Gods name

[kjw47]

Every bible scholar on earth knows 100% that God put his name --( YHVH(Jehovah) = the tetragramoton) in his bible in over 7000 spots because God wants it there. Thus wicked men by satans will removed Gods name to mislead and replaced it in OT( nearly 6800 spots) with GOD or LORD all capitols--quoted in NT over 200 spots where God willed his name.
Now in light of Jesus, who at the Lords prayer has clearly shown to all that his Fathers name( YHVH(Jehovah) is the #1 most important thing, followed by his Fathers kingdom and will. Thus to a true follower Gods name is #1 most important issue.
So then one must ask why is my religion using altered translations in support of satans will over Gods will on the matter of his name belonging in his bible? Would you say to mislead is the answer? Yes it is.
Here is a prime example of the misleading that it does
Joel 2:21-22--Whoever calls on the name of YHVH(Jehovah) will be saved---quoted 2 x in the NT at Acts 2:21-22--Romans 10:13--But since satan willed translations have LORD at Joel, Lord is at both spots of NT, and all who know Jesus is Lord will call on his name in error because they are being mislead. God is not called LORD in the OT by his will, his name belongs there. it is causing major confusion.
The New world translation corrected that matter, yet every religion using the altered translations condemned the NWT. Why because with that name back in it exposes all of those ones using the altered translations as false religion.
The sad fact is that they know Gods name belongs in all of those spots. So what are you going to do about being mislead?

[1213]

God gave Michael the name Jesus as a mortal.

Why do you think so?

Rev 6:1= the war in heaven, Michael took that ride of the white horse( righteous war)--Yet 6:2--He receives his crown--Only Jesus gets the crown. Rev 19:11- the continuation of that ride, yet Jesus is the one named on the white horse. That ride stops here at 1 Cor 15:24-28-Jesus must hand the kingdom back to his God and Father and subject himself) = forever.
1Thess 4:16--Upon Jesus return he comes with the trumpet of God( announcing the ride at Rev 6:1)and with the voice of the archangel( its his voice)
Daniel 12:1-- It is Michael who stands up for Gods chosen during the last days) = as Gods appointed king.

There is no Jesus named in the OT-- He became Jesus as a mortal. According to Jesus at John 17:3-The Only true God( Father)= the one who sent Jesus)--did not come down here, Jesus was sent down here by the ONLY TRUE GOD.

God sent his best= his archangel Michael.

And I saw when the Lamb opened one of the seals. And I heard one of the four living creatures, like a sound of thunder, saying, Come and see. And I saw, and behold, a white horse! And the one sitting on it had a bow. And a crown was given to him, and he went out overcoming, and that he might overcome.
Rev 6:1
And I saw Heaven being opened. And, behold! A white horse, and He sitting on it having been called Faithful and True. And He judges and wars in righteousness. And His eyes were as a flame of fire, and on His head many diadems, having a name that had been written, which no one knows except Himself;
Rev 19:11

If the Bible tells that the rider had a name no one knows, how could you know he is Jesus or even Michael? Sorry, I don't think those scriptures are necessary about Jesus.

Then is the end, when He delivers the kingdom to God, even the Father, when He makes to cease all rule and all authority and power. for it is right for Him to reign until He puts all the enemies under His feet; the last enemy made to cease is death. For "He subjected all things under His feet;" but when He says that all things have been subjected, it is plain that it excepts Him who has subjected all things to Him. But when all things are subjected to Him, then the Son Himself also will be subjected to the One who has subjected all things to Him, that God may be all things in all.
1 Cor 15:24-28

Because the Lord Himself shall come down from Heaven with a commanding shout of an archangel's voice, and with God's trumpet. And the dead in Christ will rise again first.
1 Thess 4:16

I don't think these are speaking of the person on white horse.

And at that time, Michael shall stand up, the great ruler who stands for the sons of your people. And there shall be a time of distress, such as has not been from the existence of a nation until that time. And at that time, your people shall be delivered, everyone that shall be found written in the Book.
Daniel 12:1

Also that scripture it not in my opinion speaking of Jesus. I would need much more direct connection to think Jesus is the same as Michael, for example because it is said in the Bible that Jesus is a man and higher than angels.

