Is Jehovah His Name?

imJRR

Active member
TrevorL, with all due respect - Whether you are interested in what I have written or not, whether you acknowledge the irrefutable truth of it or not has no relevance for me. Fact is fact, and truth is truth regardless of whether it's acknowledged or agreed with or accepted or not. And as I said - What I wrote does have direct relevance and bearing to the false belief and teaching of the Watchtowerites. I have not engaged in a discussion of the Trinity here, and I do not believe a discussion of Oneness theology has any place on a JW board - That kind of thing should be taken elsewhere, IMO, and I believe the moderators would agree. What I have done is shown the irrefutable meaning of Jesus' response to Philip in John 14:9 - seeing Jesus = seeing God Himself. Since that has been done, please go ahead and continue with discussion of the word "Jehovah". But understand this: Anytime a poster here - JW or other - tries to foist the lie that Jesus Christ isn't God Revealed, God come in the flesh the Savior, I'm going to refute that. Thank you for the opportunity to clarify.
 
Last edited:

TrevorL

Active member
Greetings again imJRR,
Fact is fact, and truth is truth regardless of whether it's acknowledged or agreed with or accepted or not. And as I said - What I wrote does have direct relevance and bearing to the false belief and teaching of the Watchtowerites.
I appreciate your response and position. I have been disciplined before by at least one moderator in the previous version of CARM and my posts in the JW sub-forum were deleted. I am not allowed by at least one moderator to discuss the Trinity on the JW sub-forum. I am also in the position that I may be closer to the JW position on this issue as I believe that there is One God, Yahweh, the Father and that our Lord Jesus Christ is the Son of God. Nevertheless I have many major differences with the JWs on even this subject. I have a thread "The Yahweh Name" on another sub-forum, and a proper understanding of the Bible revelation concerning God and Jesus will help to understand the passage that you have quoted and given an explanation.

Kind regards
Trevor
 

101G

Well-known member
Greetings again imJRR and 101G,


As stated I am not interested in a full discussion of the Trinity or Oneness on this thread. One verse which Trinitarians and Oneness advocates cannot reconcile with their beliefs is Psalm 110:1 and its numerous NT quotations and expositions which clearly teach that there is One God, Yahweh, God the Father and that our Lord Jesus Christ is the Son of God, now seated at the right hand of God the Father, in God the Father's Throne Revelation 3:21. If or when either of you come up with a clear and reasonable explanation of this, then I will acknowledge your post. Until then I will leave this aspect of the thread, but reserve the right to discuss the JW use of the erroneous word "Jehovah", their continued insistence on using this error, and this has an impact on whether they are Spirit guided as they claim.

Kind regards
Trevor
one word, "ECHAD" maning God "diversified", or EQUALLY SHARED in Flesh. who is the ONE "Spirit" God, a single person. this ECHAD of God consist of the Ordinal First.... the LORD, all caps in Psalms 110:1, and the Ordinal Last ... the Lord only the cap "L" in Lord, in Psalms 110:1.

what is the difference in layman's terms..... the Lord is the LORD, "shared in flesh. same Person. lets prove it out.

in Psalms 110:1 the term Lord there is
H113 אָדוֹן 'adown (aw-done') n-m.
אָדֹן 'adon (aw-done') [shortened]
1. sovereign (i.e. controller, human or divine).
2. lord.
{also used as a prefix for names}
[from an unused root (meaning to rule)]
KJV: lord, master, owner.

notice definotion #2. "human or divine". Jesus is in NATURAL flesh here, now this, same chapter,

Psalms 110:5 "The Lord at thy right hand shall strike through kings in the day of his wrath."

the same "Lord" at his right in verse 1 is
H136 אֲדֹנָי 'Adonay (ad-o-noy') n-m.
1. (meaning) Lord (used as a proper name of God only).
2. (person) Adonai, The Lord God of Israel (which is actually “Yahweh God of Israel”
- see Exodus 5:1 and 120 other occurrences).
[am emphatic form of H113]
KJV: (my) Lord.
Root(s): H113

bingo, see definition #2 the "PERSON", Yahweh God of Israel, yes, and did you notice the ROOT of this definition? it comes from H113, the same definition above for "Lord" in verse 1. THERE YOU HAVE IT THE SAME "ONE" PERSON who is LORD, all caps, is the same person "Lord" in verse 1.

and the difference is this, in verse 1, the Lord is in a G2758 κενόω kenoo (ke-no-ō') state in NATURAL Flesh, per Phil 2:6 & 7. but in verse 5, in the resurrected and GLORIFIED body, with "ALL POWER". supportive scripture, John 17:5, and Matthew 28:18, respectively.

do you know what this means TrevorL? you jehovah is really Jesus the LORD, who is in flesh, the Lord.

and it is the Lord Jesus, God almighty who sits on the THRONE.

but reserve the right to discuss the JW use of the erroneous word "Jehovah", their continued insistence on using this error, and this has an impact on whether they are Spirit guided as they claim.
well this is where they, and many others ERROR AT.

so I will leave this discussion.

again, thankd for the topic.

PICJAG, 101G.
 

TrevorL

Active member
Greetings again 101G,
do you know what this means TrevorL? you jehovah is really Jesus the LORD, who is in flesh, the Lord.
I agree with the Name Yahweh, but not Jehovah, and I understand that Yahweh is the Name of the One God, God the Father and that Jesus is a distinct being, the Son of God, now seated at the right hand of God, in God the Father's Throne.

