₦airaland Forum

CAPTIVATOR:
I ask a question " counted worthy of what exactly ?" u replied " let me answer you with ur two QUESTIONS at op".

Replyin question with question ....
Just admit u dont know

I don't know you people's problem.

Wasn't Abraham, Isaac & Jacob counted worthy of RIGHTEOUSNESS? What I put up there is enough for an intelligent being to decipher.

Beside don't dodge my question too, For better understanding tell me, how the WORLD benefited from Jesus' death?

dolphinheart:
@ emusan , it was nice discussing with you . In the future, [size=14pt]ill try and ask questions from those who will answer.[/size]

I can't stop laughing ooo

See escapeeee like the way your brethren normal do after undeniable facts have been presented to them.

Shalom!

1) Next time you want to make my word to appear in your post make sure it appears in QUOTE if not I won't reply your post.
2) I can't reply this your epistle so I've copied out the part I want.

dolphinheart:
Pls pls pls, let us refrain from abusive or derogatory words, pls ehn.

Where did I use an abusive or derogatory words?

Thus I believe you mean that the name of God in english language is "yaweh" so according to you, english speakers should use "yaweh" instead of "jehovah" as its the more accurate english translation of the name of God in hebrew. Why the derogatory statement?

I don't understand the use of DEROGATORY by you in this post...
Your first mistake is even to think that JEHOVAH is an English word, can you show me where any Scholar ever says Jehovah is an English word?

So by the above statement , I believe you mean or are trying to say that [size=14pt]the english language does not have a correct(accurate) name of God and must revert back to other languages and use other language(s) name of God to mention the name of God in english. I might be wrong o! That is if "yaweh "is an english language name of God .(I'm not that scholary)

@bold-the first part is correct but the @underline is wrong both JEHOVAH and YAHWEH are still Hebrew.
You repeated this mistake again here, Jehovah itself isn't an ENGLISH WORD, if you think I'm wrong show me just ONE SCHOLAR who agree with you that JEHOVAH is an English word.

I feel that if the english name of God "jehovah " is innacurate and should be discarded based on your explanation of the innacurate derivation of/from the root word , then you should also champion the cause that all names in the english bible that have root issues too should be discarded, abi no be so?.

I've addressed this in my previous post.

I asked ,"Does the english translation (s) u use add the word "jehovah" to its translations? Just want a yes or no answer pls."

The question above no need scholary answer, a simple "yes the versions I use have the name jehovah in it" or "no the versions I use does not have the name jehovah in it " or " some do and some dnt " would be ok.
I no ask "why its there" or "why its not there" or "who made it to be there" so pls can you answer the question?

Please and please for the goodness of God, after I post this last statement on this YOUR QUESTION and you still ask me this again...be ready to receive anything that comes from me.

Webster’s Third New International Dictionary: "‘Jehovah.’ Intended as a transliteration of Hebrew YAHWEH, the vowel points of Hebrew ADHONAY (my Lord) [b]being erroneously substituted for those of YAHWEH; from the fact that in some Hebrew manuscripts the vowel points of ADHONAY (used as a euphemism [less direct style of writing] for YAHWEH) were written under the consonants YHWH or YAHWEH to indicate that ADHONAY was to be substituted in oral reading for YAHWEH. [size=14pt]Jehovah is a Christian transliteration of the Tetragrammaton long assumed by many Christians to be the authentic[/size] reproduction of the Hebrew sacred name for God [size=14pt]but now recognized to be a late hybrid form never used by the Jews."[/size]

I use KJV, but Scholars have criticized the usage of Jehovah in KJV.

What do you want again after my answers to your JUST ONE QUESTION?

Sir if "jah " is the "yah " in "yaweh" then how do we pronounce it in english.

Do you want me to provide the Audio of it?

In the english language the letter "j" is pronounced differently from the letter "y" .
If you write/spell "jar" in english ,the pronounciation is different from when you write/spell "yar " in english . So pls , how should we pronounce the english word "yaweh" and how does jah being the first part of it come in during pronounciation in english.?
What I'm really asking is that should I pronounce the first letter "y" in the english word "yaweh" as I will pronounce the first letter "y" in other english words such as year, yard or yes? If no , y?

I thought it was a mistake until I discovered that it was a deliberate act for using YAWEH instead of YAHWEH.
You still mistaking by saying ENGLISH WORD.
So what is wrong if you pronounce letter Y and J the way English man use them?

You said God has other names, I asked to give us those other names , you directed me to bible verses with an indication that God other names are stated there . You did not categoricaly tell me or commit urself to [size=14pt]directly state that God other names are so so and so.[/size]
Hence I asked the question that in ur view (are you telling me) that Gods other personal names are "repurchaser" and "holy"? Pls answer and do not throw the question back at me

@bold-if I did not do that, how can you emphasis on the two words REPURCHASER and HOLY?
God's name is REPURCHASER and HOLY, am I lying?

I now went further to state that in case you believe that Gods other personal names are "repurchaser" and holy" , with your prove based on the scriptures u qouted , [size=14pt]then why does other translations say otherwise.? this you have refused to answer,[/size] all you have done is to questions my questions.
In that verse where you brought out the word " repurchaser" as the personal name of God [size=14pt]I read several other versions where the word "repurchaser" is not there,[/size] I qouted those translations for you to see and comment on, but all you did is to question me back and not explain why does translations do not conform to ur view or mention that name as the name as the name of God .this I found disturbing.

Do you know your problem, when your own VERSION which you upheld above other VERSIONS is being used against you the next thing is to revert back to those UNSUPPORTED versions. If some versions you quoted don't have the word REPURCHASHER and NWT have it who is right? This is the line I want you to reason with.
Beside those versions also do they not have the word HOLY in the other verse I quoted?

If the other name of God is repurchaser , why dnt all the scriptures state thus in english, why do they use other english words .
By the way, in those verses you qouted, what is the original hebrew or greek word?

Do you mean NWT made a MISTAKE for using the ENGLISH WORD REPURCHASER and the other version that don't have it do they render that verse MORE ACCURATELY than NWT?

On the issue of mordern english translations and the use of the word jehovah .

Sir , I asked you previously why the name "jehovah" is now occurring more and more in english translations of the bible. This questions implies that as new translations come up, new revisions are being made , the name jehovah keep coming up in them , despite ur claim that scholars say it is wrong /innacurate. I can't be refering to only older translations when the words "now" and "more and more " occur in my question. So therefore I was refering to all translations and not just the older translations .(if I'm wrong , pls tell me what you understand my question to be, as I believe that you must understand a question before you can answer it)

I answered your question the way I understood it, didn't I?

Hence ,On April 29 , by 3:29 PM you answered the question by saying " You can only find it in the oldest translation."

Your statement was not "you can find it in the oldest translations". So pls stop the twisting.

So I twist it even when I re-quoted what I initially said...

