A classic case of WT dishonesty.

The following piece of Misleading WT thinking was emailed to me recently by a close friend See what you think.  the following words are plaguerised from another person, but I did feel they should be posted.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

""Under the title "Is It Wrong to Pronounce Gods Name?" the March 8, 1999, issue of Awake! observes that many scholars in Christendom 'follow the spirit of Jewish tradition' when translating the Bible:

"The New Oxford Annotated Bible comments in its preface: The use of any proper name for the one and only God, as though there were other gods from whom the true God had to be distinguished, began to be discontinued in Judaism before the Christian era and is inappropriate for the universal faith of the Christian Church.

"Therefore," continues Awake!, "in that translation the word LORD [cap and small caps] is substituted for the divine name." The article asks the question, Do these views "reflect Gods thinking?"

The quotation is accurate. But it is quite misleading. By seeing just one sentence from the preface, the reader is led to believe that these translators are shallow in their reasoning. They don't reflect "God's thinking." Godless scholars, tainted by Christendom, right?

Something is missing--purposefully omitted. The writers have utilized only a partial quotation, as we have seen them do time and again. Read on if you want to understand the issue fully.

The sentence they quote actually begins with "(2)." They ignored (1) entirely!

The preceding explanatory material (1) is completely omitted and reasons, implications and conclusions totally ignored.

See for yourself. Take a look at the full discussion in "To the Reader" of this translation, the NRSV, New Revised Standard Version, New Oxford Annotated Bible (p. xiii). They don't even tell you the NOAB is the NRSV translation.

Among other items, the omitted material notes that LORD represents the traditional manner of rendering the Tetragrammaton, "following the precedent of the ancient Greek and Latin translators and the long established practice in the reading of the Hebrew Scriptures in the synagogue. While it is almost if not quite certain that the Name was originally pronounced Yahweh, this pronunciation was not indicated when the Masoretes added vowel sounds to the consonantal text."

They note that, because the name was 'too sacred to be pronounced,' vowel points--small markings--were added that would indicate the use of Adonai (Lord) when reading aloud. Comments are made on the Greek and Latin use of Kyrios and Dominus, respectively.

Awake! omits that material too.

Would you like to read the flat facts they omitted?

"The form Jehovah is of late medieval origin; it is a combination of the consonants of the Divine Name and the vowels attached to it by the Masoretes but belonging to an entirely different word.

"Although the American Standard Version (1901) had used Jehovah to render the Tetragrammaton, ... for two [note: two] reasons the Committees that produced the RSV and the NRSV returned to the more familiar usage of the King James Version.

"(1) THE WORD 'JEHOVAH' DOES NOT ACCURATELY REPRESENT ANY FORM OF THE NAME EVER USED IN HEBREW." [emphasis mine]

Could that be more clear? That's their prime reason for not using Jehovah.

To drive home the point: This second reason the NRSV doesn't use the word Jehovah is stated only after reason or fact (1). Awake! omits the above statement, omits the (2) and lifts only a single sentence for its purpose. Is that how "God thinks"?

And who are "such translators," as Awake! almost casually refers to them? Please look at the signatory name appearing under "For the Committee." It's the name of the highly acclaimed Biblical Greek scholar who is also one of the two editors. (See p. xiv.)

Guess who it is?

Bruce M. Metzger. Professor emeritus at Princeton. The dean of Biblical Greek scholars today. Not a godless or arrogant man, as anyone will tell you who has met him. His printed works are monuments to sound scholarship recognized globally, standards of excellence. (See Amazon.com to check him out.)

Recognize that name?

Students of the Watchtower Societys publications will immediately recognize this prestigious name as having been used many times to support a stand they wanted to make. The old 'quotation out of context' game.

Isn't it hypocrisy to cite him as an authority when you want to paint him as agreeing with you, but to disavow the heart of his informative scholarship?

"The word 'Jehovah' does not accurately represent any form ever used in Hebrew."

The next time a JW loftily says, "No one else knows and uses the name Jehovah," you have some ammunition: Truth.

How do you feel about such misleading quotations? ""

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Caspian (whose light is getting brighter and brighter.)

Edited by - caspian on 14 August 2002 9:5:35

I feel that all issues of Apuke! should be used to line pigeon coops, but why should we insult innocent pigeons?

