Bible Question?

Question

I have often read peoples answers, and questions, about how Jehovah's Witnesses have their own Bible, how they have rewritten it to suit themselves and how it is the King James Bible that is the most accurate can someone please explain to me how this difference in the King James old version and the New version is not a rewrite or taking the Name of God out of scripture?Anyone is welcome to answer research it please first!

Old KJVPsalm83:18That men may know that thou, whose name alone is JEHOVAH, art the most high over all the earth.

NKJVPsalm83:18 That they may know that You, whose name alone is the LORD,
Are the Most High over all the earth

Yet in both Versions the words in the following scripture is virtually identical
Revelation22:18,19

Thank you all for trying to answer my question.
dhcandbw FYI I have done much research over many years and I am not oblivious to the great differences to Christianity and Jehovah's Witnesses, but those differences are to the detrement of Christianity!
BrandedB Yes the Name Jehovah is a translation of YHWH yet this does not mean the same as Lord, just as your name does not mean Boy! I have studied many translations some of which also use the Name Jehovahas it is even in my dictionary where Jehovah is shown to be the principal name of God
The KJV hadthe Name Jehovah in 4 places every where else it was replaced by Lord or Godthis is even stated in the foreword of my KJVtranslation of the KJV of course in The New KJVtranslation there is no foreword stating this replacement as in the old version yet the name has been completely removed, how is that acceptable in view of (Revelation22:18&19)? that is what I asked but so far there have been only excuses no real answers.

Answer 1

its interesting to read the responses of different people here on YA... everyone pretends to know stuff and presents it as irrefutable fact when its quite the opposite! LOL

thats just 'in general' here... but now lets look at this particular topic.

it seems everyone with an agenda has a problem with translating God's Holy name from the ancient Hebrew YHWH to Jehovah... but these same people have no problem translating YHWH's only-begotten Son's name from Yhshua to Jesus!

my questions are;
do the people who refuse to call Jesus's God (John 17:3; 20:17) by His name in *any* form also refuse to call their friends by their names?

how is it "respectful" to refuse to use someones name?

if you went around calling everyone 'man', 'woman' or 'child' (all titles) instead of their names would that be showing them "respect"? cause its the same thing as calling YHWH 'god' or 'lord' (mere titles)

do the people who refuse to use the name of Jehovah as a translation of YHWH also refuse to use the name of Jesus as a translation of Yhshua? both translations start by using a J in place of a Y

finally, for all the genius' here who seem to know the history of translating "the only true God"s (John 17:3) name in ancient manuscripts; perhaps it would be advisable to do a bit of research before presenting your opinions as fact.

here is some valuable information from theologians and Biblical scholars that I've found over the past 2 decades of my search for the truth about the translation of "the only true God"s (John 17:3) Holy name:

...and just in case you might think I'm sympathetic to Jehovah's Witnesses, note that none of this information
originates with Watch Tower publications. The following historical facts are assembled
by theologians and Biblical scholars of the world.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

(Sotah 7, 6) Sanhedrin 7, 5, records that a blasphemer was not guilty
unless he pronounced the Divine Name.


God has a Name. There is no question this Name occurs upwards of 7,000
times
in the Old Testament Hebrew Scriptures. It occurs in the Hebrew Bible
from
Genesis to Malachi as YeHoWaH (YHWH). [For some who think YHWH is
missing
from Esther will have to look closer.] When the Jewish scholars of the
third
century BC translated the Hebrew into Greek they left YHWH unchanged
as the
Greek language cannot precisely accommodate all these consonants.


Though the Jews of the time of Christ did not pronounce YHWH according
to
Josephus (a Jewish historian of that period) wrote that they instead
say
Adonay (Lord) or Elohim (God). Despite this the Jews NEVER removed the
Divine Name from their sacred Scriptures. Who did remove YHWH from the
Bible? The failure falls at the feet of certain Christian scholars who
went
beyond the Jewish tradition and actually omitted YHWH and substituted
KYRIOS
or THEOS. This possibly took place during the time of the evolution of
the
Trinity doctrine.