With the original statement you made , one can't but help deduce that you are saying that one can only find the word "jehovah "in older translations and not in later (mordern) or future translations.(if I'm wrong about my understanding of ur answer, pls explain what you meant by "you can only find it in older translations"

To be sure about what you meant with that statement , I decided to ask other questions and ur later answers went contrary to ur initial statement .
This now prompted me to ask a categorical and simple question ,that, is the name "jehovah" included in mordern english translations of the bible ? In which I expect a simple answer of yes, no or I dnt know.
This answer you have not giving in ur reply , pls give us a simple answer.

If you feel you omitted the word "most" in ur statement" , pls feel free to add it anywhere in ur original statement and let's see how it goes sir. Ill be waiting for the addition.

No time to waste...this is what I first said you can only find it in older translations while inserting the omitted word 'MOST' you will have you can only find it [u]MOST in older translations

Do you clear?

You claim that I lie when I said that I "thought you said" something about mordern translations. I will only reply you when you can prove to me that my thoughts are wrong as to the meaning of ur statements on bible translations and the word "jehovah"

Does MODERN appear in your first question? If yes show me. If No, why must you say YOU THOUGHT since I answer your question directly?

You said my organization lied about scholars . My question to you is that , do all the scholars agree 100 % with ur postulations ? Is there a categorical statement accepted and agreed to by all the scholars that jehovahs witnesses now lie about?

You never know, ask yourself why did your organization remove the booklet SHOULD YOU BELIEVE IN TRINITY? if not the lies against early Father and Scholars. I will still create a thread about that don't worry.

[size=14pt]I asked about the old and mordern english Translation of the entire bible[/size] which ur claim the use of the name jehovah is wrong/innacurate . That's what our discussion is based on and not on a translator translation of a part of the bible. Let's not change the scope of our discussion.

@bold-show me where you made distinction about OLD and MODERN TRANSLATION in your previous post.

The statement "Even when translating quotations from the Hebrew Scriptures in which the
Tetragrammaton appears, most translators use “Lord” rather than God’s personal name" is true. Most do not use "jehovah". But my question is , do some old and mordern translators ever use the word jehovah in some places where the tetragrammaton exist in the bible ?
Has there been an increase or reduction in the number of bible translations that mentioned the word "jehovah"?

Now you said "most do not use JEHOVAH" that means SOME do. Then how come NWT is bragging about restoring the Divine name whereas SOME TRANSLATION even before the production of NWT has used this name?

As to ur question on the martinis inspiration , ill humbly tell you again, oga I no know.

So you don't know that THE FIRST PERSON WHO WILL EVER TRY TO USE THE DIVINE NAME OF GOD after long century out of usage was inspired, whether you like it or not the usage of the DIVINE NAME OF GOD by Martini has only two options: It's either is from God or from the Devil. Which one do you chose?

Pls be sincere, when the statement "it's
the Holyspirit who chooses the
person" was made , was he referring to martinis inspiration or to how we can't know who will be ressurected. Pls add prove.

Sorry to ask this, do you know who you're dealing with (I mean myself) because you think I was just making false accusation against someone.
Now pay attention to what lead to this your question and tell me the KIND OF PERSON YOU ARE.

This is what I wrote (NOTICE THE BOLD part because that's where the whole thing lies.) "You should know, [size=14pt]because the person who FORMED that name which is now the main pillar of your organization must have received it by revelation and his work must have made him to be part of the holy ones and little flocks.[/size]

His reply was (NOTICE also that he emphasized on the bold part) @bold section, That is your own conclusion not that of JW. then he went further to say The Holy Spirit NOT JW choose those that are part of the Holy ones/Little flock (Romans 8:16). If you knew JW well, you would know this already.

Now tell me what is the essence of saying I should be sincere?

Is being a founder an automatic ticket into Gods kingdom? If not, y do u keep hammering on Mr Russell.

Was Russell directed throughout his deal with Jehovah while on earth?
At least for someone to found an organization that is the MOUTH PIECE of God, God must have used the person beyond any other person.
Or since you're not sure let's just conclude that Russell won't be among the Holy one/Little flock.

he is just a man like me running his race to gain evalasting life.

But he has more anointing than you nah..

If he finish the race rightly, I dnt know as I was not there , and neither could I know his heart condition.

This means also that you're not sure of your own salvation since you're following the doctrines that was laid down by him because if he claimed that all what he taught (even though nothing Watchtower teaches that is new in history) is from God and he FOLLOWED HIS OWN TEACHING then there shouldn't be any doubt that you're saying now. It's just like saying the Apostles were not saved.

A jehovahs witness will tell you what God said you need to do to gain salvation and that you have to do it till the end.

Are you saying Russell didn't do them even to the END?

Jehovahs witnesses can't categorically say you did it to the end, even if they know some of the things you did, cus some parts of the things you need to do or have done can only be known between you and ur creator.

So this still stands that since they don't know then it means many people who profess Christian can also be part of the HOLY ONE/LITTLE FLOCK.

On the problem you say arose.
I do not see this as a problem
If you want to be a servant of jehovah and [size=14pt]believe that he is the only true God you must worship,[/size] then you must be his witness and be ready and willing to declare his name far and wide.

@bold-I can see the reason why you're not sure that Russell will be part of the Holy one/Little flock because Russell is a polytheist he worshiped the only true God and Jesus together which also means no Jehovah witness will be part of this Holy one/Little flock since the teaching of worshiping Jesus was change in 1950's after being taught for good 45years.
SEE THE PICTURE BELOW (also notice the LOGO of that CROSS): It was CHRIST name that early JWs declared far and wide not until March 1, 1939.
So which means no early JWs actually did what God wants.

This jesus did and want us to do, the making of jehovah name known world wide . So if you dnt preach the word of God ,(doing it according to jesus directive), going out to meet people in their homes and on the streets from location to location ,to discuss with them Gods word as jesus as the apostles did,(unless you are incapable of doing such due to contraints and issues beyond ur control) then you are not a true Christian.

That means the early JWs are not TRUE CHRISTIANS based on the evidence.

The books , magazines printed are aids to study of the bible and bible understanding, it contains scriptural reminders, warnings and advice that aid you to decipher satans snares and his attempts at not letting u know or understand the truth.
[size=14pt]If you like read all the books , magazines, etc . It does not guarantee you evalasting life. If you like read the bible from A-Z, it does not guarantee you evalasting life. Doing the will of God as stipulated in his word to us, believing in him and accepting the one he sent to save us , his directives and his ransome sacrifice will.[/size]

I so much love that bold section, how are you sure that OTHER CHRISTIANS organization are not doing what you listed above?
Do you think Russell didn't do all these either?

The questions you should now ask urself are : [size=14pt]jesus said that their is an organization[/size] that will give spiritual food at the right time to his followers after he has gone to heaven , that will care for them and guide them, that will follow his ways , that it and his members will show its fruitage of the holy spirit, that will not be part of these world or exhibit its spirit, do you know of any organization that strife to follow the above statements ? Do you know of any organization that try to display such fruitages of the holy spirit, do you know of any organizations that strive not to be part of the worlds political system? Do you know of any organization that preach the word from door to door and homes to homes like jesus did . Do you know of any organizations where its members prefer to die than even learn how to kill others?
Do you know of an organization where you dnt receive any financial reward for being a shephered in any capacity in the congregation? Do you know of any organization that combine all the aforementioned attributes?

