The "IT" Logos

In the NT Theos carrying the definite article, unless modified, is always YHWH. YHWH is not used in the NT or is it found in any of the early manuscripts. Now if you have evidence that YHWH was found in the early MSS please share with us.

Then why does the NKJV use LORD in the NT where they say it is YHWH?

It's your preferred Bible. Why do you endorse it?
 
You again misconstrue. I posted this earlier from the NET footnotes:

19:18 But Lot said to them, “No, please, Lord!48

48tn Or “my lords.” See the following note on the problem of identifying the addressee here. The Hebrew term is אֲדֹנָי (’adonay).

49tn The second person pronominal suffixes are singular in this verse (note “your eyes,” “you have made great,” and “you have acted”). Verse 18a seems to indicate that Lot is addressing the angels, but the use of the singular and the appearance of the divine title “Lord” (אֲדֹנָי, ’adonay) in v. 18b suggests he is speaking to God.

Lot is addressing the angels and speaking to God because they represent God, as angels do.

But how much do you trust NET?
Noticed this.
19:17 So it came to pass, when they had brought them outside, that [b]he said, “Escape for your life! Do not look behind you nor stay anywhere in the plain. Escape to the mountains, lest you be [c]destroyed.” {NKJV}

19:17 When they had brought them outside, they[ar] said, “Run[as] for your lives! Don’t look[at] behind you or stop anywhere in the valley![au] Escape to the mountains or you will be destroyed!” NET

FOOTNOTE​

tn Or “one of them”; Heb “he.” Several ancient versions (LXX, Vulgate, Syriac) read the plural “they.”

What does it read in the original language.

יֹּ֙אמֶר֙
אמרʾmrsay, mention, think, command
verb, Qal, wayyiqtōl (waw-consecutive + imperfect), third person, masculine, singular

Why would NET translate singular יֹּ֙אמֶר֙ as plural because it was found plural in several MSS? Notice the hypocrisy and duplicity you place on yourself, when you don't do your homework. Think about it, the very thing you are arguing for, you pull the rug from underneath it by using NET. Similar to "The Scriptures".

Now for a bit of honesty. The commentaries that touched upon this dilemma, pro God manifesting in the angels use similar arguments as NET. Those pro Lot addressing the angels argue the text.

19:2 Lot addresses the angels as lords and himself as their servant.
19:12,13,16 Both angels speak to Lot.
19:17 One angel speak to Lot
19:18 Lot speaks to both angels then one. = Note the order.
18A Then no Lot said to them
18B Please {interjection} my lord.
interjection — An exclamation word that can stand alone grammatically.
Heiser, M. S., & Setterholm, V. M. (2013; 2013). Glossary of Morpho-Syntactic Database Terminology. Lexham Press.
19:19,20 Lot addresses one angel.
If you combine 19:18b with 19:19,20
Notice = Please my lord, Indeed now, your servant has found favor in your sight, and you have increased your mercy which you have shown me by saving my life; but I cannot escape to the mountains, lest some evil overtake me and I die.
19:21,22 One angel addresses Lot.

Simply follow the narrative. Use resources. =Exegetical Guides.
Then why does the NKJV use LORD in the NT where they say it is YHWH?

It's your preferred Bible. Why do you endorse it?
You miss the point. YHWH is not found in the NT MSS. HO THEOS unless modified is equivalent to YHWH.
Where we find HO THEOS in the NT, the writer is writing about YHWH.
 
You miss the point. YHWH is not found in the NT MSS. HO THEOS unless modified is equivalent to YHWH.
Where we find HO THEOS in the NT, the writer is writing about YHWH.

No, you deflect my question. The NKJV has LORD in the OT and NT and says it means YHWH.

You endorse it. Why?

And since it's your preferred Bible why do you criticize other bibles that include the name in the NT?
 
No, you deflect my question. The NKJV has LORD in the OT and NT and says it means YHWH.

You endorse it. Why?

And since it's your preferred Bible why do you criticize other bibles that include the name in the NT?
I don’t have a problem with either Bible, one that has YHWH or Lord. My problem is when the majority of the MSS reads Adonia and someone based on X decides it’s YHWH. As to the NT, the MSS reads Theos.
Btw what is your preferred translation?
 
I don’t have a problem with either Bible, one that has YHWH or Lord. My problem is when the majority of the MSS reads Adonia and someone based on X decides it’s YHWH. As to the NT, the MSS reads Theos.
Btw what is your preferred translation?

Well, all of the NT manuscripts read Kurios but your preferred NKJV reads LORD (YHWH) in many places in the NT and it's like pulling teeth for you to address that.

You don't have a problem with that?

I have literally dozens of Bible translations in hard copy as well as Hebrew and Greek.

My preference changes all the time based on many different circumstances. Right now it's the NKJV for obvious reasons and yes it's on my shelf.
 
