| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| NKArnold |
Posted - 06 Jun 2005 : 23:32:58
There seems to be a great deal of argument about the name of God on this forum. The Truth is that there are several names of God. Throughout the entire old testament there are several. Yahweh being one of them writen origonaly as YHWH. Later on linguist added the vouls so that it could be pronounced. A german(I think not sure if I am quoting my history teacher correctly) linguist wanted to pronounce this but could not because of the Y and the W so he subtituded a J and V and pronounced it Jehovah. More names include Yahweh Saboath (Lord Of All the Host). He apeared to Abram as El Shaddai(Almighty God)(also translated as God of the Mountain).One of my well studdied teachers has discibed this as the closest the name of God comes to a feminine form as it can also be translated as a mother with a mountanous breast copiously giving to her child. Haggar saw him as El Roi(God of vission). I have not studied these myself yet (so please excuse the spelling) but El Gabor; Jehovah Gira(Providing God);Jehovah Nessi(Victorious God). any others that you know of or if I have mispelled or misinterperated any of these please let me know. I have only relayed what I have learned and am always open to truth any other information that you give me I will take to the Lord(english Version) and he will guid me in truth.
Thanks for reading,
Nathan |
| 20 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Oneisraelite |
Posted - 24 Dec 2006 : 09:25:22
This, we perceive, is a much better location for this.
For those that claim that the name of the Supreme Sovereign is not important, here's a great quote that we are happy to provide for your defense of that stance.
“For no one can utter the name of the ineffable deity; and if any one dares to say that there is a name, he raves with a hopeless madness” – Catholic Bishop Jerome, I Apol., 61. (Jerome, or Eusebius Sophronius Hieronymus, is recognized (posthumously) by the Vatican as a “Doctor of the Church”.)
brother Robert: fellowcitizen of the commonwealth of Yisar'el,
NOT the man-made, fictional STATE OF ISRAEL.
Ephesians 2:12 & 19 |
| David Merrill |
Posted - 02 Jul 2005 : 11:26:18
quote:
NAME, PERSONAL. Practically everyone since the beginning of history has had a name. Some explorers have reported discovering primitive tribes where people had no names. In these cases, tribesmen were probably reluctant to disclose their names to a stranger.
See what you can dig up in dictionaries and search engines on "cargo cults". Also my girlfriend visited China and the children swarmed them like Paparazzi with pads and pencils asking the tourists to please write down their names. Artistic science as it is, I leave the rest to your imagination.
Regards,
David Merrill.
P.S. I feel compelled to add; China has outbid Chevron for the purchase (hostile takeover) of Unocal. [My girlfriend like many other tourists complied with glee.] If China gets the bid, that nullifies all the expense of the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. That is obviously an oil war project for the Caspian Sea Pipeline. On the alternative, the United States can declare the FRN not legal tender "FOR ALL DEBTS" public and private and regulate how China can spend her investment in the USA ("trade deficit/account deficit" http://www.federalreserve.gov/boarddocs/testimony/2005/default.htm ). China has leverage to significantly impact if not collapse the dollar.
So something is going down as we speak.
http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_Caspian_Sea_Pipeline.wmv
http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_President's_reaction.wmv
President/businessman
Just look at that calculating businessman face! |
| Oneisraelite |
Posted - 02 Jul 2005 : 04:52:23
Greetings brothers and sisters,
Peace be unto the house.
quote:
The legal name has been custom and usage for so long it is amazingly difficult to really express its (legal name) misuse against men and women in bankruptcy proceedings. [Emphasis added]
Now put that together with some other thoughts on the subject.
NAME, PERSONAL. Practically everyone since the beginning of history has had a name. Some explorers have reported discovering primitive tribes where people had no names. In these cases, tribesmen were probably reluctant to disclose their names to a stranger. A superstition, widespread among primitive peoples throughout the world, held that if a person knew your name, he could acquire power over you and bring harm to you. Some peoples have kept their real names secret, being known only by nicknames. – World Book Encyclopedia, copyright 1974
Widespread among primitive peoples throughout the world… Just think about that phrase!!! Why would there be an earth-wide fear that if a person knew your name, he could acquire power over you and bring harm to you?
Should we suppose that this writer for the World Book Encyclopedia knew what he was doing when he used the word superstition? Not too long ago, the word superstition dealt directly with what we now call religion.
Superstitious use, in law, the use of land for a religious purpose, or by a religious corporation. – Webster’s 1828 American Dictionary of the English Language
Hence, it could be said that religion taught them that if a person knew your name, he could acquire power over you and bring harm to you.
Perhaps it should still be taught today.
Do not rich men oppress you, and draw you before the judgment seats? Do not they blaspheme that worthy name by the which ye are called?
"Please, state your name for the COURT."
To him that overcometh will I give…a new name…which no man knoweth saving he that receiveth it.
fellowcitizen of the commonwealth of Yisra'el,
NOT the man-made, fictional USA.
