YHWH-why deleted?

[Der Alte]

The angel said to "call His name Salvation, for He shall save His people from their sins".

The "He" who shall save His people is Jesus. His name is called "Salvation" by His people, whom "He saves from their sins".
Hoshea is the proper Hebrew noun word to say "Salvation".

So "Hosea/Salvation", not Jehoshua, is the name of the "Savior".

All the "Salvation/saved/savior" Hebrew words belong to the Messiah, as it is "He, Himself" who saves us from our sins, and yes, He is YHWH in the second Person [see my earlier post on His name, YHWH], but He is come in flesh as "the Branch", and it is His flesh and His soul of second Man nature which bore our guilt for our sins;
So call Him what you wish, but the angel said "Call His name "Salvation" because "He shall save His people from their sins".

Presenting the same unsupported assertion over and over and over does NOT make it any more valid than the first time. In order to support your claim you need to provide Biblical, grammatical, lexical and/or historical support. Once again since you ignored it the first time. The definition of the name הוֹשׁוּעַ, יְהוֹשֻׁעַ Yehoshua/Yeshua from one of, if not, the most highly accredited Hebrew lexicons in use today.

הוֹשׁוּעַ, יְהוֹשֻׁעַ S3091 GK3397, and (later יֵשׁוּעַ S3442, 3443 GK3800, 3801, n.pr.m. (& loc., v. 9 infr.) (י׳ is salvation, or י׳ is opulence, cf. אֱלִישָׁע, אֱלִישׁוּעַ, אֲבִישׁוּעַ, & NesSK 1892, 573 f.; in any case it came to be associated with ישׁע, cf. Mat 1:21; on יֵשׁוּעַ v. especially FräVOJ iv, 1890, 332 f. MüllSK 1892, 177 f. who cite analog. for change of וֹ to later—ֵ, & Nesl.c.)— 1. Moses’ successor, son of Nun, (G Ἰησοῦς) יְהוֹשׁוּעַ Dt 3:21 Ju 2:7; = יְהוֹשֻׁעַ Ex 17:9, 10, 13, 14; 24:13; 32:17; 33:11 Nu 11:28; 13:16; 14:6, 30, 38; 26:65; 27:18, 22; 32:12, 28; 34:17 Dt 1:38; 3:28; 31:3, 7, 14(×2), 23; 34:9 Jos 1:1 + 167 times Jos; Ju 1:1; 2:6, 7, 8, 21, 23 1 K 16:34 1 Ch 7:27; = יֵשׁוּעַ Ne 8:17 (G Ἰησοῦς according to P, name changed by Moses from הוֹשֵׁעַ q.v. Nu 13:8, 16 (G Αὑσ&#951 Dt 32:44 (G Ἰησοῦ&#962. † 2. יְהוֹשֻׁעַ a Bethshemite 1 S 6:14, 18 (G Ὡσηε, A Ἰησοῦς, GL Ἰωσηε). † 3. h.p. after the restoration, son of Jehozadak יְהוֹשֻׁעַ (G Ἰησοῦς) Hg 1:1, 12, 14; 2:2, 4 Zc 3:1, 3, 6, 8, 9; 6:11; = יֵשׁוּעַ (G Ἰησοῦς) Ezr 2:2; 3:2, 8; 4:3; 5:2; 10:18 Ne 7:7; 12:1, 7, 10, 26. † 4. יְהוֹשֻׁעַ governor of Jerusalem under Josiah 2 K 23:8 (G Ἰησοῦς, GL Ἰωσηε). † 5. יֵשׁוּעַ (G Ἰησοῦς) head of one of the classes of priests 1 Ch 24:11, possibly also Ezr 2:36 = Ne 7:39. † 6. יֵשׁוּעַ (G Ἰησοῦς, etc.), a Levitical family-name of frequent occurrence: a. Ezr 2:40; 3:9 = Ne 7:43; 8:7; 9:4, 5; 10:10; 12:8. b. 2 Ch 31:15 Ezr 8:33 Ne 12:24. † 7. יֵשׁוּעַ (G id.), father of a builder at the wall Ne 3:19, perhaps = † 8. a Judaite family-name (G id.), Ezr 2:6 = Ne 7:11 (cf. SmListen 12). † 9. n.pr.loc. in south of Judah Ne 11:26 בְּיֵשׁוּעַ (G ἐν Ἰησού, GL ἐν Σουα).

