Are the translators of the NWT infallible?

[JayJayDee]

Jay
What biblical (or otherwise) evidence do you have that there was a substitution in the Greek Scriptures?

"Why is the divine name in its full form not in any available ancient manuscript of the Christian Greek Scriptures?

The argument long presented was that the inspired writers of the Christian Greek Scriptures made their quotations from the Hebrew Scriptures on the basis of the Septuagint, and that, since this version substituted Ky′ri·os or The·os′ for the Tetragrammaton, these writers did not use the name Jehovah. As has been shown, this argument is no longer valid. Commenting on the fact that the oldest fragments of the Greek Septuagint do contain the divine name in its Hebrew form, Dr. P. Kahle says: “We now know that the Greek Bible text [the Septuagint] as far as it was written by Jews for Jews did not translate the Divine name by kyrios, but the Tetragrammaton written with Hebrew or Greek letters was retained in such MSS [manuscripts]. It was the Christians who replaced the Tetragrammaton by kyrios, when the divine name written in Hebrew letters was not understood any more.” (The Cairo Geniza, Oxford, 1959, p. 222) When did this change in the Greek translations of the Hebrew Scriptures take place?
It evidently took place in the centuries following the death of Jesus and his apostles. In Aquila’s Greek version, dating from the second century C.E., the Tetragrammaton still appeared in Hebrew characters. Around 245 C.E., the noted scholar Origen produced his Hexapla, a six-column reproduction of the inspired Hebrew Scriptures: (1) in their original Hebrew and Aramaic, accompanied by (2) a transliteration into Greek, and by the Greek versions of (3) Aquila, (4) Symmachus, (5) the Septuagint, and (6) Theodotion. On the evidence of the fragmentary copies now known, Professor W. G. Waddell says: “In Origen’s Hexapla . . . the Greek versions of Aquila, Symmachus, and LXX [Septuagint] all represented JHWH by ΠΙΠΙ; in the second column of the Hexapla the Tetragrammaton was written in Hebrew characters.” (The Journal of Theological Studies, Oxford, Vol. XLV, 1944, pp. 158, 159) Others believe the original text of Origen’s Hexapla used Hebrew characters for the Tetragrammaton in all its columns. Origen himself stated that “in the most accurate manuscripts THE NAME occurs in Hebrew characters, yet not in today’s Hebrew [characters], but in the most ancient ones.” (Excerpt Insight Volumes WTBTS)

http://http://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1200002391

And finally, would you agree with this statement: "all known manuscripts of the New Testament are incorrect?"

"Incorrect"? Would the Creator of the universe have difficulty correctly preserving his message of salvation to mankind? Do you believe this is possible?

If there are things "incorrect" in God's word, then we can have no faith in its author, whom you suggest is powerless to stop the devil from altering scripture.

No one has been able to do that in all the centuries of its existence. The "church" did its best take God's word out of the hands of the flock, but look where it is now! It is more accessible today in more languages than at any other point in history.

In this "time of the end" knowledge has become abundant. Understanding has been granted and used to cleanse and refine a polluted church. (Dan 12:4, 9, 10)

If we do not accept the cleansing, and separated ourselves from false worship, then we are still participating in worship that God rejects. (2 Cor 6:14-18)

 

[Big_TJ]

"Why is the divine name in its full form not in any available ancient manuscript of the Christian Greek Scriptures?

The argument long presented was that the inspired writers of the Christian Greek Scriptures made their quotations from the Hebrew Scriptures on the basis of the Septuagint, and that, since this version substituted Ky′ri·os or The·os′ for the Tetragrammaton, these writers did not use the name Jehovah. As has been shown, this argument is no longer valid. Commenting on the fact that the oldest fragments of the Greek Septuagint do contain the divine name in its Hebrew form, Dr. P. Kahle says: “We now know that the Greek Bible text [the Septuagint] as far as it was written by Jews for Jews did not translate the Divine name by kyrios, but the Tetragrammaton written with Hebrew or Greek letters was retained in such MSS [manuscripts]. It was the Christians who replaced the Tetragrammaton by kyrios, when the divine name written in Hebrew letters was not understood any more.” (The Cairo Geniza, Oxford, 1959, p. 222) When did this change in the Greek translations of the Hebrew Scriptures take place?
It evidently took place in the centuries following the death of Jesus and his apostles. In Aquila’s Greek version, dating from the second century C.E., the Tetragrammaton still appeared in Hebrew characters. Around 245 C.E., the noted scholar Origen produced his Hexapla, a six-column reproduction of the inspired Hebrew Scriptures: (1) in their original Hebrew and Aramaic, accompanied by (2) a transliteration into Greek, and by the Greek versions of (3) Aquila, (4) Symmachus, (5) the Septuagint, and (6) Theodotion. On the evidence of the fragmentary copies now known, Professor W. G. Waddell says: “In Origen’s Hexapla . . . the Greek versions of Aquila, Symmachus, and LXX [Septuagint] all represented JHWH by ΠΙΠΙ; in the second column of the Hexapla the Tetragrammaton was written in Hebrew characters.” (The Journal of Theological Studies, Oxford, Vol. XLV, 1944, pp. 158, 159) Others believe the original text of Origen’s Hexapla used Hebrew characters for the Tetragrammaton in all its columns. Origen himself stated that “in the most accurate manuscripts THE NAME occurs in Hebrew characters, yet not in today’s Hebrew [characters], but in the most ancient ones.” (Excerpt Insight Volumes WTBTS)