Ephesians 2:12 & 19
An act done by me against my will is not my act. |
| David Merrill |
Posted - 29 Jun 2005 : 16:43:17
Wow! George!
I am not sure you are right but I saw something in that. A flash revelation that may take some time to sink in. In the doodle below, I am of course describing two dimensions. I think you may be describing the third.
http://ecclesia.org/forum/images/suitors/Resonance3.gif
OneIsraelite;
I enjoyed your treatise about name. Thanks for pointing out the end of Noah's definition agrees with my findings about true name and legal name. The legal name has been custom and usage for so long it is amazingly difficult to really express its (legal name) misuse against men and women in bankruptcy proceedings.
Regards,
David Merrill. |
| georgealexander |
Posted - 29 Jun 2005 : 11:49:27
I considered myself a 'wordsmith' until I first encountered oneisraelite over a year ago. I have collected a private dictionary of oneisraelite's posts.
Today I order a headstone for my mother. Several phrases in yesterday's post 'spoke' to me and have aided me in my decision.......but
3. A person.
They list with women each degenerate name.
These are also common names, but we find it quite interesting that old Noah associated person and degenerate.
I was driven to my linear computer: 1936 Funk & Wagnall's New Standard Dictionary of the English Language (unabridged). F & W in no way depart from Noah.
My mind - pre occupied - looked to 'generatrix' ie 'mother' and it occurred to me 'women' as 'generatrix' increase the 'name' of their husband's tribe, therefore a 'decrease' of their father's tribe.....a de generation.
That's my story and I'm sticking to it.
George Alexander |
| David Merrill |
Posted - 28 Jun 2005 : 14:41:42
I enjoyed the essays on the importance of knowing the Name. I breezed through that section in complete agreement. Thanks for mentioning it. I tend to take it for granted when an author agrees. You are right, it is difficult to estimate what value to place on truth - in a book form. I have usually managed good investments bookwise by trusting my heart.
I will admit that for a few minutes in Starbuck's (adjacent to the bookstore) I was a little disturbed with you Link. I thought the author was headed for the Yahuway pronunciation and considered that you had just cost me $47 for a deliberate and lengthy debunking of his work. Especially if you already had the book and could have posted his views.
A quick look at Hebrew words like Shem, Debar and G Onoma amplify some of your points Link.
OneIsraelite;
I have spent a lot of time studying name. I have printed out your treatise and am going out to a quiet wilderness park to sit in the shade of a tree to savor it correctly. |
| Oneisraelite |
Posted - 28 Jun 2005 : 10:02:48
The definitions of the word name from Webster’s 1828 American Dictionary of the English Language with this authors notes in red, purple and blue. We hope it leads to a more complete understanding of this word and virtually all its subtleties. We apologize for the length of it, but deemed it necessary to cover the subject even superficially.
Name
NAME, n.
1. That by which a thing is called; the sound or combination of sounds used to express an idea, or any material substance, quality or act; an appellation attached to a thing by customary use, by which it may be vocally distinguished from other things. A name may be attached to an individual only, and is then proper or appropriate, as John, Thomas, London, Paris; or it may be attached to a species, genus, or class of things, as sheep, goat, horse, tree, animal, which are called common names, specific or generic.
This is the primary duty of a Proper or Appropriate Name; it sets one apart, it distinguishes one from other beings. That by which one is called: I call on Jehovah the One to be praised; and I shall be saved from my enemies. 2Shama’el (Samuel) 22:4
1st person: “Praise the lord!”
2nd person: “Uh, excuse me, but is it Lord Braxton, Lord Pomelroy or Lord Yahuwâh you wish to praise? You see lord is a common or generic name; please be more specific…if you can.”
2. The letters or characters written or engraved, expressing the sounds by which a person or thing is known and distinguished.
Note well that the little marks known as letters or characters that are written or graved only are there to express the sounds by which someone is known and distinguished.
3. A person.
They list with women each degenerate name.
These are also common names, but we find it quite interesting that old Noah associated person and degenerate.
4. Reputation; character; that which is commonly said of a person; as a good name; a bad name.
Note that in this the word ”name”, in and of itself is what is being referred to, and is here, not a Proper Name. The word ”name” could acutally be supplanted with reputation or character without losing meaning, i.e. he is known as a man of good reputation (name); a bad character ( name).
5. Renown; fame; honor; celebrity; eminence; praise; distinction.
What men of name resort to him?
Again we see that the word ”name” can be replaced with any or all of these words, renown; fame; honor; celebrity; eminence; praise; or disinction, i.e. what men of distinction (name) resort to him? What men of renown (name) resort to him? Etc., etc., etc.
6. Remembrance; memory.
The Lord shall blot out his name from under heaven. Deu 29.
