JESUS IS NOT YHWH

[freelight]

Christ in you, the hope of immortality.......

Christ in you, the hope of immortality.......

Galatians 4:1, being a heir of the Divine yet later needing adoption Galatians 4:5 is a oxymoron, to me, the symbol of a Son be it flesh or spirit is a temporal state, if we are to remain Sons forever without reaching maturity of are parents status then the Son of God analogy breaks down and should be called a creation like Frankenstein, not the off spring of God.

Paul drew his own analogies in his gospel dissertations, and even though the 'process' of salvation functions according to his own terms and explanations, the universal 'gnosis' he shared speaking 'figuratively' still holds, since indeed, "to be spiritually minded is life and peace", and "those who are led by the Spirit of God, these are the sons of God" & "where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty", and so on.

That divine mystery hidden from previous ages and revealed to Paul personally, is the 'Christ in us, the hope of 'glory' (or 'immortality'),...such is the divine nature itself, incorporated in our being by the Spirit, when we partake of the very nature of Deity, and inherit that eternal treasure as 'sons', because we inherit all the Father has, since it is his good pleasure to give us the kingdom, and its 'keys'.

 

[freelight]

​

You're right. Readers can just read below, and judge for themselves. Thank you for providing the clarity.
Thank you again.

:thumb:

You're most welcome

I have perhaps thousands of commentary here over the years as well, and the flow of logos shall ever continue, for all to explore, research and investigate for themselves. Life is an ever ongoing evolution of consciousness, and 'creation' is but the movement of such in all its various aspects and dimensions. Its all an influx of creative energies weaving new realities in space and time. In fact, 'Creator' and 'Creation' are 'One' in the sense that creation arises in Spirit, and evolves itself thru 'experience', so that even 'God' is an evolving total of pure energy, consciousness and spirit

 

[RevTestament]

The individual letters do NOT mean "Behold the nail, Behold the hand." Where do you get that translation? I've never heard that.

If you want to know what "YHWH" really means, this site is helpful:
https://www.jw.org/en/publications/books/bible-teach/jehovah-meaning-of-gods-name/#?insight[search_id]=5852194e-f483-4993-9225-0274

Yes, they do. Just do a google search for the phrase. Or you can go to any site which teaches Hebrew and learn that each of the 24 characters in Hebrew have a meaning.
The 4 letters are he, vav, he, yod. The he means to look or behold. The vav was a tent stake, peg, or nail. The yod was the hand.
I already told you what the name means as a word, so I don't need your link. The JWs are generally good people, but have the nature of God screwed up. To believe only the Father is YHWH, you have to ignore too many scriptures, and believe that the Jews would insert something which totally goes against their own present belief that only the Father is YHWH. The Father is clearly not the Branch who is to be called YHWH as well. Jews have no reason to insert that into their scripture, and JWs disregard it to their own error rather than trying to understand God from what He tells us. I will be glad to discuss scriptures with you anytime, but if you are going to remove relevant scriptures from the canon, the debate becomes meaningless. I will discuss the issue with the KJV or essentially any standard Protestant Bible. Cheers

 

[daqq]

Yes, they do. Just do a google search for the phrase. Or you can go to any site which teaches Hebrew and learn that each of the 24 characters in Hebrew have a meaning.
The 4 letters are he, vav, he, yod. The he means to look or behold. The vav was a tent stake, peg, or nail. The yod was the hand.
I already told you what the name means as a word, so I don't need your link. The JWs are generally good people, but have the nature of God screwed up. To believe only the Father is YHWH, you have to ignore too many scriptures, and believe that the Jews would insert something which totally goes against their own present belief that only the Father is YHWH. The Father is clearly not the Branch who is to be called YHWH as well. Jews have no reason to insert that into their scripture, and JWs disregard it to their own error rather than trying to understand God from what He tells us. I will be glad to discuss scriptures with you anytime, but if you are going to remove relevant scriptures from the canon, the debate becomes meaningless. I will discuss the issue with the KJV or essentially any standard Protestant Bible. Cheers

Bogus.

@RevTestament - I was hoping you might see this thread and join in but it appears you have not been around since we had this exchange, (which is why I quote your post here, just to bring it to your attention).