For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus,
1 Tim. 2:5

...and became as much superior to the angels...
Heb. 1:4

[kjw47]

God gave Michael the name Jesus as a mortal.

Why do you think so?

Rev 6:1= the war in heaven, Michael took that ride of the white horse( righteous war)--Yet 6:2--He receives his crown--Only Jesus gets the crown. Rev 19:11- the continuation of that ride, yet Jesus is the one named on the white horse. That ride stops here at 1 Cor 15:24-28-Jesus must hand the kingdom back to his God and Father and subject himself) = forever.
1Thess 4:16--Upon Jesus return he comes with the trumpet of God( announcing the ride at Rev 6:1)and with the voice of the archangel( its his voice)
Daniel 12:1-- It is Michael who stands up for Gods chosen during the last days) = as Gods appointed king.

There is no Jesus named in the OT-- He became Jesus as a mortal. According to Jesus at John 17:3-The Only true God( Father)= the one who sent Jesus)--did not come down here, Jesus was sent down here by the ONLY TRUE GOD.

God sent his best= his archangel Michael.

And I saw when the Lamb opened one of the seals. And I heard one of the four living creatures, like a sound of thunder, saying, Come and see. And I saw, and behold, a white horse! And the one sitting on it had a bow. And a crown was given to him, and he went out overcoming, and that he might overcome.
Rev 6:1
And I saw Heaven being opened. And, behold! A white horse, and He sitting on it having been called Faithful and True. And He judges and wars in righteousness. And His eyes were as a flame of fire, and on His head many diadems, having a name that had been written, which no one knows except Himself;
Rev 19:11

If the Bible tells that the rider had a name no one knows, how could you know he is Jesus or even Michael? Sorry, I don't think those scriptures are necessary about Jesus.

Then is the end, when He delivers the kingdom to God, even the Father, when He makes to cease all rule and all authority and power. for it is right for Him to reign until He puts all the enemies under His feet; the last enemy made to cease is death. For "He subjected all things under His feet;" but when He says that all things have been subjected, it is plain that it excepts Him who has subjected all things to Him. But when all things are subjected to Him, then the Son Himself also will be subjected to the One who has subjected all things to Him, that God may be all things in all.
1 Cor 15:24-28

Because the Lord Himself shall come down from Heaven with a commanding shout of an archangel's voice, and with God's trumpet. And the dead in Christ will rise again first.
1 Thess 4:16

I don't think these are speaking of the person on white horse.

And at that time, Michael shall stand up, the great ruler who stands for the sons of your people. And there shall be a time of distress, such as has not been from the existence of a nation until that time. And at that time, your people shall be delivered, everyone that shall be found written in the Book.
Daniel 12:1

Also that scripture it not in my opinion speaking of Jesus. I would need much more direct connection to think Jesus is the same as Michael, for example because it is said in the Bible that Jesus is a man and higher than angels.

For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus,
1 Tim. 2:5

...and became as much superior to the angels...
Heb. 1:4

Without God giving him the name Jesus was equal to the angels Heb 1:4 clearly shows.
Psalm 45:7--Jesus has a God-partners or fellows = angels.

[onewithhim]

[Replying to kjw47 in post #32]

It is plain to see that Michael is the angel that came to be Jesus on Earth. The description at Daniel 12:1,2 fits Jesus Christ to a tee. Would you say that the Michael of Daniel (if he's NOT Jesus) is as great as Jesus Christ? That's not showing Christ much recognition or respect. Jesus is truly "the great prince," therefore he is Michael. And Michael "stands up" for his people, just before the Great Tribulation as described there, and afterward the resurrection of many. (John 6:44) All this is tied to Jesus Christ in the Christian Greek Scriptures. (See Matthew 24. See also Isaiah 9:6---Jesus is the Prince of peace.)