CornerStone

Interesting Caspian :o)

I believe what you're saying, millions won't !

I understand the JWs stand on the name from their own point of view but they do go - on and on - about it as being a cornerstone of the faith.

You are fortunate that you can reason this way, if I were to confront my friend (still a JW) with what you have said today, I know he would blank it completely.... shame really, because as you say, it is very hypocritical for the society to use a mans words to their greater benefit and then on the other hand, cast other parts of his work into the pit of darkness where only smeg and apostates lurk :o) 

It's good information but ingrained habits die hard, and for the Jw's it would be a hard pill to swallow.

What would they call themselves without that name?

Everything centers around that name, they couldn't function without it.

Jim

That's beside the point!  The fact is that God DOES have a name, and it isn't "LORD".  To use the word "LORD" in place of the thousands of times where the Tetragrammaton appears in the Scriptures is outright dishonesty because to do so CHANGES the original text.  The LEAST any translator should do here is leave the word un-translated, with an explanation somewhere as to the reason why.

The TRUTH is that the word "LORD" does not accurately represent any form of the name ever used in Hebrew.  The TRUTH is that the word "LORD" hides the fact that God does indeed have a name.  The TRUTH is that the word "Jehovah" preserves the original text because it retains the four letters that are positively known to be there thousands of times over.  The TRUTH is that the WTBTS does not claim that the word "Jehovah" is a perfect representation of the divine name.

I feel that you're consumed with a faultfinding spirit. And it causes you to lack true appreciation for the fact that God DOES have a name.  The WTBTS has kept true to the Bible, in that it has always made it known to peoples everywhere that God does indeed have a name.  You though prefer to attack the Organization that has worked very, very hard at enlightening people regarding this issue.  In my opinion you serve the god of this worldly system, not the God that created the earth and the heavens.  Your god's time is limited, Caspian, as is the time of those who foolishly choose to copy his traits.

Friday

.

		Yadirf says:  
	

		
			I feel that you're consumed with a 
		
		
			faultfinding spirit
		
		
			 
		
	

		Lurkers take note. Yadork doesn't have a valid response to Caspian, 
	

		so he resorts to the Ad Hominem attack.
	

		What is an Ad Hominem attack?
	

		According to 
		
			
				
					http://www.dictionary.com
				
			
		
	

		
			
				Appealing
			
			
				 to personal considerations rather than to logic or reason
			
		
	

		Debaters should avoid ad hominem arguments that question their opponents' motives.
	

		So there you have it. Yadork attacks the person rather than the logic. CLASSIC WTBS training!
	

		Lisa
	

Edited by - LDH1 on 14 August 2002 16:16:35

* high-fives Lisa *

 I see our little resident WT-apologist / self-professed JW member Friday had no retort for your response.

That is because you are 100% correct.

The Watchtower Society is the EPITOME of hypocrisy and double-speak.

They also resort to ad-hominem attacks like angry little children when their doctrine and practices are exposed for being FALSE.

Yadirf-

You better go play on the merry-go-round with your friend Bleep. Once you attain a high-school level education, and are able to discern the folly in your weak arguments, then you can come to the grown-up table.

Edited by - Reborn2002 on 14 August 2002 16:29:0

LDH1 attacks Friday:

			Lurkers take note. Yadork doesn't have a valid response to Caspian, 
		

			so he resorts to the Ad Hominem attack....Debaters should avoid ad hominem arguments that question their opponents' motives. 
		

So this is all that you can come back with, eh?  Why can't you address the bulk of what I had to say, prior to the point that you prefer to reference?  Rather than give a valid response to my main point you resort to name-calling, etc.  So there you have it. LDH1 attacks the person rather than the logic. CLASSIC APOSTATE training!

You're full of the stuff that exudes from a bull's butt, LDH1.

Friday

.

Reborn attacks Friday:

And WHAT would those be?  Afraid to say?

.

Yadork, either I woke up a genius this morning or your arguments are even stupider and easier to refute than usual. (hint: I didn't wake up as a genius, LOL)

Ya dum-dum says:

So let me get this right.

Jehovah, the *TRUE* God, who is represented by the one *TRUE* religion on earth, through the "Faithful and Discreet Slave Class" has such a *HARD TIME* communicating with them, that they don't even know the PERFECT REPRESENTATION of their own God's name?

