Hi Outlaw
Sorry for the delayed reply.
The subject is about YHWH(well even these letters are a transliteration of the original Hebrew word for Jehovah since we cannot write the language)
The Simple question is... Can we use transliterated words for bible names in other languages? Yes
Why?
Because the bible itself does!
Therefore using the English version of Jehovah (whatever it's origin) is quite okay according to the Bible.
A lot of people replied but I felt I wasn't very clear and I need a few questions to clarify.
Is "generation" part of a prophecy by Jesus?
Did Jesus give us signs etc so that we could evaluate to know when?
If we are supposed to know from signs that Jesus gave us and note it says mark 13: 14 “However, when YOU catch sight of the disgusting thing that causes desolation standing where it ought not (let the reader use discernment) why then ask us to use understanding/decernment on them?
This proves we should be evaluating the signs around the generation in preparation, decerning/understanding them. Otherwise there was no point to Jesus giving us the signs to look out for.
By this it is clear prophecy is not meant to be an exact science but more about readiness.
Hi snowbird
I think this one needs fixing too then.....
John 20:17
Jesus said, "Do not hold on to me, for I have not yet returned to the Father. Go instead to my brothers and tell them, 'I am returning to my Father and your Father, to MY God and your God.' "
Hi outlaw
Since the original vowel sounds have been lost any addition of vowels to YHWH are a guess. So you prefer to think of "Jehovah" as a mistake and "Yahweh" as less of a mistake?
But the basic point we keep skirting around stands. That is, that YHWH is Gods name completely not needing vowels to change this. So adding vowels to help pronouciation in our language can niether make it correct or incorrect just easier to say in our language. Jehovah is fully Gods name as the established English version simply because it uses YHWH.
I feel we will never agree on this and you prefer to comfortably think adding vowels to YHWH to help us pronounce it in our language can make it less Gods name in some way. I disagree.
Hi snowbird
Jesus often quoted scriptures refering to YHWH/Jehovah as God, the God of the jews and his God.
Matthew 4:10
Jesus said to him, "Away from me, Satan! For it is written: 'Worship Jehovah your God, and serve him only.' "
YHWH/jehovah is used in hebrew more than 7000 times as the name of their God. Now if you go back to the scripture I quoted Jesus is talking to the jews saying his father is their God. It doesn't get much clearer than that! actually....
John 17:1-3
1 After Jesus said this, he looked toward heaven and prayed: "Father....... that they may know YOU, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent. This feels like it is disintegrating into a trinity debate so I will leave that point there. You have made your choice as I have mine which is part of debate. Hi psacra I refer you to my points above to Isaac but I think the burden of proof is with you to show that "Lord" is meaning another name other than the scripture it is quoting. you whole premise is ignoring the context of chapter, scripture and grammer. I think the grammer argument is logical hense why Joel says a name not a title. Would you say the hebrew scriptures where currupted by the removing of YHWH/Jehovah and replacing it with "lord"? What would the consequences have been if this had not come to light? and we never knew YHWH/Jehovah was God's original name? Psalm 83:18
18 Let them know that you, whose name is Jehovah—
that you alone are the Most High over all the earth.
Since history establishes that YHWH/Jehovah was meddled with in hebrew scriptures it is not illogical to suppose this could happen with the Greek. And I think Romans 10:13 proves this. Obviously people argue there where 1000's of copies to change in 70 years but they managed it for most of the Hebrews copies only leaving alone already written ancient ones. Since the curruption of YHWH/Jehovah in hebrew to "lord" is already established it is not a leap to see this could happen also in the Greek.
Hi isaac (by the way thank you for given me a full and mind-stretching debate)
The evidence is against you
1/ the chapter context is God Jehovah of the israelites is the saviour.
2/ this is a direct quote from Joel "call on the name of Jehovah"
3/ the gramatical structure of the expression "call on the name of ....." indicates the name is forthcoming as with joel "call on the name of (insert name here)"
The then historical proof that "lord" is substituted word for Jehovah by superstitious copyists caps it for me.
