Why was God's name removed from most bibles?

[seekandfind]

Many bible translations with a preface will admit that it has been replaced. How many times? Come to find out God's name has been removed over 7,000 times per bible!

There is a proper name for God in Hebrew which is "Yhwh." There is a word in Hebrew which means "lord" and it is "Adonay"-or a similar form of the root word.

Why is it important to know God's name?

Joel 2:32 "And everyone who calls on the name of "YHWH" will be saved..."- This verse is also referenced in the Greek scriptures(New Testament) at Acts 2:21 and Romans 10:13.

According to the verses it is of utmost importance to use His name. Many bibles have a rendering of it in Psalm 83:18 "That men may know that thou, whose name alone is JEHOVAH, art the most high over all the earth."-King James version

Knowing this helps clarify the Greek scripture in Acts 2:34 "For David did not ascend to the heavens, but he himself says, ‘The LORD said to my Lord: “Sit at my right hand..." which is a quote from the Hebrew scriptures(Old Testament) at Psalm 110:1 "YHWH said to my adonai, 'Sit at my right hand...'"

Ultimately who in the universe would try to hide such a basic bible truth? Since we need to know His name to be saved simply hiding it would be a tactic of Satan. Remember his 1st lie in Genesis? "Certainly you won't die." What a trickster!

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Many bible translations with a preface will admit that it has been replaced. How many times? Come to find out God's name has been removed over 7,000 times per bible!

There is a proper name for God in Hebrew which is "Yhwh." There is a word in Hebrew which means "lord" and it is "Adonay"-or a similar form of the root word.

Why is it important to know God's name?

Joel 2:32 "And everyone who calls on the name of "YHWH" will be saved..."- This verse is also referenced in the Greek scriptures(New Testament) at Acts 2:21 and Romans 10:13.

According to the verses it is of utmost importance to use His name. Many bibles have a rendering of it in Psalm 83:18 "That men may know that thou, whose name alone is JEHOVAH, art the most high over all the earth."-King James version

Knowing this helps clarify the Greek scripture in Acts 2:34 "For David did not ascend to the heavens, but he himself says, ‘The LORD said to my Lord: “Sit at my right hand..." which is a quote from the Hebrew scriptures(Old Testament) at Psalm 110:1 "YHWH said to my adonai, 'Sit at my right hand...'"

Ultimately who in the universe would try to hide such a basic bible truth? Since we need to know His name to be saved simply hiding it would be a tactic of Satan. Remember his 1st lie in Genesis? "Certainly you won't die." What a trickster!

Christian translators have adopted the Jewish tradition of avoiding the casual use of God's divine name by substituting Lord. It is an issue of respect. And there is a practical matter as well. How do you represent God's name in English letters? We only know the consonants, not the vowels. We have no idea how to pronounce "YHWH." Jehovah is a very very bad guess, since we know for sure that the J sound does not exist in Hebrew.

Since all the Hebrew copies of the Tanakh do use the tetragrammaton, I would NOT say that anyone has "removed" the name of God.

 

[seekandfind]

Replacing His name with a completely different word with a different meaning is removing it.

If you had oranges on the table and i took them away with and put apples in their place.... the oranges have been removed

If its Gods divine name and HE had it written down where is the command to remove it? Do man's traditions over rule Gods words?

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Replacing His name with a completely different word with a different meaning is removing it.

If you had oranges on the table and i took them away with and put apples in their place.... the oranges have been removed

If its Gods divine name and HE had it written down where is the command to remove it? Do man's traditions over rule Gods words?

No, its not removing it because a translation is different than a Hebrew copy. As long as the tetragrammaton is still there in Hebrew copies, it is not removed. A translation is just an inferior attempt to communicate the same message -- translations can never be put on the same level as the Hebrew texts.

And by the way, even the Hebrew texts are written by men, not God.

 

[seekandfind]

Youre placing semantics. I never claimed it was removed from existence. I said its removed from most bibles, which it is.

To add to your point about it being in Hebrew there is nothing wrong with translating it into other languages yet they dont.

And yes scripture is written by men, inspired by God.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Youre placing semantics. I never claimed it was removed from existence. I said its removed from most bibles, which it is.

To add to your point about it being in Hebrew there is nothing wrong with translating it into other languages yet they dont.

And yes scripture is written by men, inspired by God.

I do not consider translations to be Bibles. They are by their nature not completely accurate and they are therefore inferior.

The tetragrammaton cannot be "translated" as it is a name.

 

[seekandfind]

Yet bibles they are cleary in the definition of bible. You changing meanings of words now?

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Yet bibles they are cleary in the definition of bible. You changing meanings of words now?

