Jump to content
The World News Media

What gives them the right to insert YHWH so that the the scriptures are manipulated to suit the their doctrine?


Micah Ong
Message added by The Librarian

Please consider starting a new topic and possibly referring to this post. This topic is now enormous. Thank you.

Recommended Posts


  • Views 6.9k
  • Replies 85
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

It is what it is! @Anna.  What gives them the right to insert YHWH so that the the scriptures are manipulated to suit the their doctrine?  You can't get away from that.  You can't add or take away fro

You can always start another thread if one gets enormous. I doubt you caused any real angst for anyone. Anyone who shares an internet forum or even responds to a youtube video will be well prepar

@Arauna the point is that the Watchtower Organisation as changed the bible to fit doctrine. Rev 22:18 "I am bearing witness to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this scroll: If anyone ma

Posted Images

  • Member
6 hours ago, Micah Ong said:

Please show us anything that shows the divine name that dates before the earliest extant manuscripts for the New Testament?

Assuming I understand this question because it is a little confusing.

If you mean evidence of the divine name dating prior to extant manuscripts for the New Testament, then it is so abundant and in the public domain it is not worth reproducing here.

If you mean manuscripts of the New Testament earlier than what is extant, then I do not know how this could be possible, and the only answer is: as soon as they are found.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
On 4/21/2017 at 10:22 AM, Micah Ong said:

  Not inspired by Holy Spirit presenting truths from the bible as they say they are in the publications.

“The Governing Body is neither inspired nor infallible. Therefore, it can err in doctrinal matters or in organizational direction.”

From ‘Who is Leading God’s People Today?’ Pgr 12, February 2017

That's not to say they have erred in the matter under discussion. It is a translating decision that they have provided abundant justification for in the attached appendix. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
5 hours ago, Eoin Joyce said:

If you mean evidence of the divine name dating prior to extant manuscripts for the New Testament, then it is so abundant and in the public domain it is not worth reproducing here.

Well at least show us one!

"Sometime during the second or third century C.E. the scribes removed the Tetragrammaton from both the Septuagint and the Christian Greek Scriptures and replaced it with Ky´ri·os, "Lord" or The·os´, "God."" New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures - With References p.1564 1D The Divine Name in the Christian Greek Scriptures

There is no proof whatsoever to support this claim, as not a single ancient New Testament document has been found with YHWH in it. Several available manuscripts date back to this period. P47 dates prior to 300 A.D. and contains four uses of Kyrios from Revelation that the NWT translates as Jehovah. P66 dates from around 200 A.D. from John (written in 98 A.D) and contains five occurrences of Lord that appear in the NWT as Jehovah. Some manuscripts go back to within 25 years of John's writings, yet none contains YHWH.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
2 hours ago, Micah Ong said:

"Sometime during the second or third century C.E. the scribes removed the Tetragrammaton from both the Septuagint and the Christian Greek Scriptures and replaced it with Ky´ri·os, "Lord" or The·os´, "God."" New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures - With References p.1564 1D The Divine Name in the Christian Greek Scriptures

There is no proof whatsoever to support this claim, as not a single ancient New Testament document has been found with YHWH in it. Several available manuscripts date back to this period. P47 dates prior to 300 A.D. and contains four uses of Kyrios from Revelation that the NWT translates as Jehovah. P66 dates from around 200 A.D. from John (written in 98 A.D) and contains five occurrences of Lord that appear in the NWT as Jehovah. Some manuscripts go back to within 25 years of John's writings, yet none contains YHWH.

I was very dismissive of your initial post for reasons I already gave. I am sorry for that, now. But I also said that I would be happy to engage if I thought your purpose was different.

On 4/21/2017 at 8:52 AM, JW Insider said:

I would be happy to engage fully with your points especially if I thought your purpose was to help remove potential error from our teachings.

I see how serious you were in studying this issue very thoroughly and coming to a thoughtful and reasonable conclusion. Initially, I thought this was just going to be a matter of taking a few quick "snipes" at the JW teaching and therefore be dismissive of all teachings over another Trinity-related matter.