Thus today most modern versions no longer contain YHWH in their
multitude of
versions. One is instantly driven to apply certain verses of the
prophets to
these translators -- like Jeremiah 23:26, 27, "How long will it exist
in the
heart of the prophets who are prophesying the falsehood and who are
prophets
of the trickiness of their own heart? They are thinking of making my
people
forget my name by means of their dreams that they keep relating each
one to
the other, just as their fathers forgot my name by means of Ba'al
[meaning
Owner, or Lord]." .


Not only does the Divine Name appear in every book of the Bible, the
phrase
"your Name" also occurs many hundreds of times in most books. Consider
these:


Isaiah 25:1 -- O Jehovah, you are my God. I exalt you, I laud your
name, for
you have done wonderful things. Isaiah 26:8 -- For your name and for
your
memorial the desire of the soul has been. Isaiah 26:13 -- By you only
shall
we make mention of your name. Isaiah 63:16-- O Jehovah, (you) are our
Father. Our Repurchaser of long ago is your name.


Malachi 1:6 -- And if I am a grand master, where is the fear of me?'
Jehovah
of armies has said to you, O priests who are despising my name.


Malachi 1:11 -- "For from the sun's rising even to its setting my name
will
be great among the nations, and in every place sacrificial smoke will
be
made, a presentation will be made to my name, even a clean gift;
because my
name will be great among the nations," Jehovah of armies has said.


Malachi 3:16 -- And a book of remembrance began to be written up
before him
for those in fear of Jehovah and for those thinking upon his name.


When God first explained the meaning of His Name to Moses the point
could
not be missed that this was the Creator's eternal name. Consider the
Almighty's own words from a Jewish version:


Moses said to God, "When I come to the Israelites and say to them,
'The God
of your fathers has sent me to you,' and they ask me, "What is His
name?"
what shall I say to them?" And God said to Moses, "Ehyeh-Asher-Ehyeh."
[JPS
footnote: "I Am Who I Am."] He continued, Thus shall you say to the
Israelites, "Ehyeh [footnote: sent me to you. And God said further to
Moses:
"Thus shall you speak to the Israelites: The LORD [footnote: The name
YHWH],
the God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the
God
of Jacob, has sent me to you: This shall be My name forever. This My
appellation for all eternity." (Exodus 3:13-15 Jewish Publication
Society
Tanakh)"


Here even the Jewish editors remove YHWH and substitute LORD in caps.
To
remove any portion of God's inspired word is a dangerous matter, as
even the
Law states: "You (Jews) must not add to the word that I am commanding
you,
neither must you take away from it, so as to keep the commandments of
Jehovah your God that I am commanding you (Jews). ... Every word that
I am
commanding you is what you should be careful to do. You (Jews) must
not add
to it nor take away from it." (Deuteronomy 4:2; Deuteronomy 12:32)


Even the Proverbs warn: "Every saying of God is refined. He is a
shield to
those taking refuge in him. Add nothing to his words, that he may not
reprove you, and that you may not have to be proved a liar." (Proverbs
30:5,
6) The Book of Revelation ends with this warning: "I am bearing
witness to
everyone that hears the words of the prophecy of this scroll: If
anyone [a
Christian] makes an addition to these things, God will add to him the
plagues that are written in this scroll; and if anyone takes anything
away
from the words of the scroll of this prophecy, God will take his
portion
away from the trees of life and out of the holy city, things which are
written about in this scroll." (Revelation 22:18,19)


The comprehensive work Dictionary of New Testament Theology states:
"God is
not without a name; he has a personal name (Yahweh). ... God's name
belongs
with his revelation." (Volume 2, pages 649, 653)


Is it fair to conclude that adding the word LORD when it was not in
the
Hebrew original is a very serious matter? Is it fair to conclude that
removing the divine Name represented by YHWH is down right dangerous?


It is true that there is some disagreement on the exact form of YHWH
however
some outstanding scholars agree YEHOWAH (or, in English, Jehovah) is
correct. (Compare Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament, volume 1,
pages
210, 211) Some prefer YAHWEH and even others forms. The failure to use
the
name of the Father has led to much ambiguity among some Christian
groups.
For example, many hymns do not use the Name and as a result the
identity of
Lord Jehovah and Lord Jesus is confused. Many of these hymns were
composed
by Trinitarians and thus certain Bible phrases or verses that
contextually
involve Yehowah are wrongly applied to Jesus. Also, most Christians
speak of
an ambiguous "Lord" often confusing the Father and the Son in their
speech.