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA

They spend millions of dollars telling people how important God's name is, but, dammit, they're not even sure what that name is!  LOL! ROFLMAO!

Now if they don't even know how to pronounce their own God's name, what else, I ask you, may be amiss?

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Lisa

LMAO.

Friday, you are more pathetic than usual.

Even YouKnow posts nonsense that someone who is naive may be influenced by.

You on the other hand, are not even capable of that.

Since I know your kind of slow, I will copy and paste what Lisa said.

No other argument need be made, although there are many more, you dipfuck WT-apologist troll.

------------------------------------------------------

Ya dum-dum says:

So let me get this right.

Jehovah, the *TRUE* God, who is represented by the one *TRUE* religion on earth, through the "Faithful and Discreet Slave Class" has such a *HARD TIME* communicating with them, that they don't even know the PERFECT REPRESENTATION of their own God's name?

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA

They spend millions of dollars telling people how important God's name is, but, dammit, they're not even sure what that name is!  LOL! ROFLMAO!

Now if they don't even know how to pronounce their own God's name, what else, I ask you, may be amiss?

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

------------------------------------------------------

Care to explain that one?

LMAO

One of the focal points that Jehovah's Witnesses use to argue that they are the ONE TRUE RELIGION is that they alone use God's name.

They proudly wear the mantle "Jehovah's Witnesses" because it represents them being the sole individuals on earth who vindicate Jehovah's sovereignty and sanctify his name.

So your telling me that God's sole channel on earth who represent him could be walking around for decades with the wrong name?

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH

Now you want to sit there and tell me that Jehovah's Witnesses do not claim that it is the perfect representation of the divine name?

HAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

This is one of the very foundations of WT doctrine you moron!

So next time I talk to a DUB who goes door to door, I will say:

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHHAHAHAHAAHHAHA

Edited by - Reborn2002 on 14 August 2002 17:24:11

I'm bringing this  thread to the top because it's so embarassing to Yadirf and the other JW lurkers here, they want it to die.

I find it bizarre that one of Jehovah's LOYAL Witnesses admits that the WBTS "never said they knew EXACLTY how to pronounce the name."

And yet the JW blather about "Vindicating Jehovah's Sovreignty" and how "They will *have* to know that I am Jehovah    Well, I'm not exactly sure ." (Apparently, this includes the JW, who still don't know who it is everyone will HAVE to know.

Jehovah has taken a People for his name, since 1935. Unfortunately, he neglected to inform said people.

What a crock of #*$&.

Lisa

Like your friend Dirtymouth you're the epitome of foolishness, Lisa.  Your comments are so stupid they don't even deserve any retort. Like I already said above, you're full of the stuff that exudes from a bull's butt.

.

"Jehovah" - the first BIG domino in a long line of domino's to ALL FALL DOWN.  BOOM!

That WORD "Jehovah" makes me nauseous.

It was never God's "name."

So then Friday,

Please explain why "Jehovah's" own people don't even know his real name.

Lisa

That's beside the point!  The fact is that God DOES have a name, and it isn't "LORD".  To use the word "LORD" in place of the thousands of times where the Tetragrammaton appears in the Scriptures is outright dishonesty because to do so CHANGES the original text.  The LEAST any translator should do here is leave the word un-translated, with an explanation somewhere as to the reason why.

***He LEAST? You meant the MOST, right? Watchtower is guilty of the same.

The TRUTH is that the word "LORD" does not accurately represent any form of the name ever used in Hebrew.  The TRUTH is that the word "LORD" hides the fact that God does indeed have a name.  The TRUTH is that the word "Jehovah" preserves the original text because it retains the four letters that are positively known to be there thousands of times over.  The TRUTH is that the WTBTS does not claim that the word "Jehovah" is a perfect representation of the divine name.

The  TRUTH^TM is that the WTS claims to know the name of God.

Yadirf, see, you could say anything to your dog, Friday, and he'll give you a look that says "eh, that was smart; y'know, I couldn't have thought about that". But that's your dog. You embarass those brothers in good standing who visit this board. You must look for new arguments.

Pom,

You don't know that for sure!  Tell us what his real name is for sure, if you think you can.

.

Yadirf,