Additionally when Paul wrote this:

Ephesians 1:15-21 ASV
15 For this cause I also, having heard of the faith in the Lord Jesus which is among you, and the love which ye show toward all the saints,
16 cease not to give thanks for you, making mention of you in my prayers;
17 that the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give unto you a spirit of wisdom and revelation in the knowledge of him;
18 having the eyes of your heart enlightened, that ye may know what is the hope of his calling, what the riches of the glory of his inheritance in the saints,
19 and what the exceeding greatness of his power to us-ward who believe, according to that working of the strength of his might
20 which he wrought in Christ, when he raised him from the dead, and made him to sit at his right hand in the heavenly places,
21 far above all rule, and authority, and power, and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this world, but also in that which is to come:

You would not have even been allowed to speak the Name of the Father aloud anywhere in Israel, or among Jews, even if you knew how to pronounce it.

He writes, "every name that is named", but the name of the Father was not named.

 

[RevTestament]

Oh and as for your JW link - It says the English, common rendering “Jehovah” should be put back in the Bible, and that it is against the law to misuse that name. Then they should realize that Jehovah is a mispronunciation and therefore a misuse of that name. The Hebrew has no hard "J" sound. The name should be pronounced either Yehovah, or perhaps more anciently Yahowah. These are the closest transliterations to the Hebrew pronunciation.

 

[RevTestament]

Bogus.

What's bogus? That Hebrew letters have meanings that they combined to make their words? That sentiment appears to go against 3000 years of Hebrew usage... Next you will tell me all the sites teaching Hebrew are bogus I guess?

 

[daqq]

What's bogus? That Hebrew letters have meanings that they combined to make their words? That sentiment appears to go against 3000 years of Hebrew usage... Next you will tell me all the sites teaching Hebrew are bogus I guess?

Please go to the link I posted and perhaps you might see what I was talking about. Also, I edited in a scripture passage to my previous post which is now on the previous page of this thread, (Eph 1:15-21), with a little commentary that you might want to go back and look at.

 

[RevTestament]

Please go to the link I posted and perhaps you might see what I was talking about. Also, I edited in a scripture passage to my previous post which is now on the previous page of this thread, (Eph 1:15-21), with a little commentary that you might want to go back and look at.

The silly tradition that the Hebrew name is not to be pronounced is terribly silly, given that YHWH will publish His name throughout the earth. The time is at hand for the world to learn the truth of His name - so that His name will no longer be misused, but revered above every name.

Deuteronomy 32:3 Because I will publish the name of YHWH: ascribe ye greatness unto our God.

This is YHWH saying He will publish His name. Jews will not stop it - for they do not even understand it anymore, but deny His name.

 

[daqq]

The silly tradition that the Hebrew name is not to be pronounced is terribly silly, given that YHWH will publish His name throughout the earth. The time is at hand for the world to learn the truth of His name - so that His name will no longer be misused, but revered above every name.

It does not matter whether you think it was a silly tradition or not. You are not hearing the point: it is a fact that the Tetragrammaton Name of the Father was not allowed to be spoken aloud anywhere in public, in Israel, or among Jews. That has bearing on what Paul wrote because of context, culture, and time of writing. Like it or lump it; that is the truth either way. So when he says what he says in the passage it specifically excludes the Tetragrammaton Name of the Father because that name was not spoken or named among Judaism of the first century. In fact that is the most likely reason why Paul worded that statement the way in which he did, (Eph 1:21). As for what I said is bogus it has been proven so in the thread by "Beameup" which I quoted that post addressed to you on the previous page: I even quoted your post from here into that thread and gave you a "mention" in hopes that you would see it in your messages and it would come to your attention. The statement, "behold the nail behold the hand", is nothing more than speculation by those who already have it in their minds that "Jesus is YHWH" to begin with and are just looking for ways to try to make what they want to believe come true.

 

[daqq]

Bogus.

@RevTestament - I was hoping you might see this thread and join in but it appears you have not been around since we had this exchange, (which is why I quote your post here, just to bring it to your attention).

Additionally when Paul wrote this:

Ephesians 1:15-21 ASV
15 For this cause I also, having heard of the faith in the Lord Jesus which is among you, and the love which ye show toward all the saints,
16 cease not to give thanks for you, making mention of you in my prayers;
17 that the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give unto you a spirit of wisdom and revelation in the knowledge of him;
18 having the eyes of your heart enlightened, that ye may know what is the hope of his calling, what the riches of the glory of his inheritance in the saints,
19 and what the exceeding greatness of his power to us-ward who believe, according to that working of the strength of his might
20 which he wrought in Christ, when he raised him from the dead, and made him to sit at his right hand in the heavenly places,
21 far above all rule, and authority, and power, and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this world, but also in that which is to come:

You would not have even been allowed to speak the Name of the Father aloud anywhere in Israel, or among Jews, even if you knew how to pronounce it.

