Inquirer
In re reading Ray Franz ISOCF, I came across an actual photocopy of a letter written by George Howard, about new evidence in 1988 placing the Chester Beatty Papyrus No. 2 [p-46] at some time before 81CE. I was especially interested in the post-script. The complete George Howard letter states:
"Dear Mr Persson,
Thank you for your letter of 29 June regarding the re-dating of P46 to the latter part of the first century. If Dr Kim's dating is correct it would show that in in a Pauline MS of the first century the Tetragram was not used as I suggested. This weakens my theory, at least in regard to the Pauline letters. Whether or not first century manuscripts of the gospels and other writings would follow the same pattern of P46 would still be a matter of conjecture. We can only hope that first century MSS of these writings turn up as well. A close look at P75 and P66 shows that they are not far behind in date to P46.
Sincerly
George Howard
Professor
P.S. The Jehovah's Witnesseshave made too much out of my articles. I do not support their theories.
http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/ Look at the link for Anti-Marcionite Prologues... 150-400 AD it was dated! THAT'S A FLAMING LONG GAP! It could be middle second century or it could "the Masorete era!" It's dated about 2 00 years BEFORE AND AFTER CONSTANTINE! I am also shocked by the daing of CANONICAL GREEK SCRIPTURE MANUSCRIPTS! Not everyone agrees that all the books of the GS were written within the first century! I've looked at the dates when the Catholics think some of the minor prophet books were written in the HS -- and it differs so much from JW dates (and I am not talking about 607 BC) I am not saying the JW's are right OR THE CATHOLICS! What I am saying is that from time to time archaeologists get the dating wrong.
Also, George said in that letter, that the divine name may not occur in the Pauline letters, at least, but left it in doubt... But I have proof anyway as what I just showed you in the last post.
inquirer
JoinedPosts by inquirer
-
110
Do you still use Jehovah's name in prayer assuming you still pray?
by JH in.
if you do pray, will you use the name that's above all other names....says the watchtower.. if not, what name do you use?.
-
-
inquirer
-
110
Do you still use Jehovah's name in prayer assuming you still pray?
by JH in.
if you do pray, will you use the name that's above all other names....says the watchtower.. if not, what name do you use?.
-
-
inquirer
I read those posts and I know that the what you do with "the name" is important. You bring God down if you are a thief or a liar for instance.
But it says in (parapharsed) Romans 10:13 those who call on the name of Jehovah will be saved. (with good deeds of course.)
I am disappointed that you didn't look at jehovah.freewebpage.org probably. You should look at the link at the bottom of the page The Divine Name http://jehovah.freewebpage.org/Jehovah_The_Divine_Name_Part_2.htm It has historical references (talmud -- they swear blind it was taken out), legends, apocrypha, gnostic literature, contemporary writers and modern scholar opinion as proof.
IT'S NOT JUST HEBREW SCRIPTURE REFERENCE!
I just got "Truth in Translation" written by Jason BeDuhn yesterday! And he says at the start of his book that as a scholar it's important to look at things from a historical point of view! That's exactly what I am doing. They said if the JW's are right about YHWH in the Greek Scriptures, everyone should acknowledge and give respect for being right all this time, or something like that along those lines...
(He compares 9 major translations of the Bible in the Greek Scriptures, including the New World Translation.)
To be honest with you, he says the NW runs the risk of translation bias by putting YHWH in the Greek Scriptures, but at the start of his book he did (I guess contradict himself) by saying about historical point of view is important as just said last paragraph. -
110
Do you still use Jehovah's name in prayer assuming you still pray?
by JH in.
if you do pray, will you use the name that's above all other names....says the watchtower.. if not, what name do you use?.
-
-
inquirer
Quite admittingly... I wish there was more information on the subject and not just Gerard Gertoux's book. I found his book difficult to read sometimes, and I am just saying I wish there was someone native to English on the subject that was pro-divine name in the GS. I understand it now, but in any case I wish there were more authors on the subject. I guess we do have the privledge these days on the .Net (which http://jehovah.freewebpage.org) talks about of modern Bibles that use the divine name in the GS (Greek Scriptures.)