Please KINDLY QUOTE WHERE JESUS MADE THAT STATEMENT FOR ME IN THE BIBLE.
Yet all these are to exalt WATCHTOWER as the TRUE congregation and the over one thousand other Christian congregation as false.

On 2. Who is a Christian , [size=14pt]a worshiper of jesus or a follower of jesus teachings, ways and commandments.[/size]
What are jesus teachings , direct statements about who we must worship? .who did jesus call his God and his followers God, who did jesus say sent him , [size=14pt]who's persons name did jesus want declared by his followers.?[/size]

@bold section 1-So that means Russell, early JWs and the early Christians are not true Christians.
@bold section 2-Can you give me a single place in the BIBLE where Jesus and the Apostle ever ADDRESSED GOD as Jehovah and where the Apostle ever Witness of Jehovah?

oapeleo:
Can you remember the plugin you installed before this problem started?

I can't because I employed someone to design it for me.

Any hope?

oapeleo:
Try to change to wordpress default theme first.
Den update

Wordpress did update all their sites automatically few days back. Sure yours insist up to date already.

Thanks brother, but the problem now is that I can't even log-in anytime I type the url that message will just appear.

oapeleo:
ApeleDesigns

Now you can design a website by yourself.
From zero experience to professional.
Don't miss this opportunity.
Join 50 of my online students now.

Registration is free and simple (just one click)
click below and connect through facebook
http://apeledesigns.com/wp-login.php?action=wordpress_social_authenticate&mode=login&provider=Facebook&redirect_to=http%3A%2F%2Fapeledesigns.com%2Fclass%2Ftopic%2Fwant-to-learn-how-to-build-a-website%2F

Please how can I solve this problem I encountered while trying to update wordpress:

Fatal error: Cannot redeclare get_avatar_url() (previously declared in /home/propert7/public_html/wp-includes/link-template.php:3414) in /home/propert7/public_html/wp-content/themes/wpestate/libs/shortcodes.php on line 741

Thanks.

FRInteractives:
Hello NL webmasters, I will be posting some Questions in php which I have the answers already and you will figure them out for yourselves. You can also post your own questions here for others to solve.

Can you enlighten me on this problem I encountered while trying to UPDATE Wordpress.

Fatal error: Cannot redeclare get_avatar_url() (previously declared in /home/propert7/public_html/wp-includes/link-template.php:3414) in /home/propert7/public_html/wp-content/themes/wpestate/libs/shortcodes.php on line 741

Thanks.

CAPTIVATOR:
#derailing#
Counted worthy of what exactly ?

Let me use these your two questions to answer you here:

QUESTION: WHY DID Jesus CAME TO DIE FOR OUR SINS AGAIN? AFTRALL PEOPLE ARE ALREADY GOING TO HELL ?.

QUESTION: OF WHAT PURPOSE IS Jesus DEATH SINCE PEOPLE ARE MAKING HEAVEN WITHOUT HIM?

These are the questions you asked from OP, the first question is a result of evil whereas the second question is a result of RIGHTEOUSNESS.

I know you believe Abraham, Isaac, Jacob e.t.c live a life that different from the one Hitler, Osama e.t.c live, which then make them RIGHTEOUS AND COUNTED WORTHY before God.

So what is the essence of Jesus' death if people like Abraham, Isaac, Jacob live righteous without anybody died for them?

For better understanding tell me, how the WORLD benefited from Jesus' death?

CAPTIVATOR:
Emusan or what do u call urself ... If u dont have anything to contribute to the Op , Just leave the thread

So was my question outside the OP?

This is the question again, what is the essence of Jesus' death when people are already counted worthy by faith and their good works before His death according to your believe?

CAPTIVATOR:
Did Captivator ever believe people have an immortal soul that go to heaven when they die ? nah!

Just face the topic and stop derailing.

Mr man the point I'm raising wasn't centered on whether some immortal soul go to heaven or not the point I'm putting to you from OP is the statement you made [size=14pt]"Faulty! ...... Its either the ghost doctrine is a LIE or Jesus Death is useless to Mankind. ONE of these two doctrines is a fabrication.[/size]

The underline shows how big was the religious spectacle you put on, yet you want to remove others when you couldn't even see yours talk less of removing.

Now answer my question, what is the essence of Jesus' death when people are already counted worthy by faith and their good works before His death according to your believe?

CAPTIVATOR:
Next time, Just say " I dont know"

These are the questions I demanded of you,

Yet you say people will be saved according to their good work. since people will be saved ACCORDING TO THEIR GOOD WORK, why must Jesus come to die for SIN again?

Since these people were saved through their GOOD WORK without anybody died for them, what is the essence of Jesus coming to earth if some people have already been saved by good work?

Don't tell me story.

dolphinheart:
So english speakers, according to emusan , yaweh is the way to pronounce name for God in english and not jehovah.

Please if you don't have meaningful thing to contribute stop quoting me, for the last time the word JEHOVAH was derived from the LATIN inaccurate formulation of the Hebrew letters YHWH by a Chatolic monk Raymundus Martini, which has NO EQUIVALENT word in Hebrew. So if the ROOT WORD WHERE JEHOVAH WAS DERIVED IN LATIN IS INACCURATE then the derivative word Jehovah IN ENGLISH will also wrong.

Get that into your brain.

Does the english translation(s) u use add the word "jehovah" to its translations? Just want a yes or no answer pls.

Do scholars have ever criticized the usage of JEHOVAH in any English translation? Maybe this can rest your brain about what I've been saying since.

U stated (How will you know when you're made to know only Jehovah?
Psalm 68:4 "As Jah which is
his name" (Jah is the first
part of Yahweh), Isaiah 57:15
"And whose name is holy",)

Questions : pls expanciate on what you mean by jah is the first part of yahweh . How do we now pronounce the first part of Gods name in english.

What explanation do you want again from JAH? Wasn't JAH the YAH--in YAHWEH?
The way you have made to be pronouncing it from childhood.

U stated (Isaiah 63:16 "Our Repurchaser[Redeemer] of long ago is your name"

So in ur view " our repurchaser" ,"holy " are personal names of god?

Very funny of you, now that I've shown you that Jehovah is not the only name for God you're attacking a strawman again.
Is the name of God Holy and Repurchaser? That's the question.

If that's ur view, how do we then align it with the words of other translations below

Are you now telling me that these translations rendered this verse MORE ACCURATE THAN THE NWT?

New International Version
...you, LORD, are our Father, our Redeemer from of old is your name.

New Living Translation
....You are our Redeemer from ages past.

English Standard Version
..... you, O LORD, are our Father, our Redeemer from of old is your name.

