"The sacred name of our creator is not 'Jehovah'. That word is a proven transliteration error from the 13th Century..." Put it simply, that by the 1st Century to 12th Century, Christians had widely known "Jehovah" as the personal name of God. This is apparent since it was assumed by some "writers" that they have proved it wrong somewhat lately or by the 13th Century. Actually, the preserved vocalization of JHVH(YHWH) is "Jehovah" as represented by the Masoretic Text. In the KJV Old Testament it is translated 'Jehovah' seven (7) times or instances and rendered 'LORD' the remaining times. These seven (7) instances in which the KJV translators have used the sacred name of God was for very specific reasons and were found under the following conditions: 1. When JHVH(YHWH) is used as God's personal name. Exodus 6:3
And I appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac and unto Jacob, by the name of God Almighty, but my name JEHOVAH was I not known to them.
Psalms 83:18 That men may know that thou, whose name alone is JEHOVAH,art the most high over all the earth. 2. When God's name is repeated as "Jah Jehovah" Isah. 12:2 strength:
Behold God is my salvation...for the LORD JEHOVAH is my
Isah. 26:4 Trust ye in the LORD for ever: for in the LORD JEHOVAH is everlasting strength. 3. When God's personal name is part of a place name. Genesis 22:14 Exo. 17:15
And Abraham called the name of that place Jehovah-jireh:.. And Moses built an altar, and called the name of it Jehovah-nissi..
Judges 6:24 Then Gideon built an altar there unto the LORD, and called it Jehovah-Shalom.. Jehovah was the pronunciation of JHVH(YHWH) that the English speaking people understood as the personal name of God. So in places where the personal name of God was emphasized, the KJV translators transliterated the name Jehovah. To note, the KJV translators has unparralled ability. No person or modern day scholars can ever claim to match or surpassed their God-givent talent. Others have remarked, "that scholars per se, the men behind the KJV is by far superior than any of todays scholars." ( Samuel C. Gipp, An Understable History of the Bible, 1987 p.182). It is also quite interesting to know that the translators of the KJV have all the readings of the Hebrew, Greek, Latin and other languages. In fact, the translators did not do anything lightly in their preparation or making of their translation popularly known as the Authorized Version. Textual and literary scholar Rolan Musyat Frye agreed and wrote that the KJV "had the essential faithfulness to the original." ( The Bible in English in Literacy Milieu eds. John Maier and
Vincent Tollers, Grand Rapids, 1979, p.255). Professor Gerald Hammond of the University of Manchester, England, has correctly noted that the KJV translators "have taken to reproduce the syntatic details of the original." (The Literaly Guide to the Bible, eds. Robfert Alter and Frank Kermode, Cambridge, p.656). With this point of mind, the KJV is not only an outstanding English, it is also an outstanding as a representative of BIBLICAL LANGUAGES. WHEREAS, the Watch Tower and Tract Society /JW, made used of the word JEHOVAH in an ABUSIVE WAY. As to the their rule, NWT always renders the Gk. "Kurios" as Jehovah when it refers to the the Father but "Lord" when it refers to Jesus Christ. Whenever the New Testament quotes the Old Testament, the NW Translators could tell whether to use "Lord" or "Jehovah" by noticing if the Hebrew word which the New Testament quoted was "Jehovah." ( ) This is the GROSS ERROR/MISTAKES is all about, by not following the common practice in rendering the Gk. "Kurios" as Lord. For the record they have used it 237 times in the New Testament alone. ( see Watch Tower, August 1, 2008 p. 18). Some have commented that, "Several Gk. writers... that the sacred name was pronounced 'Yahweh' ". From the Preface to the NASB, 1997 edition, the translators of the NASB admitted the FACT that "It is known that for many years, YHWH has been transliterated as Yahweh, however, no complete certainty attaches to this pronunciation." (see Preface of the NASB at Internet). The Revised (reversed) Standard Version of 1901 also accepted that "...it is almost if not quite certain that the name was originally pronounced Yahweh..." (see the Preface of the RSV p. v). The Eight Editors of the New Scofield Reference Bible namely; William J. Eerdman, Arno C. Gaebelin, James M. Gray, Elmor Harris, W.G. Morrhead, Arthur T. Pierson, Henry G. Weston and William J. Pettingil