And God said to Moses again, You shall say this to the sons of Israel, Jehovah, the God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, has sent me to you. This is My name forever, and this is My memorial (remembrance) from generation to generation. Exodus 3:15
When the adversary supplanted the Supreme Suveran’s (Sovereign’s) Proper Name with common or generic names, their desire was to take it and thus Him from our remembrance; or memory. They wanted to blot His name out of the earth (from under [the] heaven/sky)
nomina si nescis perit cognitio rerum. If you know not the names of things, the knowledge of things themselves perishes. Co. Litt. 86. Maxims of Law from Bouvier's 1856 Law Dictionary
And we cannot say that we weren’t warned of this:
I have heard what the prophets said, those who prophesy lies in My name, saying, I have dreamed, I have dreamed. How long is this there in the heart of the prophets, the prophets of lies; yea, the prophets of the deceit of their own heart? They plot to cause My people to forget My name by their dreams which they tell, each one to his neighbor, even as their fathers have forgotten My name for Baal.
One more time, we remind everyone who reads this, that Ba’al means Lord. Here it is once more from Easton’s 1897 Bible Dictionary if you don’t believe us: Baal Lord. And from Webster’s 1828 American Dictionary of the English Language:
Baal
BA'AL, n. The word signifies also lord, or commander; and the character of the idol was varied by different nations, at different times. Thus Baal Berith is supposed to signify the Lord of the Covenant; Baal Peor, or rather Baal Phegor, the Lord of the dead. Ps. cvi, Baal Zebub, the god of flies, &c. Note via that last one that lord and god can be used interchangeably; this is extremely important knowledge.
7. Appearance only; sound only; not reality; as a friend in name. Rev 3.
Self-explanatory, we hope.
8. Authority; behalf; part; as in the name of the people. When a man speaks or acts in the name of another, he does it by their authority or in their behalf, as their representative.
And yet again when the word “name” is used to mean authority, the word “authority” can replace it without any loss of meaning, and generally speaking, when it is used this way it will be preceded by the word “in”.
And it shall come to pass, that whosoever will not hearken unto my words which he shall speak in my name, I will require it of him. Deu 18:19
But the prophet, which shall presume to speak a word in my name, which I have not commanded him to speak, or that shall speak in the name of other gods, even that prophet shall die. Deu 18:20
I will also leave a poor and weak people in your midst, and they shall trust in the name of Jehovah. Zep 3:12
In this specific instance the Proper Name is used only so that we know in whose authority a thing is said or done. And again, note well that the word name could be replaced with authority with no loss of intent, i.e. in the authority of Jehovah.
9. Assumed character of another.
Had forged a treason in my patrons name.
This refers to authority again, but in the third person. Self-explanatory, we hope.
10. In Scripture, the name of God signifies his titles, his attributes, his will or purpose, his honor and glory, his word, his grace, his wisdom, power and goodness, his worship or service, or God himself.
This is correct and is what we are hopefully demonstrating with this exercise.
11. Issue; posterity that preserves the name. Deu 25.
7 My husband's brother refuseth to raise up unto his brother a name in Yisra’el, he will not perform the duty of my husband's brother.
Self-explanatory, we hope.
12. In grammar, a noun.
Self-explanatory, we hope.
To call names, to apply opprobrious names; to call by reproachful appellations.
Self-explanatory, we hope.
To take the name of God in vain, to swear falsely or profanely, or to use the name of God with levity or contempt. Exo 20.
Now this one gets really interesting! To take the Name in vain, can mean to bring his reputation; character; authority; renown; fame; honor; celebrity; eminence; praise; and/or distinction to naught i.e. to make it empty; hollow; meaningless; or disreputable. And this is precisely what was/is done when His Proper Name was/is removed from the Scripture! This is exactly why Noah Webster c. 1828 said this:
When Lord, in the Old Testament, is printed in capitals, it is the translation of JEHOVAH, and so might, with more propriety, be rendered.
Propriety
PROPRI'ETY, n. [L. proprietas, from proprius.] 2. Fitness; suitableness; appropriateness; consonance with established principles, rules or customs; justness; accuracy. Propriety of conduct, in a moral sense, consists in its conformity to the moral law; propriety of behavior, consists in conformity to the established rules of decorum; propriety in language, is correctness in the use of words and phrases, according to established usage, which constitutes the rule of speaking and writing. 3. Proper state.
And, of course, accuracy is what we all want, right??
To know by name, to honor by a particular friendship or familiarity. Exo 33.[/blue]
17 And Jehovah said to Moses, This thing which you have spoken I will do. For you have found favor in My eyes, and I know you by name.
Christian name, the name a person receives by baptism, as distinguished from surname.