Jesus is higher than the angels because he is a special angel, the first creation by God alone. ("These are the things that the Amen says, the faithful and true Witness, the beginning of the creation by God." Revelation 2:14)

[kjw47]

[Replying to kjw47 in post #32]

It is plain to see that Michael is the angel that came to be Jesus on Earth. The description at Daniel 12:1,2 fits Jesus Christ to a tee. Would you say that the Michael of Daniel (if he's NOT Jesus) is as great as Jesus Christ? That's not showing Christ much recognition or respect. Jesus is truly "the great prince," therefore he is Michael. And Michael "stands up" for his people, just before the Great Tribulation as described there, and afterward the resurrection of many. (John 6:44) All this is tied to Jesus Christ in the Christian Greek Scriptures. (See Matthew 24. See also Isaiah 9:6---Jesus is the Prince of peace.)

Jesus is higher than the angels because he is a special angel, the first creation by God alone. ("These are the things that the Amen says, the faithful and true Witness, the beginning of the creation by God." Revelation 2:14)

All truth above

[historia]

Nobody has completely succeeded in hiding the Divine Name, thankfully, and scrutinizing Bible readers know that it is in the Bible canon, but it is not used by anyone because church leaders don't teach their flocks that God's name is important

If you think the Divine Name is "not used by anyone" then you need to get out more.

I read and listen to a lot of Christian authors -- not just scholars, mind you, but also popular-level authors -- and I regularly hear them using the name Yahweh, especially when talking about the Old Testament. Pick up any popular study Bible and you'll likely see the Divine Name mentioned.

Whenever folks on this forum talk about orthodox Christians "hiding" the Divine Name I seriously have to scratch my head.

Jesus teaching that it is in the Our Father, or, the Lord's Prayer. "Our Father who art in heaven, hallowed be thy name."

But notice what Jesus doesn't do in the Lord's Prayer. He doesn't actually say the Divine Name itself.

He doesn't tell the disciples to address "Yahweh in heaven," but rather, "our Father in heaven."

To this day, Jews refer to God as Hashem, "the Name." It's a kind of circumlocution, a way of referring to the Divine Name without actually saying it. Likewise, Jesus says "hallowed be thy name" in order to refer to the Divine Name without actually saying it.

In other words, the Lord's Prayer demonstrates the opposite of what you are trying to show.

Priests and ministers feel that God's name and His Kingdom are "too preachy" subjects.

Best not to project motives onto others or make sweeping statements like this, as it makes your position look desperate.

Jesus quotes the OT many times and uses the name "Jehovah" because that name appears in the OT verses that he is quoting.

There is no evidence to support this claim.

Yes there is. Jesus quoted from the OT. The Divine Name appears in the OT 7,000 times, as the Tetragrammaton (YHWH).

That doesn't prove anything. The question here is what did Jesus say when he quoted from the Old Testament. There is no evidence that he said the Divine Name when doing so.

Do you think that is absurd?

What I think is absurd is you impugning the motives of professional translators for translating the New Testament text as it actually exists.

When quoting the OT, Jesus surely would have included the Divine Name whereever it appeared in the OT text.

This is simply an expression of what you want to be true.

There is no evidence that Jesus did this, and all of the evidence points against it, as you just demonstrated above.

It's odd that you are so rabidly against the Divine Name.

I don't even know what that's suppose to mean. I've used the name Yahweh repeatedly in this and other threads. To say I'm "rabidly against" the Divine Name is little more than a slur.

[historia]

Where did Jerome say that the Divine Name "belonged in the NT before translating"?

Info on Jerome takes less than 1 whole minute to look it up for self.

"Just look it up for yourself" is what people say when they can't support their arguments with evidence.

I'm familiar with Jerome's writings. Where did he say this?

Which Greek lexicons are "done" from the Latin Vulgate?

All originals were gone when the protestants translated.

So, by "originals" here it seems you mean Greek manuscripts of the New Testament.

Your assertion that they were "gone" when Protestants started translating the Bible is utterly false.

While the Bible was largely transmitted in Latin in the western Church, Christians in the eastern Church continued to copy the Bible in Greek from the first century all the way down to the 16th (and beyond). Western Christians had copies of these Greek manuscripts at their disposal. So the Greek New Testament was never "gone," even in western Europe.

The Greek lexicons ( NT)were then translated back from Latin to Greek.

