1. 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!

Abrahamic Only: Who is Jehovah?

Discussion in 'Same Faith Debates' started by Katzpur, Apr 25, 2009.

  1. rosends

    rosends Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2014
    Messages:
    5,979
    Ratings:
    +3,711
    Religion:
    Jewish
    I'll try to make this simple because you clearly don't know what you are talking about. You referenced the shma as " WHAT OTHER LAW was said to put on your porch and door, forehead and hand, recited twice a day and to teach your children"

    So let us talk about that. The text is Deut chapter 6. It starts by saying that " This is the commandment, the statutes, and the ordinances that the Lord, your God, commanded to teach you,"

    Note the plural.

    Then 6:2 "In order that you fear the Lord, your God, to keep all His statutes and His commandments that I command you, "

    Note the fear

    Then 6:3 "And you shall, [therefore,] hearken, O Israel, and be sure to perform, "

    Note the Israel.

    Then 6:4, the singular state of God's unity and rulership over Israel.

    Then 6:5 begins a next discussion of laws and adherence, "And these words, which I command you this day, shall be upon your heart."
    then 7-9 explain what one must do with these laws, "And you shall teach them to your sons and speak of them when you sit in your house, and when you walk on the way, and when you lie down and when you rise up. And you shall bind them for a sign upon your hand, and they shall be for ornaments between your eyes. And you shall inscribe them upon the doorposts of your house and upon your gates."

    Now you have decided that what we have to teach, learn, inscribe and wear is just 6:4 AND 6:5. How do you come to that? Maybe it is because 6:4 is not written as a commandment that you can follow or "perform" as per the textual requirement ("Hear"? How do I do that today when I am alone?) and you are trying to find a "law." So you selectively include 6:5 which has another verb in the imperative, which sometimes signals a law. This gives you TWO laws! Two imperative formed verbs you have to follow so neither is a singular "first" law because you include both!

    So you say "two parts only". You have invented 2 things here: 1, the requirement that "2 parts" is important and 2, that these verses are "2 parts". Pure fiction by you -- in fact, this is your personal interpretation which you ADD ON to the text!

    Of course to do this, you ignore every other commandment and law in this chapter (let alone in any other place in the entire of the Torah) and you call everything else (beyond what YOU have included) as extra or added on. And then you ask what other law was said to be put on the doors and worn on the forehead and hand. I tried to answer that but you don't understand so you ignored it. What the Jew puts on his door is the entire of 6:4-6:10 which makes reference to more than one set of laws (the word "devarim" not "davar", but that's Hebrew and you have decided that you understand the text without being able to...um...understand the text) and Deut 11:13-21! And what does a Jew put on his forehead and arm? The two sections PLUS 2 others (13:1-10 and 13:11-16). So, to sum up: you invent a notion of the shma and its requirements and then wonder why I differentiate between the shma and "your shma." Because yours is not actually the shma, but a small bit of it that you have, arbitrarily decided to call the whole thing. I don't see any "add ons or apps" other than your interpretation -- in fact you are guilty of what you accuse others: creating a selective explanation/interpretation and adding your own law onto the text.

    And, a separate question -- if you see the primacy of this law, do you inscribe it on your door posts and wear it on your arm and hand? Or have you decided that those laws don't apply to you -- oh, that's right, you cherry pick just 2 verses as that pretend "first law" and ignore what the text says about HOW you are supposed to follow them. Well done.

    Be a military leader, the mandate of the messiah. Thing is, you don't know or understand the role of a messiah so you assume that the war was a bad idea. This just shows off how much you don't understand about Judaism.
    You keep calling it the "first law" but this is another invention of yours. It was not given first or in a vacuum. Saying the shma at death is not about its being the "first law" but about being defiant and accepting the unity of God and fulfilling the commandment to love him with all your life. A Jew also says confession and the Aleinu with his last breath. You really shouldn't rely on half knowledge (or less, in your case). So stop inventing terms like "first law" based on what you think you know. Admit your ignorance and ask questions so you can learn and not look so foolish.
    and then destroyed and then Moses wrote them himself on the second set of tablets. And then he taught ALL the laws to the people and they were all binding. If the 10 were so important, why not include the shma in the 10? TO show it is even better? But then you can choose ANY other law and say that it was taught separately in order to be "over" those. But you have arbitrarily chosen 1 verse and decided that it is the "over" one. How random!
    and what did you do? You subtracted from it! You start by ignoring every law which had ALREADY BEEN GIVEN and then, in particular, ignore 6:2 which demands fear. Then you say that no one had heard his voice when, not only had Moses, but all the people when they heard the first commandments at Sinai from God's mouth (if they hadn't, why did they ask Moses to pick up the narrative). Again, black letter text which you ignore.
     