New American Standard
Bible
....You, O LORD, are our Father, Our Redeemer
from of old is Your name.

King James Bible
.... thou, O LORD, art our
father, our redeemer; thy
name is from everlasting.

NET Bible
.....You, LORD, are our father;
you have been called our
protector from ancient times.

GOD'S WORD® Translation
....you are our Father. Your name is our Defender From
Everlasting.

Jubilee Bible 2000
....thou, O LORD, art our father; our everlasting Redeemer is thy name.

King James 2000 Bible
...you, O LORD, are our father, our redeemer; your name is from everlasting.

American King James
Version
...you, O LORD, are our father, our redeemer; your name is from everlasting.

American Standard Version
.... thou, O Jehovah, art our
Father; our Redeemer from
everlasting is thy name.

Douay-Rheims Bible
....thou, O Lord, art our
father, our redeemer, from
everlasting is thy name.

Darby Bible Translation
...thou, Jehovah, art our
Father; our Redeemer, from
everlasting, is thy name.


Webster's Bible Translation
......thou, O LORD, art our
father, our Redeemer; thy
name is from everlasting.

From the versions above, can you explain ur view on the other name of God in that verse?

I quoted two verses but you stylishly avoided the other ONE. Beside, are you telling me that these translations are more rendered accurately than the NWT that I quoted earlier?

Thought you said mordern translations "dnt" use the name "jehovah" , you are now say "if", Bros let's be certain , are mordern english translations using "jehovah as the name of God ? Yes or no or I dnt know.

I only said you can find it in the oldest translations (Though I omitted 'MOST') I DIDN'T SAY ANYTHING ABOUT MODERN TRANSLATION nor do you ask anything about modern translation, This is your post Why is it now occuring more and more in many translations when scholars say its a fake word and its not the real name of God? and my respond was You can only find it in the oldest translation.
stop lying the way your organization always lies about scholars
beside your organization has more to tell you about this, "For this reason, most modern English Bibles do not use the name Jehovah when translating the so-called New Testament. Even when translating quotations from the Hebrew Scriptures in which the Tetragrammaton appears, most translators use “Lord” rather than God’s personal name." http://www.jw.org/en/publications/bible/nwt/appendix-a/divine-name-christian-greek-scriptures/# Even your organization knew that most Modern translations don't use it.

Oga, I told you I (Jehovah's witness) dnt have the ability to know the heart of an individual, that I (Jehovah's witness) can't determine what reward awaits anyone, I (Jehovah' witness) can't judge, you are now going to t. Russell who is just another man like you and me (and the founder of Watchtower Society). Sir I dnt know what will happen to him, I dnt know him personaly and I'm not required to. (bracket mine)

Here we go!
But before I address your point let me ask again, was Martini inspired to have used the name JEHOVAH after the use of it has been lost for many years?

I purposely inserted those bracket words so that you can get the point better.
This is almost the same thing your brother said above as "it's the Holyspirit who chooses the person", which means NO HUMAN HAVE THE POWER TO KNOW HOW GOD DOES HIS THING, in that case two problems arise here
1) Then one doesn't need to join Watchtower Society, read hundreds of watchtower & Awake booklets and go door-to-door preaching before being saved.
2) Your organization was wrong to claim they're the only TRUE CHRISTIANS when they're not even a Christian because they only witness for Jehovah.

RikoduoSennin:
I don't remember making such a claim! But I remember that you said this same thing in another post- you misunderstood my original statement.

You didn't make any what? Why did you MODIFY your early post then?
Don't worry the way your organization lies to continue to buy you people's mind is what you're practicing.

See what Jesus say with his own mouth, John 17:16,26 "I have MANIFESTED THY NAME to the men whom thou gaveth me out of the world....I made known to them THY NAME and I will make IT known...."

Just give me where JESUS used the DIVINE NAME, not the place He quoted from Hebrew scripture as you people claimed.

Why will Jesus address God as FATHER and teaches His follower to address God as Father and not Jehovah?

Did Jesus shy away from using YHWH?

He didn't! Because God Himself had said that A NEW NAME WILL BE GIVEN

After Reading John 17:6,26; How would you answer that question?

Do you also know that NAME AND POWER are synonymous as being used in the Bible?

Jesus did not use a Title, he made YHWH known to others- This is a fact!

How did He do it when He addresses God as FATHER and also teaches His follower to do so?
Show me where Jesus told His follower to use the DIVINE NAME in the scripture

Papyrus roll of the Greek Septuagint (LXX) has the Tetragrammaton written in "square Hebrew characters".

[size=14pt]Q1) Did Jesus Christ and those of his disciples who wrote the christian greek scriptures have at hand copies of the Greek Septuagint with the divine name appearing in the form of the Tetragrammaton?[/size] YES, because copies of LXX remained for centuries after christ.

I can't stop laughing when you people will rush to MANUSCRIPT as if any MANUSCRIPTS support your claim.

Now see this BOLD CONTRADICTION in your post (this is the same lie your brother (CAPT) pulled up there which I put right in his face but ran away with this obvious contradiction which you also have repeated here.)

[b]@bold (especially underlined)-you claimed that "his disciples WHO WROTE the CHRISTIAN GREEK SCRIPTURES"
Yet you said below again "Jerome of the fourth and fifth century C.E wrote that Matthew/Levi wrote his book originally in Hebrew which was later translated to Greek.

Please when was a TRANSLATOR BECOME A WRITER?
Because if Matthew/Levi wrote his book in original Hebrew why referring to THE GREEK TRANSLATION AS ORIGINAL GREEK AGAIN written by Jesus disciples?

Q2) [size=14pt]Did God's name appear in the original writings of the Greek scriptures/New Testament? Jerome of the fourth and fifth century C.E wrote that Matthew/Levi wrote his book originally in Hebrew which was later translated to Greek.[/size]
(The Hebrew copy is located in the Library of ceasarea). Matthew made many quotation from the original Hebrew Scriptures, some of portions are from verses that contain the Divine Name, [size=14pt]Since Jesus and his disciples use The Divine Name,[/size] it is safe to say that They did not upheld the Tradition of removing the Divine name and replacing it with Titles (Lord and God)

DO WE STILL HAVE ORIGINAL GREEK when the writers WROTE THEIR BOOKS in ORIGINAL HEBREW?
OR you forgot that to write is different from to translate and WRITER is different from TRANSLATOR?
Where did Jesus and His disciple use the Divine name?

Lastly, when was this REMOVING OF THIS DIVINE NAME from the scriptures started, before Christ or after Christ? With evidence please

You have a nasty habit of MIS-QUOTING ME or capitalise on my Typho mistakes without following my train of thought. So to avoid meaningless argument I chose to ignore those posts.

Now I have a nasty habit of MISQUOTING you can you please show me where I did this?
So if you realized that YOUR POST ALWAYS INCLUDE TYPHO, why accusing me of being having a nasty habit of misquoting you?

RikoduoSennin:
@bold section, That is your own conclusion not that of JW.

