CORRUPT BIBLES WHICH ARE SENDIND PEOPLE 2 HELL!!
- Thread starter DoveSpirit05
- Start date
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Grailhunter
Well-Known Member
Not impossible but the line of thinking was that the Tetragrammaton was to help the Priest remember the correct pronunciation, The "V" could have thrown them off. Still not impossible
101G
Well-Known Member
addressing the names of "Yehovah/Jehovah, or Yahweh, both are in ERROR. let's go to the bible and see what God say about these names.
scripture, Exodus 6:3 "And I appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, by the name of God Almighty, but by my name JEHOVAH was I not known to them."
here God clearly states that "Abraham" didn't know him by the name "JEHOVAH" correct. let's see if this is true or not. scripture, Genesis 22:14 "And Abraham called the name of that place Jehovahjireh: as it is said to this day, In the mount of the LORD it shall be seen."
HOLD IT, STOP, how in the world is Abraham calling this place, "Jehovahjireh" when God clearly said he didn't know him by any name like that. and God was speaking in Exodus when he said Abraham didn't know him by such name, and Genesis come before Exodus. so now we have a problem, well some do, Not I. but we need to examine this corruption, because as the topic says, "CORRUPT BIBLES WHICH ARE SENDIND PEOPLE 2 HELL"
let's see if we can put the brakes on this corrupt man names.
Yehovah/Jehovah, or Yahweh, both are corrupt personal name for God. they are NOT his "PERSONAL" name. because the tetragrammaton from which these name came from is a verb and not a NOUN, and verbs are not Personal names. I AM THAT I AM or H1961 הָיָה hayah (haw-yaw) v. which is a verb, which means
H1961 הָיָה hayah (haw-yaw) v.
1. to exist.
2. to be or become.
3. to come into being, i.e. to happen, to occur (always emphatic, and not a mere copula or auxiliary).
[a primitive root]
KJV: beacon, X altogether, be(-come), accomplished, committed, like), break, cause, come (to pass), do, faint, fall, + follow, happen, X have, last, pertain, quit (one-)self, require, X use.
Compare: H1933
as said, this word is a, "VERB", and not a "NOUN". for verbs are actions words. Moses, in Exodus 3:13, asked "WHAT" is his name, not "WHO" is he in name, that's a big difference, and here's why. "WHAT" vs "WHO" in names. I use this example all the time. if I asked, "What is the first woman name", many would say "EVE", and they would be in error. why? because I asked, "WHAT" is here name, not "WHO" she is in Name. for "WHAT" she is in name is "Adam". listen to the bible, Genesis 5:1 "This is the book of the generations of Adam. In the day that God created man, in the likeness of God made he him;"
Genesis 5:2 "Male and female created he them; and blessed them, and called their name Adam, in the day when they were created." Adam is "WHAT" she is, and not "WHO" she is by name. for if I would have asked, "Who is the first woman name", the correct answer is "EVE", becase "EVE" identifies "WHO" she is in name and not "WHAT" she is in name.
so going back to Exodus 3:13 when Maose asked "WHAT", not "WHO", but "WHAT" is your name, God gave Moses no more bor less that what he asked for. "WHAT" is your name. for "WHAT" God is , King of kings, Lord of lords, all knowing, all present, all powerful... ect.... for that's "WHAT" he is... God. verbs describs actions. Nouns on the other hand describe people, places ot things. and God in the bible correct the mistakes of the scribs and their corruptions. scripture, Isaiah 52:6 "Therefore my people shall know my name: therefore they shall know in that day that I am he that doth speak: behold, it is I." there is that "I AM" or H1961 הָיָה hayah. see as God said in Exodus 6:3a "And I appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, by the name of God Almighty". God almighty is "WHAT" he is and NOT "WHO" he is. for God had not yet manifested in the flesh/Person as to have a "personal" Name yet, but when he did, just as isaiah said, listen, 52:6 "Therefore my people shall know my name: therefore they shall know in that day that I am he that doth speak: behold, it is I.". shall is a future tense designation meaning at the time of the statement it had not yet happen. but now it has come, scripture, John 8:24 "I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins."
so God personal name was never given in the OT. meaning, "Yehovah/Jehovah, or Yahweh", are not his Personal name as to "WHO" he is. that's clear as day.
only when God showed up in flesh as a "PERSON", then was the Personal name attached to that which was MANIFESTED, ..... JESUS/YESHUA.
a re-reading of this post might be nessary to get the full digestion of this meat.
PICJAG.
scripture, Exodus 6:3 "And I appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, by the name of God Almighty, but by my name JEHOVAH was I not known to them."
here God clearly states that "Abraham" didn't know him by the name "JEHOVAH" correct. let's see if this is true or not. scripture, Genesis 22:14 "And Abraham called the name of that place Jehovahjireh: as it is said to this day, In the mount of the LORD it shall be seen."
