Vatican forbids use of God's name

by bud2114 7 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  bud2114

  Not sure if this has been discussed already.

  Two things stand out to me in this piece. One, the Vatican does not recognize "Jehovah" as one of the accepted pronunciations of the tetragrammaton (YHWH). Secondly, citing ancient Jewish tradition, the article confirms that "(the name) was held to be unpronounceable and hence was replaced during the reading of sacred Scriptures ... That practice continued with Christianity, ... the Tetragrammaton was never pronounced in the Christian context nor translated into any of the languages into which the Bible was translated." This confirms that well before Jesus came on the scene "the name" had long since been abandoned and was never pronounced by either the early Christians or the NT Bible writers. Just further evidence that the NWT committee has been grasping at straws all along in trying to convince us that the divine name was orginally there in the NT but was later removed and therefore they (the NWT committee) are correct in reinserting it some 237 times
• 

  bud2114
• 

  Kenneson

  There's a very lengthy debate about this topic at the following link:

  http://www.topix.net/forum/religion/jehovahs-witness/T81N87SAARFLA892B/p1
• 

  bud2114

  

  This clip is different from the one being discussed at the link you provided. (this is a larger scan than before).

  Interestingly enough the Aug. 1, 2008 WT (public edition) has the 4-page article "Should the Name Jehovah Appear in the New Testament?" The WT article seems at first to be a convincing defense of their insertion of the name "Jehovah" some 237 times in the NT, but a closer look at things reveals that the evidence presented is flimsy, the facts have been twisted, and article is basically pure drivel.
• 

  ldrnomo

  In my opinion does God really care whether we call him by a name or a title? Isn't he perfect which to me means he can overlook anything humans do in their desire to want to please him in anyway they think possible. So again some group of religious fanatics are trying to tell God's children what to or what not to call him.

  What matter's is what each individual want's to call God. If I want to call God Jay, or Yah or "the big guy" or "big daddy" or anything else that makes me feel close to a creator it's my business and not the business of some religion that is defining the way I worship God.

  If God really cared about what people called him then why didn't he inspire someone to write the simple statement in the scriptures:

  "This is what I want everyone of you people to call me:............."

  LD
• 

  Witness 007

  First no Condoms then this! I hate the Vatican....and what are they doing about the Vampire invasion of earth? Nothing thats what!
• 

  Pahpa

  What bothers me most about the Watchtower is its inconsistency. It restores the divine name in the Hebrew Scriptures on the basis that the old manuscripts contained the tetragrammaton. And this is a reasonable argument that others have used including the Catholic Jerusalem Bible. But the Watchtower included "Jehovah" in its Christian Greek Scriptures without the authority of any ancient manuscript. It's reason that the writers of the Greek Scriptures would not removed it according to the Jewish custom of the time is only conjecture.

  All Bible translations reflect the prejudice of its translators. So, I guess we should not be surprised by the NWT. But it's the scholarship that one wonders about in these cases.
• 

  Homerovah the Almighty

  From now on I'm going to use the ( bleep ) Witnesses