What other ancient Greek Manuscripts contained the divine name? (page 2)

Leolaia

Good points Doug! And welcome to the board!

Vanderhoven7

This is a reprint of pevious material on this forum

My question after reading this is: What publication does the following abreviation represent:
*** Rbi8 pp. 1564-1565 1D The Divine Name in the Christian Greek Scriptures ***

The Divine Name

Have you ever wondered how many times the NWT sticks the name Jehovah into the NT?

Matthew	18
Mark	9
Luke	36
John	5
Acts	52
Romans	19
1 Corinthians	15
2 Corinthians	10
Galatians	1
Ephesians	6
Colossians	6
1 Thessalonians	4
2 Thessalonians	3
2 Timothy	4
Hebrews	12
James	13
1 Peter	3
2 Peter	6
Jude	3
Revelation	12
TOTAL	237

There is zero manuscript evidence of the name in the text of the NT. The "restoration" is done on the basis of a theory that it was there in the first place, and it strays beyond translation into interpretation and modification of the text. In many instances, the insertion is done to prevent OT passages referring to Yahweh from being applied to Jesus. Unless the reader understands that "Jehovah is Jesus", this insertion can destroy the logical argument in the text itself.

Also comical is the insertion of "Jehovah" in Jude 14-15. This is a quotation from 1 Enoch 1:9 where no name occurs in the original text, nor even the word "Lord" (instead it is simply "he"). The kurios in Jude was instead created by the author (for understandably literary reasons), yet the Society claims that they limit themselves to inserting "Jehovah" in the NT in cases where the OT is being quoted.

*** Rbi8 pp. 1564-1565 1D The Divine Name in the Christian Greek Scriptures ***

To know where the divine name was replaced by the Greek words Ky´ri·os and The·os´ we have determined where the inspired Christian writers have quoted verses, passages and expressions from the Hebrew Scriptures and then we have referred back to the Hebrew text to ascertain whether the divine name appears there. In this way we determined the identity to give Ky´ri·os and The·os´ and the personality with which to clothe them.

To avoid overstepping the bounds of a translator into the field of exegesis, we have been most cautious about rendering the divine name in the Christian Greek Scriptures, always carefully considering the Hebrew Scriptures as a background.

Acts 16:11-15 — Therefore we put out to sea from Tro'as and came with a straight run to Sam'o·thrace, but on the following day to Ne·ap'o·lis, and from there to Phi·lip'pi, a colony, which is the principal city of the district of Mac·e·do'ni·a. We continued in this city, spending some days. And on the sabbath day we went forth outside the gate beside a river, where we were thinking there was a place of prayer; and we sat down and began speaking to the women that had assembled. And a certain woman named Lyd'i·a, a seller of purple, of the city of Thy·a·ti'ra and a worshiper of God, was listening, and Jehovah opened her heart wide to pay attention to the things being spoken by Paul. Now when she and her household got baptized, she said with entreaty: “If YOU men have judged me to be faithful to Jehovah , enter into my house and stay.” And she just made us come.

Why would she have used the divine name? Why would Paul, foremost of the students of Gamaliel, have used the divine name? Also, how could they POSSIBLY have judged her faithful to God from that one brief encounter. And how is it that she got baptized after ONE session of teaching, I thought it took months and becoming a publisher and being regular at the meetings and a prayer of dedication...but I digress. The context does not indicate the insertion of Jehovah into this text. The next example is conveniently located just a few short verses farther on.

Acts 16:25-34 — But about the middle of the night Paul and Silas were praying and praising God with song; yes, the prisoners were hearing them. Suddenly a great earthquake occurred, so that the foundations of the jail were shaken. Moreover, all the doors were instantly opened, and the bonds of all were loosened. The jailer, being awakened out of sleep and seeing the prison doors were open, drew his sword and was about to do away with himself, imagining that the prisoners had escaped. But Paul called out with a loud voice, saying: “Do not hurt yourself, for we are all here!” So he asked for lights and leaped in and, seized with trembling, he fell down before Paul and Silas. And he brought them outside and said: “Sirs, what must I do to get saved?” They said: “Believe on the Lord Jesus and you will get saved, you and your household.” And they spoke the word of Jehovah to him together with all those in his house. And he took them along in that hour of the night and bathed their stripes; and, one and all, he and his were baptized without delay. And he brought them into his house and set a table before them, and he rejoiced greatly with all his household now that he had believed God.

Why, here we have a jailer who was not a Jew and Paul and Silas spoke "the word of Jehovah" to him? Why would they do that? Why would they not speak the gospel of Christ to him? That is what Paul later said he did. Once again, I will digress to the issue of baptism...after one conversation he and all his were baptized without delay.

I think the sheer number of times the name was added back in is impressive.

Respectfully,

....none of the 237 times we ADDED the name Jehovah in the NT are proper because there is zero manuscript support...The name Jehovah is NOT EVEN IN the new testament/Greek scriptures....not even once...so my deal breaker was "you just cant change the bible ...to say what you want"

There is only one sentence in WT history....1980 or 81 WT that admits the divine name has been added in other places other than when quoting the Hebrew scriptures...i have posted it here before....but if you look under the heading Jehovah in the Insight book...and go to the subheading Use In The Greek Scriptures...you will find a funny line like this: We find it most unusual that there are no extant manuscripts (in the world!) that contain the divine name.