-
110
Do you still use Jehovah's name in prayer assuming you still pray?
by JH in.
if you do pray, will you use the name that's above all other names....says the watchtower.. if not, what name do you use?.
-
-
inquirer
If I ask you to look at one more site, jaffacake. Look at this one. And scroll down to the bottom where it talks about the divine name in the first few centuries. Look under the last heading " UPDATED INFORMATION " which continues on the next page, and then tell me that the divine name doesn't in the Greek Scriptures. There's proof with extra-Biblical sources!
http://jehovah.freewebpage.org/ -
110
Do you still use Jehovah's name in prayer assuming you still pray?
by JH in.
if you do pray, will you use the name that's above all other names....says the watchtower.. if not, what name do you use?.
-
-
inquirer
@trevor.
Do you think that the reason God has failed to help the thousands of Christians begging him for help in New Orleans, is that they are pronouncing his name slightly wrong or just calling him God?
inq -- This could happen to anyone. It could be you stuck in there just as well as me! ...Goodness me, some people think that I want the divine name to be spoken like some magic mantra or something! It's not the case. -
110
Do you still use Jehovah's name in prayer assuming you still pray?
by JH in.
if you do pray, will you use the name that's above all other names....says the watchtower.. if not, what name do you use?.
-
-
inquirer
Re your previous post.... When... but when does a name ever mean a personal name! It must mean it sometimes! Does it ever mean "Jehovah" personally? Or do we just keep calling him God?
-
110
Do you still use Jehovah's name in prayer assuming you still pray?
by JH in.
if you do pray, will you use the name that's above all other names....says the watchtower.. if not, what name do you use?.
-
-
inquirer
jaffacake --
Hi Inquirer,
I've been looking for this. Could you confirm which book, and which chapter I can find it in please.
BTW the Tetragrammaton book - (360 pages so I dont suggest you print it) is really thorough & was checked by JWs
http://gertoux.online.fr/divinename/faq/A20.htm
Appendix C, p 249. I've read that tetragrammaton book. He's definetly done his homework, but I hate it how he doesn't draw to any conclusions. And why doesn't he talk about the fact it says "hallelujah" 4 times ni Revelation? -
110
Do you still use Jehovah's name in prayer assuming you still pray?
by JH in.
if you do pray, will you use the name that's above all other names....says the watchtower.. if not, what name do you use?.
-
-
inquirer
Do you really seek truth, or something to support the beliefs you already have?
Inq -- Come on! That's the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard! Everybody beliefs something because of something they have heard and read! And if it sounds right we believe it! We anylyze a situation, and if we think someone is lying or is untruthful -- it's rubbish!
-- what do you base things on?
The Bible - absolutely. On the Tetragrammaton question I can list the scriptural sources that I rely on. I did ask you to do the same, and to date you have referred to anti Christian (Shem Tob) and modern Catholic versions. Do you really believe we don't have accurate scriptures from nearly 2000 years ago?
Yet there are many ancient manuscripts with and without. Not so with the Christian scriptures, not one containing the Tetragram. My discussion is about the Christian Greek scriptures, not the Septuagint (OT)
"However this part of the gospel of John quoted a verse from the book of Isaiah and in all the Septuagints of this period (before 150 CE) there are none with the name kurios (Lord) instead of the tetragram. For example..."
He even underlined it like I did!
I apologise if you were insulted - not my intention. I was referring to modern versions of Bibles by people who were either publishing solely to criticise Christianity, or to convert Jews to Christianity, or published by the Trinitarian Bible Society. I consider such relatively modern versions that WTS relies on for J-references to be spurious (ie innaccurate compared to the more reliable ancient versions - that the JWs agree are inspired & form the basis of their Westcott & Hort text - an excellent version.
