in 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.
Can you name this source please?
Sure, see Josephus (The Jewish War. V:235).
Jehovah and Yahweh are not "both wrong" they are English translations of the same original name in Hebrew YHWH (JHVH), which was written only in consonants, but given clues like Judah=YHWDH (Yeh-hoo-dahh) and using "mater lectionis," as is written, one would pronounce YHWH as Yeh-hoo-ahh.
in 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:
The table below shows the vowel points of Yehovah and Adonay,
You keep dwelling on the Masoretic tradition, and I repeat myself that this was a late development in the text. Josephus predates that by almost a millennium.
Besides how do you explain that in many texts the tetragrammaton only has a schewa and a qamats? The holam vowel does not appear in thousands of instances among the four consonants. This is thought to correspond to a redaction on the usage of ADONAY's vowels and pointed to a more accurately Hebrew term, which although pronounceable was substituted by SHEMA (meaning "the Name").
The pointing of this redaction lacks the holam, thus rendering it as YEH-HOO-AHH.
In Latin, Martin the monk, used IEHOVAH because the Latin I sounded like our English Y, later the initial I became a J since the consonantal I came to be written as J.
He also wrote V because in Latin V was both a vowel sound like OO and a consonant sound like W, it wasn't pronounced as V in English back then in Latin. In later pronunciation changes the consonantal V (W sound) became what we pronounce as V in English, this change has happened in many languages like in German and Dutch where the W is a V sound, and even in modern Hebrew the letter Waw has come to be Vav.
Today's Jehovah comes from IEHOVA(H) in Latin from Hebrew YHWH (JHVH). The research supports that using Jehovah is as good as using Yahweh. They are merely English translations for the Divine Name which could be more credibly pronounced in Ancient Hebrew as YEH-HOO-AHH.
in 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 [...] Based on this reasoning, the form יְהֹוָה (Jehovah) has been characterized by some as "hybrid form",and even "a philological impossibility".
I notice what you quoted from Wikipedia, and really the "hybrid form" of Adonay and Jhvh is a "philological impossibility." YHWH (JHVH) cannot be pronounced using the exact vowel points of ADONAY.
I don't doubt that Strong's number 3068 term (יְהֹוָה) was constructed by the masoretes and to use the same vowels would be a pronouceable "impossibility."
There is ample proof that the Saducee (Priestly) tradition is different from the Pharisaic (Rabinic) tradition. Whereas the Pharisees objected to the pronunciation of the name, the High Priest did utter it in worship.
Josephus was of priestly descent and his mother claimed loyal ancestry. He knew about God's name and the superstition not to pronounce it, nevertheless he points out that it is pronounced just as it is written.
The earliest texts of the Masoretes, who put vowel points on the text, only date back to the 10th century, a full thousand years after Josephus.
Without the vowel points, as these were added much later by the Masoretes, the Hebrew text was usually read with "mater lectionis" these were consonants that gave clues to pronunciation for example using the letter Heh for AH and Yod for I, or W for U/OO, and basically used as vowel markers. 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 which was pronounced in Hebrew Yeh-hoo-ahh, like IOSUE which translated Yeh-ho-shu-a (Jehoshua, Joshua, Jesus).
in 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.
oppostate.... lets review.......... it's a mindcontrolling CULT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
If you could refute this, than do so!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I don't refute that the WT religion may be a cult.
What I'm objecting to is that folks repeat a "Catholic monk didn't know any better and started using Jehovah for the proper name of God" mantra.
How what I pointed out can "bring one again and again to the same conclusions" that "religion and gods are all man made inventions" is totally irrelevant to the discussion I started, in fact you and others are just trolling the topic because of your own atheistic views.
If this OP is irrelevant to you and your personal views then don't post in it. Go swing your cojones at some other discussion topic.
in 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.
I have read that the samaritan pronunciation eludes to Yahweh being most accurate, using the vowels from their pronunciation 'Jabe' A E.
The Samaritans had a temple on Mt. Gerizim and claimed, and still do claim, they follow the God of the Israelites as found in the Torah. Unfortunately the temple was conquered and dedicated to the Greek Zeus.
Jupiter (Deus Pater) is the Latin for Zeus. Jupiter's more ancient name in Latin is Jove. And... Jove was pronounced back then in Latin as JAW-WAY. When the Romans took control of Jerusalem a temple to Zeus Olympus was dedicated on the temple mount.
It is very typical of Latin names to transliterate Hebrew masculine names ending in AH as AY, for example Josue is Latin for Yehoshua (our English Joshua).
If Josue is from Yehoshua, you can see how Jove is from Yehowah.
