My favorite and the one I use most often is when Jesus said this to satan: (Matthew 4:10) . . .Jesus said to him: “Go away, Satan! For it is written: ‘It is Jehovah your God you must worship, and it is to him alone you must render sacred service.’”
Does God want us to use His name?
- Thread starter Robert Gwin
- 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!
My favorite and the one I use most often is when Jesus said this to satan: (Matthew 4:10) . . .Jesus said to him: “Go away, Satan! For it is written: ‘It is Jehovah your God you must worship, and it is to him alone you must render sacred service.’”
Do you honestly think Michael is higher than Jesus? Jesus was not given that name until he came to earth, and while he is still referred to as Jesus by us, when he returned to heaven, he took on his name that he had before. Jesus is in fact a created being, God's first born and first creation, according to Rev 3:14, so who honestly rejects the Bible? Fact is you are trying to deify Jesus, placing him as being Jehovah Himself. We sir accept the Bible as truth, and it is right here for all to see, so say whatever you please, that does not change the facts.
Ronald David Bruno
Well-Known Member
Sounds speculative and at best theoretical.
I am convinced the original New Testament texts were in Koine Greek. Some were in Aramaic. Possibly some in Hebrew, but none exist. There are fragments of the 1st Century Greek texts.
From what I underatand there are 5800 copies of the original texts, the majority of which are in Koine Greek.
It makes sense to me that God planned it that way. That He ordained Alexander the Great to conquer the known world in order to establish the Greek language for His purpose , to spread the Gospel hundreds of years later to the Gentile world. It was the common written language. Hebrew would only suffice for Jews. Why would He do that? I'm not arguing there weren't copies made for them. And in those copies, the tetragramaton may exist.
Modern ideas and thoughts surface. We have revisionists all over the place trying to rewrite history, change truth ... even about the scriptures.
Here is an informative study from a copy of the 1911 Encyclopedia Britannica about the name, Jehovah.
1911 Encyclopædia Britannica/Jehovah - Wikisource, the free online library
Ronald David Bruno
Well-Known Member
Michael is under the command of Jesus. To believe that Jesus is Michael incarnate is false.
The whole Bible is about Christ ... and only five verses about Michael.
You have been deceived!
You need to ask Him about that someday - He'll certainly correct you.
Firstborn from the dead. Firstborn also means preeminent. God became flesh and dwelt among us.
Which Bible are you reading? The NWT was originally translated by Fredrick Franz who had two years of Greek and couldn't translate one verse of Hebrew in a court of law. He was a hack. Christian Scholars throughout the world agree that this is the only Bible translation that was written specifically to conform to the JW belief system. Your doctrines conflicted with the others so they went in and changed words and phrases. Do you know what it says at the end of the Bible about those who add to or take away from God's word? I imagine alterations have been made since that first edition. Nevertheless, concerning these very crucial doctrines, changes are evident that would lead the reader to interpret the meaning differently - as you do.
Last edited:
Job 36
11 If they hearken and serve him,
They shall spend their days in prosperity,
And their years in pleasures.
12 But if they hearken not, they shall perish by the sword,
And they shall die without knowledge.
13 But they that are godless in heart lay up anger:
They cry not for help when he bindeth them.
Here are some links:
Writing of God | Book by Dr. Miles Jones
Nehemia's Wall
The Ancient Hebrew Research Center
Home | A Rood Awakening! International
DouglasHamp.com
These links should keep you busy until Jesus gets back.
Let's consider this prophecy regarding the supreme enemy of YHVH:
Daniel 7:25
And he shall speak great words against the most High, and shall wear out the saints of the most High, and think to change times and laws: and they shall be given into his hand until a time and times and the dividing of time.
What does "change times and laws" mean? The "appointed times" of YHVH are the holidays that prophesy of the Messiah.
Exodus 12:3, the selection of the Passover Lamb, fulfilled by Matthew 21:9.
Leviticus 23:5, the rehearsal of the events of Exodus 12, fulfilled by the crucifixion and that fulfillment confirmed by 1 Corinthians 5:7.
Leviticus 23:10 fulfilled by Matthew 27:52.
Leviticus 23:11-12 described in John 20:17
The High Priest offers the first fruits offering. The saints that rose from the graves that day were the first fruits.
Leviticus 23:16 is the Day the Holy Spirit is poured out.
The enemy of YHVH will HIDE the prophetic shadows of Messiah by changing to a new set of holidays.
However, the new set of holidays is actually an old set of holidays given new life by the supreme enemy of YHVH and his people.
