...............JEHOVAH!.................

[Coder]

...other influences. Plato, Socrates, Constantine, for example.

Those plus other influences in the Bible itself, that is my belief.

 

[I Am Hugh]

Is this superstition about symbols?

Well, let's kick it around and see what we get. Superstition is defined as excessively credulous belief in and reverence for supernatural beings; a widely held but unjustified belief in supernatural causation leading to certain consequences of an action or event, or a practice based on such a belief.

So, it's all superstition.

The history of symbols mixing with Christianity is pretty well documented. I mentioned the mystic Tau from Tammuz, the cross from Constantine, and linked to the pre-Christian uses as well as Christian from Wikipedia.

 

[I Am Hugh]

Those plus other influences in the Bible itself, that is my belief.

Okay.

 

[cataway]

Catholicism teaches it and in Catholicism, the teachings of Tradition are on par with Scripture.

To make real progress we have to understand why people consider the bible authoritative to begin with. Isn't it really from Catholicism, the idea that the Bible is to be listened to?

oh we are very aware of what Catholicism teaches . however Tradition can be wrong if its not aliened/in line, with scripture.
try standing a cross 12' long ,then try standing a pole 12'long .for both,its difficult but doable with 2-3men. then try it with 150lb man nailed to it. its so much more difficult that it takes a teem of men . men pushing up, men pulling with ropes ,men using push sticks to get it erect .
would roman's send so many men to stand up something that could easily be done by 3-4 men and 1 of them was telling the other 3 what to do?? and then ask how did they get the dead body down ? a bugger on a standing cross even if a pole, its next to impossible .how ever , its really very simple IF the thing is laid down. yet Catholicism teaches there was a standing empty cross ,3 of them . they got it wrong. no such thing as a standing empty cross.
ah ,,so how was it done ?

 

[GoodAttention]

It doesn't matter how many syllables the translation has. There are variations of names according to language, not the number of syllables. The rule applies to any name in the Bible, Hebrew, Aramaic, Greek, as well as any other language spoken by people in Bible times. Latin, for example, and then later. Jesus only has 2 in Latin and English, and 3 in Hebrew and Greek.

So it Yehovah the Greek translation?

 

[YoursTrue]

Long before that. The name was removed by the Jewish scribes, the sopherim.

It is there in the Hebrew Scriptures, but said as Adonai, not YHWH or however is was said before it was banned for pronunciation. And in many translations in English the tradition holds where the word LORD is substituted for Yahweh or Jehovah. The old King James Version has it in several places written out as JEHOVAH, particularly Psalm 83:18.

 

[I Am Hugh]

So it Yehovah the Greek translation?

Excellent question. I actually hadn't ever even considered that. Crazy. You learn something new every day. Modern Greek is Ιεχωβάς, iexovas. In ancient Greek manuscripts the name appears as the Hebrew tetragrammaton within the Greek text.

 

[YoursTrue]

I'm not.

Well, we know that vowel sounds were added later. And of course I don't think punctuation and chapter and verse numbers were there in the earliest mss. either. You probably know more about it than I do though.

 

[I Am Hugh]

It is there in the Hebrew Scriptures, but said as Adonai, not YHWH or however is was said before it was banned for pronunciation. And in many translations in English the tradition holds where the word LORD is substituted for Yahweh or Jehovah. The old King James Version has it in several places written out as JEHOVAH, particularly Psalm 83:18.

So, I know they had accurate scrolls for study and less accurate ones for reading in the temple. That means at some point in Hebrew history they used the name freely and had them in the scrolls. At another point they had inserted the generic term lord (Adonai) apparently with the tetragrammaton remaining but not to be read - is that what you're saying? And was it completely removed in later study scrolls? It certainly was, in part or in full, by the English translations.

 

[YoursTrue]

So, I know they had accurate scrolls for study and less accurate ones for reading in the temple. That means at some point in Hebrew history they used the name freely and had them in the scrolls.

That is what I understand. Yes, the Jews stopped using the Name of God some time before Jesus came to the earth.

At another point they had inserted the generic term lord (Adonai) apparently with the tetragrammaton remaining but not to be read - is that what you're saying? And was it completely removed in later study scrolls? It certainly was, in part or in full, by the English translations.

I am not sure about removing the Tetragrammaton entirely in writing in the Hebrew. I will try to do some research on that. I have some Hebrew language Bibles with English translation but don't know if they're acceptable in Judaism. Good question to ask. I do have a copy of the "old" King James Version and the "new" King James Version. And I notice that in the old the name Jehovah is used about six times in various places. Psalm 83:18 being the one I remember, also Exodus 6:3. But -- believe it or not -- the "new" King James does not use it at all, instead it uses the term LORD. I find that interesting, to say the least.
Here are a few different translations of the same verse: (Psalm 83:18)

English Standard Version
I appeared to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob, as God Almighty, but by my name the LORD I did not make myself known to them.

Berean Standard Bible
I appeared to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob as God Almighty, but by My name the LORD I did not make Myself known to them.

King James Bible
And I appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, by the name of God Almighty, but by my name JEHOVAH was I not known to them.

 

[GoodAttention]

Excellent question. I actually hadn't ever even considered that. Crazy. You learn something new every day. Modern Greek is Ιεχωβάς, iexovas. In ancient Greek manuscripts the name appears as the Hebrew tetragrammaton within the Greek text.

Now this is interesting.

At some point in time Greek linguists decided to drop the tetragrammaton in favor of a translation, but the question remains who decided to do this and how did they come to the Ιεχωβάς conclusion.

