HaShem - Yahweh or Jehovah?

Dear Arachnophilia;It was very wise of you to open this as a different thread to avoid being off topic, I was concerned about that. I should clarify my position that I am saying that the name "Jehovah" is the best choice in English to use for God. I am not saying it is the way the Name was pronounced in ancient Hebrew. Merely that it is the most commonly known and has long been used, and hence it is the most recognizable form of the Name to use. This is important, because the goal in communication is to be understood. I disagree with the other viewpoint that everyone on the planet should try to pronounce the Name the way the ancient Israelites did, since who speaks ancient Hebrew? and the exact pronunciation is not known for sure and would be a strange and hard to pronounce name to the speakers of most languages anyway.

quote:

---

It's god telling Moses that he doesn't really HAVE a name at all, he's just himself, and then telling Moses to go make himself look stupid in from of the Israelites. it's also a response to the belief that you can control a spirit by its name. if god doesn't have one, he's the most powerful spirit of all. god is all of existence, he is that which exists.

---

Moses already knew Jehovah's name, he recorded at Genesis 4:26 "At that time a start was made of calling on the name of Jehovah." that God's name was already known and used before the flood. In the Bible knowing some one's name can have the meaning of knowing their reputation, what their name means in terms of what the person is. Moses was asking not for what Jehovah's name was, which he already knew, he was asking if he was to have evidence of miraculous divine backing. Jehovah was telling him he would prove to be with Moses.

quote:

---

i would argue that most well known name for god is "God" followed by "LORD" and that those are two we should use.

---

The terms 'god' and 'lord' are titles not names, like the English "My Lord". They also by themselves fail to identify the one spoken about, which God? or what Lord, after all Jesus is Lord of Lords. That is why Jehovah has a personal name.I had been trying to wrap this discussion up, make my points and quietly exit. To support your new discussion I will attach below something I wrote earlier on the divine name. Since I wrote it before even getting to this discussion with you, don't read anything personal into it.An additional and very obvious and important trait that any true followers of Jesus would have is that they would undoubtedly have great respect for God's name as Jesus did. Matthew 6:9 (REB) "Our Father in heaven, may your name be hallowed;" That verse of course is the opening line of the most famous prayer in all the world. Jesus in demonstrating to his followers how to pray, put the sanctification of his father's name first and in his ministry Jesus also always put the sanctification of his father's name first. At John 12:28 (REB) Jesus states. "Father, glorify your name.' A voice came from heaven: 'I have glorified it, and I will glorify I again.'" Very evidently the glorifying of God's name is very important to both God and Jesus, and should be very important to those who claim to be Christians. But the problem is, if you ask most Christians what God's name is, they will say "Jesus." However Jesus did not come to here to honor himself, he always directed the praise to his father. His whole life was one of self sacrifice and obedient devotion to the doing of his father's will. So that raises the question; if God's name isn't Jesus, what is it? Answering this question isn't hard, but it is harder than it should be. For there has been a conspiracy to do away with the very name of God. Newer Bible translations generally omit God's name entirely from God's very own book. It is shocking even to think about it, God's Name erased from most translations of the Bible with most Christians today not even knowing what it is. The divine name is however still found in some Bibles. One place you can find it is in the old King James Bible at Psalms 83:18 "That men may know that thou, whose name alone is JEHOVAH, art the Most High over all the earth." Jehovah is God's name in English, in Hebrew it is Yahweh, taken from the Hebrew tetragram YHWH. Ancient Hebrew was written using only constants, so it is not certain what the exact vowels where that went with YHWH. But it doesn't really matter for the English translation, for when translating a name it is common practice to use the most widely accepted form. Many names under go a dramatic change when translated. In going from Hebrew to English, "Y" becomes "J" and "W" becomes "V". So YHWH becomes JHVH.Hence "Jehovah" is as close as we can hope to come to the proper pronunciation of the divine name in English. Plus the name Jehovah wins by default anyway being the most common and the oldest name used for God in English. The name Jehovah has long been accepted as God's name and is used in old Bibles, classic books and even many movie films. From "Pollyanna" to "The Last Crusade," Hollywood seems to have made the divine name more widely known than many modern Bible translations and most Christian religions have, with one obvious exception of course. Considering the fact that most religions have turned their back on Jehovah's name, one has to wonder if he has turned his back on them.It is only fairly recently that Christian religions have forgotten God's name. Like a recent memory, traces of Jehovah's name are still found in the collective memory of Christendom. Old Bibles and song books still carry the name Jehovah and fragments of it are found in modern writings as well. The shortened form of Jehovah is "Jah" and is contained in the word "hallelujah" which means praise Jah or praise Jehovah. Many Bibles that have removed the name Jehovah, often still have hallelujah at Revelation 19:1. "Jah" is also part of many biblical names such as Elijah, Adonijah, Urijah, Jahleel and biblical place names like Jahaz. The reason the shortened form of the divine name was used as part of names, was that each name had a meaning, Elijah means "my god is Jehovah." You really don't have to dig very deep to find out that God's name is Jehovah, because those who would wish to bury it, have only had time to dig a shallow grave.Failing to keep Jehovah's name buried, they have a second tactic, confusion. They point out that we don't know the exact pronunciation of God's name and thus many forms are possible, so we shouldn't use any. Their real motive of not wanting to have Jehovah's name known shows through their false reasoning. For as we pointed out earlier, when translating a name into another language, it is standard procedure to use the most widely known form. We know the constants in the name Jehovah are correct, and the vowels used fit in well with English pronunciation and the name is far more widely know than any other variation. As for other known forms of God's name, "Yahweh" comes in at a distant second place. Yahweh however is not a English name, it is a Hebrew name. Using the Hebrew name for God in English makes as much sense as using Yeshua (Hebrew) or Iesous (Greek) for Jesus in English. Perhaps some are uncomfortable with using the name of the living God, so if they must use it, they prefer not to even translate it, keeping it at a safe distance in another language. The true followers of Christ do not hesitate to use Jehovah's name and do their best to make it known. Those who do not use Jehovah's name betray their true motives in not being true followers of Jehovah's son Jesus Christ by having little interest in the sanctification of a name they avoid using, but was of the utmost importance to Jesus Christ. For think about, the Almighty is almighty, don't you think he would see to it that the most commonly used form of his name was the form he wanted to be used? The name Jehovah is the best English approximation of God's name and it apparently has the approval of Jehovah himself, since he could have caused things to have turned out differently if he had preferred a different pronunciation or spelling of his name.Sincerely Yours; Wm. Scott Anderson

