Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 59 (9164 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,924 Year: 4,181/9,624 Month: 1,052/974 Week: 11/368 Day: 11/11 Hour: 0/2


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   YHWH, Yahweh, Jehovah, adonai, lord, elohim, god, allah, Allah thread.
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 111 of 298 (72192)
12-10-2003 8:43 PM
Reply to: Message 109 by Abshalom
12-10-2003 3:48 PM


Re: Reply to your simple question for Buzsaw
Some eggheaded cultists decided to shuffle the vowels from Adonai (The Lord) inbetween the consonants of YHVH in order to render a name they could pronounce as "YaHoVaH."
This makes no sense atol, Abshalom. Is this some far fetched idea of yours or did you dig it up some place?? Please document your source. All Hebrew words are consanents and the phonic sound of the combination of the consonents is what determines the vowels when translating. The name is widely used throughout most of the OT far more extensively in such a manner as to depict it's proper name status in the most reliable manuscripts.
This amounts to about the same thing as if I were to insert the vowels from "Yeshua" (the approximate Hebrew for "Jesus")inbetween the Greek letters Chi and Rho (historically used as a cryptogram for Jesus)and come up with Khe-Rhu'a, and then insist that my invented misnomer is the legitimate name of the embodied one/third of the Trinity.
For you to use this rediculous argument, the Greek would have to be a consonent only language as is the Hebrew, but that's not so. You're making no sense, whatsoever.
[This message has been edited by buzsaw, 12-10-2003]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 109 by Abshalom, posted 12-10-2003 3:48 PM Abshalom has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 112 by Amlodhi, posted 12-11-2003 12:20 AM Buzsaw has replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 117 of 298 (72354)
12-11-2003 5:41 PM
Reply to: Message 112 by Amlodhi
12-11-2003 12:20 AM


Re: Reply to your simple question for Buzsaw
1. That the superstitious idea emerged after the fact of the original texts the the name YHWH shouldn't be spoken does not make them right and deterioriates/liberalizes the purity and literacy of the original intent of the text.
2. That the Y was later translated and spoken as J does not make it erroneous or miss-pronounced. Why? Because the official English language was changed across the board so as to make it the only correct way to pronounced it. Your missguided idea would require that every word in the English language in which the y was changed to j would be miss-pronounced or spelled. That makes no sense.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 112 by Amlodhi, posted 12-11-2003 12:20 AM Amlodhi has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 118 by Abshalom, posted 12-11-2003 5:51 PM Buzsaw has replied
 Message 122 by Amlodhi, posted 12-11-2003 6:54 PM Buzsaw has replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 119 of 298 (72358)
12-11-2003 6:04 PM
Reply to: Message 116 by Abshalom
12-11-2003 11:13 AM


Re: Chapter and Verse
P.S. to Buzsaw: Do you have any idea how many names are given to "El" such as Adonia, El Shaddai, El Olom, El Khai, El Elyon, Elohim, Adon, Adonay Tzivaot, Tzur Yisrael, Melekh, etc., in the Bible alone, not to mention other names in other holy texts refering to the same monotheistic diety you so carelessly refer to as Jehovah?
........And Abshalom, have you any idea how many times in the OT each of these names are used? The proper name of God/Elohim which is Jehovah is use around 6000 times. The descriptive name, El Shaddai, in comparison is used 41 times. Jehovah/YHWH is clearly, I say clearly, the proper name of the God of the Bible.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 116 by Abshalom, posted 12-11-2003 11:13 AM Abshalom has not replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 120 of 298 (72359)
12-11-2003 6:16 PM
Reply to: Message 118 by Abshalom
12-11-2003 5:51 PM


Re: If 6 were 9 ... I don't mind ... I don't mind
And, Buzsaw, it makes no difference when or why "J" was introduced to the "English" language, Jochim is still pronounced Yokheem, Jethro is still pronounced Yitro, Joseph is still pronounced Yosef, Jacob is still pronounced Yaakov, E-T-C ... E-T-C
Pronounced by whom in English speaking nations?? Last I heard, the J is official proper letter used in the English language today.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 118 by Abshalom, posted 12-11-2003 5:51 PM Abshalom has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 121 by Abshalom, posted 12-11-2003 6:35 PM Buzsaw has replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 124 of 298 (72422)
12-11-2003 11:11 PM
Reply to: Message 121 by Abshalom
12-11-2003 6:35 PM


Re: Evolution vs. Creation In Situ of
"... clearly, I say clearly ..." Buzz Bullwinkle Saw
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Are you going to yada and insult, Abshalom, or are you going to answer my question in post 120?
------------------
The immeasurable present is forever consuming the eternal future and extending the infinite past. buz

