- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Mike,
The translators are not looking at the Greek when they are translating this Hebrew Roots Version. They are looking at the Hebrew and Aramaic which was the common language of the disciples.This is really what it boils down to…as plain as day:
I Cor. 12:3 (HRV) says, “there is no one who speaks by the spirit of Eloah (God) and says that Yeshua is accursed. And neither is a man able to say that YHWH IS YESHUA except by the Ruach HaKodesh” (Holy Spirit).I Cor. 15:47 (HRV) says, “The first son of man (Adam) was dust that was from the earth. THE SECOND MAN (Yeshua) WAS YHWH FROM HEAVEN.”
I Peter 3:15 (HRV), Peter said, “sanctify YHWH, THE MESSIAH.”
I Cor. 8:6 (HRV) says, “But to us ourselves, [there] is ONE ELOAH, THE FATHER, from whom [are] all [things] and by whom we are, and ONE YHWH, YESHUA THE MESSIAH; by his hand [are] all [things] and by his hand we are also.”
YHVH the Messiah comes in the name of YHVH. Just like I have been saying…two persons who are called YHVH as well as the unity they form.
Quote (Lightenup @ July 24 2012,18:31) Mike,
The translators are not looking at the Greek when they are translating this Hebrew Roots Version. They are looking at the Hebrew and Aramaic which was the common language of the disciples.
The NT was written in Greek, Kathi. Any Hebrew or Aramaic version was then a TRANSLATION of the Greek. And the Greek word “kurios” DOES NOT translate into “YHWH” – although many times the word REFERS TO YHWH.Mike,
Here is an example showing that the original NT was in Aramaic and later translated to Greek:
Aramaic Bible in Plain English
Mark 5:41 And he took the girl's hand and he said to her, “Little girl, arise.”This Aramaic Bible in Plain English just translates from Aramaic to English. It doesn't translate the Greek to Aramaic and then the English. This is evident because there is no mention of having to translate Aramaic words like in the translations that use the Greek manuscripts which include the Aramaic words.
Now look at a translation that uses the Greek manuscript:
NASB
Mark 5:41 Taking the child by the hand, He said to her, “Talitha kum!” (which translated means, “Little girl, I say to you, get up!”).Quote (Lightenup @ July 25 2012,13:49) Mike, Here is an example showing that the original NT was in Aramaic and later translated to Greek:
Aramaic Bible in Plain English
Mark 5:41 And he took the girl's hand and he said to her, “Little girl, arise.”This Aramaic Bible in Plain English just translates from Aramaic to English. It doesn't translate the Greek to Aramaic and then the English. This is evident because there is no mention of having to translate Aramaic words like in the translations that use the Greek manuscripts which include the Aramaic words.
Now look at a translation that uses the Greek manuscript:
NASB
Mark 5:41 Taking the child by the hand, He said to her, “Talitha kum!” (which translated means, “Little girl, I say to you, get up!”).
Hi KathiI have to say you never answered my question. Jesus has a personal name so what is the Name of his Father?
Quote (Lightenup @ July 20 2012,01:05) Quote (bodhitharta @ July 17 2012,11:13) Dear sweet Kathi:) I have come to the conclusion that there is no way to out argue or convince you that you are wrong and the reason is simple you are arguing from inference and that is why there are so many Christian denominations that have such a wide range of beliefs. We wouldn't be having this conversation if Jesus had simply said “I am God, Worship me” Now God all through the Bible is crystal clear that He is God and God alone so there is never an argument there. But you take the position that when “God” shows up in the flesh he chooses not to clearly and openly declare “I am God, even the God of your Fathers” So you take a viewpoint that only has inferences
But let's see if we can shake the logic tree a little harder
You say Jesus is God
You say the Father is God
You say they are both Jehovah
so what is the Name of the Father?in other words:
Proverbs 30:4
Who hath ascended up into heaven, or descended? who hath gathered the wind in his fists? who hath bound the waters in a garment? who hath established all the ends of the earth? what is his name, and what is his son's name, if thou canst tell?You see in all your premises you left out any room for “The Father” to have a name, can you tell me what it is?
