Archaeology: Name of "Yahweh" known ...

Archaeology: Name of "Yahweh" known to Egyptians

Posted in the Jehovah's Witness Forum

First Prev
of 6
Next Last
Lars Calier

United States

#1 Jan 18, 2010
Here's a recent article being discussed now about the "Shasu", believed to be a semi-nomadic people known to Egypt including one location called "Shasu of Yahweh." The name "Yahweh" is mentioned twice in Egyptian texts; once by Amenhotep III and then by Rameses II.

It would seem apparent YHWH was known among these peoples were other descendants of Laban and Abraham.

It is note to observe the context of Jerusalem which at the time of Abraham was a city where the king-priest was a worshipper of Yahweh, namely Melchizedek, who foreshadowed the messiah at the second coming. This helps us understand why Jehovah had the Canaanites wiped out by the Israelites, not simply because they were occupying the promised land, but because their worship of Yahweh had become corrupted.

Still for any witness and especially the WTS, who I don't think was aware of this would be delighted to see the name of "Yahweh" show up anywhere in extra-Biblical texts.

Here's the complete article.

http://www.assistnews.net/Stories/2010/s10010...

LC
dee lightful

Williamston, SC

#2 Jan 18, 2010
Lars Calier wrote:
Here's a recent article being discussed now about the "Shasu", believed to be a semi-nomadic people known to Egypt including one location called "Shasu of Yahweh." The name "Yahweh" is mentioned twice in Egyptian texts; once by Amenhotep III and then by Rameses II.
It would seem apparent YHWH was known among these peoples were other descendants of Laban and Abraham.
It is note to observe the context of Jerusalem which at the time of Abraham was a city where the king-priest was a worshipper of Yahweh, namely Melchizedek, who foreshadowed the messiah at the second coming. This helps us understand why Jehovah had the Canaanites wiped out by the Israelites, not simply because they were occupying the promised land, but because their worship of Yahweh had become corrupted.
Still for any witness and especially the WTS, who I don't think was aware of this would be delighted to see the name of "Yahweh" show up anywhere in extra-Biblical texts.
Here's the complete article.
http://www.assistnews.net/Stories/2010/s10010...
LC
Why would the WTS be delighted to see Yahweh in these texts rather than Jehovah? No one questions the name Yahweh.

Since: Jan 07

Location hidden

#3 Jan 18, 2010
This is interesting. Though I don't think this is a surprise to anyone. There have always been worshippers of Jehovah.
Lars Calier

United States

#4 Jan 18, 2010
dee lightful wrote:
<quoted text>Why would the WTS be delighted to see Yahweh in these texts rather than Jehovah? No one questions the name Yahweh.
Good point. But they consider the "divine name" YHWH equivalent to "Jehovah".

Of course, they dishonor the God himself when they disobey the command not to change the sacred word and insert "Jehovah" for their own choices of "god" and "Lord" in the NT when no NT writer translated the name into Greek. How do they know for sure when the Bible refers to "those belonging to the Lord" whether this is meant to Jehovah or to Jesus, since both apply? How do they know when "by the word of the Lord" is a reference to Jesus or Jehovah? They don't. So when they make that exegetical choice, they turn the Bible into their commentary.

So they fail to learn the basics with respect to Jehovah, including making themselves a god worshipped by the witnesses, introducing idolatry and failing to learn that "obedience is better than a sacrifice."

For this reason Jehovah has cast them out into spiritual darkness. Why can't the witnesses see that? Many do, and leave. But also as the Bible says, many love the darkness. They want to be enslaved and spiritually lazy, letting the WTS do everything for them spiritually, they think. They miss the point of being a Christian.

Even so, while ancient history and the Bible has been bashed by anti-Biblical scholars, something like this coming to the light might be part of more light being shown to not only prove the Bible true but to force recognition of the precise dating of the Exodus which was known in 810 AD by Syncellus to occur at the end of the reign of Amenhotep III. It was never a question when the Exodus took place per Manetho. Yet this scenario is avoided aggressively. Once it is clear Akhenaten's conversion to monotheism was directly related to the 10 plagues, then the fake NB timeline will have to be corrected. That might be why scholars are pretending the pharaoh of the Exodus is not known or that there was no Exodus.

The Exodus occurred in 1386 BCE at the end of the reign of Amenhotep III.

LC
Lars Calier

United States

#5 Jan 18, 2010
Gareth wrote:
This is interesting. Though I don't think this is a surprise to anyone. There have always been worshippers of Jehovah.
Right. They knew who he was from Noah. The Israelites were just set apart for establishing formal worship and through which the messiah would arrive. That was their purpose.

