"""And I saw one of his heads as it were wounded to death; and his deadly wound was healed: and ALL THE WORLD wondered after the beast.

4 AND THEY WORSHIPPED THE DRAGON( Who is the Dragon? See Rev.12:9) which gave power unto the beast: and they worshipped the beast, saying, Who is like unto the beast? who is able to make war with him?

"""8 And ALL THAT DWELL UPON THE EARTH SHALL WORSHIP HIM( THE DRAGON OR SATAN THE DEVIL), whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.

To worship and call on the title name of "" GAWD=GOD "" which is the title name of the Babylonian idol image DEITY, which is also the NAME OF THE BEAST( Rev.13:15)is to worship THE DRAGON-SATAN THE DEVIL( Rev.12:9) through his deception, which is IDOLATRY practiced by SYNCRETISIM of idol pagan customs and idol pagan name deities.

Otherwise, how could satan the devil deceive ALL THOSE THAT DWELL ON THE EARTH TO WORSHIP HIM( Rev.13:3-4,--verse 8)IN THE END TIMES, which is IDOLATRY ?

Nice question isn't, however, how many out there really believes that statement made by John?

Notice what else happens in these end times too.

"""6 And he opened his mouth in blasphemy against YAH, to blaspheme his name, and his tabernacle, and them that dwell in heaven.

"""7 And it was given unto him to make war with the saints, and to overcome them: and power was given him over all kindreds, and tongues, and nations.""( Rev.13:6-7)."""

This world's ch-rches who use and call on the pagan idol image name of GAWD=GOD, which is the beasts name, will eventually cause the government to make war with the true people or saints of YHWH=YAH, and they will blaspheme the NAME OF YHWH=YAH and over come Yah's People and persecute them even to death.( Matt.24) for His TRUE Name's sake.

Written by Elyahc=Eljah C.

http://bible.crosswalk.com/Lexicons/Hebrew/heb.cgi?search=1409&version=kjv&type=eng&submit=Find

I know we all have different views and beliefs. In discussing Scripture, however, it is important that we go by the facts we have rather than our own theological views. With regards to the word Lord in the Bible languages we have the following:

The Hebrew word Adonai appears over 600 times in the Hebrew OT.

The Greek word kurios appears over 600 times in the Greek NT and over 6,000 in the LXX.

The Aramaic Mara and related words over 600 times in the Aramaic NT.

We have over 20,000 ancient manuscripts of Hebrew/Aramaic/Greek/Latin of the OT and NT and all of them have Adonai/Kurios/Mara/Dominus. There is not ONE manuscript that avoids the word.

To suggest that "Lord" (which is the English rendering of Adonai/Kurios/Mara/Dominus) is an inappropriate word is to completely disregard ALL the manuscript evidence.

To disregard the manuscript evidence is to throw away the Bible, because every single Bible in existence is based on these manuscripts.

Blessings,
Gary

Apologies for taking so long to reply to you, but for a while there were no further comments to my post so I thought people lost interest and I stopped looking at the thread. So here is a belated response.

My impression is that you see Lord as a legitimate word to render Adonai or Kurios but not to render YHWH or Kurios in the NT when it is a reference to YHWH. Though I would disagree with the last portion (Kurios - YHWH in the NT) overall I don't see much problem with your approach. What I worry more is about people who say that "Lord" is a pagan word that should not be in the Bible and who therefore rewrite the whole Bible based not on any manuscript support but on their own views. This I consider a very dangerous practise because it places human opinion above the written word of God.

Now a quick rejoinder on your points:

On point 3:
Textual criticism takes only extant textual variants into consideration; not hypothetical readings. What you would consider "internal evidence" are actually theological presuppositions concerning what the text should say, rather than what it says. Textual criticism cannot and does not take such presuppositions into consideration.

On point 4:
While no serious theologian has any qualms about the name YHWH, I do need to point out the YHWH was used in idol worship. In Judges 8:22-27 Gideon made an idol and all Israel "prostituted... by worshiping it" (8:27). The idol was made in the name of YHWH (8:23).

In Judges 17 and 18 we have the story of a man named Micah who made idols in the name of YHWH and the tribe of Dan followed him in the worship of his idols.

It is very likely that the idols that Jeroboam made and installed in Israel also bore the name YHWH.

Also, there are at least three inscription that connect YHWH with idolatrous practise. Two have been found at Kuntillet Ajrud and read:
"Yahweh of Teman and his asherah"
"Yahweh of Samaria and his asherah"

The third is from Khirbet el-Qom and reads:
"Uriyahu the rich wrote it.
Blessed be Uriyahu by Yahweh.
For from his enemies by his Asherah he has saved him."

