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

Chetsinger : You had a very good eye for noticing the actual biblical text uses "κυριοσ" and not Jehovah. I had thought to be done with this point and am glad to see that readers themselves can pick up on these theological additions into a text that never contained them.

While my own theology is just as supported whether one uses Jehovah for the God of the old Testament or not (i.e. I don't care much either way), it does assault my historical sense of accuracy to see an attempt to change history by changing text. I think there is certain specific claims Jehovah's Witnesses make, but I do not think deception is the way to support a historical theory.

The historical texts "say what they say" and to change historical texts to try to make them say something different does not create more accurate history, but obscures accurate history and creates a pseudo-history that creates more problems than it solves.





Der Alter :

I think your point that “Jehovah” cannot BE God’s actual name is an interesting point. I think the tendency to claim that God's name must be one that uses an english alphabet and that it has an anglican pronounciation simply reflects an english-based source for this theory. If the theory had originated in africa and spread, then the theory may have used a different name for God and the name chosen for this theory might have been entirely unpronounceable for english speakers, especially if they had chosen a name from enoch (which still remains inside the eastern Old Testament canon).

In my historical survey of early documents for repeating christian themes, I’ve amassed a lot of textual data on repetitive themes relating to salvational and base theology. I searched through many, many books on these specific themes only, to see if they used the name Jehovah, and how many times they used this epitath as opposed to other names for God.

In this search I had actually expected to see Jehovah being used as least some. However, what I found is that the literature does not use Jehovah at all inside of these specific themes.

The importance of this point is that even if the theory that the Pharisees removed the name of Jehovah from the Old Testament text, this would not affect either the New Testament, nor extra canonical sacred literature that was used by Christians and peri-c.e. era Jews.

Literature I searched was a wide variety of early texts. For examples :
The apostolic fathers do not use the word Jehovah for God. Not once. These texts are those that were written at the time when the apostles could have been alive or when the author could have knonw an apostle. For example, 1 Clement was written at the same period of time as N.T. revelations.

But 1 Clement does not Use “Jehovah” as the name of God. Not once. Papias was a “hearer of John”, yet the quotes from his writings do not use “Jehovah” for God. Neither do 2nd Clement, nor Ignatious; Polycarp, the Didache, Barnabas, nor Diognetus. My point is that these early Christian texts would simply have referred to God in their own usage. If Jehovah was in use by early Christians, one would expect this to be reflected in their writings.

Similarly, I searched epigraphs from the Old Testament groups. A search through textual themes having to do with Christian themes and salvation only, none of them use Jehovah as the name of God. None of the Enochs use Jehovah as a common name, Neither do the Sibylline Oracles, Apocryphon of Exekiel, Greek Apocalypse of Ezra; The Questions of Ezra; The Apocalypse of Sedrach; The Apocalypse of Baruch; The Apocalypse of Abraham; The Apocalypse of Adam; nor does The Testament of Adam.

The Apocalypse of Elijah; The Book of Jubilees does not use it, neither does the Life of Adam and Eve; Martyrdom and Ascension of Isaiah; the Testament of Moses; the Psalms of Solomon; Odes of Solomon; EZEKIEL THE TRAGEDIAN; nor does The Apocalypse of Zephaniah use it in reference to these specific themes.


Similarly, I searched through similar themes from THE DEAD SEA SCROLLS. This is a group whose texts would not have been affected by Pharisaic editing AFTER the time of christ and who were very critical of Sadducee priestly doings.

None of these extant and translated documents use Jehovah for the name of God. Ages of the world does not, the Apocryphon of Judah does not, neither do the psalms of David; the Ashes of the red heifer; their baptismal liturgy, the Blessings of the wise, the messianic “Birth of the Chosen one”, the Book of Secrets, the Charter for Israel, the Jewish sectarian Charter, The Book of Giants, the Commentaries of Genesis, the Commentary on Nahum, the coming of melchizedek, their collection of Proverbs, the copper scroll (obviously), their daily prayers, the Damascus document; the description of spirits of Light and Darkness, the discourse on exodus and conquest, the inheritance of the firstborn; the commentary of the last days, their liturgy of blessing and cursing, the parable of the bountiful tree, neither do their prayers for deliverance use "Jehovah".