Under the Christian system, the messiah comes through God's chosen Christian sect, Jehovah's witnesses. In the Bible the WTS is represented by sand on the beach. That is, having more Biblical foundation than water but still not a rock mass of Bible understanding.

Thus Christ is represented as having one foot in the sea and one foot on the beach, showing he is not formally connected to the WTS but only loosely connected, that is, half in and half out of the organization.

The parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus confirms the association of Lazarus (the messiah) with the GB of JW, represented by the Rich Man. Lazarus outside the gate of the Rich Man represents a disfellowshipped prodigal son at the time, the person who would become the messiah later on.

LC

Since: Jan 07

Location hidden

#6 Jan 18, 2010
Lars Calier wrote:
Right. They knew who he was from Noah.
The first person in the Bible recorded to have used the name "Jehovah" was Eve:

*** Gen 4:1 The man knew Eve his wife. She conceived, and gave birth to Cain, and said, "I have gotten a man with Jehovah's help."

Long before the flood men began a formal return to worshipping Jehovah:

*** Gen 4:26 There was also born a son to Seth, and he named him Enosh. Then men began to call on Jehovah's name.

I assume that must have been just about when the first people began dying of old age.

Knight Templar

“Quiet Professional”

Since: Jan 10

Location hidden

#7 Jan 18, 2010
Gareth wrote:
<quoted text>
The first person in the Bible recorded to have used the name "Jehovah" was Eve:
*** Gen 4:1 The man knew Eve his wife. She conceived, and gave birth to Cain, and said, "I have gotten a man with Jehovah's help."
Long before the flood men began a formal return to worshipping Jehovah:
*** Gen 4:26 There was also born a son to Seth, and he named him Enosh. Then men began to call on Jehovah's name.
I assume that must have been just about when the first people began dying of old age.
NOT TRUE, the fake name, "Jehovah" had not yet been invented.

The Catholics had not yet invented "Jehovah."
Lars Calier

United States

#8 Jan 18, 2010
Knight Templar wrote:
<quoted text>
NOT TRUE, the fake name, "Jehovah" had not yet been invented.
The Catholics had not yet invented "Jehovah."
Aha. I can see what you are saying, how "Jehovah" is an inadequate substitute for the divine name, YHWH.

Lost in translation.

LC

Since: Jan 07

Location hidden

#9 Jan 18, 2010
Knight Templar wrote:
NOT TRUE, the fake name, "Jehovah" had not yet been invented.
The Catholics had not yet invented "Jehovah."
There was no English language. Therefore NONE of the words of the Hebrew translations had been invented.

Therefore your point is meaningless.

There is nothing "fake" about the name Jehovah. It is simply proper English, not Hebrew. Obviously it was not in existence thousands of years ago.
dee lightful

Williamston, SC

#10 Jan 18, 2010
Gareth wrote:
<quoted text>
There was no English language. Therefore NONE of the words of the Hebrew translations had been invented.
Therefore your point is meaningless.
There is nothing "fake" about the name Jehovah. It is simply proper English, not Hebrew. Obviously it was not in existence thousands of years ago.
Your point is meaningless since you yourself said there was no English language then if jehovah is supposedly an English translation, then EVE could not have used the word "Jehovah". Why does the WT say Jehovah is incorrect?
abrother

United States

#11 Jan 18, 2010
dee lightful wrote:
<quoted text> Your point is meaningless since you yourself said there was no English language then if jehovah is supposedly an English translation, then EVE could not have used the word "Jehovah". Why does the WT say Jehovah is incorrect?
And Jehovah could not used the word "EVE". Why? Because there was no Eglish language.
dee lightful

Williamston, SC

#12 Jan 18, 2010
abrother wrote:
<quoted text>
And Jehovah could not used the word "EVE". Why? Because there was no Eglish language.
Gareth is the one who mentioned Eve using the word Jehovah after saying there was no English language then so Eve saying Jehovah is not true.
I hope Gareth is able to rethink what he said and realize he is in error. Lies to try to make the WT right do not help the WT at all esp. since the WT itself said Jehovah is not accurate.

Knight Templar

“Quiet Professional”

Since: Jan 10

Location hidden

#13 Jan 18, 2010
Gareth wrote:
<quoted text>
There was no English language. Therefore NONE of the words of the Hebrew translations had been invented.
Therefore your point is meaningless.
There is nothing "fake" about the name Jehovah. It is simply proper English, not Hebrew. Obviously it was not in existence thousands of years ago.
NO, your words are meaningless...just as is the fake word, "JEHOVAH."

Like you, it's a fake.

