You need some new put-downs, Johnny
The "IT" Logos
- Thread starter Our Lord's God
- Start date
Roger Thornhill
Well-known member
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.
Runningman
Well-known member
Simply quote a single word or action by Jesus in the Old Testament. Find us the pre-existent Son of God at the right hand of God or God the Word with God in the beginning of creation.
Tanachreader
Well-known member
In the year that king Uzziah died I saw also the Lord sitting upon a throne, high and lifted up, and his train filled the temple.
12 Hearken unto me, O Jacob and Israel, my called; I am he; I am the first, I also amthe last. 13 Mine hand also hath laid the foundation of the earth, and my right hand hath spanned the heavens: when I call unto them, they stand up together. 14 All ye, assemble yourselves, and hear; which among them hath declared these things? The LORD hath loved him: he will do his pleasure on Babylon, and his arm shall be on the Chaldeans. 15 I, even I, have spoken; yea, I have called him: I have brought him, and he shall make his way prosperous. 16 Come ye near unto me, hear ye this; I have not spoken in secret from the beginning; from the time that it was, there am I: and now the Lord GOD, and his Spirit, hath sent me.
10 “Sing for joy and be glad, O daughter of Zion; for behold, I am coming and I will dwell in your midst,” declares Yahweh. 11 “And many nations will join themselves to Yahweh in that day and will become My people. Then I will dwell in your midst, and you will know that Yahweh of hosts has sent Me to you.
Runningman
Well-known member
Don't muddy the waters by adding unnecessary noise. That doesn't show what I asked.
What you have now discovered, whether you will publicly admit it or not, is that your theology is not Biblical.
Tanachreader
Well-known member
Muddy waters by adding noise?
Can’t see the Father ( 1John 4:12) so who is this that Isaiah had seen.
Isaiah 6:1 (KJV) In the year that king Uzziah died I saw also the Lord sitting upon a throne, high and lifted up, and his train filled the temple.
It is the Bible so it must be Biblical.
Roger Thornhill
Well-known member
My go-to is the passage surrounding John 8:38:
38 I speak what I have learned and understood in the presence of my Father, and you do what you have heard from your father.
I consider the mental awareness of learning and understanding to be sufficient to establish a real personal presence.
Our Lord's God
Well-known member
No such thing unless you truly have the Holy Spirit of God dwelling within you.
You can read the Bible and learn for the next ten thousand years but without the Spirit of God in you, you really have gained nothing.
Roger Thornhill
Well-known member
It does not sound like you are following the conversation and the question that prompted my answer... that you truncated.
Roger Thornhill
Well-known member
You are probably aware then that the forward of the NKJV states that they render the covenant name of God (YHWH) as LORD in both the OT and NT.
Do you agree with that and do you know how they decide on what instances in the NT?
Towerwatchman
Well-known member
Really, I have never come across YHWH in the NT when reading Greek, or in all the years on this forum 20+ that someone argued, or read any commentary, that stated YHWH was omitted from the NT. In fact your go to translation 'The Scriptures' uses Elohim vs YHWH.
This is starting to smell like Watchtower Bible Society jargon.
Roger Thornhill
Well-known member
I asked you this because you identified the NKJV as the Bible you read.
You mentioned the Forward with respect the DSS.
So I ask you about their practice of identifying YHWH in the NT with LORD all caps.
And so I ask and ask again:
Do you agree with that and do you know how they decide on what instances in the NT?
Our Lord's God
Well-known member
He does not comprehend what you are asking. Take a different angle.
Towerwatchman
Well-known member
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.
Although the NT manuscripts that have come down to us do not contain the personal name of God that was mentioned more than 6,000 times in the OT, if we are honest with ourselves, we will recognize that it must have been written there in the manuscripts originally written by inspiration. For example, when Jesus read Isaiah 61:1,2 directly from the Hebrew text in the synagogue.
Is. 61:1 The spirit of the Sovereign Lord Jehovah is upon me,
Because Jehovah anointed me to declare good news to the meek.
He sent me to bind up the brokenhearted,
To proclaim liberty to the captives
And the wide opening of the eyes to the prisoners,
2To proclaim the year of Jehovah’s goodwill (...)
Luke 4:16 He then went to Nazʹa·reth, where he had been brought up, and according to his custom on the Sabbath day, he entered the synagogue and stood up to read. 17 So the scroll of the prophet Isaiah was handed to him, and he opened the scroll and found the place where it was written: 18 “Jehovah’s spirit is upon me, because he anointed me to declare good news to the poor. He sent me to proclaim liberty to the captives and a recovery of sight to the blind, to send the crushed ones away free, 19 to preach Jehovah’s acceptable year.” 20 With that he rolled up the scroll, handed it back to the attendant, and sat down; and the eyes of all in the synagogue were intently fixed on him. 21 Then he began to say to them: “Today this scripture that you just heard is fulfilled.”
It is not at all incorrect for a Bible translator to place the name of Jehovah in this passage, since Jesus evidently read it directly from the Hebrew text, and Luke must have recorded it as it was read.
