Do you still use Jehovah's name in prayer assuming you still pray?

by JH 110 Replies latest jw friends

  • jaffacake
    Appendix C, p 249. I've read that tetragrammaton book. He's definetly done his homework, but I hate it how he doesn't draw to any conclusions. And why doesn't he talk about the fact it says "hallelujah" 4 times ni Revelation?

    If you want conclusions drawn, Ray Franz spells it out very eloquently. The book on the website I wanted you to read does talk about the hallelujah in Revelation, as does the Ray Franz book. Again you seem to be suggesting the authors don't consider the Divine Name to be important. The book The Tetragrammaton and the Christian Greek Scriptures deals with all this, and the stuff on the website you have shown me today. It took me a month to work my way through the evidence in the Lunaquist book.

  • jaffacake
    Re your previous post.... When... but when does a name ever mean a personal name! It must mean it sometimes! Does it ever mean "Jehovah" personally? Or do we just keep calling him God?

    Before I met my first Jehovah's Witness a year ago, I was not familiar with the term 'personal name'. Does the Bible ever use the term? The personal name was, and is, very important to the Jews. I believe the NT teaches us that the personal name was for the Nation of Israel, but the NT is not addressed to a nation, but to individuals, Jew & gentile, male & female, slave & free. I believe all Christians were offered sonship with God, so we dont call a parent by a personal name, but Father.

    I don't accept Fred Franz 237 insertions, especially where there is not even OT quotations, where they were simply to bolster Rutherford's doctrines. Even so do you wonder why the name of Jesus and Christ completely dominates even the NWT, with several books ignoring any form of the Divine Name completely. Jesus certainly outnumbers the name Jehovah many times over in even the JW NT, so why does the opposite ratio exist in post-1931 Watchtowers?

    I think there is a place for the personal name, but can't comprehend why the creator would consider the spelling and pronunciation important.

    Do you have the Watchtower CD? Please look up Watchtower 1973 Feb 15 "Why does faith in the Name of Jesus Bring Life?"

    Also 1973, May 1 "What does God's Nmae Mean to you?" I don't agree with these articles, but they explain the Biblical meaning of the word 'name'.

  • jaffacake
    and then tell me that the divine name doesn't in the Greek Scriptures. There's proof with extra-Biblical sources!

    I looked up the UPDATED INFORMATION and find no Divine Name in Christian Greek Scriptures, all I see is reference to the OT in Greek (the Septuagint or LXX) Maybe I've missed something - lots of information! Bye for now inquirer...and thanks for the new links.

  • jaffacake


    Just lost another ebay auction for a kingdom interlinear, just gonna have to bid very high next time. The local JW PO didn't get me a copy, possibly because he is Greek, and an expert on j-references, he knows what I can prove with the right Watchtower Bibles. I am a potential opposer and to quote the Watchtower "not entitled to the truth".

    I'm now bidding for another kingdom interlinear !

  • jaffacake
    in all the Septuagints of this period (before 150 CE) there are none with the name kurios (Lord) instead of the tetragram.

    Inq. I wonder if I was getting confused with the pronunciation having died out, except by the High priest, well before Jesus' time? I certainly have this documented - its even in the current JW Divine Name booklet here in front of me, page 14.

  • jaffacake

    *** w73 2/15 pp. 102-104 Why Does "Faith in the Name" of Jesus Christ Bring Life? ***


    Does "Faith in the Name" of Jesus Christ Bring Life?

    "YOU may know that you have life everlasting, you who put your faith in the name of the Son of God." So wrote the apostle John to fellow followers of Jesus Christ toward the close of the first century. (1 John 5:13) More than half a century earlier, the apostle Peter had told the Jewish supreme court or Sanhedrin: "There is no salvation in anyone else, for there is not another name under heaven that has been given among men by which we must get saved."—Acts 4:12.

    Why is salvation all bound up in this "name"? Is it some sort of magical lifegiving formula? And what does it mean to have "faith in the name of the Son of God"? Could a person who knew nothing else but just the name "Jesus Christ" be in position to exercise such lifesaving faith? Would our using it at the end of our prayers be sufficient to show that we have such faith?



    Obviously we cannot put faith in someone if all we know is his name, any more than we could put faith in some remedy for an illness just through knowing the name of the medicine. The apostle John shows that life-bringing faith is actually not placed just in the words composing the name "Jesus Christ" but in the person it identifies. That is why John says of his Gospel account, that it was "written down that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ the Son of God, and that, because of believing, you may have life by means of his name." (John 20:31) So knowledge of God’s Word the Bible and all that it tells us about his Son, the Messiah or Christ, is essential to have that lifesaving faith. Do you have such knowledge?

