by Mrs Smith 57 Replies latest watchtower bible
jgnat said that "Cheeze, even these days the Germans don't have a sound for "J"."
Now where in the whole wide world did you hear THAT? Germans have a sound for J, don't try to even think anything else! You perhaps are mixing the Germans up with the Spanish? The Spanish J is pronounced much like the German "ch"-sound as in "achtung". In Spanish, the NAME is pronounced ch-e-o-ba.
There's a long of opportunities in which the use of the name was avoided, even by 'Jehovah' himself!
Jesus said "Father, glorify your name" a voice boomed out that failed to say "I am Jehovah".
Jesus skipped the Name in the Lord's Prayer , using Father instead. He skipped it while dying
quoting from a verse in the Psalms "My God, My God .." thereby losing the opportunity to have
the Name transliterated into the entire world, thru the Gospel account. The Name is missing from
all of John's letters and also missing from Paul's formulaic remark "There is to us One Lord....
and one God, the Father"
need any more?
metatron
The Spanish J is pronounced much like the German "ch"-sound as in "achtung". In Spanish, the NAME is pronounced ch-e-o-ba.
Sorry man. I hate to correct an OldHippie, but I must.
The spanish "j"(jota) is pronounced like the english "h". The NAME is pronounced hay-o-bva in spanish.
You may perhaps have gotten confused with portuguese?
Nvr
nvrgnbk,
Sorry, I haven't read that book. Otoh I have enjoyed several scholarly articles by Ehrman in his particular field, i.e. textual criticism, before he became famous. Textual criticism is a very technical and obscure discipline, generally unknown from the large public, so its popularisation is something of a challenge: it's difficult for a textual critic, who is usually concerned with tracing variant readings on minute details of the texts, to say something "big" by mediatic standards without overstepping the boundaries of his/her area of expertise. But from the discussions and recommendations here I understand it must be pretty good for its kind, and I have no doubt about Ehrman's scholarship and honesty.
Something I have learnt from textual critics (perhaps more in the OT field, like Emmanuel Tov or Dominique Barthélemy) is the enlightening lesson of a frustration: Bible scholars, translators, and readers at large resort to textual criticism as a tool to reach for "the original text". What you find instead is that there is no such thing, because there is no clear-cut border between textual and literary criticism. Every manuscript, every "family" of manuscripts, is worth to be studied for itself and as a part of a multiple textual evolution. It is almost impossible to decide, for instance, between the Alexandrine and "Western" traditions (which differ widely in parts like the book of Acts), which bests reflects an "original". The two developed simultaneously, sometimes separately, sometimes influencing or reacting to each other, always following their own "logic" which we miss as long as we're after "the original" and dismiss what looks "secondary" as mere (i.e. worthless) variants.
Thank you very kindly for your reply, Narkissos!
Enlightening as usual.
Much respect,
Nvr
As to what Jesus did do or didn't do, say or didn't say, we don't know. We only have the scriptures
to go by. Even that, it is a huge trend right now to sell the "Apocrypal" Scriptures which, in some
cases contradict the accepted ones. Did Jesus kiss Mary Magdelene on the mouth? Even if you
reject the writings that suggest that he did, it doesn't mean things happened exactly as the 4 Gospels
tell you they did.
THE DA VINCI CODE is pure fiction, but it is well researched enough to prove to the common man
that what has been handed down to us could be drastically wrong. The Church has sculpted the
written word passed down to us. This was only done early on, as the vast number of copies proves.
The essence of what was first written is basically retained in the NT, but the initial writings were
carefully crafted to create a following. Who is really to say whether Jesus had a mistress/wife/child?
Why doesn't secular history have more information about the census at the time of Jesus' birth?
I always just thought well..Jesus was KING OF THE JEWS and they didnt SAY the holy name ever. What kind of Jew who was supposed to follow the Letter of the Law would break the law by enunciating the name of God? And as for it not appearing in the new testament...not all the writers of the bible were jewish so what prevented them from writing and using the name of God?
Thanks for the replies will go and chew on it for a while.
Besides which Mrs.Smith...doesnt the Lords Prayer say, "Our Father, Who Art In Heaven, Harold Be Thy Name?"
lol!
Besides which Mrs.Smith...doesnt the Lords Prayer say, "Our Father, Who Art In Heaven, Harold Be Thy Name?"
lol!
Lovesdubs you almost made me choke on my coffee!!