I appreciate your response and attempted explanation of Psalm 110:1, but I do not accept that what you have stated is a correct understanding of this verse and the numerous quotations and expositions of this verse in the NT.
so I will leave this discussion.
Likewise. We have both stated our relative positions on this subject.

Kind regards
Trevor
 

imJRR

Active member
Greetings again imJRR,

I appreciate your response and position. I have been disciplined before by at least one moderator in the previous version of CARM and my posts in the JW sub-forum were deleted. I am not allowed by at least one moderator to discuss the Trinity on the JW sub-forum. I am also in the position that I may be closer to the JW position on this issue as I believe that there is One God, Yahweh, the Father and that our Lord Jesus Christ is the Son of God. Nevertheless I have many major differences with the JWs on even this subject. I have a thread "The Yahweh Name" on another sub-forum, and a proper understanding of the Bible revelation concerning God and Jesus will help to understand the passage that you have quoted and given an explanation.

Kind regards
Trevor

TrevorL, I have already given the proper and correct explanation and understanding and only possible meaning for what Jesus declared to Philip in John 14:9. You may disagree with that all you like, but as I previously said: Fact is fact, and truth is truth regardless of whether it's acknowledged or agreed with or accepted or not.
 

Steven Avery

Active member
I agree with the Name Yahweh, but not Jehovah,

"Yahweh" is a modern liberal unbelieving German error, from the 1800s.
It actually is Jupiter .. since Jupiter is yahweh-pater . (IOVE-pater).

It is unfortunate that modern Christians have been seduced into this abomination.

Ironically, even the JWs do not know the terrible element of yahweh.
 

TrevorL

Active member
Greetings Seven Avery,
"Yahweh" is a modern liberal unbelieving German error, from the 1800s.
I am not proficient enough to agree or disagree of whether "Yahweh" is also an error. My impression is that scholars can have a fair idea of how YHWH would be pronounced and how it would be spelled if the appropriate vowels were written. The reason for my objection to Jehovah is that it is utilising the wrong vowels to the Name YHWH, as these vowels came from Adonai, and also in other occurrences in the MT, Elohim. Please refer to the introduction by Rotherham, or other similar expositions of how this error occurred. I suggest that the JW acceptance of "Jehovah", and their continued use and strong promulgation of this error, is one of many evidences that they are not Spirit-guided.

Kind regards
Trevor
 

Steven Avery

Active member
Please refer to the introduction by Rotherham, or other similar expositions of how this error occurred. I suggest that the JW acceptance of "Jehovah", and their continued use and strong promulgation of this error, is one of many evidences that they are not Spirit-guided. Kind regards Trevor
Hi Trevori,

And I used to hang out with the Sacred Namers, so I became very familiar with the Rotherdam attempt to justify Yahweh. Later, I studied more excellently.

You have boxed yourself in a corner by making the name of Jehovah a key part of the opposition to the Jehovah Witnesses. In fact, it is more like .. a stopped clock is right twice a day. The JWs make a horrendous blunder trying to put Jehovah into the New Testament, but Jehovah itself has long been the name used by the Christian Hebraists and those with the Reformation Bible.

Today we know just how bad is "Yahweh".

Steven Avery
Dutchess County, NY USA
 

TrevorL

Active member
Greetings Seven Avery,
And I used to hang out with the Sacred Namers, so I became very familiar with the Rotherdam attempt to justify Yahweh. Later, I studied more excellently.
I am not associated with the Sacred Namers. I have considered mainly the meaning of the YHWH name in its context in Exodus 3:14 and also its meaning as it is developed throughout the Bible. I have a thread on "The Yahweh Name" but it does not deal with the spelling or pronunciation. I do not think that a person is holy or greatly benefited by having the correct spelling or pronunciation, but I consider that this subject is one of many Bible topics that help the individual in understanding the revelation of God about Himself. Once understood teaching such as Trinitarianism, Oneness and the JW Jesus as Michael the Angel is dispelled and shown to be hollow. As far as general scholarship, I am more interested in the meaning of the Name, and in my thread I advocate the meaning as "I wilbe" as rendered by Tyndale, "I will be" as mentioned in the RV and RSV margins and by many modern scholars.
You have boxed yourself in a corner by making the name of Jehovah a key part of the opposition to the Jehovah Witnesses.
Not at all, I disagree with the JWs on many topics. Most probably the JWs are content as your "Christian Hebraists and those with the Reformation Bible". But the JWs make a lot of claims concerning their almost "unique" insistence and use of "Jehovah". On other subjects for starters please refer to my thread on the JW sub-forum "The JW Book: What can the Bible teach us?". I am also quite willing to discuss other aspects of their teaching that I disagree with. One most unusual teaching or practice is that most JWs do not partake of the memorial bread and wine, witnessing to the fact that they are not in true fellowship with Jesus. The JWs only partly celebrate this once a year, but I believe that this memorial should be practiced each week by those that have believed the Gospel of the Kingdom and Name and have been baptised in identification with the death and resurrection of Jesus and the salvation that is thus available through forgiveness of sins.
Jehovah itself has long been the name used by the Christian Hebraists and those with the Reformation Bible.
I am not swayed by this claim, as "Jehovah" and its derivation from the vowel points of adonai can be traced, and is therefore an error. We have many traditions that obscure the truth. But again I am not really interested in the exact spelling or pronunciation of YHWH.

Kind regards
Trevor
 
Top