http://http://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1200002391

So let me see if I get this: Are you quoting the Watchtower and other JW publications as evidence that the tetragramation was substituted in the Greek Scriptures?

"Incorrect"? Would the Creator of the universe have difficulty correctly preserving his message of salvation to mankind? Do you believe this is possible?

If there are things "incorrect" in God's word, then we can have no faith in its author, whom you suggest is powerless to stop the devil from altering scripture.

No one has been able to do that in all the centuries of its existence. The "church" did its best take God's word out of the hands of the flock, but look where it is now! It is more accessible today in more languages than at any other point in history.

In this "time of the end" knowledge has become abundant. Understanding has been granted and used to cleanse and refine a polluted church. (Dan 12:4, 9, 10)

If we do not accept the cleansing, and separated ourselves from false worship, then we are still participating in worship that God rejects. (2 Cor 6:14-18)

I'm sorry, was that a yes or a no? Do you think that that statement is correct? A short, direct answer would be nice.

 

[JayJayDee]

So let me see if I get this: Are you quoting the Watchtower and other JW publications as evidence that the tetragramation was substituted in the Greek Scriptures?

Yes I am. Are you disputing the truth of the material and sources presented?

I'm sorry, was that a yes or a no? Do you think that that statement is correct? A short, direct answer would be nice.

This is not a courtroom. I very seldom answer with a yes or no (as you may gave noticed) because an explanation is always the best answer. Short answers can be more easily misunderstood.

If you want a direct answer, define "incorrect". Can the word of God be incorrect? It is mans interpretation of scripture that is "incorrect", not the scriptures themselves.

 

[Big_TJ]

Yes I am. Are you disputing the truth of the material and sources presented?

Just for clarification: Are you asking me if I am disputing the truth of the Watchtower material or the truth of the source that the Watchtower quoted?

This is not a courtroom. I very seldom answer with a yes or no (as you may gave noticed) because an explanation is always the best answer. Short answers can be more easily misunderstood.

Actually, you seldomly answered; you usually preach. I understand the need for explanation but what exactly are you explaining? I still cannot get from your response whether you are or are not in agreement with the statement.

If you want a direct answer, define "incorrect". Can the word of God be incorrect? It is mans interpretation of scripture that is "incorrect", not the scriptures themselves.

I am not asking about the any "Word of God;" I am simply asking if you agree with this statement: "all known manuscripts of the New Testament are incorrect?" I am totally fine if you feel uncomfortable in answering this simple question.

 

[JayJayDee]

Just for clarification: Are you asking me if I am disputing the truth of the Watchtower material or the truth of the source that the Watchtower quoted?

Both. If you want to pit scholar against scholar...I don't play that game. I just trust that the Creator of the universe can inspire and preserve his message to mankind.

Actually, you seldomly answered; you usually preach.

I'm a Christian...it's my job.

I understand the need for explanation but what exactly are you explaining? I still cannot get from your response whether you are or are not in agreement with the statement.

I have explained in as much detail as was necessary in addressing the question you asked.

I am not asking about the any "Word of God;" I am simply asking if you agree with this statement: "all known manuscripts of the New Testament are incorrect?" I am totally fine if you feel uncomfortable in answering this simple question.

I do not feel uncomfortable about anything that I have said. If you do not accept the explanation given, there is little else I can say to answer the question.

Manuscripts that have been preserved, and that are used to translate modern English Bibles are still the word of God. He would not allow his written instructions to the human race to be lost. Lives depend on its accuracy. It's not just words per se....but the kingdom message. No one can alter the message or silence the messengers.

