• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Jesus never says to worship 'Yahweh'

TrueBeliever37

Well-Known Member
KJV. The original, if questions arise.

Great
Look up Isaiah 40:3 , it says LORD in that verse - right?

Now look up Lord in your Strong's concordance (page 628 in mine) and find the number given for LORD in Isaiah 40:3. You should see 3068.

Now go to the back of the Strong's, to the Hebrew dictionary section, and find number 3068 and tell me what that word is. YHWH - right?
That is the word that is in the Hebrew of Isaiah 40:3

So, isn't that the name that should be in Matthew 3:3 since it is quoting Isaiah 40:3 ? If not, why not?
 

Desert Snake

Veteran Member
Great
Look up Isaiah 40:3 , it says LORD in that verse - right?

Now look up Lord in your Strong's concordance (page 628 in mine) and find the number given for LORD in Isaiah 40:3. You should see 3068.

Now go to the back of the Strong's, to the Hebrew dictionary section, and find number 3068 and tell me what that word is. YHWH - right?
That is the word that is in the Hebrew of Isaiah 40:3

So, isn't that the name that should be in Matthew 3:3 since it is quoting Isaiah 40:3 ? If not, why not?
Because the word is Kyriou? It's Greek, and 'Lord', in the English Bible, is a title for both Jesus, and YHWH.

Check the English Bible, it says 'the Lord', in the OT. Clearly a title, not being used as a name. The name difference is from the actual difference, not the other way around.

This is different from Judaism usage, clearly.

If it meant the same person, who is the father? Why would it ever say 'and the father', if it's the same person?
 

TrueBeliever37

Well-Known Member
Because the word is Kyriou? It's Greek, and 'Lord', in the English Bible, is a title for both Jesus, and YHWH.

Check the English Bible, it says 'the Lord', in the OT. Clearly a title, not being used as a name. The name difference is from the actual difference, not the other way around.

This is different from Judaism usage, clearly.

If it meant the same person, who is the father? Why would it ever say 'and the father', if it's the same person?


I am sorry, but please reword your reply - I just can't understand what you are saying well enough to even answer.

For example what word where is Kyriou? And I thought you said you wanted to use the KJV.

What does the name difference is from the actual difference, not the other way around, even mean?

Where in any of the verses we are presently discussing (Isaiah 40:3 and Matthew 3:3) does it even have the word father?
 
Last edited:

TrueBeliever37

Well-Known Member
You need to explain that further. In the Christian Bible, if you change the Deific names, it won't make sense.

If your argument is that the OT was revised, then you need to explain that, and explain why it affects your methodology.

'Adonai', can't be replaced with Elohim, because Adonai is purely singular, like YHWH.
As a title, it takes title form, like in the Christian Bible, and then is used for both Jesus, and YHWH.

The reason the name was changed, is the Jews didn't want to speak his name. I think it is because they said his name was too holy to pronounce, and didn't want to take it in vain.

Just as currently they say things like Ha Shem (the name) rather than pronouncing his name.

When they reach the name in the scriptures they say adonai (Lord) or elohim (God) rather than the name.

That's why we have adonai (Lord) instead of YHWH in our OT scriptures. Because when they translated into English, they used the replacement word instead of the name that was originally there. They try to indicate that this change was made by using LORD in all caps, instead of Lord in lower case, which is supposed to be there only when the original actually had that word.
 
Last edited:

Desert Snake

Veteran Member
I am sorry, but please reword your reply - I just can't understand what you are saying well enough to even answer.

For example what word where is Kyriou? And I thought you said you wanted to use the KJV.
Kyriou is the Greek word used, in that verse. The English word, Lord, is in the English Bible.

