tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2526639682918659406.comments2023-12-18T15:19:23.715-08:00The Holy Name of GodRonald Dayhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01428695352830083280noreply@blogger.comBlogger33125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2526639682918659406.post-21158976342643239042020-03-08T19:03:52.086-07:002020-03-08T19:03:52.086-07:00Zen Shawn Dean asked: "They are all invention...Zen Shawn Dean asked: "They are all inventions of men. Why defend Jehovah as if it were special?"<br /><br />We use the English form "Jehovah" because it is one of the forms based directly the Masoretic Hebrew text. We do not consider that English form "special" otherwise.<br /><br />Zen Shawn Dean asked: "Ihiwih would be perfectly fine wouldnt it?"<br /><br />We could not verify that anyone presents such an English spelling of the Holy Name, nor do we know any reason anyone would have to present such an English spelling to represent the Holy Name. If someone thought that they had good reason to present such an English spelling, however, it would simply be another addition to the many other versions many prefer of the Holy Name.Ronald Dayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01428695352830083280noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2526639682918659406.post-22987857041293563422020-03-08T19:01:46.452-07:002020-03-08T19:01:46.452-07:00Zen Shawn Dean asked: "If not why dont you ad...Zen Shawn Dean asked: "If not why dont you admit that?"<br /><br />We do admit that there is no way to tell if the Masoretes did or did not add vowel points from ADONAI and/or ELOHIM to use in their forms of the Holy Name. At the same time, nothing in their works actually shows that they did such, and we believe the evidence from their own work suggests that they did not add vowels to the Holy Name from other words.<br /><br />Zen Shawn Dean asked: "And if all renditions of yhwh are arbitrary, then all versions are equally legitimate arent they?"<br /><br />They are all variations of the same one name, if that is what is meant. If by legitimate, one means the they are all the original pronunication, such an idea would be self-contradictory.<br /><br />Zen Shawn Dean asked: "So why pretend any version is holy."<br /><br />We assume this is making the claim that no version is "holy" except the original Hebrew?<br /><br />While much of the various theories presented often appear to be used to some degree to create division or contention, God has not given any command that His Holy Name has to be represented in other languages exactly as it was pronounced in the original Hebrew; we cannot imagine that the Almighty is up there fretting over whether one pronounces His Holy Name in English as "Jehovah," "Yahweh," or some other pronunication. We have no reason, however, to believe that all the forms that are presented to represent the Holy Name are not "holy," whether the Holy Name be represented as "Jehovah," "Iehouah," "Yehowah," "Yahweh," "Jahveh," etc. If someone prefers to pronounce the Holy Name in English, for instance, as "Yahweh," we see know scriptural reason to object to such. That form is based on a Greek form, which in turn appears to be a shortend form based the sound of the Holy Name in Hebrew. We cannot, however, read the hearts of men so as to judge "why" anyone makes many claims regarding the English pronunication and/or spelling of the Holy Name. God, through Jesus, will judge their hearts.<br /><br />On the other hand, many who object to this or that form of the Holy Name as not being the orignal pronunciation, often use the English form "Jesus" to represent the name of God's Son. It is obvious that the Son's name was not originally pronounced in Hebrew as "Jesus." Does that make it not the only name given by which one must be saved, even though it is not the way it was originally pronunced in Hebrew? We have no reason that any scriptures gives us reason to think that because we pronounce the Son's name in English as "Jesus", that this is not an acceptable form of his name. -- Acts 4:12.<br /><br />Ronald Dayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01428695352830083280noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2526639682918659406.post-50168558218621434432020-03-08T18:55:03.129-07:002020-03-08T18:55:03.129-07:00Zen Shawn Dean asked: "Can you prove the theo...Zen Shawn Dean asked: "Can you prove the theory of adding vowels from Latin "lord" is wrong, that it did not happen?"<br /><br />We can only report that there is no actual evidence in the work of the Masoretes that support the assumption that they took vowels they supplied for either the words transliterated as ADONAI or ELOHIM to use in the Holy Name. We see no reason to accept what appears to be a theory that was developed at two least centuries later as being fact.