Saturday, November 20, 2021

Excerpts from Gertoux

Michael Servetus (1511-1553) participated in the Protestant Reformation and translated the Hebrew Bible into Latin. In July 1531, he published his book entitled De Trinitatis Erroribus (On the Errors of the Trinity) in which he explained clearly that the Trinity was a 3-headed monster.


 Accordingly, Catholics and Protestants alike condemned him. He was then arrested in Geneva and burnt at the stake as a heretic by order of the city's Protestant governing council. Despite the fact that Servetus had an exceptional scientific knowledge, for example he was the first European to correctly describe the function of pulmonary circulation, as well as an amazing linguistic knowledge, he was gifted in languages like Latin, Greek and Hebrew, his masterpiece De Trinitatis Erroribus was translated into English only in 1932, 400 years later1 ! 


Still worse, his main arguments in part V of his book were completely distorted. For example he explained that God's name was Iehouah because in Hebrew this name was close to the name of Iesuah (Jesus), or Iehosuah, which means “Ie[houah]-salvation”. He also knew that according to Paulus de Heredia, a Christian Cabbalist, the meaning of God's name was “He causes to be” (yehauueh, piel form of the verb “to be”), but he never confused the pronunciation of God's name (Iehouah) with its Cabbalistic meaning (yehaweh). For Servetus, Iehouah was the only true God. Paradoxically, most modern commentators of the book of Servetus have changed the name Iehouah (Jehovah), vigorously defended by Servetus, by Yahweh, a name based on a Cabbalistic guess suggested by Paulus de Heredia in his mystical book Epistle of Secrets (published in 1488). 


In addition, it is noteworthy that a (diabolic) erratum at the end of the De Trinitatis Erroribus indicates that Iehonah was printed with an n inverted instead of Iehouah. Since Servetus died, more than 450 years ago now, I have decided to promote his De Trinitatis Erroribus and I have collected more information in order to show that his choices regarding God's name were absolutely reasonable and correct, specially his explanation of Jesus as “Iehouah is salvation”. The reader will see if I have been faithful to the spirit of Servetus. 1 The Two Treatises of Servetus on the Trinity (Harvard University Press XVI, 1932). 


“Hallowed Be Thy Name” —What Name? 


You have probably already heard this expression “Hallowed be thy name”, or more commonly now “Sanctified be your name”, because it is the first request of the Lord’s prayer, also called “Our Father”, which is regularly recited today in Christendom by more than one billion persons. In fact Jesus himself has made that well-known request when he encouraged his disciples to sanctify the name of the God of Abraham (Matthew 6:9, Luke 11:2). Consequently, the God of Jesus was the God of the Jews (1st century) as well as Christians and Muslims later. The prayer of Jesus is still recited by Jews today when they say the Kaddish2 (“Holy” in Aramaic). The opening words of this prayer are inspired by Ezekiel 38:23.


 Similarly, the holiness of God's name is daily invoked by more than one billion of Muslims when they pray to God because all the surahs of the Quran (except the 9th) begin by “In the name of God”. 


One might therefore think that the name of the God of Abraham is the same today for Jews, Christians and Muslims but paradoxically this is not the case. 


If you ask a Catholic priest: what is God's name?, his answer will probably be “God”, “Father” or “Lord”, if you ask an Evangelical pastor, his answer will probably be “Lord” or “Jesus”,


 If you ask a Muslim imam, his answer 2 Kaddish (קדיש ,Qaddish) is a hymn of praises to God found in the Jewish prayer service. The central theme of the Kaddish is the magnification and sanctification of God's name. will probably be “Allah”, which means “The God” in Arabic, and if finally you ask a Jewish rabbi, his answer will probably be “Hashem” or “Adonai”, knowing these names mean respectively “The Name” and “My Lord” in Hebrew. Why such a mess? If you ask again these religious leaders why God's name is not the same, their answers generally will be: “it does not matter”; “God has many names, you can choose which one you like”; “God's name has been lost, in fact pleasing God is more important”.


 Would Jesus have agreed with these answers, did he know the name of God and finally, is it really important to know that name? Have you ever wondered why Jesus put the sanctifying of God’s name first in his prayer? Afterward, he mentioned other things such as the coming of God’s Kingdom, God’s will being done on earth and our sins being forgiven. The fulfilment of these other requests will ultimately mean lasting peace on earth and everlasting life for mankind. Can you think of anything more important than that? Nevertheless, Jesus told his disciples to pray first of all for the sanctification of God’s name. It was not merely by chance that Jesus taught his followers to put God’s name first in their prayers. That name was clearly of crucial importance to him, since he mentioned it repeatedly in his own prayers. On one occasion when he 4


 DID JESUS “JE[HOVAH]-SALVATION” KNOW GOD’S NAME?

 Jesus praying publicly to God, he was heard to say: Father, glorify your name! And God himself answered: I have glorified it, and I will glorify it again (John 12:28, The Jerusalem Bible). The evening before Jesus died, he was praying to God in the hearing of his disciples, and once again they heard him highlight the importance of God’s name. He said: I have made your name known to the men you took from the world to give me (...) Holy Father, keep those you have given me true to your name. Later he repeated: I have made known to them and will continue to make it known, so that the love with which you loved me may be in them (John 17:6,11,26). 


After Jesus' death God's name remained a central theme among his disciples. For example, the apostle Paul, who was educated at the feet of Gamaliel3 (Acts 22:3), wrote to his fellow Hebrew Christians: As it was his purpose to bring a great many of his sons into glory, it was appropriate that God, for whom everything exists and through whom everything exists, should make perfect, through suffering, the leader who would take them to their salvation. For the one who sanctifies, and the ones who are sanctified, are of the same stock; that is why he openly calls them brothers in the text: I shall announce your name to my brothers, praise you in full assembly (Hebrews 2:10-12).


 He also wrote to the Romans: For in Scripture he says to Pharaoh; It was for this I raised you up, to use you as a means of showing my power and to make my name known throughout the world (Romans 9:17). He warned Christians: However, 3 Gamaliel, a well-known Pharisee, was a Law teacher esteemed by all the people (Acts 5:34). God’s solid foundation stone is still in position, and this is the inscription on it: The Lord knows those who are his own, and: All who call on the name of the Lord must avoid sin (1 Timothy 2:19). 


However the early Christians who were of Jewish origin were extremely puzzled that now (first century CE) pagans could invoke God's name. That’s why James4 explained to the apostles: When they had finished it was James who spoke. My brothers, he said, listen to me. Simeon (Peter) has described how God first arranged to enlist a people for his name out of the pagans. This is entirely in harmony with the words of the prophets, since the scriptures say: After that I shall return and rebuild the fallen House of David; I shall rebuild it from its ruins and restore it. Then the rest of mankind, all the pagans who are consecrated to my name, will look for the Lord, says the Lord who made this known so long ago (Acts 15:13-18).


 Even though the New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology (Volume 2, page 649) says: One of the most fundamental and essential features of the biblical revelation is the fact that God is not without a name: he has a personal name, by which he can, and is to be, invoked, in 2001, the Vatican's Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments (the agency in charge of liturgical matters) put forth an “Instruction” known as Liturgiam Authenticam which included the following directive: In accordance with immemorial tradition ... the name of almighty God expressed by the Hebrew tetragrammaton (YHWH) and  James was a son of Joseph and Mary, and half brother of Jesus (Mark 6:3; Galatians 1:19).

