DJW,
The truth stays the same as Jehovah and Jesus never change.
What Name Does the New Testament Emphasize - Jehovah or Jesus?
by Vanderhoven7 263 Replies latest watchtower bible
-
-
waton
waton, I don't know French, except for a few French words. But according to Google, I learned that "jusqu'à quel profondeur?"
Disillusioned JW: The word "touche" to me carried a kind of dismissive message, but I wanted to have the fact that in the story, "Jesus" never used the official name for the deity in his prayers to sink in deeply.
We are supposed to follow His example, and Wt's adherents really really cheapen the Most High's designation, by the hundreds of times it is kicked around in meetings, conversations. worship my foot.
Jesus made known the name, namely the meaning , majesty, but never mentioned it himself. well,
to "Satan" perhaps, during the kingdom temptation scene: "You must worship your god------ alone---"
-
GodBeliever
And God said moreover unto Moses, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, Jehovah, the God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, hath sent me unto you: this is my name for ever, and this is my memorial unto all generations.
Exodus 3:15
We know God doesn't change. Neither His Name.
-
jhine
In the OT Psalm 110 uses Yahweh for the Lord who days to my Lord
In the NT where the Psalm is quoted Kyrios is used not Yahweh ( Jehovah) . As we know Yahweh is not used at all despite what the Witnesses say .
Also Jerry says to Tom " touche Pussy Cat " many times in the cartoons.
-
slimboyfat
Why do you think someone or some group would want to eradicate the name of God from the ancient manuscripts of the New Testament?
David Trobisch says that it was because the second century editors of the New Testament wanted to blur the lines between Jesus and Jehovah. He writes:
”The editors did not mind this misrepresentation of Paul. The effect on Christian readers–that Jesus and YHWH become synonymous–was probably intended.” The First Edition of the New Testament (Oxford University Press: 2000), page 67.
-
Vanderhoven7
Hi Slim,
Interesting.
How does Trobisch think someone or some group in the second century was able to doctor or destroy all ancient NT manuscripts that contained the divine name?
How much faith does he have in the reliability of the New Testament?
-
slimboyfat
David Trobisch argues that the New Testament shows signs of being editorialised in the second century because of the common features that early manuscripts share: use of codex; use of nomina sacra; order of the books; titles of the books; specific parts written by the editors (such as John 21); and even the name itself “New Testament”.
Interesting as that argument is, his related point about the original New Testament documents containing the divine name is established on independent grounds. As with George Howard, Lloyd Gaston, John McRay and Frank Shaw, Trobisch points out that the Jews used the divine name in their texts in the period when the New Testament was written and therefore the New Testament writers would have done the same. In particular he says that “it is not very likely that Paul would have avoided using the tetragram to please his Gentile audience”. He further argues that Paul and other New Testament writers made a careful distinction between YHWH and Jesus that was lost when scribes replaced the divine name with “Lord”. He cites the example of “Jehovah said to my lord, sit at my right hand”, which was clear in meaning for the original readers, to the somewhat confusing “the Lord says to my Lord, sit at my right hand”, once the divine name had been replaced with “Lord”.
This is only part of his argument. It’s worth reading his book if you can get a hold of it.
-
Disillusioned JW
waton, I am sorry that my use of the word "touché" in a reply to you seemed dismissive to you. I merely used the word to concisely convey the idea that you made an excellent rebuttal to what I had said in an earlier post about the frequency of the use of the name "Jehovah" in the scriptures.
slimboyfat, the idea that very early "editors of the New Testament wanted to blur the lines between Jesus and Jehovah" is an idea I had for many years and It is an idea that the WT has long taught, but I am currently unsure if the idea is correct. I was thinking that it is very hard to believe that is true since not even one extant NT manuscript has the name YHWH in it. If any manuscripts had had it I thought it would have been nearly impossible to eradicate all copies which had it.
But perhaps you and Trobisch are right in saying some ancient NT manuscripts had it. I think that because a lot of ancient Jewish (including Torah keeping Jewish Christian) religious literature and a lot of ancient alternative Christian literature were so effectively destroyed by Christians that the literature is no longer extant. Scholars also say that some passages in ancient rabbinical literature seem to say that a number of Jews long ago destroyed all copies they found of Christian literature which contained the divine name (YHWH). In numerous cases scholars say we know the names of numerous ancient religious books (due to citations) though we have no extant copies of them, not even known tiny fragments of them.
Just as we know (due to a leaked document) that the WT now instructs that all copies of certain old WT literature be removed (and in a number of cases, be trashed) from all kingdom hall literature counters, perhaps some 2nd century CE church leaders instructed all Christian congregations to replace all their NT manuscripts with revised ones which entirely lacked the name "YHWH".
But here is the thing. If the name YHWH was removed from all extant manuscripts of the NT books (or if so many copies of the NT containing The Name were destroyed such that no extant copies exist), why did YHWH allow that to happen? If it did happen doesn't it indicate that YHWH doesn't actually exist. To me, if such did happen then it is strong evidence that YHWH is entirely a figment of human imagination. To me it is inconceivable that if YHWH as described in the OT really exists, that he would allow such to happen to the NT.
What living author who uses his or her own personal name many times in his or her multiple copyright protected books (especially in autobiographies), who owns the copyrights to those books, would allow any editor and/or any publisher of those books to eradicate all mention of the author's name from the author's books?
-
slimboyfat
There are no New Testament manuscripts that are definitely older than 200 CE, which was after the change had been made. The early Septuagint used the divine name but Christians replaced it with “Lord” in the second century. So Trobisch argues that it’s not only plausible that the same replacement of the divine name took place in the New Testament as took place in the Septuagint, it’s in fact the most likely explanation.
What the early New Testament manuscripts do display is an unusually high number of variants in texts using “Lord”, which the removal of the divine name, and subsequent confusion over the identity of the “Lord” neatly explains. Otherwise what gave rise to the high number of “Lord” variants in the New Testament texts?
-
Vanderhoven7
Hi DJW
But here is the thing. If the name YHWH was removed from all extant manuscripts of the NT books (or if so many copies of the NT containing The Name were destroyed such that no extant copies exist), why did YHWH allow that to happen?
Well I don't believe it did happen, i.e., that someone or some group in the second century was able to doctor or destroy all ancient NT manuscripts that contained the divine name. I'll stick with what every one of the extent NT manuscripts demonstrate, i.e. that Jehovah's name is absent from the gospels and epistles of the New Testament and that the manuscripts are therefore reliable and God preserved.