First of all, again, a lexicon is a dictionary. What I think you mean to say here is Greek manuscripts.

Second, the Greek manuscripts that were used by Protestants in their translations of the New Testament were not "translated back from Latin."

In the 16th Century, Erasmus and other scholars put together a critical Greek New Testament text -- often referred to as the Textus Receptus -- from a dozen or so Greek manuscripts that were available to them at that time. Those manuscripts were all copied from earlier Greek manuscripts (etc.). That was the textual basis for Luther's translation of the New Testament, Tyndale's translation, the KJV, and many other translations into several European languages.

Now, it is true that, in a couple of verses, Erasmus used the Latin Vulgate to emend the Greek text -- especially in Revelation where the Greek text is corrupted in places. Famously, in the third edition of his critical Greek text, he added the Comma Johanneum -- "the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit" -- into 1 John 5:7-8, even though none of the Greek manuscripts in his possession contained that phrase. It was also missing or marked as spurious in many Vulgate manuscripts.

But he only did this in a couple of verses. He didn't translate the entire New Testament "back from Latin to Greek." You seem to have gotten confused on this point, and are now making wildly inaccurate claims because of it.

The JW leaders were allowed to go into the Catholic archives=late 60,s or early 70,s- They came out with proof--The spirit, water and blood are the 3 witness bearers, not the Father son and holy spirit as Catholicism translated in. Many translations either corrected that error or added it to the other one. The JW,s were never allowed back in.

That was a fun little story.

But, in reality, Catholic and Protestant scholars have questioned the authenticity of the Comma Johanneum since the 16th Century. Before Charles Taze Russell was even born, most critical Protestant scholars knew it was a later addition. Modern English translations beginning with the 1881 Revised Version have omitted it.

Your suggestion here that it was Jehovah's Witness "leaders" visiting the "Catholic archives" (whatever that is) in the late-1960s who finally figured this out is nothing more than fantasy. You're fooling yourself if you believe that.

The Hebrew scholars say there is no- i am that i am in their Hebrew written ot

Sure, but it appears that way in the LXX, which is what John and other Greek-speaking Jews and Christians used as their Bible.

It was created in 381 ce at the council of Constantinople when they added the holy spirit as apart of a trinity God.

The doctrine of the Trinity exited long before the Council of Constantinople. You're confusing a formal statement regarding a belief with the origin of that belief.

[JehovahsWitness]

IS THERE ANY EVIDENCE THAT JESUS WOULD HAVE PRONOUNCED THE DIVINE NAME WHEN QUOTING HEBREW SCRIPTURE THAT CONTAINED THE TETRAGRAMMATON ?

The evidence lies in Jesus' expressions of his high regard for the Divine Name. At no time did he express the desire that its holiness be preserved by not pronouncing it; indeed quite to the contrary he explicitly stated he had made God's name known.

It seems reasonable then to pressume that which ever text Jesus quoted from, he quoted them in full pronouncing the Divine Name as it appeared in the texts of his day. There certainly no indication in his rhetoric that bowed to later traditions that it not be pronounced nor did he ever explicitly prohibit his followers from its pronunciation.






JW

[elphidium55]

In the beginning, Hebrew used a writing system without vowel indicators. The name of the Jewish god at this time would have been written (transliterated) as YHWH. This is known by scholars as the tetragrammaton. The scholarly consensus is that this name was originally vocalized as "yahweh".

During the second temple period (3rd to 2nd centuries BCE), there developed within Judaism a reluctance to say the name of god ("yahweh") out loud.
Instead, the consonants YHWH were now being read as "adonai" (Hebrew: lord) or "elohim" (Hebrew: god). The name "yahweh" probably ceased to be used in Judaism at this time.

In the 10th through 12th centuries CE, Jewish scholars started to experiment with adding vowel indicators under their consonants. Now finally, Hebrew words could be read without having to guess at their underlying vowels. However because the tetragrammaton was no longer pronounced, Jewish scholars did not vocalize YHWH as YaHWeH. Instead, they added vowels from the words "adonai" and "elohim" to YHWH to produce the non-word Y'HoWaH. This word was meant to be read as elohim (God) or adonai (lord). Y'HoWaH was later latinized and then brought into German as "Jehovah."