HOLD IT, STOP, how in the world is Abraham calling this place, "Jehovahjireh" when God clearly said he didn't know him by any name like that. and God was speaking in Exodus when he said Abraham didn't know him by such name, and Genesis come before Exodus. so now we have a problem, well some do, Not I. but we need to examine this corruption, because as the topic says, "CORRUPT BIBLES WHICH ARE SENDIND PEOPLE 2 HELL"
let's see if we can put the brakes on this corrupt man names.
Yehovah/Jehovah, or Yahweh, both are corrupt personal name for God. they are NOT his "PERSONAL" name. because the tetragrammaton from which these name came from is a verb and not a NOUN, and verbs are not Personal names. I AM THAT I AM or H1961 הָיָה hayah (haw-yaw) v. which is a verb, which means
H1961 הָיָה hayah (haw-yaw) v.
1. to exist.
2. to be or become.
3. to come into being, i.e. to happen, to occur (always emphatic, and not a mere copula or auxiliary).
[a primitive root]
KJV: beacon, X altogether, be(-come), accomplished, committed, like), break, cause, come (to pass), do, faint, fall, + follow, happen, X have, last, pertain, quit (one-)self, require, X use.
Compare: H1933
as said, this word is a, "VERB", and not a "NOUN". for verbs are actions words. Moses, in Exodus 3:13, asked "WHAT" is his name, not "WHO" is he in name, that's a big difference, and here's why. "WHAT" vs "WHO" in names. I use this example all the time. if I asked, "What is the first woman name", many would say "EVE", and they would be in error. why? because I asked, "WHAT" is here name, not "WHO" she is in Name. for "WHAT" she is in name is "Adam". listen to the bible, Genesis 5:1 "This is the book of the generations of Adam. In the day that God created man, in the likeness of God made he him;"
Genesis 5:2 "Male and female created he them; and blessed them, and called their name Adam, in the day when they were created." Adam is "WHAT" she is, and not "WHO" she is by name. for if I would have asked, "Who is the first woman name", the correct answer is "EVE", becase "EVE" identifies "WHO" she is in name and not "WHAT" she is in name.
so going back to Exodus 3:13 when Maose asked "WHAT", not "WHO", but "WHAT" is your name, God gave Moses no more bor less that what he asked for. "WHAT" is your name. for "WHAT" God is , King of kings, Lord of lords, all knowing, all present, all powerful... ect.... for that's "WHAT" he is... God. verbs describs actions. Nouns on the other hand describe people, places ot things. and God in the bible correct the mistakes of the scribs and their corruptions. scripture, Isaiah 52:6 "Therefore my people shall know my name: therefore they shall know in that day that I am he that doth speak: behold, it is I." there is that "I AM" or H1961 הָיָה hayah. see as God said in Exodus 6:3a "And I appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, by the name of God Almighty". God almighty is "WHAT" he is and NOT "WHO" he is. for God had not yet manifested in the flesh/Person as to have a "personal" Name yet, but when he did, just as isaiah said, listen, 52:6 "Therefore my people shall know my name: therefore they shall know in that day that I am he that doth speak: behold, it is I.". shall is a future tense designation meaning at the time of the statement it had not yet happen. but now it has come, scripture, John 8:24 "I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins."
so God personal name was never given in the OT. meaning, "Yehovah/Jehovah, or Yahweh", are not his Personal name as to "WHO" he is. that's clear as day.
only when God showed up in flesh as a "PERSON", then was the Personal name attached to that which was MANIFESTED, ..... JESUS/YESHUA.
a re-reading of this post might be nessary to get the full digestion of this meat.
PICJAG.
Grailhunter
Well-Known Member
That is too much work to be absolutely wrong. Sorry. It is absolutely impossible for a "J" to be in any scripture. Impossible! The Letter "J" and its pronunciation did not exist until 1400 years after Christ and did not become popular until the 1600's...1600 years after Christ. The first KJV Bibles did not use the newly invented word Jesus. The KJV Bibles started out spelling Yeshua as Iēsous.
If you are going to talk about "J"s and Jehovah in the Old Testament you would be just as accurate if you believed Yeshua and His Apostle flew in on a Boeing 747 and landed in Yerusalem and Yahweh was the pilot and they got into their Mercedes Benz and drove around. Because none of this existed in the Bible era. 36,000 modification to the scriptures is were you error.
Jim B
Well-Known Member
Oy vey! It saddens me that you have no understanding of the art/science of Bible translation, nor understanding of how languages, including English, change over time.
Nobody anywhere thinks in or speaks 17th Century English. It is, for all intents and purposes, a dead language. Because of the changes in words and their meanings, KJV advocates can choose and distort the text to mean whatever they want it to mean. It makes them, in their own minds, some sort of Biblical authorities.
