Jehovah

[savagewind]

Jesus is Jehovah is salvation. There is not another name under Heaven by which we shall be saved. The Jehovah's Witnesses twist that scripture at Acts 2:12 (Salvation is found in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given to mankind by which we must be saved) to include the Governing Body of Jehovah's Witnesses. They believe it is through them that salvation will come. If they really are the last ones standing who's NAME will be exhalted? THEIRS. It is what they want.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

the attitude that women cant fight back when being raped is appalling imo

You don't understand psychology and trauma. Your ignorance and callousness is appalling.

 

[savagewind]

You don't understand psychology and trauma. Your ignorance and callousness is appalling.

I think she does not understand the problem. Nobody believes it isn't right to scream. Screaming probably helps. It is actually natural imo. BUT some people do not know HOW to react the right way. If they do not know how to react the right way they might be labeled fornicators by fundamental Christians. It isn't right.

I am not saying it isn't right to teach screaming. I do not know if taught screaming works better, worse or the same as natural screaming. Does anyone?

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

I think she does not understand the problem. Nobody believes it isn't right to scream. Screaming probably helps. It is actually natural imo. BUT some people do not know HOW to react the right way. If they do not know how to react the right way they might be labeled fornicators by fundamental Christians. It isn't right.

I am not saying it isn't right to teach screaming. I do not know if taught screaming works better, worse or the same as natural screaming. Does anyone?

It doesn't matter what you're taught. Trauma doesn't cause the person to react in rational ways. They're not generally going to stop to think "oh, what should I do" while being assaulted. They rely on instinct. For some, it's to scream or fight back. For others, they shut down. Some people dissociate and go to a "safe place" in their minds. It's ignorant and callous to judge people who have been through traumatic events by how they involuntarily reacted. You won't know how you'll react unless it happens to you.

 

[savagewind]

It doesn't matter what you're taught. Trauma doesn't cause the person to react in rational ways. They're not generally going to stop to think "oh, what should I do" while being assaulted. They rely on instinct. For some, it's to scream or fight back. For others, they shut down. Some people dissociate and go to a "safe place" in their minds. It's ignorant and callous to judge people who have been through traumatic events by how they involuntarily reacted. You won't know how you'll react unless it happens to you.

I agree with you. I was just commenting on my suspicion that the poster does not know it. I believe her argument is for the teaching of screaming not for the rightness or wrongness of anyone's behavior. Can a person be taught to react a way that is not natural for them? She seems to think so.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

I agree with you. I was just commenting on my suspicion that the poster does not know it. I believe her argument is for the teaching of screaming not for the rightness or wrongness of anyone's behavior. Can a person be taught to react a way that is not natural for them? She seems to think so.

Ah. Well, in that case, teaching people to scream isn't a good idea, either. Sometimes screaming and fighting back makes the assault worse. They could have a weapon like a knife or a gun. Even if they don't have a weapon, a man can beat a women pretty badly with just his bare hands or objects in reach.

 

[dantech]

I have read enough to be able to conclude the organization of Jehovah's Witnesses equate themselves to Jehovah*. They do believe Jehovah is the modern name of the God of Israel יְהוָה֙ .


I wonder why Jews are silent regarding that fact that when they say Jehovah they mean the organization of Jehovah's Witnesses.

It doesn't concern us. If they wish to go directly against a law given to them by who they believe is the master of all, then it is certainly within his power to respond accordingly.

*An example of it is when someone leaves the organization of Jehovah's Witnesses it is said they leave Jehovah.

Only in their opinions, which have absolutely no effect on us Jews.

I have concluded in my own right that calling a human organization Jehovah is sinning against the commandment "You shall not take the name of Adonai thy God in vain".

You're probably right. As I said earlier though, it's not my job to be the judge of sinners. God is well capable of doing it himself, if he does indeed judge them to be in the wrong.