The Name of God was not less minimized by the Christian Bible. The
importance of the Father's Name is seen in the Lord's Prayer,
"Hallowed be
Thy Name." (Matthew 6:9) During the Nazarene's ministry the Voice of
God was
only heard three times. One of these had a direct bearing on His Name:
"Father, glorify your name." Therefore a voice came out of heaven: "I
both
glorified [it] and will glorify [it] again." (John 12:28) Sixty years
later
this same point is mentioned in the Bible's last book: "Who will not
really
fear you, Jehovah, and glorify your name, because you alone are
loyal?"
(Revelation 15:4 NWT)


In his closing prayer with his disciples Passover night, Jesus
stressed his
Father's "name" four times: "I have made your name manifest to the men
you
gave me out of the world. ... Holy Father, watch over them on account
of
your own name which you have given me, in order that they may be one
just as
we are. When I was with them I used to watch over them on account of
your
own name which you have given me. ... I have made your name known to
them
and will make it known, in order that the love with which you loved me
may
be in them and I in union with them." (John 17:6, 11, 12, 26) Can
anyone
argue that the Father's "name" is so unimportant that it can be
removed from
those places where it originally occurred?


It is true the word "name" has a wider meaning including reputation,
character, authority, and fame. It is also true that there is little
or no
evidence that Jesus himself uttered the divine Name in private
conversation.
It has been suggested he may have used it when quoting those places in
the
Hebrew Bible where YHWH occurs. (Compare Matthew 4:4 with Deuteronomy
8:3;
Matthew 4:7 with Deuteronomy 6:16; Matthew 4:10 with Deuteronomy 6:13)
Jesus
was bound to keep all the Law of Moses. This would have included that
warning not to add or remove anything from the Law. This may suggest
the
Nazarene could possibly have used YHWH in these Hebrew Bible texts
above.


Despite this, there is no justification for removing and replacing
YHWH with
LORD in the Hebrew Bible. What may this mean for some Christians in
these
days of a profusion of Bible translations? Though it is not forbidden
any
where not to read a Bible lacking YHWH, would it be preferable, based
on the
above, to use a Bible which reads YHWH (Yehowah; Yahweh; Jehovah) in
the
largest part of the Holy Scriptures?


There are a number of excellent versions available which preserve the
7,000
occurrences of YHWH in the Hebrew Bible. Some of these are the New
Jerusalem
Bible (Yahweh), the American Standard Version (Jehovah), the New World
Translation (Jehovah), Rotherham's Emphasized Bible (Yahweh), King
James II
(Jehovah), Interlinear Bible (Jehovah).


The reason some translations included the Divine Name in its 7,000
occurrences are interesting to read:


American Standard Version (1901): "[They] were brought to the
unanimous
conviction that a Jewish superstition, which regarded the Divine Name
as too
sacred to be uttered, ought no longer to dominate in the English or
any
other version of the Old Testament . . . This Memorial Name, explained
in
Exodus 3:14, 15, and emphasized as such over and over in the original
text
of the Old Testament, designates God as the personal God, as the
covenant
God, the God of revelation, the Deliverer, the Friend of his people .
. .
This personal name, with its wealth of sacred associations, is now
restored
to the place in the sacred text to which it has an unquestionable
claim."


The German Elberfelder Bibel states: "Jehova. We have retained this
name of
the Covenant God of Israel because the reader has been accustomed to
it for
years."


Steven T. Byington, The Bible in Living English: "The spelling and the
pronunciation are not highly important. What is highly important is to
keep
it clear that this is a personal name. There are several texts that
cannot
be properly understood if we translate this name by a common noun like
'Lord,' or, much worse, by a substantivized adjective."


The renowned scholar J. B. Rotherham in Studies in the Psalms (1911):
"JEHOVAH.-The employment of this English form of the Memorial name
(Exodus
3:18) in the present version of the Psalter does not arise from any
misgiving as to the more correct pronunciation, as being Yahwéh; but
solely
from practical evidence personally selected of the desirability of
keeping
in touch with the public ear and eye in a matter of this kind, in
which the
principal thing is the easy recognition of the Divine name intended."