The manuscripts are still the word of God, regardless of whom he used to translate and transmit them to others.

Do you think that God is incapable of preserving his word intact?

 

[Big_TJ]

I have explained in as much detail as was necessary in addressing the question you asked.

I do not feel uncomfortable about anything that I have said. If you do not accept the explanation given, there is little else I can say to answer the question.

Manuscripts that have been preserved, and that are used to translate modern English Bibles are still the word of God. He would not allow his written instructions to the human race to be lost. Lives depend on its accuracy. It's not just words per se....but the kingdom message. No one can alter the message or silence the messengers.

The manuscripts are still the word of God, regardless of whom he used to translate and transmit them to others.

Do you think that God is incapable of preserving his word intact?

Gosh, this is like pulling teeth!
Ok, let me try it from another angle: Would I be correct in saying that you are not in agreement with the statement?

 

[JayJayDee]

Gosh, this is like pulling teeth!
Ok, let me try it from another angle: Would I be correct in saying that you are not in agreement with the statement?

Pulling teeth is right! :ignore:

I feel like I am in a courtroom being asked a "yes" or "no" question when there is NO "yes" or "no" answer.

Your statement was "all known manuscripts of the New Testament are incorrect?"

Define "incorrect".

Men's interpretation can be incorrect....Jehovah's word is NEVER incorrect. The message of the kingdom is NEVER incorrect, because God is NEVER incorrect.

How many ways would you like me to say it?

I ask again....Do you think that God is incapable of preserving his word intact?

 

[savagewind]

The question is about the New Testament not the Old Testament.

Are the oldest known manuscripts of the NT that do not have the Name Jehovah incorrect?

 

[JayJayDee]

The question is about the New Testament not the Old Testament.

Are the oldest known manuscripts of the NT that do not have the Name Jehovah incorrect?

In the Hebrew scriptures the tetragrammaton was used extensively throughout the text. In Jesus' day the Greek Septuagint was used and scholars thought that the divine name was absent from manuscripts of this version. Then in the mid 20th century, some very old fragments were found that contained the tetragrammaton written in Hebrew characters in the Greek text. So in Jesus' day this Greek translation of the Hebrew scriptures did contain the divine name.

If the divine name was contained in the quotations that Christian writers made of the Hebrew writings, then the tetragrammaton rightly belongs in the Greek scriptures.

Were the translators wrong in substituting God's personal name for a mere title...and without divine sanction? You be the judge.

Who can dispute that the word "Hallelujah" is found in the Greek scriptures? Who has not heard of this word?

Psalm 104:35 says...
"Let sinners be consumed from the earth
And let the wicked be no more.
Bless the Lord, O my soul.
[a]Praise [b]the Lord!

Footnotes:

1. Psalm 104:35 Or Hallelujah!
2. Psalm 104:35 Heb Yah

"YAH or JAH is the shortened form of the divine name...Yahweh.


In Revelation 19:1-6 the expression "Hallelujah" is used 4 times. "Praise Jah" is plainly saying, "Praise Jehovah".

There is no disputing that the divine name belongs in the second part of the Bible since, in the first part it is clearly stated almost 7,000 times. Why all of a sudden would it be missing from the text in what is a continuation of Jehovah's own word?
That is ridiculous!

 

[savagewind]

In the Hebrew scriptures the tetragrammaton was used extensively throughout the text. In Jesus' day the Greek Septuagint was used and scholars thought that the divine name was absent from manuscripts of this version. Then in the mid 20th century, some very old fragments were found that contained the tetragrammaton written in Hebrew characters in the Greek text. So in Jesus' day this Greek translation of the Hebrew scriptures did contain the divine name.

If the divine name was contained in the quotations that Christian writers made of the Hebrew writings, then the tetragrammaton rightly belongs in the Greek scriptures.

Were the translators wrong in substituting God's personal name for a mere title...and without divine sanction? You be the judge.

Who can dispute that the word "Hallelujah" is found in the Greek scriptures? Who has not heard of this word?

Psalm 104:35 says...
"Let sinners be consumed from the earth
And let the wicked be no more.
Bless the Lord, O my soul.
[a]Praise [b]the Lord!

Footnotes:

1. Psalm 104:35 Or Hallelujah!
2. Psalm 104:35 Heb Yah

"YAH or JAH is the shortened form of the divine name...Yahweh.