1. Why does it not matter if a non Jew does it?
2. Is it not bad if The Name is pronounced incorrectly?

1.It does matter, but it's not within our jurisdiction.
2.Probably, and we Jews keep the writing intact, but pronounce it "A*onai"

It seems to me the order of the ten commandments is significant. Why has taking The Name in vain become least significant please?

You have good questions, but I don't understand why you are asking Jews their opinion on the subject. Shouldn't you be asking the Witnesses themselves?

 

[Wherenextcolumbus]

Dantech since you are here, may I ask you for you imput regarding the rape laws in Deuteronomy, what is your view of the interpretation that if a woman does not scream while being attacked she has committed fornication?
Of course only if you want to give your input.

 

[JayJayDee]

we Jews keep the writing intact, but pronounce it "A*onai"

Was that a typo?

Respectfully, can you give us a reference to any verse in the Hebrew Scriptures where it specifically forbids the uttering of the Divine Name (that occurs almost 7,000 times in those scriptures?)

What did God mean when he made his declaration through Moses at Exodus 3:13-15

Exodus 3:13-15 "Moshe said to God, “Look, when I appear before the people of Isra’el and say to them, ‘The God of your ancestors has sent me to you’; and they ask me, ‘What is his name?’ what am I to tell them?” God said to Moshe, “Ehyeh Asher Ehyeh I am/will be what I am/will be,” and added, “Here is what to say to the people of Isra’el: ‘Ehyeh I Am or I Will Be has sent me to you.’” God said further to Moshe, “Say this to the people of Isra’el: ‘Yud-Heh-Vav-Heh Adonai, the God of your fathers, the God of Avraham, the God of Yitz’chak and the God of Ya‘akov, has sent me to you.’ This is my name forever; this is how I am to be remembered generation after generation.". (Orthodox Jewish Bible)

Adonai is preceded by the Tetragrammaton....literally "Jehovah God" (in English)
Do you see even a vague mention of the fact that this wonderful name (not just the accompanying title) of the true God was to be hidden or unuttered for all generations to come?

Did King David shy away from using the matchless name of his God? The Psalms alone are filled with praise for Jehovah. (YHWH)

What does "hallelujah" mean? "Jah" (Yah") is the shortened form of the divine name. Doesn't it mean "praise Jah"? Are Jewish people permitted to say "hallelujah"?

I believe that the Jewish people were cheated by a human tradition which caused the precious name of their God and all of its rich meaning, to be lost to them.

How can a person have a close relationship with someone whose name they can never say? I do not see anything in the Hebrew Scriptures that would lead to this practice. Although I have been told that 'taking God's name in vain' was the reason for the substitution, but basically, eliminating the name did not eliminate the crime of representing the true God in a way that brought reproach on the 'person' of God.

Can I ask if you follow the practice of other Jewish people who cannot write the word "God" without omitting the vowel? I could never understand that. How is it OK to say it but not write it? How is it OK to write the Tetragrammaton, but not say it? Perhaps you can shed some light on that for us.

You have good questions, but I don't understand why you are asking Jews their opinion on the subject. Shouldn't you be asking the Witnesses themselves?

She has....often, but she never seems to get the answers she wants.

The poster makes great claims about JW's but it is coming from a need to bring us down. Nothing this person says concerning our beliefs and practices is actual truth, but her perception of it. She is entitled to her view, but unfortunately, it is grossly distorted.

 

[savagewind]

I don't understand why you are asking Jews their opinion on the subject. Shouldn't you be asking the Witnesses themselves?

She has....often, but she never seems to get the answers she wants.

I was a Jehovah's Witness for twenty years. I know what I am suppose to believe according to them so it's not true that I have often asked them questions. I don't remember asking them anything.

The poster makes great claims about JW's but it is coming from a need to bring us down. Nothing this person says concerning our beliefs and practices is actual truth, but her perception of it. She is entitled to her view, but unfortunately, it is grossly distorted.

Ridiculous. I don't make any claims about JWs. I need to bring them down? From being down? Impossible.

