Bible Translations

Some education is sorely needed.

Although none of the extant Greek New Testament manuscripts contain the Tetragrammaton, scholar George Howard has suggested that the Tetragrammaton appeared in the original New Testament autographs,[9] and that "the removal of the Tetragrammaton from the New Testament and its replacement with the surrogates κυριος and θεος blurred the original distinction between the Lord God and the Lord Christ."[9] In the Anchor Bible Dictionary, Howard states: "There is some evidence that the Tetragrammaton, the Divine Name, Yahweh, appeared in some or all of the OT quotations in the NT when the NT documents were first penned."[9]:392

long with Howard, David Trobisch and Rolf Furuli both have suggested that the Tetragrammaton may have been removed from the Greek manuscripts.[10]:66–67[11]:179–191 In the book Archaeology and the New Testament, John McRay wrote of the possibility that the New Testament autographs may have retained the divine name in quotations from the Old Testament.[12] Robert Baker Girdlestone stated in 1871 that if the Septuagint had used "one Greek word for Jehovah and another for Adonai, such usage would doubtless have been retained in the discourses and arguments of the N.T. Thus our Lord in quoting the 110th Psalm,...might have said 'Jehovah said unto Adoni.'"[13] Since Girdlestone's time it has been shown that the Septuagint contained the Tetragrammaton, but that it was removed in later editions.[14]

Wolfgang Feneberg comments in the Jesuit magazine Entschluss/Offen (April 1985): "He [Jesus] did not withhold his father's name YHWH from us, but he entrusted us with it. It is otherwise inexplicable why the first petition of the Lord's Prayer should read: 'May your name be sanctified!'" Feneberg further notes that "in pre-Christian manuscripts for Greek-speaking Jews, God's name was not paraphrased with kýrios [Lord], but was written in the tetragram form in Hebrew or archaic Hebrew characters. . . . We find recollections of the name in the writings of the Church Fathers".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetragrammaton_in_the_New_Testament

Originally posted by josephw
I would go a step further though and say the KJV is without error.

Originally posted by josephw
Good post leunammi.

I would go a step further though and say the KJV is without error.

the idea that the KJV is without error is absurd.

The Comma Johanneum, also called the Johannine Comma or the Heavenly Witnesses, is a comma (a short clause) found in Latin manuscripts of the First Epistle of John[1] at 5:7–8. The comma first appeared in the Vulgate manuscripts of the 9th century.[2] The first Greek manuscript that contains the comma dates from the 15th century.[3] The comma is absent from the Ethiopiac, Aramaic, Syriac, Slavic, Armenian, Georgian, and Arabic translations of the Greek New Testament.[3] The scholarly consensus is that that passage is a Latin corruption that entered the Greek manuscript tradition in some subsequent copies.[1] As the comma does not appear in the manuscript tradition of other languages, the debate is mainly limited to the English-speaking world due to the King James Only movement.

Its a trinitarian interpolation

King James Version:
For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.
And there are three that bear witness in earth, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one

Originally posted by MarshallPrice
I'm aware many people here are Christians, and I'm just curious as to what translation of The Bible you personally read and why.

Originally posted by sonship

Enough of this Calvinism, the word of God cannot be made subject to the doctrines of mere men!

In the Greek text of [b]Romans 10:13 could you please indicate which part is "the doctrines of mere men" ?

transliterated below

Pas gar hos an epikalesetai to anoma Kyriou sothesetai.

Nine words written by the Apostle Paul there.
Which words are the "doctrines of mere men" ?[/b]

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
Why did your church fathers remove the divine name from their manuscripts sonship? Did not the Christ make his name manifest? Were we not taught in prayer to sanctify this name? Our father in heaven hallowed be (my name? noooooo) thy name?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
Some education is sorely needed.

Although none of the extant Greek New Testament manuscripts contain the Tetragrammaton, scholar George Howard has suggested that the Tetragrammaton appeared in the original New Testament autographs,[9] and that "the removal of the Tetragrammaton from the New Testament and its replacement with the surrogates κυριος ...[text shortened]... ngs of the Church Fathers".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetragrammaton_in_the_New_Testament

Originally posted by Suzianne
You're living in a fantasy land driven by your own egos.

Then you talk about sanctifying his name.

His name is not the name you wish to sanctify, hypocrites.

Originally posted by Suzianne
[b]"Some education is sorely needed."

No doubt.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetragrammaton_in_the_New_Testament
"None of the extant Greek manuscripts of the New Testament contain the Tetragrammaton."

You could have stopped right there. All the rest on this page is twaddle.
There was no "removal" of what was never there.[/b]

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
How would a country bumpkin like you know? how many manuscripts have you ever examined? Not a single one I'll bet and here you are proffering your opinion like it has any substance. More unadulterated windbaggery. Please educate yourself, on second thoughts, I'll do it.

Tetragrammaton Found in Earliest Copies of the Septuagint
http://www.eliyah. ...[text shortened]... entury CE/AD substitutes the Tetragrammaton (Yahweh's name) with "Kyrios" (the Greek word Lord).

Originally posted by leunammi
So does this mean God's name is Yahweh then?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
Gods name is represented by the tetragrammaton (the four Hebrew consonants YHWH or JHVH its latinised form), What this means is that no one is quite sure how it was actually pronounced because no vowel sounds were recorded. As it has come down to us from antiquity as recorded in the King James Bible in at least four places, we are sticking with the ...[text shortened]... list of languages and their rendering of the divine name, I hope I will not need to do so again.

Originally posted by Suzianne
No, I'm not.

I'm remarkably consistent.

I'm only a surprise to people who insist that things are a 'certain way', or who don't at all get where I am coming from.