I am most certainly not calling you a liar. This must be a misunderstanding about something I wrote!?
Please don't be so angry - We are both sincere and I offer friendship. I wish to discuss rather than argue. -
110
Do you still use Jehovah's name in prayer assuming you still pray?
by JH in.
if you do pray, will you use the name that's above all other names....says the watchtower.. if not, what name do you use?.
-
-
inquirer
[ I am sorry if it looks funny, but my browser does it differently and I no I don't want to change browsers.}
Inq - I could give you examples of writings that use "Halleuljah" or "IAO" LONG BEFORE 1385 CE!
My research is about the Tetragrammaton, and where the name Jehovah has been included. ; I should have been more specific. ;
I have seen the George Howard study. ; As I said GH puts forward a theory, nothing more. ; Like you I once thought it was feasible until I researched more. ; The textual basis of ;the GH study was the use of God's name in pre-Christian times and only examines Hebrew manuscripts. ; He does not even deal with all the 237 Jehovah refernces in the NWT. ; His theory focuses solely on those 112 direct and indirect Hebrew scripture quotations. ; I agree that the Shem Tob version might actually be a recension, and therefore extremely important, as this could make it a descendant of the Apostle himself.
So, maybe they had a good reason for it with these Hebrew manuscripts from 1385 -- There Hebrews! They know more about the divine name than anyone!
The 1385 source was published by Jewish physician Shem Tob. ; This work J2 was written for the sole purpose of attacking and disproving Christianity. ; GH describes the work...deals with various passages of the Bible that were disputed by ;Jews and Christians...contains the entire gospel of Matthew along with polemic (critical) comments of Shem Tob interspersed throughout the text. ; Is this the preferred Watchtower source of inspiration above the 5,000 ancient manuscripts of 1000 years earlier?
Lets assume the Shem Tob version is a recension. ; The fact is this does NOT use the Tetragrammaton! ; It uses the term hash-Shem, or indeed an abbreviation of hash-Shem ie an abbreviation of a ;phrase meaning 'The Name'. ; There is no textual evidence whatsoever that Matthew used the Tetragrammaton of Divine Name.
Answer me this: Why is the name "Yahweh" referred to so much in the Catholic New American Bible so much in the 'New Testament?" I thought it was Jesus in the NT -- that is the most popular/usual understanding!
I only ;trust Bible's that are based on the ancient manuscripts. ; I am bidding on ebay for a Kingdom Interlinear NWT. ; I trust the Westcott & Hort Greek Interlinear. ; I also trust the New Jesrusalem Bible which restores the Divine Name where it rightly belongs - in the OT. ; Perhaps that is why JWs like to use the New Jerusalem Bible, they know deep down it is more accurate than the NWT. ; I haven't seen the Bibles you mention. ; I go back to my point about whether they are based on the ancient Greek manuscripts? ; I'm not arguing that everywhere the NT says Lord, that refers to Jesus. ; I have never said that, so I don't understand why you need to make that point.
Examples: John 15:15
6 Slaves . . . friends: in the Old Testament, Moses (Deut 34:5), Joshua (Joshua 24:29), and David (Psalm 89:21) were called "servants" or "slaves of Yahweh"; only Abraham (Isaiah 41:8; 2 Chron 20:7; cf James 2:23) was called a "friend of God."
Romans 1:18
14 [18] The wrath of God: God's reaction to human sinfulness, an Old Testament phrase that expresses the irreconcilable opposition between God and evil (see Isaiah 9:11, 16, 18, 20; 10:4; 30:27). It is not contrary to God's universal love for his creatures, but condemns Israel's turning aside from the covenant obligations. Hosea depicts Yahweh as suffering intensely at the thought of having to punish Israel (Hosea 11:8-9). God's wrath was to be poured forth especially on the "Day of Yahweh" and thus took on an eschatological connotation (see Zephaniah 1:15).
Again, we have no argument here.
Starting from Revelation 10:1 and along side the footnote, it appears to recognize more than the other 2 references, that this God of the Old Testament is continuing to talk to us in the NT! -- the same God.