Nothing I say is true. OK. But you will be amazed that if a governing body member changes a JW belief and then it matches mine, it will be true then. Amazing? Oh ya.

 

[dantech]

Dantech since you are here, may I ask you for you imput regarding the rape laws in Deuteronomy, what is your view of the interpretation that if a woman does not scream while being attacked she has committed fornication?
Of course only if you want to give your input.

I think that interpretation is wrong. It shouldn't be taken literally. The word "scream" is a metaphor to being defensive, which is something a women would do when being raped. It doesn't mean the woman actually has to yell out and fight back. If she is in a state of total shock, and can't fight back, she is not guilty of consensual sex.
What the verse actually means is that a woman who doesn't "fight back" because she is agreeing to consensual sex should be stoned.

Now just so you know, in the Talmud it says that to actually kill someone legally, you would need to abide to the following rules:

1- having two witnesses who could not have been accused of sinning publicly (impossible right? It only gets 'more impossible', just wait)
2-These witnesses had to warn the people that what they are about to do is a sin.
3-The sinners has to accept the warning, and still commit the offense.
4-The sinners and witnesses would then be taken in front of a courthouse that included no less than 21 judges (Sanhedrin)
5-the witnesses' testimonials would be examined seperately to see if both accounts match. If the judges had the slightest doubt, it was dismissed.
6-there's more, but you get the point. It was basically impossible to give someone the death penalty.

The talmud in Masechet Sanhedrin says that a Sanhedrin who sent two persons to be killed within 70 years was a murderous one, and would no longer be allowed to judge in trials for such cases.

As for the laws from Deuteronomy regarding rape, there are a series of laws that are binding to the raper in the event that he does rape someone.

The Talmud teaches that the raper has to pay a 50 shekel fine. These 50 shekels are only the portion he needs to pay for the pleasure he got from the act. He also needs to pay for the pain he caused her, the indignity and the loss(virginity). This sums up to a big fine.

The law also gives the rape victim the choice of marrying the man who raped her. Not so long ago, a woman who had gone through such an ordeal would have lost all of her dignity and it would be very tough for her to find a husband. The Torah is also worried about her future, so it obligates the raper to marry her, if she agrees to it. Also, in those times, a woman depended completely on her husband for financial support and protection, which is why the Torah gave the rape victim this option. This marriage would be binding and the husband cannot divorce her without her consent.

 

[dantech]

Was that a typo?

Jews have a law that forbid them from writing down the name of God somewhere where it might not be permanent. So i put a star to substitute one of the letters.

Respectfully, can you give us a reference to any verse in the Hebrew Scriptures where it specifically forbids the uttering of the Divine Name (that occurs almost 7,000 times in those scriptures?)

Judaism does allow us to write the names of God. What it prohibits is the defacing of His names. That is why observant Jews might refrain from writing these names, out of fear that it might be eventually defaced accidentally or purposely.

We learn this type of practice from Deuteronomy 12:3. If you look it up, you will see that God commands the people that are about to take over the promised land to destroy all things even remotely related to the idols. They are commanded to wipe out the names of these idols. The next verse commands us to never do the same to our God['s names]. As you know, Judaism is a religion that has an oral law to complete the written one of the Torah. We learn from there that we shouldn't write God's name for no reason out of fear that it might be defaced.
Typically we will write it on our scrolls and prayer books as these things are dedicated to the religious purpose, and know when we see one to be careful with it.

What did God mean when he made his declaration through Moses at Exodus 3:13-15

Here is what Rashi(one of our most popular commentators explains

“Ehyeh asher ehyeh (I will be what I will be)”: “I will be” with them in this predicament “what I will be” with them in their subjugation by other kingdoms. He [Moses] said before Him, “O Lord of the universe! Why should I mention to them another trouble? They have enough [problems] with this one.” He said to him, “You have spoken well. So shall you say, etc.” -[from Ber. 9b] (Not that Moses, God forbid, outsmarted God, but he did not understand what God meant, because originally, when God said, “I will be what I will be,” He told this to Moses alone, and He did not mean that he should tell it to Israel. That is the meaning of “You have spoken well,” for that was My original intention, that you should not tell such things to the children of Israel, only “So shall you say to the children of Israel,” ‘Ehyeh [I will be] has sent me.’” From tractate Berachoth this appears to be the correct interpretation. Give this matter your deliberation.)