BD,
you said:Quote We wouldn't be having this conversation if Jesus had simply said “I am God, Worship me” Now God all through the Bible is crystal clear that He is God and God alone so there is never an argument there. But you take the position that when “God” shows up in the flesh he chooses not to clearly and openly declare “I am God, even the God of your Fathers” So you take a viewpoint that only has inferences As I showed you in a previous post, Jesus won't exalt Himself, the Father does. Read your Bible.
If He exalted Himself, then you would be telling me that He is the 'son of perdition':
3Let no one in any way deceive you, for it will not come unless the apostasy comes first, and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction, 4who opposes and exalts himself above every so-called god or object of worship, so that he takes his seat in the temple of God, displaying himself as being God.
Quote You say Jesus is God
You say the Father is God
You say they are both Jehovah
so what is the Name of the Father?They both have the name “Jehovah.” There is Jehovah the Father and Jehovah the Son and together, Jehovah the unity of both.
The Father gave His name to His Son. If the YHVH was left in the writings of the NT where it should be instead of 'LORD' you would see this better.
11“I am no longer in the world; and yet they themselves are in the world, and I come to You. Holy Father, keep them in Your name, the name which You have given Me, that they may be one even as We are. 12“While I was with them, I was keeping them in Your name which You have given Me; and I guarded them and not one of them perished but the son of perdition, so that the Scripture would be fulfilled.
BD,
I did answer it. Read this post
Quote (Lightenup @ July 27 2012,08:34) Quote (Lightenup @ July 20 2012,01:05) Quote (bodhitharta @ July 17 2012,11:13) Dear sweet Kathi:) I have come to the conclusion that there is no way to out argue or convince you that you are wrong and the reason is simple you are arguing from inference and that is why there are so many Christian denominations that have such a wide range of beliefs. We wouldn't be having this conversation if Jesus had simply said “I am God, Worship me” Now God all through the Bible is crystal clear that He is God and God alone so there is never an argument there. But you take the position that when “God” shows up in the flesh he chooses not to clearly and openly declare “I am God, even the God of your Fathers” So you take a viewpoint that only has inferences
But let's see if we can shake the logic tree a little harder
You say Jesus is God
You say the Father is God
You say they are both Jehovah
so what is the Name of the Father?in other words:
Proverbs 30:4
Who hath ascended up into heaven, or descended? who hath gathered the wind in his fists? who hath bound the waters in a garment? who hath established all the ends of the earth? what is his name, and what is his son's name, if thou canst tell?You see in all your premises you left out any room for “The Father” to have a name, can you tell me what it is?
BD,
you said:Quote We wouldn't be having this conversation if Jesus had simply said “I am God, Worship me” Now God all through the Bible is crystal clear that He is God and God alone so there is never an argument there. But you take the position that when “God” shows up in the flesh he chooses not to clearly and openly declare “I am God, even the God of your Fathers” So you take a viewpoint that only has inferences As I showed you in a previous post, Jesus won't exalt Himself, the Father does. Read your Bible.
If He exalted Himself, then you would be telling me that He is the 'son of perdition':
3Let no one in any way deceive you, for it will not come unless the apostasy comes first, and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction, 4who opposes and exalts himself above every so-called god or object of worship, so that he takes his seat in the temple of God, displaying himself as being God.
Quote You say Jesus is God
You say the Father is God
You say they are both Jehovah
so what is the Name of the Father?They both have the name “Jehovah.” There is Jehovah the Father and Jehovah the Son and together, Jehovah the unity of both.
The Father gave His name to His Son. If the YHVH was left in the writings of the NT where it should be instead of 'LORD' you would see this better.
11“I am no longer in the world; and yet they themselves are in the world, and I come to You. Holy Father, keep them in Your name, the name which You have given Me, that they may be one even as We are. 12“While I was with them, I was keeping them in Your name which You have given Me; and I guarded them and not one of them perished but the son of perdition, so that the Scripture would be fulfilled.
