The Generation nonsense is at the beginning.
wizzstick
JoinedPosts by wizzstick
-
210
TV.JW.ORG (September 2015) - Generation explained again
by Designer Stubble inguess the overlapping generation concept is difficult for most to comprehend.
david spane does his best to explain it again.
the cutoff date for this generation has now moved to 1992 (was once 1935), the year that fred franz died.
-
-
wizzstick
-
20
Help finding Watchtower or Awake Showing "We Can't Kill Apostates Now" 1954 Mag?
by ReligionOfHatred ini need information how the organization teaches members to shun any dealings with those they think are apostates, i am being labeled apostate by uncle crap head.
where is the magazine about "we wish we had the authority to kill apostates like the days of israel but the government does not allow this"?
do you have a list because my lawyer is going before a judge to show that, there is no way we can speak with them superfine's because they view us as the walking dead.
-
-
wizzstick
"We are not living today among theocratic nations where such members of our fleshly family relationship could be exterminated for apostasy from God and his theocratic organization . . . "Being limited by the laws of the worldly nation in which we live and also by the laws of God through Jesus Christ, we can take action against apostates only to a certain extent, that is, consistent with both sets of laws. The law of the land and God's law through Christ forbid us to kill apostates . . ."
The Watchtower November 15, 1952 page 703
-
5
wt study "Power of Christ"
by prologos init is all about the bible story, alleged miracles of jesus.
not one miraculously replicated since, so:.
final comment by senior elder: "that we have these powerful miracle of the christ is a guarantee for it to happen in the new system.
-
-
-
12
London Conventions 2015 - NO TWICKENHAM
by Da.Furious injust got news from a friend that yesterday a letter was read in their congregation announcing new locations for the regional conventions in london.. the main item was no twickenham in 2015.. their congregation is assigned to excel london (need to confirm since he was not 100% sure).
i will update this when i get more information tonight.. .
-
-
wizzstick
Was anyone at the London Excel RC on Friday?
Apparently there was an apostate that got up on the stage. I'm told that the speaker quickly asked everyone to grab their songbooks and start singing.
The idea of 6,000 people grabbing songbooks and singing from whatever page they come across is just hilarious.
Can anyone confirm this insanity?
-
49
What kind of errors in the Bible?
by TheWonderofYou inthe new testament specialist daniel wallace notes that although there are about 300,000 individual variations of the text of the new testament, this number is very misleading.
most of the differences are completely inconsequential--spelling errors, inverted phrases and the like.
a side by side comparison between the two main text families (the majority text and the modern critical text) shows agreement a full 98% of the time.[18].
-
-
wizzstick
Simply put, if we reject the authenticity of the New Testament on textual grounds we'd have to reject every ancient work of antiquity and declare null and void every piece of historical information from written sources prior to the beginning of the second millennium A.D.
But the Bible makes the supernatural claim to be the Word of God. Thus your comparing to other works of antiquity makes no sense.
If translators have to chose which copy of scripture to use when translating the Bible (which they do) you have to ask for evidence that God has guided them to chose the correct copy (and indeed that copy was what He wanted recorded for all time).
No evidence? Then how can you be 100% what you read is from God?
-
1
Doctor Who Series 9 trailer features a new enemy...Charles Taze Russell
by wizzstick inlooking at the the new trailer.... doctor who series 9 trailer.
who is it marching down a corridor at 21 seconds in?
none other than ctr!.
-
-
wizzstick
Looking at the the new trailer...
Who is it marching down a corridor at 21 seconds in? None other than CTR!
Time to run GB.
Selling Brooklyn has awoken him from under his pyramid of doom...
-
91
Why using Jehovah for God's name is as good as using Yahweh
by oppostate inin another thread i wrote some notes about why using jehovah in english is as good as using yahweh.
i'm starting a discussion on this topic because it sounds quite ignorant to hear people talk of the monk who started using it in latin without really understanding why the monk did so.. the spanish dominican monk, raymundus martini, in 1270, didn't get hoodwinked by an old jewish superstition about pronouncing the divine name with the vowel points of another word.. 1. first the vowel points of adonay and jehovah cannot be the same for grammatical reasons.
you just can't use the same vowel points because some vowels aren't paired with some consonants in pronouncing hebrew words.
-
-
wizzstick
Of the two examples you've provided, one 'Yeh-hoo-ahh' is from Greg Stafford, and one 'I_Eh_ou_Ah' is from Gérard Gertoux? Is that right? In all honesty neither sound anything like Jehovah - which in itself is still a hybrid word.
If there was a correct pronunciation of the Divine Name we'd know it by now. The WT has it wrong. And that is important as they claim to be God's sole channel of communication.
By the way there is an review on Amazon of the book that maybe of interest to you:
Linguists recognise that in the evolution of a language, the vowels change more noticably than the consonents. For example, The short vowels of British Recieved Pronunciation are manifested as dipthongs or even tripthongs in many accents of the Southern United States. In 1940s Britain, the present [æ] phoneme was pronounced more like [e], and this is a time difference of only 60 years!!!
Anglo-Saxon words of 900 years ago, are recognised by etymologists as antecendents of Modern English primarily by their consonents, because vowels, semi-vowels, and glides change even from generation to generation. The Anglo-Saxon language of 900 years ago is a "foreign language" in that it has changed beyond recognition due to linguistic factors such as ablaut, semi-vocalisation, palatisation.