All the above are obviously corruptions of the true worship of YHWH, were found in the area occupied by the Northern Kingdom (Jeroboam's kingdom) and probably reflect the mixture of true worship with paganism that Jeroboam instituted. They in no way indicate that there is anything wrong with the name YHWH but only with the way that people related to it. That Israel on many occassions corrupted the true worship of YHWH and mingled it with paganism is very obvious from the Bible even without such archaeological finds as the ones above.

Also, here are some possible linguistic associations between Yahweh and certain pagan deities:
1) The Indoeuropean god Jove or Jovis;
2) The ancient moon god Ioh;
3) Plutarch mentions a statue of Athena in Sais, Egypt which bore the inscription, "I am all that has been, is, and will be";
4) In ancient pagan Egypt we meet a common formula, "I am I";
5) There seems to have been an Akkadian god called Yah or Yahu;
6) Yahu and Yah seem to have been known outside Israel as they appear as compounds in foreign proper names;
7) In pre-Semitic Babylonia there was a deity who name was I, which with a Assyrian noninative ending becomes Yau.

For a good discussion (and refutation) of some of the above you can look at the Catholic online encyclopedia at http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08329a.htm

The reason I state the above is NOT to discredit in any way the name Yahweh. For me, the fact that the name is in the Bible and appears so often is enough to make it absolutely legitimate. But the above should be a warning to those who build their spiritual experience on spellings of words and pronounciations of words and who divide Biblical words into "pagan" ones and "pure" ones, and who try to rewrite the Bible to fit their views.

Blessings,
Gary

The short form name YAH appears arround 49 times in the scriptures, and its first use was BY MOSES in ( Exod.15:2), and is in the ( N.K.J.V.) as YAH in ( Psalms 68:4) and this short form name of "" Yah= Strongs Hebrew Number 3050 "" is indisputable in the scriptures and James H.Strongs leaves no doubt of its pronounciation as "" Yah "" as in " ah".

It's good to hear from you. Oftentimes I am unable to answer for few or many days due to other things in my life. I do have a few minutes this morning though to look through your statements, and maybe answer some that I am familiar with.

You wrote:

quote:

---

My impression is that you see Lord as a legitimate word to render Adonai or Kurios but not to render YHWH or Kurios in the NT when it is a reference to YHWH. Though I would disagree with the last portion (Kurios - YHWH in the NT) overall I don't see much problem with your approach. What I worry more is about people who say that "Lord" is a pagan word that should not be in the Bible and who therefore rewrite the whole Bible based not on any manuscript support but on their own views. This I consider a very dangerous practise because it places human opinion above the written word of God.

---

I appreciate your response here. I also feel that if the word adonai or kurios, originally belonged in a Bible verse that it is a sin to remove it. Every word of the Almighty is pure (Proverbs 30:5). I believe that most Sacred Name advocates would feel the same way, but would just choose a word such as "Master" or "Sovereign" as a translation of adonai or such, in lieu of "Lord". I'm not completely sure why, I think it is because they feel that the English word "lord" has negative connotations, and maybe stemmed from paganism. I've seen no evidence to this effect.

I do think we need to consider the origin of words that we apply to our heavenly Father. If a word was originally used in reference to pagan worship or a heathen mighty one, then I see no reason to adopt such a word and apply it to our heavenly Father. I even think that if a word has a questionable origin we should "toss it" when it comes to speaking or writing of our heavenly Father. He deserves the best, as I think you would agree, so there's no reason to not use the "better of two choices" we have before us. If a third or other choice comes along that seems superior in the future, I believe we should again make changes where necessary. We are seeking to honor Him, and that includes the titles we choose to use in reference to Him.

You also wrote:

quote:

---

On point 3:
Textual criticism takes only extant textual variants into consideration; not hypothetical readings. What you would consider "internal evidence" are actually theological presuppositions concerning what the text should say, rather than what it says. Textual criticism cannot and does not take such presuppositions into consideration.

---

I could not remember what I wrote, so I went back and looked it up. I am pasting it below here, for readers benefit.

Originally posted by emjanzen 12-04-2005, 6:25 a.m.

I do believe that the name Yahweh is to be understood in many places that use the Greek term kurios in the NT. There are other places which use kurios apart from quoting OT Scripture or in usage towards reference to Yeshua or other commen men at that time in which a translation of "lord", "master", "ruler" etc. will suffice.

