to use the divine name for reasons similar to those stated above. Some of these translations of the Christian Greek Scriptures have appeared recently, such as the Rotuman Bible (1999), which uses “Jihova” 51 times in 48 verses, and the Batak (Toba) version (1989) from Indonesia, which uses “Jahowa” 110 times.

Without a doubt, there is a clear basis for restoring the divine name, Jehovah, in the Christian Greek Scriptures. That is exactly what the translators of the New World Translation have done. They have a deep respect for the divine name and a healthy fear of removing anything that appeared in the original text.—Revelation 22:18, 19.

Are all these people being dishonest putting God's name back in it's rightful place?

Satan the God of this system place has tried to deceive people by having it removed.

(Romans 10:11-15) 11 For the scripture says: “No one who rests his faith on him will be disappointed.” 12 For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek. There is the same Lord over all, who is rich toward all those calling on him. 13 For “everyone who calls on the name of Jehovah will be saved.” 14 However, how will they call on him if they have not put faith in him? How, in turn, will they put faith in him about whom they have not heard? How, in turn, will they hear without someone to preach? 15 How, in turn, will they preach unless they have been sent out? Just as it is written: “How beautiful are the feet of those who declare good news of good things!”

GOD himself tells us his name. He is recorded as saying: “I am Jehovah, that is my name.” (Isaiah 42:8, American Standard Version)

The name Jehovah is the best-known English form of the Hebrew name God gave himself. It may surprise you that this unique Hebrew name appears thousands of times in ancient Bible manuscripts. In fact, it appears more often than any other name mentioned in the Bible.

Some may answer the question, “What is God’s name?” by saying, “the Lord.” Really, though, that is no more informative than it would be to answer the question, “Who won the election?” by saying, “the candidate.” Neither provides a clear answer, since “Lord” and “candidate” are not names.

Why did God reveal his name to us? He did it so that we can come to know him better. To illustrate, a person may be called Sir, Boss, Dad, or Grandpa, depending on the circumstances. These titles reveal something about him. But the name of the person reminds us of everything we know about him.

Likewise, titles such as Lord, Almighty, Father, and Creator call attention to different facets of God’s activities. But only his personal name, Jehovah, reminds us of everything we know about him.

How can you really know God without knowing his name?

BelCantoBaptist · Jul 15, 2014

spiritandtruth2 said:
spiritandtruth2 said:

The Emphatic Diaglott, by Benjamin Wilson (1864) A Christadeplhian who's work was purchased by the WTBS! Who also ran a heretical sect himself!;

Click to expand...

What you have just done is an example of the WTBS's tactic of using obscure references in order to make it seem like it has a point.

Here's Jude 14 in Greek. Find me Jehovah please: Ἐπροφήτευσεν δὲ καὶ τούτοις ἕβδομος ἀπὸ Ἀδὰμ Ἑνὼχ λέγων Ἰδοὺ ἦλθεν Κύριος ἐν ἁγίαις μυριάσιν αὐτοῦ,

Not one New Testament manuscript has Jehovah in it.

Without a doubt, there is a clear basis for restoring the divine name, Jehovah, in the Christian Greek Scriptures. That is exactly what the translators of the New World Translation have done. They have a deep respect for the divine name and a healthy fear of removing anything that appeared in the original text.—Revelation 22:18, 19.

Click to expand...

You just contradicted your own Reasoning from the Scriptures publication:

"No striking or fundamental variation is shown either in the Old or the New Testament. There are no important omissions or additions of passages, and no variations which affect vital facts or doctrines." Reasoning from the Scriptures p. 64

Click to expand...

So either scripture was tampered with and the divine name removed, or it wasn't.

No the word Jehovah does not appear in the original text nor does the Tetragrammaton.

Satan the God of this system place has tried to deceive people by having it removed.

Click to expand...

Again you contradict your own publication. Satan is not the "god of this system" that's a WTBS doctrine that is utterly false.

(Romans 10:11-15) 13 For “everyone who calls on the name of Jehovah will be saved.”

Click to expand...