What does the name difference is from the actual difference, not the other way around, even mean?
God has more than one name, in Christian Scripture.
Where in any of the verses we are presently discussing (Isaiah 40:3 and Matthew 3:3) does it even have the word father?
That is related to the fact that God has more than one name, in Christian belief, and Scripture.
I tend to use the OT for my beliefs, and that is true even without the New Testament.
God only having one name, isn't Scriptural, unless you are changing deific names, so forth. Or, it is part of your religious belief, and that isn't backed by Christian Scripture, or religious context.
 

Desert Snake

Veteran Member
The reason the name was changed, is the Jews didn't want to speak his name. I think it is because they said his name was too holy, and didn't want to blaspheme it.
And that is why YHWH, is in Scripture? So they only wanted to blaspheme some of the time?

Just as currently they say things like Ha Shem (the name) rather than pronouncing his name.
That doesn't make sense, because YHWH is in Scripture.

When they reach the name in the scriptures they say adonai (Lord) or elohim (God) rather than the name.
That doesn't mean that the Scriptural names were not intended to mean as they are written.

That's why we have adonai (Lord) instead of YHWH in our OT scriptures. Because when they translated into English, they used the replacement word instead of the name that was originally there. They try to indicate that this change was made by using LORD in all caps, instead of Lord in lower case, which is supposed to be there only when the original actually had that word.

That is a convoluted argument, based on obscure ideas. And the word that is there, is the word that is there.
Original English Bible doesn't use all upper case letters for, whatever you're trying to argue, here.
 

Desert Snake

Veteran Member
Unfortunately, they haven't done the same thing for us in the NT.
But when you have verses, where they are quoting an OT verse, that was YHWH in the original, it has to be YHWH in the NT verse. There is no way the apostles would have quoted a verse and replaced God's name with a title.

Again, where are you getting the idea, that God only has one name?
 

URAVIP2ME

Veteran Member
Again, where are you getting the idea, that God only has one name?
To me, the Tetragrammaton (YHWH) is the idea that God only has one name.
Or, as 1 Corinthians 8:6 mentions there is one God (meaning the Father)..... and one Lord Jesus Christ.......

The King James version at Psalms 110 separates the two (2) LORD/Lord's.
LORD in all Upper-Case letters stands for the Tetragrammaton (YHWH)
Lord in some lower-case letters stands for Lord Jesus and the Tetragrammaton never applies to Lord Jesus.
 

Desert Snake

Veteran Member
To me, the Tetragrammaton (YHWH) is the idea that God only has one name.
Or, as 1 Corinthians 8:6 mentions there is one God (meaning the Father)..... and one Lord Jesus Christ.......
One God doesn't mean that God only has one name. Some theories require this idea to be explained, for the argument.

The King James version at Psalms 110 separates the two (2) LORD/Lord's.
LORD in all Upper-Case letters stands for the Tetragrammaton (YHWH)
Lord in some lower-case letters stands for Lord Jesus and the Tetragrammaton never applies to Lord Jesus.

...
 

URAVIP2ME

Veteran Member
What one believes happened has no bearing on where one is going.
I still accept the non Canon viewpoint (gnostic) over the teachings of orthodoxy (catholic).
I can agree that what a person believes does Not necessarily have a bearing on where one is going.
That is because of Jesus' recorded words at Matthew 24:13 that the one who endures to the end is saved.
So, the end of a matter can be either better or worse than the beginning.
At death I find we fall asleep at death (John 11:11-14; Psalms 115:17; Psalms 146:4; Ecclesiastes 9:5) sleep until either resurrected going to heaven for some, or will come back to physical life on Earth.
Since the wicked will be destroyed forever as per Psalms 92:7, then if Not wicked, one goes to either heaven for some, or can be resurrected back to healthy physical life on Earth, and can gain 'everlasting life on Earth' as offered to Adam before his downfall.

However, those of us who are still alive on Earth at the soon coming ' time of separation ' to take place on Earth as mentioned at Matthew 25:31-33,37,40 can remain alive on Earth, and continue to live on Earth when Jesus begins his 1,000-year government rule over Earth when enemy death will be No more according to 1 Corinthians 15:24-26.
 

