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

[Micah Ong]

Yes our obedience to our almighty heavenly father is definitely an individual thing but why associate with an organisation that holds highly God's name, yet uses a hybrid name "Jehovah" which is made using the Tetragrammaton and then inserting vowel points using the vowels of Adonai?  This was popularised around the 1200's by a Catholic monk Raymundus Martini.

Imagine God's name was Tony and then every stopped using it and then 1500 years later they forgot his name but knew it had the letters TNY.  They then inserted a,o,i and get the name Tanoyi - a totally different name.

We know that no vowel points were made known to us and therefore it is a made up name.  The army and over 50 religions use that same name.  If God's name is so holy why just guess what his name is?  

The Christian Greek scriptures do not even contain the divine name.  Run a search on "Jehovah" in the Kingdom Interlinear Translation on the JW Library app and you will find it comes back with '0' occurrences. 

Yet the Watchtower takes it upon themselves to take away and add to what was already established in Koine Greek the original.

We know God's name ie his love, reputation, nature, power, plan ect is what was and is still important.  YHWH was the name he made known to his covenanted people back then.  So it seems that if he wanted that name to be known with the new covenant then he would have made it known all the way down today.

It is no secret that the New World Translation Translation uses Johannes Greber to back up doctrine in the NWT.                   

Johannes Greber was a Catholic priest turned spiritist who translated the New Testament with the help of God’s “spirits.” He used his wife, who was a spirit-medium, to channel spirits to help translate difficult verses in the bible. His experiences with spirits and their communications with him are related in his book Communication with the Spirit World, published in 1932.

Wouldn't he be considered to be apostate!?

The Word
A translation by a former Roman Catholic Priest, Johannes Greber, and (1937 edition) renders the second appearance of the word “god” in the sentence as “a god.”
– Aid to Bible Understanding 1971, p. 1669

"Keep testing whether you are in the faith"

Agape Love

John 8:32 "Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free."

 

[Arauna]

If you knew Hebrew or Arabic you will know that the consonants alone (without vowels) stand for a specific meaning. The letters KTB stand for the word Book in arabic. More than ten words can be made out of these consonants by changing the points/diacritics/vowels and all relate to books, places where one finds books, or writing.

Similarly - in Hebrew - (related Semitic language) we find that the verb from these 4 letters JHWH carries the causative form of the verb which means "I shall prove to be"  and the noun would mean - he causes - in causative form - to become.   So the Vowels are not that important but the CoNSoNaNTS always are! - unlike other languages.  This is why Hebrew and related languages are all written only with consonants - the diacritics are added for readers who are beginners only.

We say JaHWeH but in other translations Jehovah (or something close to this - depending on the language) is acceptable. The translation of Jesus is actually Jasu-3a/Jeshua but when we speak everyone knows that you are acknowledging Jesus. It is the acknowledgement of the name that counts.

Jehovah knows the heart of each individual and he is the one who can see if we acknowledge HIS name and we believe that this name (which is associated with his final purpose for the earth, Jesus' sacrifice and also associated with His wonderful qualities), as set out in the Bible, is the true god which we as individuals acknowledge.

 

Many of the old languages such as the Greek do not have the indefinite article "a" - just like Arabic.  So one ads letters when one speaks of "the" or there is a declension...... something in the word changes to show  a different form.   John 1:1  Theon and Theos.... are two different forms of the word god.....in one the word "a " must be added in the English because English has this word "a" in it but it is this what is meant by Theos - so one does not need a medium to tell you this - all one needs is a bit of knowledge of the language.

 

declension: (in the grammar of Latin, Greek, and certain other languages) the variation of the form of a noun, pronoun, or adjective, by which its grammatical case, number, and gender are identified

 

 

[Micah Ong]

@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 makes an addition to these things, God will add to him the plagues that are written in this scroll"

Jehovah is not found in the New Testament!

Evidence it did not Appear

There is much evidence that YHWH never appeared in the New Testament. Most obvious is the absence of YHWH in any of the 5,000 discovered Greek New Testament manuscripts.