The psalms of Joshua do not use it, nor does 4Qs redemption and resurrection, the songs of the Sabbath sacrifice, the songs of the sage, the tales of the partriarchs, the temple scroll, thanksgiving psalms, the two ways, the vision of Daniel, the vision of Jacob, a vision of the son of God, the war scroll, the war of the messiah, the words of the heavenly light, the words of levi, none of these have Jehovah in any Base religious theme related to early Judeo-Christian salvation.

Similarly, Christian apocrypha does not use "Jehovah" inside themes of salvation or repetitive base themes of salvation.

The apocalypse of Peter does not have it, neither does the apocalypse of Paul, the apocrphon of James, Carpocraties in his documents supporting promiscuity does not have it, neither does the Coptic psalm-book, nor the gospel of Bartholomew, gospel of nicodemus, the gospel of phillip, the gospel of the ebionites, the gospel of the the Hebrews, the gospel of Thomas does not use it and neither does the valentinian speculation.

The “gospel of truth” does not use it, neither does Jewish Haggadah. The Hymn of the Pearl does not have it, Neither does the Kaballah, nor the Manichean creation Myths; nor their hymn cycles, nor the odes of Solomon, nor does the diary of Perpetua and felicity; Nor does the second treatise of the Great seth, the secret book of John, the Secret Gospel of Mark, nor the Zohar.

The wonderful discourse on abbaton does not use it, neither does the epistle of Jesus,

My point is, if one looks at a great deal of Early Judeo-Christian literature and limits the search to salvational themes and repetitive base themes, (I did not search all other themes), then the texts do not use “Jehovah” though they do use many other epitaths and euphamisms both for God the Father, as well as for his Son Jesus, both pre-creation and post creation. Jehovah was not one they used in general.

Though I did NOT like the abuse of and attempt to change the text of the New Testament to make it say something other than what the text says (my original complaint), I was actually quite "neutral" on whether "Jehovah" was used in common reference or not. It simply didn't matter to me nor would it affect my base theology significantly.

However, after doing this survey, I am convinced that "Jehovah" was not used in common parlance of early Christians nor peri-c.e. era Jews in their extra canonical texts.

I think that your point is correct and textually, it holds true that Jehovah was not a name that early Judeo-Christians used when they spoke of God.

Clear
σεφυειειω

It is curious to me that the name of God is never mentioned in the NT. Even OT scriptures that contain the name of God that are quoted in the NT change it to kurios. I haven't resolved this issue in my own mind as to why that is.

ChetSinger said:

There you go again, adding "Jehovah" in a verse where there is no manuscript support. The word Peter wrote is κύριος. No ancient manuscript of 1 Peter 3:12 contains Jehovah or any variant of it. If you disagree, I challenge you to identify one.

Click to expand...

With all due respect you are looking but not seeing, as God has been moving things on to achieve all the things that he has prophesied in the past to these day's we are living in now.

This scripture helps us to see that it is God's will that is to be carried out.

(Isaiah 55:7-11) 7 Let the wicked man leave his way And the evil man his thoughts; Let him return to Jehovah, who will have mercy on him, To our God, for he will forgive in a large way. 8 “For my thoughts are not your thoughts, And your ways are not my ways,” declares Jehovah. 9 “For as the heavens are higher than the earth, So my ways are higher than your ways And my thoughts than your thoughts. 10 For just as the rain and the snow pour down from heaven And do not return there until they saturate the earth, making it produce and sprout, Giving seed to the sower and bread to the eater, 11 So my word that goes out of my mouth will be. It will not return to me without results, But it will certainly accomplish whatever is my delight, And it will have sure success in what I send it to do.

Unfortunately you are not seeing what is been done to achieve his purposes in these difficult times.