In Revelation 19:1-6 the expression "Hallelujah" is used 4 times. "Praise Jah" is plainly saying, "Praise Jehovah".

There is no disputing that the divine name belongs in the second part of the Bible since, in the first part it is clearly stated almost 7,000 times. Why all of a sudden would it be missing from the text in what is a continuation of Jehovah's own word?
That is ridiculous!

I googled it. I found no evidence of the existance of old fragments of the GREEK Scriptures with YHVH printed.

The year 1971 saw the release for publication of fragments of an ancient papyrus scroll (Fouad 266 papyri). What did these portions of the Septuagint, dating back to the second or first century B.C.E., reveal? The divine name was preserved in them also. These early fragments of the Septuagint provide strong evidence that Jesus and his first-century disciples knew [Of course!] and used [Wrote? - We will never know] God’s name.

Original manuscripts of the Christian Greek Scriptures (the “New Testament&#8221 more than likely contained God’s name. Professor George Howard, in an article appearing in the Biblical Archaeology Review, March 1978, offered strong arguments for this conclusion. For example, he mentions “a famous rabbinic passage (Talmud Shabbat 13.5)” that “discusses the problem of destroying heretical texts (very probably including books of Jewish-Christians).” What was the problem? “The heretical texts contain the divine name, and their wholesale destruction would include the destruction of the divine name.”

From Jehovah`s Witness: YHWH in the NT, papyrus fragments, greek septuagint

Are the oldest know manuscriptes that do not contain the Divine Name incorrect? Yes, they are incorrect according to Jehovah's Witness theory. No one knows for sure if the writers of the Greek Scriptures wrote יְהוָ֖ה or not. Since the Governing Body of Jehovah's Witnesses believe they should have written יְהוָ֖ה but may not have, then the manuscripts are wrong if they didn't. Yes. The answer is a very simple "yes".

If someone asked a Jehovah's Witness if leaving out the "a" at John 1:1 is wrong, they would have no trouble saying "yes". Why all the trouble now?

With due respect.

 

[JayJayDee]

Announcing the new revised NWT 2013.

This new revised edition of the NWT was released to all English speaking brothers and sisters, worldwide, on 6th October 2013. It was a wonderful surprise gift to all who attended the annual meeting of Jehovah's Witnesses on that day via video stream link. It is a wonderful addition to our library, packed full of new features.

Just some general information......

Since the original NWT was produced more than 60 years ago, expressions in the English language have changed over time. To address these changes the NWBT committee have revised the NWT to bring it up to date with expressions used in today's modern English, so that the readers can easily understand what is being said.

The NWBT committee used the master text of Westcott and Hort as the basis of their original New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures. Other early papyri, thought to date back to the second and third century C.E. were also used. In addition, master texts such as those by Nestle and Åland and by the United Bible Societies reflect recent scholarly studies, some of which are incorporated into the new revised NWT.

Some wording has been adjusted to incorporate what scholars generally accept as the most authentic reflection of the original writings. None of the adjustments change the basic meaning of the original writings.

Claiming that the the NWBT committee were not scholars, overlooks the fact that it was the work of recognised scholars that provided the text, not the committee members themselves. All they did was oversee the project to its completion....a labor of love that took several years and much prayerful consideration of the integrity of the original text.

The result is a marvellous, easy to read version of the Bible that has the divine name in every place it belongs, a message that is free of the biased distortion of pro-trinitarian translations, and that can be easily understood by all English speaking people in every nation.

Translations into other languages will follow and when this translation becomes available to the public in the new year, the added features will help them to hear the Bible's message, loud and clear by means of 20 simple Bible study lessons at the beginning of the book.

This is the FOREWORD for the 2013 revised NWT....

