Have you ever seen this argument for using Jehovah instead of the now-accepted Yahweh? On the surface, it makes sense, but unfortunately it's not a sound premise.
If we were to believe the Bible, then God's original people were Hebrews. They are the first to give him a name. They called him Yahweh or some variant of that. Thus, for argument's sake, Yahweh is essentially a native Jewish god.
Across languages we see different forms of other names. John (Jahn) in english is Juan (Wahn) in spanish. When someone named Juan comes to an english-speaking country, do we call him John because we speak english or do we call him Juan in respect to his native tongue? Obviously, we use the second option. Juan's name is not John, it's Juan.
The same is with Yahweh. The rules here would be to treat him as a native Hebrew, and preserve the original pronunciation as best we can. It's not a matter of Yahweh being correct and Jehovah being incorrect. It's a matter of Yahweh being MORE correct then Jehovah.
They also insist that one cannot have a close relationship with God without using his personal name. By that logic, you cannot have a close relationship with your father unless you address him by his first name. That actually signifies the opposite, that you don't respect his position as your father. Thus, if one were to believe in God, calling him by his name is not showing respect to his position.
"Jehovah" is the english version
by B_Deserter 9 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
B_Deserter
-
stillajwexelder
Jesus is also the anglicized version of what his real name was
-
B_Deserter
Correct, technically, Jesus should be called Yehoshua. In fact, there is a church near me that does just that.
-
Snoozy
Even tho my grown daughter (who was raised a JW ) is a Catholic now..when I showed her son (my grandson) the name Jehovah in their bible she got angry and said.."What's that supposed to mean?. Are you trying to say that the Jehovahs witnesses are right?" She still gets angry anytime they are mentioned. She will never forgive me for raising her in that religion..even tho we left when she was 17.
She refuses to even say that name...as for me...God will do if and when I ever decide to pray again.
I asked her son if he thought his priest represented god...he laughed and said NO!
She said their priest called her the other day and wanted the kids (16 and 17 ) to help him with others children at a retreat last weekend and the kids said they don't have time for that kind of stuff. So she just told him they were busy.
I don't know which is worse..raising kids in a religion like the JW's or raising them in a religion where they only go because it is a status symbol........................................
Snoozy
-
lazyslob
"status symbol........................................" ?????? I don´t get this part. Do you mean that being religious is some kind of positive thing around there ?
-
Doug Mason
I read "somewhere" that the Yahwists were the priests living in a small community at a place named Jerusalem, as against the Elohists who were more prominent, and who lived in the northern of the country.
-
Jim_TX
"When someone named Juan comes to an english-speaking country, do we call him John because we speak english or do we call him Juan in respect to his native tongue? Obviously, we use the second option. Juan's name is not John, it's Juan."
I understand what you are trying to say here - and agree with the logic. However... this 'rule' (Juan and not John) goes out the window with names that are from some of the oriental locations.
I knew a fella who was from China. He was trying to immigrate to the U.S. His name that he went by was One-wei ('One Way'). In reality - that was the name that the Immigration people 'gave' him - as his Chinese name was much longer - and more difficult - too difficult for the Immigration folks (and probably too difficult to put on the Immigration Forms).
The lady that lives next door to me is from South Korea. She is known as 'Kim'... but that is not her Korean name. I'm not sure that I could pronounce her real name... much less remember it.
Sooooooo... some names do not translate well across some languages.
With that being said... it doesn't matter if one uses 'Jehovah' - or 'John' - to refer to their God... in my opinion.
-
Deputy Dog
They also insist that one cannot have a close relationship with God without using his personal name. By that logic, you cannot have a close relationship with your father unless you address him by his first name. That actually signifies the opposite, that you don't respect his position as your father. Thus, if one were to believe in God, calling him by his name is not showing respect to his position.
You nailed it!!! The JWs can never see God as a loving Father, they only see God as the Judge.
For me heaven is going to court and finding the judge is my dad.
-
Doug Mason
The Scriptures are Jewish, written by and for Jews, using their concepts. To the Jews, a person's "name" was far more than a handle, far more than a means of identifying a person.
To them, a "name" was the very person, the very being of that individual. Hence we see people in Scripture having their name changed at a critical turning point in their life (Simon/Peter, Saul/Paul, etc., etc.).
The closest we might come to that idea occurs when we use "name" to mean "reputation". A person might take (legal) offence when they believe their "name" has been slandered.
The WTS tries to use the word "Jehovah" as a demarcation, an identifier that builds a fence around their followers.
Doug
-
Chalam
Hi, Yes I agree. Which english version BTW? I have it about six times in the Old Testament I recall. I have LORD hundreds of times and as the preface explains, this is derived from YHWH or Yahweh, Jehovah is not in the New Testament at all. The only version that has it in the NT is the NWT which has substituted "kurios" and other greek words for Jehovah instead of Lord, God, Master etc. The big question is why have they done this? All the best, Stephen