We are to base our beliefs on what the original NT said in this case, not only on manuscript evidence, but also upon internal evidence. Any textual criticism takes both into account. The internal evidence on the Scriptures weighs heavily in favor of the tetragram's usage in the original manuscripts of the NT, whereas the actual manuscript evidence is lacking in the manuscripts we have of the Greek NT. I've explained this in my post with the fictitious dialogue.

It appears that you are calling the use of the tetragram in the NT a "hypothetical reading" and a "theological presupposition". I strongly (yet gently) disagree with this assertion. Internal evidence is more than just what the actual NT manuscript says. For starters, if it is the NT that is quoting a passage in the OT, and the OT says - YHWH - that is a piece of very strong internal evidence that the NT text originally read, YHWH.

Further internal evidence can be found in the fact, not presupposition, that the Son proclaimed his Fathers name (John 5:43; 17:5, 11-12, 25). This is the point I'm making on internal evidence, it has nothing to do with pulling a reading out of thin air, just because I prefer the Bible to say something that it really doesn't. "Internal" has the meaning of looking at the vocabulary and structure of the passage, along with the context of the passage, and other related passages in the Bible, both Old and New Testaments. It is upon these grounds that the name YHWH should be in the New Testament.

You also wrote:

quote:

---

On point 4:
While no serious theologian has any qualms about the name YHWH, I do need to point out the YHWH was used in idol worship. In Judges 8:22-27 Gideon made an idol and all Israel "prostituted... by worshiping it" (8:27). The idol was made in the name of YHWH (8:23).

In Judges 17 and 18 we have the story of a man named Micah who made idols in the name of YHWH and the tribe of Dan followed him in the worship of his idols.

It is very likely that the idols that Jeroboam made and installed in Israel also bore the name YHWH.

---

This was a reply to my writing:

Originally posted by emjanzen, 12-04-2005, 6:25 a.m.

Yahweh was the name that was unique to the Hebrews "Mighty One" in Scripture. There was no other mighty one called by that name anywhere in the pages of holy writ. This is in stark contrast to the way in which the Hebrew term adonai is used in the Masoretic text, or in which the term kurios is used in the Septuagint. Both terms are used as generic titles/names of other mighty ones. They were not unique terms that could only be applied to Yahweh. This proves that kurios could not be the name of the Mighty One of Israel, seeing it can be applied to all the other false mighty ones, as well as applied to any man that had the position of a king or ruler.

The fact that heathens of later times, outside of Scripture, chose to refer to their mighty one(s) by the name Yah or Yahweh, does not negate this names unique usage in Scripture. The name of Yahweh is originally pure and devoted to the one, true Mighty One of the Bible (Genesis 2:4), what men do with it outside of Scripture does not negate its uniqueness inside of Scripture.

I now reply:

1: Judges 8:22-27: Nowhere in the text does it say, "the idol was made in the name of YHWH". Verse 23 has Gideon "semi-rebuking" the men of Israel for wanting Gideon and his sons to rule over them. Gideon replies that they will not rule over them but rather, Yahweh will rule over them. This is a response from Gideon, who has the creator of heaven and earth in mind, not some idol fashioned out of gold or other material. Later in the verses, Gideon to the spoil of golden rings and other ornaments, and made them into an ephod, which the Israelites went a whoring after. Nothing is said about the idol being named Yahweh.

2: Judges 17-18: In this instance we have an ephod being made by Micah (Judges 17:5) and before this we have his mother blessing him in Yahweh's name when he brings back her silver (vs. 2). She also says, "I had truly set apart the silver from my hand to Yahweh for my son, to make a carved image and a moulded image..." (vs. 3) However, nothing in the text suggest that the carved image or idols were named Yahweh. Her proclamation in Yahweh's name was given to Yahweh himself, the creator of the heavens and earth, even if it was sacreligious. People today do the same thing when they may be disobeying a command but saying, "The LORD blessed me with this. Oh thank you LORD!" It doesn't necessarily mean Yahweh blessed them, but they are using it to justify their situation. That's all that's going on here in Judges 17.

3: Jereboam: Of Jereboam you stated, "It is very likely that the idols that Jeroboam made and installed in Israel also bore the name YHWH." Gary, friend, this is what is called a hypothesis or a presupposition. You have nothing in the Bible even remotely suggesting that Jereboam's idols bore the name Yahweh. We should not conjecture where we have no proof. Proof cannot even be gleaned from the Judges passages you cited which actually used the name Yahweh.

Furthermore (as you have stated elsewhere) the use of the name Yahweh in a "pagan" context has no bearing on the purity and originality of the name itself. It's first use is found in Genesis 2:4 and there is no hint that it had anything to do with a false mighty one, but rather with the true Mighty One of the Scriptures - Yahweh. What corrupt men do with this originally pure name does not negate the original purity of the name itself.