Adonai is preceded by the Tetragrammaton....literally "Jehovah God" (in English)
Do you see even a vague mention of the fact that this wonderful name (not just the accompanying title) of the true God was to be hidden or unuttered for all generations to come?

I'm honestly not sure. But there are plenty of names that one will only learn from Kaballah. Each reserve a different role of God. These names are all "hidden". They vary (I believe) from 2 letters to 72 letters per name. I think because Jews took upon themselves to avoid saying the name of God, that eventually this name disappeared from our knowledge.

Did King David shy away from using the matchless name of his God? The Psalms alone are filled with praise for Jehovah. (YHWH)

We are in no way required to shy away from using God's names, and neither was King David. We know how to write it, we don't know how to pronounce it. David writing them plenty of times was and is completely acceptable. He was writing poetry dedicated to God, it seems only fitting to use the names that match the purpose of the poems.

What does "hallelujah" mean? "Jah" (Yah") is the shortened form of the divine name. Doesn't it mean "praise Jah"? Are Jewish people permitted to say "hallelujah"?

We aren't allowed to say God's names in vain. Blessing God, is not saying God's name in vain.

I believe that the Jewish people were cheated by a human tradition which caused the precious name of their God and all of its rich meaning, to be lost to them.

I think cheated is the wrong word. But yes, we did lose the pronunciation of the name because of a tradition. Is it a good thing? Perhaps. Less people will say it in vain. No offense, but JWs pronounce it in vain (In my Jewish opinion), all the time. Not knowing the actual pronunciation, odds are you aren't pronouncing it the correct way. Maybe that's a blessing in disguise for JWs.

How can a person have a close relationship with someone whose name they can never say? I do not see anything in the Hebrew Scriptures that would lead to this practice. Although I have been told that 'taking God's name in vain' was the reason for the substitution, but basically, eliminating the name did not eliminate the crime of representing the true God in a way that brought reproach on the 'person' of God.

We have other names we could relate to. We also know the meaning of the Tetragrammaton. We are able to have a relationship with him without knowing the pronunciation of ONE of his names.

Can I ask if you follow the practice of other Jewish people who cannot write the word "God" without omitting the vowel? I could never understand that. How is it OK to say it but not write it? How is it OK to write the Tetragrammaton, but not say it? Perhaps you can shed some light on that for us.

I am not part of the people who refuse to write GOD. I don't see a purpose as it is not one of his names. It is merely a title.
It is okay to write the Tetragammaton, it is also okay to pronounce is (if we knew how), as long as it isn't in vain. We pronounce some of God's names every time we pray, read the Torah, study scripture, bless him or anyone else, and more... We substitute it with another name because we don't know how to pronounce it.

She has....often, but she never seems to get the answers she wants.

The poster makes great claims about JW's but it is coming from a need to bring us down. Nothing this person says concerning our beliefs and practices is actual truth, but her perception of it. She is entitled to her view, but unfortunately, it is grossly distorted.

Sorry to hear that. Hopefully I answered the questions to your satisfaction.

 

[JayJayDee]

Jews have a law that forbid them from writing down the name of God somewhere where it might not be permanent. So i put a star to substitute one of the letters.

Thanks, I wondered why.

Were not the materials used to record the sacred scriptures written on perishable parchment? How many copies of the scripture scrolls containing the Divine Name have been lost to decay over these many centuries? Do you think that is why God inscribed the Ten Commandments on stone?

Judaism does allow us to write the names of God. What it prohibits is the defacing of His names. That is why observant Jews might refrain from writing these names, out of fear that it might be eventually defaced accidentally or purposely.