He writes, "every name that is named", but the name of the Father was not named.

What's bogus? That Hebrew letters have meanings that they combined to make their words? That sentiment appears to go against 3000 years of Hebrew usage... Next you will tell me all the sites teaching Hebrew are bogus I guess?

Here is just one post from that thread where your theory was demolished:

And there is yet more Beameup. In the following inscription from Wadi el-Hol, (which is one of the inscriptions discussed by Dr. Petrovich and Jeff A. Benner), there is a symbol next to the word for "El" which is not translated because apparently no one is quite sure what it is, and it sure looks familiar, (lol), while the speculation by some is that it may be what is called a "divine determinative", (a "divinity marker" used in connection with divine names to signify some sort of divine nature or importance to the name). At the very bottom of the following image file is the ox-head and lamed for the word El, directly above is what sure looks like a paleo yod with the two stems at the top closed up, (perhaps like the modern yod might be supposed to represent), and at the same time it is placed higher than the word it is accentuating similarly to the way the yod is higher than the rest of the script even in modern times, (as if floating or heavenly, that is, not touching the "ground" or bottom level of the text).

http://msheflin.blogspot.com/2012/05/wadi-el-hol-translation.html

"The Egyptian divine-determinative nṯr is certainly placed above Ilu’s name, and may unclearly be drawn next to Aṯtar’s name.The Horizontal Inscription also evidences a probable simplification of the cuneiform divine determinative. Hamilton speculated it may be a “subscript y?”."
http://msheflin.blogspot.com/2012/05/wadi-el-hol-translation.html

By "subscript y" no doubt the equivalent to yod is meant in the speculation. Now look at the symbol for the yod or "Y" sound, (second row from the bottom), from several other Sinaitic inscriptions, (Sinai 355 and 365, and note that they recognize no "Y" or yod symbol for the inscriptions discussed by Jeff A. Benner and Dr. Petrovich).

http://msheflin.blogspot.com/2012/05/wadi-el-hol-translation.html

Now look below at the letter that is labeled as "ḡ" with the sound "ḡa", (not the "g" sound from gaml or gimel), near the bottom of the list. Again, it sure looks familiar, that is, much like a yod, and look across the same row to the middle column which shows the early south Semitic yod, (which is open ended just like the later paleo yod).

Here is a better image file of the same glyph in the far right bottom corner:

Proto-Sinaitic / Proto-Canaanite script
"This is one version of the Proto-Canaanite script using Phoenician/Hebrew alphabetical order. The actual arrangement of letters used is uncertain. Most letters have more than one shape."

https://www.omniglot.com/writing/protosinaitc.htm

Note the question mark below where the description is found for the other letters: whatever the symbol is supposed to represent is unknown, (and thus the sound, "ḡa", is conjecture). So it is also possible that the yod began as somewhat of a divine determinative or divinity marker. If this were true, and those who rendered the Septuagint understood this, one might expect to find evidence of this, such as examples where names that begin with a yod are for some strange reason rendered with an eta, (just as was done with Yeshayahu, "Ησαιας", even though his name begins with a yodh in Hebrew). It could very well be that Yeshayahu was considered an "elohim" of divine-judge-prophet status just as the scripture says of the judges, princes, and rulers of Israel, so that the yodh at the beginning of his name may have been treated as both a divine marker as well as a letter, (which perhaps in their thinking called for a change from the yod-equivalent Greek Iota to instead an Eta at the beginning of his name).

More importantly for this entire topic: consider what the same thinking might imply when it comes to The Name which we are discussing, ("He Who Exists", "He Who Is", "The Existing One", "The Being", etc., Y-HWH).

EDIT-Addendum:

:chuckle:

 

[RevTestament]

More importantly for this entire topic: consider what the same thinking might imply when it comes to The Name which we are discussing, ("He Who Exists", "He Who Is", "The Existing One", "The Being", etc., Y-HWH).

Yes I realize what it means. It means the "chosen people" once did the same to the Father before the beginning - so He earned that name - just like Yeshua inherited it. Thus as echad/one Lord they can both tell Israel they are YHWH Elohim, He who gives life/the Word of the family/house of immovable power.
The people shall finally learn that Yeshua is the revelator of the Father and did nothing of Himself, but that which He saw the Father do.

Zech 12:7 The Lord also shall save the tents of Judah first, that the glory of the house of David and the glory of the inhabitants of Jerusalem do not magnify themselves against Judah.

8 In that day shall the Lord defend the inhabitants of Jerusalem; and he that is feeble among them at that day shall be as David; and the house of David shall be as God, as the angel of the Lord before them.

9 ¶ And it shall come to pass in that day, that I will seek to destroy all the nations that come against Jerusalem.

10 And I will pour upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplications: and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn for him, as one mourneth for his only son, and shall be in bitterness for him, as one that is in bitterness for his firstborn.

 

[NWL]

The JWs are generally good people, but have the nature of God screwed up. To believe only the Father is YHWH, you have to ignore too many scriptures, and believe that the Jews would insert something which totally goes against their own present belief that only the Father is YHWH. The Father is clearly not the Branch who is to be called YHWH as well.

What scriptures are you referring to in particular?

Oh and as for your JW link - It says the English, common rendering “Jehovah” should be put back in the Bible, and that it is against the law to misuse that name. Then they should realize that Jehovah is a mispronunciation and therefore a misuse of that name. The Hebrew has no hard "J" sound. The name should be pronounced either Yehovah, or perhaps more anciently Yahowah. These are the closest transliterations to the Hebrew pronunciation.

I'm not aware of your understanding of who God is, however I see that you state that God's name should not be pronounced Jehovah. Whilst I do think there are better or closer pronunciations as to what the original was I wonder, why do you call Jesus Jesus since his name begins with a J too?

No person today knows if Yeshua is exactly how Jesus name was said, so if you believe Jesus is God, with his name being above every name (phil 2:9), why do you refer to Jesus as Jesus, is this not too a perversion of a sacred name?

 

[JudgeRightly]

I'm not aware of your understanding of who God is, however I see that you state that God's name should not be pronounced Jehovah. Whilst I do think there are better or closer pronunciations as to what the original was I wonder, why do you call Jesus Jesus since his name begins with a J too?

No person today knows if Yeshua is exactly how Jesus name was said, so if you believe Jesus is God, with his name being above every name (phil 2:9), why do you refer to Jesus as Jesus, is this not too a perversion of a sacred name?

Because the Greek doesn't have a letter "J", but it does have "I" (capital i)

And I'm sure that if Jesus were among us, he'd be just fine with people calling Him Jesus. I'm also sure that he'd speak in a language we'd understand, and probably even use the NASB.

I simply call Him Jesus because that's the way His name was translated into my language, and I don't worry too much about it, because I don't think He would care too much.

 

[NWL]

Because the Greek doesn't have a letter "J", but it does have "I" (capital i)

And I'm sure that if Jesus were among us, he'd be just fine with people calling Him Jesus. I'm also sure that he'd speak in a language we'd understand, and probably even use the NASB.

I simply call Him Jesus because that's the way His name was translated into my language, and I don't worry too much about it, because I don't think He would care too much.

I'm glad you're someone who accepts the basic principle I described, I'm curious as to how RevTestament will answer. Do you also think its ok to use the name Jehovah then?

 

[JudgeRightly]

I'm glad you're someone who accepts the basic principle I described. Do you also think its ok to use the name Jehovah then?

There's a picture on the basement level of my parents' house that has every name of God in the Bible. I don't see any reason why it would be unacceptable to use any of those names when talking about God.

I'll see if I can get a photo of it when I go home this weekend.

 

[Zeke]

Paul drew his own analogies in his gospel dissertations, and even though the 'process' of salvation functions according to his own terms and explanations, the universal 'gnosis' he shared speaking 'figuratively' still holds, since indeed, "to be spiritually minded is life and peace", and "those who are led by the Spirit of God, these are the sons of God" & "where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty", and so on.

The
That divine mystery hidden from previous ages and revealed to Paul personally, is the 'Christ in us, the hope of 'glory' (or 'immortality'),...such is the divine nature itself, incorporated in our being by the Spirit, when we partake of the very nature of Deity, and inherit that eternal treasure as 'sons', because we inherit all the Father has, since it is his good pleasure to give us the kingdom, and its 'keys'.

Not blaming Paul or whoever wrote it, the paradox of the transition of the original conscience intent is the letters weakness, which is why the study of them can only take one so far, the squabbling over jot and tittle is useless other than temporal perceived victory for the intellects pride in knowing a form of truth instead of the whole of the experience that awaits our discovery within our own I am.