 “HALLOWED BE THY NAME” —WHAT NAME? 

The Name  rendered in Latin by the word Dominus, is to be rendered into any given vernacular by a word equivalent in meaning. In 2008 this rule was then reinforced by a “Letter to the Bishops Conferences on The Name of God”: In the light of what has been expounded, the following directives are to be observed: 1. In liturgical celebrations, in songs and prayers the name of God in the form of the tetragrammaton YHWH is neither to be used nor pronounced. 

. For the translation of the biblical text in modern languages, destined for the liturgical usage of the church, what is already prescribed by No. 41 of the instruction Liturgiam Authenticam is to be followed; that is, the divine tetragrammaton is to be rendered by the equivalent of Adonai/Kyrios: Lord, Signore, Seigneur, Herr, Señor, etc. 3. In translating in the liturgical context, texts in which are present, one after the other, either the Hebrew term Adonai or the tetragrammaton YHWH, Adonai is to be translated Lord and the form God is to be used for the tetragrammaton YHWH, similar to what happens in the Greek translation of the Septuagint and in the Latin translation of the Vulgate.

 For a sincere Catholic the present situation must be very uncomfortable, because he can read in his official Bible (Jerusalem Bible): They are doing their best, by means of the dreams that they keep telling each other, to make my people forget my name, just as their ancestors forgot my name in favour of Baal ("Lord"). Let the prophet who has had a dream tell it for a dream! And let him who receives a word from me, deliver my word accurately! 'What have straw and wheat in common? Yahweh demands (Jeremiah 23:27-28). 

Paradoxically his own Bible is now under the ban (!) because it uses the forbidden name Yahweh, and if he obeys his Church he disobeys God who condemns the prophets of the “Lord” (Baal). On the other hand it was written in his former Bible (Crampon 1904): Then those who feared Jehovah talked to one another about this, and Jehovah took note and listened; and a book of remembrance was written in his presence recording those who feared him and kept his name in mind. On the day when I act, says Jehovah of armies, they will be my most prized possession, and I shall spare them in the way a man spares the son who serves him (Malachi 3:16-17). Since the Bible of Abbot Crampon became the official Bible of Catholicism in 1904, the Latin title Dominus “Lord” in the Vulgate has been systematically replaced by Jehovah, however, when this name appears for the first time in the text of Genesis 2:4 a footnote explains: Its real pronunciation was Yahveh; the form Jehovah comes from the Masoretes, who attributed to this word the vowels of Adonaï, another name for God, which means Lord.

 When the Bible was revised in 1923, the main revision was 5 The Vulgate is a late 4th-century Latin translation of the Bible that became, during the 16th century, the Catholic Church's officially promulgated Latin version of the Bible. The translation was largely the work of Jerome, who, in 382, was commissioned by Pope Damasus I to revise the Vetus Latina ("Old Latin") collection of biblical texts in Latin then in use by the Church. Once published (405), it was widely adopted and eventually eclipsed the Vetus Latina and, by the 13th century, was known as the "versio vulgata" (the "version commonly-used") or, more simply, in Latin as vulgata. The Catholic Church made it its official Latin Bible as a consequence of the Council of Trent (1545-63).


  DID JESUS “JE[HOVAH]-SALVATION” KNOW GOD’S NAME?

 There aim was replace Jehovah by Yahweh. Obviously this new choice created a cacophony in God’s name and its controversial oneness (until 1923) collapsed because that name, which appeared for the first time in the Tyndale Bible6 in 1530, exploded into a multitude of names: Jehovah, Yahweh, Jahweh, Jahveh, Jahve, Jave, YHWH, etc. In view of all of this, there is a risk to conclude (if you trust more in scholars than in the Bible): We simply do not know how God’s ancient servants pronounced this name in Hebrew. However if we no longer know the pronunciation of God's name, its meaning, according to most Christian theologians, is Yahweh “He causes to become” in Hebrew. 


This naive conclusion contradicts both logic and (worse) the Bible itself. Those who state that the pronunciation of God's name has been lost are illogical because most Egyptian gods were able to preserve their names (Râ, Amun, Thoth, Isis, Horus, Aten, etc.) but the Almighty God would not have been able to preserve his great name whereas he had warned the Israelites: Which think to cause my people to forget my name by their dreams which they tell every man to his neighbour, as their fathers have forgotten my name for Baal “Lord” (Jeremiah 23:27, King James Bible). 

The prophets of 6 Tyndale included the name of God, usually spelled IEHOUAH, in several verses (Genesis 15:2; Exodus 6:3; 15:3; 17:6; 23:17; 33:19; 34:23; Deuteronomy 3:24. He also included God's name in Ezekiel 18:23 and 36:23 in his translations that were added at the end of The New Testament, Antwerp, 1534), and in a note in this edition he wrote: Iehovah is God's name... moreover as oft as thou seist LORD in great letters (except there be any error in the printing) it is in Hebrew Iehovah. the Lord, because Baal means “Lord” in Hebrew, would have succeeded to make forget God's name. Apparently they succeeded because it is written in many English Bibles: If we had forgotten the name of our God or spread out our hands to a foreign god, would not God have discovered it, since he knows the secrets of the heart? (...) Let them know that you, whose name is the LORD —that you alone are the Most High over all the earth (...) Blessed is the people of whom this is true; blessed is the people whose God is the LORD (Psalms 44:20-21; 83:18; 144:15, New International Version). 

However the translation of this Bible is incoherent because it replaced the personal name of God by LORD, but many other Bibles disagree with this choice7 , which supports the main goal of the prophets of the LORD: “overshadow the name of God”. Those who state that the pronunciation of God's name has been lost contradict the Bible itself because when God revealed the meaning of his name to Moses he 7 King James Bible: That men may know that thou, whose name alone is JEHOVAH, art the most high over all the earth. American King James Version: That men may know that you, whose name alone is JEHOVAH, are the most high over all the earth. American Standard Version: That they may know that thou alone, whose name is Jehovah, Art the Most High over all the earth. Darby Bible Translation: That they may know that thou alone, whose name is Jehovah, art the Most High over all the earth. English Revised Version: That they may know that thou alone, whose name is JEHOVAH, art the Most High over all the earth. Webster's Bible Translation: That men may know that thou, whose name alone is JEHOVAH, art the most high over all the earth. World English Bible: that they may know that you alone, whose name is Yahweh, are the Most High over all the earth. Young's Literal Translation: And they know that Thou —(Thy name [is] Jehovah —by Thyself,) [Art] the Most High over all the earth!


 “HALLOWED BE THY NAME” —WHAT NAME?  

 God, furthermore, said to Moses: Thus you shall say to the sons of Israel “The LORD, the God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, has sent me to you”. This is My name forever, and this is My memorialname to all generations (...) Your name, O LORD, is everlasting, Your remembrance, O LORD, throughout all generations (Exodus 3:15; Psalms 135:13, New American Standard Bible). Consequently, God’s name will never be forgotten: My name will be great among the nations, from where the sun rises to where it sets. In every place incense and pure offerings will be brought to me, because my name will be great among the nations, says the LORD Almighty (Malachi 1:11); All the nations may walk in the name of their gods, but we will walk in the name of the LORD our God for ever and ever (Micah 4:5). As we can see, the translation of the New American Standard Bible is really absurd because God's name will be great among the nations for ever and ever and at the same time that name will be the LORD, which is not a personal name but a title, like Eternal or God. How can one explain this paradox? Why some translations use the title LORD instead of God's name? The answer is amazing: Discipline me, LORD, but only in due measure, not in your anger, or you will reduce me to nothing. Pour out your wrath on the nations that do not acknowledge you, on the peoples who do not call on your name (Jeremiah 10:24- 25). Consequently, according to their own translation, which does not call on God's name as we have seen, God had to “pour out his wrath” on these translators. This explanation is the first key of the mystery. 