Πᾶς γὰρ ὃς ἂν ἐπικαλέσηται τὸ ὄνομα Κυρίου σωθήσεται. Romans 10:13 in Greek find me Jehovah.

ame. He is recorded as saying: “I am Jehovah, that is my name.” (Isaiah 42:8, American Standard Version)

Click to expand...

In that passage YWH is used. The Tetragrammation. It is not Jehovah. Jehovah is an invention of superstitious scribes.

Yes, many Bible scholars acknowledge that “Yahweh” more nearly represents the Hebrew pronunciation of the Divine Name (WT,[3] July 15, 1964, p. 423).

Click to expand...

Yet no one today actually can say with certainty how Moses, for example, pronounced the Divine name (WT, May 1, 1978, p. 12).

Click to expand...

As to the Old Testament name of God, certainly the spelling and pronunciation “Jehovah” were originally a blunder (The Bible in Living English, 1972, p.7).

Click to expand...

The first recorded use of this form [Jehovah] dates from the thirteenth century C.E. Raymundus Martini, a Spanish [Roman Catholic] monk of the Dominican Order, used it in his book Pugeo Fidei of the year 1270 C.E. (Aid To Bible Understanding, 1971, p. 884-5)

Click to expand...

One of the remarkable facts, not only about the extent manuscripts of the original Greek text, butof many versions, ancient and modern, is the absence of the Divine name (NWT, 1950 ed., Foreword, p. 10; the same quote is found in the Awake magazine, 1957, January 8, 25).

Click to expand...

no ancient Greek manuscript that we possess today of the books from Matthew to Revelation contains God’s name in full (The Divine Name That Will Endure Forever, 1984, p. 23).

Click to expand...

All Watchtower quotes from their own publications.

Since your organization admits that “Jehovah” is not the correct name for God (“a blunder&#8221, how is continuously mispronouncing His name honoring to God?

How can you really know God without knowing his name?

Click to expand...

There is no passage in the OT or NT that commands the people of God to call Him by a specific name—and definitely not “Jehovah.” In fact, Jesus normally used “Father” and sometimes kurios (“Lord”; e.g., Luke 10:21) to refer to God.

Der Alte · Jul 15, 2014

spiritandtruth2 said:
Recognized Bible translators have used Gods name in the Christian Greek Scriptures. Some of these translators did so long before the New World Translation was produced. These translators and their works include: A Literal Translation of the New Testament . From the Text of the Vatican Manuscript, by Herman Heinfetter (1863); The Emphatic Diaglott, by Benjamin Wilson (1864); The Epistles of Paul in Modern English, by George Barker Stevens (1898); St. Pauls Epistle to the Romans, by W.Rutherford (1900); The New Testament Letters, by J.W.C. Wand, Bishop of London (1946). In addition, in a Spanish translation in the early 20th century, translator Pablo Besson used Jehová at Jude14, and nearly 100 footnotes in his translation suggest the divine name as a likely rendering. Long before those translations, Hebrew versions of the Christian Greek Scriptures from the 16th century onward used the Tetragrammaton in many passages. In the German language alone, at least 11 versions use Jehovah (or the transliteration of the Hebrew Yahweh) in the Christian Greek Scriptures, while four translators add the name in parentheses after Lord. More than 70 German translations use the divine name in footnotes or commentaries.

Bible translations in over one hundred different languages contain the divine name in the Christian Greek Scriptures. Many African, Native American, Asian, European, and Pacific-island languages use the divine name liberally. (See the list on pages 1742 and 1743.) The translators of these editions decided to use the divine name for reasons similar to those stated above. Some of these translations of the Christian Greek Scriptures have appeared recently, such as the Rotuman Bible (1999), which uses Jihova 51 times in 48 verses, and the Batak (Toba) version (1989) from Indonesia, which uses Jahowa 110 times.

Without a doubt, there is a clear basis for restoring the divine name, Jehovah, in the Christian Greek Scriptures. That is exactly what the translators of the New World Translation have done. They have a deep respect for the divine name and a healthy fear of removing anything that appeared in the original text.Revelation 22:18, 19.

Are all these people being dishonest putting God's name back in it's rightful place?