The name a child receives by baptism is his or her Proper and Peculiar Name, as distinguished from surname…a surname is a family name, so though it too is a Proper Name, it is common to all in that family, and as such it is a common or specific name, which takes us all the way back to the end of definition number one (Thank you Noah Webster): “…or it may be attached to a species, genus, or class of things, as sheep, goat, horse, tree, animal, which are called common names, specific or generic.
fellowcitizen of the commonwealth of Yisra'el,
NOT the man-made, fictional USA.
Ephesians 2:12 & 19
An act done by me against my will is not my act. |
| Linc |
Posted - 28 Jun 2005 : 04:21:06
quote:
Originally posted by David Merrill
I thought this book would be a bit of a bore but am finding it quite interesting. The author develops the name through four methods. The last he uses is the most reliable. Only one of the less reliable suggests Yehuwah (Ihua) at all, 73% chance; opposed to Yehovah at a 92% chance by this same method.
Thank you for reading Gerards book, David. How did you feel about his beginning essays on "What does it mean to know the Name"? I agree with his position; I am mystified that anyone could feel any differently about it.
I too winced at the $47 price tag, but now that I have it I'm glad I paid it. The book is worth every penny. Even at $80 it would have been worth it.
After all, George and Jorge are the same name, yet pronounced differently. But to KNOW their names means to know their fame, power or authority. If you don't acknowledge the authority of King George, then really you don't know his name, even if you shouted it at the top of your lungs with perfect diction all day long.
Whatever his other flaws, David Merrill actually went and read Gerard Gertoux' book. I wish everyone else here would do the same; I have never seen the Sacred Name so extensively documented. Gerard's book contains pictures and references to almost every known ancient inscription of the name, and also all names the incorporate the Sacred Name.
Hallelujah! |
| David Merrill |
Posted - 27 Jun 2005 : 17:37:02
I thought this book would be a bit of a bore but am finding it quite interesting. The author develops the name through four methods. The last he uses is the most reliable. Only one of the less reliable suggests Yehuwah (Ihua) at all, 73% chance; opposed to Yehovah at a 92% chance by this same method.
On page 52 Gerard Gertroux says upon the most reliable methodology:
quote:
From the preceding one can deduce that around the third century before our Common Era the Jews avoided the pronunciation yahû. Was this the pronunciation of the Name? The answer is no, because as we have seen, this name Yahû was the substitute used by the Jews in the letters (of Elephantine) dated of the fifth century before our Common Era.
One can verify that, without exception, the theophoric names beginning in YHW- are vocalized YeHO- (IO- in the Septuagint), and those ending in -YHW are vocalized -YaHU (Ia or IOU in the Septuagint). Additionally, the vowel a very often follows the wequence YeHO-, that is to say the "normal" sequence is YeHO-()a is so universal in theophoric names that some names have been 'theophorized' by assonance...
Yet another careful Hebrew scholar agrees with Strong's, Young's and Richardson's concordance/lexicons. Well it is good to finally put that one to bed Oneisraelite.
Regards,
David Merrill. |
| David Merrill |
Posted - 24 Jun 2005 : 21:38:38
Book's in. And it starts a little cryptically - "But first, is a name actually important?" (End of Introduction.) So you may have to wait for me to read a while into the book before we get Gerard Gertoux's true opinion on the correct pronunciation. But he goes into the same argument I made above.
On the one hand he says since Yehudah is pronounced so; that YHWH logically is pronounced Yehuwah. But would seemingly contradict himself in one sentence saying, "This slight improvement gives the name YHWH the pronunciation I-eH-U-A (Iehoua), the equivalent of YeHoWaH in Masoretic punctuation." But that turns out to be that "U" may be pronounced "(or O)".
And in the next paragraph says,
quote:
Consequently, because the Tetragram is obviously the ultimate theophoric name, its reading had to be Yeho-aH to be consistent with all other theophoric names (YHWH can be read YHW-H).
So Gerard is aware of the doctrine I linked from Encyclopedia Judaica.
www.ecclesia.org/forum/images/suitors/Yehudah.jpg
Fast-forward to page 30 and we find the original Hebrew for Jesus is Yehoshua';
quote:
There exist currently therefore five possible pronunciations of the original name Yehoshua, that is to say: Jesus, Josue, Jason, Yeshua, and Yehoshua'. (emphasis added)
Here note that Gerard Gertoux discards the convention of pronouncing Jesus' Hebrew name Yehushua'. So therefore I will likely find in the extensive analysis of the pronunciation of YHWH that the author espouses Yehowah rather than Yehuwah.
And by the way, the actual cover art is, "The Name of God Y.eH.oW.aH Which is Pronounced as it is Written I-Eh-oU-Ah - Its Story" The top of every even numbered page says, "The Name of God YeHoWaH. Its Story".
Regards,
David Merrill. |
| David Merrill |
Posted - 21 Jun 2005 : 10:41:48
Granted your apology is forthcoming.
