• 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 ADHERENTS: Some churches do not teach that Jesus is JHVH

D

Desert Snake

Veteran Member
In trinity discussions, I've noticed complete different arguments, theology, so forth.

The reason, or at least part of the reason, is some churches do not teach that Jesus is JHVH.
 
Last edited:
metis

metis

aged ecumenical anthropologist
Disciple of Jesus said:
In trinity discussions, I've noticed complete different arguments, theology, so forth.

The reason, or at least part of the reason, is some churches do not teach that Jesus is JHVH.
Click to expand...
Every church I've ever been in over my 73 years teaches that He is. But, what most do is to take the Hebrew JHWH and translate it into English while acknowledging that the former is the original.

BTW, you capitalized JHVH, but there are no capital letters used in ancient Hebrew.
 
D

Desert Snake

Veteran Member
metis said:
BTW, you capitalized JHVH, but there are no capital letters used in ancient Hebrew.
Click to expand...
English has capitlal letters.
According to your theory, you shouldn't be capitalizing the first letter.
'Translated into english', it is written with the pronunciation, that is generally accepted as approximate, to how it could be said. This is why there are versions, that approximate, different pronunciations, based on scholarly study. There is no 'rule', that when written in English, the vowels must be written.

The english written with pronunciation, is also not a translation, it is a transliteration.
 
Last edited:
D

Desert Snake

Veteran Member
When I write, 'Jehovah', it is to indicate, that JHVH, has vowels. It is not meant to mean, that I would, or always would, pronounce this name, in that manner.
 
Dantedeven

Dantedeven

Member
Yahweh:
Hij die wezen zal zal wezen wat Hij wezen zal; in wezen.(Hij is wat Hij is)
Exodus 3:14-15











O discipel,verkrijg uzelve het heilige hart,al is het tijdelijk. Dan mag gij het zelf vragen.En gij zult antwoord krijgen. En Godvrezend zult u zijn, in alles wat gij vanaf die dag zal uitspoken.






Luke 1:35
Luke 1:32-38
Timothy 2:5
2 Peter 1:21
Judges 14:6
Daniel 4:8
Matthew 12:32
Luke 3:22
2 Chronicles 34:27
Numbers 12:6
Psalm 89:19
Job 7:14
Daniel 9:27
Matthew 24:15
Revelation 1:19
1 Chronicles 16:12
Jeremiah 11:5




Ik hoop dat u mij zult begrijpen, amen.
Click to expand...
 
metis

metis

aged ecumenical anthropologist
Disciple of Jesus said:
English has capitlal letters.
According to your theory, you shouldn't be capitalizing the first letter.
Click to expand...
The point is that you did not write it as it was written, and yet you get on people's case if they don't use what you use. If you were truly concerned about preciseness then you would have gone with the original.

Disciple of Jesus said:
The english written with pronunciation, is also not a translation, it is a transliteration.
Click to expand...
Yes, "God" comes out of the German language-- so?

BTW, "Jehovah" is not a correct pronunciation since there is no "J" sound in Hebrew. On top of that, no one really knows with any certainty what the vowels may have been since they were not supplied in Hebrew until much later than when the Tanakh was written. However, it is assumed in Judaism that the correct vowels were used in the "Oral Law", which Christians don't recognize as being valid.
 
D

Desert Snake

Veteran Member
metis said:
The point is that you did not write it as it was written, and yet you get on people's case if they don't use what you use. If you were truly concerned about preciseness then you would have gone with the original.

Yes, "God" comes out of the German language-- so?

BTW, "Jehovah" is not a correct pronunciation since there is no "J" sound in Hebrew. On top of that, no one really knows with any certainty what the vowels may have been since they were not supplied in Hebrew until much later than when the Tanakh was written. However, it is assumed in Judaism that the correct vowels were used in the "Oral Law", which Christians don't recognize as being valid.
Click to expand...
Jehovah, doesn't infer the same thing as YHWH, because the English uses Lord, for more than one name, or title. In other words, you can't read the OT, & NT, and everytime you read 'Lord', assume it to mean, either, the Father, or Jesus, specifically. Ie , if you are relating Lord to YHWH, as in the father, you will encounter a problem, and, if you assume Lord, to mean YHWH, the Son, you will encounter a problem, at least in standard interpretation of the Bible, that Jesus, is different, from the Father.



So, the premise is the same, and, saying that Jesus is JHWH, if you mean the father, means that those churches were not trinitarian, or something, who knows.
 
Last edited:
metis

metis

aged ecumenical anthropologist
Disciple of Jesus said:
Jehovah, doesn't infer the same thing as YHWH, because the English uses Lord, for more than one name, or title.
Click to expand...
"Lord" does not come from "YHWH" but from "Adonai" in Hebrew. However, when translating into English, at least most English Bibles I've seen use the translation "Lord" more often than what's actually found in Hebrew.

I've said nothing about the Trinitarian concept, so there's no sense in me going there.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top