| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
cactus
Guest
|
 Posted: Sun Sep 07, 2003 11:33 am Post subject: Re: God>s name |
 |
|
"BearMan" <Al@PraiseTheDay.net> wrote in message
news:eYz6b.1284$vj4.135821@nnrp1.ptd.net...
Cactus,
You still out there?
Yes, I>m out there. Just ask my family :-)
I have not found the specific reference I was looking for but in my search I
have run across a few others.
Are you familiar with the Hebrew alphabet? I saw an article speaking about
Eliezer Ben-Yehudah, proponent of modern Hebrew. In the article was a
picture of a stamp with his name on it and I realized that the name Yehuda
uses the same letters as the tetram plus a "D" (daleth). If you take out the
"D" you have the tetragrammaton.
ya-HOO-dah
ya-HOO-ah
Have you ever seen, heard, or considered this?
Am I missing something?
Yehuda would be YHDVH. It>s just a proper name. Related to the word
"yehudi," meaning "Jew. Inserting a letter changes the meaning, as does
"god" and "gold,." or "god" and "goad" in English.
Maybe this article is closer than the one I posted before:
http://www.jewfaq.org/name.htm |
|
| |
|
 Back to top |
georgann
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 07, 2003 3:34 pm Post subject: Re: God>s name |
|
|
[quote]Additionally the translation of Jehovah is not from witnesses, it is from the
KJV.
[/quote]
"The Nolalu Barn Owl" wrote:
[quote]# The Watchtower>s own book - Aid to Bible Understanding p. 884 & 885
admits that name of Jehovah was first recorded by a Catholic monk
about 700 years ago! 'The first recorded use of this form [Jehovah]
dates from the thirteenth century C.E. Raymundus Martini, a Spanish
monk of the Dominican Order, used it in his book Pugeo Fidei of the
year 1270 C.E.
This pre-dates the KJV(AND Protestantism) by about 240 years or so.
[/quote]
georgann, Teflon/Bulova apologist wrote:
Giving the name Jehovah a date neither validates its use nor does it
validate its adoption, by JWs or anyone else.
--
(`'·.¸(`'·.¸(`'·.¸ ¸.·'´)¸.·'´)¸.·'´)
«´¨`·.¸¸ ¸¸.·´¨ `»
All your prophecy are belong to Christ!
(¸.·'´(¸.·'´(¸.·'´ `'·.¸)`'·.¸)`'·.¸) |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Terry/Anti
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 07, 2003 11:24 pm Post subject: Re: God>s name |
|
|
"BearMan" <Al@PraiseTheDay.net> wrote in message
news:%oz6b.1281$vj4.135235@nnrp1.ptd.net...
[quote]"The Nolalu Barn Owl" wrote
'The first recorded use of this form [Jehovah]
dates from the thirteenth century C.E. ...
This pre-dates the KJV(AND Protestantism) by about 240 years or so.
[/quote]
Thanks for the history lesson.
That re-enforces my statement that this form is a historical translation of
God>s name.
Not some recent manifestation as some have claimed it to be.
Show me where anyone has claimed it to be a recent manifestation. I don>t
care if it>s 19 hundred years old, it>s not God>s name or an English
translation of it.
Gramps
Move the @ ahead of hot to email me. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
BearMan
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 08, 2003 1:55 am Post subject: Re: God>s name |
|
|
[quote]"Terry/Anti" wrote:
Show me where anyone has claimed it to be a recent manifestation. I don>t
care if it>s 19 hundred years old, it>s not God>s name or an English
translation of it.
[/quote]
Sheesh! Take a chill pill gramps. I didn>t say anybody claimed it was a recent manifestation.
I said *I* claimed it was not a recent manifestation.
Why does everything have to be an argument with you guys? |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
BearMan
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 08, 2003 2:22 am Post subject: Re: God>s name |
|
|
"cactus"
That was a good reference. I book marked it so I can look over some of the other materials there as well.
Back on topic though I noticed that it supports the practice of not using the name on the basis of its being lost over the centuries. Is this an accurate assessment? Also it was one of the few articles I read that does not portend to provide a suitable representation for any pronunciation and extends the fobiddence of not just any attempts to pronounce the Tetram but also any other form/name for which God may be called. Is this also your understanding since I notice you write G-d instead of God?
Here are some other references I have found...
http://www.truecovenanter.com/durham/3rdcom.html
Specifically second heading; "The Name of God", para 1-2
http://www.eliyah.com/3rdcom.htm
Although this one feels that YahWeh is correct
he brings out some interesting points about the translation
of the word vanity.
Have you ever head of the book "Fossilized Customs"? |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
jabriol
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 08, 2003 2:37 am Post subject: Re: God>s name |
|
|
"BearMan" <Al@PraiseTheDay.net> wrote in message
news:wXM6b.1347$vj4.145249@nnrp1.ptd.net...
[quote]"Terry/Anti" wrote:
Show me where anyone has claimed it to be a recent manifestation. I don>t
care if it>s 19 hundred years old, it>s not God>s name or an English
translation of it.
[/quote]
Sheesh! Take a chill pill gramps. I didn>t say anybody claimed it was a
recent manifestation.
I said *I* claimed it was not a recent manifestation.
Why does everything have to be an argument with you guys?
Because that not their interest. They are not concern with anything positive
about JW>s...
their inclination is to find fault. arguing with them is a waste of time. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Varicose Brain
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 08, 2003 3:09 am Post subject: Re: God>s name |
|
|
On Sun, 07 Sep 2003 21:37:52 GMT, "jabriol" <jabriol@sparta.org>
wrote:
[quote]Sheesh! Take a chill pill gramps. I didn>t say anybody claimed it was a
recent manifestation.