    #141 rosends, Jan 12, 2015
    Last edited: Jan 12, 2015
    • Like Like x 1
  2. nothead

    nothead Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2014
    Messages:
    586
    Ratings:
    +13
    Fear comes after the Ten, since it was not written with the finger of God directly on stone. Natch to all. And common sense. Shema is the encapsulation of any other thing related to loving God, that HE is alone and unique and to love him with all of you. So then even if you include any other so-called command in Deuteronomy or the other four books, they STILL fall under Shema as I define it, and as Deut 6: 4-5 defines it...as an ENCAPSULATION. In other words, fear is an outgrowth of love, for we fear for our children BECAUSE we love them, yeah innit? Same with God, we FEAR since we LOVE God so much and it does come to fore, just not BEfore Love.

    Erm, do you believe Simon Bar Kokhba WAS the Messiah? Really. ??
     
  3. wizanda

    wizanda One Accepts All Religious Texts
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2004
    Messages:
    8,421
    Ratings:
    +1,969
    Religion:
    Øneness
    Depends on how you pronounce it; get it wrong and you're saying Lord of Mischief. :eek:
     
  4. nothead

    nothead Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2014
    Messages:
    586
    Ratings:
    +13
    I say WHY AICH DOUBLEU AICH, how about that for a transliteration? Did I blaspheme or not?
     
    • Like Like x 1
  5. Norman

    Norman Defender of Truth

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2014
    Messages:
    985
    Ratings:
    +88
    Religion:
    The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day saints
    I posted this in this single post because of word count so someone else can reply. I believe that Jehovah is Jesus the God of the Old Testament, I quote Exodus 6:2; Exodus 6:2 And God spake unto Moses, and said unto him, I am the Lord: 3 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. (This name apparently was stopped being used because of its sacredness.) The covenant or proper name of the God of Israel. It denotes the “Unchangeable One,” “I Am” The original pronunciation of this name has been lost, as the Jews, in reading, never mentioned it but substituted one of the other names of God, usually Adonai. It was pronounced “Jahveh”, or “Yahveh” In the KJV, the Jewish custom has been followed, and the name is generally denoted by Lord or God, printed in small capitals. I have found in the following passages Psalms 83:18, Exodus 17:15, Isaiah 26:4 and Judges 6:24; All render “Jehovah” I personally prefer the name Jehovah in reference to Jesus Christ.

    Matthew testified that John the Baptist, who prepared the way for Jesus, was “he that was spoken of by the prophet Esaias, saying,…Prepare ye the way of the Lord” (Matthew 3:3). This is a reference to (Isaiah 40:3), where the word Lord is used to mean “Jehovah”. Christ Himself told the Jews in Jerusalem that “before Abraham was, “I am” (John 8:58). The people considered this blasphemy and picked up stones to kill Him, because they realized that His using the phrase I am in this way was another way of saying “I am Jehovah” (see v. 59). Isaiah 12:2 Behold, God is‍ my salvation; I will trust, and not be afraid: for the LordJehovah is‍ my strength‍ and my‍ song; he also is become my salvation.

    Some examples of the name Jehovah that is translated as such is:
    Adonijah: The Lord [Jehovah] is my Lord.
    Samuel 3:4 And the fourth, Adonijah‍ the son of Haggith; and the fifth, Shephatiah the son of Abital;
    Nehemiah 10:16 Adonijah,Bigvai, Adin,

    Jehoiachin:
    Jehovah shall establish
    Jeremiah 52:31And it came to pass in the seven and thirtieth year of the captivity of Jehoiachin king of Judah, in the twelfth month, in the five and twentieth day‍ of the month, that‍ Evil-merodach king of Babylon in the first‍ year of his reign lifted up the head of Jehoiachin‍ king of Judah, and brought him forth out of prison,

    Elijah: Hebrew
    (eliyá)(Eliyahu, “Yahweh” is God”) or “Jehovah” is my God.

    Now to turn to "YHWH," that also became too holy to pronounce and it was replaced by Adonai. Including the fact that we don't know how to pronounce it (if it contains of only vowels, it may have sounded like: AAEEIIOOUU!!) and even if the name YHWH existed before the Hebrews began to note vowels, they may have chosen for their vowel-symbols the letters that made up the name of their God. But it may also be a proper word, derived of some verb, that coincidentally came out existing of only vowels. If that is so the fact remains that the etymology of YHWH just factually is unclear and I would say would be subject to much debate as the name Jehovah is subject to much debate.

