I don't think so, my wife is currently at the convention, she said that after some of the things I have been telling her over the last few months she is hearing things more critically and plans to do research. I asked her to give me an example, she said that yesterday a talk said that the JWs are the only ones to use the name Jehovah in their translation and she suddenly thought that seemed odd. So they are still banging on about it as some good thing. I told her I know why but wasn't going to tell her, she must research it to find the answer herself.
Seeing the name "Jehovah" was a catholic invention of the 13th century and was popularised by Apostates because of its usage,"Aid Book",will new light reveal another name in the future ? Maybe Yahweh ?
by smiddy 19 Replies latest watchtower bible
-
-
Julia Orwell
My husband actually did a web search on other translations using a form of YHWH and found a big list of them. Good for your wife to see something like that. My hubby's now out of JWs, though not a full blown apostate like me ;)
-
smiddy
Even some catholic translations use the name jehovah and yahweh.and many christianreligions use the name jehovah in their hymns.
smiddy
-
Newly Enlightened
http://www.catholic.com/quickquestions/is-gods-name-yahweh-or-jehovah
Was also in the 1980 WT 2/1 pg 11-13:
The
DivineNameinLaterTimes
THAT the divine name was used in early history is beyond question. But what about later times? Why have certain Bible translations omitted the name? And what is its meaning and significance to us?
THE
NAME“JEHOVAH”BECOMESWIDELY
KNOWN
Interestingly, Raymundus Martini, a Spanish monk of the Dominican order, first rendered the divine name as “Jehova.” This form appeared in his book PugeoFidei, published in 1270 C.E.—over 700 years ago.
In time, as reform movements developed both inside and outside the Catholic Church, the Bible was made available to the people in general, and the name “Jehovah” became more widely known. In 1611 C.E. the King James or Authorized Version of the Bible was published. It uses the name Jehovah four times. (Ex. 6:3; Ps. 83:18; Isa. 12:2; 26:4) Since then, the Bible has been translated many, many times. Some translations follow the example of the AuthorizedVersion and include the divine name only a few times.
In this category is AnAmericanTranslation (by Smith and Goodspeed) with a slight variation of using “Yahweh” instead of “Jehovah.” Yet, one may ask: “Why have the translators done this? If using ‘Jehovah’ or ‘Yahweh’ is wrong, why put it in at all? If right, why not be consistent and use it every time it appears in the Bible text?”
Against the preceding historical and factual background, let us now examine what the translators say in answer.
THE
TRANSLATORS’
ANSWER
Says the Preface of AnAmericanTranslation: “In this translation we have followed the orthodox Jewish tradition and substituted ‘the Lord’ for the name ‘Yahweh.’ ” But by following “the orthodox Jewish tradition,” did the translators realize how harmful it can be to ignore God’s clear determination that his ‘name be declared in all the earth’? Moreover, Jesus condemned man-made tradition that would invalidate God’s word.—Ex. 9:16; Mark 7:5-9.
The Preface of the RevisedStandardVersion states: “The present revision returns to the procedure of the King James Version, which follows . . . thelongestablishedpracticeinthereadingoftheHebrewscripturesinthesynagogue.... For two reasons the Committee has returned to the more familiar usage of the King James Version: (1) The word ‘Jehovah’ does not accurately represent any form of the Name ever used in Hebrew; and (2) the use of any proper name for the one and only God, as though there were other gods from whom he had to be distinguished, wasdiscontinuedinJudaismbeforetheChristianera and is entirely inappropriate for the universal faith of the Christian Church.” (Italics ours.)
The translators made a great mistake in following the example of the KingJamesVersion and Jewish tradition. Did they really think it was God’s will that his name should be kept in the background? IsthedivinenamesomethingtobeashamedofsothatitshouldbeleftoutoftheBible?
RELIGIOUS
PREJUDICE?
An interesting fact is that the AmericanStandardVersion, published in 1901, uses Jehovah’s name right through the Hebrew Scriptures. In contrast, the RevisedStandardVersion, published in 1952, makes only a very brief reference to the Tetragrammaton in a footnote (at Exodus 3:15). During that period, Jehovah’s Witnesses were proclaiming God’s name world wide. Could it be that the omission of the divine name in certain translations was caused by prejudice against their witnessing activity?
That this could be so in some cases is indicated by the following statement appearing in the KatholischeBildepost (a Catholic magazine of Germany): “The name of God, however, which they [Jehovah’s Witnesses] have changed to ‘Jehovah’ is simply an invention of the sect.” (August 24, 1969) This statement smacks of religious prejudice. It also reveals poor research since, as already mentioned, the first writer to use the term “Jehova” was a Catholic monk—obviously not one of Jehovah’s Witnesses!
DOUBLE
STANDARD
“The word ‘Jehovah’ does not accurately represent any form of the Name ever used in Hebrew,” says the Preface of the RevisedStandardVersion. But what word does “accurately represent” the divine name in Hebrew? Some prefer “Yahweh,” others “Yehwah,” others “Jave,” and so on. The problem is that when writing ancient Hebrew only consonants were used, and even experts admit that it is a matter of conjecture as to which vowels made up the complete divine name.