<br /><br />Related work by another author (we do not necessarily agree with all conclusions given):<br /><a href="http://cbcg.org/franklin/debunking2.pdf" rel="nofollow">http://cbcg.org/franklin/debunking2.pdf</a><br />Ronald Dayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01428695352830083280noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2526639682918659406.post-18403807459981176762020-03-08T18:52:52.843-07:002020-03-08T18:52:52.843-07:00Zen Shawn Dean asked: "Can you present a theo...Zen Shawn Dean asked: "Can you present a theory justifying any particular vowels for thwh that is not completely arbitrary?"<br /><br />Evidently, this is asking us to choose one of the many variations that exist concerning the original pronunication of the Holy Name and prove that such pronunciation is not arbitrary? We do not know of any of the various proposed variations of the Holy Name that is actually "arbitrary," having no basis at all for their pronunciation. Most present many reasons for their choice of this or that pronunciation, often with the idea that God has commanded that we need to find the original pronunication or else the "name" is a false name, etc. Nevertheless, as we have stated many times, all the various theories have to be based upon somebody's theories regarding the pronunciation of the original Hebrew. The reality is that no one on earth today knows for a certainty what the ancient Hebrew sounded like; all we have are the various theories of men regarding the orignal pronunciation. Ronald Dayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01428695352830083280noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2526639682918659406.post-70386325700015857032020-03-08T18:50:52.900-07:002020-03-08T18:50:52.900-07:00This comment has been removed by the author.Ronald Dayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01428695352830083280noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2526639682918659406.post-3465709410864008032020-01-01T18:57:39.116-08:002020-01-01T18:57:39.116-08:00<< Your assumptions and reasoning is interes...<< Your assumptions and reasoning is interesting to say the least...... >><br /><br />Since this does not designate exactly what is being thought of as "assumptions", we can only say that is is no assumption but simplie fact that Martinin did not originate the English form, Jehovah.<br /><br />It is no assumption but simple fact that Martini did not take vowels from ADONAI and ELOHIM to create the Latin form Jehova.<br />https://nameofyah.blogspot.com/2018/11/vowel-points.html<br /><br /><< and being that the Name of GOD is so Holy as to not be mentioned because of the power involved with it, >><br /><br />Where does the Bible ever present such an idea?<br /><br /><< why haven’t you mentioned that the name Elohim that’s used successfully by Abraham >><br /><br />ELOHIM is not presented in the Bible as being a name, but rather it is title. One could say that it is a name in a general sense, similar to the way that one could say that "tree," "apple," "dog," "cat," "pencil" are names.<br /><br />The only name presented in the Bible as the Holy Name of God is that represented by the English forms "Jehovah" or "Yahweh."<br /><a href="https://nameofyah.blogspot.com/2008/10/holyname.html" rel="nofollow">https://nameofyah.blogspot.com/2008/10/holyname.html</a><br /><br />Regarding Abraham and the usage of the Holy Name in Genesis, see our study:<br /><a href="https://nameofyah.blogspot.com/2017/04/gen-tetra.html" rel="nofollow">Holy Name in Genesis</a><br /><br /><< isn’t memorialized rather than the conjecture about the y’s and v’s >><br /><br />Not sure what this is referring to.<br /><br /><< and alliteration for the supposed Name as presented by those whom cannot come to common ground and use the name Abraham used...... >><br /><br />Abraham used the name that is often represented in English as Jehovah or Yahweh, as pointed out in the study linked to above.<br /><br /><< the Trinity and Apostles’ Creed notwithstanding....just a thought....in my honest and humble opinion. >><br /><br />Since it is not clear what the point is, I will suggest prayerful examination of some of our other studies related to the Holy Name,<br /><a href="https://nameofyah.blogspot.com/p/on-this-site.html" rel="nofollow">https://nameofyah.blogspot.com/p/on-this-site.html</a><br />and also studies related the trinity, oneness, prehuman existence, etc., of Jesus:<br /><a href="https://jesusnotyhwh.blogspot.com/p/posts.html" rel="nofollow">https://jesusnotyhwh.blogspot.com/p/posts.html</a>Ronald Dayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01428695352830083280noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2526639682918659406.post-51372605103957638812020-01-01T18:55:47.031-08:002020-01-01T18:55:47.031-08:00<< Yea No sorry. The book written Pugeo Fide...