A Message for Jews

Post Reply New Topic

This is not my theory. This is fact, that has been supported and corroborated by secular and religious historians and scholars world wide for centuries. Because of Jewish superstitious the proper pronunciation of the divine name was lost in history. But Jehovah made sure his name was preserved in His Word the Bible in the form of the four consonants: Y H W H (or J H V H). The point is Jehovah wants us to know his name and to sanctify his name (Ps. 83:18; Matt. 6:9).

Having monitored a *lot* of Sacred Name debate a few years ago, I have heard otherwise. However, yes, enunciation is something that likely had to be passed along orally.

That the Tetragrammaton has that consonantal structure is clear enough. There are pointers toward reconstructing probable vocalization, but not conclusive.

The avoidance of vocalizing the Tetragrammaton - it is NOT a modern phenomenon; some, like the Jerusalem Bible, insert vocalization, though I think Yahwe is a bad choice. Check the Septuagint and the Syriac OT. The NT, of course, follows the tradition using local "Lord" in Greek, Syriac, Latin, Old Church Slavonic. Coptic borrows the Greek [p-kurios]. Don't know what the Armenian version does.

I have no axe to grind - I would have put it into the ancient versions and preserved us data on vocaization [though of course the Septuagint was a Jewish production and there was a sizable Jewish component in the early church. But from the point of view of communication, it makes less difference language to language discontiunuities as the "virgin" ruveyn regularly brings up or the ":life more abundantly" thing. Rarely is meaning obscured or altered.

In the New Testament it can be hard to tell which Lord is intended - but that is mostly inevitable given the Greek text.

Many scholars favor the spelling “Yahweh,” but it is uncertain and there is not agreement among them. On the other hand, “Jehovah” is the form of the name that is most readily recognized, because it has been used in English for centuries. Since English is the primarily or secondary language used in most lands using "Jehovah" preserves, equally with other forms, the four consonants of the Hebrew Tetragrammaton.

Most names change to some extent when transferred from one language to another. Jesus was born a Jew, and his name in Hebrew was perhaps pronounced Ye‧shu′a‛, but the inspired writers of the Christian Scriptures did not hesitate to use the Greek form of the name, I‧e‧sous′. In most other languages the pronunciation is slightly different, but we freely use the form that is common in our tongue. The same is true of other Bible names.

How, then, can we show proper respect for the One to whom the most important name of all belongs? Would it be by never speaking or writing his name because we do not know exactly how it was originally pronounced? Or, rather, would it be by using the pronunciation and spelling that are common in our language, while speaking well of its Owner and conducting ourselves as his worshipers in a manner that honors him? This is why Jehovah's Witnesses use God's personal name. In fact the name Jehovah's Witnesses is found in the Bible at Isaiah 43:10 "'YOU are my witnesses,' is the utterance of Jehovah".

Last edited by kxmode on 17 Feb 2011, 8:26 pm, edited 1 time in total.

All of which presumes that the Name has an Owner, for which there is not a particle of empirical evidence.

ruveyn

Shooting a bit from the hip here: Is there any other name having exclusive ownership even alleged?

Do you mean that you do not believe that there is a Creator, or is it that you have seen so much hypocrisy in the churches that you have no faith in what they teach? There is a great difference between the churches of Christendom and true Christianity. It is true that Christendom has oppressed people, but Christianity has not. Christendom has waged war, but Christianity has not. Christendom has failed to provide proper moral direction, but Christianity has not. God’s Word, the Bible, does not support Christendom. On the contrary, it condemns Christendom.

Why are we still discussing what a bunch of stone or bronze age primitives thought about ANYTHING?

Do we discuss why Osiris did this or that? Do we seriously debate the relationship between Odin and Thor?

And yet, here we are worrying about the end of the world in 2012 because some stone age Mayans ran out of room on their calendar wheel.

May the great Cthulhu eat your brains (if you had any)

Whatever. "Interpret" "Translate", the words were used interchangeably. As it stands, interpreting that Hebrew word as meaning "virgin" makes no sense given that it is not done so in any other context.

I think this thread has been thoroughly expounded. If you would like a free home Bible study please visit this page. Everyone is welcome, but it takes action on your part. (Romans 2:13; James 2:26) Please become reconciled to Jehovah God while there is still time. (2 Corinthians 5:18-20; Acts 1:7; Daniel 2:21; Romans 3:25-26)

Yoo Hoo. Virgins do not conceive. Only women who are f*cked conceive which means they are not virgins. So much for Isaiah 7:14

ruveyn

Last edited by ruveyn on 18 Feb 2011, 7:01 am, edited 1 time in total.

Oh, no! It's a porn site!

I see you have not kept up with the news on techniques of artificial insemination. embryo implantation, and the like.

The world has in fact progressed - that is what Progrssives call it, anyway - since 1878.

The KJV was mistranslated 400 years ago. No artificial insemination then.

ruveyn

So, please revise:

"Yoo Hoo. Virgins do not conceive. Only women who are f*cked conceive which means they are not virgins. So much for Isaiah 7:14 "

to

"Yoo Hoo. Virgins did not AT THAT TIME conceive. Only women who were f*cked CONCEIVED IN THOSE DAYS which means they WERE not virgins. So much for Isaiah 7:14 "

I'm Christian, and I find the OP boorish and heavy handed. Why single out Jews for your effort at conversion? God calls all men to repent, doesn't He? So why are Jews singled out for a conversion diatribe, as though they were worse than the rest of the world. Who do you think preserved the Jews for millenia anyway? Has it ever dawned on you that God might have a reason for keeping the Jews separate, even when scattered among the nations?

I can't imagine that big long essay at the start of the thread would convert anyone, let alone a Jew.

To any Jews reading this, I apologise for my co religionists singling you out amongst all people, as though you were some kind of trophy. Obviously, I want you to know and love God... but who am I to say you already don't?

Again, deeply deeply sorry over here.