Satan the God of this system place has tried to deceive people by having it removed.

(Romans 10:11-15) 11 For the scripture says: No one who rests his faith on him will be disappointed. 12 For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek. There is the same Lord over all, who is rich toward all those calling on him. 13 For everyone who calls on the name of Jehovah will be saved. 14 However, how will they call on him if they have not put faith in him? How, in turn, will they put faith in him about whom they have not heard? How, in turn, will they hear without someone to preach? 15 How, in turn, will they preach unless they have been sent out? Just as it is written: How beautiful are the feet of those who declare good news of good things!

GOD himself tells us his name. He is recorded as saying: I am Jehovah, that is my name. (Isaiah 42:8, American Standard Version)

The name Jehovah is the best-known English form of the Hebrew name God gave himself. It may surprise you that this unique Hebrew name appears thousands of times in ancient Bible manuscripts. In fact, it appears more often than any other name mentioned in the Bible.

Some may answer the question, What is Gods name? by saying, the Lord. Really, though, that is no more informative than it would be to answer the question, Who won the election? by saying, the candidate. Neither provides a clear answer, since Lord and candidate are not names.

Why did God reveal his name to us? He did it so that we can come to know him better. To illustrate, a person may be called Sir, Boss, Dad, or Grandpa, depending on the circumstances. These titles reveal something about him. But the name of the person reminds us of everything we know about him.

Likewise, titles such as Lord, Almighty, Father, and Creator call attention to different facets of Gods activities. But only his personal name, Jehovah, reminds us of everything we know about him.

How can you really know God without knowing his name?

But "Jehovah" is not His name. If the purpose of insisting that the term "Jehovah" be used is to use the proper name of God then that is not what is happening. Just saying "Everybody knows the name Jehovah" is not n excuse. Here is what Jewish scholars say about the name "Jehovah."

Jewish Encyclopedia-Jehovah

A mispronunciation (introduced by Christian theologians, but almost entirely disregarded by the Jews) of the Hebrew "Yhwh," the (ineffable) name of God (the Tetragrammaton or "Shem ha-Meforash"). This pronunciation is grammatically impossible; it arose through pronouncing the vowels of the "ḳere" (marginal reading of the Masorites: אדני = "Adonay") with the consonants of the "ketib" (text-reading:יהוה = "Yhwh")"Adonay" (the Lord) being substituted with one exception wherever Yhwh occurs in the Biblical and liturgical books. "Adonay" presents the vowels "shewa" (the composite () under the guttural א becomes simple {() under the י), "ḥolem," and "ḳameẓ," and these give the reading יהוה (= "Jehovah"). Sometimes, when the two names יהוה and אדני occur together, the former is pointed with "ḥatef segol" () under the יthus, יהוה (="Jehovah")to indicate that in this combination it is to be pronounced "Elohim" (הלהים( ). These substitutions of "Adonay"and "Elohim" for Yhwh were devised to avoid the profanation of the Ineffable Name (hence יהוה is also written, ה or even ד, and read "ha-Shem" = "the Name ").

The reading "Jehovah" is a comparatively recent invention. The earlier Christian commentators report that the Tetragrammaton was written but not pronounced by the Jews (see Theodoret, "Question. xv. in Ex." [Field, "Hexapla," i. 90, to Ex. vi. 3]; Jerome, "Præfatio Regnorum," and his letter to Marcellus, "Epistola," 136, where he notices that "PIPI" [= ΠIΠI = יהוה] is presented in Greek manuscripts; Origen, see "Hexapla" to Ps. lxxi. 18 and Isa. i. 2; comp. concordance to LXX. by Hatch and Redpath, under ΠIΠI, which occasionally takes the place of the usual κύριος, in Philo's Bible quotations; κύριος = "Adonay" is the regular translation; see also Aquila).