Also, I am not basing my salvation on "letters" or "vocal chords" persay, but I am calling upon the name I am told to call upon for salvation (Joel 2:32), so this is an idea that came from the mind of the heavenly Father, not the minds of men. He gave this name to Himself, so any attempt to downplay the letters or sound of the name as immaterial or irrelavent is a later attempt by mortal men. We should trust in the word of Yahweh and realize that He wants to be called Yahweh. It is His memorial to all generations (Exodus 3:15).

In Yahweh's Service,
Matthew Janzen

Blessings. A free day today and I am posting more than I would be able to otherwise. I hope I don't become overbearing in any way. By the way, where are you guys from? I live in the UK.

1. Concerning the LXX I agree that a few very early manuscripts (mss) contain YHWH. I have stated that myself in an earlier post. In contrast to NT textual criticism where scholars endeavor to come as close as possible to the original text of the NT, with the LXX there is no such thing as an original LXX text because the original is the Hebrew. Different LXX mss represent different translations from the original Hebrew. As such, the YHWH mss represent only one tendency among several different ones. This is why I said earlier that as important as these mss are, there is no question of authenticity because different mss represent different translations.

Now, no matter which way you want to look at it, if we go by the facts on hand, i.e. the mss in our possesion (and there are over 15,000 for the NT) all indicate that the apostles quoted from the LXX variants that DID NOT have the YHWH. If you want to believe otherwise, it is ok, but this is what the facts say and therefore you cannot condemn those who follow these facts.

2. Textual criticism is a Biblical discipline that examines only EXTANT mss. Any suggestion that has no mss support is hypothetical, because it has no factual support. As such, textual criticism does not study it. If you want to suggest that YHWH was part of the NT text, you can of course do so, but this is not textual criticism. There can be no textual criticism without a text!

3. On YHWH, I will not comment further, I think it is patently obvious that the two instances in Judges involved the worship of Yahweh through idols, but of course, you are free to think otherwise. With Jeroboam, I said "it is very likely" and used as evidence the inscriptions discovered in archaeological finds in the northern kingdom which date from the 8th century BC.

Also, most of the name correspondances between YHWH and certain pagan deities that I cited predate the writing of Genesis. I don't want to push the point any further because I have outmost respect for the name YHWH; I simply want to put some perspective.

I hope what I write is not offensive to anyone, I really do not want to offend anyone. My reason for being here is because of a friend I mentioned in another post who tells me that both I, and all Christians are Babylon because we use words that he finds disagreeable even though they are in the Bible - the original Hebrew and Greek! This can't be right!

Blessings,
Gary

The read and quoted this from ( Deut.8:3) which says "" LIVE BY EVERY WORD OF( K.J.V. uses LORD= Strongs Hebrew number 3068= YAHWEH)OF YHWH= YAH= YAHWEH in original Hebrew texts, not "" Greek Theos"" nor "" English GOD "".

The Messiah said that He declared the Father's NAME( not titles)in ( John 17:26), and He did just that.

Here are enough scriptures proving this to line the wall of your living room with.

Compare( Matt.21:42) with (Psalms 118:22)

Compare( Matt.22:37) with ( Deut.6:5;10:12; 30:6)

Compatre ( Matt.22:44) with ( Psalms 110:1)

Compare ( Matt.23:39) with ( Psalms 118:26)

Compare ( Mark 7:6) with ( Isa.29:13)

Compare ( Mark 11:17) with( Jer.7:11)

Compare ( Mark 12:29) with ( Deut.6:4)

Compare ( Mark 12:30) with ( Deut.6:5)

Compare ( Matt.4:4; Luke 4:4) with ( Deut.8:3)

Compare ( Luke 4:8) with ( Deut.6:13;10:20)

Compare ( Luke 4:12) with ( Deut.6:16)

Compare ( Luke 4:18-19) with ( Isa.61:1-2)

Compare ( Luke 20:37) with ( Exod.3:4-6)

Is that enough for you, or do you want more internal scriptural proof that Messiah used and spoke The Father's Name?

DO YOU DENY THE POWER AND AUTHORITY WHICH IS THE NAME OF YAHweh AND YAHushua?

Do you Know that IF you DENY to use and acknowledge YAHWEH AND YAHushua's true Name that you also DENY their Power and Authority?

Peter in Acts 10:43 says ALL( not just a few) but ALL THE PROPHETS GIVE WITNESS TO HIM( MESSIAH) AND HIS ( TRUE) NAME.