The Holy Bible is God’s written communication to all of us. We must study it to get to know its Author. (John 17:3;2nTimothy 3:16) Within its pages, Jehovah God reveals his purpose for humans and for their earthly home.—Genesis 3:15; Revelation 21:3, 4. No other book has such an impact on people’s lives. The Bible inspires us to reflect Jehovah’s qualities of love, mercy, and compassion. It gives hope, helping people to endure even the worst suffering. And it continues to expose the elements of this world that are out of harmony with the perfect will of God.—Psalm 119:105; Hebrews 4:12; 1 John 2:15-17. Originally composed in Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek, the Bible has been translated, in whole or in part, into about 2,600 languages. It is by far the most widely translated and distributed book in history. We should expect nothing less. Bible prophecy states: “This good news of the Kingdom [the key message contained in the Bible] will be preached in all the inhabited earth for a witness to all the nations, and then the end will come.”—Matthew 24:14. Recognizing the importance of the Bible’s message, we have undertaken the revision of this text with a profound respect for the content of the Bible. We feel the full weight of our responsibility to convey its message accurately. This revised edition has built on the fine foundation laid in previous editions of the New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures, a Bible that was first released more than 60 years ago. However, the English language has changed during the past half century. Such change prompted current members of the New World Bible Translation Committee to initiate this comprehensive revision. Our goal has been to produce a translation that is not only faithful to the original texts but also clear and easy to read. The Appendix articles “Principles of Bible Translation,” “Features of This Revision,” and “How the Bible Came to Us” discuss some of the linguistic refinements that were made in this edition. Those who love Jehovah God and worship him desire an accurate, understandable translation of God’s Word. (1 Timothy 2:4) To that end, we have made this revision available in English, with the intention of translating it into as many languages as possible. It is our hope and prayer that you, dear reader, will find this edition of the Holy Scriptures beneficial as you endeavor to “seek God .... and really find him.”—Acts 17:27.

New World Bible Translation Committee August 2013

 

[Pegg]

It was a wonderful surprise!

 

[Big_TJ]

The question is about the New Testament not the Old Testament.

Are the oldest known manuscripts of the NT that do not have the Name Jehovah incorrect?

Thanks, Savagewind; hopefully my question is a bit clearer now. The question to JayJay is this: Since NONE of the over 5000 known manuscripts contain the tetragrammation, are they ALL incorrect?

 

[JayJayDee]

The question to JayJay is this: Since NONE of the over 5000 known manuscripts contain the tetragrammation, are they ALL incorrect?

TJ, you are debating a technicality. Why are you playing word games?

You first have to ask why the Tetragrammaton is missing from the Greek manuscripts in the first place? Was it a command from Jehovah that his name no longer be mentioned? Can you point to a directive in any scripture where God says to substitute a title for his personal name? Were the words of Exodus 3:15 meaningless? How long was this to be his name? How long is "FOREVER"?

Does it seem reasonable to you, that the divine name is used extensively throughout the OT, but when it comes to the NT, his name is missing from texts that quote the OT where the Tetragrammaton was plainly in evidence?

What did Jesus read when the scroll of Isaiah was handed to him? (Isa 61:1, 2; Luke 4:16-24)
In view of the fact that he told his disciples..."I have made your name known to them and will make it known" (John 17:26) What is the logical conclusion? That passage in Isaiah contains the Tetragrammaton several times...do you think Jesus failed to say his Father's name?

It was men who made the substitution, with no permission from the divine author of the Bible.

Is the fact that men did this incorrect? To this, I would answer yes.

 

[Pegg]

Thanks, Savagewind; hopefully my question is a bit clearer now. The question to JayJay is this: Since NONE of the over 5000 known manuscripts contain the tetragrammation, are they ALL incorrect?

The tetragrammaton was used throughout the Greek Septuagint which is what the early christians were using. The tetragrammaton also appears in the dead sea scrolls which is evidence that it was still in use among those 1st century communities.

In the Journal of Biblical Literature, George Howard, associate professor of religion at the University of Georgia, wrote: “Since the Tetragram was still written in the copies of the Greek Bible which made up the Scriptures of the early church, it is reasonable to believe that the N[ew] T[estament] writers, when quoting from Scripture, preserved the Tetragram within the biblical text.”1977, Volume*96, No.*1, page*77.



But there is even stronger line of evidence that the christians were using Gods name. The Jewish Talmud!

A passage of the Talmud was written about by Lawrence H.*Schiffman in his book 'Who Was a Jew?' where he quotes from a section dealing with holy books and whether to save them from the fire on a sabbath.
Quoting from the Talmud (translated into english) it states:
“We do not save from a fire (on the Sabbath) the Gospels and the books of the minim (‘heretics&#8217. Rather, they are burned in their place, they and their Tetragrammata. Rabbi Yose Ha-Gelili says: During the week, one should cut out their Tetragrammata and hide them away and burn the remainder. Said Rabbi Tarfon: May I bury my sons! If (these books) would come into my hand, I would burn them along with their Tetragrammata.”


So from that evidence, it would seem feasible that the early christians were using Gods name in the form of the tetragrammaton.