This message is a reply to:
 Message 121 by Abshalom, posted 12-11-2003 6:35 PM Abshalom has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 125 by Rei, posted 12-11-2003 11:25 PM Buzsaw has replied
 Message 133 by Abshalom, posted 12-12-2003 11:55 AM Buzsaw has not replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 126 of 298 (72427)
12-11-2003 11:25 PM
Reply to: Message 122 by Amlodhi
12-11-2003 6:54 PM


Re: Reply to your simple question for Buzsaw
Whether or not the vowel points of "adonai" were applied to "YHWH" as the result of "superstition" is irrelevant. The fact remains that the Name itself was not intended to be pronounced with those vowel sounds.
That the Jews did not write vowels does not mean theat they did not speak them phonetically. So what vowels would they have spoken so as to translate YHWH? Yaweh fits the ticket for speaking the consonent Hebrew name. They did btw speak as well as write the name YHWH before the superstition emerged, which included most of their history.
As to "Y" versus "J", I was merely explaining how the "J" vocalization originated.
You were also contending that using the J is miss-pronunciation which I factually refuted.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 122 by Amlodhi, posted 12-11-2003 6:54 PM Amlodhi has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 128 by Amlodhi, posted 12-11-2003 11:46 PM Buzsaw has replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 127 of 298 (72429)
12-11-2003 11:39 PM
Reply to: Message 125 by Rei
12-11-2003 11:25 PM


Re: Evolution vs. Creation In Situ of
Wow, now that's quite the change. For once, I get to see Buzsaw bother someone else to try and get an answer to his questions.
The end must be nearer than we thought....
Well, Rei madear, but Abshalom chose the low insultive road in response rather than to either remain silent or concede to the facts. Then too, if A. chooses not to answer my question for whatever reason, I'll do the Christian thing and not bug him/her adnausium.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 125 by Rei, posted 12-11-2003 11:25 PM Rei has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 135 by Abshalom, posted 12-12-2003 12:18 PM Buzsaw has not replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 129 of 298 (72435)
12-11-2003 11:54 PM
Reply to: Message 128 by Amlodhi
12-11-2003 11:46 PM


Re: Reply to your simple question for Buzsaw
I see I need to clarify my question. What vowels would have been phonetically spoken before the taboo of speaking the name prevailed, that is when they were actually both speaking and writing the name?
What I am driving at here is that since you claim the vowels a and e were derived from the taboo, borrowing the vowels from adonai, I'm saying adonai had nothing to do with the usage of a and e in phonetically speaking or translating the name, as they would have been always the normal natural vowels spoken phonetically.
[This message has been edited by buzsaw, 12-12-2003]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 128 by Amlodhi, posted 12-11-2003 11:46 PM Amlodhi has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 132 by Amlodhi, posted 12-12-2003 12:58 AM Buzsaw has replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 131 of 298 (72445)
12-12-2003 12:36 AM
Reply to: Message 130 by Rei
12-12-2003 12:08 AM


Most English scholars use the Yahweh spelling and pronunciation because it is phonetically suited rather than that the vowels were borrowed from another word. I would assume the Hebrews would have done likewise, but admittedly that can not be proven.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 130 by Rei, posted 12-12-2003 12:08 AM Rei has not replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 136 of 298 (72536)
12-12-2003 1:08 PM
Reply to: Message 132 by Amlodhi
12-12-2003 12:58 AM


Re: Reply to your simple question for Buzsaw
.....But taking a word such as adonai with completely different consonents and trying to say the vowels were borrowed is pure conjecture on the part of you who believe this. It would not be nearly as unusual to assume that the early English translators added the o as when pronouncing yehweh, a slow pronounciation might have somewhat of an o sound. Then too, when translating into any completely different language, one would not expect it to look like the Hebrew as to vowels. Yah-o-weh is much closer to Yahweh than it is to adonai. If one would pronounce Yaweh very slowly, an o comes close to being pronounced. That Jehovah/Yaweh (proper name) is lord/adonai does not diminish the meaning or change the pronunciation of either word.
[This message has been edited by buzsaw, 12-12-2003]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 132 by Amlodhi, posted 12-12-2003 12:58 AM Amlodhi has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 137 by Abshalom, posted 12-12-2003 1:28 PM Buzsaw has replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 138 of 298 (72550)
12-12-2003 2:21 PM
Reply to: Message 137 by Abshalom
12-12-2003 1:28 PM


Re: Reply to your simple question for Buzsaw
So how does that factor adonai into the pronunciation of YHWH? I'm contending that none of this does as these are two completely different words, the former a descriptive title and the latter a proper name of lord/master/ruler Jehovah, i.e. adonai Yahweh. Nor has anyone refuted that the proper modern English pronunciation of Yehowah/Yahweh is Jehovah.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 137 by Abshalom, posted 12-12-2003 1:28 PM Abshalom has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 139 by Abshalom, posted 12-12-2003 3:14 PM Buzsaw has replied
 Message 141 by Amlodhi, posted 12-12-2003 8:42 PM Buzsaw has replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 140 of 298 (72593)
12-12-2003 7:12 PM
Reply to: Message 139 by Abshalom
12-12-2003 3:14 PM


Re: Reply to your simple question for Buzsaw
Buz, I'm bored.
Absholem, move over to the side of truth and you'll get over being bored. This supercilious idea of rejecting the J because it only went back to the 17th century is nuts. You people who divide the "brethren" by insisting we must speak the name of God in the Hebrew language are wrong. We're English speaking Americans. Our language uses the letters J and V. Get use to it. Our people understand and relate to our language, not foreign ones or ancient ones.
The link you posted insists we use Hebrew in both the names of Jesus and Jehovah. That's bogus and nonsensical. Let the Jews use their Hebrew and we Americans will continue to use Jehovah and Jesus as our language renders it. If you people were consistent, you would refer to everone you know by the name of Joe or Judy by dropping the J and inserting the Y. You all are straining at gnats and swallowing camels somewhat like the Pharasees of Jesus's day.
------------------
The immeasurable present is forever consuming the eternal future and extending the infinite past. buz

This message is a reply to:
 Message 139 by Abshalom, posted 12-12-2003 3:14 PM Abshalom has not replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 143 of 298 (72660)
12-13-2003 9:00 AM
Reply to: Message 141 by Amlodhi
12-12-2003 8:42 PM


Re: Reply to your simple question for Buzsaw
According to the Encyclopedia Judaica, p. 680, vol. 7, ?the true pronunciation of the tetragrammaton YHWH was never lost. The name was pronounced Yahweh. It was regularly pronounced this way at least until 586 B.C., as is clear from the Lachish Letters written shortly before this date.?
http://www.familybible.org/Teaching/Messianic/Jehovah.htm
------------------
The immeasurable present is forever consuming the eternal future and extending the infinite past. buz
[This message has been edited by buzsaw, 12-13-2003]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 141 by Amlodhi, posted 12-12-2003 8:42 PM Amlodhi has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 144 by Abshalom, posted 12-13-2003 9:12 AM Buzsaw has not replied
 Message 145 by Amlodhi, posted 12-13-2003 10:29 AM Buzsaw has replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 146 of 298 (72703)
12-13-2003 3:20 PM
Reply to: Message 145 by Amlodhi
12-13-2003 10:29 AM


Re: Reply to your simple question for Buzsaw
But my contention and the reason for posting what the Judaic Encyclopedia said is that before at least 586BC the tetragram was prounounced Yahweh. So this was the official pronunciation, no matter what the Mesorites did many centuries later and the word adonai had nothing to do with the official pronunciation because the phobia of speaking the word, i.e. changing the name to adonai, didn't come until later than 586 BC.
------------------
The immeasurable present is forever consuming the eternal future and extending the infinite past. buz

This message is a reply to:
 Message 145 by Amlodhi, posted 12-13-2003 10:29 AM Amlodhi has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 149 by Amlodhi, posted 12-13-2003 5:01 PM Buzsaw has replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 147 of 298 (72706)
12-13-2003 3:33 PM
Reply to: Message 145 by Amlodhi
12-13-2003 10:29 AM


Re: Reply to your simple question for Buzsaw
Yes, the article you linked to agrees exactly with what I have repeatedly demonstrated to you; the Name should be pronounced "Yahweh", not "Jehovah", not "slowly with an "o", but "Yahweh".
That the o was added is not unusual since the English language is much different than the Hebrew. You're insisting that the English be exactly as the Hebrew, and that doesn't cut it for translating. The Jews may claim this, but that doesn't make it so. There is an o sound in saying the w in Yahweh whether you say it fast or slow. It's just that when you say it slow it is more pronounced. Say it slowly to yourself and you will see what I mean.
The same people who are uptight about the English name Jehovah are the ones uptight about the name Jesus, trying to insist the Hebrew Yeshuah be pronounce or you've got one foot in hell, so to speak. Again, we're Americans and that's the way we speak the name in English. You need to get over your own phobia about this.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 145 by Amlodhi, posted 12-13-2003 10:29 AM Amlodhi has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024