Romans 10:13

by PSacramento 54 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  PSacramento

  We all know that the passage from Paul's letter to Romans, Romans 10:13 says:

  "All those who call on the name of the Lord will be saved".

  Now, in the NWT they Translate that as Jehovah instead of the word "Lord", because this is a quote from Joel 2:32 and in the OT the tetragrammaton YHWH is used, which the NWT translates as "Jehovah" (Not only the NWT does that, the ASV,YNG and DBY, do it also in regards to Joel).

  However, of the 16 translations I have seen, ALL translate that passage in Romans as Lords AND all the commentaries I have read so far, point to view that Paul was applying that passage to Jesus, being His Name that is Salvation.

  Commentaries by James, Fausset and Brown, by Matthew henry and by Barnes, to name only 3.

  Comments?
• 

  isaacaustin

  all the receding verses say we must declare Jesus, make public decalration of Jesus, verse 12 says "calling upon him, and now the WT inserts Jehovah in verse 13 as to who we are to call on. Jehovah is the name of the Divine Being- of which Jesus is a person. But since the WT teaches Jehovah is only the Father this makes the script make no sense.

  9 For if you publicly declare that ‘word in your own mouth,’ that Jesus is Lord, and exercise faith in your heart that God raised him up from the dead, you will be saved. 10 For with the heart one exercises faith for righteousness, but with the mouth one makes public declaration for salvation.

  11 For the Scripture says: “None that rests his faith on him will be disappointed.” 12 For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek, for there is the same Lord over all, who is rich to all those calling upon him. 13 For “everyone who calls on the name of Jehovah will be saved.”
• 

  snowbird

  YHWH is Jesus.

  Jesus is YHWH.

  Yes. Amen.

  Sylvia
• 

  Chalam

  The NWT is a false translation and there insertion of "Jehovah" into this verse contradicts what is written elsewhere.

  Acts 4:10-12 (New International Version)

  10 then know this, you and all the people of Israel: It is by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom you crucified but whom God raised from the dead, that this man stands before you healed. 11 He is
  " 'the stone you builders rejected,
  which has become the capstone.' 12 Salvation is found in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given to men by which we must be saved."

  John 20:31 (New International Version)

  31 But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.

  All the best,

  Stephen
• 

  PSacramento

  There is nothing LITERALLY wrong with inserting the name Jehovah in that passage, since it is a direct quote from Joel, but it does change the meaning of the context of how Paul was applying that passage.

  The other translations that use the name Jehovah in Joel do NOT use it in Romans.

  To me, I am not a Trinitarian, it is not a case of Jesus being God, or the refute thereof, but a case of Jesus being the fullfillment of that passage in the NEW Covenant.
• 

  JosephMalik

  To me, I am not a Trinitarian, it is not a case of Jesus being God, or the refute thereof, but a case of Jesus being the fullfillment of that passage in the NEW Covenant.

  PSacramento,

  That is correct. It is not a matter of identity. The scripture was not written to prove identity and does not try to do that. It is how the verse is now applied to the one that God sent to represent him that mattered and the Tetragrammaton can be used to do that. This is not any different than what happened to the angel that came in the name of the Tetragrammaton in other texts like in the burning bush. In NT texts we learn: Mr 12:26 And as touching the dead, that they rise: have ye not read in the book of Moses, how in the bush God spake unto him, saying, I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob? The fact that it was really an angel representing the tetragrammaton and identified by the name of God at the time does not matter. It is the application of this angel representing God not the identity of the one delivering the message that is the point of the text. Yet both the angel and the God that sent him are identified in the texts so we know how such things are done. The use of Lord by Paul made this applicatoin apparent like the word angel did in Ex. 3:2 and the text in Romans should not have been tampered with by the Watchtower.

  John Gill comments on Joel 2:32 Ver. 32. And it shall come to pass, [that] whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be delivered, &c.] Or "saved," as in #Ac 2:21; from those miseries and calamities before described, from the impending ruin and destruction of the city; and so it was, that those that believed in Christ, that were in the city, had an intimation of it beforehand, and removed from thence to a place called Pella {w}, and so escaped being involved in the common calamity: though this also may be understood of a spiritual deliverance and salvation by Christ, from sin, Satan, and the world, and from the second death, and wrath to come, and out of the hands of every enemy; which such share in who call on the name of the Lord, pray to him for grace and mercy, life and salvation, through Christ; that have a spiritual knowledge of God in Christ, real and sincere desires after him, and trust and confidence in him, which this phrase supposes; and which also includes the whole worship of God, internal and external, performed in a spiritual and evangelical manner; see #Ro 10:13;

  Joseph
• 

  Chalam

  There is nothing LITERALLY wrong with inserting the name Jehovah in that passage, since it is a direct quote from Joel, but it does change the meaning of the context of how Paul was applying that passage.

  I strongly disagree. The word in the original koine greek that Paul wrote was kurios. Now, that word means Lord

  http://strongsnumbers.com/greek/2962.htm

  Even the NWT agrees because they translate it Lord in other places.

  When it suits them they change it to "Jehovah". That is a mistranslation.

  They do the same with the greek word for God, theos. Sometimes, they change that to "Jehovah" if it support their doctrine and other times not.

  Now, back to the case in point. The insertion of "Jehovah" now places a contradiction in the NT. What name do people call on for salvation? Jehovah or Jesus? Acts 4 and John 20 make it cleat that there is one name only to call upon and that name is Jesus.

  So the NWT, with its "highest level of accuracy" actually ends up contradicting the bible and confusing people. Listen to the WT teaching and the job is well and truly done :(

  All the best,

  Stephen
• 

  Spike Tassel

  We haven't got to the "originals" of the NT, for one. Secondly, we are to pray to God, in the name of Jesus, as other Scriptures bear out.
• 

  PSacramento

  Joseph,

  I agree.

  Chalam,

  I was trying to say that, I don't have issues with YHWH being inserted into the NT where there are quotes from the OT in which YHWH appears, IF the context of the chapter and passage permit it, which is not the case with Romans 10:13.
• 

  Spike Tassel

  I beg to differ with PSacramento as to "which is not the case with Romans 10:13". The meaning of Jesus' name as well as Isaiah 43:11 must still be factored in correctly, I suggest.