All things considered, is it not the course of wisdom to use a Bible
that
incorporates the Divine Name YHWH. Jesus did. So did Paul and the
other
inspired writers.


Could Jn. 17:6, 26 mean that Yeshua actually pronounced the name? The
Toldot
Yeshu, a hostile Rabbinic parady on the Gospel story records the
following
legend:


After King Jannaeus, his wife Helene ruled over all Israel. In the
Temple
was to be found the Foundation Stone on which were engraven the
letters of
God's Ineffable Name. Whoever learned the secret of the Name and its
use
would be able to do whatever he wished. Therefore, the Sages took
measures
so that no one should gain this knowledge. Lions of brass were bound
to two
iron pillars at the gate of the place of burnt offerings. Should
anyone
enter and learn the Name, when he left the lions would roar at him and
immediately the valuable secret would be forgotten. Yeshu came and
learned
the letters of the Name; he wrote them upon the parchment which he
placed in
an open cut on his thigh and then drew the flesh over the parchment.
As he
left, the lions roared and he forgot the secret. But when he came to
his
house he reopened the cut in his flesh with a knife an lifted out the
writing. Then he remembered and obtained the use of the letters. He
gathered
about himself three hundred and ten young men of Israel and accused
those
who spoke ill of his birth of being people who desired greatness and
power
for themselves. Yeshu proclaimed, "I am the Messiah; and concerning me
Isaiah prophesied and said, 'Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear
a
son, and shall call his name Immanuel.'" He quoted other messianic
texts,
insisting, "David my ancestor prophesied concerning me: 'The Lord said
to
me, thou art my son, this day have I begotten thee.'" The insurgents
with
him replied that if Yeshu was the Messiah he should give them a
convincing
sign. They therefore, brought to him a lame man, who had never walked.
Yeshu
spoke over the man the letters of the Ineffable Name, and the leper
was
healed. Thereupon, they worshipped him as the Messiah, Son of the
Highest.


(A similar legend about Yeshua appears in b.Shab. 104b; b.San. 67a;
t.Shab.
11:15; j.Shab. 13d)


Now Hugh Schonfield theorized in his book According to the Hebrews
that
Toldot Yeshu is a hostile parody on the Gospel according to the
Hebrews. So
while this legend sounds fantastic there may be some truth at its
root.


Now another passage in Matthew might also lead us that direction. The
passage is Mt. 27:59-65:


59 Now the chief priests, the elders, and all the council sought false
testimony against Yeshua to put Him to death,


60 but found none. Even though many false witnesses came forward, they
found
none. But at least two false witnesses came forward


61 and said, "This [one] said "I am able to destroy the Temple of God
and to
build it in three days."


62 And the High Priest arose and said to him, "Do you answer nothing?
What
do these men testify against you?"


63 But Yeshua kept silent. And the High Priest answered and said to
him, "I
adjure you by the living God that you tell us if you are the Messiah,
the
Son of God."


64 Yeshua said to him, "It is as you said, Nevertheless, I say to you,
hereafter you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the
Power, and coming on the clouds of heaven."


65 Then the High Priest tore his clothes, saying "He has spoken
blasphemy!
What further need do we have of witnesses? Look, now you have heard
his
blasphemy!


Note the phrase TEMPLE OF GOD in verse 61. This phrase never appears
in the
Tenach which always has TEMPLE OF YHWH. Also in verse 64 THE POWER is
a
common euphemism for YHWH which should appear based on the fact that
this
verse combines Ps. 110:1 with Dan. 7:13 where YHWH does appear in Ps.
110:1.
Could Yeshua have been being accused of blasphemy for having used the
phrase
"Temple of YHWH" could he have aggravated and confirmed the charge by
citing
the Ps. 110:1/Dan. 7:13 phrase with the name YHWH pronounced? The
Mishnah
sheds a great deal of light on the events of this trial. The Mishnah
states:


He who blasphemes is liable only when he will have fully pronounced
the
Divine Name. Said R. Joshua ben Qorha, "on every day of the trial they
examine the wtnesses with a substitute name. once the trial is over,
they
would not put him to death with the euphemism, but they put everyone
out and
ask the most important of the witnesses, saying to him, "Say, what
exactly
did you hear?" And he says what he heard. And the judges stand on
their feet
and tear their clothing.
(m.San. 7:5)


Now from this passage of the Mishnah we learn many things about
Yeshua's
trial. It was normal for the witness to use a euphemism in his
testimony of
what Yeshua said. We also know that a charge of blasphemy required
that the
offender had "fully pronounced the Divine Name." It is therefore clear
that
Yeshua had been pronouncing the name of YHWH. Normally at the end of
the
trial the room would have been emptied and the witness asked to repeat
the
"blasphemy" without the euphemism. However, in this case, Yeshua
surprised
everyone. He wanted his statement heard by all so he repeated one of
his
"blasphemous" statements right there in the beit din. We know that he
used
the actual name and not "the Power" here because it was called
"blasphemy"
and would not have been unless Yeshua had "fully pronounced the Divine
Name." That Yeshua also spoke the name of YHWH as part of his
"blasphemy"
was clear from the phrase "the High Priest tore his clothes" which
agrees
exactly with the halachah of the Mishnah "And the judges stand on
their feet
and tear their clothing."


Ya'akov HaTzadik (James the Just), the leader of the Nazarenes after
Yeshua'
s death also recited the exact phrase Yeshua had recited "hereafter
you will
see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Power, and coming
on the
clouds of heaven." (Dan. 7:13/Ps. 110:1) and was killed for having
made the
statement (Hegesippus as quoted by Eusebius Eccl. Hist. 2:23). Was he
also
killed for blaspheming the name of YHWH?


On yet another occasion certain Jews (probably pharisees) "made
insurection
with one accord against Paul" (Acts. 18:12) a ringleader of the
Nazarenes
(Acts). They said that he "persuaded men to worship God contrary to
the
law." (Acts 18:13). Paul was later released with the Roman authorities
saying "if it be a question of words and names and of your law, look
you to
it; for I will be no judge of such matters." (Acts 18:15) It seems
then that
Paul was accused of persuading men to worship God using the word/name
of
YHWH in contradiction to the ban on the name practiced by other sects
of
Judaism at the time.


Is "Lord" (Kyrios) the name of God in the Greek Scriptures ?


In the papyrus P90 dated 150 CE which contains the verses
of John 18:36-19:7, the name of Jesus is this time shortened into JS
according to the process of nomina sacra, like the word Kurios (Lord)
which is written KS. So, when the sacred name was absent the word
'Lord' had to be written without abbreviation. For example, in this
codex the verse of John 12:38 have appeared:


INA.O.LOGOS.HSAIOU.TOU.PROFHTOU.PLHRW
QH.ON.EIPEN.KURIE.TIS.EPISTEUSEN.TH.AKOH
HMWN.KAI.O.BRACIWN.KURIOU.TINI.APEKALU


(John 12:38)


However this part of the gospel of John quoted a verse
from the book of Isaiah and in all the Septuagints of this period
(before 150 CE) there are none with the name Kurios (Lord) instead of
the Tetragram. For example:


INA.O.LOGOS.HSAIOU.TOU.PROFHTOU.PLHRW
QH.ON.EIPEN.*YHWH.TIS.EPISTEUSEN.TH.AKOH
HMWN.KAI.O.BRACIWN.*YHWH.TINI.APEKALU
*the divine name here written in ancient Hebrew letters


(Isaiah 53:1 [LXX])


There are only two ways to explain this modification,
where the Tetragram was exchanged by the word 'Lord'. Either the
Christians changed this name after 150 CE(more exactly between 70 and
135) because they did not understand it anymore, or they changed it
before 150 CE(more exactly before the previous period) for theological
reasons but without there being any archaeological witnesses. The
first explanation seems more logical because if the Christians
(Judeo-Christians) had changed this name during the first century
(before 70 CE) this teaching would have been seen in the NT especially
among a Jewish environment, what is never the case. For example, Jesus
should have said «I have made you known to them under your new name
'Lord'» but as a Jew he said nothing new on this very important matter
(John 17:6, 26). It should be remembered that the book of John (who
was a Jew) was written around 98 CE and he kept the short name Yah
rather than Lord in his book of Revelation (Rv 19:1-6) when he wrote
the Hebrew word Allelu-ia instead of Allelu-adonai. Even in 129 CE,
Aquila who was a Christian converted to Judaism kept in his
translation of the Septuagint the Tetragram embedded in a Greek text.
It is interesting to note that Rabbi Tarphon (Shabbat 116a), between
90 and 130 CE, related the problem of the destruction of heretical
(Christian) texts that contained the Tetragram.