I understand the respect demonstrated for God's name, but do you equate his titles with his personal name? You said "names". How many personal names did he reveal to Moses?

We learn this type of practice from Deuteronomy 12:3. If you look it up, you will see that God commands the people that are about to take over the promised land to destroy all things even remotely related to the idols. They are commanded to wipe out the names of these idols. The next verse commands us to never do the same to our God['s names].

Thank you for the reference.

"3 Break down their altars, smash their standing-stones to pieces, burn up their sacred poles completely and cut down the carved images of their gods. Exterminate their name from that place.4 “But you are not to treat Adonai your God this way. 5 Rather, you are to come to the place where Adonai your God will put his name. He will choose it from all your tribes; and you will seek out that place, which is where he will live, and go there. 6 You will bring there your burnt offerings, your sacrifices, your tenths [that you set aside for Adonai], the offerings that you give, the offerings you have vowed, your voluntary offerings, and the firstborn of your cattle and sheep. 7 There you will eat in the presence of Adonai your God; and you will rejoice over everything you set out to do, you and your households, in which Adonai your God has blessed you." (Deut 12:3-7)

Is this not saying that God would place his own name in the place where he intended his people to worship him? It appears that the Tabernacle and the Temple were the place where God's name would be placed. Have I read that correctly?

I'm honestly not sure. But there are plenty of names that one will only learn from Kaballah. Each reserve a different role of God. These names are all "hidden". They vary (I believe) from 2 letters to 72 letters per name. I think because Jews took upon themselves to avoid saying the name of God, that eventually this name disappeared from our knowledge.

I am aware that God has many titles, but as far as I know, he has only one personal name. This the one revealed in scripture as YHWH.

I think cheated is the wrong word. But yes, we did lose the pronunciation of the name because of a tradition. Is it a good thing? Perhaps. Less people will say it in vain.

As I mentioned, it wasn't the using of God's name per se, but bringing reproach upon it by ungodly conduct. God's name has been inextricably linked to his people down through the centuries. Most ancients were known by the gods they worshipped. Their conduct was usually a reflection of this.

Wouldn't the reproach still be brought upon the person of God by the conduct of his worshippers, whether they used his name or not? A person's name is tied up with their reputation. This is what I do not understand. Eliminating the name did not eradicate their bad conduct or take reproach away from their God.

No offense, but JWs pronounce it in vain (In my Jewish opinion), all the time. Not knowing the actual pronunciation, odds are you aren't pronouncing it the correct way. Maybe that's a blessing in disguise for JWs.

Jewish opinion notwithstanding, (LOL) we believe that this matchless name should be shouted from the rooftops. Not just in English, but translated into every language on earth.
The creator of language surely understands his name in all tongues?

:help: As I was looking for a specific scripture in Joel, I was surprised to find that it is missing from both Jewish Bibles on Bible Gateway. Do you know why? I am curious.

Joel 2:32 says...."Then everyone who calls on the name of Yahweh will be saved,
for there will be an escape for those on Mount Zion and in Jerusalem,
as the LORD promised, among the survivors the LORD calls." (Joel 2:32 Holman)

EDIT: It appears as if the tetragrammaton was used three times (not twice as previously stated) in this passage, yet is translated only once as "Yahweh" in the Holman Bible.

Calling on the name of Yahweh (Jehovah) involves using one's voice, does it not?
Those doing so would be saved. How do you read this? Or does it not exist in Jewish scripture?

The Jewish Christian apostle Paul quoted those words to Christians. So we believe that "calling on the name of Jehovah" is as important to identify his worshippers today, as it was in ancient times. God places his name on his people...they go together.

I am not part of the people who refuse to write GOD. I don't see a purpose as it is not one of his names. It is merely a title.
It is okay to write the Tetragammaton, it is also okay to pronounce is (if we knew how), as long as it isn't in vain. We pronounce some of God's names every time we pray, read the Torah, study scripture, bless him or anyone else, and more... We substitute it with another name because we don't know how to pronounce it.