Why does the Catholic Bible not stop talking about Yahweh when it's the NT! Isn't it Jesus' part of the Bible?
Are you seriously suggesting that I, or Catholics divide the Bible into teo parts, OT for Jehovah and NT for Jesus. ; That is what the JWs teach you that non JWs, especially trinitarians believe. ; It is not! ; ; Why should I defend a modern catholic Bible translation. ; Is that the source you rely on? ; It is certainly not my idea of the most accurate inspired scripture available to us. ; I am sorry but I cannot accept catholic or any other trinitarian versions as the most accurate versions of the accurate inspired scriptures. ; Both you and the Watchtower rely heavily on modern trinitarian versions. ; I rely on 5000 ancient manscripts, as did westcott & Hort, some from as early as 20 - 30 years after the death of the last NT author.
To quote Gerard Gertoux's book in the Book of the resurrection of Bartholemew, they apply the divine name to Jesus (this book is dated between the 5th and 6th century.) I know it's Jesus, but why did they use a "Hebrew Scripture" concept in the "Greek Scriptures?" And why does Severi of Antioch (465 - 538 AD) comment on John 8:58 and say IOA was God's name in Hebrew? In Greek, they don't have "H", that's why it only contained 3 letters.
I agree, an abbreviated Divine Name, but no Tetragrammaton, and certainly nothing to translate as Jehovah.
Why is the Divine Name not recorded in any ancient NT manuscript? ; I don't dispute he called out to his Father, but he did not say his name!
And also, why did Steven get stoned to death? Because he used the divine name! That was the real reason!
I'll have to look that up when I get back. ; But the Divine Name does not exist in the Christian Greek sriptures, not if we believe we have accurate ancient manuscripts. ; I can name my 500 sources for you to check. ; Do you prefer to trust anti-christian versions (Shem Tob) or trinitarians? ;
I agree with all of this...until this section below....
”’ This is proof of the divine name in the Greek Scriptures! But other Bible versions put this confusing "the Lord said to my Lord..." situation...
“This is what you are to say to the sons of Israel, ‘Jehovah the God of YOUR forefathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob, has sent me to YOU.’ This is my name to time indefinite, and this is the memorial of me to generation after generation.
For one reason. ; There is no scriptural textual evidence that it was ever there. ; I don't believe God is concerned with the spelling or proninciation of his name, if he was why has he allowed its pronunciation to be forgotton forever? ; I believe this refers to the proper scriptural meaning of someone's name - the argument about good name or reputation, that you readily dismiss.
___
I read your post... Let's just forget about what it said in the ancient Greek text for a moment... And let's think about Pslams 110:1, but using titles for kings. "The KING said to the king..." Who's the KING and why is the other king called "king?" If you wrote a book called "The 2 kings" and it was about the king of England, and the king of France, don't you think it would be confusing and strange that the "2 kings" never get called their personal name? Why aren't we told their names?
Re: Shem Tob. What about the other "J references?" Are they ALL anti-Christian too? Forgive me, I get so confused on this subject at times.
Let me ask you this: If you quote the "divine name passage in the HEbrew Scirptures" shouldn't you write YHWH in the Greek Scriptures! Let's say we are living in an era before the priting press. And I came up to you and asked your friend how to bake a banana cake. I saw her original sheet of paper. I copied it all down, word-for-word. Made sure I didn't write 2 tablespoons of sugar instead of 1 and so forth. NOw, wouldn't I be stupid if added certain ingredients and took out some necessary flour that made the cake taste nice in the first place! Isn't logical to follow word-for-word... and if you take something out, you've ruined it! It's like with the divine name in the Greek Scriptures... You know it's there but you have this feeling inside you that someone took it out! That's how I felt about the divine name! I can just imagine Paul quoting a Hebrew Scripture and writing it in the Greek Scriptures! He loves YHWH and wants to teach the Christians a certain doctrinal point. Why would he not quote it properly! I could show you some Bible links that are not NWT that include the divine name! There's heaps of the them! AND YES THE DIVINE NAME IS INCLUDED IN THE GREEK SCRIPTURES AS WELL! Does that make them wrong, those translators? Does that make the "J reference Hebrew translations" wrong? Even a bad person can give good gifts you know!