[size=14pt]The Holy Spirit NOT JW choose those that are part of the Holy ones/Little flock (Romans 8:16).[/size] If you knew JW well, you would know this already.

If it's the Holyspirit who chooses the Holy ones/Little flock, why do you think any other Christians won't be part of this Holy ones/Little flock?

Do you know criteria the Holyspirit uses to chose this Holy ones/Little flock?

dolphinheart:
So to everyone , when reading the bible and come accross the name "jehovah" pls cancel it as those translators where were wrong o
The proper name in english is _____, emusan pls help fill the gap.

For now the proper name is YAHWEH since Jehovah isn't the best rendition

Does the translation(s) u use add the word "jehovah" to its translations?

Stop going backward

Interesting , so God has more than one name , ill like to know those other names pls , with its bible location.

How will you know when you're made to know only Jehovah?
Psalm 68:4 "As Jah which is his name" (Jah is the first part of Yahweh), Isaiah 57:15 "And whose name is holy", Isaiah 63:16 "Our Repurchaser[Redeemer] of long ago is your name"

are you saying that modern translations do not use the name jehovah?

If they do it's still wrong because Jehovah is an inaccurate rendering.

Oga, I no know who they go heaven or who dey stay earth, being a member of the organization is not a direct criteria for evalasting life.
Doing good work is not a criteria for evalasting life, doing good work to the end is . I dnt know how the man lived his life to the end.

But you know T. Russell will go to heaven.

Rilwayne001:
Can you explain the above to your fellow xtian brother Emusan,. I believe he needs explanation such has the above, he is a TRINITARIAN.

Can you do that for him please?

Why must you involve me?

When last did I discuss on Islamic thread?

Beside am I the only TRINITARIAN on this forum?

RikoduoSennin:
He wants JW to use the Form:

YHWH in Hebrew = Yahweh

JHVH in English = Jahveh or Jahweh

See how it rhyme with the short form of God's name: Jah in English.

The curious thing is, Is there any official Church document that use this form Jahveh or Jahweh? I think not, because their main focus in on the pronunciation rather than the meaning/ idea behind the name.

You've not cleared the mess you put yourself into, you claimed Jesus USED a TITLE for God's name
Now why Jesus didn't bother to restore God's name instead of using a title?
Wouldn't this prove that Jesus blasphemes which He said the name of God should be sanctified yet He couldn't sanctify it?
Since Jesus used Title where your organization get the Hebrew word Jehovah into Greek book of Christians from?

This are the question you cover your eyes from as if you didn't see them.

dolphinheart:
So the word "jehovah " is fake, not real name of God in english language and should be discarded right? Ok o

That's the truth which your organization even knew about.

By the way, which bible translation are u using ? Does it contain the name "jehovah"?

I used many translation KJV is among them but I've said earlier that scholars have criticised the usage of Jehovah in KJV.

Are we supposed to term as inacurate any translation that uses the word jehovah in its english translations?

Yes! but God doesn't bother about that because;
1. God has already given believers a new name to call upon for salvation.
2. God has more than one name.

Why is it now occuring more and more in many translations when scholars say its a fake word and its not the real name of God?

You can only find it in the oldest translation.

To the questions
1. Yes

You can still say yes when evidence has been given to you that Jehovah is an inaccurate name for Divine name.

2.I dnt know , I dnt know the monk or what he did behind close doors, I cnt read the heart, and its not my job or my place or my ability to know who will be saved or which class they belong

You should know, because the person who FORMED that name which is now the main pillar of your organization must have received it by revelation and his work must have made him to be part of the holy ones and little flocks.

Then this render your organization claim as only people who belong to your organization as true Christians useless.

JMAN05:
i have given answer to that sir. but will u change if u see proof? Just give me answer to that question and i will add to what I ve said earlier about that Hebrews.

[size=14pt]Because if u are not sincere in this discussion,[/size] I won't discuss with u. thats my method now, u can't change that. are u willing to change sir?

@bold-Are you and your organization being sincere at anytime?

Asking someone to change, please change to where? To your lie and scholarly teaching or updating teaching?

Just like your Watchtower always misquotes scholars by inserting (...) to deceive you people the site you quoted has done the same.

I won't reply in detail to all your post because I'm still looking for these scholars' work to see what they actually says.

BIBLESPEAKS:
Early Christian scholar Origen writes:

"There are certain creatures, rational and divine, which are called powers [spirit creatures, probably angels]; and of these Christ was the highest and best and is called not only the wisdom of God but also His power." - ANF 10:321-322.

So you agree with Origen here that Christ was DIVINE?

Back in the early 1800's, Bible scholar Joseph Benson stated that the description of Michael as found in the Bible "manifestly points out the Messiah."　
-----------------------------------

And you want us to swallow this without reference...

Nineteenth-century Lutheran E. W. Hengstenberg agreed that "Michael is no other than Christ."
-----------------------------------

And no reference again.

Similarly, theologian J. P. Lange, when commenting on Revelation 12:7, wrote: "We take it that Michael . . . is, from the outset, Christ in warlike array against Satan."
-----------------------------------

As usual (...), what was actual inside this ... that your author omitted?

Clarke’s Commentary (Adam Clarke)

Jude :9

“Let it be observed that the word archangel is never found in the plural number in the sacred writings. There can be properly only one archangel, one chief or head of all the angelic host. Nor is the word devil, as applied to the great enemy of mankind, ever found in the plural; there can be but one monarch of all fallen spirits. Michael is this archangel, and head of all the angelic orders; the devil, great dragon, or Satan, is head of all the diabolic orders. When these two hosts are opposed to each other they are said to act under these two chiefs, as leaders; hence in Revelation 12:7, it is said: MICHAEL and his angels fought against the DRAGON and his angels.　 The word Michael　 lakym, seems to be compounded of ym mi, who, k ke, like, and la El, God; he who is like God; hence by this personage, in the Apocalypse, many understand the Lord Jesus.”
----------------------------------

This is the reason I said your Watchtower always misquotes scholars.

Adam first statement that your author omitted is, Verse 9. Yet Michael the archangel] Of this personage many things are spoken in the Jewish writings "Rabbi Judah Hakkodesh says: Wherever Michael is said to appear, the glory of the Divine Majesty is always to be understood." Shemoth Rabba, sec. ii., fol. 104, 3. [size=14pt]So that it seems as if they considered Michael in some sort as we do the Messiah manifested in the flesh.[/size]

So it was opinion of the Jews that Adam is contrasting with the Apocalypse, which stems out from his point "...hence by this personage, in the Apocalypse, many understand the Lord Jesus.”