Hi outlaw
It is a transliteration option since it is YHWH that is completely Gods name without vowels in written Ancient hebrew and a tranliterated name into another language (in this case English) that gets established using these letters can hardly be called a mistake. You would have to prove there is a correct choice which is impossible since Only Ancient hebrews knew which sounds went with which consonants. It is IMPOSSIBLE to know how any name was pronounced in ancient hebrew since all sounds were lost. The addition of pointers for vowels 500 years later were best guesses by the then hebrew people amd incorrect by your standards. It was these pointers they removed due to superstition over God's name which is weird since they were not correct and only best guesses themselves.
I let it go your saying a monk is the source but the current thoughts are that he got his lettering from semitic jews using this from 1000 years earlier obviously without the english "J"
Jehovah is the established English version of YHWH and uses all of what is the hebrew written name of YHWH completely. While other options like YAHWEH exist they too are only guesses and not correct or a mistakes. You are making impossible demands. You reasoning would have us not use any name because none of them could possibly be correct by virtue of not being in their original languages. We would just have blanks were names are in the bible.
do any of the following apply to you?
It is not Ancient hebrew therefore it is not correct.
Yahweh is guessed by a scholar I respect therefore it is correct.
We shouldn't use transliterated names into different languages but it's okay to use a translated bible in a whole other language.
Do you think yahweh is more "Correct" by virtue of being a more modern guess?
Hi snowbird
since Jesus like myself thought Jehovah was his father only. I prefer to agree with him.
John 8:54
Jesus replied, "If I glorify myself, my glory means nothing. My Father, whom you claim as your God, is the one who glorifies me.
Hi psacra
your whole point rests on the issue that the word "lord" and not "Jehovah" is correct. Once you see it is meant to be jehovah the confusion is cleared up. The name is Jehovah. Lord is not a name. If you then saying "lord" here is meant to be Jesus, then why didn't he say "Jesus" rather than lord? aka "call on the name of Jesus" he says you must call on a name yet deliberately doesn't say the name replacing it with the word "Lord" that doesn't make sense. When the scripture he is quoting did say Jehovah "call on the name of (whose) Jehovah" making perfect sense.
The whole gramatical make up of the sentence "call on the name of" indicates the name is forthcoming as in joel " call on the name of Jehovah" .
This scripture more than any other proves like I said above that later copyist meddled with "lord" for the greek like they did for the hebrew.
Hi Isaac
I do have reading comprehension I also look at the scriptural context.
Pauls starts this whole chapter with the following words.
1 Brothers, my heart's desire and prayer to God for the Israelites is that they may be saved.
The God of the israelites is shown to be saviour.
Next we look at 14-16 the scriptures after the controversial one.
14 How, then, can they call on the one they have not believed in? And how can they believe in the one of whom they have not heard? And how can they hear without someone preaching to them? 15 And how can they preach unless they are sent? As it is written, "How beautiful are the feet of those who bring good news!" [a]
16 But not all the Israelites accepted the good news. For Isaiah says, "Lord, who has believed our message?" [ b ] 17Consequently, faith comes from hearing the message, and the message is heard through the word of Christ.
Who is the one we should believe in? and who has brought good news about him? who brought the message of him?
!7 shows that the messenger was Jesus whose word it came though. He cannot be the messenger as well as the the source. you cannot be a messenger to yourself (yes I know trinitarians have a whole belief system based on this oxymoron). clearly this is indicating Jehovah not Jesus.
It is also established that this is a direct quotation of Joel.
Hi snowbird
I absolutely agree that having a title used for both Jesus and Jehovah is confusing to say the least. And one of the major reasons I completely agree with witnesses that this cannot have been inspired this way and that "lord" for Jehovah like in the hebrew scriptures was a later Copyists change against God's inspired word in the greek scriptures also.
Hi psacra
I made my point above but to add to yours, it isn't just talking about Jesus it says "and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead you will be saved"
So it's actually referencing God after Jesus as saviour.