URAVIP2ME

Veteran Member
One God doesn't mean that God only has one name. Some theories require this idea to be explained, for the argument.
...
One God does Not have to mean that God only has one name, some people have more than one name.
However, I find the biblical God, or the God of the Bible, is represented by only one name as presented by the Tetragrammaton being only applied to God Himself.
 

URAVIP2ME

Veteran Member
He said it is written, Thou shalt worship YHWH thy God, and him only shalt thou serve in Matthew 4:10 and Luke 4:8
Go to the verse in the OT he is quoting, and saying it is written - When you do, you will find it is YHWH in the Hebrew, for that verse.
But as the scripture points out in Philippians 2:11, every tongue will confess that the Messiah is YHWH

I find Philippians 2:11 mentions two (2) persons: (and so does 1 Corinthians 8:6)
Every tongue confess that Jesus is Lord -> to the glory of God the Father. (Not to Jesus' glory)
Jesus as Lord (does Not say as Messiah), and God.
The Tetragrammaton does Not appear at Philippians 2:11.
I find this to be in harmony with Romans 10:9
Confess Lord Jesus.... that God raised Jesus from the dead....
So, Jesus did Not resurrect himself, but his God resurrected the dead Jesus back to life.
Plus, Jesus taught who to worship at John 4:23-24.
 

Phantasman

Well-Known Member
I can agree that what a person believes does Not necessarily have a bearing on where one is going.
That is because of Jesus' recorded words at Matthew 24:13 that the one who endures to the end is saved.
So, the end of a matter can be either better or worse than the beginning.
At death I find we fall asleep at death (John 11:11-14; Psalms 115:17; Psalms 146:4; Ecclesiastes 9:5) sleep until either resurrected going to heaven for some, or will come back to physical life on Earth.
Since the wicked will be destroyed forever as per Psalms 92:7, then if Not wicked, one goes to either heaven for some, or can be resurrected back to healthy physical life on Earth, and can gain 'everlasting life on Earth' as offered to Adam before his downfall.

However, those of us who are still alive on Earth at the soon coming ' time of separation ' to take place on Earth as mentioned at Matthew 25:31-33,37,40 can remain alive on Earth, and continue to live on Earth when Jesus begins his 1,000-year government rule over Earth when enemy death will be No more according to 1 Corinthians 15:24-26.
If that is what you want to believe. Jesus never has wanted to rule the Earth, and refused it when tempted by it of the devil (in the desert). He clearly has said his kingdom is "not of this Earth". But if you want to follow the orthodox , by all means enjoy. The Spirit (capital S) taught a different path (gnosis) which enlightens and does away with waiting for this (orthodox) rapture everyone see's around the corner for centuries.
 

TrueBeliever37

Well-Known Member
I find Philippians 2:11 mentions two (2) persons: (and so does 1 Corinthians 8:6)
Every tongue confess that Jesus is Lord -> to the glory of God the Father. (Not to Jesus' glory)
Jesus as Lord (does Not say as Messiah), and God.
The Tetragrammaton does Not appear at Philippians 2:11.
I find this to be in harmony with Romans 10:9
Confess Lord Jesus.... that God raised Jesus from the dead....
So, Jesus did Not resurrect himself, but his God resurrected the dead Jesus back to life.
Plus, Jesus taught who to worship at John 4:23-24.


When asked show us the Father, what was his reply? John 14:8-9 Have I been so long time with you and you still don't know me?

Who did he say would raise his body in John 2:19 ? He said I will raise it up. Did he lie?

Didn't Thomas say he was God? John 20:28

I and My Father are one. Then they were ready to stone him for making himself God. John 10:30-33

The son to be born would also be the mighty God, and the everlasting Father. Isaiah 9:6

No the Tetragrammaton does Not appear at Philippians 2:11, but it is supposed to be there. Just like it is supposed to be at Matthew 3:3 and Mark 1:3 and so many other scriptures.
Trinitarians have tampered with the scriptures. Such as adding 1 John 5:7 which is not in the original.