What name does ALL THE PROPHETS IN THE HOLY SCRIPTURES GIVE WITNESS TO ? Is it Je' sus? No, it is YAHWEH-(SHUA) is the name that ALL the Prophets give witness to as Peter said .

And His Name is His Authority( Acts 4:7) for they mean the one and the same, and IF you do not use and submit to HIS NAME, then you DO NOT submit to His Authority, and you are not under His Authority either. Fact of Scriptures!

_Read ( Acts 4:7) ( N.I.V.)... "" and began to guestion them BY WHAT POWER( ie-AUTHORITY) OR WHAT NAME( ie-AUTHORITY)...

His Name IS THEE AUTHORITY, they mean THE ONE AND THE SAME.

Yah( Psalms 68:4)-shua said, "" John 5:43 "" I am come in my Father's NAME ( ie- YAH-SHUA which is the Name and thee authority), AND YOU RECEIVE ME( Him the true Messiah Yah-shua) NOT: if ANOTHER( ie- Je'sus, He'sus, Ye'sus) shall come in his own NAME( ie-another name je'sus and his authority), him ye will receive.

And that is exactly what the religious world has done, they have accepted and received ANOTHER FALSE SAVIOR( Matt.24:24), and rebel against the true Savior Yah-shua Messiah, and rebel against His true Name as well as the Father, for both have the SAME NAME, and therefore, they also rebel against their AUTHORITY ALSO, for if you do not use and reject their TRUE NAME, you also reject thier AUTHORITY, because that NAME OF "" YAH "" is thee authority.

Since "" POWER""( ie-authority) and "" NAME( ie- authority) mean the same, then IF you rebel and refuse to acknowledge, use, and submit to the true Messiah's true and real NAME of Yahshua ,which is also His Authority, then you also rebel against His Authority and POWER also, and if you do not have the Father's Name( Rev.14:1; Rev.22:3-4) in your forehead or mind and confess it before men ( Matt.10:32; Luke 12:8) as Messiah said, and if you are not also sealed with the true SPIRIT OF YAH ( Eph.1:13) by His true NAME, then, if any person that has not THE SPIRIT OF MESSIAH( which is also the Spirit of YAH), then that person is NONE OF HIS( Rom.8:9) or does not belong to Messiah or is not of the true Bride of Messiah either.

__Since "" POWER""( ie-authority) and "" NAME( ie- authority) mean the same( Acts 4:7), then IF you rebel and refuse to acknowledge, use, and submit to the true Messiah's true and real NAME of Yahushua ,which is also His Authority, then you also rebel against His Authority and POWER also, and if you do not have the Father's Name( Rev.14:1; Rev.22:3-4) in your forehead or mind and confess it before men ( Matt.10:32; Luke 12:8) as Messiah said, and if you are not also sealed with the true SPIRIT OF YAH ( Eph.1:13) by His true NAME, then, if any person that has not THE SPIRIT OF MESSIAH( which is also the Spirit of YAH), then that person is NONE OF HIS( Rom.8:9) or does not belong to Messiah or is not of the true Bride of Messiah either.

Then, those who do not ACKNOWLEDGE, USE, and CONFESS THEIR( The Father YAH-weh and the Son's true Name Yah-shua) before men, will not have their( or those who deny to use their memorial personal given names) names written in the lambs book of life either ( Rev.13:8), because they have not been SEALED WITH THE HOLY SPIRIT OF YAH's NAME in their foreheads or minds( Rev.7:1-9; Rev.14:1; Rev.22:3-4), which also identifies the true people that OBEY Yah's Commandments which is the RE-NEWED COVENANT( Jer.31:33; Heb.8:10) which is also in His true BRIDES MINDS ALSO.

The Hebrew word Shem for NAME means MEMORIAL MARK( ie -sign) OF AUTHORITY AND CHARACTOR.

Their, the true Father YAH( Psalms 68:4)weh and the Messiah's true Name of Yah-shua is their MEMORIAL MARK OR SIGN OF THEIR AUTHORITY AND CHARACTOR, check this Hebrew word " NAME" out in a Strongs Exaustive Concordance Hebrew Dictionary, you will see that i'm telling you the truth of scriptures.

To refuse to use their true NAME is to refuse their MEMORIAL, MARK, AUTHORITY, and their CHARACTOR,which is sealed in His true servants and people's [B] foreheads or minds ( Rev.7:1-9; Rev.14:1; Rev.22:3-4).

Do you use the true names of YAHweh and Yah-shua? If you don't, then you are not His at all.
There is a scripture that says concerning the end times, that says "" They Having a form of the ALMIGHTY, but DENYING THE POWER( ie-His Name and or Authority) thereof. Ah ha. who said that?