Remember what was said at this scripture:-

(1 Corinthians 2:12-16) 12 Now we received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit that is from God, so that we might know the things that have been kindly given us by God. 13 These things we also speak, not with words taught by human wisdom, but with those taught by the spirit, as we explain spiritual matters with spiritual words. 14 But a physical man does not accept the things of the spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; and he cannot get to know them, because they are examined spiritually. 15 However, the spiritual man examines all things, but he himself is not examined by any man. 16 For “who has come to know the mind of Jehovah, so that he may instruct him?” But we do have the mind of Christ.

You are looking for the physical evidence, but the word of God is in harmony with itself, so God's Holy spirit has put things back in the rightful place and as a spiritual man you would see that.

Satan has been fooling mankind for centuries with the results and the works we see in Religions of today would you agree.

Hope this of some help to you when studying the whole Bible, not just picking out a scripture here and there, you have to get every word that is contained in God's word, into context, to what is being said and who it's actual referring to, as Jesus always quoted from the Hebrew scriptures and always doing the will of his Heavenly Father.

ChetSinger said:

Once again, you construct a multi-paragraph post that doesn't address the post you're supposedly answering. My post was challenging your translation of 1 Peter 3:12.

Click to expand...

The questions have been answered but you being a physical man and not a spiritual one, you cannot see it.

I think this scripture sums up the difficulty you having.

(Mark 4:11, 12) 11 He said to them: “To you the sacred secret of the Kingdom of God has been given, but to those outside all things are in illustrations, 12 so that, though looking, they may look and still not see, and though hearing, they may hear and still not get the sense of it;

I hope and pray

(Ephesians 1:17) 17 that the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give you a spirit of wisdom and of revelation in the accurate knowledge of him.

Start thinking of the whole thread that runs through the whole Bible and you will hopefully get the answers to your questions.

ChetSinger said:

I think they replaced it with the name of Jesus. In it's native language, Jesus means "YHWH is salvation". So every time we call upon that name we're still calling on the original name of God.

Here's Peter, extolling the name of Jesus as the name to call upon:


Did Peter actually say "...no other name..."? Really? Not even YHWH? Yeah, as I read it. Moses and the prophets were told to call upon YHWH. Me, I'm told to call upon "YHWH is salvation".

Click to expand...

I had to think some about what you said. The thought came to me that if the divine name Yahweh had been used in the NT, then it would have diminished the importance of Jesus name. One only has access to YHWH through Jesus. So perhaps God's motive for keeping YHWH out of the NT was just that, to focus on the one who would bring men to the relationship with YHWH that Adam lost in the Garden.

I know that Jesus name means Yahweh the savior. but it's Ya which is short for Yahweh, and oshea "he who saves". So JEsus name only consists of the divine name Yahweh in it's short form Ya.

Exodus 3 ;13 Moses asked , if the Israelites ask who sent me , who shall I say

4x4toy said:

Exodus 3 ;13 Moses asked , if the Israelites ask who sent me , who shall I say

Click to expand...

(KJV) Exodus 3:14 14 And God said unto Moses, I Am that I Am: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I Am hath sent me unto you.
(KJV) John 8:58 58 Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am (hath sent me unto you..)

John 6:57 57 As the living Father hath sent me, and I live by the Father: so he that eateth me, even he shall live by me.
John 8:29 29 And he that sent me is with me: the Father hath not left me alone; for I do always those things that please him.

john 8.42 Jesus said unto them, If God were your Father, ye would love me: for I proceeded forth and came from God; neither came I of myself, but he sent me.


here's more

John 5:30 30 I can of mine own self do nothing: as I hear, I judge: and my judgment is just; because I seek not mine own will, but the will of the Father which hath sent me.
John 17:25 25 O righteous Father, the world hath not known thee: but I have known thee, and these have known that thou hast sent me.
John 20:21 21 Then said Jesus to them again, Peace be unto you: as my Father hath sent me, even so send I you.

John 6:44 44 No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day.

This is so beautiful, yet I'm probably the only one in the world who can see it since I am the scum of the church, as was revealed to me in a dream last night.

2ducklow said:

(KJV) Exodus 3:14 14 And God said unto Moses, I Am that I Am: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I Am hath sent me unto you.
(KJV) John 8:58 58 Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am (hath sent me unto you..)