In fact, God has always revealed his name to his faithful servants, those seeking his glory (John 5:39-44; 12:43), despite frequent persecutions and apparent foolishness (1 Corinthians 1:19-25), not those seeking their own glory (Matthew 11:25). First conclusion, when the translators of a Bible refuse to use God's name they strongly displease God because it is written in the Jerusalem Bible: Give thanks to Yahweh, call his name aloud. Proclaim his deeds to the people, declare his name sublime. Sing of Yahweh (...) we hoped in you, Yahweh, your name, your memory are all my soul desires (...) Yahweh our God, others lords than you have ruled us, but we acknowledge no one other than you, no other name than yours (...) My name is Yahweh, I will not yield my glory to another, nor my honour to idols (...) all day long my name is constantly blasphemed. My people will therefore know my name; that day they will understand that it is I who say: I am here (...) to make known your name to your enemies, and make the nations tremble at your presence (...) I was ready to be approached by those who did not consult me, ready to be found by those who did not seek me. I said: I am here, I am here, to a nation that did not invoke my name (Isaiah 12:4; 26:8,13; 42:8; 52:6; 64:2; 65:1). You may wonder: who proclaims the name of Yahweh today and who are the people of Yahweh? Apparently nobody. Once again the answer is within the Bible itself. For example, the apostle Peter explained why the early Hebrew Christians 


 DID JESUS “JE[HOVAH]-SALVATION” KNOW GOD’S NAME? 


Christians received the Holy Spirit: When Pentecost day came round, they had all met in one room, when suddenly they heard what sounded like a powerful wind from heaven, the noise of which filled the entire house in which they were sitting; and something appeared to them that seemed like tongues of fire; these separated and came to rest on the head of each of them. They were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak different languages as the Spirit gave the gift of speech (...) These men are not drunk, as you imagine; why, it is only the third hour of the day. On the contrary, this is what the prophet Joel spoke of: In the last days to come —it is the Lord who speaks— I will pour out my Spirit on all mankind. Your sons and daughters shall prophesy, your young men shall see visions, your old men shall dream dreams. Even on my slaves, men and women, in those days, I will I pour out my Spirit. I will display portents in heaven above and signs on earth below. The sun will be turned into darkness and the moon into blood before the great Day of the Lord dawns. All who call on the name of the Lord will be saved (Acts 2:1-4,15-21)


. This translation is quite accurate and reliable except on one central point: the quotation of Joel 3:1-5 in the Jerusalem Bible reads Yahweh instead of the Lord, which changes completely the meaning of what Peter said. To be saved must we call on the name of Yahweh (formerly Jehovah) or Lord? If our salvation depends on our invocation of the divine name, so it is important to know it. We have seen that the translators who replaced God's name by “Lord” had made this choice for theological reasons. This imposture was unmasked by a relatively simple investigation, indeed the fact of checking internal contradictions in the bibles of these translators has been sufficient. This imposture is very old since it appeared with the first Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible (c. 280 BCE), known as the Septuagint (LXX).


 For example the text of Leviticus 24:13-16 is read in the Jerusalem Bible as: Yahweh spoke to Moses; he said: Take the man who pronounced the curse outside the camp. Let all who have heard him lay their hands on his head, and let the whole community must stone him. Then say to the Israelites: Anyone who curses his God shall bear the consequences of his fault. The one who blasphemes the name of Yahweh must die; the whole community must stone him. Stranger or native, if he blasphemes the Name, he will be put to death, but the same text is read in the Septuagint (Brenton LXX) as: And the Lord spoke to Moses, saying: Bring forth him that cursed outside the camp, and all who heard shall lay their hands upon his head, and all the congregation shall stone him. And speak to the sons of Israel, and thou shalt say to them: Whosoever shall curse God shall bear his sin. And he that names the name of the Lord, let him die the death: let all the congregation of Israel stone him with stones; whether he be a stranger or a native, let him die for naming the name of the Lord. Paradoxically, as had noticed a Jewish philosopher named Philo (-25 to +50) in his book on the life of Moses that: it was worse to name God than even to curse him (De vita Mosis II:203-206)! How can one explain that Philo gave such an absurd comment 


 “HALLOWED BE THY NAME” —WHAT NAME?

According to the text of Numbers 6:22-27, that the high priest had to name the name of God upon all the people on the day of atonement, once a year, in order to get the blessing from God: And the Lord spoke to Moses, saying: Speak to Aaron and to his sons, saying: Thus ye shall bless the children of Israel, saying to them: The Lord [YHWH] bless thee and keep thee; the Lord make his face to shine upon thee, and have mercy upon thee; the Lord lift up his countenance upon thee, and give thee peace. And they shall put my name upon the children of Israel, and I the Lord [YHWH] will bless them. According to the text of the Septuagint the high priest had to name God [YHWH] and consequently to be stoned! Obviously, this conclusion is absurd. Regarding the divine name in the first century, Philo explains: there was a gold plaque shaped in a ring and bearing four engraved characters (tetragrammaton) of a name which had the right to hear and to pronounce in the holy place those ones whose ears and tongue have been purified by wisdom, and nobody else and absolutely nowhere else. And this holy prophet Moses calls the name, a name of four letters (YHWH), making them perhaps symbols of the primary numbers (...) above this mitre is a golden leaf, on which an engraving of four letters was impressed; by which letters they say that the name of the living God is indicated, since it is not possible that anything that it in existence, should exist without God being invoked; for it is his goodness and his power combined with mercy that is the harmony and unity of all things (De vita Mosis II:115,132). 


The testimony of Philo confirms several points: the name of God was still pronounced in the 1st century but only by a small group of people (the priests in the temple), this sacred name was made up of four letters that Philo could not read any more (because it was ancient Hebrew), and he concluded in his comment on Exodus 3:14 that paradoxically God had no proper name [in Greek] (De vita Mosis I:75)! The strange conclusion of Philo is explained by the fact that he did not know Hebrew. Regarding the pronunciation of God’s name, Flavius Josephus (37- 100), gave a more reliable witness because he was familiar with the Bible and was able to read it in Hebrew8 . Contrary to Philo, Josephus says that some Jews (those who spoke Hebrew) knew the proper name of God: when those people thought they had got clear of the enemy, they snatched from them what they had brought with them, even while they had frequently entreated them, and that by calling upon the tremendous name of God (The Jewish War V:438). Regarding the pronunciation of God's name, he explains: The high priest had his head dressed with a tiara of fine linen embroidered with a purple border, and surrounded by another crown in gold which had in relief the sacred letters; these ones are four vowels (The Jewish War V:235). 


Thursday, November 18, 2021

Common objections to the Divine Name Gertoux

 Common objections regarding God’s name


Knowing the name of God is useless. Knowing the name of God is vital for a religious Jew because it is written: And it shall come to pass [that] whosoever shall call on the name of YHWH shall be saved (Joel 2:32). It is also vital for a religious Christian because the text of Joel is quoted in the New Testament (Acts 2:21; Romans 10:13). Joel’s text has become obscure today because the name YHWH was replaced by KS in Greek, from 130 to 400 CE, then by KURIOS (“LORD”). The last stage was to replace “the name of LORD” by “the name of the LORD”. !