Remember ( Acts 4:7) ...By what POWER( ie-Authority) or by what NAME( ie-Authority) ?

Oh boy, aren't there millions today that claim to have a form of YAH ALMIGHTY, but they DENY THE POWER( ie- His Name which is His Authority) thereof. ?

Then If you deny His NAME, then you also deny His POWER or AUTHORITY, very plain and simple.

To prove this further( however remember that POWER( ie-Authority) and NAME( ie- Authority) are synomous or mean the same( Acts 4:7)), look at ( luke 22:69) when Messiah was on trial before the Elders and High Priest.

Look at ( Matt.26:64) The Messiah Yahshua said """" YAHushua saith unto him, Thou hast said: nevertheless I say unto you, Hereafter shall ye see the Son of man sitting on the RIGHT HAND OF POWER( ie- On the right hand of the Father and His Name of YAH and His Authority), and coming in the clouds of heaven.
( See Also Ps 110:1 Dan 7:13 ).

Look at ( Mark 14:62) the Messiah said, """" 62 And Yahushua said, I am: and ye shall see the Son of man sitting on the RIGHT HAND OF POWER( ie- The Right Hand Of the Father and His Name and Authority of YAH), and coming in the clouds of heaven.

YAHshua Messiah said,""" 69 Hereafter shall the Son of man sit on the right hand of the POWER( ie-NAME OR AUTHORITY) OF El ( Or YAH, meaning the Father).( Luke 22:69).

And Messiah said """ ( Matt.28:18) 18 And YAHushua came and spake unto them, saying, All POWER( ie- His -the Father's Name and Authority) is given unto me in heaven and in earth.

Now look at ( 2 Tim.1:8) what Paul said, """8 Be not thou therefore ashamed of the testimony of our Master Messiah, nor of me his prisoner: but be thou partaker of the afflictions of the gospel according to the POWER( ie- His Name of YAH and or His Authority) OF EL( 2 Tim.1:8).

Now look at ( 2 Tim.3:5) Paul said """ Having a form of all that is good, but DENYING THE POWER( ie- The Father Yah and Yahshua's true Name and their AUTHORITY) thereof: FROM SUCH TURN AWAY.

Make no mistake about it, IF you DENY the Father and Son's true Name of YAH and YAHshua, then, you also DENY THEIR POWER AND OR AUTHORITY, and Paul says to turn away from such people.

People today have a great mis-understanding about WHO TO PRAY FOR, the Messiah YAHshua said to pray for YOUR ENEMIES, however, He DID NOT SAY to pray for the enemies YAH ALMIGHTY, and Paul proves and demonstrates this concerning Elymas the Sorcerer""" Then Saul, (who also is called Paul,) filled with the Holy Spirit, set his eyes on him.

10 And said, O full of all subtilty and all mischief, thou child of the devil, thou enemy of all righteousness, wilt thou not cease to pervert the right ways of YAH?

11 And now, behold, the hand of YAH is upon thee, and thou shalt be blind, not seeing the sun for a season. And immediately there fell on him a mist and a darkness; and he went about seeking some to lead him by the hand.( Acts 13:8-11).

You cannot deny prayer for YOUR ENEMIES, but do not pray for YAHWEH'S ENEMIES.

If you deny using and confessing their true Name to people , ( Matt.10:32; Luke 12:8) as Messiah said to do), You also DENY THEIR POWER AND AUTHORITY over you and you do not belong to to them, and neither will Messiah confess YOUR NAME BEFORE THE TRUE FATHER YAH IN HEAVEN either as He also said.

Elyahc=( Eljah C.)

Blessings and thank you for your post. It doesn't really address the point I raised, namely that "Lord" is a fully biblical and legitimate word to use. Nonetheless, I will give a reply to what you wrote.

1. You say that the Bible has been corrupted and reference Jeremiah 8:8. But Jeremiah 8:8 says nothing of the Bible being corrupted. Actually, the Bible is perfectly clear that it has NOT been corrupted:

NKJ Psalm 12:6 The words of the LORD are pure words, Like silver tried in a furnace of earth, Purified seven times.

NKJ Psalm 119:140 Your word is very pure; Therefore Your servant loves it.

NKJ Daniel 10:21 "But I will tell you what is noted in the Scripture of Truth.

NKJ 2 Timothy 3:16 ALL SCRIPTURE is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness.