re: meaning of Jesus, Joel... But these names have meaning! And they are found in the Greek Scriptures! Are you saying that you are allowed to know that Jesus means "Jehovah is salvation" but never allowed to utter his name in the Greek Scriptures! This is significant to me. I can't understand why you can see what I am saying...
re: trinitarians or Shem Tob. -- I won't go into that one. Put it this way, I don't know how to read Hebrew but they know the divine name, and I don't agree with trinitarians, but they have good Bible translations -- most Bible translations are biased towards trinitarianism. But of course you knew that.
re: -- So what if there is no tetragrammaton! You should have faith rather than just rely on sight! Luke quoted Psalms 110:1 and it should be there in black and white -- the YHWH name that is. I know it's not there IN FULL in the Greek Scriptures but logically it should be!
re: God let's a lot of things go astray. Scriptures have been taken out (like in the NWT in the gospels - no doubt a good reason) And God's pronunciation has been lost, apparently. But in the book there has been an ancient heiroglyph piece been found that has God's name with the pronunciation Yehua' -- from 1400 BC!
re- book of Nicodemus... This is an Apocryphal book written within the first 2 centuries and you ignore this just because God's name is not written in full! Jah means Jehovah, it's just an abbreviated form!
re - NAB quotes... I was merely quoting the footnotes where the divine name is mentioned. I don't know what manuscripts they use, but I still think it's significant.
I hope I answered all your questions! -
110
Do you still use Jehovah's name in prayer assuming you still pray?
by JH in.
if you do pray, will you use the name that's above all other names....says the watchtower.. if not, what name do you use?.
-
-
inquirer
Inquirer
In re reading Ray Franz ISOCF, I came across an actual photocopy of a letter written by George Howard, about new evidence in 1988 placing the Chester Beatty Papyrus No. 2 [p-46] at some time before 81CE. I was especially interested in the post-script. The complete George Howard letter states:
"Dear Mr Persson,
Thank you for your letter of 29 June regarding the re-dating of P46 to the latter part of the first century. If Dr Kim's dating is correct it would show that in in a Pauline MS of the first century the Tetragram was not used as I suggested. This weakens my theory, at least in regard to the Pauline letters. Whether or not first century manuscripts of the gospels and other writings would follow the same pattern of P46 would still be a matter of conjecture. We can only hope that first century MSS of these writings turn up as well. A close look at P75 and P66 shows that they are not far behind in date to P46.
Sincerly
George Howard
Professor
P.S. The Jehovah's Witnesseshave made too much out of my articles. I do not support their theories.
GH's theory was described by himself using the words "we could imagine that...." Moreover, his theory was strictly limited to quotes from OT scriptures, and would most definately not justify the majority of the NWT insertions in the NT.
current message inquirer--
Goodness me! What do I believe now! lol But get this! Gerard Gertoux said in his book, that the name was taken out between 70 CE - 135 CE! That is what he said!!!! It's amazing what theories people come up with!!! It just goes on forever!'Who do you believe?
Thanks for showing me this letter, but it still seems to me they aren't sure on this subject... There's still room to believe that people could have taken the name out! And it seems as if my theory is correct because it says "Hallelujah" in Revelation 4 times! Let's never forget that! Jehovah was praised continously and repetitively (I mean that in the most respectful way!!!) from about Psalm 108 onwards! Towards the end it keeps saying "Praise Jah, Praise Jehovah" and giving different proses of poetry to explain why we should give him praise. And this "hebrew Scripture concept" is in the Greek Scriptures 4 times!!!
I'll reply your other posts -- haven't had the chance yet.