- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Hi H,
They will know his voice and that voice they will follow. They will not listen to the voice of a stranger who says truth is only found in the KJV. There are many manuscripts and they vary in age and in number. Each version makes a selection of these according their criteria. Those who make these choices though do not limit our access to the whole truth contained in all the manuscripts.Quote John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. What does this scripture say about Jesus' Father in the KJ Bible?
Psalm 83:18 (King James Version)
“That men may know that thou, whose name alone is JEHOVAH, art the most high over all the earth.”I'm wondering how often you use the name Jehovah, the name of the one who is described as the “most high over all the earth?”
God's name originally occured thousands of times in the original languages.
Then, there was the “great apostasy” we're discussing.
Suddenly God's very name wasn't so important. What a disgrace.The King James has the words “LORD” and “GOD” several thousand times where God's name originally was. There are a few places in the KJ such as above where they haven't replaced God's name with titles. But for the most part, God's Word, his inspired Word which had his name in it almost 7000 times in the Hebrew Scriptures alone, has had His name removed from Bible translations.
Someone writes a book. The translators replace his name with “THE AUTHOR.” How does the author who has a name feel?This happened during the great apostasy. It was one of the factors that lead to ease of the trinity belief. It confused who the Lord Jesus with the Lord Jehovah.
Quote Have you not heard the words
Galatians 5:9 A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump.
For the most part, people no longer use or necessarily even understand old english. “leaveneth”? Have you ever used that word in real life?
The Bible is meant to be understood. Keeping it in Greek or Hebrew would not do the trick. Neither would old english. It is meant to be understood, in the tongue of the people. There are a lot of phrases in the King James which were understood when it was written 400 years ago. But today, not easily understood.Quote I am saying that if a bible translation is corrupt, it can cause false doctrines and false religions and it has done so.
I believe the removal of God's name from the Bible is one of the greatest misdeeds man has ever committed. It has changed the entire feeling of the Bible–made God less personal and familiar and more misunderstood and confusing.I only have a few Bible translations. King James is one of them. But the fact that it has removed God's name thousands of times, roughly 7000 times…how do you respond to that?
Psalm 83:18 (King James Version)
“That men may know that thou, whose name alone is JEHOVAH, art the most high over all the earth.”david
david,
I don't see the point in replacing one error for another.
Most who come here know that the Watchtower is just as much part of the great apostacy as Catholic doctrine is. Their false prophecies testify to that.
Yes I agree that some of what you point out is error, but I do not go along with your remedy.
Most people here are too cautious to be sucked into the JWs. They have already come out of error, why would they want to walk right back into it?
Get real david. We are not hear to be abused by denominational premotion. We are here to learn truth. We are here to learn from each other.
Let God have his way. You can't compete with God.
amen t8,
The word “Jehovah” was never given us by God for Himself, but men have added letters to the bible to artificially give a create such a name, for He who calls himself by the descriptive name, “I Am Who Am”.Quote Get real david. We are not [here] to be abused by denominational premotion. We are here to learn truth. We are here to learn from each other. Are you kidding? Is this a joke? Where did I abuse you T8? In my last post I don't recall “denominational premotion” or anything of the sort.
We are here to learn from each other you say. He had stated that the KJ was infallible. I showed him one scripture from the KJ that said the one whose name is Jehovah is the most high and pointed out that the most high's name has been in large part removed from the KJ. For an infallible translation that doesn't make sense does it? No T8, it doesn't.I'm wondering which sentence in my post above so ofended you. I've read it a few times now and can't find any errors. Which sentence? I realize the number 400 I rounded off, but other than that….what bothered you so much?
Nick, are you saying that I am who I am, is God's name?
Quote david, I don't see the point in replacing one error for another.
Most who come here know that the Watchtower is just as much part of the great apostacy as Catholic doctrine is. Their false prophecies testify to that.
Yes I agree that some of what you point out is error, but I do not go along with your remedy.
Most people here are too cautious to be sucked into the JWs. They have already come out of error, why would they want to walk right back into it?
Get real david. We are not hear to be abused by denominational premotion. We are here to learn truth. We are here to learn from each other.
Let God have his way. You can't compete with God.
I looked at this again T8.
Do you realize that instead of helping him see his “error” your “remedy” was to attack me? Somehow, that doesn't seem very…good.
david.
Quote (david @ June 05 2006,08:22) Quote Get real david. We are not [here] to be abused by denominational premotion. We are here to learn truth. We are here to learn from each other. Are you kidding? Is this a joke? Where did I abuse you T8? In my last post I don't recall “denominational premotion” or anything of the sort.
We are here to learn from each other you say. He had stated that the KJ was infallible. I showed him one scripture from the KJ that said the one whose name is Jehovah is the most high and pointed out that the most high's name has been in large part removed from the KJ. For an infallible translation that doesn't make sense does it? No T8, it doesn't.I'm wondering which sentence in my post above so ofended you. I've read it a few times now and can't find any errors. Which sentence? I realize the number 400 I rounded off, but other than that….what bothered you so much?
Nick, are you saying that I am who I am, is God's name?
Hi David,
Ex 3.14
” God said to Moses
“I AM WHO I AM”The Living God , The eternal One, The Ancient of Days.
Yes, but is “the living God” a name? Is “the eternal one” a name. Interestingly, there is a Bible that has “the eternal one” in Ps 83:18, where God's name should be.