Do you agree with the reasons why it was lost and is no longer known today?
Would you use it freely and with appropriate reverence if the correct pronunciation was made known to you now?

Hopefully I answered the questions to your satisfaction.

Yes, and thank you for your time and for the information.
We have no Jewish people where I live, so it is nice to speak with someone who can give me information first hand rather than second hand if you know what I mean.....?

Shalom

 

[Wherenextcolumbus]

I think that interpretation is wrong. It shouldn't be taken literally. The word "scream" is a metaphor to being defensive, which is something a women would do when being raped. It doesn't mean the woman actually has to yell out and fight back. If she is in a state of total shock, and can't fight back, she is not guilty of consensual sex.
What the verse actually means is that a woman who doesn't "fight back" because she is agreeing to consensual sex should be stoned.

Now just so you know, in the Talmud it says that to actually kill someone legally, you would need to abide to the following rules:

1- having two witnesses who could not have been accused of sinning publicly (impossible right? It only gets 'more impossible', just wait)
2-These witnesses had to warn the people that what they are about to do is a sin.
3-The sinners has to accept the warning, and still commit the offense.
4-The sinners and witnesses would then be taken in front of a courthouse that included no less than 21 judges (Sanhedrin)
5-the witnesses' testimonials would be examined seperately to see if both accounts match. If the judges had the slightest doubt, it was dismissed.
6-there's more, but you get the point. It was basically impossible to give someone the death penalty.

The talmud in Masechet Sanhedrin says that a Sanhedrin who sent two persons to be killed within 70 years was a murderous one, and would no longer be allowed to judge in trials for such cases.

As for the laws from Deuteronomy regarding rape, there are a series of laws that are binding to the raper in the event that he does rape someone.

The Talmud teaches that the raper has to pay a 50 shekel fine. These 50 shekels are only the portion he needs to pay for the pleasure he got from the act. He also needs to pay for the pain he caused her, the indignity and the loss(virginity). This sums up to a big fine.

The law also gives the rape victim the choice of marrying the man who raped her. Not so long ago, a woman who had gone through such an ordeal would have lost all of her dignity and it would be very tough for her to find a husband. The Torah is also worried about her future, so it obligates the raper to marry her, if she agrees to it. Also, in those times, a woman depended completely on her husband for financial support and protection, which is why the Torah gave the rape victim this option. This marriage would be binding and the husband cannot divorce her without her consent.

This is the problem when Christian organisations are not humble enough to ask Rabbi when they obviously don't understand Torah. I suspected that it was not literal because there may not have been a word for rape at that time. Thanks!

 

[dantech]

Thanks, I wondered why.

Were not the materials used to record the sacred scriptures written on perishable parchment? How many copies of the scripture scrolls containing the Divine Name have been lost to decay over these many centuries? Do you think that is why God inscribed the Ten Commandments on stone?

Of course nothing is permanent, even stone can break. The point is not to write it somewhere where we know for sure that it will be quickly defaced, and for no reason. In a prayer book, the pages might rip, but the purpose of writing the names is for our prayers to be accurate. It's not in vain. Same thing for the Torah Scroll. In the case of the Torah scroll, if any one letter is barely defaced (not only from God's name), than the Torah is non kosher, and not useable until it has been repaired.

I understand the respect demonstrated for God's name, but do you equate his titles with his personal name? You said "names". How many personal names did he reveal to Moses?

I don't equate his titles to his names. I can easily write, in hebrew "King of Kings" and then destroy it. It's his name that should be respected.

Thank you for the reference.

Is this not saying that God would place his own name in the place where he intended his people to worship him? It appears that the Tabernacle and the Temple were the place where God's name would be placed. Have I read that correctly?

The place which God chose for us to interact with him in those days was in the Tabernacle, and eventually in the Temple. The name could be written anywhere as long as it wasn't at high risk of being defaced, and as long as it wasn't in vain. The Temple fits that criteria

I am aware that God has many titles, but as far as I know, he has only one personal name. This the one revealed in scripture as YHWH.