Compare Mark 1:2 As it is written in the prophets ,Behold I send my messenger before thy face, which shall prepare thy way before thee. (Making it look like more than one)
with what it is supposed to be quoting. Malachi 3:1 Behold, I will send my messenger, and he shall prepare the way before me.

In Isaiah 40:3 the voice that crieth in the wilderness Prepare ye the way of YHWH, make straight in the desert a highway for our God.
In the NT, John the Baptist was the voice - Who did he prepare the way for? Who showed up? Wasn't it the Messiah? But didn't the prophecy say it would be YHWH? The prophecy was true because he was YHWH.

Who created the heavens and the earth? Was it YHWH as it says in Isaiah 42:5 and Isaiah 40:3 (note the words: alone, and by myself ) or was it the Messiah as in Colossians 1:14-16 ?
Or are both scriptures true, and it is as I said - He is YHWH?

YHWH said in Isaiah 44:6 I am the first and I am the last; and beside me there is no God. But isn't the Messiah the first and the last according to Revelation 22:12-13 ?
If I was in a race, and finished first and last, wouldn't that mean I was the only one in the race?
 
Last edited:

TrueBeliever37

Well-Known Member
And that is why YHWH, is in Scripture? So they only wanted to blaspheme some of the time?


That doesn't make sense, because YHWH is in Scripture.


That doesn't mean that the Scriptural names were not intended to mean as they are written.



That is a convoluted argument, based on obscure ideas. And the word that is there, is the word that is there.
Original English Bible doesn't use all upper case letters for, whatever you're trying to argue, here.

I was a little tired when I wrote that, I didn't mean to say blaspheme - I meant to say they thought his name was too holy to pronounce, and didn't want to take his name in vain.

Yes YHWH is in scripture, but the Jews don't say it. They say other words in it's place.

You told me you were using KJV. Now you are trying to use a version where they evidently don't show the upper case letters. That means you have to look at a Hebrew - English interlinear or you can refer to the numbers shown in the Strong's Concordance as I showed you. Did you look at that?
When you look up Lord - all the places where it says that it comes from number 3068 are places where YHWH was what was in the original Hebrew text.
 
Last edited:

Phantasman

Well-Known Member
When asked show us the Father, what was his reply? John 14:8-9 Have I been so long time with you and you still don't know me?

Who did he say would raise his body in John 2:19 ? He said I will raise it up. Did he lie?

Didn't Thomas say he was God? John 20:28

I and My Father are one. Then they were ready to stone him for making himself God. John 10:30-33

The son to be born would also be the mighty God, and the everlasting Father. Isaiah 9:6

No the Tetragrammaton does Not appear at Philippians 2:11, but it is supposed to be there. Just like it is supposed to be at Matthew 3:3 and Mark 1:3 and so many other scriptures.
Trinitarians have tampered with the scriptures. Such as adding 1 John 5:7 which is not in the original.

Compare Mark 1:2 As it is written in the prophets ,Behold I send my messenger before thy face, which shall prepare thy way before thee. (Making it look like more than one)
with what it is supposed to be quoting. Malachi 3:1 Behold, I will send my messenger, and he shall prepare the way before me.

In Isaiah 40:3 the voice that crieth in the wilderness Prepare ye the way of YHWH, make straight in the desert a highway for our God.
In the NT, John the Baptist was the voice - Who did he prepare the way for? Who showed up? Wasn't it the Messiah? But didn't the prophecy say it would be YHWH? The prophecy was true because he was YHWH.

Who created the heavens and the earth? Was it YHWH as it says in Isaiah 42:5 and Isaiah 40:3 (note the words: alone, and by myself ) or was it the Messiah as in Colossians 1:14-16 ?
Or are both scriptures true, and it is as I said - He is YHWH?

