If Jehovah let his name be removed from the Bible - how accurate can it be?

by truthseeker 15 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  truthseeker

  This question has always troubled me.

  Suppose you write a book. It becomes a best seller. Then some little fart comes along and replaces your name with anonymous.

  Now this book can be published and edited by just about anybody who chooses to be "anonymous".

  End result - your original work is lost and some Revised Edition has replaced it, written by "anonymous"

  This is exactly what has happened with Jehovah, the author of the Bible. Jehovah God, who used 40 different Bible writers to complete his work, had his name removed 7,000 times from the Bible.

  Of course, God did actually write the Bible - but he didn't do anything about those scribes and modern day printeries who removed his name and replaced it with Lord.

  What am I trying to say here?

  If Jehovah God allowed his name to be removed, not just once, but 7,000 times, then what's stopping any Bible publishing house from changing the sacred scrolls to what they want them to say?

  True, Revelation talks about what will happen to those who make "an addition or deletion to the scroll" - but no one has suffered the fiery torment that awaits them.

  So how can the Bible be taken so literally, and be so accurate, if the author did nothing about his name being removed?

  Well, the Witnesses say, we put his name back! And so they did! Eighty-three times more necessary than they had to, replacing Jesus with Jehovah and changing the meaning of context by adding words and making paragraphs to support their "faithful and discreet slave doctrine."

  You can't win.
• 

  kls

  That is so true, we have no idea what was left or taken out even when the scrolls were first written down. No one knows if the Bible is say 10% or 90% accurate. The Bible was written by man and they can add take away, look at NWT ,none of the writers could speak or interrupt Hebrew very well, look what they did.
• 

  dh

  God did actually write the Bible

  you reckon?

  i think major parts old testement exist in a very accurate form, proved by the existence of the the dead sea scrolls which showed that the integrity of the text in those sections was accurate, when compared to other manuscripts from later periods, it showed that there hadn't been major changes to that part of the bible.

  of course that is to the original langauge, not translation, in translation there's no letter 'j' throughout the whole hebrew scriptures so naturally a lot is not right and translators messed up a great deal in early editions, confusing names of people etc.

  then there also are the issues of who compiled the biblical canon and how they did it, oodles of info out there

  there is a scripture somewhere that states words to the effect of if a letter in the torah (the books of moses, genesis-deuteronomy) is changed, then the world will cease to be, but this could easily mean that as long as there is one accurate unchanged copy somewhere out there, it's alright if the others are corrupted.

  the only way to guage whether the bible is the word of something higher than men is a lab test of its prophecies, which i know has been done before using laws of probability etc.
• 

  bebu

  So how can the Bible be taken so literally, and be so accurate, if the author did nothing about his name being removed?

  The WT insists that removing the vowels somehow changed the content, and diminishes God in some great way. I can't say that that is a very logical argument. But then, the WT is not known for making logical arguments.

  Here is something I've been thinking over. God gives His name as Yaweh, as most scholars believe it would be given. But there is no way to VERIFY this. The WT zeroes in on this unverifiable name, and bends over backwards trying to distinguish themselves as the only ones who truly worship God--since they alone use His 'name' Jehovah...

  In the meantime... Jesus is called the heir of all things (Hebrews 1), and Philippians 2 says that at JESUS' name every knee will bow, and confess that HE (Jesus) is Lord. Also note the following passage that is popular with the WT. They insert "Jehovah" in in verse 13 in lieu of Lord--who is identified in verse 9 as JESUS:

  Rom 10:9

  That if you confess with your mouth, "Jesus is Lord ," and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. 10 For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you confess and are saved. [Note: no mention of Jehovah/Yahweh here!] 11 As the Scripture says, "Anyone who trusts in him will never be put to shame." 12 For there is no difference between Jew and Gentile--the same Lord is Lord of all and richly blesses all who call on him, 13 for, "Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved."