    The fact is from my studies “YHWH” is an old word of unknown origin which sounded something like what the verb hawa sounded in the days of Moses. However, if the word were spelled with four letters in Moses' day, I would have expected it to have had more than two syllables, for at that period all the letters were sounded." What I mean by this is if people in the days of Moses would have still pronounced it, it would have sounded like “Yahay” or “Wayhay.”Even though the name YHWH is etymologically difficult to explain, to a Hebrew audience it may have looked very much like “He Who Causes” or "That Which Is" To Be. Either way you look at it, all this is subject to debate. I believe it would be up to the person as to what name He or She would desire to call their God.
     
  6. rosends

    rosends Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2014
    Messages:
    5,979
    Ratings:
    +3,711
    Religion:
    Jewish
    Have you read the ten? The shma isn't in there. In fact, the ten include no commandment to love. They do include that God is jealous and visits punishment on people.
    all the rest of the laws are "so called commands? ROFLMJAO!
    oh, as YOU define it...got it.
    Deut 6 does not define it in any way other than as one of a number of different laws, including "fear."
    In Deut 6 it comes BEFORE the love. Love is an outgrowth of fear in that section. How could you miss that?
    Nope, never said I did. You don't actually believe Jesus WAS the messiah, right?
     
    • Like Like x 1
  7. rosends

    rosends Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2014
    Messages:
    5,979
    Ratings:
    +3,711
    Religion:
    Jewish
    Those are two different words, separated by more than pronunciation. They have different letters and everything.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  8. nothead

    nothead Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2014
    Messages:
    586
    Ratings:
    +13
    What I missed was your own prioritization of Law, once more. Love is first, and this is wisdom. Love unto God, first and this is both the exponential First Law of the Ten and elucidated IN Shema. Shema is first because it says Love is first. You KNOW you disenfranchise yourself from much of orthodox Judaism, when you say the Shema isn't even there in the Ten. It expounds the First of the Ten, and encapsulates the rest...why WOULD you put any other one OVER Shema? Why would you put any other one ON YOUR FOREHEAD, sir? Thou shalt not murder is the biggy for societal law, but again the First Law even OF the Ten is unto God, not man...can you murder God?

    Hint: to have other "gods" or elohim before the One True God is to...not love Him. GENIUS, God is...when He gave the Shema, sir. It CONCLUDED Moses' own tenure upon this earth.

    AND by the way gave the hardest thing for man to do unto God, love Him with ALL of himself.

    So then the Hardest Law known to mankind would be a secondary law? Or an equal law to other laws? Noooo. Doesn't make sense. God put THIS LAW, Shema in two parts encapsulating ALL LAW to be put on your noggin, right there between your eyeballs, although not your proverbial oriental "third eye." This is said EXPLICITLY in Deut 6:4-5, so that ye may knoweth, sir.


    Why say Simon Bar Kokhba is greater than Jesus as a messiah option, if he WASN'T even firstly claimed even by himself?

    What do you have which is so bad ABOUT Jesus, sir? Of COURSE if he claimed to be God, then you would have something...alas my endeavor is to take THIS option from you. Hint: every prophet claims God sent him firstly. Simon Bar Kokhba never even MADE this claim at least not to begin with.
     
    #148 nothead, Jan 12, 2015
    Last edited: Jan 12, 2015
  9. wizanda

    wizanda One Accepts All Religious Texts
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2004
    Messages:
    8,421
    Ratings:
    +1,969
    Religion:
    Øneness
    They look the same:
    H3068 Jehovah יְהֹוָה
    H1943 Mischief הֹוָה
    The only difference is the Yodh in front of it. :rolleyes:
     
  10. nothead

    nothead Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2014
    Messages:
    586
    Ratings:
    +13
    ...and let me tell you a better story regarding your own Judaism, sir. CLEAVING unto God does NOT come out of fear. Fear, rather comes by the CLEAVING unto God and the FEAR that this relationship could be, could might be lost. Adam in the Garden FEARED God, and was not cleaving, yeah innit? He was in fact HIDING, yeah innit? I.e. getting AWAY from God as much as he could, yeah innit? Do you know what YEAH INNIT means, sir? VERILY VERILY.

    Consider this verse in your Torah Deut 30:

    10 If thou shalt hearken unto the voice of the Lord thy God, to keep his commandments and his statutes which are written in this book of the law, and if thou turn unto the Lord thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul.

    11 For this commandment which I command thee this day, it is not hidden from thee, neither is it far off.

    12 It is not in heaven, that thou shouldest say, Who shall go up for us to heaven, and bring it unto us, that we may hear it, and do it?

    13 Neither is it beyond the sea, that thou shouldest say, Who shall go over the sea for us, and bring it unto us, that we may hear it, and do it?