Dear Arachnophilia;It was very wise of you to open this as a different thread to avoid being off topic, I was concerned about that. I should clarify my position that I am saying that the name "Jehovah" is the best choice in English to use for God. I am not saying it is the way the Name was pronounced in ancient Hebrew. Merely that it is the most commonly known and has long been used, and hence it is the most recognizable form of the Name to use. This is important, because the goal in communication is to be understood. I disagree with the other viewpoint that everyone on the planet should try to pronounce the Name the way the ancient Israelites did, since who speaks ancient Hebrew? and the exact pronunciation is not known for sure and would be a strange and hard to pronounce name to the speakers of most languages anyway.

quote:

---

It's god telling Moses that he doesn't really HAVE a name at all, he's just himself, and then telling Moses to go make himself look stupid in from of the Israelites. it's also a response to the belief that you can control a spirit by its name. if god doesn't have one, he's the most powerful spirit of all. god is all of existence, he is that which exists.

---

Moses already knew Jehovah's name, he recorded at Genesis 4:26 "At that time a start was made of calling on the name of Jehovah." that God's name was already known and used before the flood. In the Bible knowing some one's name can have the meaning of knowing their reputation, what their name means in terms of what the person is. Moses was asking not for what Jehovah's name was, which he already knew, he was asking if he was to have evidence of miraculous divine backing. Jehovah was telling him he would prove to be with Moses.

quote:

---

i would argue that most well known name for god is "God" followed by "LORD" and that those are two we should use.