YHWH said in Isaiah 44:6 I am the first and I am the last; and beside me there is no God. But isn't the Messiah the first and the last according to Revelation 22:12-13 ?
If I was in a race, and finished first and last, wouldn't that mean I was the only one in the race?
I cannot address everything because I don't believe the OT is gospel. But you are perverting the book from the Johaninnes (John) which is the true gnosis of the four Canon gospels (and why it was written last).

John is not written in real time, but after the fact.

John 2:

19 Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.
20 Then said the Jews, Forty and six years was this temple in building, and wilt thou rear it up in three days?
21 But he spake of the temple of his body.
22 When therefore he was risen from the dead, his disciples remembered that he had said this unto them; and they believed the scripture, and the word which Jesus had said.

Jesus said he was doing works of the Father, not that he was Father. John 5:36, John 10:25, John 10:32, John 10:37, John 14:10.

To understand John (gnosis), one must read the other non Canon gospels and Spirit books and not influence them with the OT.

Matthew 17:1-8 explains why Jesus wanted to keep secret NOT to listen to Moses or Isaiah until he had risen (as proof). Had the disciples told the Jews of the vision, no Jew would have been saved. Which is why he said in Matthew 17:9:
9 And as they came down from the mountain, Jesus charged them, saying, Tell the vision to no man, until the Son of man be risen again from the dead.

Jesus had a hard time convincing the Jews they were on the wrong path. The Gentiles, were much easier to teach, than the Jews, which is why the first three Canon gospels were written to them in mind, complete with a "linage" of birth to help out. John doesn't include such linage, as it was written for the world and not the Jews. 12 disciples to the Jews had a much harder time than Paul, who taught the Gentiles, not even seeing Christ, but having the same Spirit (capital S) that Jesus had and gave to the disciples. John 7:39, John 20:22

Remember, John was written after the first three Canon gospels and the book of Acts as well as Pauls letters. The Johaninnes saw where the gospel was moving, and tried to correct the path, writing 1 John as well.

Just my thoughts after 40+ years of seeking and study.
 

Desert Snake

Veteran Member
Your replies to my other posts don't make sense to me.

The problem is that it should.

Please give me some scriptures showing the different names for God you are talking about. You do know there is a difference between a name and a title - right?

Ok, at a very basic level, the argument of what is a name, and what is a 'vague', title, I guess that is what you are saying, is itself problematic, because then you are inferring that references to God, are 'vague', in the Bible.
Now, do you you really believe that when other names/titles, are used for God, that they are 'vague'?

If you aren't saying that, then they are 'names', and God has numerous names, quite frankly.

You cannot say that although names or titles, used for God, are vague, that you are the authority on when it is, or isn't, vague.

You sort of have to pick between more than one name, or, vague titles, that can mean other gods.
 

Desert Snake

Veteran Member
I was a little tired when I wrote that, I didn't mean to say blaspheme - I meant to say they thought his name was too holy to pronounce, and didn't want to take his name in vain.

Yes YHWH is in scripture, but the Jews don't say it. They say other words in it's place.

That's great, but we aren't discussing what you might say, when reading the Scripture, we are discussing what is actually in the text. For example, when I write Jehovah, I'm indicating that this name has vowels, not necessarily how I would always say it, personally.

You told me you were using KJV. Now you are trying to use a version where they evidently don't show the upper case letters. That means you have to look at a Hebrew - English interlinear or you can refer to the numbers shown in the Strong's Concordance as I showed you. Did you look at that?
When you look up Lord - all the places where it says that it comes from number 3068 are places where YHWH was what was in the original Hebrew text.
Well, it's important to your argument, because your argument consists of some obscure methodology of using big letters, to denote something, which frankly, are you saying it denotes the Hebraic JHVH? Or, are you saying it denotes where they believe JHVH was the intent of inference? I don't know what Bible you are using, however if your Bible has replaced Adonai, with Elohim, then they are changing names, and it is incorrect, as I already noted.
 
Last edited:
Top