I said *I* claimed it was not a recent manifestation.
Why does everything have to be an argument with you guys?
Because that not their interest. They are not concern with anything positive
about JW>s...
their inclination is to find fault. arguing with them is a waste of time.
[/quote]
You certainly waste enough of it. Maybe you ought to follow your own
advice if you think us "fault-finders" aren>t worth your time. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
jabriol
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 08, 2003 3:52 am Post subject: Re: God>s name |
|
|
"Varicose Brain" <lacruiser@aol.com> wrote in message
news:e2bnlvgbfrgpu25pil22rib2h47e0p1vng@4ax.com...
[quote]On Sun, 07 Sep 2003 21:37:52 GMT, "jabriol" <jabriol@sparta.org
wrote:
Sheesh! Take a chill pill gramps. I didn>t say anybody claimed it was a
recent manifestation.
I said *I* claimed it was not a recent manifestation.
Why does everything have to be an argument with you guys?
Because that not their interest. They are not concern with anything
positive
about JW>s...
their inclination is to find fault. arguing with them is a waste of
time.
You certainly waste enough of it. Maybe you ought to follow your own
advice if you think us "fault-finders" aren>t worth your time.
[/quote]
that is why I return carol and bethe to me killfile.... I have not killfiled
you yet.. since you participate in the science threads.... I think once
bearman get tired and realize that carol and others are toying with him..
he will do as other JW>s will do here on the group.. look for the sincer
questioners, and ignore the doomsayers with their lies , twiat and slant... |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
* {@()@}* ~~ (@()@) *
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 08, 2003 5:17 am Post subject: Re: God>s name |
|
|
"jabriol" <jabriol@sparta.org> wrote in message
news:QyN6b.725163$hf5.5324367@news.easynews.com...
[quote]Because that not their interest. They are not concern with anything
positive
about JW>s...
==============================[/quote]
What positive thing can be said for the WTS and it>s gullible misled
followers?
The ONLY positive thing I can think of is now with the internet out there
many are learning the TRUTH and leaving the WTS. :-)
--
Millika Flickem.........
Don>t forget they also have stock in RJ Reynolds (Tobacco), they forbid
their members to smoke and then they profit on the addiction of others to
tobacco. As the (WTS) hypocrites go marching on! (Credit to Barb).
Note: The WT also owns stock in a Co. making war materials.
~~~* ~~~* ~~~* ~~~* ~~~* ~~~* ~~~* ~~~* ~~~* ~~~* ~~~* ~~~* |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Varicose Brain
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 08, 2003 5:18 am Post subject: Re: God>s name |
|
|
On Sun, 07 Sep 2003 22:52:20 GMT, "jabriol" <jabriol@sparta.org>
wrote:
[quote]You certainly waste enough of it. Maybe you ought to follow your own
advice if you think us "fault-finders" aren>t worth your time.
that is why I return carol and bethe to me killfile.... I have not killfiled
you yet.. since you participate in the science threads.... I think once
bearman get tired and realize that carol and others are toying with him..
he will do as other JW>s will do here on the group.. look for the sincer
questioners, and ignore the doomsayers with their lies , twiat and slant...
[/quote]
Fine. Killfile me. That just makes it much easier to present the facts
about the wicked, mudering, sadist that you call Jehovah. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
* {@()@}* ~~ (@()@) *
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 08, 2003 5:19 am Post subject: Re: God>s name |
|
|
"jabriol" <jabriol@sparta.org> wrote in message
news:EEO6b.731664$Bf5.102726@news.easynews.com...
[quote]that is why I return carol and bethe to me killfile.... I have not
killfiled
you yet.. since you participate in the science threads.... I think once
bearman get tired and realize that carol and others are toying with him..
he will do as other JW>s will do here on the group.. look for the sincer
questioners, and ignore the doomsayers with their lies , twiat and
slant...[/quote]
===================================
Or he will actually do some research on your harmful, controlling,
communistic cult and LEAVE it on his own as many have.
--
MiKrobez......
(Jabriol) should be more careful in the way he presents
himself. Some people here might start pulling out all those
JW quotes about "knowing the tree by its fruit" (Credit to Campbell)
====================================================><> |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
georgann
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 08, 2003 5:02 pm Post subject: Re: God>s name |
|
|
[quote]"georgann" wrote
Giving the name Jehovah a date neither validates its use nor does it
validate its adoption, by JWs or anyone else.
[/quote]
"BearMan" wrote:
[quote]Yes you are correct. But it helps to know as mich about the history of names
and words as possible. Do you agree?
[/quote]
georgann, Teflon/Bulova apologist wrote:
I might agree, if I knew what you think it "helps to know".
--
(`'·.¸(`'·.¸(`'·.¸ ¸.·'´)¸.·'´)¸.·'´)
«´¨`·.¸¸ ¸¸.·´¨ `»
All your prophecy are belong to Christ!
(¸.·'´(¸.·'´(¸.·'´ `'·.¸)`'·.¸)`'·.¸) |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Budikka
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 10, 2003 9:40 am Post subject: Re: God>s name |
|
|
Jabriol, before you blather more lies, bullshit and assininity on this
topic, you need to catch up on your previous moronic displays first.
Define and detail what the "colossal holes" are in the Theory of
Evolution. I have been waiting some considerable time to see you list
them, ever since you plagiarised Booker>s article from two decades
ago.
Can you detail what these colossal holes are, or not? If you can,
then do so, right here in this thread, which I will monitor. If you
cannot, then admit that you are doing nothing but spreading lies with
your clueless posts on evolution.
Budikka |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
|