The fact that the name YHWH is made up entirely of slippery semi-vowels, and possibly aspirants, renders it very difficult for linguists to extrapolate an original form.
palatal [j] --- semi-vowel [y] --- vowel[i]
labiodental[v] --- biablial[β] --- semi-vowel[w] --- vowel[u]
(This demonstrates semi-vocalisation, palatisation and the forming of approximants)
Ablaut is shown in the gradual vowel changes of the Proto-Indo-European *[pod] to the Latin *[ped] to the authors own language French: 'pied' [pye] ('d' not reflected in modern pronunciation)
To be objective though, the change from PIE *[pod] to the Anglo-Saxon [fo:t] to our present pronunciation of 'foot' [fut] is less striking with regard to consonent preservation, but we still notice a general trend of vowel "slipperyness".
Ablaut (or apophony) is also demonstrated by the the pluralisation of 'man' to 'men' or that of 'goose' to 'geese'. This is common in Amharic, ANOTHER SEMITIC LANGUAGE.
ASSUMING that the Hebrew language underwent linguistic changes similar to Amharic, in the 1070 years between the first and last books of the Old Testanment (compared to the 900 years between Beowulf and the present literature), it is quite possible that many pronunciations of The Name came in and went out of use, especially in view of the Jewish prohibition of pronouncing the name.
Due to the ablaut of the unwritten and "un-pin-downable" vowels in Hebrew, the name Y.eH.oW.aH (Jehovah/Yehowah), could easily have been Y.aH.oW.eH (Yahweh/Yahoweh) or even hypothetical Y.iH.uW.H (Jihuβh) or iY.H.uW.H (Ihuh).
I appreciate the depth of research and reasoning that Gertoux has undertaken but i still believe from a linguistic point of view that is impossible to determine the original pronunciation of The Name and therefore any dogmatic attempts to support ANY of the varients are futile, even with the support of personal names such as Yehoshuah/Yahushuah/Yeshua. -
91
Why using Jehovah for God's name is as good as using Yahweh
by oppostate inin another thread i wrote some notes about why using jehovah in english is as good as using yahweh.
i'm starting a discussion on this topic because it sounds quite ignorant to hear people talk of the monk who started using it in latin without really understanding why the monk did so.. the spanish dominican monk, raymundus martini, in 1270, didn't get hoodwinked by an old jewish superstition about pronouncing the divine name with the vowel points of another word.. 1. first the vowel points of adonay and jehovah cannot be the same for grammatical reasons.
you just can't use the same vowel points because some vowels aren't paired with some consonants in pronouncing hebrew words.
-
-
wizzstick
A mitre also of fine linen encompassed his head, which was tied by a blue ribbon, about which there was another golden crown, in which was engraven the sacred name [of God]: it consists of four vowels.
So I can see the 4 vowels, but I can't find anyone suggesting it's pronounced "Yeh-hoo-ahh" aside from you? A bit of Googling reveals no one that I can find agreeing with your opinion on "Yeh-hoo-ahh".
Pronouncing the Tetragrammaton
I would suggest that anyone suggesting a particular way of pronouncing the tetragrammaton is just guessing.
-
91
Why using Jehovah for God's name is as good as using Yahweh
by oppostate inin another thread i wrote some notes about why using jehovah in english is as good as using yahweh.
i'm starting a discussion on this topic because it sounds quite ignorant to hear people talk of the monk who started using it in latin without really understanding why the monk did so.. the spanish dominican monk, raymundus martini, in 1270, didn't get hoodwinked by an old jewish superstition about pronouncing the divine name with the vowel points of another word.. 1. first the vowel points of adonay and jehovah cannot be the same for grammatical reasons.
you just can't use the same vowel points because some vowels aren't paired with some consonants in pronouncing hebrew words.
-
-
wizzstick
Thus Josephus says the Divine Name is pronounced as written, in Latin it has four vowels I, O, U, E, that is Jove which transliterated YHWH and pronounced in Hebrew "Yeh-hoo-ahh"
Can you name this source please?
At the end of the day, neither Jehovah or Yahweh is accurate but Yahweh is 'better' as it isn't a hybrid word.
On a side note, given you've ended up suggesting that the correct pronunciation is "Yeh-hoo-ahh" wouldn't a more accurate title to this thread be "Why Jehovah or Yahweh are both wrong"?
-
91
Why using Jehovah for God's name is as good as using Yahweh
by oppostate inin another thread i wrote some notes about why using jehovah in english is as good as using yahweh.
i'm starting a discussion on this topic because it sounds quite ignorant to hear people talk of the monk who started using it in latin without really understanding why the monk did so.. the spanish dominican monk, raymundus martini, in 1270, didn't get hoodwinked by an old jewish superstition about pronouncing the divine name with the vowel points of another word.. 1. first the vowel points of adonay and jehovah cannot be the same for grammatical reasons.
you just can't use the same vowel points because some vowels aren't paired with some consonants in pronouncing hebrew words.
-
-
wizzstick
In summary, looking back to the mid-20th Century it was generally thought that Jehovah was a good translation of the Divine Name.
But in recent years there's been a noticeable swing to Yahweh as it is a more accurate rendering (but still a best guess).
So, in another example of the WT backing the wrong horse (see 607 as another example), they have a legacy issue that they'll have to sort out one day.
Yahweh's People anyone?