John 6:57 57 As the living Father hath sent me, and I live by the Father: so he that eateth me, even he shall live by me.
John 8:29 29 And he that sent me is with me: the Father hath not left me alone; for I do always those things that please him.

john 8.42 Jesus said unto them, If God were your Father, ye would love me: for I proceeded forth and came from God; neither came I of myself, but he sent me.

voila, here's the clincher, in verse 57 Jesus says the Father hath sent me, in verse 58 Jesus makes an incomplete sentence , so the Jews naturally understood that Jesus was referring to ex. 3.14 where it says "I AM hath sent me unto you. Since Jesus previously in that chapter had said several times that the Father hath sent him, and specifically right before Jesus said "I AM" it is obvious that the Jews understood the rest of Jesus incomplete sentence which was "hath sent me unto you". Especially since Jesus preceeded his incomplete sentence with the prep. phrase "Before Abraham was"

Click to expand...

Again with this nonsense? Your interpretation here is entirely without merit as was shown in the entire thread you dedicated to this. You're inserting things into the texts which are not there. I AM (ego eimi in the Greek) is the imperfect form in Hebrew of "to be" it implies continual existence in the past, in the present, and in the future. Not to mention a name was seen as the character of the person who bore it. So when God said He was I AM He meant that He was creator, He was the foundation of all existence. So when Jesus said He was I AM they wanted to stone Him for Blasphemy! Which your interpretation makes a complete nonsensical reaction.

I feel like I've loosened the Gordian knot around john 8.58. Ah but I'm the only one who know's I've done that. oh well. What do I mean by Gordian knot? glad you asked, what I mean is all explanations of what john 8.58 leave something wanting, all of them miss the mark, none of them are completely satisfactory, except this one I've brought which makes perfect sense, and is completely satisfactory, of course Like I said, I'm the only one who can see it even though it's so plain and simple, as plain and simple as saying 3 is not 1. 3 is 3.

the clincher, the new revelation that I just got on this subject is that Jesus said several times in John 8 that the Father hath sent him (Jesus). That seals the deal. IT's so obvious and plain and simple that everyone will miss it, no doubt about it.

2ducklow said:

the clincher, the new revelation that I just got on this subject is that Jesus said several times in John 8 that the Father hath sent him (Jesus). That seals the deal. IT's so obvious and plain and simple that everyone will miss it, no doubt about it.

Click to expand...

This proves nothing for you. The Messenger who appeared to Moses was obviously "sent." Yet he said about himself, "I am the God of your Fathers," and "I am that I am."

That Messenger was Christ preincarnate for sure.

I only found 2 web sites that deal with the issue that Jesus spoke an incomplete sentence in John 8.58. I found some of what this web site said to be interesting and informative.

.....I AM!!! Jesus is the only person I know who uses an incomplete sentence to describe Himself. I AM....is not a complete sentence. I believe it is left that way for a reason. Because we are to fill in the blank and complete the sentence. For example: I AM the provider of your needs; I AM a healer; I AM a comforter of the afflicted; I AM HE who does the miraculous among you; I AM the Resurrection; I AM the way, truth and the life. You see my brothers, whatever we need our Lord to be for us HE IS!!! All we need to remember is to fill in the blank

Click to expand...

F.C.M.I. » Jesus is I AM

Bravo on that last bold of mine. But if one assumes that I AM refers to ex. 3.15 ( for that is where God used the term I AM, not ex. 3.14. In ex. 3.14 God uses the term I AM that I AM.) then one would have to fill in the blank with what is in ex. 3.15, namely 'hath sent me unto you."

So really john 8.58, with the blank filled in, reads "Before Abraham was I AM hath sent me unto you.

It is highly revealing that the fact that Jesus uttered an incomplete sentence is almost totally ignored by everyone. It is a subject that has had almost no investigation. It's a fact that doesn't even enter into any analysis of John 8.58 by almost everyone.

2ducklow said:

But if one assumes that I AM refers to ex. 3.15 ( for that is where God used the term I AM, not ex. 3.14. In ex. 3.14 God uses the term I AM that I AM.)

Click to expand...

The MESSENGER said, "I am the God of your fathers," and, "I am that I am."

ChetSinger said:

That's the conclusion I've come to.