I see that you have made a good point about the quote above where the reference edition of the NWT states that "Sometime during the second or third century C.E. the scribes removed the Tetragrammaton from both the Septuagint and the Christian Greek Scriptures . . . "

I agree that there is no evidence for this claim (yet) although I would not be surprised if something was discovered in the future that might shed more light on this. I have agreed for several months now with the idea that we should not be insistent on adding a form of the Divine Name to the Greek Scriptures [New Testament] until that evidence shows up. But I have not made a thorough investigation of the evidence for myself, and I see from your posts that there is already some good evidence to work from - that leads you to the opposite conclusion. I'd like to go through this evidence myself, and see if there is anything that might sway against the evidence you referenced. If more evidence leads to the same conclusion then I'll see just what position that might lead to.

I had the impression that no one knew very much about the divine name in the LXX translation of the Hebrew Scriptures [Old Testament] until fairly recently. (About 1939 seemed to be indicated in the various NWT forewords and appendixes). This is a big deal to the stance the JWs have taken for decades. When the NWT "NT" was published in 1950, the Foreword on pages 10-25 covered this point, and showed that it was public knowledge that such LXX versions existed due to the comments from Jerome and others. I know that finding the divine name represented in the LXX is not evidence that it was ever in the New Testament manuscripts, but at the very least it could allow for the idea that direct quotes of the OT in the NT could have some reason to include it. 

I think that the points about the so-called "J documents" have always provided a very weak argument since the addition was done for didactic purposes just as it was done in some Native American (Indian) language translations and African languages, for example. Clearly one of the reasons for these so-called "J documents" was to help teach the Trinity doctrine, which is why the NWT translators have also ignored a lot of the so-called "J" support for using the divine name.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
3 hours ago, Micah Ong said:

 

"Sometime during the second or third century C.E. the scribes removed the Tetragrammaton from both the Septuagint and the Christian Greek Scriptures and replaced it with Ky´ri·os, "Lord" or The·os´, "God."" New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures - With References p.1564 1D The Divine Name in the Christian Greek Scriptures

There is no proof whatsoever to support this claim, as not a single ancient New Testament document has been found with YHWH in it. Several available manuscripts date back to this period. P47 dates prior to 300 A.D. and contains four uses of Kyrios from Revelation that the NWT translates as Jehovah. P66 dates from around 200 A.D. from John (written in 98 A.D) and contains five occurrences of Lord that appear in the NWT as Jehovah. Some manuscripts go back to within 25 years of John's writings, yet none contains YHWH.

   P52 aka  Papyrus Rylands 457 is the mss you are asserting in your last sentence and you well know that "kyrious" does not even occur in the fragment at all so can not be used to prove the point as it only contains John 18:31-33. You can look it up on the one I sell on ebay and see for yourself. As for "proof" you also know that the hundreds of books I listed in the previous posts have the proof you need and NONE of then were even produced by the Watchtower Society. Remember you do not have any original mss. from the New Testament the same way that we do not so neither of us can "prove" by those means but that does not mean our way is wrong and yours must be right.

   The Bible was written by Jews including the apostles as Jewish Christians who were meticulous in translating the Bible from quotations in the Old Testament. So when they saw the Tetragrammaton in Psalm 110:1 in the Septuagint they would have NOT changed the Bible's words to read "Lord"now would they since to change the Bible is a sin that a Jew would not do. {See Matthew 22:44}.  Yes as everyone now knows the original Septuagint written by the Jews contain the Tetragrammaton. If you do not believe me then look at my site on ebay as I also offer the Manuscripts there that contain the Tetragrammaton in the Septuagint copies that came directly from the "Israeli Antiquities Authority" from the Dead Sea Scrolls Museum in Israel.

   Yes the so-called Christians after the First Century DID change "YHWH" to "Kyrios" as the Bible clearly shows that after the 'apostles" a falling away would occur. So using any "proof" after the First Century would of course be suspect since they are not original.