Well, all of the NT manuscripts read Kurios but your preferred NKJV reads LORD (YHWH) in many places in the NT and it's like pulling teeth for you to address that.
No they do not. When speaking of YHWH either Ho Theos , Theos, or Kurios. Look it up . You can easily find it on the internet.
You don't have a problem with that?
No, one can easily conclude from the text or consult a resource.
I have literally dozens of Bible translations in hard copy as well as Hebrew and Greek.
If you have Greek how is it you cannot find Theos. For example what does Jn 1:1 read? Theos or Kurios?
My preference changes all the time based on many different circumstances. Right now it's the NKJV for obvious reasons and yes it's on my shelf.
Ok.
 
I said:

Well, all of the NT manuscripts read Kurios but your preferred NKJV reads LORD (YHWH) in many places in the NT and it's like pulling teeth for you to address that

No they do not. When speaking of YHWH either Ho Theos , Theos, or Kurios. Look it up . You can easily find it on the internet.

Yes they do. From their preface they say:

The covenant name of God was usually translated from the Hebrew as "Lord" or "God" (using capital letters as shown) in the King James Old Testament. This tradition is maintained. In the present edition the name is so capitalized whenever the covenant name is quoted in the New Testament from a passage in the Old Testament


No, one can easily conclude from the text or consult a resource.

If you have Greek how is it you cannot find Theos. For example what does Jn 1:1 read? Theos or Kurios?

Ok.
 
Well, all of the NT manuscripts read Kurios but your preferred NKJV reads LORD (YHWH) in many places in the NT and it's like pulling teeth for you to address that.
I’ve watched him duck and dodge this point too. He’s been trying to distract you in an effort to avoid it.
 
I said:

Well, all of the NT manuscripts read Kurios but your preferred NKJV reads LORD (YHWH) in many places in the NT and it's like pulling teeth for you to address that
If that is the case. For example one of the most debated verse Jn 1:1 (Kia Theos eimi Ho logos). Never been in a debate where someone argued Kurios.
Yes they do. From their preface they say:

The covenant name of God was usually translated from the Hebrew as "Lord" or "God" (using capital letters as shown) in the King James Old Testament. This tradition is maintained. In the present edition the name is so capitalized whenever the covenant name is quoted in the New Testament from a passage in the Old Testament
And? I did not disagree with it. It does not change the jist of the message, or disagrees with what I wrote. Theos, Ho Theos, or Kurios. You are spitting hairs where it is not necessary. Similar to how many times did the rooster crow when Peter denied Jesus. The point is that the rooster crowed.
 
See the troll rolled out from his mom’s basement.
Maybe so, but at least this troll knows the difference between

ego eimi
and
ego eimi ho on.

As one who loves to dogmatically tell us what ho theos means, and pretends to know Greek better than all of us, you should’ve known better than to confuse

I AM
with
I AM THE BEING.
 
Maybe so, but at least this troll knows the difference between

ego eimi
and
ego eimi ho on.

As one who loves to dogmatically tell us what ho theos means, and pretends to know Greek better than all of us, you should’ve known better than to confuse

I AM
with
I AM THE BEING.
And the troll continues.
 
If that is the case. For example one of the most debated verse Jn 1:1 (Kia Theos eimi Ho logos). Never been in a debate where someone argued Kurios.

Again you deflect. John 1:1 does not have Kurious at all. And don't try to keep harping on the Scriptures version as it is not a version I have or use. It had one use... to prove you wrong and I know that stung but get over it already 😂





And? I did not disagree with it.

So you are ok with the NKJV putting LORD in the NT even when KURIOS is not there because it's a quote from the OT? Yes or no?

It does not change the jist of the message, or disagrees with what I wrote.

So you are ok with translating Kurious as LORD YHWH if you agree with it doctrinally?


Theos, Ho Theos,

Stop with the Theos already. Off topic.


or Kurios. You are spitting hairs where it is not necessary. Similar to how many times did the rooster crow when Peter denied Jesus. The point is that the rooster crowed.

Just trying to get you to admit that you believe it's ok to have YHWH in the NT as does the NKJV.
 
Again you deflect. John 1:1 does not have Kurious at all. And don't try to keep harping on the Scriptures version as it is not a version I have or use. It had one use... to prove you wrong and I know that stung but get over it already 😂
Rather childish. Your MO is to prove me wrong. I am not one to keep score, but you have taken a theological licking.
Your post.
Well, all of the NT manuscripts read Kurios.

Instead of attempting to prove me wrong you learn how to write comprehensively.

So you are ok with the NKJV putting LORD in the NT even when KURIOS is not there because it's a quote from the OT? Yes or no?
No I don’t. Why? Because they are translating from the NT MSS, and I don’t know of any NT MSS that contains YHWH when quoting the OT.
Just trying to get you to admit that you believe it's ok to have YHWH in the NT as does the NKJV.
How old are you? Are you trying to twist my arm till I say uncle?
 