Important evidence is also contained in the writings of the early Christians. These are referred to as the Apostolic Fathers and Ante Nicene Fathers who wrote from the times of the Apostles to the third century. This includes Polycarp, who studied with the Apostle John and Justin Martyr who lived from 110 to 165 A.D. Their extensive writings are a source of information on the early Church, including the formulation of the Trinity doctrine and the development of the Bible Canon. Yet in their writings there is no discussion about the removal of God's name from the Scriptures. If a global conspiracy existed to remove YHWH from the all New Testament manuscripts debate most certainly would have occurred between these writers.

Furthermore, their works do not contain YHWH when quoting from New Testament Scriptures. For example, in Against Heresies, Irenaeus quotes Matthew 1:20; 4:10 and Romans 11:34, each time using the word Lord instead of Jehovah. Clement, mentioned at Philippians 4:3, wrote the Epistle of Clement to the Corinthians between 75 and 110 A.D. and used Kyrios when quoting from the Old Testament. (See 1 Clement 13:5 which quotes Ezekiel 33:11.)

Justin Martyr converted to Christianity around 150 A.D., a mere 50 years after the Bible was completed. He had access to early copies of the New Testament yet in The Second Apology, Chapter VI he wrote;

"But to the Father of all, who is unbegotten, there is no name given. For by whatever name He be called, He has as His elder the person who gives Him the name. But these words, Father, and God, and Creator, and Lord, and Master, are not names, but appellations derived from His good deeds and functions."

Justin Martyr shows that Christians referred to the Father by appellations, but not a name such as Jehovah.

That the Holy Name was not being uttered in Jesus day is attested to by first century historian Josephus:

"Whereupon God declared to him [Moses] his holy Name, which had never been discovered to men before; concerning which it is not lawful for me to say anymore. " (Josephus; Antiquities 2:12:4)

As we do not have the actual original copies that the Bible writers penned it is always possible to say that YHWH may have appeared in the original copy. However the weight of evidence shows that YHWH was not in the original copies. If the Watchtower claims God allowed men to edit out his name "YHWH" and that no proof has been found to its existence to this day, how can a person have confidence in any of the New Testament?

The New Testament is one of the most attested ancient documents. The reason a person places trust in it is their conviction that God ensured the Bible has come down to us accurately. If use of the name Jehovah is so important one must wonder why the word never appears in any existing New Testament documents. If God inspired and protected the Bible, keeping the Bible accurate throughout all history why does his name not appear in the oldest Greek manuscripts or in the very first Bible, the 5th century Latin Vulgate?

Conclusion

The Watchtower presents the following paradox; Jehovah has not been found in the New Testament because it has been tampered with, but the Bible has been inspired and accurately preserved by Jehovah.

"Thus modern scholarship gives reason for complete confidence that the Bible has come down to us today essentially unaltered." Awake! 1972 Jun 22 p.8

"Why, then, is the name absent from the extant manuscripts of the Christian Greek Scriptures or so-called New Testament? Evidently because by the time those extant copies were made (from the third century C.E. onward) the original text of the writings of the apostles and disciples had been altered." Insight on the Scriptures - Volume 2 p.10

The divine name appears over nearly 7,000 times in the Old Testament. By Jesus time, it had been removed from most Old Testament translations yet Jesus never mentioned or criticised the removal. As this indicates that Jesus did not feel this was an important omission whether Jehovah appears in modern translations of the Old Testament is up to the discretion of the translation. On the other hand, as Jehovah does not appear in the New Testament it so should not be added to by translations such as the NWT.

As Jehovah was not used in the New Testament, use of the word Jehovah cannot be a necessary requirement for salvation. Rather, the New Testament shows that Jesus is the name through which salvation comes. Jesus words show that God is to be addressed as Lord or Father.

By the time of Jesus, YHWH was not in regular use. The divine name does not appear in any known manuscripts of the New Testament, indicating that Jesus kept to the tradition and law on not using the Divine Name. To include Jehovah in the New Testament the Watchtower Society has taken liberties with God's Word. An assumption has been made in order to give weight to Watchtower doctrine. The effect is an inaccurate understanding of what Jesus taught. It affects a Jehovah's Witness ability to reason correctly on subjects such as the Trinity and to understand what the Bible says as to Jesus' role in salvation.