The Jewish Encyclopaedia explains the word Jehovah in a similar way. http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp... (25/9/2005)

"A mispronunciation (introduced by Christian theologians, but almost entirely disregarded by the Jews) of the Hebrew "Yhwh," the (ineffable) name of God (the Tetragrammaton or "Shem ha-Meforash").

This pronunciation is grammatically impossible;

This pronunciation is grammatically impossible;

This pronunciation is grammatically impossible;it arose through pronouncing the vowels of the "?ere" (marginal reading of the Masorites:= "Adonay") with the consonants of the "ketib" (text-reading:= "Yhwh")"

The first time the Tetragrammaton appeared in an English Bible was on the title page of William Tyndale's Bible translation of 1525, where it was written as Iehouah.

This was an interlace of YHVH and Adonai. The King James Version also originally used Iehouah, influenced by the Ben Chayim codex.

The King James Bible changed the spelling to Jehovah for the 1762-1769 edition.

This pronunciation is grammatically impossible;

This pronunciation is grammatically impossible;

This pronunciation is grammatically impossible; Except for cults.
Lars Calier

United States

#14 Jan 18, 2010
Knight Templar wrote:
This pronunciation is grammatically impossible;
This pronunciation is grammatically impossible;
This pronunciation is grammatically impossible; Except for cults.
Okay, then correct us. What is your more correct or acceptable reference for YHWH?

Or is "YHWH" the best rendering? One I prefer to use actually. I tend to use YHWH except in JW settings, like this JW discussion board.

LC

Knight Templar

“Quiet Professional”

Since: Jan 10

Location hidden

#15 Jan 18, 2010
Lars Calier wrote:
<quoted text>
Okay, then correct us. What is your more correct or acceptable reference for YHWH?
Or is "YHWH" the best rendering? One I prefer to use actually. I tend to use YHWH except in JW settings, like this JW discussion board.
LC
Jews recognise the divine name in modern times as Yahweh. The Jewish Encyclopedia published between 1901 and 1906 by Funk and Wagnalls includes the divine name as Yahweh when translated into English.

the divine name as Yahweh when translated into English

the divine name as Yahweh when translated into English

the divine name as Yahweh when translated into English

The version of the Old Testament used by Aramaic speaking Assyrians, Syrians and Chaldeans was the Peshitta text. In the fourth century CE vowels were added to the Aramaic text. When they added vowels to names that begin with part of the divine name the result was to start with Yah, such as in Yahosaphat.

Egyptian hieroglyphics contain written vowels. In Budge's An Egyptian Hieroglyphic Dictionary page fifteen shows that the shortened form of YHWH was transliterated as "IA" or "YA", also supporting that God's name begins with the sound Yah.

Assyrian cuneiform script has been found which had the divine name spelt with written vowels. A.H.Sayce published Halley's Bible Handbook in 1898. On page sixty two it discusses three clay cuneiform tablets dating from the time of Hammurabi which contain the phrase Jahweh.

Josephus also can be used to support the idea that the sacred name was pronounced Yahweh. In Jewish Wars, chapter V, Josephus wrote;

"... in which was engraven the sacred name: it consists of four vowels."

Yahweh or Yahuweh contains four 'vowels', being pronounced as ee-ah-oo-eh, whereas Jehovah only contains three.

In Jesus time the Greek transliteration of the divine name was Iaoue or Iabe. This supports Yahweh as it was pronounced ee-ah-oo-eh. In the second century Clement of Alexandria wrote: "The mystic name which is called the Tetragrammaton, by which alone they who had access to the Holy of Holies were protected, is pronounced Iaoue, which means 'who is, and who shall be.'" In Latin it was similarly written as Iabe.

Knight Templar

“Quiet Professional”

Since: Jan 10

Location hidden

#16 Jan 18, 2010
It was in 1926 that the importance of the word Jehovah was introduced by Rutherford.

"Especially since the year 1926 they have been making known the name of the heavenly Father of the King Jesus Christ, even going to the extent of embracing the name "Jehovah's witnesses" in the year 1931." God's Kingdom of a Thousand Years Has Approached p. 288

In response to the radical new direction Rutherford was taking the Watchtower Society, many left the Organization and formed independent Bible Student groups. In an effort to distance his followers from this "evil slave class", Rutherford introduced the distinguishing name Jehovah's Witnesses. This is discussed in the Watchtower 1931 September 15 and October 1. Rutherford used Isaiah 62:2 as his principle reference.

Isaiah 62:2 "And you will actually be called by a new name, which the very mouth of Jehovah will designate."

This was poor choice of scripture as just 2 verses later the name given is not Jehovah but Hephzibah.

Isaiah 62:4 "… but you yourself will be called (Hephzibah RSV) My Delight Is in Her …."