along with Dr. Scofield and others host of scholors, including Prof. James Barodlet of the Theological Faculty of Lausanne, Professors Sayce and Mangoliuth of Oxford and CR Eerdsman all agreed the "name of Jehovah (LORD) is introduced..." (see notes on Gen. 2:4 of NSRB). Even the NIV, the name Yahweh was not used, instead they used "...Lord in capital letters to distinguish it from Adonai..." (see the Preface of the NIV). Further, a good English Dictionary like the American Dictionary of the English Language eds. 1828 and 1901 or commonly referred as the Webster's Dictionary have the word JEHOVAH in it while the word Yahweh is not found. This is also true to the Online Cambridge Dictionary. Only new or modern dictionaries have the word Yahweh with the same definition of the word JEHOVAH. The vowels "a" and "e" in JHVH/YHWH were actually laid by Theodoret in the 5th Century. Not familiar with the Hebrew, Theodoret used the Syrian Jabe. (see The New Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge, Vol 11, 1911 pp. 323-324). Gail Riplinger stated that "unbelieving Bible critics in the 19th Century, merged the vowels in Jabe with JHVH, ignoring every vowel-pointed Hebrew Manuscript." (see Topics on AVPublications.com). Another self-proclaimed writer suggest that "J-h word could not be the ancient sacred name of our creator." The reasoning is that "the letter 'J' was the last letter added to the English alphabet." and even boasted that "the early KJV of the bible did not contain the J-h word." UNLEARNED in the Elizabethan alphabet rules and letters makes one rationalized that the KJV did not contain the word. One must learned that the old/Elizabethan alphabet contained only 24 letters as opposed to the modern English alphabet which contained 26 letters. The old English letter "i" and "j" were used as the same letter (interchangeable). The "j" usually used as the capital form of the letter "i" (Taken from www.elizabethan-era.org). So that Iermyah is to be read on the later editions of the KJV as Jeremiah not 'Yeramayah'. Another, is that "there is no 'j' sound in the Hebrew". This is true, and if this is the rule to be
followed then there is also no "w" in the Hebrew. Below you will find the list of the 22 Hebrew alphabet with their literal meaning and the Latinized form. Accordingly the Latinized form of "Yod" is either capital letter "i" ie. I or J. The pictogram and the literal meaning is actually an extended arm or hand which resembles a J in our English alphabet.
Vav, usually a consonant pronounced as a "v," is sometimes a vowel pronounced "oo" (u) or "oh" (o).
"No one is above the law" and that law is the Word of God. This law states "Thy word is true" (Psalms 119:160) and "...is given by inspiration..." (2Tim. 3:16). It is settled in heaven (Psalm 119:89). For King David it was his meditation all the day.This law further states the whole truth and nothing but the truth. The FACT is there is no really a substitute for the Words of God. For the
Christian believers, the BIBLE is the final authority of faith and practice. History, Pillology that is against the Words of God is alltogether, a non-authorative sources. An internet, home or public library based information is never to be equated to the Words of God. Even one jot in the scriptures, cannot be compared with all the volumes of man's opinion. Haven't you read that "the Queen of Sheba", who onced asked the wisest man on earth of his day, that is King Solomon concerning the name of the LORD (JHVH/YHWH)? Ever wonder, there is a name of the LORD? For information and self-study read 1 Kings 10:1-9, see also Exodus 34:14. So what's the point, scholarship, history and pillology is nothing and fall short to the very pure words of God. The statement the "...name of the creator is not Jehovah..." is certainly true since the very name of our Creator in Genesis 1:1 is "Elohim". Only in Genesis 2:4 that the name Jehovah was introduced. In regards, to the "Fuego Fedie", I have searched and read the articles of the Daggers of Faith (see www.escholars-era.org), it seems that I haven't read any instances that Raymund Martini made an attempt to transliterate the sacred name of God. These unfounded quotes must first be verified thus making our statements to be true and realiable. Others were in conflicting view, some pre dates it 13 Cent. while on the same reports it was until the 16th Century that the vocalization was introduced. To this I conclude, Half truth is never a truth at all...
Frederick L. Langit