There are only 2 kinds of religious observances. There are ones decreed by YHVH to be prophetic shadows of his Messiah, and there are the holidays that honor other gods. Co-opting the second set and attaching Jesus to them is an abomination. That is why we have the Law. It is the set of holidays that honor Jesus.
Jeremiah 10:1-5
We have been hypnotized by Babylon. Jesus wants us to escape. Only then can He complete His work in us.
Revelation 18:4
And I heard another voice from heaven, saying, Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues.
Jesus is not calling pagans out of Babylon. He is calling US! If He is calling us out, then He must think that is where we are.
Come into the deep water, my friend. The Torah is college for Christians.
Yes. You are convinced that the story given to you by Rome is correct. You refuse to consider that the organization responsible for some of the worst evil in history could be wrong. Let's not forget, the organization you are defending burned people at the stake for translating the Bible into English. But, hey, they can't be wrong about this!
Even photographic evidence to the contrary will not change your mind. The first edition of the very Bible you read has a picture that proves them wrong. But, you will defend Rome rather than have your beliefs challenged. Facts don't matter to you. That attitude is why the people you try to evangelize will not listen to you.
Not even one time have you said anything like, "I would like to know more about this so I can decide for myself what is true. Where can I get more information about the research regarding these ideas?" Nope. As far as you are concerned, no archeological or linguistic research can even be considered. You are convinced that what you have been taught is true and there is no way you are willing to entertain any idea that challenges your theological model.
The VERY FIRST LINE from your Encyclopedia Britannica article is demonstrably false!
Anyone who spends significant time investigating how the Divine Name of God should be pronounced will inevitably come across those who claim that the vowel pointers for “Adonai” were used to replace the original vowel pointers for יהוה in order to disguise the true pronunciation, thus creating the so-called “false” rendering of JeHoVaH or YeHoVaH.
BUT… is this Adonai-vowel-replacement claim accurate? Lets take a look and see for ourselves…
The vowels for "Adonai" are A-O-A ( chataph patach - cholam - kamatz )
The vowels for "YeHoVaH" are (E, as in egg.)O-A ( shva - cholam - kamatz )
Their claim, which is now your claim, is that "ah" and "eh" are the same vowel.
That is what passes for scholarship these days.
Have a nice day.
Ronald David Bruno
Well-Known Member
So you are not a JW but beleive the name is legit. But you also trash holidays, claiming they come from the enemy? Am I getting that right? Easter, Christmas, Thanksgiving, etc. are from Satan?
Are you a Messianic Jew?
Last edited:
Are you so devoid of legitimate arguments that you have to try and attach labels to people so that an ad hominem seems appropriate?
I will give you points for consistency.
You consistently ignore virtually everything I say in favor of trying to find a way to attack me personally.
That is the fundamental strategy of Socialism.
Attack people, not ideas.
If that is all you have, we're done.
Ronald David Bruno
Well-Known Member
I gave my initial post as my argument. Then I backed it up with history, how God prepared the world
for the Gospel to be received by establishing the Greek language throughout hundreds of years before Christ. Then I gave also legitimate commentary from an old encyclopedia.
What, are you ashamed of revealing your church, who you are? I was just trying to figure out where you got this stuff you're pushing.
I did'nt ignore it, I just don't agree with it. I said "it sounds speculative or at best theoretical" and favoring Jewish/Hebrew sources ... (250 exant Hebrew manuscripts).
I am not attacking. If you were a Messianic Jew, that's wonderful, it would just clear things up a little - yiur school of thought.
Most Christians I know would have no problem sharing their testimony, how they were saved, and through what church. It is easier to understand where someone is coming from so we can cut to the chase.
I guess you want to keep that private. I am okay with being done too.
Btw, I am against socialism, the NWO, Global Warming hoax and vaccine depopulation, and all of the liberal, Left-wing agenda. I was saved by grace through faith, born again, attended a Prostestant Spirit-filled evangelical church 31 years ago.
Last edited:
amigo de christo
Well-Known Member
Concering the very name of GOD .
I have given them THY NAME . JESUS SAID THAT . OH YES .
Now let all praise and thank the glorious LORD . Let all that draws breath praise the glorious Lord .
Point to Christ , HE alone is the only way , the TRUTH and the LIFE and no man can come unto the Father
but BY HIM . Time for a praise fest unto the glorious Lord
I have given them THY NAME . JESUS SAID THAT . OH YES .
Now let all praise and thank the glorious LORD . Let all that draws breath praise the glorious Lord .
