Path: paganini.bofh.team!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!news.mixmin.net!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: "NightBulb.net" Newsgroups: alt.religion.christian.roman-catholic,alt.bible,alt.religion.christian Subject: Re: True translations vs false translations Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2022 13:37:01 -0600 Organization: Mixmin Message-ID: References: <9u2vph123ari6c15l6huq4vc7isegvgbss@4ax.com> <63a08206$0$2250$1c4686b2@news.club.cc.cmu.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Injection-Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2022 05:27:04 -0000 (UTC) Injection-Info: news.mixmin.net; posting-host="d2ecf279f9db57a3ecf3e5985e9bfed2f945d15a"; logging-data="2843688"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@mixmin.net" Content-Language: en-US In-Reply-To: Xref: paganini.bofh.team alt.religion.christian.roman-catholic:1154215 alt.bible:653938 alt.religion.christian:795825 On 12/19/22 13:35, zebra2@windstream.net wrote: > On 19 Dec 2022 15:23:50 GMT, servant wrote: >> Smile, then why not use the most accurate transliteration of the name, not >> the mistaken one of the middle ages rcc "jehovah"? JEHOVAH is not Roman Catholic. Yahweh is the Roman Catholic name. "Yahweh" is the ancient Latin pronunciation of the Latin, IOVE, or JOVE, or Jupiter. IOVE or JOVE is pronounced, "Yah-weh." In ancient Latin the "V" has a "W" sound and "IO" is "Yah". There's the real origin of the name, "Yahweh." The Hebrew JHWH is pronounced, JEH-HO-VEH, with a clear, distinct, "J" sound, not a "Y" sound. It is the Romans who pronounced the I/J as a "Y". The Hebrews pronounced the letter JOT with a "J" sound where it occurs as the first letter before a vowel, just as did ancient Greeks and other peoples speaking various languages using the same alphabet. JEHOVAH is from the Masoretic and Textus Receptus used by all the reformers, who were avowed enemies of the RCC. You're inventing a myth that tricks Christians into worshipping the Roman JOVE, the prince of demons. The Romans and Egyptians and Babylonians have been trying to get everyone to worship their Jupiter deity by hook or by crook. > Because the more accurate one (closer to Hebrew; Yahweh) is not as > well known as the Latinized-English form Jehovah. And it plays upon > the letters in the Tetragrammaton. (which to my knowledge may also not > be 100% correct; YHWH in English. Bullshit. The name is JHWH, not YHWH. The first letter is JOT, and is vocalized as the J sound. The modern name, "YOD" is a modern invention. In the original Hebrew/Phoenician/Proto-Greek alphabet (they all used the same alphabet) the JOT is a JOT with a "J." Before a vowel at the beginning of a word it has the "J" sound. > God did not see fit to carry His exact name forward to our time. Thus > we use a name for God that has been around the longest in later times, > and that most people today can identify with. When the resurrection > happens, by then we will certainly know the correct pronunciation and > spelling of His sacred name. Nonsense. He said his Name would be preserved to all generations. And by calling it, "His sacred name" you are taking part in the Hebrew roots heresy. There is no "sacred name." It's just a name, or more properly, a title. The Name roughly means, LORD, or BIG BOSS. Jesus said every JOT and title would be preserved. So go argue your theory with Him. >> Friend james list, or so >> he is told, the below in english translation *only*. No jw vatican person >> doing "translation" kknows *none* of the below in the original languages, >> *none*. Neither do the "Church" scholars. Of special note is the fact that during the reformation era, the men translating bibles were those who fought against the Church, not the men beholden to it. >> Instead the jw vatican took a limited number of existing english >> translations and back fitted them by editing to now contain jw vatican >> doctrines. Every pastor of every church I've ever visited does the same thing every Sunday from the pulpit. > If someone correctly translates many words that you need, it would be > stupid and a waste of time to translate them again for yourself. Is > that not logical? If that was me, that is what I would do, as long as > I gave the source. (which JW's have done for ALL their translated > material. See below.) Jehobuzz Witlesses insert the name JEHOVAH into the New Testament, despite the fact that that name never occurs anywhere in the original manuscripts. [.....] > Thus they consulted all of those reference works in making the NWT. I > am not privy to all the details of the translations, but am glad they > did all that research first. And as far as I know, their Bible is as > accurate as it gets. > > I ask again, did your Bible remove the around 7000 places of the > Tetragrammaton from itself? Please answer this time. If you are not > sure, just give me the name of your translation and I will look it up. The Witchtower Society inserts the tetragrammaton into the NT, where it is not found. Is that "as accurate as it gets?" Of special note here is all the wannabe scholars who pretend to know ancient languages when clearly they don't and are just re-gurgitating linguistic myths. You so-called Christians need to stop pretending that you know anything and become as little children so you can find the truth. Start asking real questions instead of pretending to know the answers. It's OK to be wrong. It's not OK to prop up your errors as divinely inspired. -- Nightbulb | https://blog.nightbulb.net | Flip the night switch. If tacky red hats annoy Pharisees I want to buy hats for the whole town.