---

The terms 'god' and 'lord' are titles not names, like the English "My Lord". They also by themselves fail to identify the one spoken about, which God? or what Lord, after all Jesus is Lord of Lords. That is why Jehovah has a personal name.I had been trying to wrap this discussion up, make my points and quietly exit. To support your new discussion I will attach below something I wrote earlier on the divine name. Since I wrote it before even getting to this discussion with you, don't read anything personal into it.An additional and very obvious and important trait that any true followers of Jesus would have is that they would undoubtedly have great respect for God's name as Jesus did. Matthew 6:9 (REB) "Our Father in heaven, may your name be hallowed;" That verse of course is the opening line of the most famous prayer in all the world. Jesus in demonstrating to his followers how to pray, put the sanctification of his father's name first and in his ministry Jesus also always put the sanctification of his father's name first. At John 12:28 (REB) Jesus states. "Father, glorify your name.' A voice came from heaven: 'I have glorified it, and I will glorify I again.'" Very evidently the glorifying of God's name is very important to both God and Jesus, and should be very important to those who claim to be Christians. But the problem is, if you ask most Christians what God's name is, they will say "Jesus." However Jesus did not come to here to honor himself, he always directed the praise to his father. His whole life was one of self sacrifice and obedient devotion to the doing of his father's will. So that raises the question; if God's name isn't Jesus, what is it? Answering this question isn't hard, but it is harder than it should be. For there has been a conspiracy to do away with the very name of God. Newer Bible translations generally omit God's name entirely from God's very own book. It is shocking even to think about it, God's Name erased from most translations of the Bible with most Christians today not even knowing what it is. The divine name is however still found in some Bibles. One place you can find it is in the old King James Bible at Psalms 83:18 "That men may know that thou, whose name alone is JEHOVAH, art the Most High over all the earth." Jehovah is God's name in English, in Hebrew it is Yahweh, taken from the Hebrew tetragram YHWH. Ancient Hebrew was written using only constants, so it is not certain what the exact vowels where that went with YHWH. But it doesn't really matter for the English translation, for when translating a name it is common practice to use the most widely accepted form. Many names under go a dramatic change when translated. In going from Hebrew to English, "Y" becomes "J" and "W" becomes "V". So YHWH becomes JHVH.Hence "Jehovah" is as close as we can hope to come to the proper pronunciation of the divine name in English. Plus the name Jehovah wins by default anyway being the most common and the oldest name used for God in English. The name Jehovah has long been accepted as God's name and is used in old Bibles, classic books and even many movie films. From "Pollyanna" to "The Last Crusade," Hollywood seems to have made the divine name more widely known than many modern Bible translations and most Christian religions have, with one obvious exception of course. Considering the fact that most religions have turned their back on Jehovah's name, one has to wonder if he has turned his back on them.It is only fairly recently that Christian religions have forgotten God's name. Like a recent memory, traces of Jehovah's name are still found in the collective memory of Christendom. Old Bibles and song books still carry the name Jehovah and fragments of it are found in modern writings as well. The shortened form of Jehovah is "Jah" and is contained in the word "hallelujah" which means praise Jah or praise Jehovah. Many Bibles that have removed the name Jehovah, often still have hallelujah at Revelation 19:1. "Jah" is also part of many biblical names such as Elijah, Adonijah, Urijah, Jahleel and biblical place names like Jahaz. The reason the shortened form of the divine name was used as part of names, was that each name had a meaning, Elijah means "my god is Jehovah." You really don't have to dig very deep to find out that God's name is Jehovah, because those who would wish to bury it, have only had time to dig a shallow grave.Failing to keep Jehovah's name buried, they have a second tactic, confusion. They point out that we don't know the exact pronunciation of God's name and thus many forms are possible, so we shouldn't use any. Their real motive of not wanting to have Jehovah's name known shows through their false reasoning. For as we pointed out earlier, when translating a name into another language, it is standard procedure to use the most widely known form. We know the constants in the name Jehovah are correct, and the vowels used fit in well with English pronunciation and the name is far more widely know than any other variation. As for other known forms of God's name, "Yahweh" comes in at a distant second place. Yahweh however is not a English name, it is a Hebrew name. Using the Hebrew name for God in English makes as much sense as using Yeshua (Hebrew) or Iesous (Greek) for Jesus in English. Perhaps some are uncomfortable with using the name of the living God, so if they must use it, they prefer not to even translate it, keeping it at a safe distance in another language. The true followers of Christ do not hesitate to use Jehovah's name and do their best to make it known. Those who do not use Jehovah's name betray their true motives in not being true followers of Jehovah's son Jesus Christ by having little interest in the sanctification of a name they avoid using, but was of the utmost importance to Jesus Christ. For think about, the Almighty is almighty, don't you think he would see to it that the most commonly used form of his name was the form he wanted to be used? The name Jehovah is the best English approximation of God's name and it apparently has the approval of Jehovah himself, since he could have caused things to have turned out differently if he had preferred a different pronunciation or spelling of his name.Sincerely Yours; Wm. Scott Anderson

Dear Arachnophilia;

quote:

---

(Moses already knew Jehovah's name, Genesis 4:26)the bible is confusing in this matter. the last verse in genesis four does say that that was the point at which people began to use the name of the lord. the bible contains the name well before this, however, as early as chapter two, in conjunction with eloyhim.
it's not really a problem if you give it some thought: genesis was written AFTER the events in took place, not during. if i wanted to be an apologist, i'd say that at some point people forgot the name of the lord, since god doesn't use it with the major patriarchs. he uses varitions of elowah.

