"Jehovah" is basically an accepted English translation of YHWH, but if we go with Yahweh, would all the other Hebrews names of people and places have to be changed? I have enough to try to learn from the bible without worrying about pronunciation differences.
Is it possible that worshiping "Jehovah" is worshiping a false god?
by A-Team 23 Replies latest watchtower bible
-
-
ErEf
It's remarkable how few times Jesus is recorded saying the name. Only when citing the Hebrew text.
Further what did he learn us..
Our Father in heaven mt 6:9
O Father if it is possible let this cup mt 26:39
Mt 11:25,Lk 16:24; Lk23:34; John chapter 17
he learned us that Jehovah is no longer that what he needs to be primarily, judge, teacher, king etc., but that through Jesus he is now our Father and that we may say Father
Rom 8:15 For the Spirit that God has given you does not make you slaves and cause you to be afraid; instead, the Spirit makes you God's children, and by the Spirit's power we cry out to God, “Father! my Father!” (kjv)
-
moggy lover
Hi, AT, I agree with you in that worshipping the God of the Bible today with the name "Jehovah" is in fact worshipping a false god. And I advance two reasons for saying this:
1 "Jehovah" is not simply one of several possible variations of the Tetragrammaton, but is a wrong way to pronounce it. It is what we can call a mongrelization of it. The word "Jehovah" remember does NOT represent the letters YHVH. It only represents the consonants of that word. "Jehovah" in addition to YHVH, also represents the vowels of the Hebrew word Adonay [E d O n A y] So in effect, the word "Jehovah" represents two seperate words, which forced into a semantical impossibility, constitute in effect, a mongel construction. It is because of this that Jews everywhere refuse to use such a word.
Other proper names in the OT are not so affected, because they represent the semantic equivalent of the original Hebrew. For instance, "Jeremiah" represents the exact equivalent of the Hebrew name, in both consonantal as well as vocalized structures. This is the same with all the OT names. If you want to combine the same vowels with the consonants of YHVH, you can't do better than Yahweh, now almost universally accepted, even among pious Jews To say that "Jehovah" is the English way of saying Yahweh is nonsense, since the English way of saying Yahweh, is Yahweh.
2 Having said that however, even if we grant the WTS position of "Jehovah" any probity, we are still faced with a problem today.
If we were living in OT times, in the tribal structure of ancient Israel, yes, we could concede that we would, in addition to Temple worship, sabbath keeping, circumcision, dietry regulation, tribal distinctiveness, festival commemoration, geographical uniqeness, tithe keeping, priest supporting, sacrifice conducting, need to identify the God we worshipped with that distinctive name.
But I believe we have, thanks to the progressive revelation found in the NT, been unburdened with all that "Judaism" of the OT. Judaism no longer has a hold on us. If we have been made free in Christ, the Jewish system has passed away, having been fulfilled. That, I believe is the reason that the Yahweh of the OT deliberately allowed His OT "name", like Temple worship and sacrifice conducting, to fall into disuse.
There is a new Name we have to deal with. The name for which we are clearly recognized as witnesses of. [Ac 1:8] When asked "In what name they were empowered to preach" the apostle Peter responded with the Name that we are now emboldened to use. [Ac 4:10] This new name has taken us beyond the confines of any single earth-bound location, and has encompassed heaven itself.
When He was on earth, Jesus taught us that the God of the OT He identified with was called "The Father" - evidently something the OT Jews had been negligent to stress. There simply is no evidence, textual, historical, or even theological, that Jesus conveyed any other message. Only the repetitve and dogmatic assertions of the WTS
By continuing to stress this incorrect word, jehovah, the WTS has clearly identified itself as a highly regulated, and tribal, religious system - not even remotely connected with the NT system of worship.
Cheers
-
Narkissos
It's remarkable how few times Jesus is recorded saying the name.
Indeed. Exactly 0.
There is not a single ancient Greek NT manuscript which contains any form of the Hebrew OT divine name (Yhwh). Not even in OT quotations.
-
Tyre
Mat 6:9 Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name.
Jborg should restored the God's name in NWT
Our Jehovah which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name.
-
A-Team
It appears, at least for no in my research, that Jesus always called him father. Now, if Jesus called him Father, what make sit wrong fro us to call him Father?
-
A Paduan
Besides the name invention, the jw conception of "god" is like an old man dictator, indeed like a dominant male animal requiring subjection or lashing out, insisting on control, and no one else seeding the flock - any other impregnating threat is sought out and quickly dispensed with, separated.
This imaginary god (image) is like a man who is like a beast, given life by the followers who also trade (buy and sell) 'love' while concerning themselves about appeasing the imaginary beast - it's a regular study in revelation - but nothing new.
-
Mad
It looks like you need more than "feedback"! The illustration of the name being unchanged (in the way it's pronounced) in different languages is totally untrue! A quick example is my name "Michael". It's - as you know- "Miguel" in Spanish!
My GUESS is that since you have such as dislike of the Watchtower Society, you are trying (maybe subconsciously) to find a reason for not honoring the True God with His name!
When you say "Jesus" - shouldn't you be saying "Yeshua" instead? (Hebrew pronounciation)
Mad
-
Scully
The way things are now, JWs don't even worship Jehovah anymore. They worship The Organization™. Smells like idolatry to me.
-
AwSnap
I've recently found that a Catholic Monk is actually the first person to *find* that YHWH translates in Jehovah. Why do the jw's use the Catholics as THE example for all churches (I don't remember them using Methodists or Christadelphians as examples, for instance), yet they adopted a name for god that was initially discovered BY A CATHOLIC. ? I'm a little perplexed. Wasn't there an article somewhere in the JW literature that says they acknowledge that "Jehovah" isn't technically god's name but that it's the most accepted form of YHWH? I noticed Roosters comment...what does "napp" stand for? Is that from jw literature?