Brown, Francis ; Driver, Samuel Rolles ; Briggs, Charles Augustus: Enhanced Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew and English Lexicon. electronic ed. Oak Harbor, WA : Logos Research Systems, 2000, S. 221​

While Hosea may have been a type or shadow of the coming Messiah, so were many others, including Joshua who shared the Messiah's name.

Showing that your argument is fatally flawed, the name Hosea is transliterated in the Greek OT, the LXX, as ωσηε. This name does NOT appear even one time in the NT! The name Joshua is transliterated in the Greek LXX as Ἰησοῦς which is exactly how the Savior's name is written 935 times in the N.T.

 

[Der Alte]

* Things that go bump in the night *

 

[steve4.truth]

Yeshuasavedme, I have to agree with the other two about you not presenting evidence. Assertions can be made by anyone. I respect it as your assertion, but it won't affect my life without evidence to convince me. It also is distracting from the theme of this thread, which was about the deletion of the divine name in all modern translations and also deleted from "Christian" vocabulary.

 

[Der Alte]

[ . . . ]It also is distracting from the theme of this thread, which was about the deletion of the divine name in all modern translations and also deleted from "Christian" vocabulary.

I thought I would reply to this misrepresentation of Christian vocabulary. I recently joined my church's praise team. The very first Sunday we sang a praise song which has the chorus, "There's no God like Jehovah." repeated four times, first by the altos, then joined by the sopranos, then the tenors, and finally the basses, for a total of 16 times. The chorus is repeated twice after the first and second verses. Just thot you'd like to know the truth.

 

[steve4.truth]

You really shouldn't be singing about Jehovah. that's the wrong pronunciation, remember? just kidding.
That's great, and I'm aware that the name is used. But if most churchgoers know the name, doesn't that make it more disgraceful that no one seems to mind that it has been removed from the translations almost 7000 times? And His name is not just for chanting in a religious ritual. It is to be used in our common speech and prayers. We should cherish God's name. Like when a husband gazes into the eyes of his beloved wife and says her name. It brings up emotions built up over decades of memories and experiences. that is only a small idea of how intimate our relationship with YHWH should be. James 4:8 Draw nigh to God, and he will draw nigh to you.

 

[FredVB]

Hello. I have just joined Christian Forums. I found it while searching under Yahweh Christian on internet, which turned up, with many other things, a page in Christian Forums. I wanted to respond, although yes errors abound and you have to be careful, there can be a truly Christian group that uses the name of Yahweh. This was the reason for my search. I would like to find others that agree with my position. I do not say it has to have the one pronunciation, but as in the Bible we are told that God said that this name was for all generations, and we can rely on the pronunciation of the name as it is preserved in old writings as it is in Greek. The site that I opened, for a yahoo group I wish to form, Christian Tribe of Yahweh, having yet to develop, I can't display, as I have only started posting, but would like to share it. It would be truly Christian and hold to the Bible that we know.

 

[steve4.truth]

I'm glad you are taking YHWH name seriously. You're not just acknowledging that the name exists, but you are taking action and using the name. I think it is a sad day when "Christianity" will debate everything and anything that doesn't affect our life, squabbling and fussing over every silly detail--yet ignore such blatantly obvious violations of truth as using and appreciating the very name of the One they worship. We can't afford to tamper with such a fundamentally basic doctrine as who God is! Every "minister" knows that YHWH is God's name ,that we are commanded to use it, and that all the Bible writers profusely used it, yet they promote Bible versions that have omitted that name and substituted "LORD" in capital letters 7000 times--knowing full well that there is another Hebrew word for "Lord". That is heresy!