"Jehovah" is generally held to have been the invention of Pope Leo X.'s confessor, Peter Galatin ("De Arcanis Catholicæ Veritatis," 1518, folio xliii.), who was followed in the use of this hybrid form by Fagius (= Büchlein, 1504-49). Drusius (= Van der Driesche, 1550-1616) was the first to ascribe to Peter Galatin the use of "Jehovah," and this view has been taken since his days (comp. Hastings, "Dict. Bible," ii. 199, s.v. "God"; Gesenius-Buhl, "Handwörterb." 1899, p. 311; see Drusius on the tetragrammaton in his "Critici Sacri, i. 2, col. 344). But it seems that even before Galatin the name "Jehovah" had been in common use (see Drusius, l.c. notes to col. 351). It is found in Raymond Martin's "Pugio Fidei." written in 1270 (Paris, 1651, iii., pt. ii., ch. 3, p. 448; comp. T. Prat in "Dictionnaire de la Bible," s.v.). See also Names of God.

JEHOVAH - JewishEncyclopedia.com

spiritandtruth2 · Jul 15, 2014

BelCantoBaptist said:
What you have just done is an example of the WTBS's tactic of using obscure references in order to make it seem like it has a point.

Here's Jude 14 in Greek. Find me Jehovah please: Ἐπροφήτευσεν δὲ καὶ τούτοις ἕβδομος ἀπὸ Ἀδὰμ Ἑνὼχ λέγων Ἰδοὺ ἦλθεν Κύριος ἐν ἁγίαις μυριάσιν αὐτοῦ,

Not one New Testament manuscript has Jehovah in it.

You just contradicted your own Reasoning from the Scriptures publication: So either scripture was tampered with and the divine name removed, or it wasn't.

No the word Jehovah does not appear in the original text nor does the Tetragrammaton.

Again you contradict your own publication. Satan is not the "god of this system" that's a WTBS doctrine that is utterly false.
Πᾶς γὰρ ὃς ἂν ἐπικαλέσηται τὸ ὄνομα Κυρίου σωθήσεται. Romans 10:13 in Greek find me Jehovah.

In that passage YWH is used. The Tetragrammation. It is not Jehovah. Jehovah is an invention of superstitious scribes.

All Watchtower quotes from their own publications.

Since your organization admits that “Jehovah” is not the correct name for God (“a blunder&#8221, how is continuously mispronouncing His name honoring to God?

There is no passage in the OT or NT that commands the people of God to call Him by a specific name—and definitely not “Jehovah.” In fact, Jesus normally used “Father” and sometimes kurios (“Lord”; e.g., Luke 10:21) to refer to God.

Click to expand...

Why Use God’s Name if Its Pronunciation Is Uncertain?

No one today knows exactly how God’s name was pronounced in ancient Hebrew. Significantly, however, God’s personal name appears in the text of the Bible some 7,000 times.

Jesus made God’s name manifest when on earth, and he instructed his disciples to pray for the sanctification of that name. (Matthew 6:9; John 17:6)

Thus, one thing is certain—the use of God’s name is of utmost importance to Christian faith. Why, then, is the original pronunciation of that name uncertain today?

There are two main reasons.

First, some two thousand years ago, there arose among the Jews a superstitious tradition that it was wrong to pronounce God’s name. When a reader came to the name in Bible text, he would say the word “Lord” as a substitute. In this way, after many centuries of disuse, the pronunciation of God’s name faded from memory.

Second, ancient Hebrew was written without vowels, very similar to abbreviations in English and other languages. When reading the written text, the reader supplied the missing vowel sounds from memory. In time, a system was devised to prevent the pronunciation of Hebrew words from being completely forgotten. Vowel points were added to each word in the Hebrew Bible. For the divine name, however, either the vowel points for “Lord” were added to remind the reader to pronounce the substitute word, or none were added at all.

What survived, then, were the four consonants called the Tetragrammaton, which one dictionary defines as “the four Hebrew letters usually transliterated YHWH or JHVH that form a biblical proper name of God.” It is easy to see how JHVH, with vowel points and vowel sounds added, becomes “Jehovah,” the form that is most familiar and widely accepted in English.

Some scholars, though, recommend the pronunciation “Yahweh.” Is that closer to the original pronunciation?

No one can be certain.

