ChristiaNet MallWorld's Largest Christian MallChristian BlogsFree Bible QuizzesFree Ecards and Free Greeting CardsLoans, Debt, Business and Insurance Articles

David8318's Blog Replies
Post a New Blog

Vote on David8318 as a helpful ChristiaNet blogger by clicking this link. Currently David8318 has 180 votes. The higher the number of votes the more helpful this blogger is considered by the ChristiaNet community.


Celebrating Christmas Day
  
//NOT that it was ESSENTIAL to address him name//- StrongAxe.

So to use StrongAxe "Howard" analogy, StrongAxe wouldn't use Howards name at all! It's not essential to address God or anyone else by their name!? What stupid logic.

If God didn't want us to use his name, why would he have it recorded in the Bible in the first place?

The person who hates Jehovah and his name is of course Satan. And Satan has used his false religious organisations and his cohorts to make sure God's name has been removed from many translations.

Demonic-cult outfits remove, change and conceal the fact that God has a personal name. StrongAxe is simply a mouthpiece for these cult organisations who play loose and fast with God's name.


Celebrating Christmas Day
  
//Since it isn't//- Cluny.

So should we stop using 'Jesus'? If 'Jehovah' isn't accurate, neither is using 'Jesus'. The name 'Jesus' is just as inaccurate as 'Jehovah'. Yet I don't see you complaining about using 'Jesus'!

The point of course is what is more recognisable. You and others falsely claim 'adonai' [LORD] is the Hebrew word used at such places like Isaiah 42:8. This is YOUR HENIOUS LIE! The word 'Adonai' doesn't appear in Isaiah 42:8! Stop your lying Cluny!

If your reasoning is, "well no one knows", then we should all stop using 'Jesus'. But of course, your reasoning is a pathetic straw man argument. You don't want God's personal name known because it dismantles your pagan trinity dogma.


Celebrating Christmas Day
  
I haven't insisted on anything. My issue is why do translators insist on changing and removing God's name when translating from Hebrew to English.

NewKJV has no issue translating Yeshua to Jesus. Why does the NewKJV ( & others) play loose with YHWH? Why does the NewKJV not use Yahweh or Jehovah? They now remove "JEHOVAH" completely from new editions. WHY?

StrongAxe hypocritically points to one word in the NWT ('other' at Col.1:16) when the Bible he promotes plus many others remove and change God's name 6973 times!!

StrongAxe squeezes out the knat ("you use other"), but gulps down the camel by ignoring 6973 deliberate mistakes in trinitarian translations.


Bring Back Christmas
  
//Jews do it all the time when they read the Tanakh//- Cluny.

But the Jews kept God's name in the text! The issue with the Jews was about pronunciation, not Cluny's remove, change and twist policy.

//The NKJV renders the Hebrew YHVH as "LORD"//

Cluny needs educating as he doesn't know the difference between consonants and vowels. God's name is the Hebrew consonants YHWH. Cluny insists YHWH should be translated as "LORD". Y=L, H=O, V=R and H=D.

A 10 year old could tell you "H" is a consonant and is not equivalent to "O", a vowel.

Clear evidence the translators of the NewKJV deceitfully remove and change God's name. Cluny's insistence I will put down to childish ignorance.


Bring Back Christmas
  
//The NKJV renders the Hebrew YHVH as "LORD"//- Cluny.

"Lord" is not God's personal name!

Have a look at Isaiah 42:8. Isaiah wrote his book in Hebrew. In verse 8, the Hebrew word "adonai" ['Lord'] does not appear. In verse 8, the Hebrew consonants "YHWH" are found- God's personal name -as the verse states.

Thus, careful scholars will translate this verse:

"I am Yahweh, that is My name" (Holman, WEB, Lexham)

"I am Jehovah, that is my name" (ASV, Darby, Youngs, Byington)

The NewKJV and many other translations remove and change YHWH all 6973 times to 'Lord' when adonai is not the original Hebrew word used.

WHY?


Celebrating Christmas Day
  
//Mussolini and Hitler were not practicing any religion//- Cluny.

I haven't said they were practicing any religion. What the RCC is completely guilty of is giving these fascists support and credence. The RCC is absolutely complicit in supporting fascist characters who brought death and misery to millions during the last century.

Like Hitler, Mussolini signed a concordat with the Catholic church because these fascists knew gaining the support of the RCC was imperative to spreading their anti-semitic filth.

If the Jehovah's Witnesses had signed up to these fascist thugs the same way the RCC did, I wonder if Cluny would be so apologetic to the JW's?