    Mere use of the name "Jesus Christ" does not prove that one has genuine faith in it, faith of the kind that assures life everlasting. Did not Jesus himself say that, at the time of his expressing God’s judgment, some would say: "Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and expel demons in your name, and perform many powerful works in your name"? And yet Jesus said he would tell such ones: "I never knew you! Get away from me, you workers of lawlessness." (Matt. 7:21-23) Today there are clergymen, ministers and preachers, as well as members of their flocks, who use the name of Jesus Christ and who claim to do works ‘in his name’ and yet they do not have true ‘faith in his name.’ Why not?



    Because they are not acting and living in harmony with God’s Word the Bible. You see, Jesus’ "name" stands not only for himself, his person, but also for something more. What? His authority to carry out and execute God’s will and purpose as set forth in the Bible. We can understand this if we remember the expression sometimes used by police officials: "Open up, in the name of the law"; or the expression "in the name of the King" found in royal edicts and decrees. Here the phrase "in the name of" means "by the authority of," that is, by the authority of the government whose law is being enforced or of the king whose decree is being published.

    Showing that the Greek word (o´no·ma) for "name" was used similarly back in the time of the apostles, Vine’s Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words (Vol. III, pp. 99, 100) says: "ONOMA ( ? ??µa) is used . . . for all that a name implies, of authority, character, rank, majesty, power, excellence, etc., of everything that the name covers."

    Yes, Jesus’ "name" stands for the vast executive authority that Jehovah God has entrusted to him, even as Jesus told his disciples following his resurrection that "all authority has been given me in heaven and on the earth." (Matt. 28:18) The crucial question therefore is: Do we have faith that he has such authority and do we show that by submission to him?

    When the apostles Peter and John performed a mighty work of healing, the rulers and elders of Israel brought them in for questioning and asked them: "By what power or in whose name did you do this?" In effect, they were asking them, ‘Who empowered you to perform such works, or to whose authority did you appeal to be able to do such a miracle?’ It was then that Peter expressed his faith that the name of God’s Son is the ‘one name under heaven’ through which saving works can authoritatively be accomplished. (Acts 3:1-10; 4:1-13) But those religious leaders did not have faith in that name. They had earlier shown where their faith was placed when they had cried out to Pontius Pilate, "We have no king but Caesar," thereby rejecting God’s Son. (John 19:13-15) They put faith in the name or authority and power of Caesar and his imperial government. Many persons who use the name of Christ Jesus and claim to have faith in it actually belie that claim by putting their faith in human leaders and political governments of men to bring peace and righteous conditions on earth.

    But of Christ Jesus it was prophesied that "his name will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Eternal Father, Prince of Peace." (Isa. 9:6) Today persons by the hundreds of thousands are turning from human schemes and systems to the kingdom of God’s Son as their real hope and they look to his rule as the one with authority and power to bring them the justice and relief for which they hunger. In this way a further prophecy is fulfilled, that "in his name nations will hope."—Matt. 12:18-21; compare Isaiah 42:4, where the Hebrew uses the word "law" instead of "name."

    This helps us to understand why it is that, at Ephesians 1:21, the apostle Paul links ‘names’ with ‘governments, authorities, powers and lordships.’ We can also see that it is because God has put his Son at the head of the Kingdom government and given him all authority to carry out the divine will that Philippians 2:9-11 says that God exalted Jesus to "a superior position and kindly gave him the name that is above every other name, so that in the name of Jesus every knee should bend of those in heaven and those on earth and those under the ground, and every tongue should openly acknowledge that Jesus Christ is Lord to the glory of God the Father." Yes, the name of Christ Jesus should inspire in us a feeling of respect and honor and obedient submission superior to that of any human leader on earth and second to none in heaven except that of his Father, Jehovah God.



    Christ Jesus gave his life as a ransom sacrifice and serves as God’s great High Priest on behalf of mankind. So, while many pray to God "in the name of Jesus," some use this phrase without appreciating its real significance. They think of Jesus more or less in terms of a sort of celestial ‘switchboard operator’ who relays their requests on to God.