Yeah. I think it's enough, because in the OT the "Ya" part of the name identifies YHWH in names such as Jeremiah, Isaiah, Nehemiah, etc.

Click to expand...

There are those, that argue that the word “Jehovah” should not be used because it is not really the name of God.

For example, the Catholic Douay Version, which does not use God’s name in its main text, says in its footnote to Exodus 6:3: “Some moderns have framed the name Jehovah the true pronunciation of the name, which is in the Hebrew text, by long disuse, is now quite lost.”

Yes, as the Catholic Bible here says, God’s name does appear in the Hebrew text, Hebrew being the language in which the first 39 books of the Bible were written. The name is represented there by four Hebrew letters, YHWH.

In ancient times the Hebrew language was written without vowels, letters such as a, e, i, o and u, which help us to give the proper sound to words. Therefore, the problem today is that we have no way of knowing exactly which vowels the Hebrews used along with the consonants YHWH.

To help us to understand the problem, consider the word “building.”

Suppose that it began always to be written “bldg,” and that, in time, the word was never pronounced. How, then, would a person living 1,000 years from now know how to pronounce “bldg” when he saw it in writing?

Since he had never heard it pronounced and did not know what the vowels were in the word, he would not know for sure.

It is similar with God’s name. It is not known exactly how it was pronounced, even though some scholars think “Yahweh” is correct.

However, the form “Jehovah” has been in use for many centuries and is most widely known.

Yet, should we use God’s name, even though we may not be saying it exactly the way it was originally pronounced?

Well, we use the names of other persons in the Bible, even though we do not say them in the way the names were pronounced in the original Hebrew.

For example, Jesus’ name is pronounced “Yesh’ua” in Hebrew.

Likewise, it is proper to use God’s name, which is revealed in the Bible, whether we pronounce it “Yahweh,” “Jehovah,” or in some other way common in our language. What is wrong is to fail to use that name. Why?

Because those who do not use it could not be identified with the ones whom God takes out to be “a people for his name.” (Acts 15:14) We should not only know God’s name but praise it before others, as Jesus did when on earth.—Matthew 6:9; John 17:6, 26.

spiritandtruth2 said:

There are those, that argue that the word “Jehovah” should not be used because it is not really the name of God.

For example, the Catholic Douay Version, which does not use God’s name in its main text, says in its footnote to Exodus 6:3: “Some moderns have framed the name Jehovah the true pronunciation of the name, which is in the Hebrew text, by long disuse, is now quite lost.”

Yes, as the Catholic Bible here says, God’s name does appear in the Hebrew text, Hebrew being the language in which the first 39 books of the Bible were written. The name is represented there by four Hebrew letters, YHWH.

In ancient times the Hebrew language was written without vowels, letters such as a, e, i, o and u, which help us to give the proper sound to words. Therefore, the problem today is that we have no way of knowing exactly which vowels the Hebrews used along with the consonants YHWH.

To help us to understand the problem, consider the word “building.”

Suppose that it began always to be written “bldg,” and that, in time, the word was never pronounced. How, then, would a person living 1,000 years from now know how to pronounce “bldg” when he saw it in writing?

Since he had never heard it pronounced and did not know what the vowels were in the word, he would not know for sure.

It is similar with God’s name. It is not known exactly how it was pronounced, even though some scholars think “Yahweh” is correct.

However, the form “Jehovah” has been in use for many centuries and is most widely known.

Yet, should we use God’s name, even though we may not be saying it exactly the way it was originally pronounced?

Well, we use the names of other persons in the Bible, even though we do not say them in the way the names were pronounced in the original Hebrew.

For example, Jesus’ name is pronounced “Yesh’ua” in Hebrew.

Likewise, it is proper to use God’s name, which is revealed in the Bible, whether we pronounce it “Yahweh,” “Jehovah,” or in some other way common in our language. What is wrong is to fail to use that name. Why?

Because those who do not use it could not be identified with the ones whom God takes out to be “a people for his name.” (Acts 15:14) We should not only know God’s name but praise it before others, as Jesus did when on earth.—Matthew 6:9; John 17:6, 26.