Thus, between 70 and 135 CE, the Christian copyists (most
of them were heathens who had become Christians, furthermore they were
strongly influenced by some antic Trinitarian philosophies, see
http://www.socinian.org/Numenius2.html) simplified the 'strange'
writing YHWH [KURIOU] into a 'sacred name' , consequently the
expression KURIOS YHWH [O THEOS] became o , and KURIOU IESOU XRISTOU
became in the same way . In time, many other sacred names appeared.
However, Symmachus still used the Tetragram written in Paleo-Hebrew in
his Greek translation (165 CE), and according to Eusebius
(Ecclesiastical History VI:17), he was an Ebionite, that is a
Judeo-Christian, who also wrote a comment on the book of Matthew.


The replacement of YHWH may explain the inexplicable
number of errors leading to confusion between the terms 'Lord' and
'God' in the Gospel. As we have seen, the expression Kurios YHWH posed
a difficult problem for the translators of the Septuagint. This
expression is much rarer in the Gospels; on the other hand, the title
'Lord' (Kurios) is frequently applied to Jesus, which could lead to
confusion with the other 'Lord', the translation of YHWH. So, some
copyists, to avoid this confusion, preferred to translate YHWH by
'God' (Theos) or simply to omit this name, as noted in the following
passages: Lk 1:68; Ac 2:17; 6:7; 7:37; 10:33; 12:24; 13:5,44,48;
15:40; 19:20; 20:28; Rm 14:4; Col 3:13,16; 2 Tm 2:14; Jm 3:9; Jude 5;
Rv 18:8. The list of variants is considerable for these few verses.
Why did translators stumbled over the reading or understanding of such
simple and well known words as 'God' and 'Lord'? Some specialists
admit that several times 'Lord' or 'God' took the place of YHWH. These
replacements were done early, since after the second century of our
era no more traces of the writing and pronunciation of the Name are
found, except among a few Christian scholars. Paradoxically, a
Christian reader might even believe that the God of the Bible was
called Sabaôth, because this name is found in the expression Lord
Sabaôth (KurioV SabawJ) in Romans 9:29 and in James 5:4.

Answer 2

The following article is about the Interlinear Greek Scriptures, from which the New World Translation gets its Greek Scriptures:

"It Is The Best Interlinear New Testament Available",
by Dr. Jason BeDuhn, Associate Professor of Religious Studies, and Chair Department of Humanities, Arts, and Religion at Northern Arizona University
http://mysite.wanadoo-members.co.uk/newworldtranslation/kitbest.htm

>After being familiar with the NWT for 20 yrs and comparing it with some 55 English translations over that same period we can honestly say that it is our opinion this translation is indeed one of the major/main Bible translations of the 20th century, as Harper's Bible Dictionary* and The Lion Handbook to the Bible** admits."
*(1985 ed. R.G.Bratcher, The English Bible. pp.266, 267)
**(Lion Publishing, 1976 reprint, p. 79)
http://mysite.wanadoo-members.co.uk/newworldtranslation/home.htm

Regarding the NKJV:

New King James Version Preface
- The Format, (#5) says:

"The covenant name of God was usually translated from the Hebrew as "LORD" or "GOD" (using capital letters as shown) in the King James Old Testament. This tradition is maintained. In the present edition the name is so capitalized whenever the covenant name is quoted in the New Testament from a passage in the Old Testament." [At least they did that much!]


So... the actual >Name< of its own >Divine Author< has been "ussually" >Removed<, without the smallest of an attempt to explain why... ... ...

Wouldn't this be considered Copyright Infringement in any other case?