<< Yea No sorry. The book written Pugeo Fidei by the Monk Raymundus Martini does not spell it Yehowah so u are lying. >><br /><br />Since we never made such a claim, the above is irrelevant. We agree that Martini did not spell the Holy Name as YEHOWAH. <br /><br /><< Also i are lying really hard because no scholars will back u. >><br /><br />What is this referring to? Possibly you are misreading something? What it being referred to by the statement: "no scholars will back u."? If "U" here short for "you", or are you referring to the letter "u"? In either case, what exactly is being referred to?<br /><br /><< His name is pronounced Yahweh >><br /><br />Evidently this is asserting that the Latin form "Yahweh" is the correct way that the Holy Name was orignally pronounced? Actually no one on earth today knows for a certainly what ancient Hebrew sounded like. One would have to be at least about 2,000 years old with an excellent memory to know how the Holy Name was pronounced in the time of Christ. The Latin form “Yahweh” came into existence as a result of a Greek rendering of the holy name with vowels, such as might be represented with the Latin vowels: IAOUE or IAUE. IAUE appears to be shortened from IAOUE. Remember that there could be no transliteration of ancient Hebrew into Greek anytime before the fourth/fifth centuries AD, since the Hebrew had no written vowels. Rendering of names into Greek from Hebrew had to depend on sounds. It is also apparent that names were adapted to the Linguistic patterns common to the Greek. It is from this Greek usage that the English “Yahweh” was formed, by taking the Hebrew consonants often labeled YOD HE WAW HE and overlaying them with the assumed Greek pronunciation, and then attributing the English transliteration as being “Yahweh”. Regardless, however, such presents nothing definite, is the rendering as Yahweh is being the way it was originally pronounced is probably less likely than the rendering given by that Masoretes, upon which the English forms "IEHOUAH," "JEHOVAH," "YEHOWAH," etc., are directly based.<br /><br />Original pronunciation of the Holy Name is important only if God says so. God has given no command that His Holy Name has to be pronounced as it was originally pronounced in ancient Hebrew. This command comes from man, not from God. We do not claim that either Jehovah or Yahweh represents the "correct" original pronunciation -- we have no way of knowing such.Ronald Dayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01428695352830083280noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2526639682918659406.post-57090534475817686942020-01-01T18:13:09.763-08:002020-01-01T18:13:09.763-08:00Not sure what is meant by the above, nor as to how...Not sure what is meant by the above, nor as to how it relates to the Holy Name in the book of Genesis. Here is a link to various commentators on Deuteronomy 28:68:<br /><a href="https://www.studylight.org/commentary/deuteronomy/28-68.html" rel="nofollow">https://www.studylight.org/commentary/deuteronomy/28-68.html</a>Ronald Dayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01428695352830083280noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2526639682918659406.post-12843416863097584632020-01-01T18:02:17.416-08:002020-01-01T18:02:17.416-08:00This comment has been removed by the author.Ronald Dayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01428695352830083280noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2526639682918659406.post-3092723263202501122019-12-28T14:48:11.852-08:002019-12-28T14:48:11.852-08:00Root for Jehovah Part 2
I definitely have no rea...Root for Jehovah Part 2<br /><br /><br />I definitely have no reason to imagine and assume that Satan had "'hovah' added to further the slandering of God's name by that 12th century Catholic Dominican monk, the Raymundus Martini moron." The historical fact is that Raymundus Martini gave the Holy Name the Latin spelling of "Yohoua." As best as I can determine, he disagreed with the sound system and the vowel points given by the Masoretes. When his work was finally published several centuries later, however, the editor changed "Yohoua" to "Jehova." Nevertheless, the forms "Iehouah," "Yehowah," "Jehovah," etc., are all based on direct transliteration of the most common form of the Holy Name that appears in the Masoretic text, which was in existence long before Martini was born. <br /><br />I will say also that some of the Watchtower publications erred in what they presented concerning Raymundus Martini. Their errors were corrected in the their later publications. I discussed this at:<br /><a href="https://nameofyah.blogspot.com/2016/10/martini.html" rel="nofollow">https://nameofyah.blogspot.com/2016/10/martini.html</a><br /><br />For more related to Martini:<br /><a href="https://nameofyah.blogspot.com/p/raymundus-martini.html" rel="nofollow">https://nameofyah.blogspot.com/p/raymundus-martini.html</a><br /><br />The English form "Yahuah" is itself based on assumptions (although