---

I used Genesis 4:26 because of the refence to the "name" of God, as indicated by the earlier use of Jehovah in Genesis God's name was known and used before Genesis 4:26. What Genesis 4:26 is referring to, is that people began to use God's name in false religion, since calling on Jehovah by true worshippers like Able and Enoch is recorded as having happened earlier."at some point people forgot the name of the lord, since god doesn't use it with the major patriarchs. he uses varitions of elowah."? You are thinking of course of Exodus 6:3 "And I used to appear to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob as God Almighty, but as respects my name Jehovah I did not make myself known to them." But if you check in the Bible we find that the patriarchs knew and used Jehovah's name.
(Genesis 12:8) "Then he built an altar there to Jehovah and began to call on the name of Jehovah."
(Genesis 22:14) "And Abraham began to call the name of that place Jehovah-jireh. This is why it is customarily said today: "In the mountain of Jehovah it will be provided."
(Genesis 26:25) "Accordingly he built an altar there and called on the name of Jehovah and pitched his tent there, and the servants of Isaac went excavating a well there.
(Genesis 28:16) . . .Then Jacob awoke from his sleep and said: "Truly Jehovah is in this place . . .(Genesis 29:35) . . .: "This time I shall laud Jehovah." She therefore called his name Judah. . . .
(Genesis 30:24) . . .So she called his name Joseph, saying: "Jehovah is adding another son to me."Notice the specific references to calling on the Name of Jehovah, and the naming of people and places using the Divine Name. The patriarchs knew Jehovah's name, they used it in scripture, what Exodus 6:3 is referring to, is that Jehovah had not made his name manifest to them through the use of divine power on the scale like he was going to do for the Israelites in bondage in Egypt. So what Jehovah was saying was that the patriarchs hadn't seen the vast power behind Jehovah's name.

quote:

---

you must not have read very far into the bible. there are LOTS of instances in which god is JUST called god.

---

Of course, the Bible is the Word of God, it is not necessary to identify God by name all the time. But the fact that the Bible does so frequently, shows the important of using God's name. But outside that context in the real world, identification of God is very necessary for there are many 'gods' and 'lords'. If you don't use God's name, for all you know you might as well be praying to a pink unicorn. (somebody on the board's imaginary god, doesn't answer any prayers he says, so you really want to use a name.) In fact we are commanded to use God's name. Hebrews 13:15 "let us always offer to God a sacrifice of praise, that is, the fruit of lips which make public declaration to his name."

quote:

---

actually, they were doing this in 300 bc as well. why do you think christ refers to god as "father" and says "your name" instead of just using it? the custom of avoidance of speaking hashem was already in place during his lifetime.

---

Jesus frequently made us of the Divine Name, when he said "it is written" he was quoting from the Hebrew Scriptures, and the Greek Septuagint in use in his day contained the Divine Name. Some Bible translations for this reason use the Divine Name in those texts. Matthew 4:7 "Jesus said to him: "Again it is written, 'You must not put Jehovah your God to the test.'" NWT Jesus commanded his followers; "'Go therefore and make disciples of people of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the holy spirit, " Matthew 28:19 so he and his true followers did and do make use of the Divine Name.Sincerely Yours; Wm Scott Anderson

Dear Arachnophilia;

quote:

---

uh, no. the name of the lord is not recorded as being uttered by anyone in the text until genesis 4:26. in fact, i bet you won't find "LORD" surrounded by a quotation made by a man anywhere in the book of genesis at all,

---

Genesis 4:1 "In time she gave birth to Cain and said: "I have produced a man with the aid of Jehovah."" If you want to split hairs, the quotation was made by a woman rather than a man, so on very technical grounds in this case you could be correct. LOL!
(Genesis 5:29) . . .And he proceeded to call his name Noah, saying: "This one will bring us comfort from our work and from the pain of our hands resulting from the ground which Jehovah has cursed."
(Genesis 9:26) . . ."Blessed be Jehovah, Shem's God,. . .
(Genesis 10:9) . . .: "Just like Nimrod a mighty hunter in opposition to Jehovah."
(Genesis 14:22) . . .At this Abram said to the king of Sodom: "I do lift up my hand [in an oath] to Jehovah the Most High God, Producer of heaven and earth,

quote:

---

but genesis is horribly inconsistent in these matters. reading it in order, in clear english blew me away. look at this: Genesis 6:3 "The LORD said, "My breath shall not abide in man forever, since he too is flesh; let the days allowed him be one hundred and twenty years."
now, god says this before noah, before babel. yet,
Genesis 9:29 "And all the days of Noah came to 950 years; then he died"

---

The 120 years allowed for man was the 120 years till the flood, it was not a statement of maximum allowable life span.

quote:

---

what does that mean? make his name manifest.