    And this is the very reason now dozens of complete Bibles now contain "YHWH" in various forms in the New Testament whereas in 1950 when the NWT was made only a couple did. It is because of the evidence over the years from the original LXX that so many has as can be seen from the over 100 Translations I offer on ebay that contain the Divine Name in the New Testament.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
19 minutes ago, bruceq said:

And this is the very reason now dozens of Biblse now contain "YHWH" in various forms in the New Testament whereas in 1950 when the NWT was made only a couple did.

The Foreward to the 1950 NWT indicates that there were then about 60 Bible versions with a vernacular form of YHWH in the NT.  This included NT-only Bibles, especially "missionary" Bibles. Did you mean only a couple of full Bibles as opposed to partial?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
3 minutes ago, JW Insider said:

The Foreward to the 1950 NWT indicates that there were then about 60 Bible versions with a vernacular form of YHWH in the NT.  This included NT-only Bibles, especially "missionary" Bibles. Did you mean only a couple of full Bibles as opposed to partial?

Yes I did not mean the ones in other languages full copies. The ones I offer are only in English. Sorry for any confusion.

The couple were like "Emphatic Diaglott" and a few others.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
3 hours ago, Micah Ong said:

Well at least show us one!

The wording of your original question wasn't clear to me and it reads as if you are referring to any manuscripts prior to extant NT manuscripts. I deduce (hopefully) from your reply that you must mean any NT manuscripts, to which the alternative answer applies:

8 hours ago, Eoin Joyce said:

If you mean manuscripts of the New Testament earlier than what is extant, then I do not know how this could be possible, and the only answer is: as soon as they are found.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
4 minutes ago, bruceq said:

Yes I did not mean the ones in other languages. The ones I offer are only in English. Sorry for any confusion.

Yes, I understand. I just saw your link and now I recognize that I have already purchased from you several times. In case that link disappears, I wanted to quote from it. I hope you don't mind. I wanted to have access to comment on what you said:
 

Quote

 

. . . Psalms Dead Sea Scrolls 11Q5.  {See New World Translation Study Edition for more info }.

   Why should the name "JEHOVAH" {YHWH} appear in the New Testament ? 

   One reason is that Copies of the Hebrew Scriptures used in the days of Jesus and his apostles contained the Tetragrammaton throughout the text. In the past, few people disputed that conclusion. Now that copies of the Hebrew Scriptures dating back to the first century have been discovered near Qumran, the point has been proved beyond any doubt. So Jesus and his Apostles would have quoted from these scrolls that contained the Tetragrammaton - JEHOVAH !!! {See 2013 New World Translation Appendix A and B}.

  This Psalms in a Dead Sea Scroll dated to the first half of the first century C.E. the very time of Jesus and his Apostles of the First Century Christian Congregation! The text is in the style of the Hebrew letters commonly used after the Babylonian exile, but the Tetragrammaton appears repeatedly in distinctive ancient Hebrew letters

   Psalms Scroll 11Q5 Reproduction mounted in a clear two-sided frame 6 by 18 inches with hardware for table or wall mounting included. This Psalms scroll contains 11 of the 15 Songs of Ascent (Psalms 120-134). Pilgrims would sing these Psalms while they ascended up to Jerusalem. It was in 1956 that a Bedouin discovered cave 11 with these psalms. These Psalms date to the first half of the 1st century C.E.

 

I was just doing some reading last night and this morning to try to get a better sense of what the DSS actually show us about the use of the Divine Name during the time period(s) represented. So I'll want to get back to this soon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member

Yes you may quote from my ebay site, also there is now alot more updated info from 2017 that many may not realize since it is not in print but only online in the NWT Study edition on JW.ORG:

