Thanks for the exhortations.
Christian Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
Desire to be a vessel of honor unto the Lord Jesus Christ?
Join For His Glory for a discussion on how
https://christianforums.net/threads/a-vessel-of-honor.110278/
-
Taking the time to pray? Christ is the answer in times of need
https://christianforums.net/threads/psalm-70-1-save-me-o-god-lord-help-me-now.108509/
-
-
Depending upon the Holy Spirit for all you do?
Read through the following study by Tenchi for more on this topic
https://christianforums.net/threads/without-the-holy-spirit-we-can-do-nothing.109419/
-
-
How are famous preachers sometimes effected by sin?
Join Sola Scriptura for a discussion on the subject
https://christianforums.net/threads/anointed-preaching-teaching.109331/#post-1912042
-
Could God's plan for the lost be this simple?
- Thread starter Alfred Persson
- Start date
No, no evidence for it whatsoever. Not one Greek mss or fragment has the tetragrammaton. Not only that, no private correspondece or pottery shards or burial materials with Greek NT quotes has it.
It would take an act of God to miraculously remove the Divine Name from every Greek fragment of the NT.
You've been lied to. No Greek NT text has the tetragrammaton in it, or any version of the Divine Name.
Great. Then you can stop hijacking my thread.
You should quote the entire verse, bold the exact words you say proves your point. Do it under your new thread, I'll answer you there.
And neither the apostles or NT Christians went to Kingdom Halls. Not one of them sold Awake and Watchtower Magazines, and they didn't live in the rarified air of a WatchTower.
None of them claimed to be a special anointed class, the 144000. They taught we are all brothers:
4 "For they bind heavy burdens, hard to bear, and lay them on men's shoulders; but they themselves will not move them with one of their fingers.
5 "But all their works they do to be seen by men. They make their phylacteries broad and enlarge the borders of their garments.
6 "They love the best places at feasts, the best seats in the synagogues,
7 "greetings in the marketplaces, and to be called by men,`Rabbi, Rabbi.'
8 "But you, do not be called`Rabbi'; for One is your Teacher, the Christ, and you are all brethren.
9 "Do not call anyone on earth your father; for One is your Father, He who is in heaven.
10 "And do not be called teachers; for One is your Teacher, the Christ.
11 "But he who is greatest among you shall be your servant.
12 "And whoever exalts himself will be humbled, and he who humbles himself will be exalted.
(Matt. 23:4-12 NKJ)
So list a few. More than one:
- The Jehovah’s Witnesses do not actually cite more than one scholar here. While they cite two sources, The Anchor Bible Dictionary and Dr. George Howard, what they don’t mention is that George Howard wrote the section of the Anchor Bible Dictionary that they are citing. So, in fact, they simply provide two quotes from the same man.
- Dr. George Howard, former associate professor of religion at the University of Georgia, is an intelligent man, but he is hardly a grand authority on the original text of the New Testament. He is most famous for his claims regarding the origins of the book of Matthew. He asserts that Matthew was originally written in Hebrew and only later translated into Greek. Others have speculated things like that before, but Howard goes further. He claims that a medieval Spanish Jew named Shem Tov, who wrote against Christianity in the 14th Century and frequently quoted from the gospel of Matthew in Hebrew, was actually using a copy of the lost Hebrew original of Matthew, albeit a copy that was somewhat corrupted by scribal errors through the centuries.2 Thus, Howard tends to reconstruct the text of the New Testament based on somewhat sensational theories. Scholars more directly involved in the study of New Testament manuscripts and textual history do not share his conclusions.
- The quotes the Jehovah’s Witnesses give from Dr. Howard are much more guarded than their own claims. These quotes from Howard only say that there is “some evidence” and that it is “reasonable to believe” that the name YHWH might have been in the original New Testament specifically when it is directly quoting from the Old Testament. Even that claim is beyond the actual evidence, but it is a far cry from establishing the wide use of “Jehovah” throughout the NWT New Testament or the dogmatic certainty Jehovah’s Witnesses claim. Howard’s words do not justify the Jehovah’s Witness teaching or practice.
- The scholar they quote says that the Divine Name would have been used in Old Testament quotations from the Septuagint, but the Jehovah’s Witnesses only selectively follow this practice when it suits their agenda. For example:
Hebrews 1:10-12 (NWT), “At the beginning, O Lord, you laid the foundations of the earth, and the heavens are the works of your hands. They will perish, but you will remain; and just like a garment, they will all wear out, and you will wrap them up just as a cloak, as a garment, and they will be changed. But you are the same, and your years will never come to an end.”