---

Jesus stated at John 17:6 "I have made your name manifest to the men you gave me out of the world." now his disciples already knew Jehovah's name, what they learned was how Jehovah was working out his will through his son Jesus Christ and they had seen the powerful works Jesus had done in his Father's name. (1 Samuel 3:7-8) . . .As regards Samuel, he had not yet come to know Jehovah, and the word of Jehovah had not yet begun to be revealed to him.) 8 . . .

quote:

---

and this is exactly why the bible does use his name -- in places. certain portions show evidence that they were written AFTER it was customary to avoid the name of the lord.
i'll spare you the actual quotes, but compare psalms 53 and 14. they're the same psalm. the books of psalms (there's five) overlap a little, and overlap with other books too. this is one indication of an overlap in the book itself. so it's useful for examining the differences in thought patterns in different circles at different times.
psalm 14 uses the name of the lord, but psalm 53 uses eloyhim in place of it in every instance (unless you have a masoretic text, but i think they've inserted it there to make it match 14).

---

The Divine Name originally occurred in those verses such as Psalm 53, but was later removed by later Jewish copyists. YHWH occurs in earlier manuscripts, which is why better Bible translations have God's name in those verses today as it was there when it was written. Psalm 53:1 "The senseless one has said in his heart: "There is no Jehovah.""The Jewish custom of avoiding saying God's name occurred later after the OT was written and is still an on going thing with Orthodox Jews. The Bible writers made free use of God's name, even if later copyists and Bible translators sometimes removed it.

quote:

---

my bible doesn't say that. Matthew 4:7 "efh autw o ihsouV, palin gegraptai, ouk ekpeiraseiV kurion ton qeon sou." we recognizing this word in greek yet? it's kurios, or lord. not "jehovah" but "lord" lowercase. as in "adonai" in hebrew. if jesus spoke hebrew, we would have said "adonai eloyhim" not "yahweh eloyhim" in this verse. but since jesus did not speak hebrew (he spoke aramaic), i don't know what he said. however, i doubt it would have been the name of god. it was recorded as using the title for god.

---

Jesus was quoting from Deuteronomy 6:16 "YOU must not put Jehovah YOUR God to the test," and the Greek Septuagint in use in his day contained God's Name in the form of the Tetragrammaton. Being the one who made God's name manifest, he certainly would not have shied away from using it. It was in the second and third centuries that the Divine name was removed from both the OT and the NT. Which is why better Bible translations restore God's name when ever NT writers made a direct quote from a OT verse where the name was used. That is why the Bible translation I quoted from, the NWT, uses Jehovah at Matthew 4:7.Sincerely Yours; Wm Scott Anderson

Dear Buzsaw

quote:

---

Where is your documentation that the divine/proper name of God, "Jehovah/Yehoah" was removed in the early NT translations?

---

Circumstantial evidence indicates that the Name was removed from the NT books after they were written. I don't believe that we have any old manuscripts of the NT with the Name in the text, what we do know is that the NT writers quoted from the earlier Greek Septuagint which had the Tetragrammaton in the text. There is no reason why the NT writers would not have used the Name when quoting from the Greek Septuagint OT. Plus we also know that Matthew first wrote his gospel in Hebrew, so he certainly used the Tetragrammaton.This is why a number of Bible translations have Jehovah in the NT verses which are quotes from the OT where the Tetragrammaton appeared; it belongs there. I wish one of those older manuscripts of the NT with the divine Name still intact would turn up, so that it would be possible to restore the Name to all the places the original writers used it, not just the places where they quoted from the OT.Sincerely Yours; Wm Scott Anderson

Dear Arachnophilia;

quote:

---

moses fathers his three children at age 500, and the flood comes when he's 600. that's 100 years difference. god tells moses he's going to flood the earth at some point after noah has his kids. so noah had at most 100 years to build the ark, not 120 as the beginning of chapter 6 suggests with your reading. did god wait to tell moses?