 In the Old Testament, God’s name is not Jehovah but YHWH. Jehovah is the English vocalization of the transcription Yehowah, which is written YHWH in Hebrew. Accordingly Jehovah is the usual vocalization of YHWH in the same way that Jesus (Yehôshûa) is the usual vocalization of YHWŠW‘. 


! We don’t know the pronunciation of God’s name because it has been lost. According to the Talmud: Rabbah bar Chanah said in the name of Rabbi Yochanan: The 4-letter Name of God is transmitted by the Sages to their studentsonce every seven years. And some say twice every seven years (Kiddushin 71a). Maimonides wrote in his Mishna Thora-Hilchot Tefillah 14:10: Outside the Temple, the 4-letter Name “Yud Heh Vav Heh” is pronounced “A-do-nai”. Inside the Temple, when the priests gave the Priestly Blessing, they pronounced it (“I-ehu-a”) as it is written (“Y-h-w-h”). There are no Jewish documents specifying that the pronunciation of God's name was lost in Hebrew. In contrast, some Cabbalists claim that the “true pronunciation (?)” of the 4- letter name could give you direct access to God, but this mystical teaching contradicts the Bible (as well as logic because Satan himself knows God's name). ! 


We cannot be dogmatic, the vocalization Jehovah is not certain. Generally, those who claim not to be dogmatic are paradoxically extremely dogmatic in their doubt. In addition, it is true that the pronunciation Jehovah is not absolutely certain, but like all the other names in the Bible, no more no less. One supposes for example that Jesus, the English pronunciation of the Greek name “Iesus”, comes from the Aramaic name Yeshu which comes itself from the Hebrew name Yehoshua‘, but obviously nothing is certain, including uncertainties. ! 


The true pronunciation of God’s name is Yahwoh (Iaô) according to a copy of the Septuagint found in Qumran. Given that it was forbidden to pronounce God's name in Qumran, under penalty of excommunication, consequently the form Iaô which was a Greek vocalization of the Hebrew substitute Yahû (YHW), already used (6th century BCE) by the Jewish scribes of Elephantine, was not the complete name YHWH. Given that the name Jesus means “Je[hovah is] salvation” in Hebrew 88 DID JESUS “JE[HOVAH]-SALVATION” KNOW GOD’S NAME? (Yehoshua), if Yahwoh had been the true pronunciation, the name Jesus would have been Yahoshua in Hebrew (“Ya[hoshua is] salvation”) and consequently would have been shortened into Jasus, not Jesus216. In addition, when the Psalms of the Bible were sung, God's name was sometimes replaced by Adonay or Elohim. Given that these two words have exactly 3 syllables (A-do-nay, Elo-him) they were used to replace Ye-ho-wah. As one can see, the name Yahwoh has only 2 syllables. ! 


The true pronunciation of God’s name is Yahweh according to its linguistic meaning “He causes to become (Yahaweh)”. The biblical meaning of Yehowah is given in Exodus 3:14 “I shall [prove to] be what I shall [prove to] be”. Given that the question of Moses was not about the linguistic meaning of God's name (because Moses knew Hebrew!), but only regarding the personality of God (in the same way Pharaoh asked: who is Yehowah?) accordingly there is no reason to link God’s answer with the pronunciation of his name. Interestingly, the verbal form yihweh (= yihyeh) found in Ecclesiastes 11:3 means “he will [prove to] be” which is identical to the biblical meaning of Yehowah. In contrast, the verbal form Yahweh “He causes to be/come” never existed in Hebrew. ! 


Jehovah is the God of the Old Testament, called Lord in the New Testament. Jesus and his disciples were Jews and they regularly quoted and read some verses of the Old Testament in 216 Moreover, if the true name of God had been Iaô (instead of YHWH), the evangelical writers would have used it in their writings. which YHWH appears frequently. In addition, the prohibition of not pronouncing God's name only appeared from 130 CE onward. The discussion between Jesus and Satan in Matthew 4:3-10 highlights a crucial point: Jesus read aloud God's name in Hebrew and systematically used it, while Satan never did so because one notices that he preferred to use the word God (Elohim). This choice was not made by chance because Jesus quoted Deuteronomy 6:13, which says: Yehowah your God you should fear, and him you should serve, and by his name you should swear. It reads: Yehovah your God in the Bible of Rabbi Lazarus Goldschmidt (1925) as well as Iehovah your God in the Rabbinic Bible of Samuel Cahen (1938-1851). No Jewish Bible contains the fanciful name Yahweh. ! 


Among the thousands of papyrus and manuscripts of the New Testament there is not one with Jehovah. In fact, among the hundreds of papyrus and manuscripts of the New Testament, between 150 and 400 CE, there is not one with KURIOS “Lord”, but only the cryptic name KS appears (similarly Jesus is written IS). Those strange names are called nomina sacra (“sacred names”). Before 150 CE, among all the Christian papyrus, including those from the Septuagint, there is not one with KURIOS “Lord”, but only the name YHWH written in Hebrew. In his letter to the Hebrews the apostle Paul [who knew Hebrew (Ac 22:1-3)] systematically quoted the Septuagint, but never the Masoretic text. COMMON OBJECTIONS REGARDING GOD’S NAME 89 !