I know God said that to Moses. Nick, do you know what God's name means?Hi,
God only has a descriptive name, not a personal name. He is far above any of His creation and to copy human familiarisation according to name is folly.Also the name yehowshua – aka Joshua – aka Jesus – was a name or designation for God in the OT as well as Elohim.
Yehowshua (probably spelt wrong so forgive me for that) means 'YHWH is Salvation'.
The tetragrammaton or 'four letters' of YHWH or their various variations sometimes translated as Adonai, is where the word Jehovah is derived from even as Jesus is a derivation of Yehowshua or Yeshua from which we get Joshua in our english translation.
YHWH had at least 7 compound redemptive name/titles according to scofield (I know of nine)
YHWH Jireh – the LORD is our provider
YHWH Shalom – the LORD is our peace
YHWH Nissi – the LORD is our banner
YHWH Tsidkenu – the LORD is our righteousness
YHWH Rapha – the LORD is our healer
YHWH Ra'ah – the LORD is our shepherd
YHWH Shammah – the LORD is present
YHWH Ga'al – the LORD is our redeemer
YHWH
?(can't remember the hebrew word) – the LORD is my sanctifierJesus our Savior expressed all of these in his ministry fulfilling the manifestation of YHWH in flesh. If there ever was a name given to a man that God identifies Himself with it would be Jesus Christ. Yeshua Hammashiah is the YHWH of the OT manifest in His son in the NT.
In my humble opinionQuote God only has a descriptive name, not a personal name. He is far above any of His creation and to copy human familiarisation according to name is folly.
how do you define “personal”?He has many titles, as does Jesus, and others in the Bible.
If Yahweh or Jehovah is not a personal name, what is? It is descriptive and personal. A name can be both. Most every name in the Hebrew scriptures has a meaning. Yet, they are personal names. Right?Quote Yeshua Hammashiah is the YHWH of the OT manifest in His son in the NT.
In my humble opinion
I know we've just entered anther trinity discussion, but what do you mean by this statement? Yeshua is the Yahweh of the old testament in Yahweh's Son in the New Testament?Quote YHWH had at least 7 compound redemptive name/titles according to scofield (I know of nine)
YHWH Jireh – the LORD is our provider
YHWH Shalom – the LORD is our peace
YHWH Nissi – the LORD is our banner
YHWH Tsidkenu – the LORD is our righteousness
YHWH Rapha – the LORD is our healer
YHWH Ra'ah – the LORD is our shepherd
YHWH Shammah – the LORD is present
YHWH Ga'al – the LORD is our redeemerJust to note that YHWH doesn't mean “lord.” You could just as well insert God for “lord” or Creator, or almighty, or Father, etc. Yahweh is a name. Lord is a title. God's name occurs more than ALL HIS TITLES PUT TOGETHER. Countless times in the Bible, we are told of God's name. The expression: “name Jehovah” occurs 16 times. “Jehovah's name” occurs 17 times for example. There are many more verses that specifically speak of Jehovah or Yahweh as being God's name.
I just wanted to clarify that.But, because of Jewish superstition and man made traditions, God's name stopped being pronounced and eventually was not put in Bibles. A part of the great apostasy. Satan wants to turn people away from God. Turning him into an impersonal force who doesn't have a name, someone who is now confused with his son, all benefit His opposer, Satan.
Quote The expression: “name Jehovah” occurs 16 times. “Jehovah's name” occurs 17 times for example.
Of course, “God's name” also occurs 8 times. But nowhere does the expression the “name God” appear. Nor the “name Creator.” Nor the “name Lord.” We get the idea.Hi david,
Names are given. Adam named the animals. We name our children. God had no parents and no beginning. He just applies titles to Himself that describe Him and so we can differentiate him from other beings such as His Son and the angels and men.
Same with Jesus. Was he ever called Immanuel?Anyway we should find a suitable thread to continue this discussion. If men feared God they would not treat His Name with disrespect either.
The loss of the fear of God among men aligned with the vain attempts by theologians to encompass our Awesome God withiin terms of human understanding have led to the great apostasy.
Only when men forgot the terrible and immense nature of our God could they wander off into dangerous speculations that;
because His Son is said to be like to Him, and the Son was seen in human form,
that He was like a man and able to be judged according to human understanding.Who would dare?
First, I think the removal of God's name from the Bible is part of the great apostasy, so I don't mind discussing this.
But it is a bit off topic discussing whether or not God has a name.You say:
Quote Names are given.
Yes, and God gave himself his name. Or isn't he allowed to do this Nick? We KNOW this because as I stated we find the expression the “name Jehovah” many times in the Bible. God has a name.Sadly, Satan is opposing Jehovah.
What is the sense in having God's written word if no one is going to believe it. Here is the problem with using multiple translations. You are creating God in your own image. You can pick and choose what verse from what translation fits your situaltion. Sorry, but that sounds like a ploy by the enemy to lead men away from God. If you believe that God is in all translations, then what about the one that is coming out that has all traces of homosexuality removed from off it's pages?
Hi H,
If you knew you had the Spirit to guide you would you be anxious about feeding on the food shown by the Spirit in other versions?
Is it not in the nature of man to want to be in control and to limit access to the full truth can be an expression of that real human need?
But is that human need not the opposite of what God wants-He wants us to be led by the Spirit and not trapped by men in prisons of limited illumination.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