BD,
I did answer it. Read this post
You didn't answer the question at all. I said Jesus had a personal name of his own unique to only him are you saying that the Father has no name unique to Only Himself but Jesus does?Quote (Lightenup @ July 24 2012,20:49) Mike, Here is an example showing that the original NT was in Aramaic and later translated to Greek:
Aramaic Bible in Plain English
Mark 5:41 And he took the girl's hand and he said to her, “Little girl, arise.”This Aramaic Bible in Plain English just translates from Aramaic to English. It doesn't translate the Greek to Aramaic and then the English. This is evident because there is no mention of having to translate Aramaic words like in the translations that use the Greek manuscripts which include the Aramaic words.
Now look at a translation that uses the Greek manuscript:
NASB
Mark 5:41 Taking the child by the hand, He said to her, “Talitha kum!” (which translated means, “Little girl, I say to you, get up!”).
And suppose the Bible was originally written in English, and one verse said, Then Jesus called him a casa blanca, (which translated, means “white house”).Do you suppose in the Spanish translation of the original, they would render it as, Then Jesus called them casa blanca, (which translated, means “casa blanca”). ?
Kathi, I want you to think very hard about this: If the NT was written IN Aramaic, why would that translation even be in there? If, in the “original” Aramaic, Jesus said Little girl, arise, then why would a Greek TRANSLATOR put those words in Aramaic first – ONLY TO RE-TRANSLATE THEM INTO GREEK?
If the “original” simply says, Little girl, arise, then why doesn't the “translation” into Greek also simply say, Little girl, arise ?
Mike,
you asked:Quote Kathi, I want you to think very hard about this: If the NT was written IN Aramaic, why would that translation even be in there? If, in the “original” Aramaic, Jesus said Little girl, arise, then why would a Greek TRANSLATOR put those words in Aramaic first – ONLY TO RE-TRANSLATE THEM INTO GREEK? The Greek translator put those words in Aramaic because they were originally spoken in Aramaic and not in Greek. That is why he had to translate them for his Greek readers. Apparently he felt that it was important to show what language that Jesus spoke in at that event.
As I put on another thread for you, go read this resource:
This resource is very interesting. It is in a PDF form and I can't copy and paste from it. You can find it by going to this google search link and clicking on the fourth option “Was the New Testament Really Written in Greek.”
https://www.google.com/search?….bih=821
Within chapter 6 regarding the historical (external proofs), you can find part of this quote from Josephus about Greek not being his own tongue. You can read his writings here:
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/josephus/complete.ii.xxi.xi.htmlFor those of my own nation freely acknowledge that I far exceed them in the learning belonging to Jews; I have also taken a great deal of pains to obtain the learning of the Greeks, and understand the elements of the Greek language, although I have so long accustomed myself to speak our own tongue, that I cannot pronounce Greek with sufficient exactness; for our nation does not encourage those that learn the languages of many nations, and so adorn their discourses with the smoothness of their periods; because they look upon this sort of accomplishment as common, not only to all sorts of free-men, but to as many of the servants as please to learn them. But they give him the testimony of being a wise man who is fully acquainted with our laws, and is able to interpret their meaning; on which account, as there have been many who have done their endeavors with great patience to obtain this learning, there have yet hardly been so many as two or three that have succeeded therein, who were immediately well rewarded for their pains.
I encourage you to read the PDF publication because it is very thorough.
BD,
Even today we have sons that have the exact name of their father, even the middle name is the same, and they put Jr. or II after their name to show a distinction. In the OT and NT Jehovah is used for the Father or the Son or both in the general sense. Just like context would tell you the difference if someone today wrote an article about a father and a son who had the same exact name, you would have to look for clues in the context to determine which one was being referred to if the Jr. or Sr. or the I or II were left out. It is like the OT leaves out the Jr./Sr. or I/II and the NT often reveals it.Quote (Lightenup @ July 27 2012,22:17) BD,
Even today we have sons that have the exact name of their father, even the middle name is the same, and they put Jr. or II after their name to show a distinction. In the OT and NT Jehovah is used for the Father or the Son or both in the general sense. Just like context would tell you the difference if someone today wrote an article about a father and a son who had the same exact name, you would have to look for clues in the context to determine which one was being referred to if the Jr. or Sr. or the I or II were left out. It is like the OT leaves out the Jr./Sr. or I/II and the NT often reveals it.
