" Is it, then, wrong to use a form like Yahweh? Not at all. It is just that the form Jehovah is likely to meet with a quicker response from the reader because it is the form that has been "naturalized" into most languages. " " Similar comments could be made regarding all the names we read in the Bible. We pronounce them in our own language and do not try to imitate the original pronunciation. Thus we say "Jeremiah," not Yir·meya'hu. Similarly we say Isaiah, although in his own day this prophet likely was known as Yesha e ·ya'hu. Evenscholars who are aware of the original pronunciation of these names use the modern pronunciation, not the ancient, when speaking about them. And the same is true with the name Jehovah. Even though the modern pronunciation Jehovah might not be exactly the way it was pronounced originally, this in no way detracts from the importance of the name. " http://www.watchtower.org/e/na/article_02.htm
Why didn't Jehovah ??
by Phizzy 45 Replies latest watchtower bible
-
-
The Quiet One
"If Jehovah had really wanted His people to use His name, would not a prophet, at least would not His son have said so ?" John 17:26 -- Also, if you think about it, when Jesus read from the OT he would have pronounced the Tetragrammaton, not say 'Lord'. Make of that what you will.
-
Phizzy
Thanks for posting TQO, you seem to have cut and pasted most of your reply, but you do not say from where ?
I was not concerned with the pronunciation of YHWH, I was simply making the point that use , or non-use, of some form of the name was not taught by Jesus or the Apostles, so use of it does not impart any Kudos to the JW religion over other religions that do not use it.
Many would argue that if Jesus read from the Septuagint that the name would not have been in his copy, only indications to say "Lord", and he would have been an accurate reader would he not ? That too is a diversionary thought, we cannot know for sure that Jesus was even fully literate.
-
The Quiet One
You can check the wiki page for the source of the quotes in the 1st post, the 2nd you could try clicking the link I gave, and the 3rd post was just a scripture and my words... Firstly, Jesus was literate, he knew the Scriptures inside out and read in front of the synagogue, which would've been filled with educated men. Further, suggesting the Son of God/God was unable to read the Bible ( that he saw written/inspired) correctly is beyond words as to how ridiculous it sounds. And if you don't believe he was either, why are you having this discussion? As to whether Jesus read from the Septuagint.. "Would God's name have appeared in these Greek writings? Well, some very old fragments of the Septuagint Version that actually existed in Jesus' day have survived down to our day, and it is noteworthy that the personal name of God appeared in them. The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology (Volume 2, page 512) says:"Recent textual discoveries cast doubt on the idea that the compilers of the LXX [ Septuagint ] translated the tetragrammaton YHWH by kyrios. The oldest LXX MSS (fragments) now available to us have the tetragrammaton written in Heb[rew] characters in the G[ree]k text. This custom was retained by later Jewish translators of the O[ld] T[estament] in the first centuries A.D. " Therefore, whether Jesus and his disciples read the Scriptures in Hebrew or Greek, they would come across the divine name." "Thus, Professor George Howard, of the University of Georgia, U.S.A., made this comment: "Whenthe Septuagint which the New Testament church used and quoted contained the Hebrew form of the divine name, the NewTestament writers no doubt included the Tetragrammaton in their quotations." ( Biblical Archaeology Review, March 1978,page 14)" http://www.watchtower.org/e/na/article_06.htm
-
Phizzy
Interesting TQO,
If Jesus was reading from the Septuagint, in Greek, how exactly would he have pronounced the divine name ? The greek of his day had no H sound and no W sound. Are you going to argue that he would have known the correct pronunciation, in Hebrew, and " read" that out loud ? Switching from Greek to Hebrew for the one word ?
It is possible I suppose, but surely as that seems not to have been the practice of the day, would that not have caused a furore bigger than some that he did cause ?
-
The Quiet One
He could have used a greek transliteration of the original Hebrew or switched to Hebrew, I don't know. Regarding the apostles not promoting the use of Yhwh/Jehovahs name.. In Romans 10:13, Paul quotes from Joel 2:32 (check any decent reference work if you don't believe this).. Even if LORD replaces it in many Bibles, the scripture in Joel contained the Tetragrammaton and referred to Yhwh/Jehovah. Now read Romans 10:14.. '..how will they call on him in whom they have not put faith? How, in turn, will they put faith in him of whom they have not heard? How, in turn, will they hear without someone to preach?'. He was clearly saying that unless someone calls on the name of Jehovah/Yhwh, they wouldn't be saved, and that to hear about Jehovah, people would have to preach about him, and teach people to 'call on his name'.. Jw's do this, in line with Pauls words. No doubt you'll say that the Yhwh in Joel is Jesus, but if you want to believe the Trinity, I'm not going to stop you..
-
Ucantnome
He was clearly saying that unless someone calls on the name of Jehovah/Yhwh, they wouldn't be saved, and that to hear about Jehovah, people would have to preach about him, and teach people to 'call on his name'.. Jw's do this, in line with Pauls words. No doubt you'll say that the Yhwh in Joel is Jesus, but if you want to believe the Trinity, I'm not going to stop you..
If I read Pauls first letter to the Corinthians it says,
"to the congregation of God that is in Corinth, to you who have been sanctified in union with Christ Jesus, called to be holy ones, together with all who everywhere are calling upon the name of our Lord, Jesus Christ, their Lord and ours." 1Cor. 1:2 NWT
The surrounding verses of Romans 10 are talking about Jesus verse 9 "... if you publicly declare that 'word in your mouth,' that Jesus is Lord" verse 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" (NWT)
and Paul starts the letter to Romans
Romans 1:4-7 "...-yes, Jesus Christ our Lord , through whom we received undeserved kindness and an apostleship in order that there might be obedience of faith among the nations respecting his name among which [nations] you also are those called to belong to Jesus Christ." (NWT)
When we use the name of Jesus I believe it means "Yahweh is salvation" and so in calling on Jesus we call on Jehovah.
-
The Quiet One
Why then, did Jesus teach his disciples to pray to his Father? Look at the beginning of the model, or 'our father' prayer, the prayer that Jesus set as a basic template for all prayers.. with no mention of addressing prayers to him at a later date. The first priority, the primary thing that we should be concerned about according to Jesus, is that His name be hallowed. The Fathers name, not Jesus'. Jesus himself set that standard.. and you know that YHWH said that He wouldn't share His worship with anyone else. Unless you believe that Jesus and Jehovah are the same person? Or that Jesus was teaching the disciples how to pray to him when he returned to heaven?
-
Ucantnome
There the LORD issued a ruling and instruction for them and put them to the test. 26 He said, “If you listen carefully to the LORD your God and do what is right in his eyes, if you pay attention to his commands and keep all his decrees, (Ex. 15 NIV)
A voice came from the cloud, saying, “This is my Son, whom I have chosen; listen to him.”(Luke 9NIV)
24 Then the end will come, when he hands over the kingdom to God the Father after he has destroyed all dominion, authority and power.(1 Cor 15 NIV)
-
Ucantnome
YHWH said that He wouldn't share His worship with anyone else. Unless you believe that Jesus and Jehovah are the same person?
It's an interesting thought.
I think that JW making known the name Jehovah and whether God is a trinity are two separate issues although related.