|5 years ago :: Sep 01, 2012 - 7:48PM #41|
Hi Mr. Dave - Are you Baptist?
I was baptized 8/13/60 - studied for 4 years first - starting 1956 - so we're the same age!
I think the Scofield KJV is the same as the standard KJV - the only difference is the footnotes and marginal notes - but - hey - correct me if I'm wrong!
What I want to know is where I can find the Scofield marginal notes online!
Btw - did you know there is a Watchtower edition of KJV? I have it - it is maroon. While some of NW was published by 1956, it was only certain volumes - NW took some 10 years to complete - 1950-1960! Obviously Scofield's marginal notes showing where the Divine Name, Jehovah, is in mostly quotes of OT in NT, long preceded NW restoring the Divine Name - and somewhere in this thread is an example where Scoffield notes Jehovah and NW does not have Jehovah in the main text! I.e. our research was obviously independent of Scofield's research.
|5 years ago :: Sep 01, 2012 - 8:29PM #42|
I am not in any denomination nor am I a member of any church.
If asked, I will use a Moslem term for serious Christians, "follower of the book". They call RC "idol worshippers".
I have attended baptist, congregational, assembly of God, non-denomination churches and RC.
It's what's being preached, not the title on the door. Baptist are not the only ones who baptize by immersion. I was baptized Catholic, but I had no say in that.
In my home town there are 4 baptist churches, all different, all ignore the others, none associate with the others.
I grew up in one of those, was saved in same, have preached in many churches as fill-in and taught SS in many. I was asked to leave the last church I was a member in...LOL. I wouldn't sign some document of theirs.
I suppose if Christian churches did DF I would be DF at most churches I attend.....LOL. I essentially won't do anything just because someone says so. I say, "got a scripture for that".
I had to sign a agreement of doctrinal statement to play the piano at church my wife is member at. I only did because she was chairman of music and was crying she'd have to find replacements for all the weeks I was scheduled. So I did, she is the one who feeds me....LOL.
I did attend and finish a Bible Institute program, it was called ELOHIM Bible Institute. One of the best classes was the Names of God class. We did not have Hebrew or Greek classes, so never learned either, thus my limit to baklava.
DECISION DETERMINES DESTINY
|5 years ago :: Sep 01, 2012 - 9:19PM #43|
Mr. Dave - We are off thread theme - that's OK for now. I never signed any document from my religion - but I did sign when going before the draft board in 1965 - for the government. Of course, we refuse to go to war - I was informed I could be sent to prison (as many of our brothers were) - thankfully I was classifed IV-D.
OK, I am not familiar with some of the terms you used. Baklava?
I assume teaching SS was not Social Security?
In your elohim class were you informed that Moses was called Elohim in Exodus 4:16 & 7:1?
There is actually only one personal name of God, btw - all the others are title-names, not personal names.
And that does bring us back to thread theme - Did Jesus actually come in Jehovah's name?
(Mark 11:9) And those going in front and those coming behind kept crying out: “Save, we pray! Blessed is he that comes in Jehovah’s name!
KJV reads Lord in Mark 11:9 - and Scoffield misses this OT quote!
However, Scoffied gets in in John 12:13
(John 12:13) took the branches of palm trees and went out to meet him. And they began to shout: “Save, we pray you! Blessed is he that comes in Jehovah’s name, even the king of Israel!”
KJV - Lord - Scoffield note "t" - "t Jehovah Psa. 118.26"
Scoffield cfs. Psalms 118:26 at Luke 19:38 but misses noting the name Jehovah there.
This is one of the rare examples where one verse in the Hebrew Scriptures is quoted 4 times in the Christian Greek Scriptures. I'm not sure why Scoffield references the Divine name in Matthew and Johns' quote of Ps. 118:26 but not in Luke or Mark's quote. Obviously the Divine Name belongs in all four quotes.
BTW - the Jews are well aware YHVH is the Divine Name - they just consider it too sacred to pronounce. I don't know why they are willing to pronounce Bible names with the long form prefix "Jeho" since this is obviously the Divine Name in Bible names like Jehoshuah or its short from via Greek: Jesus.
It would seem that if the pronuciation should not be uttered - why be willing to pronounce the first two vowels and consonants of the Divine Name?
Then again, of course, the English pronunciation of all these names would be different from the Hebrew pronunciation anyway.
|5 years ago :: Sep 01, 2012 - 9:56PM #44|
That's funny, you don't know what BAKLAVA means. Well, I suppose, since it's not in the Bible or Strong's (I have one of those to, makes a great doorstop).
Baklava is a very sweet Greek pastry. Others like Armenians make and eat baklava. I bet you've eaten it without knowing name.
Yes, SS means Sunday School.
I was 1-A, never went to war, but did get hurt in basic and was a disabled Veteran for 6 years.
Don't remember if mentioned Moses as Elohim, it was 1980 - 1982 I was at Elohim.
I don't disagree with the tetragrammaton being the personal name of God. I have never met a Christian who has a problem that God has a personal name. I would teach that in SS.
I do remember at Elohim being told it could be YHVH, YHWH, JHVH or JHWH and that no one really knew. I took their word on the subject.
The obsession with Jehovah does bug me, since Jehovah or Yahweh is the translators best guess at the spelling. We have hymns like, "Guide me Oh thou Great Jehovah". In names of God class, names or titles lke Jehovah Nissi, El Shaddai etc etc. Had to learn first OT appearance, meaning, NT usage for dozens of names.