Hence, Adam didn't say Jesus Christ is the created Micheal in fact this stems out from his commentary on the same Jude 1:4 "The only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ.] monon despothn yeon kai kurion hmwn ihsouv criston aruoumenoi. These words may be translated, Denying the only sovereign God, even our Lord Jesus Christ. But yeon GOD, is omitted by ABC, sixteen others, with Erpen's Arabic, the Coptic, AEthiopic, Armenian, and Vulgate, and by many of the fathers. It is very likely that it was originally inserted as a gloss, to ascertain to whom the title of ton monon despothn, the only Sovereign, belonged; and thus make two persons where only one seems to be intended. The passage I believe belongs solely to Jesus Christ, and may be read thus: Denying the only sovereign Ruler, even our Lord Jesus Christ. [size=14pt]The text is differently arranged in the Complutensian Polyglot, which contains the first edition of the Greek Testament: kai ton monon yeon kai despothn, ton kurion hmwn ihsoun criston arnoumenoi. Denying the only God and Sovereign, our Lord Jesus Christ.[/size] This is a very remarkable position of the words, and doubtless existed in some of the MSS. from which these editors copied. The Simonians, Nicolaitans, and Gnostics, denied God to be the creator of the world; and Simon is said to have proclaimed himself as FATHER to the Samaritans, as SON to the Jews, and as the HOLY GHOST to all other nations. All such most obviously denied both Father, Son, and Spirit."

John Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible

Daniel 12:1

“Ver. 1.

And at that time shall Michael stand up,.... The Archangel, who has all the angels of heaven under him, and at his command, the Son of God, our Lord Jesus Christ;”

And even trinitarian Bible scholar W. E. Vine (“recognized as one of the world’s foremost [Bible] Greek scholars”) tells us that this “voice of the archangel” (1 Thess. 4:16) is apparently “the voice of the Lord Jesus Christ”! - p. 64, An Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words.
--------------------------------------
The International Standard Bible Encyclopaedia:

“The earlier Protestant scholars usually identified Michael with the preincarnate Christ, finding support for their view, not only in the juxtaposition of the “child” and the archangel in Rev. 12, but also in the attributes ascribed to him in Daniel” – vol. 3, p. 2048, Eerdmans Publishing, 1984 printing.
-------------------------------------
Protestant Reformer John Calvin said regarding "Michael" in its occurrence at Daniel 12:1:

"I embrace the opinion of those who refer this to the person of Christ, because it suits the subject best to represent him as standing forward for the defense of his elect people." - J. Calvin, Commentaries On The Book Of The Prophet Daniel, trans. T. Myers (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1979), vol. 2 p. 369.
-------------------------------------

Looking for the books

John Wesley:

Chapter XII
A promise of deliverance, and of a joyful resurrection, ver. 1 - 4. A conference concerning the time of these events, ver. 5 - 7. An answer to Daniel's enquiry, ver. 8 - 13. For the children - The meaning seems to be, as after the death of Antiochus the Jews had some deliverance, so there will be yet a greater deliverance to the people of God, when Michael your prince, the Messiah shall appear for your salvation. A time of trouble - A the siege of Jerusalem, before the final judgment. [size=14pt]The phrase at that time, probably includes all the time of Christ, from his first, to his last coming.[/size]

Wesley on Daniel 10:21: "Michael - Christ alone is the protector of his church, when all the princes of the earth desert or oppose it."

These are just a contrasting statement on personage of Micheal with that of Christ he didn't say Michael is Christ. This is more evident when you read his comment on Jude where he suppose to affirm Michael as Jesus but nothing like that happened;
V. 9. Yet Michael-It does not appear whether St. Jude learned this by any revelation or from ancient tradition. It suffices, that these things were not only true, but acknowledged as such by them to whom he wrote.

The archangel-This word occurs but once more in the sacred writings, 1Th 4:16. So that whether there be one archangel only, or more, it is not possible for us to determine.

When he disputed with the devil-At what time we know not.

Concerning the body of Moses-Possibly the devil would have discovered the place where it was buried, which God for wise reasons had concealed.

Durst not bring even against him a railing accusation-Though so far beneath him in every respect. But simply said, (so great was his modesty!)

The Lord rebuke thee-I leave thee to the Judge of all.

Jonathan Edwards (1703-1758):

Works of Jonathan Edwards, Vol. 2, Ch. 1, “Angels”:

“II. When Lucifer rebelled and set up himself as a head in opposition to God and Christ, and drew away a great number of the angels after him, Christ, the Son of God, manifested himself as an opposite head, and appeared graciously to dissuade and restrain by his grace [size=14pt]the elect angels[/size] from hearkening to Lucifer’s temptation, so that they were upheld and preserved from eternal destruction at this time of great danger by the free and sovereign distinguishing grace of Christ. [size=14pt]Herein Christ was the Saviour of the elect angels,[/size] for though he did not save them as he did elect men from the ruin they had already deserved, and were condemned to, and the miserable state they were already in, yet he saved them from eternal destruction they were in great danger of, and otherwise would have fallen into with the other angels. [size=14pt]The elect angels joined with him (Christ), the glorious Michael, as their captain,[/size] while the other angels hearkened to Lucifer and joined with him, [size=14pt]and then was that literally true that was fulfilled afterwards figuratively.[/size] (Bold, color & bracket-mine)

Rev. xii. ‘When there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels, and prevailed not; neither was there place found any more in heaven. And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.’ ”
------------------------------------

Can you see how your author has misunderstood this statement?
1. Christ is not part of the elect Angels
2. Michael was part of the elect Angels
I think the point Edwards trying to bring out here is the fact that ""And they overcame him by the blood of the Lamb..."
Micheal was never referred to as LAMB.

"Angel of the Lord [angel of Jehovah] - occurs many times in the Old Testament, where in almost every instance it means a supernatural personage to be distinguished from Jehovah .... Some feel the pre-incarnate Christ is meant." - p. 39, Today's Dictionary of the Bible (trinitarian), Bethany House Publ., 1982
------------------------------------

"Angel of the Lord. ... Christ's visible form before the incarnation." - p. 40, Smith's Bible Dictionary (trinitarian), Hendrickson Publ.
------------------------------------

"ANGEL OF THE LORD, ... is represented in Scripture as a heavenly being sent by God to deal with men as his personal agent and spokesman [`word'] .... In the NT [which trinitarians agree explains and amplifies the OT] there is no possibility of the angel of the Lord being confused with God. .... mostly when appearing to men he is recognized as a divine being, even though in human form, and is [sometimes] addressed as God" - p. 38, New Bible Dictionary, Tyndale House (trinitarian), 1984 printing.
------------------------------------

"The Angel of the LORD.... Traditional [from 2nd century A. D. (at least)] Christian interpretation has held that this `angel' was a preincarnate manifestation of Christ as God's Messenger-Servant. It may be ..., the angel could speak on behalf of (and so be identified with) the One [Jehovah] who sent him." - footnote for Gen. 16:7 in the highly trinitarian The NIV Study Bible by Zondervan Publishing, 1985.
---------------------------------------------------

Please I never see where any one said the Angel of the Lord is Michael here, can you show us?


Finally, if truly this people teaches that Jesus Christ is the Archangel Michael without changing in their teaching;
1. why would JWs change the teaching of Jesus being Micheal FIVE times before they finally come to conclusion that Jesus is Michael?
2.Is it God who is inspiring all these changes?
3. What have JWs taught that have not been talked about by anybody before YET they are still claiming INSPIRATION for their work?