One could also ask those objecting to the form “Jehovah” why they do not object to other names such as “Jesus” or “Peter.” Why do these critics not insist on using the original Greek forms of those names (Iesoús and Petros)? Are these individuals not guilty of applying a double standard in rejecting “Jehovah”?
OTHER
TRANSLATIONS
Many translations, of course, do use “Jehovah” or “Yahweh” or some other representation of the Tetragrammaton. Moreover, there are about 40 vernacular translations of the Christian Greek Scriptures (“New Testament”) that use a vernacular form of the Tetragrammaton such as Iehova (Hawaiian) and Uyehova (Zulu).
The
BibleinLivingEnglish (by Steven T. Byington) also uses “Jehovah” right through the Hebrew text. In his Preface, Byington says concerning “Jehovah”: “The spelling and the pronunciation are not highly important. What is highly important is to keep it clear that this is a personal name.” Yes, the name of the most exalted Person in the universe is unique, exclusive, incomparable, sublime.
WHAT
DOESTHISUNIQUENAME
MEAN?
To answer this, a historical flashback is appropriate. When he was commissioned by the Most High to lead the Israelites out of Egypt, “Moses said to the true God: ‘Suppose I am now come to the sons of Israel and I do say to them, “The God of your forefathers has sent me to you,” and they do say to me, “What is his name?” What shall I say to them?’ At this God said to Moses: “I SHALL PROVE TO BE WHAT I SHALL PROVE TO BE.’ And he added: ‘This is what you are to say to the sons of Israel, “I SHALL PROVE TO BE has sent me to you.”’” (Ex. 3:13, 14) This means Jehovah would carry his own grand purpose to completion in vindication of his name and sovereignty, and this helps us to understand the memorial name “Jehovah,” given in verse 15. According to the Hebrew root of the name, it appears to mean “He Causes To Become” (or, “Prove To Be”) with respect to himself. Thus God’s name has real significance to thoughtful persons. That name reveals him as being One who unfailingly fulfills what he promises and is perfectly in control of whatever situation may arise.
What a deep, sacred meaning the divine name has! It is the name par excellence of the universe, a glorious name. The term “Lord” is pale and inexplicit in comparison. Jesus loved and respected his Father’s name and once said to him: “Father, glorify your name.” The account continues: “Therefore a voice came out of heaven: ‘I both glorified it and will glorify it again.’”—John 12:28.
If Jesus had been a Bible translator today, would he have omitted his Father’s name from new translations? Hardly! Without a doubt, Jesus, of all persons, had the right attitude toward Almighty God and His name. So what should be our attitude toward God and his name?
-
Phizzy
Another reason they will not abandon the usage "Jehovah" is because Yahweh has been taken up as part of the name of many churches, not least "The Church of Yahweh".
They have missed the boat on that one as a Brand name.
Any other change to another rendering, say Yehowah, which would be equally arguable as accurate, would promote a lot of research by some JW's, who would find out the truth about Yahweh, and the origins of his evolution.
From minor Canaanite god, an equal divinity with his wife, to the God of the jewish Priests returned from Babylon who thought it a brilliant control method to invent him as the only God, the slow birth of Monotheism is a shock to find out for an active JW.
They have to face the fact in the end that "Jehovah", or YHWH, is a fiction.
-
5go
YHWH an it's Egyptian hieragliph were found in reference to another god and also a town in the region of Arabia. That god did have his name translated turns out not joking BTW it's Yahu. (Yes, pronounced Yahoo)
-
Phizzy
Dear 5go, could you provide more detail on this please ? it is very interesting.
-
InquiryMan
It has been published in other Watchtower publications as well.
I knew this when I was a teenager.
-
Apognophos
Yes, this is a serious case of imagining a scandal where there isn't one.
-
5go
Phizzy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yahweh_%28Canaanite_deity%29
Yahweh, prior to becoming Yahweh the national god of Israel and taking on monotheistic attributes in the 6th century BCE, was a part of the Canaanite pantheon in the period before the Babylonian captivity. Archeological evidence reveals that during this time period the Israelites were a group of Canaanite people. Yahweh was seen as a war god, and equated with El. Asherah, who was often seen as El's consort, has been described as a consort of Yahweh in numerous inscriptions.[1] The name Yahwi may possibly be found in some male Amorite names.[2] Yahu may be found in a place name.
Smith's 1863 A Dictionary of the Bible says that "Yahweh" is possible because shortening to "Yahw" would end up as "Yahu" or similar.
http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/11305-names-of-god
I am have trouble find the Arabia town reference because of the stuipid Egypt Saudi spat causing Google™ to come up with links to conspircy site but the article basically said there was and still are towns name with Yahu in their names in Arabia one of them can be traced back to the ancient egyptian period and has a heiroglyth associated with it and the that heiroglyph is refering is the same symbol that was used for YHWH. It also was used for the Caananite god Yahu.