---

Yes.

quote:

---

please do show me where the septuagint contains the name of the lord though, because i have yet to find one example of it.

---

The nearly complete copies of the Septuagint available today do not use YHWH in the text, these only date to the 4th & 5th centuries AD. Fragments of portions of earlier copies of the Septuagint exist which date back earlier ( 1st century BC ), these fragments have YHWH in Hebrew characters in the text. One of these fragments is part of the book of Deuteronomy, it is "P. Fouad Inventory No. 266." I have a picture of this fragment, it appears in the book "Insight On The Scripture" 1988, Watch Tower Bible and Track Society of New York, Inc. Vol 1, Page 326. I also highly recommend the large article on "Jehovah" in the beginning of Volume 2. This two volume set is not sold anywhere and is only available from Jehovah's Witnesses, some libraries do have it, but otherwise you will have ask a local Witness for it.

quote:

---

what i just provided you with is evidence that the custome began while the bible was still being compiled. the person who transcribed psalm 53 avoided the name, but the person who transcribed 14 did not. these two were written down by SEPARATE INDIVIDUALS.

---

Incorrect, since the earlier Hebrew OT manuscripts have the Tetragrammaton in those verses while the later ones do not, the removal occurred after the OT was written.

quote:

---

the new testament was mostly WRITTEN during the second and third centuries ad.

---

Incorrect, the writing was completed by about 98 AD when John wrote the last book written 3 John. When Peter wrote 2 Peter (64 AD), the letters of Paul were already recognized as being part of the Scriptures or Bible. 2 Peter 3:15-16 "Paul according to the wisdom given him also wrote YOU, speaking about these things as he does also in all [his] letters. In them, however, are some things hard to understand, which the untaught and unsteady are twisting, as [they do] also the rest of the Scriptures, to their own destruction." The reason why Paul's letters and the other books of the NT were accepted at once as being inspired scripture is given by Paul.
1 Corinthians 12:7-10 "the manifestation of the spirit is given to each one for a beneficial purpose. For example, to one there is given through the spirit . . . discernment of inspired utterances,"The early Christians through the power of the holy spirit knew what was part of the inspired Word of God as soon as they read it. With this ability, the NT books were recognized as cannon as soon as they were written.Sincerely Yours; Wm Scott Anderson

Dear Firebird;

quote:

---

Is there evidence that "the Greek Septuagint in use in his day contained God's Name in the form of the Tetragrammaton"?

---

The nearly complete copies of the Septuagint available today do not use YHWH in the text, these only date to the 4th & 5th centuries AD. Fragments of portions of earlier copies of the Septuagint exist which date back earlier ( 1st century BC ), these fragments have YHWH in Hebrew characters in the text. One of these fragments is part of the book of Deuteronomy, it is "P. Fouad Inventory No. 266." I have a picture of this fragment, it appears in the book "Insight On The Scripture" 1988, Watch Tower Bible and Track Society of New York, Inc. Vol 1, Page 326. I also highly recommend the large article on "Jehovah" in the beginning of Volume 2. This two volume set is not sold anywhere and is only available from Jehovah's Witnesses, some libraries do have it, but otherwise you will have ask a local Witness for it.sincerely Yours; Wm Scott Anderson

Dear Arachnophilia;

quote:

---

psalm 14 IS the earlier manuscript and that psalm 53 was put together later, and thus avoids using hashem. psalm 53 does not contain this name anywhere in the hebrew.

---

As I stated in my earlier posts, there are early Hebrew manuscripts that have the Tetragrammaton in Psalm 53, therefore the removal of the Name occurred after the book of Psalms was completed.

quote:

---

i've had this explained at length to me by a hebrew professor. i don't know much hebrew, but i know enough to understand that jehovah is a very incorrect rendering of the word.

---

Of course it is, welcome to the English language, that is how things are unfortunately done. Of course just about every name in the Bible that in English that starts with a 'J' should start with a 'Y', but that decision has already been made long ago and we are stuck with it. Look at the name Jerusalem, it should start with a 'Y' do you think we would ever able to root out the current 'wrong' pronunciation and replaced it with a corrected one? Same thing with the name Jehovah, it is too well established and has the support of our Language's so called 'rules'.Sincerely Yours; Wm Scott Anderson

Dear Firebird;

quote:

---

How many such fragments exist, and has it been conclusively established that they are "mainstream" versions, rather than just reflecting the views of a particular sect or copyist?