the assumptions are most often presented as being fact) and the idea that this Latin/English form is the orignal way it was pronounced in ancient Hebrew itself has to be assumed. No one on earth today knows for certainly what ancient Hebrew sounded like. Indeed, this was true when the Masoretes endeavored to assign sounds to the ancient Hebrew; the Masoretes themselves did not agree in many cases what sounds should be attributed. <br /><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Masoretes" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Masoretes</a><br /><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Masoretic_Text" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Masoretic_Text</a><br /><br />Regardless, it is the Masoretic text, not Raymundus Martini, that the forms "Iehouah," "Yehowah", "Jehovah," etc. are based on. <br /><br />Several centuries after the Masoretes completed their work, the claim was made that the Masoretes took vowel points from the Masoretic words often transliterated as ADONAI and ELOHIM to created the vowel points to be used in the forms of the Holy Name. Supposedly, the Masoreted did this to remind the reader to substitute ELOHIM or ADONAI wherever the Holy Name appears. However, we find nothing in the work of the Masoretes that suggests that they did such a thing.Ronald Dayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01428695352830083280noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2526639682918659406.post-89354943116899395892019-12-28T14:47:21.655-08:002019-12-28T14:47:21.655-08:00Root for Jehovah: Part 1
I have no reason to imag...Root for Jehovah: Part 1<br /><br />I have no reason to imagine and assume and claim to be a fact that "Hovah is the root for Jehovah." I do not believe at all that the Masoretes had any idea of forming the word often transliterated as HOVAH as being the root of the forms of the Holy Name that they presented.<br /><br />God no where has given any command that one has to pronounce His Holy Name in all languages exactly as it was pronounced in ancient Hebrew so as to imagine and assume and proclaim as being a fact that the English form "Jehovah" is a "false Satanic name." What scripture identifies the English form of Strong's 3068 as Jehovah as being a false Satanic name? Such imaginations are not from any command of God, but comes from the command od men beyond what is written. I do believe that Satan is behind all the imaginations and assumptions that many are claiming to be fact about the Holy Name.<br /><br />I definitely have no reason to imagine and assume that the common usage of the English form "Jehovah" is itself linked with the assumptions being made about Jabulon.<br /><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jahbulon" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jahbulon</a><br /><br />I, myself, cannot agree that the Latin forms Yahu'ah, Yahowah, Yahuwah are correct (all three are correct?), but then again I cannot state that any of these Latin forms are incorrect. From the scriptural standpoint, I do not believe it is a matter of any of these Latin/English forms being correct or incorrect.<br /><br />YHWH forms no name at all in English. How does one pronounce YHWH in English? This is simply somebody's transliteration of the four letters that make the Holy Name in ancient Hebrew without any vowels. In ancient Hebrew, however, no word had any written vowels. Vowel sounds, however, were added when the words were spoken. Therefore, if one should think the Holy Name should be rendered in English as YHWH or JHVH, etc., then, to be consistent, it would seem that this should be done with every Hebrew name of the Bible. I don't know of anyone who does such, however.<br /><br />I have no reason to think that addition of the letter "J" at any point in history to the English alphabet offers any reason at all to accept the common English usage of "Jehovah" as corresponding to Strong's #3068. The assumption appears to be that because the letter "J" was added (usually claimed to have happened in the 17th century), no such sounds existed in English until the letter "J" was added. The addition of the letter "J" to English alphabel, however, does not mean that the sounds attributed to letter "J" did not exist in the various dialects of English until the letter "J" was added. I am sure that the sounds existed long before the letter "J" was added; in other words, more than likely the letter "J" was added to accommodate already existing sounds, not to add sounds to English that had not existed before. Regardless, it has no bearing on using the common form of "Jehovah" to represent Strong's #3068.