Biblical translation is both an art and a science. There is no such thing as a "word-for-word" translation, as words can have a variety of meanings depending on context, and verb tenses are often different. In addition, there are idioms that have no meaning in modern English. What would a person from the Biblical era think if I said, "it's hot as hell today but I hear that this afternoon it will be raining cats and dogs"? Modern translations to create in the reader's mind the same thought image that was in the minds of the original hearers/readers... as it should be!
Nobody today, including those who post on this forum -- including yourself -- writes/thinks/speaks in the dead language of the early 17th Century. The Bible should be as clearly understood as the translators can possibly make it.
bbyrd009
Groper
- Nov 30, 2016
- 33,943
- 12,081
- 113
- Faith
- Christian
- Country
- United States Minor Outlying Islands
bbyrd009
Groper
- Nov 30, 2016
- 33,943
- 12,081
- 113
- Faith
- Christian
- Country
- United States Minor Outlying Islands
^
you know those are their vowels, yeh? They have been transliterated to us i guess, but a translation would be more like AEOU or something?
Jim B
Well-Known Member
While I understand your your suggestion, translation is not that easy. In fact it's difficult.
There are some basic rules, the first of which is the translation must be able to be understood by the people who read it. There is no use in creating a word-for-word translation because 1) the source languages (ancient Hebrew, Aramaic, and koine Greek) are very different than the receptor language (in this case English). 2) There can be more than one meaning for a single word depending how it's used in context; the verb tenses are often different, and there are idioms throughout that can be meaningless in the receptor language. and 3) the receptor language must be clearly understood by the readers.
The last item is the main problems with old translations such as the King James. Nobody writes, speaks, or thinks in 400-year-old English, including the British people. Some words have changed meaning, some words are obsolete, and many are no longer in use. English, like most other languages, constantly changes. I know of nobody who speaks, writes, or even think in "olde Englyshe"; it is by now a foreign language.
The ends of the translation spectrum are formal equivalence -- as close to the original words as possible -- and functional equivalence -- as close to the original meaning as possible. The translators must use their knowledge of a) the ancient language, b) how that language was understood, and c) the receptor language, in this case English, and d) how that language is understood by the readers. That is no easy task! No matter how it's done, their are always compromises to be made, and the translation committees must decide how to balance those factors to achieve their desired goal. That was as true in 1611 (and before) as it is today.
I prefer translations that lean toward functional equivalence. I want to understand as clearly as possible what the Bible means to my 21st Century brain, not how it sounded to people that lived centuries ago. For example, the King James rendition of Luke 14:10 is "
But when thou art bidden, go and sit down in the lowest room; that when he that bade thee cometh, he may say unto thee, Friend, go up higher: then shalt thou have worship in the presence of them that sit at meat with thee." What does that mean? Hint: in order to explain that to me, you will have to use entirely different words -- modern English! Why not have the verse translated into the language everybody uses 400 years later? "But when you are invited, take the lowest place, so that when your host comes, he will say to you, ‘Friend, move up to a better place.’ Then you will be honored in the presence of all the other guests." or "But when you are invited, go and take the least important place, so that when your host approaches he will say to you, ‘Friend, move up here to a better place.’ Then you will be honored in the presence of all who share the meal with you." or "But when you are invited, go and sit down at the lowest place, so that when your host comes, he may say to you, ‘Friend, move up higher’; then you will be honored in the presence of all who sit at the table with you." Any one of these is much clearer than the KJV, and they're all a good balance of formal and functional translation techniques. And I'm not including versions that translate the meaning (functional equivalence) such as “Instead, take the lowest place at the foot of the table. Then when your host sees you, he will come and say, ‘Friend, we have a better place for you!’ Then you will be honored in front of all the other guests."
Even the KJV translators acknowledged that earlier English translations were "the word of God" and that their translation would need to be revised with the passing of time. If those translators stated that in the (lengthy) preface, why shouldn't we believe them?
101G
Well-Known Member
first thanks for the reply, second, another ERROR on your part, "Yeshua" was in the bible, pointing to "his salvation" which is H3444 יְשׁוּעָה yshuw`ah (yesh-oo'-aw) n-f. and when the dominate Language English came on the scene, the name Yeshua H3444 was translaterate not TRANSLATED, but translaterated as "JESUS". when John wrote Revelation, he declared, Revelation 19:12 "His eyes were as a flame of fire, and on his head were many crowns; and he had a name written, that no man knew, but he himself. 13 And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God”.
now if he had a name no man knew at that time even not in Hebrew, even John didn't know. that by itself elininate any Yehovah or Yahweh. only as God he knows his name to come. and that name is "JESUS".
so yes, all that work that work was in vain. as Jeremiah 8:8 states, "How do ye say, We are wise, and the law of the LORD is with us? Lo, certainly in vain made he it; the pen of the scribes is in vain."
so all those names are just that... MAN MADE NAMES.
so the tickes are ready to be boarded on that 747...