 

[FredVB]

Steve, thanks for your response. My position is for following the correct revelation we have with the Bible. I will not fall for misinterpretations, and am in agreement on many things with Christians generally, including the basis of salvation to Christians, but there are a few disputed points, some of which I have a decided position, and regarding the revealed name of our true God, Yahweh, I know that Christians and others generally have remained in helpless or chosen ignorance, but I suspect I will find other such Christians who are not ignorant in that way beyond the yahoo group I have, to which I would invite them if I can find them or find those I can convince on these points. I cannot display it as I have said, but again say it can be checked out by a search, so it can be seen besides the things I can still post at Christian Forums.

 

[steve4.truth]

I appreciate your adherence to the Bible. There are so many traditions and beliefs that are not supported by the Bible, yet are taught by many churches. I believe the Bible is the only guidance we need and by following it as closely as we can, we will benefit ourselves and make YHWH happy (Prov. 27:11). If you're looking for Christians who are not ignorant as to the divine name, there are over 7 million in 235 different countries proclaiming His name! I know it is hard to imagine any good in Jehovah's witnesses as we are the most hated religion, and 6 years ago I cringed at the name, but an unbiased investigation surprised me. Many circulated stories are lies--as they are propagated by disgruntled ex-members who were expelled for gross sin. Believing everything they say would be like believing everything an ex-wife says about the current wife Bottom line: we are doing the work that Jesus did--proclaiming the kingdom and God's name in all the earth.
Mt. 24:14 "this good news of the kingdom will be preached in all the inhabited earth for a witness to all the nations and then the end will come."

 

[FredVB]

Thanks again for the response, Steve. I am happy to have dialogue with any. I myself am not one of Jehovah's Witnesses, I came here after finding one thread in Christian Forums to respond to after the internet search I mentioned, when seeing on the side of the page access to another place the name of Yahweh was under discussion. I will talk on this subject with any who would agree to engage in the discussion, and maybe there will be more opportunities in Christian Forums. I still want to find any that would be interested in Christian Tribe of Yahweh, it is findable by a search through yahoo groups. It may not be something you would want to join, as it does not agree on some points of Jehovah's Witnesses, but I fully submit it to teachings of the Bible, the difference will be the group would not give weight to any other writings for its teachings. Any interested can still go look to check it out in any case. I will welcome those who find the points of the group agreeable and want to join.
By the way, I do not hate anyone, that would be sin. Sin itself is to be hated. But I will speak on the truth.

 

[steve4.truth]

I really appreciate your outlook. By the way, you mentioned "the difference will be the group would not give weight to any other writings for its teachings." I know many say that about the watchtower. Actually, the watchtower is a Bible study aid, not inspired or a "holy book". Have you ever read them? There are numerous verses quoted on each page. So it's similar to what other churches call a commentary. the difference is that we don't have a different commentary from each scholar. In fact, none of our literature is signed or attributed to an author. Our leaders come to an agreement on what a scripture means based on prayer and Holy Spirit. They publish their understanding in the watchtower. (You can verify this on watchtower.org) This avoids emphasis on individuals like Charles Stanley or chuck Swindol or Billy Graham etc.... There are no "big names" in our organization. So I fully agree that we must "fully submit" to the teachings of the Bible. May YHWH bless your efforts.

 

[FredVB]

Again I am glad to see your response. I am well read in the Bible, of course I never want to stop learning from it, for there is always more. I have looked at some watchtower issues, but I have not changed, some things I can agree with, certainly continuing with recognizing and referring to God by name, but not everything, and I still understand what I do from the Bible. I recommend a view of what is said at the group I mentioned.

By the way, I like that statement that you sign off with,
When a man who is honestly mistaken hears the truth he either ceases to be mistaken or begins to be dishonest,
and wish to be able to quote it, too.

 

[steve4.truth]

I got that quote from someone else on this site. It seems to appeal to those who value truth above sentiment or opinion. That is rare these days when people believe what they saw on TV without questioning, but won't give the Bible a fair trial.