HaShem - Yahweh or Jehovah?

Dear Firebird;

quote:

---

the name, IF IT IS NOT IN THE ORIGINAL IT SHOULD NOT BE IN THE TRANSLATION.

---

That is just it, we don't have the original, we can 'reconstruct' them by comparing different copies we do have and weeding out errors by the pattern of appearance. One way of spotting such, is those that appear in later copies, but not earlier manuscripts. In short, there are a number of ways of figuring out what the original verse was. One of those methods is when the NT quotes from the OT, the wording of the NT verse should read like the OT. When God's name was used in that verse in the OT, then it was undoubtably in the NT verse. God's name was systematically removed from the NT a few centuries after the NT was written, unfortunately we do not have any copies that predate that time. Picture Matthew sitting there writing his gospel in Hebrew, using a Hebrew copy of the OT with the Tetragrammaton in a verse that he is quoting from, do you think he replaced God's name with a title?

quote:

---

As per Arachophilia's opening post, . . . "Yahweh" which is the way hebrew speakers today pronounce the name . . . the English translation of "Jehovah" is based on errors

---

Yes the English translation of YHWH is Jehovah and the Hebrew translation is Yahweh. What every it is based on, Jehovah is an English translation, Yahweh is a foreign word that had been taken into the English language. As to whether it will replace 'Jehovah' time will only tell. As for the logic that 'Yahweh' is the only acceptable why of pronouncing God's name, I would point out two holes in this argument,1. then all names in the Bible should be pronounced in Hebrew or Greek,2. Yahweh is probably not the correct pronunciation anyway, it is not certain it is correct and there is evidence pointing towards the Divine Name having three syllables rather than two like Yahweh.All things considered, that is why I favor Jehovah over Yahweh, if someday in the future Yahweh or some other form of the Divine name is more common, then I will use that. Some people miss the point that it is not so important how you pronounce something, as it is that people understand what you say.Sincerely Yours; Wm Scott Anderson

Dear Arachnophilia;

quote:

---

my bible's missing a few books. namely the apocrypha, which you mentioned. before you go off on how it's not inspired, please remember that the catholic church considers it canon.

---

Oh, please, let us not waste time with dumb games, you already know this so there is no point in telling you what you already know.

quote:

---

which book of jeremiah does your bible have? there are two -- mostly the same text, but one is arranged differently. . . . a bunch of verses are missing from one version. we don't know which came first, either.

---

What are you talking about? Do you have the name of the right book? I can't find any reference to a major controversy about there being two difference versions of the book of Jeremiah.

quote:

---

i've consistently demonstrated that IT IS NOT THE OLDEST FORM. hebrew has no j, and the earliest english bibles DO NOT render the name of the lord, a point you've chosen to ignore.

---

Jehovah is the earliest transliteration of the Divine Name in English. "Lord" is not a transliteration of YHWH, it is a title and is not even a name. So let me state it clearly for you, "The earliest transliteration of YHWH into English, that is still in common usage today, is 'Jehovah'. 'Lord' and 'God' are titles and are not personal names, and while many Bible translations use them as a substitute for YHWH, they are not a transliteration of YHWH." Sincerely Yours; Wm Scott Anderson

Dear Spin;

quote:

---

The form "Yahweh" is supported by the gnostic evidence; it doesn't make any deviant substitutions for letters in the original consonantal form; and has a much better chance of reflecting a hypothetical original pronunciation.

---

I agree entirely, I use "Jehovah" because it is the way the Name has been used in English and people know who you are talking about. I never claimed it was the way the Hebrews pronounced the Name.Sincerely Yours; Wm Scott Anderson

Dear Arachnophilia;

quote:

---

which version of jeremiah does your bible have?

---

Like I said before, this is a non issue and is also getting off topic. The NWT like all modern translations, uses the Masoretic Hebrew text. I checked your link and did some checking and found that your link glossed over some important details that negated their argument. Here is a quote from a web site that summed it up nicely.

quote:

---

Regardless of who wrote the Dead Sea Scrolls, we can safely state that there is little in them that can be used against the Traditional Hebrew Text. In fact, because the evidence from Qumran overwhelming supports the Masoretic Hebrew Text, we must say the findings at Qumran strongly favor the Traditional Text and the Authorized Version. Additionally, as we have seen, findings at Murabbaat and Masada exclusively support the Masoretic Text, proving that the established text accepted as the oracles of God (Romans 3:1-2) was the Traditional Hebrew Text.

---

http://members.aol.com/DrTHolland/Chapter7.htmlI would probably disagree with a few minor points on that web site, for example when NT writers quote from the Septuagint and that verse differs significantly from the Masoretic text, since the NT writers wrote under inspiration, I would say that in that verse the Septuagint has the correct rendering. I would also think that since under this premiss, the NT quotes reveal errors in the Masoretic text, there are probably a few more that we don't know about which high lights why it is unwise to base a doctrine on just a few words in a single verse.

quote:

---

"jehovah" is an aberation, and occurs in exactly .06% of the instances of YHWH in the kjv text.

---

Psalms 83:18 "That men may know that thou, whose name alone is Jehovah, art the most high over all the earth."-- King James. That is not a mistake, the verse is VERY clear in what it states.Sincerely Yours; Wm Scott Anderson

Dear Spin;

quote:

---

(there is evidence pointing towards the Divine Name having three syllables)- On what philological evidence exactly is this supposition of three syllables based on??

---

Truthfully I don't know. I haven't researched it because the exact ancient Hebrew pronunciation of the Divine Name is not known for sure and all such arguments fall short of total certainty. They end up being more of historical interest in how the Name may have been pronounced. I did see one web site on this when I was looking for something else, and the argument seemed to be based on the meter in songs in which the Name was used, that to fit, the Name had to have three syllables. I have also heard arguments that YHWH had an 'O' vowel sound in it, so if you combine the two lines of thought you come up with 'Yahoweh.' If you do a search on the web using that spelling you will find some sites on it, but you can probably take all kinds of different spelling variations of Yahweh and find web sites proclaiming that each one is the one and only correct name of God. Part of the reason why I don't get too excited over using 'Yahweh' instead of Jehovah, since the pronunciation is uncertain, I might as well use what I am the most familiar with and most people already know as God's name.Sincerely Yours; Wm Scott Anderson

Dear Firebird;

quote:

---

the NWT translators specifically claiming that their inspired source is the NTs in Greek, which they regard as inspired. If these do not contain something that should be translated as "Jehovah", why should the translation?

---

Because the OT is inspired too. When the NT quotes the OT, the Name should be retained.

quote:

---

if a quoter did not wish to pronounce the name of the god.

---

In the case in question, the quoter was an inspired Bible writer working under the influence of the holy spirit quoting from a OT verse with the Name in it, not wishing to pronounce the Name is not a possibility since such a person wouldn't be entrusted as a writer.

quote:

---

Then surely God can hear and understand the people who address Him as "Lord" and are trying to reach and obey Him? How can it be so important to Him that they address Him by an incorrect name?

---

Of course. Jehovah can read hearts and knows our intentions better than we do ourselves. While using the Name is not necessary to worship God, using it adds to it, like addressing your prayers "Jehovah God-". Using God's Name shows respect for him and shows that we have an interest in getting to know him as a person, as a friend.
Using God's name is important when dealing with people who don't know Jehovah. He isn't Allah or some other god, he is Jehovah God Almighty the creator of all things. Whether you use the name Yahweh, Yahoweh or Jehovah, using the Name serves to separate who you are talking about from all the false gods and nonsense that is out there. It clearly clarifies who and what you are talking about.Sincerely Yours; Wm Scott Anderson