My take on that is that they want as many people as possible to be under the impression that Jehovah's Witnesses aren't really Christian. However, Revelation 1:5a calls
"...Jesus Christ, 'the Faithful Witness'..."
So, aren't all actual footstep followers of Christ by necessity also Jehovah's Witnesses?

Jesus was a Jew, & Jehovah had told that nation:

“YOU are my witnesses,” is the utterance of Jehovah, “even my servant whom I have chosen," ... YOU are my witnesses,” says Jehovah, “that I am God." --Isaiah 43:10,12

"A faithful witness is one that will not lie,
but a false witness launches forth mere lies" --Proverbs 14:5

Is not Lieing by Omission still a lie?

Has God somehow lost the right to determine how His own Word reads? If anyone else had a book written about their own dealings with others, would it likely refer to them by "Man", Mr., "Human", "Governor"... or rather by their personal name?

Answer 3

In the Old Testament, God is frequently called by the name יהוה

That was considered by the Jewish to be "the" sacred name of God. Because of the first commandment against using his name in vain, and out of respect, it became a tradition that the name was never spoken. Instead, the Jewish would write the word "Lord" over the word יהוה whenever it occurred in the scriptures.

When the Jews translated the Hebrew scriptures into Greek (around 250 BC) they translated the word יהוה as "Lord". Along came the Christians, and they followed the same tradition, using the word LORD (all in caps) for יהוה

The name appears several hundred times in the Old Testament. In seven verses, it is "transliterated" as the word Jehovah. (To transliterate means to write the word using English letters without translating it) The other times it is translated as LORD.

Since 1611 when the King James Bible was translated, our understanding of the Hebrew alphabet has improved. We now know that "Jehovah" is an inaccurate transliterating of the Hebrew יהוה into English. In fact, because the Jewish NEVER wrote the whole name, we have no way of properly transliterating it into English. Scholars best guess today is "Yahweh". So rather then mis-transliterate the name, most modern version choose to translate the name, using LORD instead of Jehovah or Yahweh.

The New World Translation, however, choose to go with the older, inaccurate transliteration of יהוה as Jehovah.

Answer 4

Without researching I believe God led King James into his translation for a reason. Anyone reading this that has a high school education has read Shakespears plays they were written at the peak of the English language. The word Lord in the King James version has a meaning of respect in it. Changing that to Jehovah isnt exactly wrong but removing the word Lord changes its meaning thats the reason the word Lord is in there For the word God. The word Lord used by King David meant that his God was well above his position as King. Lord is a more powerful word than Jehovah as for as the English language is concerned.

Answer 5

I believe that the 1611 KJV is the most accurately translated copy of the bible. I don't like the New King James any more than I like the NIV, the NWT, etc...

Jehovah is not the "True Name of God". It is YHWH (Yahweh). The Jews were so affraid of breaking the commandment of taking the Lord's name in vain, that they would not even speak His name, but substituted the name "Adonai" (Lord) or some other name in its place when ever they read it in Scripture. Eventually the scribes inserted the vowels from Adonai within the consonants YHWH and the result was Yahowah, or Jehovah. Jehovah was a man-made term.

The name Jehovah never occurs in the Greek manuscripts of the new testament, however it is inserted many many times in the JW translation. I have combed over many scriptures in the greek new testament comparing it to the JW translation, and there are many times where verses are changed to suit JW "doctrines".

Example, Acts 20:28
King James: "Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood."

JW bible: "Pay attention to yourselves and to all the flock, among which the holy spirit has appointed YOU overseers, to shepherd the congregation of God, which he purchased with the blood of his own Son."

Nowhere in the Greek text does it say any word that could be interpreted to mean "son".

Answer 6

Of what I know thus far, the bible of the Jehovah's Witnesses call Jesus a god, which only makes Him more like a really powerful and popular person and not perfectly God with us and the ultimate and only sacrifice for all sins. Their bible has many "word curves" or twisted interpretations that lead people to believe that they don't need Christ and that they can just go to God in heaven in prayer and when they die. But that isn't true. God is perfectly Holy and an unimaginably powerful Spirit. In a sense in order to relate to us better He sent His Son Jesus to experience every thing we experience as human beings so that He could save us from our sins. God in the form of Christ was tempted in every way like people are tempted but He never sinned. The bible of the Jehovah's Witnesses tell a completely different story; a 1/2 truth if you will. If you line their bible up side by side with the King James Version in the book of John the first chapter and/or Psalms 23 you'll see the play on words that make their bible a very bad interpretation of the real King James.