2. Groups who want to change or add to the Bible always end up in a mess:

(a) The Catholic church has added to the Bible the Apocrypha which were never part of Scripture;

(b) The Jehovah's Witnesses in their New World Translation change the original text to suit their theology (e.g. John 1:1);

(c) The Mormons claim that some portions of Scripture were not properly translated and have provided their own translation which, needless to say, supports their own theology;

God, forseeing this trend, inspired John to write the following words at the end of the Bible: "For I testify to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: If anyone ADDS to these things, God will add to him the plagues that are written in this book; and if anyone TAKES AWAY from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part from the Book of Life, from the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.

It seems to me that you surpass all of the above groups when you say that Scripture has been corrupted and needs to be restored.

3. But ok, lets us assume that the Bible is corrupt. Why do you quote from it to prove a point? How can you quote from a "corrupt" work to make a valid point?

4. You might say, only certain portions are corrupt. Right. Well, put it this way. In the NT the following words appear as follows:
Lord (Kurios) 720 times
God (Theos) 1317 times
Jesus (Iesous) 917 times

If you tell me that every time one of these words appear the text has been corrupted, then you are saying that the NT has been corrputed in nearly 3,000 places. A 200 page document that is corrupted in 3,000 places is worthless and should be thrown away. I mean, who is to say that the hand that corrupted the text in these 3,000 places did not corrupt it elsewhere?

When I told these figures to my friend (who calls me a Babylonian), he said that the NT has only been corrupted in these 720+1317+917 times and nowhere else. When I asked him, how could he be so sure, he said he just knew it is so and that is the way it is!

5. In believing that the Bible is corrupt and that you or someone else needs to put it right, you are in essence putting human wisdom above the Word of God, because in the end, you make yourself the judge of what is "pure" in the Bible and what is "corrupt". Rather tha try to mold the Word of God, let the Word mold you.

Blessings,
Gary

Did you really even take the time to read my last post and its scriptures carefully?

IF you DENY His true NAME( ie- MEMORIAL MARK OF AUTHORITY AND CHARACTOR) YAH for substitute titles given by men, you also DENY His POWER AND OR AUTHORITY.

How about believeing the scriptures as they are originall written, and NOT believing your own ideas but about the scriptures, as they SEEM RIGHT TO YOU( Proverbs 14:12; 16:25).

Anytime in the scriptures when the Children of Israel practiced " SYNCRETISIM ""( Judges Chapter 2) of combinning or SUBSTITUTING YAHWEH'S OWN given NAME( Exod.3:13-15)with substitute surogate title Names, it was considered IDOLATRY and as their punishment it was captivity by other nations.

I don't think you read my first posts very carefully looking up all the scriptural references very close such as ( Hosea 2:16-17), and even the ( O.K.J.V.) scriptures in the "" center reference column"" will prove that the word "" LORD "" is the same as "" BAALI"", and Yah also says that "" HE WILL REMOVE( even by force)THE( TITLE) NAMES of BAALIM out of their -the people's mouths.

That word " LORD " has deceived the whole world into forgetting His true NAME of Yah( Exod.15:2; Psalms 68:4), and the common people do not even KNOW HIS TRUE NAME TO CALL ON FOR SALVATION( Joel 2:32; Acts 2:21; Acts 4:7-12; Rom.10:9-14), or even heard it inorder to believe IN HIS NAME as Paul asked the questions in ( Rom.10:13-15).

If He is going to remove those title names out of people's mouths( Hosea 2:16-17), then why not get an early start at doing it willingly( I'd rather obey Him willingly now), instead of waiting for Him to do it by His own force and power later by His Judgment?

The Lord as a title is perfetly alright. Because through translation the traditions of the elders were honored to replace the name of Yahueh with all these other substitutes Mara/Maran/Mariah, Kurios, Dominius, and LORD and GOD in small capitals do we accept the tradition or look at recorded history for the practice of Yahushua Himself and the Apostles after His ascension into the throneroom following His example?

I find evidence in Acts 18 that this was a matter of "words and names" verse 12? I believe it is without consulting the text.

Recorded history tells us the Jews told thier children in their fairy tales that Yeshu was killed by hanging on a tree, for using the name of Yahueh for healing and casting out demons, thus becoming a curse, and having His name changed to Yeshu which is an acronym for "May His name and memory be blotted out" eeach letter standing for a word in this curse. Why would Jews teach such a moral to their children as late as in the Middle Ages unless there was some merit to this claim?

Recorded history of the Church Fathers also tells us that the sect of the Nazarenes spoken of in the Book of Acts used the name of Yahueh.

Celsius a pagan also tells us that the Name in that barbaric tongue of Hebrew some even in his day claimed must be pronounced (transliterated sound for sound) properly. This is a sect of Messianic believers this proponent of paganism was mocking. Why is this so if this belief was not widespread in his day?