"Iehouah" has no "W" in it. However the "U" is pronounced like a "W". Like I have been saying, a cross between a soft "V" and a hard "W". Following the "O" sound. That is the way it is intended to be spoken by the original authors.
My $50 book about pronouncing the Name is still on order but should be in soon.
Regards,
David Merrill. |
| Oneisraelite |
Posted - 21 Jun 2005 : 08:06:50
Greetings and salutations, brothers and sisters:
Peace be unto the house.
We wish to make public an error, which has now been corrected, in our Jun 10 2005 : 09:35:20 AM & Jun 17 2005 : 06:44:59 AM posts on this thread; we spelled the Hebrew name of the “first woman”, hey waw hey and that is incorrect, it should have read chêyth waw hey. The only good news in this is that it detracts in no way from the point that we were trying to make, which of course was that the sound of the Ancient Hebrew waw is the same as our semi-vowel W, i.e. an oo sound similar to our U, as in flu.
We apologize for the error but it certainly does serve to verify why Shaul/Paul said we should “prove all things; hold fast that which is good”.
We thank you in advance for your kind understanding.
Sincerely,
brother Robert:
fellowcitizen of the commonwealth of Yisra'el,
NOT the man-made, fictional USA.
Ephesians 2:12 & 19
An act done by me against my will is not my act. |
| David Merrill |
Posted - 18 Jun 2005 : 11:04:09
This is the topic at hand. The argument over how to pronounce the Name of God.
It is pronounced Yahovah. In English transliteration it should be understood that the "J" is silent and never existed in the Hebrew or Aramaic alphabets. The "V" should be pronounced as a hard "W" sound. But the major point is that the "O" vowel after the yod and hey is a long "O" sound, not a "U" sound as you will have us believe. You nitpick at tangents when you profess I misquoted you by spelling your version Yahuwah as Yahuway. I stand corrected on that point. It is not a typo so much as another common mispronunciation of the Name. I got your error mixed up with another error.
quote:
If anyone here at ecclesia.org has the e-Sword software and cares to assure this Accuser that we are indeed copying and pasting that verse unedited from its 1599 Geneva Bible software, you are more than welcome to do so. Thank you for your time and assistance in this matter.
Sure. If anyone can show that e-sword has had the 1599 Geneva Bible OneIsraelite is talking about available in the past, I consider that germane to the argument. Meanwhile since you refuse to apologize for your mistake I will presume that the misdirection to the Geneva Study Bible was intentional sophistry. And I admit very clever at that.
For if you would have said you were quoting the 1587 Geneva Bible then I probably would have hit on it. Better yet, if you would have just provided the link to e-sword so that I could verify for myself, then that would have circumvented the accusation. But you said "1599" and now expect that I would know the Geneva Bible and the Geneva Study Bible are completely different bibles? This is why I am quickly convinced you have invented a way to argue, while being technically correct about my accusation.
Now here is what really gets me about you OneIsraelite:
quote:
From the 1587 Geneva Bible
Exo 6:3 And I appeared vnto Abraha, to Izhak, & to Iaakob by the Name of Almightie God: but by my Name Iehouah was I not knowen vnto the.
Look at the differences in "V" and "U" and "W" and "J" and apparent lack of the letter "M". You have no business citing such an archaic work without giving us direct link to validate the context. http://www.e-sword.net/bibles.html
See how easy that is? So any conditional apology from me would stand upon your either apologizing for stating the wrong date or proving that e-sword has ever distributed such a 1599 Geneva Bible. For now I am convinced it is the same intent to misquote and persuade readers about your incorrect pronunciation; albeit you cleverly used technical misdirection to do it this time.
Also you should provide some kind of evidence that "Iehouah" used in the Geneva Bible and other places is to be pronounced your way instead of the way everybody else pronounces it.
Better yet. Back to my original inquiry. Exactly how, where, when and through what ministers or doctrine did you come to believe that the Name is Yahuwah instead of Yehovah? You will not explain that in simple terms. And why do you feel it is so important, even to be disruptive, to teach it to others?
Regards,
David Merrill.
P.S. My assertion about these misquotes being true convictions against OneIsraelite in the past is based on him changing the names in the LITV Bible. Just one example: http://www.ecclesia.org/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=88&whichpage=4&SearchTerms=litv%2Coneisraelite%2Cdavid%2Cmerrill
quote:
Oneisraelite said:
quote:
Yirm'yahu 8:8(LITV) How do you say, We are wise, and the Law of Yahuwah is with us? Behold, the lying pen of the scribes has certainly worked deceit.
And I quoted in correction:
quote:
Jer 8:8 How do ye say, We are wise, and the law of the Lord is with us? Lo, certainly in vain made he it; the pen of the scribes is in vain. KJV
quote:
What are the initials LITV for? And does it really say "Yahuway" instead of "LORD" or some other reference to God?