Bring Back Christmas
  
The 2 trinitarians taking issue with God's name complain JW's use 'Jehovah' but then are hypocritically happy to use 'LORD' instead. I'm sure their hypocrisy is clearly evident.

Yes 'Yahweh' is closer to the rendering of YHWH. But everyone is happy with 'Jesus' despite the fact Yeshua is a more correct way. I don't hear StrongAxe complaining about the use of 'Jesus'!

God is not a pronunciation Nazi.

So JW's use of 'Jehovah' for God [YHWH], and 'Jesus' for the Son of God is purely because of people's familiarity with them.

On the other hand, changing God's personal name YHWH to adonai as trinitarians Cluny and StrongAxe advocate is a blatant abuse of scripture.


Bring Back Christmas
  
//So the Watchtower has created a doctrine//

Another ridiculous statement from StrongAxe.

So the Watchtower wrote these ancient manuscripts in existence today which contain God's personal name Jehovah [YHWH]? Suggesting such a thing would be in the realms of stupidity. The evidence is abundant- ancient manuscripts in existence today contain God's personal name- YHWH. StrongAxe needs to suck it up.

Either StrongAxe is in denial of the truth or he is complicit with the dangerous practice of removing God's personal name, and replacing it erroneously with a title such as adonai or kyrios all 6973 times!

A dangerous practice which anyone engaged in or complicit with must pay heed to Rev.22:19!


Bring Back Christmas
  
//EVERY SINGLE NT MANUSCRIPT, God is called "Kyrios"//

What everyone should know is that NT manuscripts after the 4th century, God is called kyrios.

None of the original NT manuscripts predating the 4th century exist today. So no one can for any certainty claim that God's name was not in the original NT manuscripts.

What is without question is God's name, Jehovah [YHWH], was in Hebrew manuscripts and in the LXX- some of which can be examined today to prove.

The pagan trinity doesn't work when both God and his son have personal names- Jehovah and Jesus. It is no surprise then that trinitarians airbrush God's name out of the Hebrew and Greek for false doctrinal reasons.


Bring Back Christmas
  
//the Greek equivalent of YHVH is used nowhere in the NT, or in the LXX.//- Cluny.

Cluny really knows how to get things so badly wrong. God's name- YHWH -did appear in the Septuagint (LXX). Greek writers of Jesus' day did see God's personal name in the Hebrew text- and kept it preserved in the LXX in the form of the Hebrew Tetragrammaton [YHWH]. So how does Cluny know it wasn't used in the NT?

Cluny will deny this fact until the cows come home, but anyone can examine an existing fragment of an early LXX manuscript to see God's name in all it's glory there in the text.

Do a search on: septuagint, Oxyrhynchus, Egypt, job 42:11-12, and click images. See for yourselves.

Cluny's in for a shock!


Celebrating Christmas Day
  
//RCC making an agreement with Hitler was under duress//- StrongAxe.

Absolute rubbish! That's straight out of the RCC apologists text book.

Throughout history, the Vatican and various high ranking Catholic figures such as Charlemagne, Otto the Great, Napoleon, Mussolini and Hitler have participated in nearly all of Europes bloodiest, most destructive conflicts!

//behaviors OF THEIR OWN PEOPLE//

Well at least JW's refuse to go to war and slaughter their brothers and sisters- unlike some who have shamelessly gone to war and killed members of their own churches!

JW's obey Christ's command to "have [agape] love among themselves"- Jo.13:34,35.


Bring Back Christmas
  
//God knows what we mean. He is not a Grammar Nazi//- StrongAxe.

God is not a Pronunciation Nazi either.

Yes, both 'Jehovah' and 'Jesus' are inaccurate. That's my point. But everyone accepts 'Jesus' as meaning God's son. Similarly 'Jehovah' is widely accepted as the personal name of the Almighty God. Pronunciation Nazi's will insist otherwise.

What Jehovah does care about is the complete removal of His name from Bible translations when it is blatantly in the original text. StrongAxe gulps down the camel, ignoring the fact that trinitarian translators have removed God's name all 6973 times and squeezes out the gnat as to how God's name should be pronounced.

Everyone can see the ridiculousness of StrongAxe argument!


Bring Back Christmas
  
//I was confirming what the tradition has been for thousands of years before Christ//- StrongAxe.

StrongAxe is suffering delusions of grandeur as he has no idea how God's personal name was pronounced 1000's years before Christ!

"Jehovah" is a valid name for YHWH just as "Jesus" is for YESHUA. Which is probably why the King James Bible uses JEHOVAH at Psalms 83:18 and in 4 other places. But StrongAxe ignores the central point- it's not the pronunciation of YHWH- it's using and recognising God's name rather than subsituting it 6973 times with an appellative title like "Lord". 6973 deceitful errors!

If 'Jehovah' is wrong, so is 'Jesus'.


Celebrating Christmas Day
  
//some Catholics followed Hitler. Therefore, Trinitarian theology is evil//- StrongAxe.

I have not said this at all.

StrongAxe misnomer that it was "some Catholics". No!! It was the Catholic Hierarchy that gave the Nazi regime legitimacy. There is a case for collective responsibility here. It was not a case of RCC leaders denouncing Hitler while "some Catholics" supported him. That's StrongAxe fallacy. It was RCC policy from the Vatican down that supported Hitler while "some Catholics" denounced him.

If RCC leaders had been practicing true Christian teachings of love rather than false teachings (like the trinity), I'm sure we would all have been spared WWII (Jo.13:34,35).


Bring Back Christmas
  
//many anti trinity people have told be I am going to hell//- Samuelbb7.

They certainly were not JW's.

JW's do not believe in "hell" where false religion teach people burn for eternity and use the threat of "hell" to extort money from the laity.

Hellfire is not a Bible teaching and not taught or used as a threat by JW's.

Jehovah's Witnesses believe Jehovah God is a just and loving God. The thought of burning people in fire is something detestable to Him- Jer.7:31, 1Jo.4:8.


Celebrating Christmas Day
  
//NOTHING in Trinitarian theology itself that teaches slaughter//- StrongAxe.

They certainly did not teach love during the 2 World Wars!

Anyone only has to look up Hitler and Catholic priests on any internet search, click on images and you will find an array of pictures from the 2nd World War of trinitarians dressed up as Catholic priests sucking up to the Nazi leader Hitler, even giving him the Nazi salute.

There were trinitarian (Catholic and Protestant) Chaplains and padre's blessing troops on both sides! It was important for Satan's political system to have false religion on board to send the masses to war.

There was no Christian "love" shown by trinitarians (Jo.13:34,35).


Bring Back Christmas
  
//Not really//- Cluny.

Yes, really!

Yes I do know some translations have changed YHWH to appear as 'LORD' in the English text.

But 'LORD' is not a suitable replacement for God's name as it appears in the Hebrew text: the Tetragrammaton "YHWH".

The Hebrew Adonai and the Greek kyrios are accepted as the word "Lord" and translated as such in English. "LORD" does not do YHWH justice.

Trinitarians hide and remove God's name YHWH [Yahweh or Jehovah] from the text 6973 times for false doctrinal reasons. It would have been difficult for the trinity to develop if God's personal name, distinct from Jesus, was to remain.

Trinitarian Bibles have at least 6973 errors.


Bring Back Christmas
  
//the majority of which... superiority of the majority opinion//- StrongAxe.

You treat hypocrisy as if it were a virtue. Do you mean the subjective opinions you're making?

Which versions have you quoted? You've only quoted KJV. I have pointed to many versions which use "He" at 1Tim.3:16.

I doubt nobody in their right mind would willingly "join" a trinitarian sect if they were told where the pagan trinity came from. But of course, you guys baptise them when they're infants, so they can't use their own minds to decide for themselves. I'm wise to your pagan trinity dogma. Why would I swap Bible truth for the pagan trinity?

There were only 8 in the Ark. "Majority opinion" means nothing.


Bring Back Christmas
  
//usage of "other"//- StrongAxe.

"Other" has every right to be in the text at Col.1:16. The Greek word pan'ta allows "other" to be in the text [pan'ta: an inflected form of pas- eg.Lu.13:2 "all other" (see: NewKJV, NIV, NLT, NRS, RSV etc...)].

Col.1:16, "All other things have been created through him and for him" makes perfect grammatical sense. Jehovah created all things, all "other" things have been created through him [Jesus] and for him [Jesus].

Who would Jesus be creating "through" and "for" if "other" wasn't there?

Greek grammar and context allow for "other" to be in the text.


Bring Back Christmas
  
//I quoted KJV... looks like "God"... to me//- StrongAxe.

So strongaxe accepts without question what is written at 1Tim.3:16 in KJV when numerous other translations read "He [who] was manifest..."

KJV was translated from the Received Text, based on Erasmus' Greek text of 1516 itself based on 2 inferior 12thC manuscripts.

But many scholars agree that the text accepted in the 16th & 17th Centuries (ie.the Recieved Text on which KJV is based) is full of inaccuracies, many of which have be corrected by the vastly wider availability of older manuscripts now in existence today.

The 4thC Codex Sinaiticus is one such text which shows 1Tim.3:16 saying "He was manifest..."



Copyright© 2017 ChristiaNet®. All Rights Reserved.