This erroneous reasoning was later corrected, and Isaiah 43:10 brought to prominence instead.

"Although the evidence points persuasively to Jehovah's direction in selection of the name Jehovah's Witnesses, The Watchtower (February 1, 1944, pp. 42-3; October 1, 1957, p. 607) and the book "New Heavens and a New Earth" (pp. 231-7) later pointed out that this name is not the "new name" referred to at Isaiah 62:2; 65:15; and Revelation 2:17, though the name harmonizes with the new relationship referred to in the two texts in Isaiah." Jehovah's Witnesses - Proclaimers of God's Kingdom p. 156 Footnote

The Watchtower gives precedence to the name Jehovah's Witnesses based on Isaiah 43:10 in favour of the wealth of New Testament guidance to be "witnesses of me"- Christ Jesus.(Acts 1:8)

Luke 24:46-48 "In this way it is written that the Christ would suffer and rise from among the dead on the third day, 47 and on the basis of his name repentance for forgiveness of sins would be preached in all the nations-starting out from Jerusalem, 48 YOU are to be witnesses of these things."

Acts 10:43 "To him all the prophets bear witness, that everyone putting faith in him gets forgiveness of sins through his name."

Hebrews 12:1-2 " … we have so great a cloud of witnesses surrounding us,... as we look intently at the Chief Agent and Perfecter of our faith, Jesus."

Revelation 17:6 "…the witnesses of Jesus."

Further effort to shift attention from Jesus to Jehovah was made in 1939 when The Watchtower and Herald of Christ's Kingdom was renamed The Watchtower Announcing Jehovah's Kingdom.

Since: Jan 07

Location hidden

#17 Jan 18, 2010
dee lightful wrote:
<quoted text> Gareth is the one who mentioned Eve using the word Jehovah after saying there was no English language then so Eve saying Jehovah is not true.
I hope Gareth is able to rethink what he said and realize he is in error. Lies to try to make the WT right do not help the WT at all esp. since the WT itself said Jehovah is not accurate.
Dee, that argument really is absurd.

Since: Jan 07

Location hidden

#18 Jan 18, 2010
Knight Templar wrote:
<quoted text>
NO, your words are meaningless...just as is the fake word, "JEHOVAH."
Like you, it's a fake.
The Jewish Encyclopaedia explains the word Jehovah in a similar way. http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp... (25/9/2005)
"A mispronunciation (introduced by Christian theologians, but almost entirely disregarded by the Jews) of the Hebrew "Yhwh," the (ineffable) name of God (the Tetragrammaton or "Shem ha-Meforash").
This pronunciation is grammatically impossible;
This pronunciation is grammatically impossible;
This pronunciation is grammatically impossible;it arose through pronouncing the vowels of the "?ere" (marginal reading of the Masorites:= "Adonay") with the consonants of the "ketib" (text-reading:= "Yhwh")"
The first time the Tetragrammaton appeared in an English Bible was on the title page of William Tyndale's Bible translation of 1525, where it was written as Iehouah.
This was an interlace of YHVH and Adonai. The King James Version also originally used Iehouah, influenced by the Ben Chayim codex.
The King James Bible changed the spelling to Jehovah for the 1762-1769 edition.
This pronunciation is grammatically impossible;
This pronunciation is grammatically impossible;
This pronunciation is grammatically impossible; Except for cults.
You are so BUSTED!!!

“email at [email protected]

Since: Dec 07

central louisiana

#19 Jan 18, 2010
Gareth wrote:
This is interesting. Though I don't think this is a surprise to anyone. There have always been worshippers of Jehovah.
ihv>> there were never worshippers of "jehovah" till russell came along.. before that they worshipped "LORD" "GOD" "FATHER" GOD ALMIGHTY....the made up name was a name only and nobody really ever used it prior to your religon when they took up the false name in the 30s
will

Knight Templar

“Quiet Professional”

Since: Jan 10

Location hidden

#20 Jan 18, 2010
Gareth wrote:
<quoted text>
You are so BUSTED!!!
Gareth, that argument really is absurd.

And IGNORANT!

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 6
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Jehovah's Witness Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
What does this mean? 5 min Erran 674
God's Name WAS in the Original NT!!! (Sep '16) 1 hr red blood relative 2,155
Hey JW Subliminal Artist!! YOU are done! 1 hr red blood relative 92
What is the trinity? (Apr '13) 1 hr rsss1 27,207
When are the "Last Days"? 1 hr Alank 226
Hebrews 1:13-14 2 hr The Real Karen 185
Why don’t JW's accept blood transfusions? 3 hr Sparlock 52
Eternal Life 10 hr Alank 35
More from around the web