JMAN05:
Sir, Jude quoted an OT scripture where the divine name appeared. The correct thing should be "YHWH rebuke you". consult cross references.

Since Jude quoted OT where the Divine name appeared, why YHWH is NOT INSERTED EVERYWHERE the NT writers quoted OT where the Divine name appeared in NWT?

What occurred here is " princes", not archangels. Have you seen where the word "archangels" (emphasis on plural) occurred in the bible before?

There could be more than one princes, but not more than one archangels.

If they could be more than ONE PRINCES how Micheal which supposed to be ONLY ARCHANGEL still be among the PRINCES?

Which one higher in rank Archangel or Chief prince?

If Archangel is higher than Chief prince, why would Micheal can be classified as ONE of the Chief princes again?

Which I believe, you don't even know that ARCH means Chief also:

743. arcaggelov archaggelos, ar-khang'-el-os
Search for 743 in KJV

from 757 and 32; a chief angel:--archangel.

See Greek 757 (archo)
See Greek 32 (aggelos)

Come with another lie.

JMAN05:
So you are saying that [size=14pt]Jesus can't be called chief prince?[/size]

This is another place you will be lying at the face of the scriptures, he didn't say Jesus can't be called CHIEF PRINCE haba...

The verse says [size=14pt]"ONE[/size] of the chief prince" which means there are many Chief prince and Micheal happened to be ONE of them this negate Jesus being [size=14pt]ONLY begotten[/size] of the Father.

See how you keep twisting someone's statement.

PastorOluT:
So going by ur rationale, [size=14pt]Michael is one of the chief princes,[/size] meaning he is not the only chief prince. So that would negate the theory that [size=14pt]Jesus is the only begotten son if He is Michael?[/size]

I didn't just know how JWs can reconcile those two @bold statements.

You can see how far they can go just to limited Jesus Christ.

The evidence that you don't ponder over your statement before creating this thread is too obvious.

CAPTIVATOR:
Am calling on you professed christians to come out and defend urselves.

Are you a professed Christian or not?

While I was a kid, I was made to bliv that ALL righteous persons go to heaven while the sinners go to hellfire ! This is made possible because humans are said to possess a ghost within them.

Is it that "human are said to..." or what the scriptures say?

[size=14pt]BUT THE FAULTY CHRISTIANITY will still tell u that Jesus died for your sins , accepted[/size]

Why must you accept? Then see how what you accepted stands against you.

... My reader , there is a problem here If u dont see it, I will help u remove that religious spectacle.

Have you removed the religious spectacle in yours first?

Goliath, philistines , sons of Amon, Sons Of Edom and many other countries that are not isrealite WORSHIP IDOLS and thus when they die they will be judged and will go to hellfire

Show me where you read this in the Bible?

QUESTION: WHY DID JESUS CAME TO DIE FOR OUR SINS AGAIN ? AFTRALL PEOPLE ARE ALREADY GOING TO HELL?.

Yet you organization says people will be saved according to their good work. since people will be saved ACCORDING TO THEIR GOOD WORK, why must Jesus come to die for SIN again?

ON the other hand ... Abraham , Noah, noahs three sons and their wives , Sarah, Abigeal , Jonathan son of Saul are good people , when they died they have go to heaven.

Since these people were saved through their GOOD WORK without anybody died for them, what is the essence of Jesus coming to earth if we people have already been saved by good work?

QUESTION: OF WHAT PURPOSE IS JESUS DEATH SINCE PEOPLE ARE MAKING HEAVEN WITHOUT HIM ?

I can't stop laughing at your ignorance,
Of what purpose is the death of Jesus since your good work can save you?

Faulty! ...... Its either the ghost doctrine is a LIE or Jesus Death is useless to Mankind . ONE of these two doctrines is a fabrication .

The question is which ?

Just consider how ridicule your questions sound.

CAPTIVATOR:
YOU are finally exposed again .. Uv said the derivative word must come from the root word !

The greek writers didnt follow such illicit rule of yours. Greek Esaias WAS NOT DERIVED FROM the root hebrew word Yeshayahu. The difference is clear

Greek Ieremias WAS NOT DERIVED FROM the root hebrew word Yirmeyahu , The diference is very clear ! [size=14pt]They only use an acceptable GREEK FORM.[/size]

You're still confusing things here,

As you rightly said @bold both Isaiah and Jeremiah were USED BY THE GREEK WRITERS which is EQUIVALENT TO HEBREW before it became ACCEPTABLE these word WERE NOT TRYING TO BE DERIVED FROM THE ORIGINAL HEBREW.

NB: I made mention of equivalent word in original language.

But in case of Jehovah, Martini was trying to FORM its EQUIVALENT WORD in original Hebrew NOT THAT HE USED LATIN EQUIVALENT, this is very clear and two things in view.

Grow up from all this trash u read all over the internet , [size=14pt]the present Greek manuscript we possess are not the originals AND There are evidences that the greek writers preserve the tetramagaton in the greek text.[/size]

- Matthew wrote his account in hebrew language that owns the tetramagaton NOT Greek . It was Somone unknown that translated it to greek

Yet you said in above that "AND There are evidences that the greek writers preserve the tetramagaton in the greek text." Is the unknown person a writer? If Yes! When was translator became writer?

- the book of Revelation uses the word " Hallelu jah" which means " Praise Jah" , Jah is an abreviated form of the name Jehovah.

Nobody disputed the use of it in Hebrew.

Does the God's name appear in Christians book that's the question?

Remember you said it yourself below.

Read More : Bible scholars acknowledge that God’s personal name, as represented by the Tetragrammaton (יהוה), appears almost 7,000 times in the original text of the Hebrew Scriptures. [size=14pt]However, many feel that it did not appear in the original text of the Christian Greek Scriptures.[/size] For this reason, http://www.jw.org/en/publications/bible/nwt/appendix-a/divine-name-christian-greek-scriptures/#

Notice the bold part.
Please where is the evidence you said "...evidences that the greek writers preserve the tetramagaton in the greek text."

CAPTIVATOR:
Emusan beautifully exposed!

And you can't show where this happened

Open ur eyes bro , this is a disputed text .. Even many trinitarian translations doesn't contain " me" either , KJB, Jubilee, King James, AKJV, ASV, Darby, websters , WEB, Young.

It's not disputed.
You said many but absolutely it was there. If NWT is accurate why must it omit the word?

And for your information the kingdom interlinear translation is based on Wescott and Hort greek text Whereas The NWT is a comparison of different master texts apart from Wescott and Hort.

Including the work of Johannes Greber the spirit-ism.

As earlier noted screaming Jesus or Lord around the internet is not the point even sinners say Lord Jesus to cover their evil deeds, what matters to Jesus is doing his fathers will. - Matt 7:21-23

Not about screaming the name Jesus Christ is what we are talking about here Mr man, please read in between the line before you post.