 

[savagewind]

I am sure the debate isn't about the using of God's Name. It is about the writing of God's Name. It is very possible that the first time the words or the new testament were written the writer wrote Lord not יְהוָ֛ה

"To make God's Name known" does not only means the written name. To make someone's name known means to reflect their character precisely so that those looking for that person can find him and know what he would desire. It is similar to the expression "he made a name for himself". Jesus made a name for His Father. Believers are now able to respect The Father and obey The Father because Jesus made his name known.

 

[JayJayDee]

Exodus 3:13-15 from the Complete Jewish Bible.....

Moshe said to God, “Look, when I appear before the people of Isra’el and say to them, ‘The God of your ancestors has sent me to you’; and they ask me, ‘What is his name?’ what am I to tell them?” 14 God said to Moshe, “Ehyeh Asher Ehyeh [I am/will be what I am/will be],” and added, “Here is what to say to the people of Isra’el: ‘Ehyeh [I Am or I Will Be] has sent me to you.’” 15 God said further to Moshe, “Say this to the people of Isra’el: ‘Yud-Heh-Vav-Heh [Adonai], the God of your fathers, the God of Avraham, the God of Yitz’chak and the God of Ya‘akov, has sent me to you.’ This is my name forever; this is how I am to be remembered generation after generation."

Is there any dispute about the fact that"Yud-Heh-Vav-Heh" (YHWH, Jehovah) is in fact the name that was to be "remembered generation after generation"?

 

[savagewind]

Exodus 3:13-15 from the Complete Jewish Bible.....

Moshe said to God, “Look, when I appear before the people of Isra’el and say to them, ‘The God of your ancestors has sent me to you’; and they ask me, ‘What is his name?’ what am I to tell them?” 14 God said to Moshe, “Ehyeh Asher Ehyeh [I am/will be what I am/will be],” and added, “Here is what to say to the people of Isra’el: ‘Ehyeh [I Am or I Will Be] has sent me to you.’” 15 God said further to Moshe, “Say this to the people of Isra’el: ‘Yud-Heh-Vav-Heh [Adonai], the God of your fathers, the God of Avraham, the God of Yitz’chak and the God of Ya‘akov, has sent me to you.’ This is my name forever; this is how I am to be remembered generation after generation."

Is there any dispute about the fact that"Yud-Heh-Vav-Heh" (YHWH, Jehovah) is in fact the name that was to be "remembered generation after generation"?

No dispute from me. It is the meaning of The Name YHVH that will endure forever. YHVH are the letters that make the sound of God's Name. Meaning is more important than letters and sounds imo.

 

[JayJayDee]

Yeah...I'll never forget whats-his-name.....

How many "Lords" are there in the Bible? How do you tell which "Lord" is being spoken about?

"...as indeed there are many gods and many lords, yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom are all things and we exist for Him; and one Lord, Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we exist through Him." (1 Cor 8:5, 6)

How many "Lords" are YHWH?

"And when they heard this, they lifted their voices to God with one accord and said, “O Lord, it is You who made the heaven and the earth and the sea, and all that is in them" (Acts 4:24 NASB)

Who is the "Lord" in this scripture?

The apostles were quoting Neh 9:6....

"Thou art Jehovah, even thou alone; thou hast made heaven, the heaven of heavens, with all their host, the earth and all things that are thereon, the seas and all that is in them, and thou preservest them all; and the host of heaven worshippeth thee." (ASV)

How important is the name of Jehovah?...obviously not that important to those who don't really know him. (John 17:3)

 

[savagewind]

Yeah...I'll never forget whats-his-name.....

How many "Lords" are there in the Bible? How do you tell which "Lord" is being spoken about?

"...as indeed there are many gods and many lords, yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom are all things and we exist for Him; and one Lord, Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we exist through Him." (1 Cor 8:5, 6)

How many "Lords" are YHWH?

"And when they heard this, they lifted their voices to God with one accord and said, “O Lord, it is You who made the heaven and the earth and the sea, and all that is in them" (Acts 4:24 NASB)

Who is the "Lord" in this scripture?

The apostles were quoting Neh 9:6....

"Thou art Jehovah, even thou alone; thou hast made heaven, the heaven of heavens, with all their host, the earth and all things that are thereon, the seas and all that is in them, and thou preservest them all; and the host of heaven worshippeth thee." (ASV)

How important is the name of Jehovah?...obviously not that important to those who don't really know him. (John 17:3)

"Jehovah" is who made the heaven and the earth and the sea, and all that is in them. Who made the heaven, the earth, the sea and all that is in them is WHO to worship. I did not need to know God's name is Jehovah to worship HIM. Did you?