 The vocalization Iehouah (Jehovah) is very late. It appeared for the first time in 1518 in the work of Galatino. Cardinal Nicholas of Cusa in his sermon on John 1:1: In Principio Erat Verbum (1428 CE), explained, based on Maimonides’ works, the various names of God and the meaning of the tetragrammaton, which he vocalized Iehoua. Judah Halevi, a Jewish scholar, in The Kuzari (1140 CE), wrote that the main difference between the God of Abraham and the God of Aristotle was the tetragrammaton YHWH, which was the personal name of God. He pointed out that the letters of God’s name have the remarkable property of being “mother of reading”: Y = Î, W = Û and H (final) = Â, implying a reading IHUA for YHWH (Kuzari IV:1-16). The Book of Nestor the idolatrous priest (Sefer Nestor Hakomer) is a dispute between a Nestorian and Monophysiste which is commented by a Jewish scribe in the 7th century CE. This book teaches us two things: some Christian scholars had contact with Jews who (at that time) were using the Hebrew substitute Hashem (HŠM) which means “The Name”, abbreviated in H' in place of the tetragram (in the passage of Matthew 4:1-10 for example). In its onomasticon sacrum, the Codex Coislinianus 1 (dated 6th century CE) explains the God’s name Ïôa means “invisible” (αορατος) and Ïêoua “Life of G[o]d” (ζωη θυ). Some authors, such as Severus of Antioch (465-538), used the form IÔA (Ιωα), not IAÔ, in a series of comments on chapter eight of John's gospel (Jn 8:58), pointing out that it was God's name in Hebrew. Evagrius Ponticus wrote (c. 380 CE): The tetragram, which is ineffable, was written in Hebrew: Ioth, e, ouau, e, that is to say, πιπι the God. He also explained that the name of the Lord (Jesus) is: ioth, e, ouab, eth, with the Hebrew letter “s” (called shin) in the middle. Maybe he meant that the name Jesus was pronounced Iesûa in Hebrew, involving Ieûa for God’s name, because the name Jesus is written Iesoua (Dt 1:38) in the Septuagint of Aquila. According to the Talmud (c. 135 CE): They then brought up R. Hanina b. Teradion and asked him: Why hast thou occupied thyself with the Torah? He replied: Thus the Lord my God commanded me. At once they sentenced him to be burnt, his wife to be slain, and his daughter to be consigned to a brothel. The punishment of being burnt came upon him because he pronounced the Name according to its letters. But how could he do so? Have we not learnt: The following have no portion in the world to come: He who says that the Torah is not from Heaven, or that the resurrection of the dead is not taught in the Torah. Abba Saul says (c. 130 CE): Also he who pronounces the Name according to its letters (I-H-U-A)? He did it in the course of practising, as we have learnt: Thou shalt not learn to do after the abominations of those nations, but thou mayest learn [about them] in order to understand and to teach. Why then was he punished? —Because he was pronouncing the Name in public (...) The Executioner then jumped and threw himself into the fire. And a bathkol exclaimed: R. Hanina b. Teradion and the 90 DID JESUS “JE[HOVAH]-SALVATION” KNOW GOD’S NAME? Executioner have been assigned to the world to come (Abodah Zarah 17b-18a). Rabbi Tarphon, related the problem (90-130 CE) of the destruction of Christian texts which contained the tetragram (Shabbat 116a). According to Flavius Josephus (c. 95 CE): The high priest had his head dressed with a tiara of fine linen embroidered with a purple border, and surrounded by another crown in gold which had in relief the sacred letters; these ones are 4 vowels (The Jewish War V:235). According to Philo of Alexandria (c. 40 CE): there was a gold plaque shaped in a ring and bearing 4 engraved characters of a name which had the right to hear and to pronounce in the holy place those ones whose ears and tongue have been purified by wisdom, and nobody else and absolutely nowhere else. And this holy prophet Moses calls the name, a name of 4 letters, making them perhaps symbols of the primary numbers (De vita Mosis II:115,132). Philo of Byblos, a Punic writer of grammatical and historical works, wrote (c. 100-120 CE): Of the affairs of the Jews the truest history, because the most in accordance with their places and names, is that of Sanchuniathon of Beirut, who received the records from Hierombal the priest of the god Ieüô (Ιευω); he dedicated his history to Abibaal king of Beirut, and was approved by him and by the investigators of truth in his time. Now the times of these men fall even before the date of the Trojan war (1184 BCE), and approach nearly to the times of Moses, as is shown by the successions of the kings of Phoenicia (Phoenician History IV). The character Hierombal (1300-1260 BCE), priest of Ieüô (Yehowah), was called “Hierobaal [Gideon], Judge of the god YHWH”, in the Septuagint (Jg 7:1). On a shield from Soleb (Nubia) dated around 1350 BCE we read: Land of Shasu (Israelites) those of Yehua. The name Y-h-w3, which is read Yehua (from conventional reading of Egyptian hieroglyphs), is still very close to Yehowah (in Hebrew). ! 


The vocalization Yehowah comes from a mix between the letters of God's name (YHWH) and the vowels of Adonay. The vowels of “Adonay” are a,o,a, not e,o,a, and up to 1300 CE the vowels of God’s name were only e,a (YeHWaH) originating from the Aramaic word shema “The Name”. !


 Yehovah is better than Yehowah. Yehovah is God’s name in modern Hebrew and it originates from ‘Yehowah217’ in 1st century spoken Hebrew. Jesus was able to know and pronounce God's name (Hebrews 2:12) because, before 70 CE, the high priest knew God’s name and, above all, he had to pronounce it in the Temple of Jerusalem (Numbers 6:24-27). Given that in the 1st century we know that all theophorus names began with Yehô- (or Yehow-) in Hebrew, consequently YHW-H was to be pronounced Yehow-ah (Iôa in Greek) not Yahow-ah or Yahû (Iaô in Greek). ! 


Yehovah is better than Jehovah. Yehovah is God’s name in Israeli rendered as Jehovah in English. ! Ihouah is better than Jehovah. Maybe, but all theophoric names begin with Yehô- not Ihô-. 217 Until 130 CE, the Hebrew letter “W” (Û) was always pronounced Waw (ουαυ) in the Septuagint not Vav “V” (βαβ), see: Lamentations 1:6; 2:6; 3:15,16; Psalms 118(119):41. !

 I have kept for the end the most formidable objection: if the pronunciation of the name of God in Hebrew was really Yehowah in the 1st century, Yehovah today, why is there still no linguist of the Semitic languages (absolutely none indeed) who endorses this choice? After reading this booklet the reader will have understood that the specialists who discredit Yehowah’s vocalization are essentially theologians. Indeed, the Old Testament asserts on many occasions that “the nations will have to know that I am Jehovah (Ezekiel 37:28)”, and the New Testament confirms that God will preserve “a people for His name (Acts 15:14)”. Consequently, God asserts unambiguously that he will preserve his word and especially his great name. The question of Moses about the name of God in Exodus 3:13-14 did not concern its pronunciation since his mother was called Yochebed “Yehow[ah] is glory” but its prophetic meaning “I shall [prove to] be what I shall [prove to] be” (and not its linguistic meaning since Moses knew Hebrew). Very early the rabbis assumed that the Hebrew pronunciation of God's name actually derived from the amalgam of three verbal forms Yihyeh, howeh, hayah “He will be, (He) being, He was”. Catholic and Protestant theologians have definitely obscured the name of God by proposing new meanings as “he is/he will be (yihweh)” in the Septuagint, then “he causes to be (yehaweh)” or “he causes to become (yahaweh)”. Evidently the linguists of the Semitic languages (who are not theologians) rely solely on linguistic and historical facts in order to recover the historical pronunciation of ancient words or names. One might think that these specialists could have been more objective than theologians but in fact this is unfortunately not the case because the name of God is above all a religious subject that strongly interferes with the religious beliefs of these specialists (atheism is also a strong belief). In order to understand why professors of Ancient Languages are systematically “silent” concerning God's name I recently sent an email to an eminent Professor of Hebrew and Hamito-Semitic in which I said: Since you know Emmanuel Tov I would like to ask you a question that I hope you will not judge impertinent. Indeed, I do not understand why the academics in general continue to endorse the Omerta on the pronunciation of God’s name (Yehovah in modern Hebrew). Indeed, I have observed many times that this was an open secret (even among the rabbis) but that it should not be revealed to the general public for reasons that I find indefensible. For example, I have a friend who is finishing his thesis on the Greek transcriptions of the tetragrammaton in medieval manuscripts and who has discussed several times with Emmanuel Tov. Although this eminent scholar never vocalizes the name of God in his works, he confided to my friend, without difficulty, that this name is actually pronounced Yehovah in Hebrew, but as he published in journals financed mainly by religious institutions (mainly Jewish) he did not want to offend his readers. It is because of this kind of behaviour that I admire the approach of Nehemia Gordon (who worked extensively with Emmanuel Tov) when he denounces this “conspiracy of silence” in his book Shattering the Conspiracy of Silence: The Hebrew Power Of the Priestly Blessing Unleashed (2012). I also find that his attitude is also more honest than that of other academics because he does not mislead his readers by making them believe that the 92