Like all his names, this one represents one of God's characteristics. All of his names are personal. This one is a contraction for "I was, I am, I will be" meaning that he is Eternal.

As I mentioned, it wasn't the using of God's name per se, but bringing reproach upon it by ungodly conduct. God's name has been inextricably linked to his people down through the centuries. Most ancients were known by the gods they worshipped. Their conduct was usually a reflection of this.

Any reason you would write it with no real purpose, is wrong. Call yourself J's Witness, I believe is wrong. You are not accomplishing anything in God's name by writing/saying/preaching it.

Wouldn't the reproach still be brought upon the person of God by the conduct of his worshippers, whether they used his name or not? A person's name is tied up with their reputation. This is what I do not understand. Eliminating the name did not eradicate their bad conduct or take reproach away from their God.

I don't get what you are asking... We didn't lose the name to eradicate our bad conduct...

Jewish opinion notwithstanding, (LOL) we believe that this matchless name should be shouted from the rooftops. Not just in English, but translated into every language on earth.
The creator of language surely understands his name in all tongues?

Yes, of course he understands every language. But what you believe goes against what we Jews believe in. My Jewish opinion is what you were asking for, I am giving you just that.

:help: As I was looking for a specific scripture in Joel, I was surprised to find that it is missing from both Jewish Bibles on Bible Gateway. Do you know why? I am curious.

The Book of Joel is part of a collection of the Book Of Minor Prophets known as "The Twelve".

Joel 2:32 says...."Then everyone who calls on the name of Yahweh will be saved,
for there will be an escape for those on Mount Zion and in Jerusalem,
as the Lord promised, among the survivors the Lord calls." (Joel 2:32 Holman)

It appears as if the tetragrammaton was used twice in this passage, yet is translated only once as "Yahweh" in the Holman Bible.
Calling on the name of Yahweh (Jehovah) involves using one's voice, does it not?
Those doing so would be saved. How do you read this? Or does it not exist in Jewish scripture?

I would like to read it in Hebrew to see if the translation is accurate, but I don't have access to it right now. I will check up on it later.

The Jewish Christian apostle Paul quoted those words to Christians. So we believe that "calling on the name of Jehovah" is as important to identify his worshippers today, as it was in ancient times. God places his name on his people...they go together.

A "Jewish Christian" doesn't exist. Both are contradictory terms. As for Paul, I would rather not get into the subject.

Do you agree with the reasons why it was lost and is no longer known today?
Would you use it freely and with appropriate reverence if the correct pronunciation was made known to you now?

I believe we would pronounce it, when we read it from scripture, or in certain prayers when that name is used. I would not use it "freely". You wouldn't even address a human judge using his name, you would call him "Your Honor". God deserves the greatest of respects. I would only pronounce it to avoid changing scripture and keep it in it's holiness. Otherwise, no.

Yes, and thank you for your time and for the information.
We have no Jewish people where I live, so it is nice to speak with someone who can give me information first hand rather than second hand if you know what I mean.....?

Shalom

Shalom

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

In the case of the Torah scroll, if any one letter is barely defaced (not only from God's name), than the Torah is non kosher, and not useable until it has been repaired.

(Or the anomaly is 'canonized' as was the case with the vav ketia in the covenant of peace offered Pinchas.)

 

[dantech]

(Or the anomaly is 'canonized' as was the case with the vav ketia in the covenant of peace offered Pinchas.)

There are a few anomalies in the Torah, such as the small Aleph in parashat Vayikrah. It's not necessarily defaced letters. As for the Vav, whether it's defaced or an anomaly can be up for debate in another thread, if your up for it.

 

[JayJayDee]

Like all his names, this one represents one of God's characteristics. All of his names are personal. This one is a contraction for "I was, I am, I will be" meaning that he is Eternal.

Could you please list other "names" that the scriptures give to the Most High. (Psalm 83:18) I have never seen any and would appreciate the information.