PICJAG.
Grailhunter
Well-Known Member
Yahweh is the name of God the Father. Yahweh was in the Old Testament 6800 times. Then they removed it and replaced it with the tetragrammaton YHWH. Then they removed that and replaced it with God or Lord. Now you have a Bible that has had the names of God the Father and God the Son completely removed. But Satan is there. No chance..first thanks for the reply, second, another ERROR on your part, "Yeshua" was in the bible, pointing to "his salvation" which is H3444 יְשׁוּעָה yshuw`ah (yesh-oo'-aw) n-f. and when the dominate Language English came on the scene, the name Yeshua H3444 was translaterate not TRANSLATED, but translaterated as "JESUS". when John wrote Revelation, he declared, Revelation 19:12 "His eyes were as a flame of fire, and on his head were many crowns; and he had a name written, that no man knew, but he himself. 13 And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God”.
now if he had a name no man knew at that time even not in Hebrew, even John didn't know. that by itself elininate any Yehovah or Yahweh. only as God he knows his name to come. and that name is "JESUS".
so yes, all that work that work was in vain. as Jeremiah 8:8 states, "How do ye say, We are wise, and the law of the LORD is with us? Lo, certainly in vain made he it; the pen of the scribes is in vain."
so all those names are just that... MAN MADE NAMES.
so the tickes are ready to be boarded on that 747...
PICJAG.
absolutely no chance of a "J" appearing anywhere in the scriptures. So dream on. They only way Christ's mother would have heard something that sounded like Jesus is if someone sneezed! Do a little research before you continue on with this.
101G
Well-Known Member
thanks for the reply, "Yahweh" has never been God personal name. it makes no difference if it 6801 time in the bible, did you not hear God himself? listen, Isaiah 52:6 "Therefore my people shall know my name: therefore they shall know in that day that I am he that doth speak: behold, it is I."
see the keyword is "his people" will know his name....
only his people will know his name, and here it is. Luke 2:21 "And when eight days were accomplished for the circumcising of the child, his name was called JESUS, which was so named of the angel before he was conceived in the womb."see Grailhunter, the Name existed before he came in flesh to wear it....
so all those fake name are just that false names.
PICJAG.
Jim B
Well-Known Member
first thanks for the reply, second, another ERROR on your part, "Yeshua" was in the bible, pointing to "his salvation" which is H3444 יְשׁוּעָה yshuw`ah (yesh-oo'-aw) n-f. and when the dominate Language English came on the scene, the name Yeshua H3444 was translaterate not TRANSLATED, but translaterated as "JESUS". when John wrote Revelation, he declared, Revelation 19:12 "His eyes were as a flame of fire, and on his head were many crowns; and he had a name written, that no man knew, but he himself. 13 And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God”.
now if he had a name no man knew at that time even not in Hebrew, even John didn't know. that by itself elininate any Yehovah or Yahweh. only as God he knows his name to come. and that name is "JESUS".
so yes, all that work that work was in vain. as Jeremiah 8:8 states, "How do ye say, We are wise, and the law of the LORD is with us? Lo, certainly in vain made he it; the pen of the scribes is in vain."
so all those names are just that... MAN MADE NAMES.
so the tickes are ready to be boarded on that 747...
PICJAG.
So when you quote Jeremiah 8:8 (out of context) you of course are including the King James translators, correct?
101G
Well-Known Member
thanks for the reply, including the King James which correct the mistake made by the lying pen of the scribes. Isaiah 52:6 "Therefore my people shall know my name: therefore they shall know in that day that I am he that doth speak: behold, it is I."
if they already knew the name why did God say that "his" people SHALL, SHALL, know his name? because the name was not given as to "WHO" he is by name, vs as to "WHAT" he is in name...
so that want fly.so what about that John 1:3 and isaiah 44:24 is it the same person yes or no?
PICJAG.
Grailhunter
Well-Known Member
The word Jesus did not exist before 1400 AD even the KJV did not use it until the "J" slam.thanks for the reply, "Yahweh" has never been God personal name. it makes no difference if it 6801 time in the bible, did you not hear God himself? listen, Isaiah 52:6 "Therefore my people shall know my name: therefore they shall know in that day that I am he that doth speak: behold, it is I."
see the keyword is "his people" will know his name....
see Grailhunter, the Name existed before he came in flesh to wear it....
so all those fake name are just that false names.
PICJAG.
101G
Well-Known Member
Grailhunter
Well-Known Member
Grailhunter
Well-Known Member
101G
Well-Known Member
you still must not have read post #90.
read it again and you'll see about the "J". ....
... READ.PICJAG
101G
Well-Known Member
Similar threads