Actually, other scholars have cited reasons for not using this pronunciation. Of course, Bible names, when spoken in a modern-day language, probably sound nothing like the original Hebrew, and hardly anyone objects.

This is because these names have become part of our language and they are easily recognized. So it is with the name Jehovah.

The first-century Christians were called a people for God’s name.

They preached about the name to others and encouraged them to call upon it. (Acts 2:21; 15:14; Romans 10:13-15)

Clearly, it is important to God that we use his name in whatever language we speak, appreciate its significance, and live in harmony with what it stands for.

Jehovah is happy to be called by this name, as it separates God from all other names and everyone knows who is being talked about.

Almighty God know's that there is no confusing it, so his Holy Spirit has blessed it.

The Title Lord does not, do you get the point.

This codex from the early 15th century is one of the oldest extant documents in which the Tetragrammaton is rendered “Iehoua.”

This written testimony is further evidence that forms of God’s name similar to “Jehovah” have been the most common literary transcription of God’s name for centuries.

lesliedellow · Jul 16, 2014

ChetSinger said:
Hello, I have a question for Jehovah's Witnesses concerning the NWT's use of "Jehovah" in the book of Colossians.

I've been told that we possess no NT manuscripts that contain Jehovah, YHWH, or any variant thereof in Colossians (or indeed in any NT book). Assuming this is true, my question is this: what criteria have the NWT translators used to insert it into Colossians (where it appears multiple times)?

Specifically,

Why is "Jehovah" in the particular places that it is?

Why is it there at all?

The Greek, and the modern translation I have just consulted, has kyrios (Lord) in Col 3.13, where the KJV has Christ. Nowhere in the New Testament, that I can think of, does LORD appear in upper case letters.

Der Alte · Jul 16, 2014

spiritandtruth2 said:
Why Use Gods Name if Its Pronunciation Is Uncertain?

No one today knows exactly how Gods name was pronounced in ancient Hebrew. Significantly, however, Gods personal name appears in the text of the Bible some 7,000 times....

The better question is, why continue to use a name which has been proven to be false? The pronunciation "Jehovah" did not exist until 1518, 1500 years plus after Jesus was born. The term "Jehovah" has no meaning in Hebrew. God's name must have some relationship to אהיה אשׁר אהיה/ehyeh 'sher ehyeh, translated I am that I am. The covenant name of God יהוה/YHWH must be some form of the verb "to be." The "name" Jehovah has absolutely no meaning in Hebrew and no grammatical relationship to the Hebrew verb "to be" nor any other Hebrew word.

While there is some question as to the correct pronunciation of יהוה/YHWH there is historical evidence dating to ca. 150-215 showing that the name was pronounced variously Iαβέ/Yahbay, 'Iαουέ/Iahouway, 'Iαουαί/Iahouai, and Ιαωουηε/Iahouay.

See my [post=65997945]Post #336[/post] this thread, which has been ignored.

spiritandtruth2 · Jul 16, 2014

lesliedellow said:
The Greek, and the modern translation I have just consulted, has kyrios (Lord) in Col 3.13, where the KJV has Christ. Nowhere in the New Testament, that I can think of, does LORD appear in upper case letters.

Jehovah sees everything and knows everything we do and say, and we should not even question it, as the scriptures are in harmony as God himself has purposed with his Holy Spirit totally in charge, so I wouldn't worry about it.

(1 Peter 3:12) For the eyes of Jehovah are on the righteous, and his ears listen to their supplication, but the face of Jehovah is against those doing bad things.

Also when we pray to our Heavenly Father, he knows it is to him we are praying to, as we use and respect the avenue of prayer which is through his mediator and Son Jesus Christ.

(1 Timothy 2:4, 5) 5 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, a man, Christ Jesus,

A question for JWs about the use of "Jehovah" in Colossians

Newbie

Newbie

Newbie

This is me about 1 yr. old.

Member

Member

Newbie

Member

Member

This is me about 1 yr. old.

Newbie

Newbie

This is me about 1 yr. old.

Newbie

Newbie

This is me about 1 yr. old.

Newbie

Member

This is me about 1 yr. old.

Newbie

Similar threads