  ...To me it looks like a kind of scissors action. 1) The name of Yahweh/Jehovah is not only NOT written in the NT, but we are unable to be 100% certain of its actual pronunciation from the OT. 2) Yet, the name of Jesus is known in Hebrew (Y'shua/Yeshua), and the exact meaning of Jesus is well-known (as it was not an uncommon name): "God is our salvation". (The angel also told Mary that her baby would be called "Immanuel"--'God is with us'...)

  So, I think that God deliberately moves our relationship with Him not just in terms of His simply "existing" (as Yahweh basically means), but into a particular relationship with Him, where we may exist (live forever) because of His salvation.

  At any rate, the WT is zealously trying to focus attention away from personally relating to God thru Christ (tho' they give him occasional lip service!), and keep everyone riveted on a name that is great, but still impersonal... And perhaps the "losing" of His name was not only allowed, but intentional, so that if we were intent on being accurate about names, Jesus is the only thing that we'd be corralled into using, from any angle.

  My $.02,

  bebu
• 

  undercover

  I always wondered why JWs put so much emphasis on using God's name. They name their religion using his supposed name. They brag that only they use his supposed name. If it meant so much to God that his worshippers use his name would he have allowed the actual spelling and pronunciation to be lost? So I guess my question would be, "If God let his name be removed from the Bible, how powerful and almighty can he be?"
• 

  Maverick

  Let me come at this from a different angle. Why is the WTS god so insecure? The God I worship is not too worried about what humans think of Him. He knows what He is and can do. He doesn't have to stomp His feet and whine and threaten and extort people to love Him. As for His name, He could care less if we know it or not. The WTS made "God's name" an issue. But is it? Step out of the box and think about it. Mav
• 

  bebu

  I always wondered why JWs put so much emphasis on using God's name.

  Me too. The only reason is: because it gives them an "edge" in "proving" themselves as having the only authority today from God. ... (but didn't using "Jehovah" really get zeroed in on later in Witness history?)

  Great post, Mav!

  bebu
• 

  Swan

  LOL!

  That's a great question!

  Tammy
• 

  rocketman

  So, I think that God deliberately moves our relationship with Him not just in terms of His simply "existing" (as Yahweh basically means), but into a particular relationship with Him, where we may exist (live forever) because of His salvation.

  At any rate, the WT is zealously trying to focus attention away from personally relating to God thru Christ (tho' they give him occasional lip service!), and keep everyone riveted on a name that is great, but still impersonal... And perhaps the "losing" of His name was not only allowed, but intentional, so that if we were intent on being accurate about names, Jesus is the only thing that we'd be corralled into using, from any angle.

  Very interesting post, bebu. Certainly, Jesus takes center stage in the NT, and yet the Society clings strongly to Jehovah this, Jehovah that - while his name fades from the NT....no, wait, drops like a stone from the NT in comaprison with the OT.

  Earlier in jw history, there was more emphasis on Jesus. The wts then began emphasizing Jehovah instead. For example, they removed many songs from their song book that extolled Christ and replaced them with songs praising Jehovah mainly.

  To me, this was a concerted move to differentiate them with religions of Christendom, and in and of itself has no real support scripturally, for the reasons you point out.
• 

  XQsThaiPoes

  From what I've looked up YHWH. Is not really "God's Name". It is not even hebrew. Infact many references labeld "Lord/God" by the christians are just as bad as the JWs trying to make everything Jehovah.

  Look at Allah vs YHWH. Allah is in the bible. Allah is not the same god as YHWH. Aten is in the bible. Not the same as YHWH. I think it was a miracle that we are not calling him Baal. So whom ever inspired the exodus story (the awake admitted moses is not a name) invented the concept that Jahve was a going to be the name for all Gods past (which was his pagan wifes God most likely) and present likewise wise christians decided Jesus was.

  And no offense I think that it is idiodicy to then that a Necromancer Rabbi was a midianite volcano god made into flesh and blood to die for your sins. If that is the case I wonder who mount st. Helen sent.