22 Apr 12
4 edits
Originally posted by menace71Along with Howard, David Trobisch and Rolf Furuli both have written on the how the
The name Jehovah was never taken out of the original manuscripts BECAUSE it was never in them. YHWH was in the manuscripts but once again......WE have no clue how it was pronounced.
Manny
Tetragrammaton may have been removed from the Greek MSS. In the book
Archaeology and the New Testament, John McRay has also written of 'the possibility that
the New Testament autographs may have retained the divine name in quotations from
the Old Testament.' Robert Baker Girdlestone stated in 1871 that if the LXX 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.' [26] Since Girdlestone's
time it has been shown that the LXX had the Tetragrammaton but was latter removed
by Christians.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetragrammaton_in_the_New_Testament
thus the issue is not whether we know the correct pronunciation, but the fact that the
Hebrew character which represent the divine name have been removed by
Christians resulting in a confusion and an inability to distinguish between God and
Christ. Furthermore it has resulted in some ludicrous translation, Psalm 110 being an
example, 'my lord said to my lord???'.
22 Apr 12
Originally posted by robbie carrobieGood stuff Robbie. But until they can get straight who Jehovah and Jesus are it will always be a problem for them.
Along with Howard, David Trobisch and Rolf Furuli both have written on the how the
Tetragrammaton may have been removed from the Greek MSS. In the book
Archaeology and the New Testament, John McRay has also written of 'the possibility that
the New Testament autographs may have retained the divine name in quotations from
the Old Testament.' R ...[text shortened]... some ludicrous translation, Psalm 110 being an
example, 'my lord said to my lord???'.
24 Apr 12
Originally posted by galveston75do you get the logic of what your saying? Your actually right in the sense that God has more than one name. You can call him almighty God or any of the names that give Him his honor. The bible says actually that there is one name under heaven by which men can be saved and I believe it is Jesus but I'm sure Jesus is pronounced many ways in different languages.
You know what I mean. If you want to stick with YHWH that if fine but now how do you pronounce it? The would over recognizes it and even dumb silly movies have used it. But the point is you have to use it to be heard by God. And certianly using a wrong name such as Jesus will get you no where. For me to listen to you, you use my name, right? God is no di ...[text shortened]... to stick with the trinity, that would make sense why you refuse to use God's name in anyway.
Manny
8 Then Peter, filled with the Holy Spirit, said to them: “Rulers and elders of the people! 9 If we are being called to account today for an act of kindness shown to a man who was lame and are being asked how he was healed, 10 then know this, you and all the people of Israel: It is by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom you crucified but whom God raised from the dead, that this man stands before you healed. 11 Jesus is
“‘the stone you builders rejected,
which has become the cornerstone.’
12 Salvation is found in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given to mankind by which we must be saved.”
Manny Acts 4:12 NASB
24 Apr 12
1 edit
Originally posted by menace71what have you to say Manny about the tetragrammaton having been removed by
do you get the logic of what your saying? Your actually right in the sense that God has more than one name. You can call him almighty God or any of the names that give Him his honor. The bible says actually that there is one name under heaven by which men can be saved and I believe it is Jesus but I'm sure Jesus is pronounced many ways in different languages.
Manny
Christians and substitutions like Kyrios and Adoni replacing it which was after all your
point of contention. Are you simply going to ignore it and introduce a completely
different and unrelated argument in the hope that it will go away?
24 Apr 12
2 edits
Originally posted by galveston75Hi Gman dude, yes i think most serious Biblical scholars now agree with our position
Good stuff Robbie. But until they can get straight who Jehovah and Jesus are it will always be a problem for them.
that the divine name represented by the tertragrammaton has been removed and
substitutes introduced. Of course we have known this for some time but it takes a
while for the rest to catch up, so we must be patient. 🙂
24 Apr 12
Originally posted by robbie carrobieYes we have to be patient as Jehovah is. But the time is running out for ones who refuse to be humble to learn the truths in the Bible and to want to know who Jehovah is.
Hi Gman dude, yes i think most serious Biblical scholars now agree with our position
that the divine name represented by the tertragrammaton has been removed and
substitutes introduced. Of course we have known this for some time but it takes a
while for the rest to catch up, so we must be patient. 🙂
24 Apr 12
2 edits
Originally posted by RJHindsno it doesn't equal anything but an inaccurate translation and giving significance to the term
Yes, He said, "I AM" and at another place "I AM HE".
I guess you know "I AM" = "YAH" as in Hallelu YAH.
'I am', where none exists elsewhere except when it comes to Jesus.
24 Apr 12
Originally posted by galveston75Indeed it is, we are after all living in the last days of the system of things. Gulp!
Yes we have to be patient as Jehovah is. But the time is running out for ones who refuse to be humble to learn the truths in the Bible and to want to know who Jehovah is.