 

[I Am Hugh]

That is what I understand. Yes, the Jews stopped using the Name of God some time before Jesus came to the earth.

When Jesus read from the LXX was the name there in Isaiah? (Isaiah 61:1-3; Luke 4:17-21) It was translated sometime between the 3rd and 1st centuries. The name appears in the Hebrew manuscript Aleppo Codex (c. 920 CE) and the Greek Septuagint (P. Fouad Inv. 266, c. 960 BCE) from the same passage of Deuteronomy 32:3, 6, but the Codex Alexandrinus of the fifth century CE doesn't have it.

 

[YoursTrue]

When Jesus read from the LXX was the name there in Isaiah? (Isaiah 61:1-3; Luke 4:17-21) It was translated sometime between the 3rd and 1st centuries. The name appears in the Hebrew manuscript Aleppo Codex (c. 920 CE) and the Greek Septuagint (P. Fouad Inv. 266, c. 960 BCE) from the same passage of Deuteronomy 32:3, 6, but the Codex Alexandrinus of the fifth century CE doesn't have it.

Offhand I don't know. But I recall reading some time back that the Jews used the Name in their everyday speech, but it was eventually forbidden by the rabbis for them to say the name out loud. Some while before Jesus came to the earth. I'd have to double check about this, though, thanks for the conversation.

 

[GoodAttention]

Offhand I don't know. But I recall reading some time back that the Jews used the Name in their everyday speech, but it was eventually forbidden by the rabbis for them to say the name out loud. Some while before Jesus came to the earth. I'd have to double check about this, though, thanks for the conversation.

@Ehav4Ever can you make a comment on this?

 

[I Am Hugh]

Offhand I don't know. But I recall reading some time back that the Jews used the Name in their everyday speech, but it was eventually forbidden by the rabbis for them to say the name out loud. Some while before Jesus came to the earth. I'd have to double check about this, though, thanks for the conversation.

That's the sort of interesting thing about it to me. The Jews and early Christians, just like the modern day, have various practices regarding the name that weren't/aren't necessarily reflected in the texts of their time. Of course, to what degree is for the most part speculative, but, that's okay. And likewise, thanks to you and everyone else for the discussion.

 

[Ehav4Ever]

@Ehav4Ever can you make a comment on this?

Greetings. The comment that you quoted from YT is a bit misinformed. This topic is not something I suggest you will get a lot out of discussing with people who don't know Hebrew or Aramaic. Also, those who don't have first hand knowledge of how things have historically worked in the Torah based judicial system can't give you any meaningful information.

Just to give you an example of what I mean:

1. How does one know how any word in the Jewish Hebrew language, name or not, was ever pronounced?
2. In the langauge and culture anciemt Yisrael and Yehudah (Judah), from more than 3,000 years ago, what does it mean for something to be a name?
3. Given that written texts in Hebrew prior to about 1,500 years ago, didn't have markings for vowels or punctiation and the ability to pronounce vowels and establish breaks in thought were taught and learned among Jews orally, who would one have to go to determine what is the correct pronuciation of a word?

 

[Ehav4Ever]

@Ehav4Ever can you make a comment on this?

One other comment I would make. You should always be hyperaware of people who would have no way of knowing the answers to a question like this. Let me give you an example of what I mean.

Take the Hebrew Torah - the text contains 79,980 words (word count including words that are repeated in other forms, tenses, etc), and 304,805 letters in five books of the Torah. Many of rabbis who have made commentaries on the Torah have been very clear, for several thousand years, that 79,980 words in the text of the Torah is only a small of fraction of the Hebrew language from the time periods discussed in the Torah. Thus, the Torah only gives a condensed version of a) every event it describes and b) a small fraction of the langauge that was spoken by the people during the times it addresses.

For example, starting at what you Exodus - even in English - go from the first entrance of Benei Yisrael (Israelis) into the wilderness until they were about to leave it at the end of Deut. Count every conversation between people that took place, excluding conversations between Hashem and Moses. Is one to beleive that the Torah contains every conversation that every Israeli said for 40 years? Is one to beleive that every action, event, etc. for 40 years is confined to what the written text describes? The answer is, of course not.

Thus, when one deals with what Israelis / Jews did or didn't do back then the written text only gives a small snapshot of it, on purpose. Thus, when we Jews say that there was an Oral Torah you may now have a better picture of what we mean by that.

Thus, if someone tells you what any Jew did or didn't do or the reasons that they beleive any Jew did or didn't do something you have to walk in skeptical that they have considered anything close to what I mentioned above. This again causes you to have to default back to someone who live the culture in question, received it from a valid source, knows the languages in question, and has the oral transmission to understand what any of it means.

 

[Ebionite]

How does one know how any word in the Jewish Hebrew language, name or not, was ever pronounced?

By observing how it is currently pronounced.

In the langauge and culture anciemt Yisrael and Yehudah (Judah), from more than 3,000 years ago, what does it mean for something to be a name?

Same as now, it identisies an individual or a group.

Given that written texts in Hebrew prior to about 1,500 years ago, didn't have markings for vowels or punctiation and the ability to pronounce vowels and establish breaks in thought were taught and learned among Jews orally, who would one have to go to determine what is the correct pronuciation of a word?

Someone who knew how to pronounce it based on ordinary usage.

There's no reason to think that YHWDH was pronounced differently by native speakers.

 

[Ehav4Ever]

By observing how it is currently pronounced.

Currently pronounced by who?

In order to see what I mean, this may help.

 

[Ebionite]

Currently pronounced by who?

People who speak Hebrew, obviously.