After being evasive and if I remember some prodding in PMs, OneIsraelite answered the Literal Bible and I was able to find the passage:
quote:
8 How do you say, We are wise, and the Law of Jehovah is with us? Behold, the lying pen of the scribes has certainly worked deceit.
So it is clear OneIsraelite misquoted the LITV translators by changing "Jehovah" to "Yahuwah". And the passage he altered is eloquently ironic.
P.P.S. From another site:
quote:
OneIsraelite said:
For he/she is not an Yisra’elite that is one outwardly, nor is circumcision that outwardly in flesh; but he/she is an Yisra’elite that is one inwardly, and circumcision is of heart, in spirit, not in letter; of whom the praise is not from men, but from Yahuwâh. (the brother Robert: translation of Romans 2:28-29)
|
| Oneisraelite |
Posted - 18 Jun 2005 : 10:11:54
Dear David Merrill:
Peace be unto the house.
Let us get the facts in order.
(1) It is you who misquoted!! You posted the link to The 1599 Geneva Study Bible…
quote:
It is easy to see that you misquoted the Geneva Bible. If you link to the Geneva Bible you are citing it is spelled "Jehovah". Readers; just click on http://bible.crosswalk.com/Commentaries/GenevaStudyBible/gen.cgi?book=ex&chapter=006 and see for yourself. – Posted - Jun 17 2005 : 11:08:37 AM - by David Merrill
…which is evidently not even a Geneva translation! If we were as blunt, unkind, and unthinking as yourself, we could probably call you a Liar, since that is Not the Bible we were quoting, but we instead will be more thoughtful and simply say that perhaps you are senile.
(2) We downloaded our e-Sword about three years ago and have what it self-describes as a 1599 Geneva Bible. We obviously did not know that brother Rick, the creator of e-Sword, now evidently offers the Geneva Bible, 1587 (with Apocrypha) in place of the 1599 Geneva Bible. Since the only one he evidently now offers is the 1587 version with Apocrypha this cannot be the one we have, since ours does not have an apocrypha and, as we said, self-describes itself as the 1599 Geneva Bible. If this is not truth then you will have to take it up with brother Rick Meyers, the creator of e-Sword.
(3) We copied and pasted Exodus 6:3 from our self-described 1599 Geneva Bible without editing the Proper Name in any way and do it once more herewith.
Exo 6:3 And I appeared vnto Abraham, to Izhak, and to Iaakob by the Name of Almightie God: but by my Name Iehouah was I not knowen vnto them.
Thus you have made a False Accusation when you said, “So you misquoted.” Again, if we were as rude and as insensitive as yourself, we would say that you are a Liar, but we will instead simply say that perhaps you have misspoken.
(4) Here we feel, you Intentionally misquote us, as you have so many times before, we have simply lost count.
quote:
I feel you still avoid the issue. Iehouah is pronounced "Yehovah" and was intended so by the original translators who spelled it that way. Not "Yahuway".
To the best of our knowledge and recollection we have Never used “Yahuway” as you have stated over and over again in your posts, thus again, if we were like you we would make wild accusations against you and call you a Liar, but we will be kind and simply say you are in error, and ask you to produce the evidence for the members of ecclesia.org that we have ever used that variation of the Proper Name of the Creator.
(5) And yet again, if we were as calloused as yourself we would simply call you a Liar once more for this statement made by you…
quote:
There is plenty of evidence behind my claim and you have failed to bring any forth about your pronunciation. [Emphasis added]
…since, even a blind man (figurativly speaking) can see that we have indeed produced evidence about the pronunciation we use, however, in kindness we will just presume that you are functionally illiterate.
(6) I cast the aspersion of Accuser on you because, you are, and it should be evident to everyone here including that figurative “blind man” we mentioned above. It is our opinion that you simply love to argue (debate).
(7) With all this being clarified we now post this pompous statement made by you…
quote:
If you did it intentionally for debate leverage and I find out so, then that is our last debate OneIsraelite.
…and say, let us save you the effort of any more vain threats…Yahuwâh willing, this is our last debate with the person called David Merrill. They are, as nearly always, distracting, pointless and unending and do nothing to enhance the topic at hand.
fellowcitizen of the commonwealth of Yisra'el,
NOT the man-made, fictional USA.
Ephesians 2:12 & 19
An act done by me against my will is not my act. |
| David Merrill |
Posted - 18 Jun 2005 : 00:08:40
Quoting you:
quote:
And Abraham called the name of that place Iehouah-ijreh (Yahuwâh sees)… Genesis 22:14 (1611 KJV spelling)
You insist that Iehouah is pronounced Yahuwah. That is the point I have been making. Obviously I have not been contesting that there have been some spellings of the name Yehovah by the Greek direct equivalent Iehouah.