---

There are at least 10 copies of the Septuagint that we have fragments of that use the Divine Name. From what I understand, they are considered mainstream and merely predate the later removal of the Tetragrammaton from the Septuagint. The Tetragrammaton in the earlier Septuagint was written in square Hebrew letters in the Greek text, it is understandable that after a period of time and copying, that later Greek speakers would tend to replace the unfamiliar Hebrew letters with something in Greek. [quote] inserting "Jehovah" in the NT on the assumption that Jesus would have quoted exactly, is still more than a translation. It is building in the beliefs of the translator, [/paste] Since we now know that the OT in use when the NT was written had the Tetragrammaton in it, and since the OT quoted from OT verses where the Name was used, use of the Name in those verses is not inserting or adding, it is restoring, it is putting back what was once there before it was removed by later copyists.Sincerely Yours: Wm Scott Anderson

Dear Buzsaw;

quote:

---

The name was never intended to be in the NT. Why? Because Jesus, for the first time in history taught that God should be addressed as "Father."

---

Isaiah 63:16 "O Jehovah, are our Father."
Deuteronomy 32:6 "Is it to Jehovah that YOU keep doing this way, O people stupid and not wise? Is he not your Father who has produced you, He who made you and proceeded to give you stability?"
Isaiah 63:16 "For you are our Father; although Abraham himself may not have known us and Israel himself may not recognize us, you, O Jehovah, are our Father."The Jews called Jehovah "father" because Israel was God's son.Exodus 4:22 " And you must say to Pharaoh, 'This is what Jehovah has said: "Israel is my son, my firstborn."So addressing God as "Father" was not introduced by Jesus and the name Jehovah is in the NT. When the Divine Name was taken out of the NT, they left in its use in its shortened form of "Jah" in the phrase Hallelujah which means "praise Jehovah" at Revelation 19:1. Some translations render this verse as Hallelujah, while others have praise Jehovah or praise the LORD, or something to that effect.-- American Standard
Revelation 19:1 After these things I heard as it were a great voice of a great multitude in heaven, saying, Hallelujah; Salvation, and glory, and power, belong to our God:Now if Christians were now to call God Father rather then use his name, why does John use it? I can't imagine true followers of Jehovah and Jesus Christ not making frequent use of Jehovah's name any more than I can see them not using Jesus' name.Sincerely Yours; Wm Scott Anderson

Dear Arachnophilia;

quote:

---

show me.

---

Let me serve myself a hopefully small serving of crow. I checked my source only to discover that the small type footnote reference was not to a manuscript, but to a reference book;
Introduction to the Massoretico-Critical Edition of the Hebrew Bible, by C. D. Ginsburg, Ktav Publishing House, New York, 1966 reprint. , pp. 368, 369
which I can't find on the web and I will have to get through an interlibrary loan which normally takes 6 weeks. So in all honesty, I don't know what the use of the Divine Name in Psalms 53 in the NWT is based on, it could be an old manuscript fragment, but is more probably a text argument.We could and have been going round and round on the Jehovah /Yahweh argument without end. Opinions vary, you have yours and I have mine. In the end popular usage will decide which is the one to use.Sincerely Yours; Wm Scott Anderson

Dear Firebird;

quote:

---

Are the ten fragments all from Deuteronomy? Does the writing suggest a common author? Are there earlier fragments which do not use the Tetragrammaton? How is it established that there was a full OT version of which the fragments were a part, and that it was the accepted version?

---

The ten sets or groups of fragments are from various pasts of the OT and they have been found in different locations, they didn't all turn up in the bottom of one old chest or something like that. As far as I can find out, the fragments are from an earlier version of the Septuagint of which the biggest difference was that it had the Divine Name in Hebrew letters in the text. As Arachnophilia has already pointed out, we have been discussing the early Greek translation of the OT that was in common use in the first century, the original Hebrew version of the OT in the oldest most reliable manuscripts has the Divine Name and that has not been a question. We have just been arguing whether or not the Name should appear in the NT or in certain verses in the OT. To see the Divine Name for yourself in the OT, all you need to do is to walk over to your bookshelf and take down your copy of the old KJV and look up Psalms 83:18 "That men may know that thou, whose name alone is Jehovah, art the most high over all the earth." The Name appears four times in the old King James Bible, and also turns up on old coins, on old buildings and in old secular books. You can even find it the dictionary.

quote:

---

1. Arachnophilia's point that Jehovah is a mistranslation is still valid.

---

No, his point was that "Yahweh" which is the way hebrew speakers today pronounce the name is what we should use and that the English translation of "Jehovah" is based on errors. "Jehovah" is an accepted translation with a long history and when translating names the oldest most accepted version is the "correct" one, no matter how flawed. Our language is filled with distorted words from other languages, do we have to correct all of them too? All of the OT names that begin with a 'J' in Hebrew begin with a 'Y', the Yahweh argument would have us pronouncing everything in Hebrew.

quote:

---

2. Inserting "Jehovah" into the NT when the OT is neither translating (as it is not in the source) nor restoring (as there is no evidence that it ever was in the NT source). It is an addition based on belief. Whether or not you believe it probable or likely that Jesus would have used the Divine Name, it is still simply that, a belief.

---

I can't image Jesus not using his Father's name. Restoring God's name in the verses where NT writers quoted from OT verses which use the name, is just that, restoring. We know that the Name was removed, and we know where the NT quotes from where it is used in the OT, so we know at least some of the places where the Name was removed from. Restoring God's name to those verses in the NT makes sense, after all, the same sentence in the OT has it.The New World Translation is a VERY good translation. Here are a couple of links to a rating of the NWT.hector3000.future.easyspace.com is no longer available
hector3000.future.easyspace.com is no longer availableSincerely Yours; Wm Scott Anderson

Dear Arachnophilia;

quote:

---

textually we KNOW that original version of psalm 53 did indeed contain the name of god. this is one of those cases in biblical literature that comes very close to being hard fact. we know this because we have psalm 14. my argument is simply that they originated from the same exact poem, but one was altered prior to it's inclusion in that particular book of psalms. that's not an outrageous claim, is it?

---

I agree with you on all points except for one, I believe that it was altered after inclusion rather than before. My logic on this is simple, the Bible writers were inspired, later copyists were not, removal of God's name would not have occurred under inspiration so it must have occurred later when being copied. As you said, we know it was removed, and I just can't see it being done under inspiration. Of course I know this argument carries no weight with anyone who doesn't believe that the Bible is inspired, but for those of us who do, it is solid.Sincerely Yours; Wm Scott Anderson

Dear Arachnophilia;

quote:

---

if we were stuck to understanding only what came before, and only used the oldest translations... well. we wouldn't be using translations at all. we'd all just have to learn hebrew. and then NONE of us would say "Jehovah," we'd all say "adonai." i mean, that IS the oldest and most accepted translation.

---

Now you are just being silly, I was referring to the English rule of names, using the most commonly used form which is normally the oldest and earliest form used. (in English of course) Also popular usage can change, with one form of a name replacing another as the most commonly known form of a name.

quote:

---

in summary, the NWT fails two tests, correctly renders the name of Azazel, understands hebrew poetry, but still incorrectly renders the name of god. so i would say that at first glance, it is a mediocre translation at best.

---

Well, you make some good points, the NWT certainly isn't perfect. 'Red Sea' instead of 'Sea of reeds' one maybe more correct, ('sea of reeds' is in the footnote by the way) but people are only going to recognize the other. On Genesis 6:2 the word 'true' is in brackets, so it hasn't been added to the text as part of the translation, also see the footnote. It is your test, but maybe you want to check the reference edition of NWT, the foot notes and references may make a difference in your test score.I will have to look into the JPS version. (What does JPS stand for?)Sincerely Yours; Wm Scott Anderson

Dear Arachnophilia;Those of us who believe in the Bible, believe that God guided what was included and what was not included. Which is why we have terms like apocryphal, we have enough information available to weed out what was added by man and not by God. Many things are repeated in the Bible, that is how it was put together. God has seen to it that his word has survived intact.

quote:

---

i know your point is also wrong. my name is an old spelling, the second oldest form of the name, dating to the 1400's. and it confuses people to no end, because they're used to spelling it the modern way.

---

No, your name merely supports what I was saying. Your name had been the accepted form, but it has been supplanted by a more recent spelling that has become the accepted form. It is the same with the name "Jehovah" it is the oldest and still is the most accepted form, we will have to wait and see if Yahweh" becomes more wildly accepted by the general population. Like your name, it doesn't matter how many scholars or history buffs know it, what counts is general usage. So far "Jehovah" has a big lead in that area.On reviewing the NWT, here a couple of more in-depth reviews.hector3000.future.easyspace.com is no longer available
hector3000.future.easyspace.com is no longer available "What Is The Best New Testament"Sincerely Yours; Wm Scott Anderson