Some english bibles still render the tetragrammaton as "Lord," but more scholarly translations now use "Yahweh" instead. Jehovah seems to be used for doctrinal/denominational reasons rather than academic ones.

[kjw47]

Where did Jerome say that the Divine Name "belonged in the NT before translating"?

Info on Jerome takes less than 1 whole minute to look it up for self.

"Just look it up for yourself" is what people say when they can't support their arguments with evidence.

I'm familiar with Jerome's writings. Where did he say this?

Which Greek lexicons are "done" from the Latin Vulgate?

All originals were gone when the protestants translated.

So, by "originals" here it seems you mean Greek manuscripts of the New Testament.

Your assertion that they were "gone" when Protestants started translating the Bible is utterly false.

While the Bible was largely transmitted in Latin in the western Church, Christians in the eastern Church continued to copy the Bible in Greek from the first century all the way down to the 16th (and beyond). Western Christians had copies of these Greek manuscripts at their disposal. So the Greek New Testament was never "gone," even in western Europe.

The Greek lexicons ( NT)were then translated back from Latin to Greek.

First of all, again, a lexicon is a dictionary. What I think you mean to say here is Greek manuscripts.

Second, the Greek manuscripts that were used by Protestants in their translations of the New Testament were not "translated back from Latin."

In the 16th Century, Erasmus and other scholars put together a critical Greek New Testament text -- often referred to as the Textus Receptus -- from a dozen or so Greek manuscripts that were available to them at that time. Those manuscripts were all copied from earlier Greek manuscripts (etc.). That was the textual basis for Luther's translation of the New Testament, Tyndale's translation, the KJV, and many other translations into several European languages.

Now, it is true that, in a couple of verses, Erasmus used the Latin Vulgate to emend the Greek text -- especially in Revelation where the Greek text is corrupted in places. Famously, in the third edition of his critical Greek text, he added the Comma Johanneum -- "the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit" -- into 1 John 5:7-8, even though none of the Greek manuscripts in his possession contained that phrase. It was also missing or marked as spurious in many Vulgate manuscripts.

But he only did this in a couple of verses. He didn't translate the entire New Testament "back from Latin to Greek." You seem to have gotten confused on this point, and are now making wildly inaccurate claims because of it.

The JW leaders were allowed to go into the Catholic archives=late 60,s or early 70,s- They came out with proof--The spirit, water and blood are the 3 witness bearers, not the Father son and holy spirit as Catholicism translated in. Many translations either corrected that error or added it to the other one. The JW,s were never allowed back in.

That was a fun little story.

But, in reality, Catholic and Protestant scholars have questioned the authenticity of the Comma Johanneum since the 16th Century. Before Charles Taze Russell was even born, most critical Protestant scholars knew it was a later addition. Modern English translations beginning with the 1881 Revised Version have omitted it.

Your suggestion here that it was Jehovah's Witness "leaders" visiting the "Catholic archives" (whatever that is) in the late-1960s who finally figured this out is nothing more than fantasy. You're fooling yourself if you believe that.

The Hebrew scholars say there is no- i am that i am in their Hebrew written ot

Sure, but it appears that way in the LXX, which is what John and other Greek-speaking Jews and Christians used as their Bible.

It was created in 381 ce at the council of Constantinople when they added the holy spirit as apart of a trinity God.

The doctrine of the Trinity exited long before the Council of Constantinople. You're confusing a formal statement regarding a belief with the origin of that belief.

Jerome and Gods name in NT--GOOGLE IT.
Its recorded history that no trinity was served prior to 381 ce when they added the holy spirit as apart of a godhead of 3. It even says so in the new Catholic encyclopedia-1967, vol XIV, page 299-- It as well says-The apostolic Fathers know 0 of God being a trinity.

[otseng]

All truth above

9. No unconstructive one-liners posts are allowed in debates.

Kindly refrain from making posts that contribute nothing to debate and/or simply express agreement / disagreement or make other frivolous remarks.

For complimenting or agreeing use the Thank button. For anything else use PM.