Click to expand...

You're taking scripture out of context in your last part of your post. Whose name did the Early Church witness to people in? Jesus or God's?

Where in the Bible does God command us to use His name or else we're not saved?

YWH is the correct form. Jehovah is an error as I showed in my last post to you as admitted by the WTBS

BelCantoBaptist said:

You're taking scripture out of context in your last part of your post. Whose name did the Early Church witness to people in? Jesus or God's?

Where in the Bible does God command us to use His name or else we're not saved?

YWH is the correct form. Jehovah is an error as I showed in my last post to you as admitted by the WTBS

Click to expand...

In the last book of the Bible, its writer the apostle John says concerning himself as a Christian: “John, who bare witness of the word of God, and of the testimony of Jesus Christ.” (Rev. 1:1, 2, American Standard Version)

A true Christian has to bear witness of both God and of his Christ or Messiah.

Let no one forget or hide the fact that the title Christ or Messiah means “Anointed One.” For there to be an anointed one there has to be an anointer or anointing one. So, in order to bear full witness concerning Jesus Christ, we also have to bear witness to the One who anointed Jesus and made him the Christ or Messiah.

We have to bear witness to the Anointer as well as the Anointed One. Well, then who anointed Jesus, and with what—oil, or what?

Jesus himself tells us who anointed him.

When, in the Jewish synagogue, the book of Isaiah was handed to him, he turned to chapter sixty-one, verses one and two, and read them in the Hebrew, as follows:

“The Spirit of the Lord Jehovah is upon me; because Jehovah hath anointed me to preach good tidings unto the meek; he hath sent me to proclaim the year of Jehovah’s favor.” (Isa. 61:1, 2, AS)

After reading those words in the Hebrew text, in which the Hebrew name of God occurs (יהו&#1492, he opened up his sermon to the Jews, saying: “To-day hath this scripture been fulfilled in your ears.” (Luke 4:16-21, AS)

Thus Jesus publicly said that the Lord Jehovah had anointed him with holy spirit.

Jesus on earth did not anoint himself with holy spirit from heaven.

Three and a half years later he baptised his disciples with holy spirit from heaven, but Jesus did not baptise himself with spirit.

The Lord Jehovah did that; and Jesus said that the Lord Jehovah was the One who sent him to preach and to “proclaim the year of Jehovah’s favor.”

So Jesus and Jehovah are not the same individual. Jehovah is the Sender; Jesus is the Sent One. Jehovah is the Anointer; Jesus is the Anointed One or Messiah.

(Matthew 24:13) But the one who has endured to the end will be saved.

Not once saved, always saved, is not true.

Also further confirmation

(1 John 4:8-10) .Whoever does not love has not come to know God, because God is love. 9 By this the love of God was revealed in our case, that God sent his only-begotten Son into the world so that we might gain life through him. 10 The love is in this respect, not that we have loved God, but that he loved us and sent his Son as a propitiatory sacrifice for our sins.

Who sent his Son?

(1 John 4:11, 12) 11 Beloved ones, if this is how God loved us, then we are also under obligation to love one another. 12 No one has seen God at any time.

Jesus cannot be God if No one has seen God at any time. Yes?

also

There was every reason why the apostle John, in the last book of the Bible, should call Jesus Christ “the faithful witness, the firstborn of the dead, and the ruler of the kings of the earth. and he made us to be a kingdom, to be priests unto his God and Father.” (Rev. 1:5, 6, AS) And the apostle John quoted Jesus as saying to him: “These things saith the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of the creation of God.”—Rev. 3:14, AS; AV.

Of whom was Jesus Christ “the faithful and true witness”?

By his birth into the nation to whom the words of Isaiah 43:10-12 were directed, Jesus Christ was obliged to be a witness of Jehovah. He lived up to this obligation, for all the written record as to what he said and as to all the Hebrew scriptures that he quoted proves that he was Jehovah’s witness.

If the question were today directed to Jesus Christ, Of which God are you a witness? he would reply: Of Jehovah!

He was and still is in heaven the “faithful and true witness” of “his God and Father.”—Rev. 1:5, 6, AS.