In fact, although it was previously thought that the LXX did not contain the personal name of God, older manuscripts were recently discovered showing that it did. So the citations of Jehovah's name from the LXX version of the OT by many Christian preachers in the NT must have been quoted without fear, just as the original writers of those inspired texts must have written it.
Rom. 4:4 That being so, what will we say was gained by Abraham, our forefather according to the flesh? 2 For instance, if Abraham was declared righteous as a result of works, he would have reason to boast, but not with God. 3 For what does the scripture say? “Abraham put faith in Jehovah, and it was counted to him as righteousness.” (Verbatim quote from Gen. 15:6) 4 Now to the man who works, his pay is not counted as an undeserved kindness but as something owed to him. 5 On the other hand, to the man who does not work but puts faith in the One who declares the ungodly one righteous, his faith is counted as righteousness. 6 Just as David also speaks of the happiness of the man to whom God counts righteousness apart from works: 7 “Happy are those whose lawless deeds have been pardoned and whose sins have been covered; 8 happy is the man whose sin Jehovah will by no means take into account.” (Verbatim quote from Psal. 32:1,2)
Is. 61:1 The spirit of the Sovereign Lord Jehovah is upon me,
Because Jehovah anointed me to declare good news to the meek.
He sent me to bind up the brokenhearted,
To proclaim liberty to the captives
And the wide opening of the eyes to the prisoners,
2To proclaim the year of Jehovah’s goodwill (...)
Luke 4:16 He then went to Nazʹa·reth, where he had been brought up, and according to his custom on the Sabbath day, he entered the synagogue and stood up to read. 17 So the scroll of the prophet Isaiah was handed to him, and he opened the scroll and found the place where it was written: 18 “Jehovah’s spirit is upon me, because he anointed me to declare good news to the poor. He sent me to proclaim liberty to the captives and a recovery of sight to the blind, to send the crushed ones away free, 19 to preach Jehovah’s acceptable year.” 20 With that he rolled up the scroll, handed it back to the attendant, and sat down; and the eyes of all in the synagogue were intently fixed on him. 21 Then he began to say to them: “Today this scripture that you just heard is fulfilled.”
It is not at all incorrect for a Bible translator to place the name of Jehovah in this passage, since Jesus evidently read it directly from the Hebrew text, and Luke must have recorded it as it was read.
In fact, although it was previously thought that the LXX did not contain the personal name of God, older manuscripts were recently discovered showing that it did. So the citations of Jehovah's name from the LXX version of the OT by many Christian preachers in the NT must have been quoted without fear, just as the original writers of those inspired texts must have written it.
Rom. 4:4 That being so, what will we say was gained by Abraham, our forefather according to the flesh? 2 For instance, if Abraham was declared righteous as a result of works, he would have reason to boast, but not with God. 3 For what does the scripture say? “Abraham put faith in Jehovah, and it was counted to him as righteousness.” (Verbatim quote from Gen. 15:6) 4 Now to the man who works, his pay is not counted as an undeserved kindness but as something owed to him. 5 On the other hand, to the man who does not work but puts faith in the One who declares the ungodly one righteous, his faith is counted as righteousness. 6 Just as David also speaks of the happiness of the man to whom God counts righteousness apart from works: 7 “Happy are those whose lawless deeds have been pardoned and whose sins have been covered; 8 happy is the man whose sin Jehovah will by no means take into account.” (Verbatim quote from Psal. 32:1,2)
Our Lord's God
Well-known member
There is absolutely no evidence anywhere that the New Testament contained the tetragrammaton in a single verse.
Your imaginations are irrelevant.
Oh yes it is incorrect because you are changing what the original author wrote to suit your Watchtower agenda. That is blatantly dishonest.
That's a myth.
You are inventing a story with no basis in fact. That's how lies are started.
There is no evidence anywhere that Paul ever wrote such a thing and therefore there is no excuse for this. The Watchtower is creating lies.
And any idiot can read Genesis 15:6 or Psalm 32 and see that the original reading was YHWH and everyone in churchianity does it. You behave as if nobody knows it is "missing." You are living in a fairy tale never never land.
Our Lord's God
Well-known member
It's dishonest to plant the name "Jehovah" in place of kyrios in the New Testament since we have absolutely no reason to believe the original authors wrote such a thing. But you don't seem to care and your excuses for your Watchtower crimes seem to be good enough for you.
Why would I want to do that?
Interestingly, those who resent God's personal name, Jehovah, being placed where for obvious reasons it originally was in the NT, blatantly quote many OT passages that originally contain it from versions that blatantly removed it and replace it with a title.
What's worse? Put it about 200 times where for obvious reasons it should have been, or delete it more than 6000 times from where everyone knows it was?
What's worse? Put it about 200 times where for obvious reasons it should have been, or delete it more than 6000 times from where everyone knows it was?
Our Lord's God
Well-known member
Only an utterly brainwashed person would say such a thing.
And everyone is aware of those passages. You behave as if nobody knows but JWs. Are you living under a rock or something?
Your "obvious reasons" claim is pitifully laughable.