I'm giving you the standard Jewish understanding. We do not consider any translation to carry authority. Only the Hebrew texts are the Tanakh (OT) for us. Translations are helpful tools for those who do not read Hebrew, but they are inferior and inadequate.

 

[YoursTrue]

Christian translators have adopted the Jewish tradition of avoiding the casual use of God's divine name by substituting Lord. It is an issue of respect. And there is a practical matter as well. How do you represent God's name in English letters? We only know the consonants, not the vowels. We have no idea how to pronounce "YHWH." Jehovah is a very very bad guess, since we know for sure that the J sound does not exist in Hebrew.

Since all the Hebrew copies of the Tanakh do use the tetragrammaton, I would NOT say that anyone has "removed" the name of God.

There is no J sound in Hebrew, that's true. That doesn't mean it cannot be translated or transliterated to an extent to another language that uses a J sound for perhaps a Y sound. So would you say it would be improper to say Jerusalem or Joshua or Jericho, etc.?

 

[IndigoChild5559]

There is no J sound in Hebrew, that's true. That doesn't mean it cannot be translated or transliterated to an extent to another language that uses a J sound for perhaps a Y sound. So would you say it would be improper to say Jerusalem or Joshua or Jericho, etc.?

Joshua and Jericho are not sacred names.

 

[YoursTrue]

I'm giving you the standard Jewish understanding. We do not consider any translation to carry authority. Only the Hebrew texts are the Tanakh (OT) for us. Translations are helpful tools for those who do not read Hebrew, but they are inferior and inadequate.

Let me put it this way: you couldn't possibly understand what the text says unless you have someone or something (like the Talmud or a rabbi) to help you through it. And -- there are different interpretations, Hebrew or not.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Let me put it this way: you couldn't possibly understand what the text says unless you have someone or something (like the Talmud or a rabbi) to help you through it. And -- there are different interpretations, Hebrew or not.

If you are saying that there is no Torah without Oral Torah, I fully agree.

 

[YoursTrue]

Joshua and Jericho are not sacred names.

What about Jerusalem? But that's not the point and you're missing it. You're now saying you can't possibly learn the Tanach without understand Hebrew. (Wow.) Not a real good testimony in my opinion. Of course it helps to put the proper interpretation on a word when translating.

 

[YoursTrue]

If you are saying that there is no Torah without Oral Torah, I fully agree.

I know. So what you're also saying is that knowing Hebrew is not enough. And having the 'right' rabbi is essential because so many Jews and others do not understand Hebrew well. That's ok. Glad I understand more about these things. take care.

 

[seekandfind]

To me, saying you cant understand it unless you kow Hebrew makes no sense. I think people speaking of the Hebrew scriptures are the only people ive ever heard make such a claim about language.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

What about Jerusalem? But that's not the point and you're missing it. You're now saying you can't possibly learn the Tanach without understand Hebrew. (Wow.) Not a real good testimony in my opinion. Of course it helps to put the proper interpretation on a word when translating.

Jerusalem is not a sacred name. God's name is so holy that there is one of the ten commandments telling us not to take it in vain. No other word is put on this level.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

I know. So what you're also saying is that knowing Hebrew is not enough. And having the 'right' rabbi is essential because so many Jews and others do not understand Hebrew well. That's ok. Glad I understand more about these things. take care.

I have tried to give you the Jewish perspective, but you seem to be at a loss for understanding it. It's not about "the right rabbi."

 

[YoursTrue]

No, its not removing it because a translation is different than a Hebrew copy. As long as the tetragrammaton is still there in Hebrew copies, it is not removed. A translation is just an inferior attempt to communicate the same message -- translations can never be put on the same level as the Hebrew texts.

And by the way, even the Hebrew texts are written by men, not God.

Sure it is removing it. There are many Jews who do not know Hebrew, do not read Hebrew, and go to synagogue only on a few days each year. When they hear the text read and they come across YHWH, the reader doesn't say anything like YHWH. As you know, he says adonai, which means of course, Lord. A complete coverup, and many, many, many Jews don't even know that much. Neither do many in the churches know that either. It's actually a sign of disrespect to cover up the divine name. But thanks for trying to explain it.

 

[YoursTrue]

Jerusalem is not a sacred name. God's name is so holy that there is one of the ten commandments telling us not to take it in vain. No other word is put on this level.

So you don't think the word Lord as a coverup for the divine name can be taken in vain? Maybe later --

 

[IndigoChild5559]

There are many Jews who do not know Hebrew, do not read Hebrew, and go to synagogue only on a few days each year.

All of this is irrelevant. Jewish tradition is that only the Hebrew is the sacred text. You are more than welcome to disagree with that, but it is STILL Jewish teaching.