The author of Hebrews is quoting from Psalm 102:25-27. The Psalm is definitely about Jehovah God and uses His name throughout. Further, the author of Hebrews is directly quoting from the Septuagint. Jehovah’s Witnesses claim that, in the time of the New Testament, the Septuagint used the divine name and not the word “Lord” when referring to God. They insist that the practice of using the word “Lord” in place of God’s name only came later. So why leave this reference to Psalm 102 as “Lord” and not Jehovah? The reason is obvious. The author of Hebrews is applying this verse to Jesus. It is saying that Jesus is the “Lord” referred to in Psalm 102. To translate it as Jehovah would be to admit the obvious truth that the book of Hebrews is claiming Jesus to be Jehovah God. If they were consistent in their practice, they would have to admit that this passage teaches the full deity of Christ and points to the doctrine of the Trinity. But that is exactly what they are trying to deny, so they selectively leave the word as “Lord” here, even though their own textual theory would insist that it should be “Jehovah.” Thus, it becomes clear that the real reason for selectively changing the word “Lord” into “Jehovah” is a doctrinal agenda rather than an actual concern for the original form of the text.
Was the name Jehovah removed from the New Testament? Modern Scholars
Jehovah's Witnesses appeal to scholars to support their insertion of the name "Jehovah" into the New Testament, but their case is greatly lacking.
carm.org
Remember to tell me where it is, I'm looking forward to it.
Only if you know the Father as THE ONLY TRUE GOD and know Jesus--It means eternal life-John 17:3
Exactly catholicism translation excluded Gods name. If you look up-Jerome who translated from originals to the Latin Vulgate, it states--He told the Pope Gods name belongs in the NT, because it does.
You should probably go read it. Although it takes believing Jesus over errors and religious dogmas. I never met a trinitarian who will.
They did listen to Jesus though--Luke 10-Acts 20:20-- house to house knocking on doors with the good news of Gods kingdom. Which does not stop until the end. Matt 24:14. No they didnt have awakes and watchtowers back then. Letters were sent for all to read and listen to. They are now bible books. Using thewatchtower is a great tool for all to learn from. Scriptures in every paragraph backing what is being taught. And worldwide the JW,s get the same spiritual feeding week after week using the watchtower along with the bible. It helps accomplish this true mark of the religion that has Jesus-1Cor 1:10--Unity of thought( all of Gods 1 truth) no division. 33,999 trinity based religions cant seem to understand that simple bible milk of no division. They will find out--A house divided will not stand, you know why? Jesus is not with a divided house.
So list a few. More than one:
Taken together, we see that the Jehovah’s Witnesses are not at all on the side of modern scholarship. Even the one scholar they could find doesn’t actually support their selective and idiosyncratic approach to the divine name. At any rate, their appeal to “Bible scholars” to substantiate their re-writing of the New Testament and their radical revisionist history of its transmission falls completely flat. Scholars do not support their conclusions.
- The Jehovah’s Witnesses do not actually cite more than one scholar here. While they cite two sources, The Anchor Bible Dictionary and Dr. George Howard, what they don’t mention is that George Howard wrote the section of the Anchor Bible Dictionary that they are citing. So, in fact, they simply provide two quotes from the same man.
- Dr. George Howard, former associate professor of religion at the University of Georgia, is an intelligent man, but he is hardly a grand authority on the original text of the New Testament. He is most famous for his claims regarding the origins of the book of Matthew. He asserts that Matthew was originally written in Hebrew and only later translated into Greek. Others have speculated things like that before, but Howard goes further. He claims that a medieval Spanish Jew named Shem Tov, who wrote against Christianity in the 14th Century and frequently quoted from the gospel of Matthew in Hebrew, was actually using a copy of the lost Hebrew original of Matthew, albeit a copy that was somewhat corrupted by scribal errors through the centuries.2 Thus, Howard tends to reconstruct the text of the New Testament based on somewhat sensational theories. Scholars more directly involved in the study of New Testament manuscripts and textual history do not share his conclusions.
- The quotes the Jehovah’s Witnesses give from Dr. Howard are much more guarded than their own claims. These quotes from Howard only say that there is “some evidence” and that it is “reasonable to believe” that the name YHWH might have been in the original New Testament specifically when it is directly quoting from the Old Testament. Even that claim is beyond the actual evidence, but it is a far cry from establishing the wide use of “Jehovah” throughout the NWT New Testament or the dogmatic certainty Jehovah’s Witnesses claim. Howard’s words do not justify the Jehovah’s Witness teaching or practice.
- The scholar they quote says that the Divine Name would have been used in Old Testament quotations from the Septuagint, but the Jehovah’s Witnesses only selectively follow this practice when it suits their agenda. For example:
Hebrews 1:10-12 (NWT), “At the beginning, O Lord, you laid the foundations of the earth, and the heavens are the works of your hands. They will perish, but you will remain; and just like a garment, they will all wear out, and you will wrap them up just as a cloak, as a garment, and they will be changed. But you are the same, and your years will never come to an end.”