    In reality, praying in the name of Jesus, as he himself instructed, means doing so through his good offices as God’s "Chief Agent of life" who, as appointed High Priest and Judge, effects cleansing from sin and judiciously administers the ransom benefits to individuals of mankind according to their worthiness to live under his Kingdom rule. (Heb. 2:10; 6:20; Eph. 1:8-10; John 5:22, 27) When we pray in Jesus’ "name," therefore, this means we are making an appeal to his authority. We are petitioning that his power and position and benefits as Chief Agent of life be exercised on our behalf, making our prayer acceptable to the Sovereign Ruler, Jehovah God.



    If we want to be among those showing faith in the name of Christ Jesus so as to be assured of everlasting life, we must also show loyalty to him. We must serve him as the Head of the Christian congregation, faithfully upholding his executive authority and his Kingdom interests. We must be like those Christians in the first-century congregation at Pergamum who, under danger to their lives from those opposing Christ’s Kingdom rule, kept on ‘holding fast his name and did not deny their faith in him,’ and like those in Philadelphia who ‘kept his word and did not prove false to his name.’ (Rev. 2:13; 3:8) Our conduct, both among ourselves and toward those in the world, must be such as will not deny what the name of God’s Son stands for. Even as Christians back then experienced persecution, we can expect the same today, for Jesus foretold: "Then people will deliver you up to tribulation and will kill you, and you will be objects of hatred by all the nations on account of my name."—Matt. 24:9.

    Does such international hatred come upon religious organizations and church members who merely claim to believe in Jesus as their Savior who redeems them from sin? No, such hatred does not come merely from accepting Christ Jesus as the "Lamb of God" who shed his lifeblood for us. It comes because of persons’ loyally ‘holding fast to his name’ as standing for the ‘all authority in heaven and earth’ that is his through God’s commission of him. It comes because of recognizing him as the rightful King of all the earth and his government as the one and only rulership with divine backing. Is that your stand and the stand of your church? Or does your religion claim to put faith in the name of Jesus while actually looking to "Caesar," the governments of the present system, as their hope?

    For your eternal welfare and that of those closest to you, learn all that the "name of the Son of God" signifies. Put your full trust in God’s backing of his Son’s kingly rule, and then you too may "know that you have life everlasting, you who put your faith in the name of the Son of God."—1 John 5:13.

  • jaffacake

    *** w73 5/1 pp. 259-261 What Does God’s Name Mean to You? ***


    Does God’s Name Mean to You?

    THROUGH the preaching of Jehovah’s witnesses, millions of persons have come to learn God’s name, Jehovah. Perhaps you too have read this name in your Bible, as at Psalm 83:18.

    God holds his name in high regard. This is shown by how often it is in his Word, the Bible. "Jehovah" appears 6,973 times in just the "Old Testament" or Hebrew Scripture portion of the New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures. You can find it 237 times in the "New Testament" or Greek Scriptures of that version. That is a total of 7,210 times all together!



    God’s "name" is also important to Jesus Christ. Just before his death he prayed: "I have made your name manifest to the men you gave me out of the world . . . watch over them on account of your own name which you have given me . . . And I have made your name known to them and will make it known."—John 17:6, 11, 26.

    We are not to believe that when Jesus said, "I have made your name known" or "manifest," he referred to only the pronunciation of the divine name. His listeners were Jews who, reportedly with the exception of the high priest, did not know the pronunciation of the Tetragrammaton, the four Hebrew letters making up the name. Then, how did Jesus, by more than pronouncing the name correctly, ‘make God’s name known’ to the apostles? Note the answer given by one noted Bible commentator:

    "The word name [in John 17] includes the attributes, or character of God. Jesus had made known his character, his law, his will, his plan of mercy. Or in other words, he had revealed God to them. The word name is often used to designate the person."—Notes, Explanatory and Practical, on the Gospels by Albert Barnes (1846).

    So, as Jesus ‘explained the Father’ by his own entire perfect life course on earth, he was really ‘making God’s name known.’ He demonstrated that he spoke with God’s full backing and authority. Jesus could therefore say: "He that has seen me has seen the Father also." God’s "name" thus took on greater meaning to his early followers. Accordingly, an appreciation of it and the Personality that it stood for should be reflected in every aspect of the Christian’s life.—John 14:9; 1:18; 5:19, 30; Matt. 11:27.



    For instance, the Christian apostle Paul shows that a deep love for Jehovah himself, the Person represented by the divine name, would move a Christian to "offer to God a sacrifice of praise, that is, the fruit of lips which make public declaration to his name."—Heb. 13:15.