 DID JESUS “JE[HOVAH]-SALVATION” KNOW GOD’S NAME? tetragrammaton cannot be pronounced or that its pronunciation is unknown. I know that you mention several times in your thesis on the Hebrew of Baruch Spinoza that this Jewish grammarian used the word Jehova several times, but you do not give any negative or positive criticism of this controversial linguistic choice. So my question is quite simple: do you think that this pronunciation Jehovah (Yehovah in modern Hebrew) is the right one? The first time I asked this question was to Jean Margain (my Hebrew teacher at the beginning of my research). He kindly replied in his letter dated February 22, 1998: « I cannot tell you that your conclusions are false. Everything connected with the designation of a divinity is not merely logical. Your work is to be placed on the subject of this delicate question in which beliefs of a religious or emotional nature, taboos, pagan influences and superstitious practices are mingled with the belief. I congratulate you for having carried out such an inquiry and I wish you to continue your research successfully ». Henri Cazelles, after having also congratulated me, registered my thesis in 1995 at the library of the Institut Catholique de Institute (T594GER) but without further action. I also asked Jean Leclant, who at the time was professor of Egyptology at the Collège de France, why he preferred to use Yahweh rather than Jehovah in his transcript of the tetragrammaton appearing in the shield found at Soleb and dated the 14th century BCE. He replied in his letter dated February 20, 1998: « It is very difficult to answer your question and it is best to stick to the conventional transcription system (yhw3) ». Professor Leclant obviously knew that the conventional transcription yhw3 was to be vocalized yehua according to this conventional system, as confirmed to me and patiently explained Jean-Claude Goyon, a research master at the CNRS and Professor Emeritus of Egyptology at the University of Lyon II. I received many answers to my question and some even explained why they were using Yahweh knowing it was wrong. For example, Alfred Kuen, a translator of the Living Bible and a professor at the Bible Institute, wrote to me in his letter of January 11, 2011: « I confess that I did not research as thoroughly as you did on the name of God. Personally, I do not like the name Yahweh (which sounds like the name of a foreign god), but its use has spread so widely —erroneously as you say— it is hard to escape from it. The reluctance to use the name of Jehovah doubtless comes, as you say, from the fear of being confused with the Jehovah’s Witnesses. I carefully keep your letter with all this information to use when the time comes (which I do not see yet) ». After reading this letter I wondered whether the final remark was humour or involuntary mockery. As you see the subject is disturbing, but thank you for having read me to the end. One day later, immediate reply by the Professor (email written in French): « The reply of Jean Margain, [private information], is the best answer that can be given. There is, therefore, no conspiracy and, for me, everyone is free to utter the tetragrammaton as he sees fit, since academics have no elements to clarify their reading. Yours sincerely ». Readers will judge. As can be seen, the main objections to my conclusions are always the same: 1) There is no conspiracy against the Name (given that Satan does not exist), 2) everyone is free to utter the tetragrammaton as he sees fit (because of the right of free speech), 3) since academics have no elements to clarify their reading (because there is no absolute truth). These fallacious objections had already arisen when I published my book: The Name of God Y.eH.oW.aH Which is Pronounced as it is Written A FEW OBJECTIONS REGARDING THE NAME JEHOVAH 93 I_Eh_oU_Ah (University Press of America, 2002). As one can understand, the main conclusion of my work is summarized in the title, which clearly contradicts the three previous objections. When my book was accepted for publication, my editor asked several peer review committees to give their opinion in order to promote my academic work. Paradoxically, he received 2 contradictory opinions: one short positive review (which he kept on his website, obviously) and another long review, but very negative (which was largely promoted by those who did not like my book, obviously). ! The first review was published in the Religious Studies Review218 (July 2003 Vol. 29:3 page 285) by Professor Won W. Lee, Calvin College, who wrote: This detailed treatment of the Name is useful for those who are interested in the history of its translation of the centuries. As can be seen the support was low (not to say minimum) but it has been positive. ! In contrast the second review, which was published in the Review of Biblical Literature (6/6/2004) by Professor John Laurence Gee, a Mormon apologist, and Egyptologist at Brigham Young University, known for his writings in support of the Book of Abraham, who wrote: Certain issues need to be examined at least once a generation, if only to remind ourselves why the current consensus is what it is. The pronunciation of the Tetragrammaton is one of those issues. In the book under review, Gérard Gertoux, a French engineer, takes issue with the current consensus and contends that it is incorrect. With excruciating detail and tortured logic, Gertoux passionately argues his point. This work is a revision in English of the author’s thesis at the Institut Catholique de Paris. The French stamp on the work is apparent not only in the extensive use of French sources but in the transliterations throughout the work, which are into French rather than English. This proves one of the more frustrating aspects of the work, as too many times the French-style transliteration obscures rather than clarifies the argument, and in the case of the Egyptian evidence it leads Gertoux to erroneous conclusions (...) A decent editor could have fixed some of the book is obvious flaws. Errors of fact abound, and it would be pointless to attempt to correct them all. One wishes that less effort had been put into the Paleo-Hebrew fonts and more into fixing the transliterations used throughout the book. The book raises serious doubts about whether Gertoux controls any of the languages necessary for his study. Assertions such as “Hebraic language ... favors a vocalic reading of proper names instead of a consonantal reading (Aramaic)” (42) and errors in his transliteration chart (230) do nothing to assuage our doubts. Most of the relevant Egyptian evidence was passed over in silence, and what was used was often misconstrued; his appendix on the subject should be ignored. The Akkadian evidence was also underutilized. One wonders about his grasp of Greek phonetics when he asserts that “iotacism ... led mainly to the confusion of the sounds” iota, epsilon, eta, and alpha-iota (40). Examples could be multiplied ad nauseum, but possibly the best example of Gertoux’s failure to master his languages is his advocacy of what he calls his letters method. Gertoux’s letters method assumes that there is only one way to vocalize any particular consonantal skeleton, which is not the case. Thus his method is fundamentally flawed. 218 RSR is published by the Council of Societies for the Study of Religion (Valparaiso University). 94 


DID JESUS “JE[HOVAH]-SALVATION” KNOW GOD’S NAME? The first criticism of Gee gives the key to understand what lies behind the curtain: With excruciating detail and tortured logic, Gertoux passionately argues his point. Did he mean that my arguments were satanic? In addition why was it so important to mention that I was a French engineer (from 1979 to 1983 to be precise)? In any case, the main objections were as follows: A decent editor could have fixed some of the book is obvious flaws. Errors of fact abound, and it would be pointless to attempt to correct them all (...) Examples could be multiplied ad nauseum, but possibly the best example of Gertoux’s failure to master his languages is his advocacy of what he calls his letters method. Gertoux’s letters method assumes that there is only one way to vocalize any particular consonantal skeleton, which is not the case. Thus his method is fundamentally flawed. A child can understand that according to “my letters method” the name



Friday, August 27, 2021

How to translate John 1:1 θεόν & θεὸς: The Trinity Yay or Nay?

 

 I came across this in considering the Greek of John 1.1 and other related text in Greek relating to the Deity of Christ. I believe he is a Professor of Linguistics. I ordered his book "Babylon Cypher" Concerning language and possibly Social Sciences.

Interestingly, the New World Translation is often targeted as being "wrong" but it is far from the only translation that renders it as such. The argument was not even about the NWT at all so it seems someone may simply have a bee in their bonnet.

Here is an interesting comment from Robert Price, who although is considered by most a rebel to New Testament theology, does shed some light on John 1.1 and other trinitarian concepts. Also,  other beliefs Jehovah's Witnesses hold. 