The author of Hebrews is quoting from Psalm 102:25-27. The Psalm is definitely about Jehovah God and uses His name throughout. Further, the author of Hebrews is directly quoting from the Septuagint. Jehovah’s Witnesses claim that, in the time of the New Testament, the Septuagint used the divine name and not the word “Lord” when referring to God. They insist that the practice of using the word “Lord” in place of God’s name only came later. So why leave this reference to Psalm 102 as “Lord” and not Jehovah? The reason is obvious. The author of Hebrews is applying this verse to Jesus. It is saying that Jesus is the “Lord” referred to in Psalm 102. To translate it as Jehovah would be to admit the obvious truth that the book of Hebrews is claiming Jesus to be Jehovah God. If they were consistent in their practice, they would have to admit that this passage teaches the full deity of Christ and points to the doctrine of the Trinity. But that is exactly what they are trying to deny, so they selectively leave the word as “Lord” here, even though their own textual theory would insist that it should be “Jehovah.” Thus, it becomes clear that the real reason for selectively changing the word “Lord” into “Jehovah” is a doctrinal agenda rather than an actual concern for the original form of the text.
Was the name Jehovah removed from the New Testament? Modern Scholars
Jehovah's Witnesses appeal to scholars to support their insertion of the name "Jehovah" into the New Testament, but their case is greatly lacking.
Carm was started as an anti witness sight. Years ago i was in it, i am now as well i went back. At Minimum back then, 15 apostate ex JW,s with books they wrote and all listed. I put the thread about Jesus teachings in there and they all ran because they have no answer to Jesus teachings which expose their falseness. Its the new one i started today. Its a shame the majority who claim to be his follower outright refuse to listen to him and believe him.
Its in Theology.
I replied:
So list a few. More than one:
____________________________________
Where is your list?
Good, I'll go there.
I answer in your thread, Reply #2
The true teachings of Jesus
The teachings of Jesus who many claim to serve, found in every translation on earth. Its a 100% guarantee the teachers who have Jesus teach exactly what he taught. 1) Matthew 6:33-- Therefore, keep on seeking-FIRST- the kingdom and his( YHWH(Jehovah) righteousness and all these things will be...
Mere Ad hominem. You made a claim that EVERY scholar on earth knows God's name was removed. I asked you to give me a list, with at least two scholars on it.
So where is your list?
I replied:
So list a few. More than one:
____________________________________
Where is your list?
I dont need a list. Its well known fact in the christian world. The clergys dont tell anyone because it exposes them , that they support satans will over Gods will.
God said in the the bible-The wicked demands proof. Your eternal life depends on YOU having truth. Its very simple to google the tetragramoton. That is what the 4 Hebrew consonants of Gods name is called-YHWH--Every spot in the OT where-GOD or LORD all capitols is. And the NT where the OT is quoted and the name should be-about 7000 places. And at Romans 10:13-14 it says one must use Gods name. That brings up the question-Why are clergys in a house divided that will not stand not supporting Gods will over satans will. And Why wont they use Gods name as is required?
You made a claim, I asked for proof.
You need to list more than one scholar.
It is NOT a well known fact, if it were then providing a list should be easy.
BUT only ONE scholar speculated about the existence of the Divine Name in early versions, and no other scholar agrees with him.
Prove all things; hold fast that which is good. (1 Thess. 5:21 KJV)
Obeying scripture is good, not wicked.
Only a fool doesn't demand proof, because many false prophets have gone out into the world:
Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits, whether they are of God; because many false prophets have gone out into the world. (1 Jn. 4:1 NKJ)
Here is the text you are misinterpreting:
"A wicked and adulterous generation seeks after a sign, and no sign shall be given to it except the sign of the prophet Jonah." And He left them and departed (Matt. 16:4 NKJ)
Why is Christ correct? For two main reasons.
1 He's already did many signs Satan cannot do, like raise the dead. They asked for more signs, not to be convinced, but to accuse Him if He didn't comply.
2 Because we have scripture to test whether something is true or not.
Signs can be deceiving. The Lawless One will do "lying signs and wonders", that is, real signs that support lies:
The coming of the lawless one is according to the working of Satan, with all power, signs, and lying wonders, (2 Thess. 2:9 NKJ)
The false prophet will do lying signs, make fire come down from heaven to deceive those who dwell on the earth:
11 Then I saw another beast coming up out of the earth, and he had two horns like a lamb and spoke like a dragon.
12 And he exercises all the authority of the first beast in his presence, and causes the earth and those who dwell in it to worship the first beast, whose deadly wound was healed.
13 He performs great signs, so that he even makes fire come down from heaven on the earth in the sight of men.
14 And he deceives those who dwell on the earth by those signs which he was granted to do in the sight of the beast, telling those who dwell on the earth to make an image to the beast who was wounded by the sword and lived. (Rev. 13:11-14 NKJ)
Last edited: