Jump to content
IGNORED

Show a Jehovah's Witness that Jehovah has removed his own name from the Bible!


Limey_Bob

Recommended Posts


  • Group:  Advanced Member
  • Followers:  3
  • Topic Count:  27
  • Topics Per Day:  0.01
  • Content Count:  327
  • Content Per Day:  0.13
  • Reputation:   172
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  03/30/2017
  • Status:  Offline

One of the main arguments which Jehovah's Witnesses will claim when they approach you on your own doorstep, is that the divine name (YHWH - popularized as Jehovah, which even they will admit is an incorrect rendering), has been removed from the Bible being substituted with the word "LORD."  This substitution was made by the ancient Jewish leaders, in order to prevent the name of God being used in everyday profane speech by God's people, as we hear today on so much television and in the Hollywood films, where the Jewish producers will often include the occasional "Jesus" or "Christ" as a profanity or as a swear word. 

 

So returning to the Jehovah's Witnesses, they will claim that it is a sin to remove the sacred name (YHWH) or Jehovah from the text of the Old Testament. However, by comparing Psalm 14:2 in their latest 2013 edition of their NWT (New World Translation) with Psalm 53:2 in the same NWT, we can see that Jehovah himself, has removed YHWH (Jehovah) from the text of Psalm 53:2, substituting it with Elohim (God). So ask the next Jehovah's Witness whom you meet to explain this substitution by Jehovah himself to you?

 

NWT 2013 ed Psalm 14-2 YHWH.jpgNWT 2013 ed Psalm 53-2 Elohim.jpg

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Worthy Ministers
  • Followers:  0
  • Topic Count:  905
  • Topics Per Day:  0.19
  • Content Count:  9,646
  • Content Per Day:  2.02
  • Reputation:   5,832
  • Days Won:  9
  • Joined:  04/07/2011
  • Status:  Offline

I did not realize they were substituting YHVH for Elohiym in the first place.

Far as I can tell (at 4:45 AM) there is no YHVH or adonoi in Psalm 53 in the original Hebrew.

It's been proven for decades that the "scholars" of the WBTS are revisionists with only WBTS

doctrine at heart... the NWT has undergone many rewrites for that reason.

Duane Magnani has lots of references and materials how older NWTs contradict WBTS doctrines

prompting the rewrites.

That and they are sloppy, and in the words of others... either uneducated or uncaring.

Duane Magnani used to have an extensive NWT expose' site online that I can't find right this minute.

I did find this...

Duane Magnani Ex Jehovah's Witness forum 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Worthy Ministers
  • Followers:  0
  • Topic Count:  905
  • Topics Per Day:  0.19
  • Content Count:  9,646
  • Content Per Day:  2.02
  • Reputation:   5,832
  • Days Won:  9
  • Joined:  04/07/2011
  • Status:  Offline

A former stepfather has been a JW since @ 1980.

I've tried everything to witness the truth to him but had to leave it in the LORD's

hands. I checked last night for an obit. He's still alive as far as I can tell. We have

lost touch since about 20 years ago.

His name is Norm (and he's 85) if any feels led to pray for him. I still do.

Briefly... dear mummy (who has this knack) essentially drove him to commit suicide.

The afternoon he was about to pull the trigger in his estranged mobile home... two

JW's knocked on his door and (thankfully) talked him out of the permanent solution

to a temporary problem.

Trouble is, he's emotionally bound to the WBTS (apparently for life)... :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Advanced Member
  • Followers:  1
  • Topic Count:  12
  • Topics Per Day:  0.00
  • Content Count:  499
  • Content Per Day:  0.19
  • Reputation:   277
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  12/06/2016
  • Status:  Offline

When I hear a JW bring this up I ask...what's the big deal...doesn't it all mean the same?

What are your thoughts about whether the name has been changed or not?

Is there a significant change in meaning?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...