[Micah Ong]

Yes it does matter @Arauna because God meant his word to be presented as he originally intended it.

From 1385 A.D. onwards, the New Testament Greek manuscripts started to be translated into certain Hebrew versions with the inclusion of YHWH. It is essential to understand that these have no connection whatsoever with the Hebrew Scriptures or Old Testament manuscripts and were not translated until well over one thousand years after Jesus death.

Jesus never quoted the Father as being Jehovah.  It was illegal to use the divine name and no one would of listened to him.

Firstborn(Col 1:15) in the scriptures seems to indicate preeminent one(existing before all creation).  David is said to be the first born of Jesse even though he was the youngest.  And in Genesis Manasseh is said to be firstborn but then in Jer 31:9 Ephraim is called firstborn.  The reason of this is because he was to become Lord or Heir.  So in this sense we See that Jesus can aptly be called Lord of Creation.  This lines up with the rest of the scriptures.

Rev 1:7,8 Jehovah as Alpha and Omega.  Remember though that earliest transcripts say Lord or kurios.  But this essentially means in the NWT no beginning and no end.  Jehovah has no beginning nor end right? 

And now Jesus talking in Rev 1:17,18 "And he laid his right hand on me and said: “Do not be afraid. I am the First and the Last, 18 and the living one, and I became dead, but look! I am living forever and ever..."  Jesus also has no beginning or end.

Gen 18 talks about Jehovah walking on the earth in human form before he walked as Jesus born from Mary.  Not impossible for him to do so.  Abraham prepared and gave food to him(3 men altogether).  Chapter 19 verse one shows that the other two men were angels and had arrived in Sodom.

John 8:58 Kingdom interlinear Before Abraham to become, I AM.  That our Lord by this expression asserted his divinity and eternal existence, as the great I AM, appears evident from the use of the present tense.

Exodus 6:2,3 Then God said to Moses: “I am Jehovah. 3 And I used to appear to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob as God Almighty, but with regard to my name Jehovah I did not make myself known to them

You say the Hebrew Scriptures are key to understanding the whole bible and this I do not deny. 

Isaiah 43:10-13 is key and you know it very well: “You are my witnesses,” declares Jehovah, “Yes, my servant whom I have chosen, So that you may know and have faith in me And understand that I am the same One.  Before me no God was formed, And after me there has been none.  11 I—I am Jehovah, and besides me there is no savior.”  12 “I am the One who declared and saved and made known
When there was no foreign god among you.  So you are my witnesses,” declares Jehovah, “and I am God."

First point regarding this passage is in Isaiah 62:2 He said they would be called by a new name talking about Zion/Jerusalem.  In Acts 11:19 here they are first called Christians.  Wouldn't you agree as Christs followers this would aptly be the new name.  Acts 1:8 "...and you will be witnesses of me in Jerusalem."  Witnesses of Jesus not Jehovah

Secondly Isaiah says concerning Jehovah himslelf Before me no God was formed, And after me there has been none.  If Jesus was created as a god as John 1:1 states then how can God form a god, when he said: there has been none but would of created him at the time of Abraham.  He wasn't talking about foreign gods or false gods.  Yes Satan is the god of this system but he is only a false god or counterfeit god.  There is only one true God!  Angels aren't gods like Michael.  Arch angel is just a chief angel.

But If Jesus is God then John 1:1 now makes sense being only one God. Not two.  Emmanual means God is with us so God existing in a man harmonizes with that name as well.

Acts 4:10-12 - Jesus name alone is the means of salvation.

It isn't impossible for God to exist in a hyper-static state being the Father in Heaven and being in a limited form as a human.  Yes Jesus was still God but limited as a human.  He can be rightly called the Son because he was born from himself into human form so in that state he can be called Gods son, remember the Jews wanted to stone him because they thought he was saying he was equal to God. 

We also exist in three states.  Body, Soul(Mind, Emotions), Spirit (energy life force) but God is more dynamic.  Quantum physics demonstrates the rule of entanglement where one particle is entangled with another particle along way away.  So even though we aren't familiar with all his ways Quantum Physics demonstrates hyper-static states in particles.

What if, just what if Jesus is God!?  Then how much more amazing is the price he paid for us and the agony he went through for us because he love us.  It is mind blowing and so humbling and awe inspiring and feels me with more love and appreciation for him.  1 Tim 3:16

I was a Jehovah's Witness and left last month and am astounded at what I am learning from the scriptures now.  I do not regret all the education I received as a JW because it helped me to have good study habits and have a good general knowledge of the scriptures.  But believe please believe me the bible does not belong to the Governing Body.  Jesus promised a helper in the Holy Spirit to help under stand the Holy Scriptures.  The scriptures tell us to get baptized in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit (not a spirit directed organization).  Please let scripture interpret scripture.

There are 7 names for God in the bible.  The link below describes them well with scriptural reference.

https://www.gotquestions.org/names-of-God.html

 

[JW Insider]

6 hours ago, Micah Ong said:

Yes our obedience to our almighty heavenly father is definitely an individual thing but why associate with an organisation that holds highly God's name, yet uses a hybrid name "Jehovah" which is made using the Tetragrammaton and then inserting vowel points using the vowels of Adonai?

I'm glad you got right to the point. Asking "why associate with an organization that...?" clearly means that you think Christians should leave the organization of Jehovah's Witnesses. You are bringing up points that could be put in a thread of their own, but I'll assume that you are tying these points to survival of the Great Tribulation, which many (most?) Witnesses conflate with any fear of a third world war or the potential of world-wide persecution.

Asking that question, "why associate?" means you have given up on the idea that Jehovah's Witnesses are a true and valid representation in this twenty-first century of the Christian congregation in the first century.

Personally, I don't see anything wrong with you bringing these issues up for whatever reasons. I bring up similar issues regularly for clarity, so that fellow brothers and sisters are aware of the counter-arguments to our beliefs, and so that we don't fall into the trap of dishonesty where we simply say that something can't be true if it makes us look wrong. 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. That said, I don't actually believe that we survive the Great Tribulation of Revelation 7 by "washing our robes" through perfectly clean teachings, but by the cleanness of our conscience, by clean conduct. Therefore honesty about doctrine is even more important than claiming to have the right doctrine:

(Matthew 7:21-24) 21 “Not everyone saying to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter into the Kingdom of the heavens, but only the one doing the will of my Father who is in the heavens will. 22 Many will say to me in that day: ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and expel demons in your name, and perform many powerful works in your name?’ 23 And then I will declare to them: ‘I never knew you! Get away from me, you workers of lawlessness!’
24 “Therefore, everyone who hears these sayings of mine and does them will be like a discreet man who built his house on the rock.

Therefore, it's a matter of what sort of persons ought we to be, not what sort of doctrines did we believe.

But there is also considerable overlap between doctrines themselves and how we should honestly conduct ourselves. For example, we should trust that we don't need to participate in the world's politics and wars if we think about what it must mean to remain 'no part of this world.' That is very difficult for most people, and most religions. I won't get into dozens of other points like that here, but I'll try to get to the question of using the name "Jehovah."

I have a 1-year old granddaughter who calls me g'PA and sometimes GanPA and sometimes Gam'PA and sometimes GAM'pa. She identifies me correctly when she sees a picture on their wall, or in my iPhone, or on Skype or FaceTime. She has another grandfather who she calls Papa and Poppy (she calls her father Dada and Daddy). When I come through her door a few times a week to babysit along with my wife, I smile inside and out when she calls out g'PA. That's my name to her. She doesn't use that term for anyone else. I don't mind in the least that she mispronounces "grandpa" by leaving out a couple of whole consonants, or turns two syllables to one syllable.  Someday, she will probably try to distinguish her two grandfathers by including a more specific name like Grandpa Beezlebumps vs. Grandpa Hamhocker. Having her know that I have a more personal and specific name is probably not that important to me, as long as she knows me.

I can understand why we could be just as happy to "know" the personal specific name for God and use it for circumstances like public prayer and discussion, and use a title like "Father" in private, in the same way that my granddaughter calls me "g'PA." But we have the example of the Israelites whose history as found in the Bible contains the specific name THOUSANDS of times. That's the reason we think it's important. Because of the Bible. Jesus used the term Father (also Aramaic, abba) in his speech and prayers. And when the apostle Paul speaks of distinguishing our God from other gods, he doesn't use the divine name, but also calls Him, "God, the Father."

(1 Corinthians 8:5, 6) 5 For even though there are so-called gods, whether in heaven or on earth, just as there are many “gods” and many “lords,” 6 there is actually to us one God, the Father, from whom all things are and we for him; and there is one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things are and we through him.

No one thinks it's a magic name that must be pronounced exactly right, or exactly the same in each language. That's not the point. The point is that we try to use a name that is distinctive, based on the tetragrammaton, with whatever vowels are common and understandable, and so that others know who we mean.

Also, just because Greber translates John 1:1 as we do, doesn't mean that the NWT depended on Greber or has any relationship to him. It's just an acknowledgement that other translators have translated the verse as the NWT does. People don't usually have a lot of complaints about how the Greber translation turned out, usually only two or three passages. Another one is about how the bodies turned up from an earthquake. We like Greber's version here, too.

(Matthew 27:51-53) . . .. 52 And the tombs were opened, and many bodies of the holy ones who had fallen asleep were raised up 53 (and people coming out from among the tombs after his being raised up entered into the holy city), and they became visible to many people.  [NWT shown, Greber presents same idea]

My point is that people don't complain about the Greber Bible as a bad translation with a lot of mistakes. They only point out one or two. They also complain about a claim of "spiritism" made about his translation process. Martin Luther made similar claims. One might even say that the apostle Paul made similar claims. It's what some people expected the direction of "holy spirit" to feel like.

[Micah Ong]

@JW Insider I apologise for being blunt but I do think it is important for everyone to know how tainted the NWT is to suit doctrine which I think was clearly shown in that they took it upon themselves to insert Jehovah in the Christian Greek Scriptures under their own assumptions.  Therefore trust in the Governing Body is clearly misdirected and dangerous.  I just want to sound the warning.

You are right in saying "it's a matter of what sort of persons ought we to be"

Bible based principals are what shape us and coming to Jesus in spirit and 'truth' is part of our worship to the God of truth.

Geofferr Jackson GB member admitted at the Royal Commission under oath, that it would be presumptuous to say they are being used by Jehovah, but that they are Guardians Of the Doctrine(G,O,D).  Not inspired by Holy Spirit presenting truths from the bible as they say they are in the publications.

[Anna]

5 hours ago, JW Insider said:

I bring up similar issues regularly for clarity, so that fellow brothers and sisters are aware of the counter-arguments to our beliefs, and so that we don't fall into the trap of dishonesty where we simply say that something can't be true if it makes us look wrong.

I appreciate you doing this and I would like to add something more to that but it would off topic here, so I am working on starting another topic (hoping it hasn't already been raised at some point already, but I'm sure the Librarian will let me know)

3 hours ago, Micah Ong said:

I do think it is important for everyone to know how tainted the NWT is to suit doctrine which I think was clearly shown in that they took it upon themselves to insert Jehovah in the Christian Greek Scriptures under their own assumptions.  Therefore trust in the Governing Body is clearly misdirected and dangerous. 

I could understand your reasoning if this had to do with something that was doctrinal very serious, such as misrepresenting God, his standards and his qualities. But using God's name Jehovah? And apparently inserting it into the Christian Greek scriptures instead of the title God? I can not take that kind of argument seriously, especially if you are thereby trying to prove that God is Jesus.

Perhaps as JWInsider suggests, this should be under another topic.

[Micah Ong]

5 hours ago, Anna said:

 ...apparently inserting it into the Christian Greek scriptures instead of the title God? I can not take that kind of argument seriously, especially if you are thereby trying to prove that God is Jesus.

Perhaps as JWInsider suggests, this should be under another topic.

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 from God's word no matter what your intention is.  It's his word!

Deut 4:2 "You must not add to the word that I am commanding you, neither must you take away from it, so as to keep the commandments of Jehovah your God that I am commanding you."

Deut 12:32 "Every word that I am commanding you is what you should be careful to do. You must not add to it nor take away from it."

Rev 22:18,19 "“I am bearing witness to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this scroll: If anyone makes an addition to these things, God will add to him the plagues that are written in this scroll; 19 and if anyone takes anything away from the words of the scroll of this prophecy, God will take his portion away from the trees of life and out of the holy city, things that are written about in this scroll.

If God wanted YHWH there he would have made sure of it, like he did with the Hebrew Scriptures.  But he has reason for not using it.  Jesus is the saviour!  Acts 4:10-12

Isaiah 43:11 "I-I am Jehovah, and besides me there is no savior."

Titus 2:13-3:6 "manifestation of the great God and of [the] Savior of us, Christ Jesus, However, when the kindness and the love for man on the part of our Savior, God, was manifested, This [spirit] he poured out richly upon us through Jesus Christ our Savior." (Note the New World Translation inclusion of [the] to change the meaning of this passage.)

It is misrepresenting God if you add the name when it was not in the Christian Greek Scriptures because the New Testament clearly shows that Jesus is the new name under which people must get saved. 

The Watchtower is deliberately misleading sincere honest hearted people.

But we can be sure that God reads the heart and knows those who belong to him in all religions even though he does not have a religion. 

As you are aware ALL religion will be done away with.

I know how you feel as I would of defended the Watchtower in the past but the scriptures speak for themselves.  I would rather defend the scriptures than defend an organization.  And then encourage people to build up their faith and love built on truths found in the bible.  God blesses that!  Because then you can have a deeper relationship with him based on spirit and truth.

 

 

 

 

 

[John Houston]

Micah, I ask a question in passing by? Whose name was Jesus making known while here on earth? His own or his Father? As stated by his words at John 17:26? And if it was his Father's they would have known it and used it correct? And it would have been written down even in the Greek right? Such as when quoting from the Hebrew word for word, correct? So how if a correction is made there is an adding when all is being done is placing his name where it has been removed? And using your premise, who gives them the right to remove it from where it was being used by his son Jesus who was making it known to his disciples? The knowledge they had was not trivial it was deep about Jehovah and personal. Not him being in 2 places at one time, mystical and stuff. Revelation states Jehovah is the reason all live exists, ALL, even that which is the Word, this being had a beginning. No other creature, life existed other than Almighty God without a beginning, without creation. 

[John Houston]

Why was it legal to use the divine name? Jesus would have used it and like many of the man made doctrines, Jesus would have ignored them. You use the word'firstborn' and use it correctly, and you state, before Jehovah brought any other being into existence he brought his only begotten Son, his firstborn. This is so true!

You state the truth at Rev. 1:7,8 about Jehovah God. This also is true! Yet you cite verses 17,18; can this be true of Christ Jesus? NO! Because there he states he was alive then, DEAD, then alive again and now will forever and ever. Not the same as the Father!

How is this possible? You actually believe that Jehovah God, all powerful God came to earth and walked among us? If that is so, why not take on a form and grant Moses request? Why when Jehovah is written in scripture to have actually, not through any agent, this very earth has the problems it had at Mt. Sinai? But you say Jehovah could take form and calmly walk among SINFUL humans? Not happening! You then cite John 8:58, the argument with the Jews was not his divinity, but that he had lived before Abraham due to his prehuman existence in heaven. You did not study well my friend.

 

You do know what the name Jehovah means,right? So when he appeared as God Almighty,what was his name? It was still, Jehovah, yet he used his power in helping each of these persons in fulfilling his purpose. He had to show strength in each case, if you had done your study.

Yes a new name, who is this talking about! What hope did Jesus open up with his death, who did he forge a new covenant with for kingdom on the night of his death? And as that verse continues to say that new name--Jehovah will designate and have written on their foreheads, chosen by him, Jehovah! Has nothing to do with being called Christians or Jehovah's witnesses.

You bring up John's words at John 1:1. I ask what I ask all who state such things like you. The verse reads just like you say, yet it speaks about 2 persons, not ONE. FOR it speaks about the Word being WITH GOD, never BEING GOD, that is the part skipped by many in reading this scripture. You say there is the Word and the Word IS GOD, but that is not whole verse, the verse states correctly; the Word WAS WITH GOD, and does so in the past tense, because the Word for a time came to live as a human on earth, which John was about to tell us about!

I could go on, but I know this is useless. I am sorry you left, that is your choice. But you are denying the words of Peter when he had the very same choice at John 6:68. Remember what he said and did? Yes the Bible does not belong to those you speak of and I have never thought so these past 50 years, but what does Jesus own words tell us at Matt. 18:20? Even with the helper we cannot go off by ourselves. And when we get baptized, you are aware this is a PUBLIC DISPLAY of our private dedication to Jehovah,to the very things you just said. Why did Jesus get baptized? To repent of sin? We dedicate our our lives to do Jehovah's will in all things we do, worship and life!

[bruceq]

Here are some books for research regarding the Tetragrammaton in the New Testament as found at "Watchtower Historical Items and Research Publications" on ebay:

HERE ARE JUST SOME OF THE HUNDREDS OF BOOKS AND BIBLES THAT WE OFFER HERE ON EBAY. THESE ARE ALL RELATED TO THE USE OF THE DIVINE NAME at lisa.joeywit

New Testament Letters  
His Name is One  
Biblical Archaeology Review 1978  
Egypt Israel in Ancient Times  
Divine Name Controversy  
Synonyms of the Old Testament  
Dead Sea Scrolls [Burrows]  
Who Was a Jew  
The Lord and the Tetragrammaton  
Modern Matthew [Carr]  
First Edition of the New Testament  
Epistles of the Romans [Rutherford]  
Emphatic Diaglott  
The Living Words  
Hebrew English New Testament  
Interlinear Bible [Green]  
Archaeology and the New Testament  
New Testament Greek to Hebrew Dictionary  
Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia  
Original Aramaic New Testament [Peshitta]  
Reina Valera Santa Biblia  
TranslationWuest Translation  
Simple English Bible  
Goodspeed Parallel [An American Translation]  
The New Old Testament Interlinear [Follett]  
Holy Bible [Moffatt]  
Tanakh [Jewish Publication Society]  
Youngs Literal Translation  
Jerusalem Bible  
Proclaim His Holy Name Bible  
American Standard Version  
Bible in Living English [Byington]  
Amplified Bible  
Unvarnished New Testament  
New Living Translation  
Darby Translation  
The Four Gospels - Revelation [Lattimore]  
Rotherham Translation [Emphasized Bible]  
Sacred Name Bible  
Original New Testament [Schonfield]  
Emphatic Diaglott  
Interlinear Bible [Green]  
21st Century New Testament  
The Patristic Gospels  
Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia  
Westcott and Hort Greek Text  
Holman Christian Standard Bible  
Original Aramaic New Testament [Peshitta]  
Reina Valera Spanish Holy Bible  
Julia E. Smith Bible  
Hexapla Polyglot Interlinear Parallel 
1611 Edition of King James with Tetragrammaton on New Testament Title Page 
Hawaiian/English Parallell Bible  
Bay Psalm Book  
The Name of God Yehowah  
Indian Algoonquin New Testament [Eliot Bible]  
Polychrome Bible  
Hebrew Gospel of Matthew [Howard]  
The Stones Cry Out  
Cairo Geniza  
Jubilee Bible 2000  
Anchor Bible Dictionary  
The Restored New Testament [Willis Barnstone]  
The Companion Bible [KJV]  
Messages of the Apostles  
New Testament [Kneeland]  
Interlinear Psalster [Bagster]  
Hebrew-English Genesis [Greenfield]  
NIV Interlinear Hebrew-English [Kohlenberger]  
Holy Bible [Sharpe]  
New Testament [Heinfetter]  
Studies in Matthew [Bacon]  
Epistles of Paul [Stevens]  
Divine Name King James Version  
The Exhaustively Cross-Referenced Bible [Goodwin] 
Yehowah God [Goodwin] 
Origen's Hexapla 
Hieroglyph Bible 
Septuagint and Modern Study 


 

 

 

Part of The Bible and Divine Name Museum Displays

BIBLE AND DIVINE NAME MUSEUM

We have dozens of artifacts and manuscripts that can be used in displays such as the Dead Sea Scrolls, Papyrus fragments such as P Fouad 266, Original Bible leaves going back over 400 years old and much more.

 

Also see this list all of which are for sale on ebay at lisa.joeywit:

Jehovah in New Testament and Old Testament

New Testament Letters 
His Name is One 
Biblical Archaeology Review 1978 
Egypt Israel in Ancient Times 
Divine Name Controversy 
Synonyms of the Old Testament 
Dead Sea Scrolls [Burrows] 
Who Was a Jew 
The Lord and the Tetragrammaton 
Modern Matthew [Carr] 
First Edition of the New Testament 
Epistles of the Romans [Rutherford] 
Emphatic Diaglott 
The Living Words 
Hebrew English New Testament 
Interlinear Bible [Green] 
Archaeology and the New Testament 
New Testament Greek to Hebrew Dictionary 
Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia 
Original Aramaic New Testament [Peshitta] 
Reina Valera Santa Biblia 
Julia E. Smith Bible 
Hexapla Polyglot 
1611 Edition of King James with Tetragrammaton on New Testament Title Page  
Hawaiian/English Parallell Bible 
Bay Psalm Book 
The Name of God Yehowah 
Indian Algoonquin New Testament [Eliot Bible] 
Polychrome Bible 
Hebrew Gospel of Matthew [Howard] 
The Stones Cry Out 
Cairo Geniza 
Jubilee Bible 2000 
Anchor Bible Dictionary 
The Restored New Testament [Willis Barnstone] 
The Companion Bible [KJV] 
Messages of the Apostles 
New Testament [Kneeland] 
Interlinear Psalster [Bagster] 
Hebrew-English Genesis [Greenfield] 
NIV Interlinear Hebrew-English [Kohlenberger] 
Holy Bible [Sharpe] 
New Testament [Heinfetter] 
Studies in Matthew [Bacon] 
Epistles of Paul [Stevens] 
Divine Name King James Version 
The Exhaustively Cross-Referenced Bible [Goodwin] 
First Epistle of St. Peter [Hort] 
Quotations in the New Testament [Toy] 
Gospel According to John Indian Language [Buckner] 
Shem Qadesh Scripture 
Liberal Translation New Testament [Harwood] 
Literal Translation New Testament [Heinfetter] 
Inclusive Language Bible 
Scofield Reference Bible 
Restoration Sacred Name Bible 
Sacred Scriptures Bethel Edition 
Gospel of Mark [Swete] 
KJV Names of God Version 
Pulpit Commentary 
Annotated Bible [Gaebelein] 
Adam Clarke Commentary 
Exposition of the Revelation of Jesus Christ 
Adair History of the American indians 
Commentary on Revelation [Swete] 
Jehovah in the New Testament [In Italian] 
Hieroglyphick Bible [Thomas} 1788 
Edwards Family New Testament 1851 
New Testament Text and Transmission {Comfort} 
Translation Handbook on Luke 
Messages of the Bible Synoptist {Sanders} 
Jewish Annotated New Testament 
Newberry Reference Bible 
Commentary of the Bible {Dummelow} 
Critical Commentary of Luke {Plummer} 
Critical Handbook of Mark and Luke {Meyer} 
New Testament Commentary {Hendriksen} 
New American Commentary {Stein} 
New Darby Version 
Jesus The Jew {Geza Vermes} 
Did Only the High Priest Use the Tetragram in Jesus' Time? 

[Micah Ong]

 

On 02/05/2017 at 3:49 AM, bruceq said:

 

Here are some books for research regarding the Tetragrammaton in the New Testament as found at "Watchtower Historical Items and Research Publications"

 

I'm only referring to the New Testament and the 'earliest extant manuscripts,' not anything dated later than the earliest extant manuscripts. 

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