Monday, June 13, 2011

Question #27

In Phil 2:9, the NWT inserts the word "other" even though it doesn't appear in the original Greek (See Gr-Engl Interlinear). What is the reason for inserting this word? Is the word "Jehovah" a name? See Exo 6:3, Ps 83:18, and Isa 42:8. How would the verse read if the word "other" had not been inserted? What does scripture say about adding words to the Bible? See Prov 30:5-6. If Christians are persecuted for the sake of Jehovah's name, why did Christ tell the first Christians that they would be persecuted for the sake of his (Jesus') name, instead of Jehovah's (Mt 24:9, Mk 13:13, Lk 21:12,17, Jn 15:21, and Acts 9:16)? If the name "Jehovah" is so important, then why does Acts 4:12 say, "There is salvation in no one else; for there is not another name [vs 10 Jesus Christ] under heaven that has been given among men, by which we must get saved"? If the teachings of the WTS are correct, would this not have been the logical place for God to have used the name "YHWH" or "Jehovah"? Since the word "Jehovah" didn't appear until at least the 12th century, and since the term "Jehovah's Witnesses" wasn't used by the WTS until the early 1930's, doesn't this mean that the first century Christians were not known as "Jehovah's Witnesses"?
______________________


Again, the questioner betrays their ignorance of basic Bible truths, as well as principles of translation. The verse in question states: “For this very reason also God exalted him to a superior position and kindly gave him the name that is above every [other] name, so that in the name of Jesus every knee should bend of those in heaven and those on earth and those under the ground, and every tongue should openly acknowledge that Jesus Christ is Lord to the glory of God the Father.”

First, every translation of the Bible uses words that do not appear in the original text. After all, the obligation of the translator is to convey the intended message of the original, not merely words. That being the case, it is the prerogative of the translator to use the best possible phrasing that makes clear what the original actually meant. 


When the NWT inserts a word that was not in the original they use the device of enclosing the word in brackets. Other translations do not do that. Which translator is being more straightforward?

As for the context of Philippians 2:9, anyone reading the surrounding verses, who does not have an agenda, can clearly see that God gave Jesus the honors bestowed upon him. Jesus did not give himself a name that is above all others. God gave it to him. 

So, it is surely obvious to all put the most perverse deceivers, that, Jesus is not above the One who elevated him to the superior position and decreed that all creation must bow before the Son. That being the case, the NWT is perfectly justified in adding clarity to that passage to make it clear that the name of Jesus is not above the name of God. 

No doubt the reason the NWT committee felt compelled to do that is because the waters have been so muddied up by those who wish to confuse Jehovah with Jesus.

As for the name of Jehovah appearing in English in the 12th century, that is almost as old as the English language itself. In fact, moderns who try to read olde English will realize that it is almost a different language. 


So, the name Jehovah is not a new and strange thing to English. The divine name was introduced into English before modern English even developed and it appeared in the first English translations of the Bible. And the construction of the name JEHOVAH follows exactly the fundamentals of the way all other Hebrew names have been rendered into English.

As for the first century Christians, they were known as the people for God's name. But since English didn't exist then, and the original Christians spoke a variety of languages, we may be sure they did not use the name Jehovah. But they obviously did use his name in their own dialect. And they surely knew that YHWH and Jesus were not the same entity.


The hoax the Devil and his dupes have long sought to foist upon the unlearned is that Jesus has replaced Jehovah, or that they are one and the same. The fact is, the world will soon be forced to know that God is Jehovah, and the beauty of it is that Jesus is going to be the enforcer.


No comments:

Post a Comment