    14 But the word is very nigh unto thee, in thy mouth, and in thy heart, that thou mayest do it.

    ...again the GENIUS SHEMA is the encapsulation of all that precedes it in the sentence....were not the Ten given BEFORE "the day" the Shema was given? THIS COMMAND is the singular one, to love the GOD of you, YHWH Elohim with all of you, the hardest command under the sun.
     
    #150 nothead, Jan 12, 2015
    Last edited: Jan 12, 2015
  11. nothead

    nothead Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2014
    Messages:
    586
    Ratings:
    +13
    1) "I am" Theology does not hold up in the end, from either end of language, either from the Hebrew: "I will be what/whom I will be," OR from the Koine "ego eimi" (without the complement). "I AM" in other words in the Koine is mentioned at least four times in John without a compliment, and in every case is normally seen grammatically as "I am he." The [he] being implicitly meant. ESPECIALLY for the blind man in chpt 6, meaning he was THE ONE whom Jesus healed.

    James White has distanced himself from this concept, that "I am" is referring to Exodus 3. He says now it is in fact a reference to Isa verse, ALL of which hold complements, and NONE even making as much sense as Exodus 3.

    IF Jesus said he was YHWH, THEN you have a case. Alas, he said he came IN THE NAME of "YHWH," which is another concept altogether.
     
  12. rosends

    rosends Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2014
    Messages:
    5,979
    Ratings:
    +3,711
    Religion:
    Jewish
    In your earlier post, you referenced words 3050 and 1943, not 3068.
     
  13. rosends

    rosends Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2014
    Messages:
    5,979
    Ratings:
    +3,711
    Religion:
    Jewish
    this is YOUR prioritization. I don't priotitize. Judaism doesn't prioritize.
    and that is the fiction you create. The shema is directly preceded by the commandment to fear but you ignore it because it undermines your point.
    Really? Gee, in my neighborhood, if you ask 10 orthodox Jews if the Shema is in the 10 Sayings, no one will answer "yes." Funny how you think you know Judaism better than those of us who live it.

    I don't. Nor do I put Shema over any other. Each law is different, and some have different applications and uses. But we also learn that even the most "minor" laws are as important to observe as the major ones.
    Because that's what we are commanded to do and any jew who puts on tefillin puts on 4 separate passages. That's a fact and it proves your system wrong.

    Really, because there are a lot of laws after that. But those are all ones you ignore.

    So you can just keep on making things up because you are starting from a position outside Judaism. Feel free. It makes no sense to anyone actually inside the religion, but as I have stated, you have the right to be wrong.


    He was a more potentially valid messianic option for a number of reasons, not the least of which was that he served the role of messiah as national military leader. jesus didn't. The messiah does not need to claim to be a prophet or a messenger of God. He has to DO certain things, and in that regard, Bar Kochva got closer than Jesus.
     
  14. rosends

    rosends Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2014
    Messages:
    5,979
    Ratings:
    +3,711
    Religion:
    Jewish
    This borders on the incomprehensible. You now are introducing your personal understanding of the relationship between god, fear and love. It comes from no where other than your imagination. Consider Deut 6:13 " You shall fear the Lord, your God, worship Him, and swear by His name." Purely awe of God as a direct commandment. You can choose to ignore it, as you have ignored other points, but it is still there. And notice WHERE it is...verses 2 and 13 of chapter 6 bookend this part of the shema with the commandment to fear. Somehow, you ignore these verses and jump into the middle and extract just that center that you like. That's a bit dishonest IMHO.
     
  15. Norman

    Norman Defender of Truth

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2014
    Messages:
    985
    Ratings:
    +88
    Religion:
    The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day saints
    Norman: Hi nothead, I actually do not agree with YHWH, I prefer Jehovah. I think I mentioned both sides of the issue on YHWH and Jehovah. I mentioned that both were up for debate as to which one was appropriate. I am aware of James White, I actually personally know him and have met him several times
    when I lived in Salt Lake City. I do not believe that I quoted him in the letter that I posted from in my post to a Baptist Minister. I actually do not quote him
    at all since he is very much against my Church. Good point in your post.
     
  16. nothead

    nothead Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2014
    Messages:
    586
    Ratings:
    +13
    If you cannot weigh higher laws from itty bitty insignificant laws, what kind of rabbi are you? One who has no relationship with God attall? Even lawyers know some are primal and some secondary.
    The right kind of fear, even visceral must PROCEED from love, not precede it. If you FEAR your father you try to avoid him. But if you LOVE your father you will not try to disappoint him. All common sense refutes you, sir.