<br />Ronald Dayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01428695352830083280noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2526639682918659406.post-84058952008048231832019-12-28T14:41:28.484-08:002019-12-28T14:41:28.484-08:00Chris Rasmus stated: QUOTE: I hear you, but when y...Chris Rasmus stated: QUOTE: I hear you, but when you pronounce the name, Jeh-hovah (Yah-hovah) what you're in effect saying in Hebrew is Yah "ruin" or "cursed". :ENDQUOTE<br /><br />The above would be true IF indeed the Masoretes derived the forms they used from Strong's #3050 + #1943; the fact is that they derived the forms from Strong's 3068.<br /><br />"Jehovah", of course, is not Hebrew -- it is a Latin form of the Holy Name based directly on Strong's #3068. It is not at all formed from Strong's #1943 or #1942. By pronouncing God's Holy Name in English as Jehovah, there is no reason at all that one should imagine and assume that one is combining the words designated by Strong's #3050 and #1943 so as be saying that Jah is ruin or cursed. Jehovah is directly based on Strong's #3068, not Strong's #1943 added to Strong's #3050.Ronald Dayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01428695352830083280noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2526639682918659406.post-44798282793320343662019-12-28T09:14:59.157-08:002019-12-28T09:14:59.157-08:00Srecko Sostar wrote: QUOTE: JW writers (their gove...Srecko Sostar wrote: QUOTE: JW writers (their governing body) not claim to be infallible, BUT they ask that all JW members obey those infallible doctrines and instructions published in their magazines and books :)))) :ENDQUOTE<br /><br />This site is not affilated with the Jehovah's Witnesses. Despite the claims made by leadership, the fact that a member of the JWs could be disfellowshiped for disagreeing with their governing body shows that they are dogmatic about what the present. For links to some interesting material related to the Jehovah's Witnesses and Charles Taze Russell:<br /><a href="http://rlctr.blogspot.com/p/jws.html" rel="nofollow">http://rlctr.blogspot.com/p/jws.html</a><br /><br />This site is not affilated with the Jehovah's Witnesses. Despite the claims made by leadership, the fact that a member of the JWs could be disfellowshiped for disagreeing with their governing body shows that they are dogmatic about what the present. For links to some interesting material related to the Jehovah's Witnesses and Charles Taze Russell:<br /><a href="http://rlctr.blogspot.com/p/jws.html" rel="nofollow">http://rlctr.blogspot.com/p/jws.html</a>Ronald Dayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01428695352830083280noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2526639682918659406.post-22168013674415281772018-08-07T15:57:43.281-07:002018-08-07T15:57:43.281-07:00This is a good article. Thank you. deborahmonromin...This is a good article. Thank you. deborahmonroministries.orgAnonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09489866060222913496noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2526639682918659406.post-63347151891465250682018-07-14T22:55:59.340-07:002018-07-14T22:55:59.340-07:00If we have to trust what the Bible says about God&...If we have to trust what the Bible says about God's name when He was asked, God said : I am who I am. You will call me like that eternally. Rise up a question, Where the Tetagrammaton came from. God should say, My Name is YHWH for eternity.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05327595288969040239noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2526639682918659406.post-65008645465287708442018-06-28T13:29:16.717-07:002018-06-28T13:29:16.717-07:00Can you present a theory justifying any particular...Can you present a theory justifying any particular vowels for thwh that is not completely arbitrary? Can you prove the theory of adding vowels from Latin "lord" is wrong, that it did not happen? If not why dont you admit that? And if all renditions of yhwh are arbitrary, then all versions are equally legitimate arent they? So why pretend any version is holy. They are all inventions of men. Why defend Jehovah as if it were special? Ihiwih would be perfectly fine wouldnt it?Zen Shawn Deanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18355982934963423327noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2526639682918659406.post-16941622437575449672018-04-07T23:45:43.634-07:002018-04-07T23:45:43.634-07:00Yea No sorry. The book written Pugeo Fidei by the ...Yea No sorry. The book written Pugeo Fidei by the Monk Raymundus Martini does not spell it Yehowah so u are lying. Also i are lying really hard because no scholars will back u. His name is pronounced YahwehAnonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04871404023670838756noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2526639682918659406.post-59888762128558151662018-02-23T03:11:54.248-08:002018-02-23T03:11:54.248-08:00Deuteronomy 28:68 = Transatlantic Slave Trade