Any reason you would write it with no real purpose, is wrong. Call yourself J's Witness, I believe is wrong. You are not accomplishing anything in God's name by writing/saying/preaching it.

We believe that Jehovah's Witnesses go all the way back to Abel. He has always had his witnesses (Isa 43:10) because there is a legal battle going on over God's rightful sovereignty. This 'case' has a predicted outcome but the people who take their stand for one side or the other, are yet to be determined. Witnesses are testifying every day to the judge of all. If there is no scriptural command to desist from using God's name, we see no reason to hide it behind a title. If I introduce someone, I use their name as well as any title they may have. No one should ever be known by a mere title. A title is "what" they are...their name is "who" they are and it distinguishes them from all others.

I don't get what you are asking... We didn't lose the name to eradicate our bad conduct...

No but it appears that the ancient Jews lost the name so as not to become 'accountable' for their bad conduct. Losing the name did not make the reproach on the 'person' of God any less...it just created a legal loophole.
In the eyes of God and the rest of the world what did the substitution of God's name accomplish? All it did was create a way to get out of a penalty as far as I can see. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

Yes, of course he understands every language. But what you believe goes against what we Jews believe in. My Jewish opinion is what you were asking for, I am giving you just that.

Yes, I understand and appreciate that. But I see no real or valid basis for the substitution to begin with. Do you? Are you saddened by the loss?

The Book of Joel is part of a collection of the Book Of Minor Prophets known as "The Twelve".

I would like to read it in Hebrew to see if the translation is accurate, but I don't have access to it right now. I will check up on it later.

Thank you, that would be good. I was rather surprised to find the verses missing. Joel 2 ends at verse 27 in the Jewish Bibles.

A "Jewish Christian" doesn't exist. Both are contradictory terms. As for Paul, I would rather not get into the subject.

:sorry1: No offence, but all of the first Christians were Jewish. There are Messianic Jews in the world today, but Orthodox Jews do not recognize them as Jews, is that correct? I don't believe that they call themselves "Christians" because that is associated with Paul.

If someone becomes a Christian convert from the Jewish faith, how are they viewed? Can a person cease to be a Jew if he is born into the Jewish nation? Do you see "Jewish" as an ethnic or religious description or both?

I believe we would pronounce it, when we read it from scripture, or in certain prayers when that name is used. I would not use it "freely". You wouldn't even address a human judge using his name, you would call him "Your Honor". God deserves the greatest of respects. I would only pronounce it to avoid changing scripture and keep it in it's holiness. Otherwise, no.

Is that a general view held by all in the Orthodox faith? You would restore God's name if you knew how to pronounce it correctly?

It is interesting that judges were for many years in Australia addressed as "Your Worship" (a left over from the British system, no doubt) No one would suggest that judges be "worshipped", but honored, certainly for their position.

Shalom

And to you.

 

[Benoni]

Johovah is just one of many names of God in the bible. The JW will tell you Johavah is the only name of God and all these other names are titles. HOGWASH>>>

"AND IN NAME." The name speaks of the nature and character of a person. In that our God is so marvelously great, He has many names, each revealing to us another facet of His nature and character, etc. We ascribe unto Him many titles: He is Wonderful, Counselor, Prince of Peace, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, etc. Then we have all the compound names of Jehovah-- as our Healer, our Banner, our Righteousness, our Provider, our Defender etc. All of these names and titles help us to identify Him to us. But now He states that He will make a people high above all nations "IN NAME." He is ready to share His identity with humanity-- it is utterly awesome and amazing!

 

[Ingledsva]

:help: As I was looking for a specific scripture in Joel, I was surprised to find that it is missing from both Jewish Bibles on Bible Gateway. Do you know why? I am curious.

Joel 2:32 says...."Then everyone who calls on the name of Yahweh will be saved,
for there will be an escape for those on Mount Zion and in Jerusalem,
as the LORD promised, among the survivors the LORD calls." (Joel 2:32 Holman)


Shalom

In Tanakh, 3:5.


*