Interestingly, the New World Translation is often targeted as being "wrong" but it is far from the only translation that renders it as such. The argument was not even about the NWT at all so it seems someone may simply have a bee in their bonnet.




 Here are a few translations, I am sure you could find more.

 1)14th century: "and God was the word" – Wycliffe's Bible (translated from the 4th-century Latin Vulgate) 

2)1808: "and the Word was a god" – Thomas Belsham


 3)The New Testament, in an Improved Version, Upon the Basis of Archbishop Newcome’s New Translation: With a Corrected Text, London. 1822: "and the Word was a god" – The New Testament in Greek and English (A. Kneeland, 1822.) 

4):1829 "and the Word was a god" – The Monotessaron; or, The Gospel History According to the Four Evangelists (J. S. Thompson, 1829) 

5) 1863 "and the Word was a god" – A Literal Translation of the New Testament (Herman Heinfetter [Pseudonym of Frederick Parker], 1863) 

6)1864  "and a god was the Word" – The Emphatic Diaglott by Benjamin Wilson, New York and London (left hand column interlinear reading) 

7) 1867 "and the Son was of God" – The Joseph Smith Translation of the Bible 1879: "and the Word was a god" – Das Evangelium nach Johannes (J. Becker, 1979) 

8)1885  "and the Word was a god" – Concise Commentary on The Holy Bible (R. Young, 1885) 

9) 1911 "and [a] God was the word" – The Coptic Version of the New Testament in the Southern Dialect, by George William Horner 

10)1924  "the Logos was divine" – The Bible: James Moffatt Translation, by James Moffatt. 1935:

11) "and the Word was divine" – The Bible: An American Translation, by John M. P. Smith and Edgar J. Goodspeed, Chicago. 

12) 1955 "so the Word was divine" – The Authentic New Testament, by Hugh J. Schonfield, Aberdeen. 

13)1956  "And the Word was as to His essence absolute deity" – The Wuest Expanded Translation 

14)1958  "and the Word was a god" – The New Testament of Our Lord and Saviour Jesus Anointed (J. L. Tomanec, 1958); 

15)1975   "and a god (or, of a divine kind) was the Word" – Das Evangelium nach Johnnes, by Siegfried Schulz, Göttingen, Germany 

16)1975   "and the Word was a god" – Das Evangelium nach Johannes (S. Schulz, 1975); 

17)1978   "and godlike sort was the Logos" – Das Evangelium nach Johannes, by Johannes Schneider, Berlin 

18) 1985  “So the Word was divine” - The Original New Testament, by Hugh J. Schonfield. 

19) 2017 “and the Logos was god” - The New Testament: A Translation, by David Bentley Hart.

Tuesday, February 16, 2021

If you believe in the Trinity then why...........Joseph Pavolic

1. Then why do NUMEROUS encyclopedias agree that "... the doctrine of the Trinity was of gradual and comparatively late formation; that it had its origin in a source entirely foreign from that of the Jewish and Christian scriptures; that it grew up, and was ingrafted on Christianity"? – p. 34, The Church of the First Three Centuries, Alvan Lamson, D.D.

2. Then why do many encyclopedias, dictionaries and other sources (including Sir Isaac Newton) agree that the "Trinity was a pagan corruption imposed on Christianity in the fourth century by Athanasius" and 2 Roman Emperors?

  3. Then why does the Bible consistently identify God by singular person pronouns: "I, "Me," "He, and "Him" instead of "We", "Us", "They" or "Them"?

  4. Then why does 2 Cor. 13:14 say that the Lord Jesus Christ is one individual, the holy spirit is another individual (whether a person or a thing), and that "GOD" IS ANOTHER DIFFERENT INDIVIDUAL?

  5. Then why is there not even one scripture which clearly defines the Trinity?

  6. Then why is there not even one scripture of a vision, dream, or CLEAR description wherein God is shown as three persons?

7. Then why is there not even one scripture where God is described using the word "three"? If Jesus is Almighty God...

  1. Then why is "God the head of Christ just as Christ is head of every man"? (1 Cor. 11:3)

2. Then why does Scripture consistently phrase Jesus as a separate person from God? (John 20:17; John 14:1; Mark 10:18; John 17:1-3; etc. Also in heaven, 1 Cor. 11:3; Luke 22:69; etc.)

  3. Then how can Jesus have a God? Could Almighty God have a God? (Mic. 5:4; Ps. 45:6, 7; 89:26; John 20:17; Rom. 15:6; 2 Cor. 1:3; Eph 1:3; Col 1:3; Mark 15:34; John 17:1-3; Also in heaven, Rev. 1:6; 3:2, 12)

  4. Then why does Scripture say he was born and is part of Creation? (Col. 1:15)

  5. Then why does Rev. 3:14 say that Jesus is "the beginning of the creation of God"?

  6. Then why is he subject to GOD, like we're subject to him? (1 Cor. 15:27, 28; Eph. 1:17)

  7. Then why does Micah 5:2 say that Jesus' ORIGIN was “from early times”?

  8. Then why does Jesus not know what God knows? (Matt. 24:36, Rev.1:1; Luke 8:45)

  9. Then why is Jesus still subject to God when he is as high as he will ever be? (1 Cor. 15:27, 28)

  10. Then why does Proverbs 8:22-31 show that the Messiah was CREATED / PRODUCED by God?

  11. Then why is he not powerful enough to subject things to himself? (1 Cor. 15:27, Eph. 1:17, 22)

12. Then why would he have to be given any power and authority? (Mt. 28:18; 11:27; Jn. 5:22; 17:2; 3:35; 2 Pet. 1:17)

  13. Then why did he have to learn anything? (Heb. 5:8; John 5:19; 8:28)

14. Then why is speaking against him not as bad as speaking against the Holy Spirit? (Mt. 12:31,32; Luke 12:10)

  15. Then why did Jesus call the "Father...the only true God"? (John 17:1, 3)

  16. Then why did he need to be saved? (Heb. 5:7; John 12:27)

  17. Then why did he have to be exalted to Leader and Savior? (Acts 5:31)

  18. Then how could he be exalted and given a higher name than he had? (Phil. 2:9-11; Heb. 1:2-4)

  19. Then why did he have to be given life in himself? (John 5:25,26)

  20. Then how can the Father be greater than he? (John 14:28)

21. Then how could Jesus be tempted by Satan when God cannot be tempted with evil? (James 1:13)

22. Then why did he worship the Father? (John 4:22)

23. Then why can he not do anything on his own? (John 5:19; 6:38)

  24. Then why would he pray to anybody? (Luke 22:44; John 17:1,2; Heb. 5:7)

25. Then why does John 1:18 (cf. Jn 3:16, 18) say that Jesus is God's "only BEGOTTEN Son"? ASV

  26. Then how can he be God's servant? (Acts 4:26,27,30)

  27. Then how could he receive strength from an angel? (Luke 22:43)

  28. Then how could he be a mediator between God and man? (1 Tim. 2:5)

  29. Then how could he be with God (ho theos)? (John 1:1)

  30. Then how can he be God's image? (Col. 1:15; Heb. 1:3)

31. Then why is he called the agency (dia) of creation and not the Originator (ek)? (1 Cor. 8:6; John 1:1-3; Prov. 8:30; Heb. 2:10; Col. 1:15

,16)

  32. Then why did Jesus say GOD was "good" in a way that Jesus was not? (Mark 10:18)

  33. Then why does he have an archangel's voice instead of God's voice? (1 Thess. 4:16)

  34. Then why is the only "worship" given to him the same given to humans? (Heb. 1:6, cf. Mt. 18:26; Rev. 3:9 - "Proskuneo")

  35. Then why do many who believe this rely on a few selected, so-called 'proof-texts' instead of the context of the consistent teaching of the entire Bible?