THE ...Deuteronomy 28:68 = Transatlantic Slave Trade<br />THE KHAZAR FAKE Je-WISH GIG IS ALMOST OVER !Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10141088137659571776noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2526639682918659406.post-16988916471767263452018-01-16T11:07:09.089-08:002018-01-16T11:07:09.089-08:00Thank you for your research. Currently looking int...Thank you for your research. Currently looking into this issue, and learning about the controversies surronding what you would think is a simple question to answerLordSlubpubhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05741216917403138889noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2526639682918659406.post-47448878174255224722017-11-30T17:21:43.959-08:002017-11-30T17:21:43.959-08:00Your assumptions and reasoning is interesting to s...Your assumptions and reasoning is interesting to say the least......and being that the Name of GOD is so Holy as to not be mentioned because of the power involved with it, why haven’t you mentioned that the name Elohim that’s used successfully by Abraham isn’t memorialized rather than the conjecture about the y’s and v’s and alliteration for the supposed Name as presented by those whom cannot come to common ground and use the name Abraham used...... the Trinity and Apostles’ Creed notwithstanding....just a thought....in my honest and humble opinion.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12084856616570578634noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2526639682918659406.post-81545492833962177602017-07-08T13:43:28.773-07:002017-07-08T13:43:28.773-07:00Well thought out; well written. James ParkinsonWell thought out; well written. James ParkinsonTheresa Parkinsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07625430392074743463noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2526639682918659406.post-81289171617813987792017-04-07T12:39:44.934-07:002017-04-07T12:39:44.934-07:00You might want to do some more research on the sat...You might want to do some more research on the satanically inspired, blasphemous false name 'JeHovah'. <br /><br />I made a number of comments with links to websites and videos under my user name kevinb1914. You have to click 'Load more' near the bottom to see the latest comments.<br /><br />https://thehovahofjehovah.blogspot.com/2012/04/does-hovah-really-mean-ruin-disaster.html <br /><br />You can also check out my blogspot and respond with any comments:<br />http://yahuahisgod.blogspot.com/<br /><br />Were you ever one of Jehovah's Witnesses? Do you now believe that God's Name is 'Yahweh', with 'Yah' being His shortened Name?kevinb1914https://www.blogger.com/profile/04744349272230943797noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2526639682918659406.post-90206308361050300752017-04-03T07:22:45.778-07:002017-04-03T07:22:45.778-07:00I hear you, but when you pronounce the name, Jeh-h...I hear you, but when you pronounce the name, Jeh-hovah (Yah-hovah) what you're in effect saying in Hebrew is Yah "ruin" or "cursed". If you're doing it out of ignorance, that's different. But if you know that something you're saying in English means Cursed God in Hebrew, why would you want to keep saying it? Morcristhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10722379843941137833noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2526639682918659406.post-43960468560471334732017-01-03T08:26:50.724-08:002017-01-03T08:26:50.724-08:00JW writers (their governing body) not claim to be ...JW writers (their governing body) not claim to be infallible, BUT they ask that all JW members obey those infallible doctrines and instructions published in their magazines and books :)))) Srecko Sostarhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04957579284837863788noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2526639682918659406.post-76132529363671117022015-05-14T04:36:04.466-07:002015-05-14T04:36:04.466-07:00My own greatest example in a single moment was an ...My own greatest example in a single moment was an encounter with a ghost. I fell asleep after a rude friend puffed his marijuana smoke in my face and woke up where the room's nightlights lit up like it was bright heaven. I knew my eyes were dilated and i saw a ghost over my chest and i said jehovah do not let him into me. No change, nothing happened until i though how to put application to that name. If there is ectoplasm from humans, then someone is asleep, so i called out to my friend who woke up, the ghost vanished, the room went dark, and asking him what happened he said he went to the living room to watch TV and fell asleep. A ghost cannot enter against your will, that is why you must be drunk or drugged to become submissive to it, further unless entered by the ghost, the ghost cannot use your ectoplasm to appear to someone else. Thus the sleeping medium is already a possessed victim. And so i applied what i knew of the name, which means apply the truth he has taught you.Elijahhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15977164879781195618noreply@blogger.com