Once again you cannot answer the question. To say Jesus is not like saying “sr.” “Jr.” or so on it is a distictive name, Mike would say and I would agree that YHVH is a distinction that separates Jesus from his Creator, but you have said Jesus is YHVH and GOD which doesn't add up because YHVHsaid His name was in Jesus because Yeshua means “God is Salvation” so what do you think about the Name of Jesus?The word Jesus is the Latin form of the Greek Iesous, which in turn is the transliteration of the Hebrew Jeshua, or Joshua, or again Jehoshua, meaning “Jehovah is salvation.”
Now I am asking you if it says Exodus 23:21
Beware of him, and obey his voice, provoke him not; for he will not pardon your transgressions: “for my name is in him.”Who's name is in Jesus?
BD,
The Father's name is YHWH/Jehovah.
The Son's name is YHWH/Jehovah.
The general name for the unity of the Father with the Son is YHWH/Jehovah.The Son became flesh and His name became LORD JEHOVAH Yeshua The Messiah, Yeshua for short. God's name was in Him.
1 Cor 8:6
Aramaic Bible in Plain English (©2010)
To us, ours is one God The Father, for all things are from him and we are in him, and The One LORD JEHOVAH Yeshua The Messiah, for all things are by him, and we are also in his hand.Quote (Lightenup @ July 28 2012,13:20) BD,
The Father's name is YHWH/Jehovah.
The Son's name is YHWH/Jehovah.
The general name for the unity of the Father with the Son is YHWH/Jehovah.The Son became flesh and His name became LORD JEHOVAH Yeshua The Messiah, Yeshua for short. God's name was in Him.
1 Cor 8:6
Aramaic Bible in Plain English (©2010)
To us, ours is one God The Father, for all things are from him and we are in him, and The One LORD JEHOVAH Yeshua The Messiah, for all things are by him, and we are also in his hand.
So who put his name in him?Quote (Lightenup @ July 27 2012,05:05) The Greek translator put those words in Aramaic because they were originally spoken in Aramaic and not in Greek.
Do you suggest that Jesus generally spoke in Greek, and only occasionally uttered phrases in Aramaic or Hebrew?Okay Kathi.
It seems we are having this HRV discussion in other threads right now, so let's get back to the discussion we were having here before you brought the HRV into it.
I'm waiting for responses to the 2-6 posts on page 40 of this thread.
Quote (Lightenup @ July 28 2012,14:05) BD,
The Father, it seems.
Whi is The Father what is this personal name he gave to Jesus?Here is a hint:
King James Version (KJV)
26 At that day ye shall ask in my name: and I say not unto you, that I will pray the Father for you:
27 For the Father himself loveth you, because ye have loved me, and have believed that I came out from God.
BD,
Before Jesus came as the Christ, His name was YHWH…the Father gave Him His own name…both were YHWH. Then after YHWH, the Son, became flesh He was also called YahuShua, some spell it Yeshua, YahShua. The name YHWH is YaHuWaH or YaHuWeH. There is a 'Yah' in YahuShua, the name Jesus. So, I would say that is the Father part of Christ's name after He became flesh. That 'Yah” is the Father's name in YahShua. That is how I understand it.God put His name in Abram when it changed to AbrAHam and Sarai when it changed to SarAH. This is the way it seems to me but I haven't got any Hebrew training.
Quote (Lightenup @ July 29 2012,16:33) BD,
Before Jesus came as the Christ, His name was YHWH…the Father gave Him His own name…both were YHWH. Then after YHWH, the Son, became flesh He was also called YahuShua, some spell it Yeshua, YahShua. The name YHWH is YaHuWaH or YaHuWeH. There is a 'Yah' in YahuShua, the name Jesus. So, I would say that is the Father part of Christ's name after He became flesh. That 'Yah” is the Father's name in YahShua. That is how I understand it.God put His name in Abram when it changed to AbrAHam and Sarai when it changed to SarAH. This is the way it seems to me but I haven't got any Hebrew training.
Ystill won't tell me what the name of the Father is if they were both named YHWH from all time then Jesus always had the name so at what point did the Father have a name independent of Jesus to give him a His name and what was that name the Father had that Jesus did not have?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