For one thing you are calling the Bible you quoted the "1599" Geneva Bible and that is the Geneva Study Bible as I understand it now from your Post. So you misquoted. Then you insist on an apology by sending me to a link to the "1587" Geneva Bible; the only Geneva Bible on the Page. http://www.e-sword.net/bibles.html
If you are going to quote obscure Bibles that are difficult to read because the spellings of words are long fallen out of use, then you better be linking them directly yourself - in the original quotation. Whether by mistake or not, you led me into the accusation and therefore my apology is retiscent and stipulating the above. Because if you made an honest mistake about the year that directed me to the accusation, then you should apologize. If you did it intentionally for debate leverage and I find out so, then that is our last debate OneIsraelite.
I feel you still avoid the issue. Iehouah is pronounced "Yehovah" and was intended so by the original translators who spelled it that way. Not "Yahuway". There is plenty of evidence behind my claim and you have failed to bring any forth about your pronunciation.
Thank you for the link to e-sword. That software looks promising. I will likely convert and load up on a few Bible translations.
Regards,
David Merrill.
P.S. For the record, OneIsraelite said:
quote:
If anyone here at ecclesia.org has the e-Sword software and cares to assure this Accuser that we are indeed copying and pasting that verse unedited from its 1599 Geneva Bible software, you are more than welcome to do so. Thank you for your time and assistance in this matter.
When there is no such Bible on e-sword.
Up until now, and only because of this misdirection this time, every accusation about misquoting the Bible on this forum has been correct. So it is no surprise that OneIsraelite casts the aspersion "Accuser" upon me. I have convicted him several times of this intentional misquoting Bible translators. |
| Oneisraelite |
Posted - 17 Jun 2005 : 20:14:40
Why do I waste my time communicating rationally with you. Go download the e-Sword here: http://www.e-sword.net Then download its 1599 Geneva Bible software and verify that what we have posted is what is there, word for word, and then come back here and apologize for your False Accusations.
If anyone here at ecclesia.org has the e-Sword software and cares to assure this Accuser that we are indeed copying and pasting that verse unedited from its 1599 Geneva Bible software, you are more than welcome to do so. Thank you for your time and assistance in this matter.
quote:
1599 Geneva Bible
With
Original Footnotes
and Corrected Spelling
Not to be confused with "The 1599 Geneva Study Bible" on www.Crosswalk.com which is not even a Geneva translation. -http://www.genevabible.org/Geneva.html [Emphasis added]
The 1599 Geneva Bible and The 1599 Geneva Study Bible are not the same; in fact it would appear as though The 1599 Geneva Study Bible isn't even a Geneva translation!! Unfortunately neither is a 1599 Geneva Bible...with Corrected Spelling.
fellowcitizen of the commonwealth of Yisra'el,
NOT the man-made, fictional USA.
Ephesians 2:12 & 19
An act done by me against my will is not my act. |
| David Merrill |
Posted - 17 Jun 2005 : 11:08:37
It is easy to see that you misquoted the Geneva Bible. If you link to the Geneva Bible you are citing it is spelled "Jehovah". Readers; just click on http://bible.crosswalk.com/Commentaries/GenevaStudyBible/gen.cgi?book=ex&chapter=006 and see for yourself. But that accusation is so old and I really did not want to rehash that. It is the reason this Topic was started basically; because OneIsraelite likes to misquote popular Bible translators to make it look like the proper way to say the Name is Yahuway. I explain my personal history with that pronunciation and why it is such misdirection on other Topics already.
Finally OneIsraelite has come back to this forum and he finally explained some things that he would not before. He is claiming that William Tyndale and Miles Coverdale in using the spelling Iehouah were thinking his pronunciation Yehuway and trying to tell us that verifies his deviation in the pronunciation is valid.
quote:
Secondly, if I am ignorant for stating that the Ancient Hebrew waw is pronounced like our English double-u, I am not alone. As we pointed out earlier, to those who are functionally literate, Eve in the Scripture is hey waw hey. See that waw in the middle, David? Below, for your edification, are three witnesses to the modern understanding of what the closest transliteration of that letter is, in the English language, a double-u. Now pronounce the following two syllables slowly, oo-ill, and we will (oo-ill) see how the double-u got its name.
I always assumed that the "double-u" (however it is spelled out) came from the shape. So I do not buy into OneIsraelite's assumption. However if I did it would support my contention that the Iehouah spelling is pronounced Yehovah. And it agrees with the book title:
quote:
When will anyone here read the book by Gerard Gertoux, titled "The Name of God YeHoWaH Which is Pronounced as it is Written I_Eh_oU_Ah Its Story"
Thank you, Link.
It seems if the Name of God is so important to OneIsraelite he would analyze it in light of the facts.
Regards,
David Merrill.