 

[Nihilo]

Can you show where Jesus taught this?

There any number of New Testament verses that can be referenced for the Trinity (Acts 20:28 KJV ; Matthew 28:19 KJV ; 2nd Corinthians 13:14 KJV ; 1st Peter 1:2 KJV), but the correct succinct answer to your question is that He teaches us still today, and He last revised the expression He uses to teach us in 1994, with the promulgation of Pope Saint John Paul's new Catechism of the Catholic Church, and later on with Pope Benedict's Compendium to the Catechism of the Catholic Church.

 

[daqq]

Yes I realize what it means. It means the "chosen people" once did the same to the Father before the beginning - so He earned that name - just like Yeshua inherited it. Thus as echad/one Lord they can both tell Israel they are YHWH Elohim, He who gives life/the Word of the family/house of immovable power.
The people shall finally learn that Yeshua is the revelator of the Father and did nothing of Himself, but that which He saw the Father do.

Zech 12:7 The Lord also shall save the tents of Judah first, that the glory of the house of David and the glory of the inhabitants of Jerusalem do not magnify themselves against Judah.

8 In that day shall the Lord defend the inhabitants of Jerusalem; and he that is feeble among them at that day shall be as David; and the house of David shall be as God, as the angel of the Lord before them.

9 ¶ And it shall come to pass in that day, that I will seek to destroy all the nations that come against Jerusalem.

10 And I will pour upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplications: and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn for him, as one mourneth for his only son, and shall be in bitterness for him, as one that is in bitterness for his firstborn.

1) "...and the house of David shall be as God, as the angel of the Lord before them."

What does that mean to you?

2) "...and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced..."

If you think that is the Father speaking you did not do enough homework.

massa - burden, utterance, prophecy . . .
n'um - the oracle, the utterance, thus says, ("thus saith"), the whisper . . .

A burden-prophecy of the Word of YHWH concerning Yisrael; the Oracle of YHWH who stretches out the heavens, and lays the foundation of the earth, and forms the spirit-breath of man within him: Behold, I (the Oracle-Word of YHWH) will make Yerushalem a cup of reeling-intoxication to all the surrounding peoples...

...And they shall look on me, (the Oracle-Word of YHWH), whom they pierced...

In the mgillat-kephalidi-header of the Sefer it is written concerning me . . .

Sacrifice and offering You have not desired: mine earlets You have opened, (pierced), burnt offerings and sin offerings You have not required. Then I said, Behold, I am come, in the mgillat-kephalidi-header of the Sefer it is written concerning me: I delight to do Your will, O my Elohim, and Your Torah is within my inward parts.

λογια ζωντα - Living Oracles, (the Torah, Acts 7:38), Living Words, Living Sayings . . .

PS ~ Reply #1070 has been edited with another file added at the bottom of the post.

 

[RevTestament]

What scriptures are you referring to in particular?



I'm not aware of your understanding of who God is, however I see that you state that God's name should not be pronounced Jehovah. Whilst I do think there are better or closer pronunciations as to what the original was I wonder, why do you call Jesus Jesus since his name begins with a J too?

No person today knows if Yeshua is exactly how Jesus name was said, so if you believe Jesus is God, with his name being above every name (phil 2:9), why do you refer to Jesus as Jesus, is this not too a perversion of a sacred name?

I was responding to the JW site which was being picky. However, I often use Yeshua. That is probably what His contemporaries called him. Back in the days of the prophets, He would probably be called Yahoshua. This apparently got shortened to Yeshua after the diaspora. Why does it matter? Because Jesus has no meaning. What does it mean? It is a made-up word formed by trying to convert the name into Greek and then later adding an English J sound. I think Yeshua would have been better served by transliterating the name into Greek, but this is not what Jerome did. If it weren't for Jerome, I imagine Gentiles would be calling Jesus, Joshua. Yahoshua means God/Yah saves. It is also important to prophecy as to who is saying what to whom. In deference to my Savior I have often begun using Yeshua. It's a word that has meaning.

 

[RevTestament]

I'm glad you're someone who accepts the basic principle I described, I'm curious as to how RevTestament will answer. Do you also think its ok to use the name Jehovah then?

Jews will prefer it since it is not an accurate pronunciation. I prefer, however, to accurately publish His name.