I would not be against the inserting of tetragrammatton in NT, if ALL the Greek/Hebrew experts were involved and came to a consensus. The opinion of a single group would be unacceptable to me.
Your thoughts on why Jews have no trouble using Jah or ah or Jeh or el, etc. At Elohim we were told it was a common thing to include the name of God in Hebrew names, like MichaEL or IsaiAH or JeremiAH. Again I just took their word for it.
Daniel 1: 6 Now there happened to be among them some of the sons of Judah, Daniel, Hananiah, Mishael and Azari′ah.7And to them the principal court official went assigning names. So he assigned to Daniel [the name of] Belteshazzar; and to Hananiah, Shadrach; and to Mishal, Meshach; and to Azariah, Abednego.
We were told that the Babylonians changed Hebrew names which contained the name of Hebrew God to Babylonian names that contained names of Babylonian gods.
I suspect that a real jewish pronunciation would be totally different, for example Jews for Jesus call Jesus, Yeshua Hamashiach.
I suspect all the names we say today will be different in heaven, when we will speak whatever is the language of heaven. Doubt language classes will be needed, and we will totally unaware we are not speaking Earthly languages any more. Just my opinion, no scriptures to support
DECISION DETERMINES DESTINY
|5 years ago :: Sep 01, 2012 - 9:57PM #45|
NEWTONIAN: Five point - First of all, you have not attempted to find a source on internet that provides Scoffield's scholarly marginal notes.
FIVE_POINT_DAD: I don't have a very good opinion of C. I. Scofield or his work. He was the attorney general of Kansas who abandoned his family and never obtained a doctorate degree, but used the title. His notes, as famous and well known as they are, I don't consider very scholarly. "The Scofield Reference Bible" you can now obtain in nearly any translation you wish. It isn't a translation; its a study Bible with specific notes.
NEWTONIAN: Secondly, you have not provided any scholarly evidence as to who removed the Divine Name from these quotes.
FIVE_POINT_DAD: That's because no one removed it. That's like asking, who removed the giant pink horse from in front of the Capitol Building? It was never there to begin with. I would call your attention to your own Organization's statement. "None of the Greek manuscripts that we have today of the New Testament contain Jehovah's name in full." I'm sure you would never disagree with the Watchtower.
NEWTONIAN: See my thread on Setterfield's research into the history of the Septuagint where he gives scholarly evidence that the Christian Bible writers used the wording of the Septuagint in their quotes. And see also the scholarly evidence I provided that the Septuagint in Jesus' time had the Divine Name in Hebrew in the Greek text.
FIVE_POINT_DAD: Neither you nor I consider the Septuagint inspired Scripture. The LXX copies that do have Hebrew characters are palmsests that circulated among Hebrew speaking people. That is exactly what you would expect and that is exactly what exists.
NEWTONIAN: Scoffield also notes the name Jehovah in the quotes of Deuteronomy 6:4,5 in Matthew 22:37-40 and Mark 12:29,30.
FIVE_POINT_DAD: Scoffield put that in his notes, not in any translation. You seem to think that Scofield produced his own rendering of the Bible and he never did, as far as I know. He had no training in the original languages and, like you, thought those New Testament quotations should contain the Hebrew, and like you, he simply expressed his unwarranted opinion without any textual authority. The only thing that you have proven is that the Watchtower isn't the only one guilty of textual molestation of God's Word.
NEWTONIAN: So, five point - who removed the Divine Name from the greatest commandment in the Bible?
FIVE_POINT_DAD: No one. It is quite evident in every Hebrew copy I have in both Ex. 20 and Deu 5. Your own organization agrees with me that no Greek manuscript of the NT contains God's name in full and it never appears in the NT.
NEWTONIAN: Now, concerning Jesus quote of Matthew 4:7 - you failed to read the context and thus do not understand the account. Here is the account:
(Matthew 4:5-7) 5 Then the Devil took him along into the holy city, and he stationed him upon the battlement of the temple 6 and said to him: “If you are a son of God, hurl yourself down; for it is written, ‘He will give his angels a charge concerning you, and they will carry you on their hands, that you may at no time strike your foot against a stone.’” 7 Jesus said to him: “Again it is written, ‘You must not put Jehovah your God to the test.’”
FIVE_POINT_DAD: I understand it very well. The devil was tempting Christ, anyone can see that. Jesus told him "Thou shall not tempt the Lord your God." That's equally simple. The difference between our understandings is this: Even if you could produce biblical scholarship and discover something, you're not permitted to deviate from Watchtower propaganda. So, your scholarship, no matter how good it may be, must be restricted to the party line of the WBTS. Just like Galileo's conflict with the Roman Church when Galileo said the earth orbits the sun. My scholarly endeavors have no such restrictions. That's why educational institutions grant "tenure" so that researchers can be free to pursue their academic calling without fear of censorship. There is no such thing as a tenured Watchtower scholar. (Actually, I don't believe there is any such thing as a Watchtower scholar with or without tenure!)
NEWTONIAN: So, rather than telling you the answer - I will simply ask you - how would Jesus hurling himself down be putting God to the test?
FIVE_POINT_DAD: The devil tempted Christ to prove his divine sonship by performing a miracle. In replay, Jesus told him it was written not to tempt the Lord God. He referred to Himself as God; it's not that complicated!