    Do you ‘publicly’ declare your faith in God’s name? Paul refers to the "fruit of lips," but obviously he means more than just ‘lip service.’ The "sacrifice of praise" that comes from one’s mouth must be heartfelt, genuine. So, keeping God’s name holy by preaching and teaching involves more than just impressive-sounding words. Note how this is borne out at Romans 2:21-24:

    "Do you, however, the one teaching someone else, not teach yourself? You, the one preaching ‘Do not steal,’ do you steal? You, the one saying ‘Do not commit adultery,’ do you commit adultery? You, the one expressing abhorrence of the idols, do you rob temples? You, who take pride in law, do you by your transgressing of the Law dishonor God? For ‘the name of God is being blasphemed on account of you people among the nations.’"

    Teaching in God’s name requires the teacher to lead a life consistent with his "public declaration." Suppose a father teaches his son "Do not steal." But, then, what if the father himself behaves contrary to this, withholding income taxes or stealing from his neighbor? The man’s oral teaching will not likely convince his child. More importantly, the man is giving reason for "the name of God" to be "blasphemed." So, real love for God’s name as well as effective teaching makes it mandatory that a Christian ‘practice what he preaches.’ Do you?


    Further, did you realize that your actions at your place of employment reflect on God’s name? Paul shows this at 1 Timothy 6:1:

    "Let as many as are slaves under a yoke keep on considering their owners worthy of full honor, that the name of God and the teaching may never be spoken of injuriously."

    In the first century Christian slaves were to render any master "full honor" or "greatest respect." (An American Translation) To do otherwise would imply that God’s truth had made no real change in the slave. Christian teaching would appear powerless to affect lives. God’s name, yes, God himself, would "be spoken of injuriously."—Compare 1 Peter 2:18.

    Few persons today live in actual slavery. But the principles governing employer and employee are similar to those of slave and master. As a Christian, do your work habits give reason for anyone to ‘speak injuriously of God’s name’? For example, do you frequently show up late for work? Do you grant your employer "full honor," even when not in his presence? Do you do this even though he may be a demanding employer? If you happen to have a "believing" employer, a fellow Christian, do you presume on his kindliness? If Jehovah’s name is truly holy to you, even your business relationships will show it.


    One also shows love for God’s name by the way one deals with fellow Christians. Note this at Hebrews 6:10: "For God is not unrighteous so as to forget your work and the love you showed for his name, in that you have ministered to the holy ones."

    When Paul wrote those words, good ‘works’ no doubt included rendering material help to fellow Christians in need or suffering persecution. (Heb. 10:32-34) Do you practice Christian hospitality?

    From what we have discussed it is evident that the question, "What does God’s name mean to you," involves much more than just knowing how to pronounce God’s personal name. It stands for God himself. So, his admirable qualities should be evident in all Christian dealings.

    Are you one who is not yet acquainted with Jehovah? His witnesses will enjoy teaching you about him. You can contact them by writing the publishers of this magazine. Learn how your life may be a real credit to ‘God’s name.’

    [Pictures on page 260]

    If a father uses the Bible to teach his son not to steal but he himself cheats on taxes, the man brings reproach on God‘s name

    A Christian who frequently shows up late for work may cause God’s name to be "spoken of abusively"

  • jaffacake
    (which talks about of modern Bibles that use the divine name in the GS (Greek Scriptures.)

    For me a key question is - can we elevate any of these modern Bibles to authentic canon of NT scripture, replacing the universal aceptance of the ancient Greek manuscripts? All scholars, inc Watchtower, accept the most ancient manuscripts are the most accurate. Why else did they use Westcott & Hort?

    I continue to make the distinction between OT and NT. Some Greek OT scriptures contain YWHW, but no Greek NT scriptures do, I am sure the Watchtower would have announced it loudly if any did, or there would be a J-reference for it.

    I wouldn't have so much of a problem with people putting the Divine Name where there are OT quotations. Is this what those modern Bibles do (as per George Howard theory)? I am not against the Divine Name in any way, my favourite Bibles are what I believe to be most accurate - New Jerusalem and Kingdom Interlinear. I suspect these the Bible you refer to don't try to insert the Divine Name in places where it was clearly not present in the first place ie - most of the NWT 237 places.