Answer 7

The name "Jehovah" is in itself a translation of the Hebrew "Yahweh." It means the same as "the Lord" in the context of the Word. When we talk about God, the meaning is beyond any one word. "Jehovah" is not considered accurate by many scholars. "The Lord" is a suitable English shorthand for the great I AM, Creator, Father in Heaven, God, etc. His name is truly beyond the human tongue and is only known in our hearts because it is written there.
Many people have trouble with the language in the KJV. The NKJV is simply the same translation with more modern language, making it easier for most folks to read. There are several translations out there that are good. If you are serious about studying the Word, you should start with what you are comfortable with and explore other translations.
The Message translation is excellent for those starting to read the Word. It is written in very contemporary language, using modern idioms and even changing certain phrases into their modern, colloquial counterparts. The New Living Translation is the most commonly used right now. It is also easy to read and very accurate.
The problem with the Jehovah's Witnesses' bible is that they believe that Jesus is actually the archangel Michael. Their bible is, shall we say, edited to match their ideas of Jesus and his divinity.
Hope this helps. Explore God's Word. It is always full of new discoveries. God bless.

Answer 8

in translating the Old Testament translators had to decide if they want to translate YHWH as the name Jehovah (or Yahweh) or preserve the Jewish custom of replacing it with the word 'Lord'. Different times and translators do it differently. If they use the word "lord" they indicate it in the notes.
This is OT only. The passage you refer to from Revelations has the word 'God' in the Greek, that is neither Yahweh nor Lord. All versions would translate the word 'theos' as God.

The charge of 'taking the name of God out of Scripture' has to do with the NT. The JWs believe that the name Jehovah was in the NT and replaced with 'Lord', and so wherever the word "Lord" appears referring to God they change it to Jehovah, but when it refers to Jesus (indicating he and Jehovah are one) they leave it in. There is no reason from the texts to do it; it is only done to try to support their novel beliefs about Jesus.

Answer 9

My loyalties are to the original manuscripts of the Old and New Testaments, written in Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek. Only the original languages are the Word of God as He inspired it. A translation is only an attempt to take what is said in one language and communicate it in another. The modern translations are superb in taking the meaning of the original languages and communicating it in a way that we can understand in English. However, none of the modern translations are perfect. Every translation contains verses that are at least somewhat mistranslated. In my study and teaching, I use several of the different translations in addition to studying the original languages. By comparing and contrasting the different translations, it is often easier to get a good grasp on what the verse is saying than by only using one translation.

Answer 10

The old King James used "THE LORD" in place of the Hebrew "YHWH" which is God's name out of respect just as observant Jews will not say or even write "God". The quote you have given is one of four occurrences of "Jehovah" in the King James version.

The old king Jame translates "YHWH" 6,510 as "The LORD", 4 times as "GOD" and 4 times as "JEHOVAH"

So, the New King James just took care of that inconsistency. I don't like their choice since there 200 additional entries of "Lord" in the King James and I would prefer to know if the writer was speaking of "Lord" or "YHWH".

As to taking the name of the Lord out of scripture, I don't think that was the intent. It, like the older Jewish tradition, was done out of reverence to God. As someone who is currently on his first time through the New King James it seems to have preserved the power of the word. Like all translations it is not perfect but when I research the words in the original language I have found fewer "glitches" in the translation than in other popular translations.

Answer 11

Do you really know the "NAME". Nope it is not Jehovah, or even better "Yaweh" which is a closer rendition of the sacred tetragrammon. Not even the Jews, who were given the sacred name even now today know its correct punctuation and rendition. The letters YHWH in the original text had no vowel points. So where did they come from? From the targums. Jewish copyists later added them. When they would come to the August Name they would not pronounce it, but would say another name for God lest they should pronounce and bring a curse on themselves. Eventually they lost the correct "pronunciation". They may tell you they know it, but they wont utter it, for the same reason mentioned above. Yet, this does not prove that they know it, just that they will not pronounce it for fear. I have done a thorough search of this so I know.