ANOTHER DISHONEST QUOTE FROM CHRIST'S BROTHERS! (page 4)

Band on the Run

Many Jews today refuse to even use "God." I see it in written form as "G-D." The Jewish God has much dignity. Calling him by a personal name is bad form. No one ever refered to God as "Jehovah."

What is the point of all this empahsis on a personal name today? It reminds of that Paul Simon song, "Call me Al." Isn't the concept of God much broader than YHWH. YHWH is a minor god. El was the supreme god.

I've read Hasidic materials. Even they don't want to worship as ancient Israelites. A member here told me a sign of a cult is special words that outsiders cannot reference. The Jehovah part is so bizarre to Christians that people note the weirdness. It brands the Jehovah's Witnesses. The effect would not be the same for God's Witnesses.

I can understand "Abba." They never address the main points such as the original condition of humans, Christology. They bog us down with Jehovah, cross vs. stake, dates. etc. These are trivial issues. We never discussed how we care for our own as Christians. Neither did we ever discuss how we relate to other faiths or lack of faith. Whether or not to recite the Lord's Prayer is a huge issue for them. I don't think Jesus would care. He would care about our hearts and souls. They have no social gospel. In fact, I can't tell you how they view salvation or grace. All that was ever clear to me ws don't mess with Bethel.

AndDontCallMeShirley

BOTR: A member here told me a sign of a cult is special words that outsiders cannot reference

---

And there you have it! Cut through all the crap and that's what it boils down to.

As I mentioned earlier in this thread, WT must retain this argumentation over god's name for one simple reason: brand recognition!

Without "Jehovah", Jehovah's Witnesses lose their precious claim to exclusivity, Re: being god's only "named" people.

DATA-DOG

No flaming from me!

Using the term " inappropriate " threw me at first, especially being raised a dub. How could anyone say God's name is inappropriate!! Well, most of the time we use that term in a very negative way. I amy say, " The joke you told at dinner was inappropriate." Now what? Everyone thinks that you told a dirty joke. What if we were having a joke competition, with no political joke allowed? You tell a joke about the President. Then I say, " That was inappropriate."

Or we are on the golf course. You have a 80 yard shot. You reach for your 3-wood. As your Caddy, I say, " That club is not appropriate."

I have a feeling that if the Revised Standard Edition committee had used a word like " redundant " or " incorrect " the WTBTS would never have gabbed that quote and altered it. Since it contained the word " inappropriate" they jumped on it. They knew how most people use that word, and view that word. They are very sneaky. The way they used the quote, changed the whole flavor. They painted anyone who does not use " Jehovah " as a false Christian. Not fair...

leaving_quietly

ADCMS: This statement, along with the more important point #1, IN CONTEXT, makes all the difference in the world.

The scholars are saying,

1. Jehovah is not a Hebrew name (true) and was not invented until many centuries after the Bible was written (true). Therefore, no Jewish or Christian writers used that name because it was impossible for them to use that name (true).

Ahhh. Yes. Along with point #1, I see what you're saying. Agreed.

Data-Dog: Using the term " inappropriate " threw me at first, especially being raised a dub. How could anyone say God's name is inappropriate!!

I see what you're saying here. Certainly a different way of looking at it. I, like you, looked at it the same way. WT, no doubt, wants everyone to see it this way, too. Does the RSV at least use the YHWH where the Tetragrammaton appears in the original text? I don't have this translation, so I don't know.

ÁrbolesdeArabia

Help me understand why we can translate Jesus or Joshua's name but the Jews hid the name of Jehovah. What is different from the base (YHWH) to a complex name (Joshua later reduced to Jesus over time) and why do they still use the word "Jah" in Revelation?

Joshua is "YHWH is Salvation"? How bad did the Nations abuse the Divine name so they hid the name? I read the books on 2nd Century BC Judaism and the influences of the Greeks, it was a Dark Time for the Jews, was Antioch Epiphanes 4 and his violation of the alter by pouring the blood of a swine on YHWH's alter? Why hide YHWH's real name, was it pre 300 BE or before that, was it the ancient Nations who picked on the JWs when they returned to Jerusalem that started the Jews to hide God's name?

Please help me with this, why can't they translate the base name most of the Hebrew names are derived from. Appreciate your help with my ignorance.

DATA-DOG

I don't have an answer. ( something you will rarely hear from a dub." How many vowels existed in Hebrew? Let's plug them into a computer program and calculate how many possible combinations are possible with the consonantal YHWH. ( I have no idea how to do that..)

AndDontCallMeShirley

AA:Help me understand why we can translate Jesus or Joshua's name but the Jews hid the name of Jehovah

What is different from the base (YHWH) to a complex name (Joshua later reduced to Jesus over time) and why do they still use the word "Jah" in Revelation?

Joshua is "YHWH is Salvation"?

---

I am not a scholar, just passing on what I've learned.

Perhaps some of the confusion you're having is separating what modern Christianity has done, particularly the WT, as it relates to Judaism.

To reiterate, the ancient Jews would not have used the name "Jehovah", as that name was not fabricated until the 14th century A.D., long after both the Hebrew and Greek (OT and NT) were completed.

Here's what I've copied Re: Joshua:

it-2 p. 113 Joshua

(Josh ′ u·a) [shortened form of Jehoshua, meaning "Jehovah Is Salvation"].

(This is how WT translates things. However, as the Jews did not even have the modern rendering of God's name as "Jehovah", we can see this is not accurate)

Joshua

is a Biblical given name derived from the Hebrew Yehoshua ( ????? ). Although it is often etymologized as related to the root for "salvation," e.g. as " Jehovah rescues" or "Jehovah is salvation"., [1][2][4]
the form of the word does not support this etymology. It is more likely Yeho-Shua, "YHWH's gift," with the same second element as Malki-Shua (1 Sam. 14:49), Bat-Shua (1 Chron. 3) and Avishua (1 Chron. 5:31).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joshua_(name)

AndDontCallMeShirley

This may help:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetragrammaton

ÁrbolesdeArabia

Thank you "Don't call me Shirley", for your patience. I once thought I use to know things about the Bible until I began to visit JWN and found some ex-JWs debating others on the internet with people from Tetragrammaton.Org. That's when it hit me, I was just parroting Watchtower proof-texts, thank you dear DCMShirley for your patience. I am trying to learn and one day I hope to be like a Leolia or a junior Greg Stafford (whether you agree with him or not, he is one hell of a Bible Student and a very smart Witness of Jah.) I trust Greg because of his honesty to change from the Watchtower after trying his best to help them have dialogue.

We have some good scholars on this board, Lars58, Blondie, MarvinShillmer, Leolia, Tammy, and you DNCMShirley! Thanks! Bobcat and Sebastian and others that are slipping my mind. Sorry if I did not post your name, know you are not forgotten as a great scholar whether you are atheist to theist or in-between, I have learned to respect all points of view as long as they are not some rabid angry hateful group of people like the Organization with their anti-Apostate hatred speech!

Phizzy

A little off topic, but a poster above reminds us of the WT claim that "Apostates" got at the N.T after the death of John and removed the Name.

This is their scintillating answer as to why no extant manuscripts contain the Name, but this begs the question, what else did these "Apostates" remove ?

How can we trust the N.T "Scripture" that has come down to us in any way if what the WT says is true ?

ANOTHER DISHONEST QUOTE FROM CHRIST'S BROTHERS!

Share this