I said:
So you are ok with the NKJV putting LORD in the NT even when KURIOS is not there because it's a quote from the OT? Yes or no?

No I don’t. Why? Because they are translating from the NT MSS, and I don’t know of any NT MSS that contains YHWH when quoting the OT.

I don't understand how "No I don't" is a response to "are you ok with the NKJV putting LORD in the NT even when KURIOS is not there because it's a quote from the OT"?

Why don't you condemn the NKJV for putting LORD in the NT when the OT is quoted where YHWH is present?

And, are you ok with any English Bible translation that puts YHWH in the NT? If not, why not?
 
I said:
So you are ok with the NKJV putting LORD in the NT even when KURIOS is not there because it's a quote from the OT? Yes or no?

I don't understand how "No I don't" is a response to "are you ok with the NKJV putting LORD in the NT even when KURIOS is not there because it's a quote from the OT"?
Again the NT MSS are written in Greek. They do not contain YHWH even when its a quotation from the OT. If we are to believe that the NT authors were inspired by God to write, and they did not use YHWH when quoting from the OT, even when YHWH was used in the quotation, then I am good with it also.
And, are you ok with any English Bible translation that puts YHWH in the NT? If not, why not?
No, I am not OK with it. Solo Scruptura = only scripture and only as it reads in the NT MSS. The job of the translator is that, to translate, and not to 'improve' as he or she sees fit. As if what God inspired now needs improvement.
 
We Jehovah's Witnesses are very sure that the original or hagiographic writings of the NT contained Jehovah's personal name many times.

At one time it was believed that the Greek translation of the OT, the LXX, used by Christians in the first century, did not contain the name of Jehovah. All known manuscripts did not have the name, but instead said "the Lord." But suddenly older manuscripts of the LXX began to appear that did have Jehovah's name written in Hebrew characters.

Then everything was understood: although some group tried to make the manuscripts containing the name disappear, they could not prevent them from being found... That same situation must have happened with the oldest writings of the NT. The Jews did not want Gentiles to use God's name, and they burned many Christian books. Then translators and versionists began to practice the same custom of removing God's personal name EVEN from the OT.

Jehovah has witnesses on earth. His name will never disappear, no matter how much effort the Devil makes.

Psal. 83:18 May people know that you, whose name is Jehovah, You alone are the Most High over all the earth.

Eze. 36:23 ‘I will certainly sanctify my great name, which was profaned among the nations, which you profaned among them; and the nations will have to know that I am Jehovah,’ declares the Sovereign Lord Jehovah, ‘when I am sanctified among you before their eyes.

Mal. 3:16 At that time those who fear Jehovah spoke with one another, each one with his companion, and Jehovah kept paying attention and listening. And a book of remembrance was written before him for those fearing Jehovah and for those meditating on his name.
17 “And they will be mine,” says Jehovah of armies, “in the day when I produce a special property. I will show them compassion, just as a man shows compassion to his son who serves him. 18 And you will again see the distinction between a righteous person and a wicked person, between one serving God and one not serving him.”

Who are the witnesses of Jehovah in our times?

Is. 2:2 In the final part of the days, The mountain of the house of Jehovah Will become firmly established above the top of the mountains, And it will be raised up above the hills, And to it all the nations will stream. 3 And many peoples will go and say: “Come, let us go up to the mountain of Jehovah, To the house of the God of Jacob. He will instruct us about his ways, And we will walk in his paths.” For law will go out of Zion, And the word of Jehovah out of Jerusalem. 4 He will render judgment among the nations And set matters straight respecting many peoples. They will beat their swords into plowshares And their spears into pruning shears. Nation will not lift up sword against nation, Nor will they learn war anymore.

Acts 15:12 At that the entire group became silent, and they began to listen to Barʹna·bas and Paul relate the many signs and wonders that God had done through them among the nations. 13 After they finished speaking, James replied: “Men, brothers, hear me. 14 Symʹe·on has related thoroughly how God for the first time turned his attention to the nations to take out of them a people for his name. 15 And with this the words of the Prophets agree, just as it is written: 16 ‘After these things I will return and raise up again the tent of David that is fallen down; I will rebuild its ruins and restore it, 17 so that the men who remain may earnestly seek Jehovah, together with people of all the nations, people who are called by my name, says Jehovah, who is doing these things, 18 known from of old.’ 19 Therefore, my decision is not to trouble those from the nations who are turning to God, 20 but to write them to abstain from things polluted by idols, from sexual immorality, from what is strangled, and from blood. 21 For from ancient times Moses has had those who preach him in city after city, because he is read aloud in the synagogues on every sabbath.”
 
Back
Top