    My previous post rather proves Shema to be the HIGHEST and HARDEST Command under the Sun. Love your God. What Command can possibly be more conducive to the cleaving UNTO your God than this one? FEAR? VISCERAL and TERRIFYING FEAR? Let me tell you, the first thing you will say unto your God, is this: "Away from me Lord, for I am an unrighteous man." Is not THIS the very opposite of CLEAVING? My grandmother knows more than you, oh rabbi...and she be rollin in her grave. What kinda wisdom you spewing and where is your heart for God?

    Where has true Judaism gone then...the gutter is my first vision here.


    Many Christians share your view. Join the Club of the Insufferable, sir.

    The smudging of all Law to be equal and equally weighed is so wrong even a child knows to murder someone isn't to sin like being prejudiced against him, or to cheat him...

    I know not what exactly you put on your tefillin, but the Shema in two parts is the only primary thing said to be on your forehead and hand, sir.


    Yayuh, but I have the Foundational Ones correct. So who is worse off, me or you, oh sage?

    Does God allow you the right to be wrong in what you TEACH, rabbi?




    Misery in defeat is a first indicator that God wasn't with you, sir. OR Simon the Defeated either. God allows defeat to PUNISH his own, so that they will turn back to Him. Can you even conceive of this? The OT theme is repeatedly said. Did you understand? Apparently not. The disciples of Jesus had their own faith tested in this manner, but the upper room pentecostal infilling proved their faith pristinely of YHWH Elohim. And your children shall be dashed against the walls. And you shall weep and wail for your loved ones dead.
     
    #156 nothead, Jan 13, 2015
    Last edited: Jan 13, 2015
  17. nothead

    nothead Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2014
    Messages:
    586
    Ratings:
    +13
    I believe in the Fear of God as a primal command, but it must come UNDER the one to love God, or else all is lost. You seem to think Fear is the Dynamic which makes this world turn...and the Mafia says no less...yet where has the 20 year dispensation of grace whereby they were untouchable gone? Luuuuv, rules this cosmos, not fear or anything else. Heeeeepies know more than you and many are promiscuous.

    If I did not believe God commands love to Him first and his other nepheshes second...I would have no faith in anything at all, mayes well give up the ghost, and smolder in my eternal depression. NOTHING will any longer make sense at all.

    Oh faithless and degenerate generation, where has love gone?
     
  18. nothead

    nothead Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2014
    Messages:
    586
    Ratings:
    +13
    Being not familiar with LDS, I'm not sure how to respond. Being familiar with SIN, however...I can't really see how Joseph Smith could be right, or righteous. Jesus said man is ideally with one wife, and it seems the extended revelation of JS was apart from this. I have ignored his teachings ever since. Although now the subject is off-track from this POV, that is where I come from.

    Much of what he taught is off-track from a heart condition with your God. The pronunciation of the Tetragrammaton is not really known whether transliterated or the original vowel points attempted.
    To get it RIGHT would too be an off-track idea, since it after all is not the any longer NEEDED cry to the heavens. "Jesus" and all translations and transliterations is the binding and powerful name on this earth, not his God's name. Not because it is the highest name objectively. Because God MADE this name all-powerful in the cosmos, that of His beloved and created Son. Jesus came in the name of his Father, we however come in the name of the Lord, Jesus.
     
  19. wizanda

    wizanda One Accepts All Religious Texts
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2004
    Messages:
    8,421
    Ratings:
    +1,969
    Religion:
    Øneness
    Lol, Jehovah (3068) if you say it wrong, can be made up of Yah - Lord (3050) and Hovah - Mischief (1943). :innocent:
    *It* = Jehovah (3068) ;)
     
  20. rosends

    rosends Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2014
    Messages:
    5,979
    Ratings:
    +3,711
    Religion:
    Jewish
    All you have done here is show absolute ignorance of (and lack of respect for) Judaism. That is your prerogative.

    Nope, only your uncommon and bizarre thinking. Judaism refutes you repeatedly.

    No, you CLAIM, not prove. You canot prove because you have ignored the text and selected only bits of things that support your claim. A proof would have to account for all evidence. Yours doesn't.
    You have come to a decision about how YOU feel about "fear" and "love." Your poor grandmother must be so ashamed of you.

    No doubt. You judge anything that doesn't agree with you that way. Scratch the surface and find someone insulting Judaism. Not unexpected.

    That Judaism has a tradition, thousands of years old, which disagrees with you is only one way in which you are shown to be wrong and ignorant about this.

    Of course you don't know. How else do you keep making these ridiculous statements. Learning and knowledge would leave you with nothing to claim.

    In your own mind.
     
Loading...