The point here is Romans 10:13 calling upon the NAME of the Lord to be saved which your organization says this is a quote speaking about the Son. So the point is PRAYING TO Jesus.

Moreover, what differenciate a christian from a Jew is that while we christians call on the name of Jesus while bending our knees to the Father,

But Stephen the first Martyr bends his knee and call upon the name of Jesus.

believing he is our mediator THEY bliv they dont have to approach the Father through Jesus name .. Describing the kind of environment the Apostles did their preaching.

Can we pray to Jesus?
Did Apostles called upon the Name of Jesus (which means they pray to Him) the way people of Old called upon the of Jehovah?
That's the point here.

ALL the apostles direct their prayers to God througH the name Jesus - ACT 4: 24-30 thats the example I follow.

Please show me where they prayed through the name of Jesus in those verses? I'll laugh you if you refer to vr 30.

But EVERYONE WILL CALL UPON THE NAME OF THE SON TO BE SAVED, have you called upon Jesus' name for you to be saved?

"but in everything by prayer .... Let your petitions be made known to God " Phi 4:6,7
'throw all your anxieties upon God becaus he cares for you - 1pet 5:6,7

And if we ask Jesus ANYTHING He will do it. So who should we pray to?

CANTICLES:
See moonlight tales .... When did yoruba become the basis for selecting vowel sounds?

Does Yoruba Language has vowel and consonant?

@ Bolded , Has anyone been bearing Yahweh or Yehowah before so as to qualify which one is name and which one is not a name ?

From my illustration just as Gbenga (mind you this might not be the actual intent of the writer for GBNG) is closed to GBNG as a plausible name in Yoruba Yahweh is closed to Hebrew with the addition of vowel 'O' makes it losses any form in Hebrew.

Just a simple explanation.

dolphinheart:
Bro ,abeg no vex , but u fit just for my sake answer the question.

OK! The English word Jehovah comes from the inaccurate Latin word YEHOWAH formed by Martini a Catholic Monk, when he wrongly inserted three vowel into the Tetragrammaton of Divine name for God to form YEHOWAH.

So since the root word where Jehovah comes from is inaccurate then the derivative word Jehovah is inaccurate too though people have wrongly using it which you can also find in some versions like KJV, ASV but Scholars have said that this word have been wrongly used by those translation.

The astonish part is that JWs knew this yet they still went ahead to use the same word just because "...people's familiarity with it" and claimed they have RESTORED the Divine name.

Can you answer those questions I put to you now?
1. Has your organization TRULY RESTORED the DIVINE name of GOD?

2. Now will the MONK who FORMULATED this name before being translated into English be among the Little one or the holy ones?

dolphinheart:
All I want to know is if we cant use in english the word "jehovah " as the divine name of the almighty God . in ur personal view, is it wrong to use that name ? For the benefit of laymen Like me, pls give us an answer

Sorry to ask you this, what is your problem?

If you can't read my post and draw your conclusion from it, please and please don't quote me again for goodness' sake.

CAPTIVATOR:
Mr JW say, [size=14pt]the form Isaiah And Jeremiah ARE NEVER CLOSE TO THE ORIGINAL HEBREW NAMES,[/size] AND ur hipocrisy will make u accept them over the original Yeshayahu and Yirmeyahu which should hav been retained . but none of the two are retained despite everyone know they are the originals. INTERESTINGLLYYYYYY,GOD preserve his word to the extent that when we say Jeremiah, Isaiah AND JEHOVAH .... EVERYONE could identify the person been reffered to. smiles

The bold part is a pure lie both Isaiah and Jeremiah were used by the writers of the NT which gives the Translators better idea of how to render them in English.

Or you want to tell us that when the NT writers used these words they weren't conveyed the true meaning and pronunciation?

If the Divine name has ever APPEARED in Greek NT, translators would have resolved this problem since but as NO NT writers use it I wonder how JWs get the Divine name into their own NT rendering.

CAPTIVATOR:
Mr JW say , am suprised u dont even know the word "God" was added to that verse. its NOT part of it content.

Ohhhhh...it's now you can see added word in one's translation but you can't you own added and omitted word in NWT.

The exact Greek word-for-word rendering in the Kingdom Interlinear Translation for John 14:14 is:
if ever anything YOU should ask me in the name of me this I shall do.
According to that Greek text, the Lord Jesus taught his disciples to pray to himself and he (Jesus) shall do it. In contrast to the Greek, the NWT inaccurately reads:

If YOU ask anything in my name, I will do it. Obviously, 'ME' has been removed by the NWT because of the implication of praying to Jesus.

You agree that THE NAME of Jesus will be CALLED UPON which is the truth we found the NT,
1. Have you CALLED ON THIS NAME BEFORE?
2. Why your organization says we can't pray to Jesus when it's evident that people will CALL ON HIS NAME?

Though you've claimed that CALLING UPON the name of Jesus is doing His Father's will but see the reason why this is just another attempt of twisting scriptures.

1. Both Christians and Jews know that God is being referred to as FATHER; and Paul is a Jews, so why will Paul be persecuting those who are TRULY DOING THE WILL OF THE FATHER since he persecuted those who called on the name of Jesus Christ? "But Ananias answered, [size=14pt]"Lord, I have heard from many about this man, how much evil he has done to thy saints at Jerusalem; and here he has authority from the chief priests to bind all who CALL UPON THY NAME."[/size] Acts 9:13-14 RSV (bold & capital, mine)

2. If someone is doing the will of THE FATHER it's a thing ONLY GOD Himself could know, NO HUMAN BEING CAN TRULY KNOW IT. Then how come people know this if we should go by your perverted interpretation of the scriptures? "And all who heard him were amazed, and said, [size=14pt]"Is not this the man who made havoc in Jerusalem of those who called on this name?[/size] And he has come here for this purpose, to bring them bound before the chief priests." acts 9:21 RSV (bold, mine)

Don't be surprised that Watchtower has mislead you.

RikoduoSennin:
See the Bold Section and see the Root word- The TeTragrammaton. Note: there is not consonant in the original manuscript. You wrote how the consonants were added for the root word (Yehowah) where Jehovah came from
, HOW DID THE VOWEL COME ABOUT FOR YAHWEH?

What are you saying here? YHWH are they consonant or vowel?
Or you mistake vowel for consonant?

Do you have a Beef with Yehowah?

I don't! But thank God you've said it yourself that Jesus REPLACED the Divine name with a TITLE, so tell us where your organization get there own Divine name in the GREEK MANUSCRIPTS.

Did the Hebrew Scholars favor the use of Yahweh( which is a Hebrew word) in English Language Translations?

Explained in my above post.

If So, most names in the Bible will change base on SAME principle.

Nothing will change mr because some names were DIRECTLY used by the Apostles in the New Testament which gave the clue of what the represented in original Hebrew.

YES!

I asked two questions but you can only answer one
Even this one you answered is still false so back to the same question, will the MONK who FORMULATED this name before being translated into English be among the Little one or the holy ones?