36. Then how could he get commanded to do anything? (John 12:49; Deut. 18:18)

  37. Then why did Steven see two separate entities, GOD and Jesus, and not just one God or three persons? (Acts 7:55)

38. Then how could he be seen at GOD's right hand? (Luke 22:69; Acts 7:55; Rom. 8:34)

39. Then how could Jesus be exalted (not to become God Himself, but) to the position at the "right hand OF God"? (Acts 2:33)

40. Then why would he have to receive a revelation from God? (Rev.1:1)

41. Then why is he called God's "begotten" Son before he came to earth? (John 3:16; Gal. 4:4; 1 John 4:9)

  42. Then how could he have a Father? (John 20:17)

  43. Then how could he come in the flesh? (1 Kings 8:27; Acts 17:24,25)

  44. Then why did he not come in his own name? (John 5:41-44)

45. Then why did Jesus "come down from heaven to do" God's will and not his own will? (Luke 22:42; John 6:38; John 5:30; John 8:42)

  46. Then how could he appear before GOD? (Heb. 9:24)

  47. Then how could he die? Can God die? Can part of God die? (Rom. 5:10; Acts 5:30; 1 Cor. 15:3; Hab.1:12; cf. 1 Tim. 6:16; Num. 23:19; Ps. 90:2; Dan. 6:25-26)

48. Then why is it that God resurrected Jesus? (Acts 2:32)

  49. Then why was he seen by men if "no man has seen God at any time"? (John 1:18)

  50. Then why is there not one clear scripture where Jesus is called "God the Son," (equal to those declaring "God, the Father)?

  51. Then why does the last Gospel writer not tell us so in his final conclusion? John 20:31 John's final conclusion IF THE HOLY SPIRIT IS ALMIGHTY GOD...

1. Then why do quotes from Trinitarians admit that the Holy Spirit is not God but rather is a force from God?

  2. Then why would Jews instructed in the Old Testament scriptures and in the teachings of John the Baptist, NOT EVEN KNOW WHAT THE HOLY SPIRIT WAS? (Acts 19:2)

3. Then why isn't the Holy Spirit given equal description in the Bible?

  4. Then why didn't Jesus ever teach that the Holy Spirit was God along with the Father and Son?

5. Then why does the Bible describe the Holy Spirit as an "it"? (Is. 34:16 ASV, KJV; Numbers 11:17, 25 ASV, KJV, RSV, NRSV, AT, LB, NEB, REB, NAB, JB, NJB; and Romans 8:16, 26 in the KJV.)

6. Then why does the Bible describe the Holy Spirit as a thing that can be poured out into portions? (Acts 2:17, 18, 33; Numbers 11:17, 25)

  7. Then why is the holy spirit nameless and indistinguishable from all of the other holy spirits?

  8. Then why did the Council of Nicaea in 325 AD disregard the Holy Spirit as a member of the Godhead when they declared Jesus to be 'God' in 325 AD? Why did they wait until the Council of Constantinople in 381 AD to include the Holy Spirit in the formula?

  9. Then wouldn't the water and blood be persons too according to Trinitarian reasoning and 1 John 5:8?

  10. Then why is it sandwiched between a list of QUALITIES at 2 Cor. 6:6?

  11. Then why does the NT Greek Lexicon describes the Holy Spirit as "this" at Acts 2:33?

  12. Then why is it that nowhere in the Bible is the Holy Spirit ever said to be an equal member of a trinity?

  13. Then why is it that nowhere is it mentioned in the Bible the words, "God, the Holy Spirit," or "The Holy Spirit is God"?

  14. Then why is it that there is never mentioned a vision, dream or clear description in scripture wherein God and the Holy Spirit are shown as the same person? (Dozens of Questions For Those Who Believe in the Trinity )

Sunday, January 31, 2021

Philippians 2.6-11 A New understanding of Christian Monotheism? Not by Jehovah's Witnesses.

In reading the Book "The Only True God" by James F. McGrath some startling observations were made concerning Monotheism and the Letters attributed to Paul, especially concerning Jesus and the exalted position given him by Jehovah.

"That Pauls application of the divine name "Lord" and of Yahweh text from the Hebrew Bible to Jesus is intended to present Jesus as God's agent, who shares in God's rule and authority, becomes clear when one considers Romans14.9-11, where Paul takes up the language of Isaiah 45.23 once again, but here emphazes that the throne of judgment is ultimately God's, even though Christ is the Lord through whom the judgment is carried out. In 1 Corinthians 15.27-28 Paul makes clear the roles played by Jesus and God: Jesus is the "(son of Man)" to whom all things are to be subjected.

  That is to say, Jesus is the representative of humankind whom God has chosen to be his agent and mediator of judgment" pg 49-50

  It does not configure that Jewish nor Christian monotheism was compromised by attaching the divine Name nor ascribing some sort of proskeneo (worship, obescience)to others to the ultimalte exhaltation to the supreme God or Lord,( Give thanks to the God of gods....give thanks to the Lord of lords. Ps.136.2,3) who is exalted over all as Almighty God Jehovah.

"To put it another way, readings of Philippians 2.6-11 which emphasize the exalted status of Jesus and the application to him of language which applied to Yahweh in Isaiah tend to emphasize only part of what this passage actually says. That Paul believed Jesus occupied this exalted status can hardly be questioned. However, this text makes equally clear thst Jesus was exalted by God to this postition, and the clear implication is that this was a position he did not previously occupy. God exalted him." pg 51

"In ancient Judaism, God could empower his agent to wield his full power and authority, precisely because any figure so empowered always remained by definition subject and subordinate to the one empowering him, namely God." pg 51

In conclusion, unless forced to understand these text in some sort of unnatural way. We must go with the clear and unambigious text and let other text help us along the way.

Sunday, January 10, 2021

Did Jesus have a God?

In reply to Satan Jesus retorted, "For it is written,(Deut.10.20)'It is Jehovah your God you must worship, and it is to him alone you must render sacred service.'

Paul unswervingly answered yes to this question. "That with one accord you may with one mouth glorify the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ" Romans 15.6...'So you glorify the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.' Romans 15.6

2 Corinthians 1.3 says,"Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ"

2 Corinthians 11.31: "The God and Father of the Lord Jesus, even the One who is to be praised." Not only is he the God of Our Lord (Who was made Lord Acts 2.36 and sits at the right hand of Jehovah as Lord...not Adonai but Adoni used 195 times never to Jehovah.) but also the one to be praised forever.

Colosians 1.3 "We thank God the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ"

Ephesians 1.3 'Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ"

Ephesians 1.17 "That the God of our Lord Jesus Christ..."

John in his writings made it quite evident that Jesus had a God. And that God could not possibly be the Trinity. John 17.3 "Prayer to the Father..."This means everlasting life their taking in knowledge of you the only true God..."

John 20.17 Jesus calls the Father My Father and My God. Revelation was given to Jesus by God. If he was God he would not have to be given it. Rev1.1 Rev. 3.2,12