Allah, Yahweh, or Jehovah

[Jayhawker Soule]

I don't subscribe to the two Isaiah's theory. The evidence weighs heavily against such a theory, IMO.

In your opinion? And what is your opinion of …

The book identifies itself as the words of the 8th century BCE prophet Isaiah ben Amoz, but there is ample evidence that much of it was composed during the Babylonian captivity and later. The scholarly consensus which held sway through most of the 20th century saw three separate collections of oracles: Proto-Isaiah (chapters 1–39), containing the words of Isaiah; Deutero-Isaiah (chapters 40–55), the work of an anonymous 6th-century author writing during the Exile; and Trito-Isaiah (chapters 56–66), composed after the return from exile. While one part of the consensus still holds – virtually no-one maintains that the entire book, or even most of it, was written by one person – this perception of Isaiah as made up of three rather distinct sections underwent a radical challenge in the last quarter of the 20th century. A great deal of current research concentrates on the book's essential unity, with Isaiah 1–33 projecting judgement and restoration for Judah, Jerusalem and the nations, and chapters 34–66 presupposing that judgement has already taken place and restoration is at hand. It can thus be read as an extended meditation on the destiny of Jerusalem into and after the Exile. [wik]

… and what it the credibility of your opinion?

 

[BilliardsBall]

None of the above. Allah means "the god" and was also a specific deity's name in lexicon before Muhammad smashed many idols, leaving one image, and declaring it "THE God".

Jehovah and Yahweh are contrivances and mispronunciations of God's true name.

 

[rusra02]

In your opinion? And what is your opinion of …

​

… and what it the credibility of your opinion?

The credibility of your statement that virtually nobody maintains that Isaiah was written by one person is questionable, to say the least. All the writers of the Christian Greek Scriptures and Jesus Christ ascribe the book to a single author. Further, millions of people today accept the book as a single volume penned by a single individual. The 2nd century BCE Dead Sea scroll of Isaiah has what is now known as Chapter 40 beginning on the last line of a column, with the opening sentence being completed in the next column. The copyist was thus uninformed of any supposed change in writer or division in the book at that point. I have already mentioned the testimony of Josephus. I repeat, the evidence weighs heavily against such a theory. IMO.

 

[outhouse]

All the writers of the Christian Greek Scriptures and Jesus Christ ascribe the book to a single author

Attributed to a single author rhetorically, a very long time after the fact, by people far removed from where the books where authored, by theist, not credible historians.


All the gospels were compilations, and no one with credibility argues this.

I may not like Jay, but he is correct, and you do not have a habit of being such.

 

[outhouse]

Jehovah and Yahweh are contrivances and mispronunciations of God's true name.

And who was Yahwehs father? and brother?

Jehovah yes is a later creation.


Do you understand how the concept has evolved for thousand's of years ?

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

All the writers of the Christian Greek Scriptures and Jesus Christ ascribe the book to a single author. Further, millions of people today accept the book as a single volume penned by a single individual.

Stunning confirmation indeed.

BTW: Just for fun, where does Jesus Christ ascribe the book to a single author?

 

[GoodbyeDave]

The notion of "Yahweh" comes from guesses based on other regional deity names and the linguistic meaning and therefore conjugation-based pronunciation of the letters.

No. It's supported by reports of Samaritan practice in late Antiquity.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

No. It's supported by reports of Samaritan practice in late Antiquity.

The Samaritans understood the pronunciation to be iabe. - source

^ this.

 

[Desert Snake]

Allah, Yahweh, or Jehovah. Which one and why?

Jesus.

 

[rusra02]

Attributed to a single author rhetorically, a very long time after the fact, by people far removed from where the books where authored, by theist, not credible historians.


All the gospels were compilations, and no one with credibility argues this.

I may not like Jay, but he is correct, and you do not have a habit of being such.

Is it your view then that only atheists are "credible historians"? Or that only those who agree with your views have "credibility"? The Bible is much more well attested to than other ancient writings considered historical, including those of Herodotus, Julius Caesar, and many others. I believe opposers of the Bible come up with these false theories in an attempt to explain away the amazing prophecies in the Bible with their obvious fulfillment.

 

[rusra02]

Stunning confirmation indeed.

BTW: Just for fun, where does Jesus Christ ascribe the book to a single author?

Just for fun, research this for yourself. Let me know what you find.

 

[Desert Snake]

Allah, Yahweh, or Jehovah. Which one and why?

First off, these are names for the same deity; even though some muslims do claim a difference from Allah to JHVH.

I assume other people might claim the same, however, technically, it's the same deity.

 

[Servant_of_the_One1]

Say, "Call upon Allah or call upon the Most Merciful. Whichever [name] you call - to Him belong the best names." And do not recite [too] loudly in your prayer or [too] quietly but seek between that an [intermediate] way.

 

[BilliardsBall]

Stunning confirmation indeed.

BTW: Just for fun, where does Jesus Christ ascribe the book to a single author?

When He said, "Well did Isaiah prophesy of you hypocrites..." and not "Well did the book of Isaiah teach of you hypocrites..."

I'm trying to not be a hypocrite.

 

[outhouse]

Is it your view then that only atheists are "credible historians"?

I don't know many atheist scholars. So no I do not.

The Bible is much more well attested to than other ancient writings considered historical, including those of Herodotus, Julius Caesar, and many others.

Doesn't mean it did not use mythology written in rhetorical prose.


Do you think it is wise to debate with a closed mind, not understanding what it is even being debated?

Or that only those who agree with your views have "credibility"?

See if you had a little education on the topic, you would know what is being taught in universities as credible knowledge.

 

[rusra02]

I don't know many atheist scholars. So no I do not.




Doesn't mean it did not use mythology written in rhetorical prose.


Do you think it is wise to debate with a closed mind, not understanding what it is even being debated?





See if you had a little education on the topic, you would know what is being taught in universities as credible knowledge.

Like the unproven theory of evolution?

 

[outhouse]

Like the unproven theory of evolution?

Evolution is proven as fact.

Your denial is fanaticism, nothing more. Sorry reality is what it is. Your denial changes nothing.

 

[rusra02]

Evolution is proven as fact.

Your denial is fanaticism, nothing more. Sorry reality is what it is. Your denial changes nothing.

If it is fanaticism as you claim, it is shared by millions of intelligent, thinking people who have taken the effort to examine the evidence for themselves, rather than be swept along by the tide of propaganda spewing from many evolution supporters.

 

[Ashraf]

Allah

 

[outhouse]

Allah

Is not a credible historical source, please try again when you can contribute something relevant.