And beyond no manuscript backup whatsoever in the over 5000 manusripts we do have the WT will quote agreement from Hebrew versions as their justification for the 'restoral' of the name Jehovah. Think about what that means- a version is simply a translation from those same manuscripts. And those 'J' sources are from the 14th thru the 18th century, as opposed to 2nd and 3 century manuscripts, where the older the source the closer to the original we are. Definite academic dishonesty to uphold WT teachings.

Of the 237 occasions that the Freddy "restored" the name "Jehovah" to the NT text, the impression is created that, apart from a few minor exceptions, the "J" sources are direct quotes from some reference to the OT in which the Heb original had "Yahweh". In fact the opposite is true. Of the 237 citations, only 112 are OT references [47.2%] while the majority [52.8%] ie 125 citations, are merely a Freddy insert.

The earliest "J" is J2, published in 1385, which is cited 16 times. The most popular is J7, cited 181 times. Despite its published antipathy against the Erasmus TR text, the WTS has carefully avoided to reveal that all the "J" references are quotations of this text. Evidently we must be made to understand that a text in its Greek original is faulty, but becomes pristine in a Hebrew translation!! [The WT society often reminds us that the TR is "faulty" "defective" etc. this is primarily because of what is termed "the Johannine Gloss of 1Jo 5:7,8 Se for instance the "Reasoning" book pg 423]

I would have had a greater respect for Freddy's "scholarship" had he the guts to use "Jehovah" at 1Cor 12:3, where J14 uses the Tetragrammaton

- - - -

My question after reading this is: What publication does the following abreviation represent:
*** Rbi8 pp. 1564-1565 1D The Divine Name in the Christian Greek Scriptures ***

mP

You can read the oldest complete bible online at codexsinaticus.org. Its from the early 4th century and guess what no Jehovah in the NT or Christian anywhere, or Jesus in the OT.

I put it to you someone somewhere smashed two completely difference religions into one book. Christians have been struggling ever since to explain or ignore the contrasts between the two.

lost

mp - very good point.

I am coming to the same conclusion.

Comatose

Agreed. It explains why some have to ignore so much of the OT.

DATA-DOG

Ok, as a born-in dub, I always believed that the LXX was a really old copy of the NT. I think that is what most rank and file dubs think When they hear the words 'Greek' and 'Bible' together. Agree or Disagree? Also, the WTBTS actively discourages the study of Hebrew and Greek. The 2012 DC was the first time I had publicly heard them say," Do not study independently in small groups, do not study Hebrew or Greek." I feel it becomes clear why they do that. If most dubs think " Greek=NT " when they hear LXX, then they believe that the Divine name appeared in the form of YHWH in the oldest copies of the NT. Once they are operating under those false pretenses, it is very easy to accept that it's ok to add Jehovah in all kinds of places. The truth is, that YHWH never appeared in any of the extant copies of the LXX. Is that correct?

Does that make sense? I know it's deeper than that, but a misunderstanding of what the LXX is must be a major factor.

Comatose

That's how I see it DD. I thought it was the oldest copies and removed by the Catholics or scribes.

somebody

Vanderhoven7, the abbreviation is for the NWT on the WT cd.

adamah

I've always thought the wholesale replacement of Lord, God, etc with Jehovah in the NT was one of the least of the translation crimes the New World Translation has committed, questionably being justified by inserting the evidence of scriptural support for choosing the name of their religion.

More disturbing is the deliberate mistranslation of words and phrases from the Hebrew Torah which significantly change the meaning of the Biblical accounts, in order to remove certain pesky details, eg their ignoring the Hebrew phrase (le haskil, 'to make one wise') from Genesis 3:6 (which is found in both the Masoretic and Samaritan Torah), which explains WHY Eve desired to eat the fruit.

The NWT is the only modern translation to 'cherry-pick' from the Septuagint (Hebrew to Greek) or Vulgate (Greek to Latin) specifically for this verse, probably because they wanted to ignore the element which explained Eve's motivation for eating the fruit : Eve wanted to be wise! The Society not only cherry-picks quotes, they cherry-pick from prior Bible translations that are known to contain errors.

If I were a sister in the JWs, I'd be VERY INTERESTED to learn one way in which the NWT actively supports the WT's suppression of women's rights and misogeny, and has done so for many decades. I discuss this deliberate mistranslation of the NWT in a recent article on Adam and Eve.

Adam

Separation of Powers

Sorry I posted 6 years late...

There are no greek manuscripts of the new testament that date to the original period of the 1st century. Any manuscript that contains the Tetragramaton would date centuries later. To use the LXX or Septuagint as the basis for reinserting the "name" into the new testament is not supported by the majority of scholars. Why? Because they are two separate and distinct works for one, written by two different groups of people with a different perspective and purpose.

Some would state that to insert the "name" into the New Testament, except only in cases where it may appear in the LXX as a direct quote is a cause for concern.

SOP

What other ancient Greek Manuscripts contained the divine name?

Share this