The majority do not do what is correct. And the Apostates and heretics outnumber the true believers by many times. So we see through a glass darker than the Apostle Paul spoke of in 1Corinthians 13 so we must all go where the minority of truthbelievers and seekers lead us clues as they did not have the freedoms we all posses in our time in the United STates of America.

Yeremiah chapter 8 is speaking of those that say the Words of Yahueh were not preserved by the scribes so how can we believe what is written? It does not mean that we are to believe blindly the writings preserved by heritics and traditionalist who feel they can traslated by their traditions and make it alright by doing so. We should feret out the truth and follow the truth not the traditons of men.

Would Yahueh have warned those which would add to His Word if no one could or would do so Gary P?

Another thing you should consider GaryP is that those here on this forum in generaland especially the moderator are trying to preserve in the most original form the Word of Yahueh not build their lives on the shifting sands of scepticism ot man made traditions!

You said """It is easy to simply say we only have copies of copies; thus instilling doubt and fear into many. However, to the best of our knowledge, the LXX was translated from the original Hebrew text; and yet it has the word 'kurios' throughout."""" Unquote.

I will let you know that the Earliest fragments of Manuscripts of the LXX did in fact contain the NAME, and EliYah of this forum has an excellent Article with a picture of a fragment of the first LXX which shows you the NAME.

http://www.eliyah.com/lxx.html

Shalom,

quote:

---

Originally posted by GaryPap:
I know we all have different views and beliefs. In discussing Scripture, however, it is important that we go by the facts we have rather than our own theological views. With regards to the word Lord in the Bible languages we have the following:

---

I have been off the forum for a while, or i would've written sooner. This particular post looked like a good summary of the points you are making, so i'll address each one below. There are 2 major points i will mention, which i'm astounded that they haven't been mentioned so far in this thread.

quote:

---

The Hebrew word Adonai appears over 600 times in the Hebrew OT.

---

I think it's perfectly acceptable to use the Hebrew word "Adonai" , where it actually appears in the text (except for the 132 places where it was admittedly substituted for "YHWH"), or any proper English word that has the same meaning, such as "sovreign" or "master". (See below, why i feel that "LORD" is not a "proper" English word.)

Note that nearly ALL occurrences (except about 22 or so) of "Adonai" use it in conjunction with "YHWH" -- i.e. "Adonai YHWH", which clearly identifies WHICH "Master" it's talking about.

quote:

---

The Greek word kurios appears over 600 times in the Greek NT and over 6,000 in the LXX.

---

As for the NT, i believe that the ORIGINAL MSS of the NT had the Name of "YHWH" (or Grk. "IAOUE"), and it was later replaced with "Kurios". This is based on manuscript evidence; more on that below.

quote:

---

The Aramaic Mara and related words over 600 times in the Aramaic NT.

---

quote:

---

We have over 20,000 ancient manuscripts of Hebrew/Aramaic/Greek/Latin of the OT and NT and all of them have Adonai/Kurios/Mara/Dominus. There is not ONE manuscript that avoids the word.

---

quote:

---

To suggest that "Lord" (which is the English rendering of Adonai/Kurios/Mara/Dominus) is an inappropriate word is to completely disregard ALL the manuscript evidence.

---

1. There is reasonable evidence that the English word "Lord" itself is derived from the name of a pagan deity. This comes from Kris Koster's book "Come Out of Her, My People".

2. Since "Lord" is the word of choice used by the English translators as a substitute for "YHWH", for me that puts it in the category of "bad words", so i generally avoid it and use "Master" or "Sovreign" instead.

quote:

---

To disregard the manuscript evidence is to throw away the Bible, because every single Bible in existence is based on these manuscripts.

---

"As a rule, the Aramaic Peshitta Tanak (Old Testament) renders EL/Eloah/Elohim with ALAHA; ADONAI/ADON with MAR; and YHWH with MARYA. For example:
Psalm 110:1a Hebrew: ADONAI said to my ADON...
Psalm 110:1a Aramaic: MARYA said to my MAR...

This pattern continues through the Aramaic NT as well. These Aramaic manuscripts have Aramaic MARYA for YHWH and MAR (or MARI or MARAN) for ADON/ADONAI. Now we have objective manuscript evidence to support placement of the sacred name into the NT text, the era of guesswork is over."

Some disagree with Dr. Trimm, and there ARE a small handful of exceptions, but it certainly convinced me that the ORIGINAL NT MSS (whether Greek or Aramaic or Hebrew) DID IN FACT use the Name of "YHWH". How else would the Aramaic writers have known where to use "MARYA" instead of "MAR"?