Point to Christ , HE alone is the only way , the TRUTH and the LIFE and no man can come unto the Father
but BY HIM . Time for a praise fest unto the glorious Lord
Ronald David Bruno
Well-Known Member
tigger 2
Well-Known Member
Earlier Hebrew used the waw ('w' sound) whereas modern Hebrew has changed it to the vav ('v' sound). So it was YHWH or Yehowah.
The Disciple John
Active Member
Whoa. You really pack it on.
Thanks. I'll try to get through them before Jesus returns.
RR144
Well-Known Member
Hi Robert, I didn't bother to read through ALL the comments here, so forgive me if this has been covered, but we really don't know what the
correct pronunciation of the Tetragrammaton.
The official website of the Catholic Church states:
“About the 13th century the term ‘Jehovah’ appeared when Christian scholars took the consonants of ‘Yahweh’ and pronounced it with the vowels of ‘Adonai.’ This resulted in the sound ‘Yahowah,’ which has a Latinized spelling of ‘Jehovah.’ The first recorded use of this spelling was made by a Spanish Dominican monk, Raymundus Martini, in 1270” (www.catholic.com/qa/is-gods-name-yahweh-or-jehovah).
Below are some references to Yahweh:
“The true pronunciation of the name YHWH was never lost. Several early Greek writers of the Christian Church testify that the name was pronounced ‘Yahweh’” (Encyclopaedia Judaica, vol. 7, p. 680).
“Early Christian writers, such as Clement of Alexandria in the 2nd century, had used the form Yahweh, thus this pronunciation of the Tetragrammaton was never really lost. Greek transcriptions also indicated that YHWH should be pronounced Yahweh” (Encyclopaedia Britannica, 15th ed., vol. x, p. 786).
“The pronunciation Yahweh is indicated by transliteration of the name into Greek in early Christian literature, in the form iaoue (Clement of Alexandria) or iabe (Theodoret; by this time Gk. b had the pronunciation of v)…Strictly speaking, Yahweh is the only ‘name’ of God. In Genesis wherever the word sem (‘name’) is associated with the divine being that name is Yahweh” (Eerdman’s Bible Dictionary, 1979 p. 478).
“Such a conclusion, giving ‘Yahweh’ as the pronunciation of the name, is confirmed by the testimony of the Fathers and gentile writers, where the forms IAO, Yaho, Yaou, Yahouai, and Yahoue appear. Especially important is the statement of Theodoret in relation to Ex. lvi, when he says: ‘the Samaritans call it [the tetragrammaton] ‘Yabe,’ the Jews call it ‘Aia’…” (The New Schaff-Herzog Religious Encyclopedia, “Yahweh,” p. 471)
In addition to early Christian sources, evidence for Yahweh is also found in the Nag Hammadi codices, dating from the 2nd to 4th century CE. This library of Gnostic writings was discovered in Upper Egypt, near Nag Hammadi, in 1945. In all, there are over 50 texts within this library. Since they are in Greek, as with the church fathers, they preserve the pronunciation.
Interestingly, there is a whole movement under the umbrella SACRED NAME GROUPS that uses YAHWEH in their worship. They have nothing to do with the Jehovah's Witness religion, but have similar basic beliefs.
- Witnesses of Yahweh
- Congregation of Yahweh's Witnesses
- Assemblies of Yahweh
- Assembly of Yahweh
- House of Yahweh
- Restored Israel of Yahweh
Those among the SACRED NAME GROUPS, have differences among themselves as to the proper pronunciation. There was a group called Assemblies of Yah, Assemblies of Yahvah, Called out ones of Yah. There is even a group called Assembly of YHWHHOSHUA, a hybrid of Yahweh and Hoshua. One group uses the name Yahuwah. Then of course there is Stafford's group that uses the term Christian Witnesses of Jah.
The Disciple John
Active Member
To be honest with you Ronald, from a perspective of an onlooker, it does not look like you are typing to "just clear things up a little", but it's more like @Happy Trails is saying - that you are looking to attack something other than his post.
It is evident from the time you threw the JW tag on him, and started attacking "that theology" which is his... so you thought.
It is evident from your attacking the "theology" of the other guys... mentioning Fredrick Franz, and his "inability"..."their theology".
It looks to me like you are not as interested in countering what they say, as you are interested in attacking their beliefs, and giving the reason to be, "their theology".
They could easily say the same thing... "Your theology", but where would that get anyone?
If @Happy Trails did reveal their faith, I believe sure you would zero in on something about their faith you don't like. Am I right?
It's better to address the posts, isn't it?
I would like you to explain something to me. Is that okay with you?
The Disciple John
Active Member
RR144
Well-Known Member
The Disciple John
Active Member
Similar threads