    These insertions were the work of one man in history, uniquely I believe - Fred Franz, with no textual basis whatsoever. For no other reason than to try diminish the central importance of God's Son, Jesus Christ, to uphold another individual's 1931s u-turn on Christianity (Rutherford) He failed to diminish the importance that God gave to his Son in the NT - just read any NT, even the NWT. I was very offended at the memorial this year when the text of the day was NOT about Christ, even on that day. It was about his modern replacement - the FDS (Matthew 24). Shameful! That was my first & only visit to a Kingdom Hall.

    On what basis in 1931 did Rutherford completely switch emphasis overnight from NT to OT? Because there were too many partaking of the emblems, Christianity was full up as Armageddon was imminent. The change in doctrine was needed because of the literal interpretation of the 144,000 heavenly, which must have been almost full in 1931. He could have either altered doctrine so that 144,000 was a symbolic number, as they accept each of the 12,000s that add up to the 144,000 to be only symbolic. Then they would have been able to continue teaching that all Christians could have a heavenly hope, as they had taught for most of their history until 1931. Anyway that is history now.

    All the J-references are in relatively modern translations not versions, translated from the ancient Greek manuscripts. Just because they were quite recently translated into Hebrew, that might sound impressive, but it doesn't make them more reliable in some way - many are 19th century, and no more authentic than modern translations into Portuguese, English or Cantonese - they are still just modern translations. The primary reason the NT translated into Hebrew was to convert Jews to Christianity, so they might find YHWH more appealing.

    It is interesting that for each of the Jehovah references, the NWT list J-references followed by two or three alternative references supporting Kyrios. They give the impression that the Hebrew translations are more numerous. When in reality there are very few J-references and hundreds of the other references which would be far too numerous to begin listing.

  • inquirer

    I read those posts and I know that the what you do with "the name" is important. You bring God down if you are a thief or a liar for instance.
    But it says in (parapharsed) Romans 10:13 those who call on the name of Jehovah will be saved. (with good deeds of course.)

    I am disappointed that you didn't look at probably. You should look at the link at the bottom of the page The Divine Name It has historical references (talmud -- they swear blind it was taken out), legends, apocrypha, gnostic literature, contemporary writers and modern scholar opinion as proof.


    I just got "Truth in Translation" written by Jason BeDuhn yesterday! And he says at the start of his book that as a scholar it's important to look at things from a historical point of view! That's exactly what I am doing. They said if the JW's are right about YHWH in the Greek Scriptures, everyone should acknowledge and give respect for being right all this time, or something like that along those lines...
    (He compares 9 major translations of the Bible in the Greek Scriptures, including the New World Translation.)

    To be honest with you, he says the NW runs the risk of translation bias by putting YHWH in the Greek Scriptures, but at the start of his book he did (I guess contradict himself) by saying about historical point of view is important as just said last paragraph.

  • inquirer


    In re reading Ray Franz ISOCF, I came across an actual photocopy of a letter written by George Howard, about new evidence in 1988 placing the Chester Beatty Papyrus No. 2 [p-46] at some time before 81CE. I was especially interested in the post-script. The complete George Howard letter states:

    "Dear Mr Persson,

    Thank you for your letter of 29 June regarding the re-dating of P46 to the latter part of the first century. If Dr Kim's dating is correct it would show that in in a Pauline MS of the first century the Tetragram was not used as I suggested. This weakens my theory, at least in regard to the Pauline letters. Whether or not first century manuscripts of the gospels and other writings would follow the same pattern of P46 would still be a matter of conjecture. We can only hope that first century MSS of these writings turn up as well. A close look at P75 and P66 shows that they are not far behind in date to P46.


    George Howard


    P.S. The Jehovah's Witnesseshave made too much out of my articles. I do not support their theories. Look at the link for Anti-Marcionite Prologues... 150-400 AD it was dated! THAT'S A FLAMING LONG GAP! It could be middle second century or it could "the Masorete era!" It's dated about 2 00 years BEFORE AND AFTER CONSTANTINE! I am also shocked by the daing of CANONICAL GREEK SCRIPTURE MANUSCRIPTS! Not everyone agrees that all the books of the GS were written within the first century! I've looked at the dates when the Catholics think some of the minor prophet books were written in the HS -- and it differs so much from JW dates (and I am not talking about 607 BC) I am not saying the JW's are right OR THE CATHOLICS! What I am saying is that from time to time archaeologists get the dating wrong.

    Also, George said in that letter, that the divine name may not occur in the Pauline letters, at least, but left it in doubt... But I have proof anyway as what I just showed you in the last post.

Share this