The name Jehovah is no more an invention than Jehoshua, Jehoshaphat, Jehoadah, Jehoaddan, Jehoahaz, Jehoash, Jehohanan, Jehoiada, Jehoiakim, Jehoiarib, Jehonadab, Jehonathan, Jehoram, Jehosheba, Jehozabad, Jehozadak, or for that matter, Jehu, Jehubbah, Jehucal, Jehud, Jehudi, Jehudijah, Jehush, not to mention the names that end in -jah from -yahu.
i've met a few.
i'm not talking about the jw who, whether df'd or not, falls off the radar and just gets on with living a normal life - good luck to them and may there be many more!.
i mean the former jehovah's witness who is now enjoying all the benefits of a cult free life thanks to the efforts of many bloggers, posters and activists, but is critical of the efforts of someone close them to free more jws.
Breadcrumbs as opposed to dumping a bucket of ice over their heads.
Uhhh, yeah. I'm disposed to throw a block of ice to the head. But frankly it doesn't seem to be working very well for me.
If you are successful in setting down the crumbs and patient enough to let them follow the path, kudos to you, you have my respect and admiration. I wish I could be more tactful sometimes instead bullishly confrontational.
The thing, though, is that I've been able to set a barrier where those who seek to pounce on me get a hefty wallop and the wafty persuasion not to do it again. On the same thought, it does allow generally sincere and more critically open minds to connect with mine.
It just pushes my buttons to deal with a truly fanatical mind-drone, not mentally subservient WT minions, but the holier-than-thou bullies, who spew off WT references to put pressure on you, and who slosh like a turd on a bucket whenever the WT makes a doctrinal move. Those folks are just begging for a block of ice upside the head.
in 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.
Regardless of how you view God and His existence, many here make reference to the Catholic monk as if he'd been an idiot who didn't know any better theologically. That viewpoint is not entirely correct and I make the point that he knew what he was doing in transliterating the personal name of the Judeo-Christian Deity in the Old Testament.
And regarding the title of this thread, notice that it's not a question, silly. It's a statement.
Your answer exemplifies a tender mind, unconcerned by issues that you don't care to consider.
If you think this thread irrelevant then don't take the trouble to post in it.
My concern is that those who merely repeat an assertion based on ignorance of the facts reflect a bad light on WT dissenters. If you make two points and one of them is wrong, there's less likelihood that the factually correct point will be doubted.
well, our sister congregation just had their co visit this past week.
on saturday afternoon, i was talking to a couple of ministerial servants in that congregation and they stated that an unmarried brother is not fulfilling to the max what jehovah wants of us.
they stated that the co went on a tirade that if you are unmarried you are being selfish and not following what jehovah wanted for mankind since he created eve as a compliment for the man.
I know this CO. He is a loud mouth opinionated a$$hole.
That seems to be the trend with a lot of "remaining CO's" (those who have survived the latest purges among their ranks) especially the younger CO's who are all cocky and fanatically loyal to their Momma WT.
Loud mouthed and quite opinionated matches CO Scott Henry to a capital T. A chip of the old tree trunk, both his CO dad, now deceased, and he were quite the ar$eholes when dealing with those under them, but cow-towing and bum-kissers to those over them in the hierarchy.
i've met a few.
i'm not talking about the jw who, whether df'd or not, falls off the radar and just gets on with living a normal life - good luck to them and may there be many more!.
i mean the former jehovah's witness who is now enjoying all the benefits of a cult free life thanks to the efforts of many bloggers, posters and activists, but is critical of the efforts of someone close them to free more jws.
If you don't want to help me that's okay, it really is, just don't make a fuss about what I'm doing
Exactly. I do see your point better now.
To whine and tell someone else not to try to help out is as useless as admonishing them they need to do so.
The reasonable thing would be to discuss the "why", the motivation behind what one does. And so to come to understand one another better.
I, like you, also feel that it's good to spend time helping others out from the cult, as perhaps we were helped ourselves out of bondage to the WT. Too, I don't see anything wrong in just leaving the WT behind and moving on with one's life.
If I misunderstood your OP, I apologize. Your point of view, in not wanting to be told to stop trying to help others out of the WT, is something I would support. You have a right to do as you wish, especially so if your objective is to pay it forward and help others to find their freedom.
well, our sister congregation just had their co visit this past week.
on saturday afternoon, i was talking to a couple of ministerial servants in that congregation and they stated that an unmarried brother is not fulfilling to the max what jehovah wants of us.
they stated that the co went on a tirade that if you are unmarried you are being selfish and not following what jehovah wanted for mankind since he created eve as a compliment for the man.
So Paul's words saying it's best to remain single and not be troubled with family duties, unless your physical need for intimacy with the opposite sex is too tempting--that counsel was inaccurate--maybe old light?
The WT is quite "brazen" in changing their doctrines, they are blown this way and that by whatever benefits them.
