Why JWs should soft-pedal the "Divine Name"

by Open mind 51 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  isaacaustin

  Yes, the key word above is "UNITARIAN". This is a cult teaching that Jesus was an extraordinarily good man only, nothing more. A Mr. Thomas Belsham after Archbishop Newcome's death, altered his text. [See page 394, "Manual of Biblical Bibliography".]

  This altered text dishonoring Archbishop Newcome's careful scholarship also provided a basis for the New World Translation's "...and the Word was a god".(see also the Kingdom Interlinear Translation, page 1160, 1969 ed.)

  Archbishop Newcome certainly never said, the Word was "a god". why would the Watchtower use as their guide a cult denying the Biblical Christ, and guilty of altering a reputable biblical text? Every Jehovah's witness needs to check this out.
• 

  BurnTheShips

  onomatopoeia

  The Bible says onomatporneia is wrong.
• 

  BurnTheShips

  The New Jerusalem also does a good job with the nomina sacra. They consistently use "Yahweh".

  BTS
• 

  isaacaustin

  that was a copy paste from me above-http://mmoutreachinc.com/jehovahs_witnesses/john1_support.html
• 

  snowbird

  The Bible says onomatporneia is wrong.

  Thanks, Burn. I really needed that.

  My wayward granddaughter is driving me crazy!

  Sylvia
• 

  isaacaustin

  and the number of insertions of Jehovah into the NT by the WT is 237.
• 

  reniaa

  and the number of insertions of Jehovah into the NT by the WT is 237.

  thx i didn't know the exact number I was relying on memory oops never agood idea for me lol

  Erm blondie I'm not sure what point your trying to make are you implying Jw's should only use Jehovah not God? which is weird be like saying they could only use jesus not christ.

  My main point is for those that say "If God wanted us to use his name he wouldn't have allowed it to be replaced by Lord" is faulty reasoning because by the same token I can say "If God didn't want us to use his name he would have stopped it's discovery and then the Jehovah's witnesses using it"

  For all yahweh supporters as nice as it is, it's still is not proven to be how to pronounce God's name in the same way Jehovah isn't, so both are equal in that sense, the best we can say is yahweh is more likely maybe but Jehovah has the senority of having origins from 12th century so was chosen instead, If yahweh had been chosen it would equally have not mattered the importance is we are using the 4 consonants and pronouncing Gods name the English version of it, which was established well before the Jw's came along as jehovah.
• 

  Open mind

  reniaa:

  it's what makes the Jehovah's Witnesses unique

  I agree 100% with you on that point. I'm sure we'll disagree on the motivation behind adopting the name though. Part of the appeal of the JWs is that they have "The Truth". Adopting the name Jehovah into the name of the religion, was a stroke of marketing genius on Rutherford's part.

  because superstitious jews allowed the correct pronouciation of JHWH to laps should we follow suit and not use it?

  Not only did the "superstitious jews" allow the correct pronunciation to lapse, GOD HIMSELF allowed it. You haven't really addressed one of the key parts of my initial thread. If God really cared about his name, he would have ensured that it was preserved. He hasn't. All we have is four consonants, no vowels, and (from a Yank to a Brit), do I really have to elaborate on what can happen to pronunciation with just a little bit of time & distance thrown into the mix?

  The whole point I'm making about "soft pedaling" the Divine Name is this: It's not a big deal to God. If it was he could have easily accomplished it. I'm not trying to be disrespectful here, truly. Just honest.

  Let's say you were given god-like powers of creation and were told that part of the deal is that you should expect your creation to call you by your name. OK fine. Hmmm. I know, I will hardwire into my creation a particular combination of sounds that, when uttered, gives them a sense of calm and reverence. That way it's kind of a win/win when they say it. The name is: OHM. or MAHDEEP, or YAHWEH or JEHOVAH or whatever. And since the ACTUAL NAME is so important, I'll make sure they know to pronounce it properly from DAY ONE and ensure that it doesn't get mangled over time.

  Has anything like that happened?

  No.

  God (if he exists) is not a bungler.

  He doesn't care about the pronunciation of the name. He cares about His reputation. Even JWs admit this when cornered. But as soon as you let them off the debating mat, they go back to acting like "JEHOVAH" is some kind of sacred/lucky/mystic talisman that sets them apart and makes them special.

  Here's another example: If God picked the Bible Students in 1919, why didn't he reveal the original pronunciation of his name to them? Wouldn't that be an awesome demonstration of the Divine Will? Or how about when Rutherford decided that God's "chosen people" should incorporate the Divine Name into their religion? Wouldn't that have been the perfect time for God to thunderously proclaim from the sky to all in attendance at Cedar Point or Yankee Stadium or wherever "My name is.........Yaaaa Heeeee Waaaaaa Heeeeeee."

  I know these scenarios sound wacky & irreverent, but they illustrate my point. God.....doesn't.......care. At least not about the name itself. If he did he could have easily made sure we knew what it was.

  OM
• 

  metaspy

  The term Christians should use for the Father is ABBA - so simple even a child can say it.
  In fact it is an onomatopoeia. I knew I would get to use that word one day!

  
  Sorry to correct you, but it isn't an onomatopoeia.
  its called a Palindrome - a word spelled forwards and backwards the same way.
  
  An onomatopoeia is a word that is pronounced like it sounds, an example: Cock-a-doodle-doo.
• 

  reniaa

  Not only did the "superstitious jews" allow the correct pronunciation to lapse, GOD HIMSELF allowed it. You haven't really addressed one of the key parts of my initial thread.

  I did in my recent post but you missed it,

  The point I made... is this is faulty reasoning because it doesn't allow for certain similar reasonings if we can go down that road.

  1/ if God wasn't bothered by his name being used why use it at all? 7000 times in Ot is a lot to not be bothered about.

  2/ So maybe he put it in and changed his mind and so allowed it to lapse be replaced thereby letting it slide into historical oblivion, again this doesn't work since it's been found and restored.

  3/ Why allow the witnesses to use it as an identifying mark? if you have made sure it wasn't used by jews in the past? Does not correctly pronouncing it cancel it out so they can use it? if so wouldn't that also cancel nearly all the other names in the bible because there no way any are correctly pronounced because we are talking with English language and verbal expressions when trying to pronounce them.

  These are all the roads I can go down using your reasoning that somehow jehovah is responsible for it's not being used deliberately because it automatically begs the question of him now allowing it and why?