Appendix C

 
Link to comment
Share on other sites





  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Popular Contributors

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • It appears to me that this is a key aspect of the 2030 initiative ideology. While the Rothschilds were indeed influential individuals who were able to sway governments, much like present-day billionaires, the true impetus for change stems from the omnipotent forces (Satan) shaping our world. In this case, there is a false God of this world. However, what drives action within a political framework? Power! What is unfolding before our eyes in today's world? The relentless struggle for power. The overwhelming tide of people rising. We cannot underestimate the direct and sinister influence of Satan in all of this. However, it is up to individuals to decide how they choose to worship God. Satanism, as a form of religion, cannot be regarded as a true religion. Consequently, just as ancient practices of child sacrifice had a place in God's world, such sacrifices would never be accepted by the True God of our universe. Despite the promising 2030 initiative for those involved, it is unfortunately disintegrating due to the actions of certain individuals in positions of authority. A recent incident serves as a glaring example, involving a conflict between peaceful Muslims and a Jewish representative that unfolded just this week. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/mar/11/us-delegation-saudi-arabia-kippah?ref=upstract.com Saudi Arabia was among the countries that agreed to the initiative signed by approximately 179 nations in or around 1994. However, this initiative is now being undermined by the devil himself, who is sowing discord among the delegates due to the ongoing Jewish-Hamas (Palestine) conflict. Fostering antisemitism. What kind of sacrifice does Satan accept with the death of babies and children in places like Gaza, Ukraine, and other conflicts around the world, whether in the past or present, that God wouldn't? Whatever personal experiences we may have had with well-known individuals, true Christians understand that current events were foretold long ago, and nothing can prevent them from unfolding. What we are witnessing is the result of Satan's wrath upon humanity, as was predicted. A true religion will not involve itself in the politics of this world, as it is aware of the many detrimental factors associated with such engagement. It understands the true intentions of Satan for this world and wisely chooses to stay unaffected by them.
    • This idea that Satan can put Jews in power implies that God doesn't want Jews in power. But that would also imply that God only wants "Christians" including Hitler, Biden, Pol Pot, Chiang Kai-Shek, etc. 
    • @Mic Drop, I don't buy it. I watched the movie. It has all the hallmarks of the anti-semitic tropes that began to rise precipitously on social media during the last few years - pre-current-Gaza-war. And it has similarities to the same anti-semitic tropes that began to rise in Europe in the 900's to 1100's. It was back in the 500s AD/CE that many Khazars failed to take or keep land they fought for around what's now Ukraine and southern Russia. Khazars with a view to regaining power were still being driven out into the 900's. And therefore they migrated to what's now called Eastern Europe. It's also true that many of their groups converted to Judaism after settling in Eastern Europe. It's possibly also true that they could be hired as mercenaries even after their own designs on empire had dwindled.  But I think the film takes advantage of the fact that so few historical records have ever been considered reliable by the West when it comes to these regions. So it's easy to fill the vacuum with some very old antisemitic claims, fables, rumors, etc..  The mention of Eisenhower in the movie was kind of a giveaway, too. It's like, Oh NO! The United States had a Jew in power once. How on earth could THAT have happened? Could it be . . . SATAN??" Trying to tie a connection back to Babylonian Child Sacrifice Black Magick, Secret Satanism, and Baal worship has long been a trope for those who need to think that no Jews like the Rothschilds and Eisenhowers (????) etc would not have been able to get into power in otherwise "Christian" nations without help from Satan.    Does child sacrifice actually work to gain power?? Does drinking blood? Does pedophilia??? (also mentioned in the movie) Yes, it's an evil world and many people have evil ideologies based on greed and lust and ego. But how exactly does child sacrifice or pedophilia or drinking blood produce a more powerful nation or cabal of some kind? To me that's a giveaway that the authors know that the appeal will be to people who don't really care about actual historical evidence. Also, the author(s) of the video proved that they have not done much homework, but are just trying to fill that supposed knowledge gap by grasping at old paranoid and prejudicial premises. (BTW, my mother and grandmother, in 1941 and 1942, sat next to Dwight Eisenhower's mother at an assembly of Jehovah's Witnesses. The Eisenhower family had been involved in a couple of "Christian" religions and a couple of them associated with IBSA and JWs for many years.)
  • Members

    No members to show

  • Recent Status Updates

  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
      65.4k
    • Total Posts
      158.9k
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      17,670
    • Most Online
      1,592

    Newest Member
    Apolos2000
    Joined
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Service Confirmation Terms of Use Privacy Policy Guidelines We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.