P.S. Link. The treatise clearly leads the reader to believe the Iehouah spelling is from the Greeks trying to imitate the Hebrew. So they probably got the vowel sounds correct. But where did you get the "I_Eh_oU_Ah" from? Is that the title of the treatise?
http://gertoux.online.fr/divinename/exceptional/documents.htm
quote:
For example, an erudite theologian, Cardinal Nicholas of Cusa (1401-1464), in his sermon entitled In principio erat verbum (In the beginning was the Word), written around 1428, he explained, based on rabbi Moyses's works, the various names of God (Adonai, Jah, Sabaoth, Schaddai, etc.) and the meaning of the Tetragram, which he vocalized Iehoua (Nicolai de Cusa - Opera omnia. Sermo I In principio erat verbum Hamburg 1970 Ed.
And moreso supporting the "o" sound after the "Yeh"; and that the "u" sound is a "w/v" sound (soft "v" or hard "w") is the quote at the bottom of the snippet:
quote:
Thus, Sébastien Chateillon constantly used the name Ioua in his Latin translation of the Bible (1551) then in his French translation (1555). Antoine Fabre d'Olivet used Ihôah in his French translation of the Book of Genesis (1823) and Johann Babor sometimes used Ihoua in his German translation of the New Testament (1805).
P.P.S.
Link; I found it by search engine.
http://www.muslim-names.co.uk/namebooks/free.php?in=ca&asin=0761822046
And looks like what was meant by the author was to emphasize the "O" not the "U". Click the above link and here is the Google hit exactly as found:
quote:
The Name of God Y.Eh.Ow.Ah Which Is Pronounced As It Is Written ...
Current Amazon Canada particular-edition data for 'The Name of God Y.Eh.Ow.Ah Which
Is Pronounced As It Is Written I_Eh_Ou_Ah: Its Story' by Gerard Gertoux.
And from the book advertizement:
quote:
The Name of God Y.Eh.Ow.Ah Which Is Pronounced As It Is Written I_Eh_Ou_Ah: Its Story
So I suspect the book advertizer spelled it incorrectly when placing the banner on the ad.
I am going shopping for that book Link. Thanks again. - - Hey! Ouch! $47.
|
| Oneisraelite |
Posted - 17 Jun 2005 : 06:44:59
Dear David Merrill:
Peace be unto the house.
Look David Merrill, if you wish to call a duck, a pigeon, go ahead, that’s your business, but to anyone with eyes to see, this is an accusation…
DM: This is what I am talking about. Exodus 6:3 of the 1599 Geneva Bible spells "JEHOVAH", not "Iehouah"...
…so you may want to do some “calibrating” on your grey matter. 
Secondly, if I am ignorant for stating that the Ancient Hebrew waw is pronounced like our English double-u, I am not alone. As we pointed out earlier, to those who are functionally literate, Eve in the Scripture is cheyth waw hey. See that waw in the middle, David? Below, for your edification, are three witnesses to the modern understanding of what the closest transliteration of that letter is, in the English language, a double-u. Now pronounce the following two syllables slowly, oo-ill, and we will (oo-ill) see how the double-u got its name, from its oo or U sound.
Eve - fem. proper name, from Biblical first woman, from Heb. Hawwah, lit. "a living being." – Online Etymology – http://www.etymonline.com
Eve
ETYMOLOGY:
Late Latin Eva, Heva, from Hebrew hawwâ, living, life, from hayâ, to live; see hyw in Semitc roots. – The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition. Copyright © 2000 - http://education.yahoo.com/reference/dictionary/entry/Eve
Eve [[ME < LL(Ec) Eva, Heva < Heb Hawwah lit. life, living being]] – Webster’s New World Dictionary of American English, Third College Edition, copyright 1988-1996, (page 471 in the 1988 edition).
So, as you can see it may be you who are “evading the point”; so, as everyone can see this is yet another false accusation from you.
Thank you for your time.
fellowcitizen of the commonwealth of Yisra'el,
NOT the man-made, fictional USA.
Ephesians 2:12 & 19
An act done by me against my will is not my act. |
| Linc |
Posted - 16 Jun 2005 : 23:53:56
When will anyone here read the book by Gerard Gertoux, titled "The Name of God YeHoWaH Which is Pronounced as it is Written I_Eh_oU_Ah Its Story"
The evidence in that book is so complete, and so compelling, the Yahwists and Yehvests are left without a leg to stand on. |
| David Merrill |
Posted - 16 Jun 2005 : 22:46:34
quote:
The above is a copy and paste directly from our e-Sword software so perhaps you should not be so quick to accuse.
You jump to the conclusion I was accusing probably because you are conscious you are evading the point.
The point is that "Iehouah" is not pronounced like you say. It was intended by the Bible translators to be pronounced "Yehovah"; with the "v" being a hybrid of "w" and "v". You have nothing to back your assertion that it is pronounced "Yahuwah".
There is no indication that William Tyndale and Miles Coverdale had any other than Yehovah in mind when they would occasionally spell the Name Iehouah.
Regards,
David Merrill.
|
|
|
