Hi Locoman, you should have started your research with the Septuagint, the Greek version of the Old Testament, because you would have saved yourself a
lot of time. You would have noticed that throughout the Greek version of the Old Testament, both of the Hebrew words Yahweh and Adowne are translated
by the Greek word Kurios, (just as they are in the Greek new testament Gospels) throughout the entire text. This is because there is no Greek
equivalent of the Hebrew word Yahweh. Nothing was changed in the Old Testament Hebrew texts, it simply a matter of discrepancy because of translating
a passage between two different languages.
Besides, if you were to believe something was changed, how do you know it was the Old Testament texts, and not the New Testament texts? Also, IF it
was changed, and the Greek version in the Gospels is the more accurate version, then the original Hebrew passage would have used the word adown in
both instances, and not Yahweh, because Yahweh has a different meaning that the Greek word Kurios, but the Hebrew word Adowne has the same meaning, so
it would have been "the adowne said unto my adowne", not "Yahweh said unto my Yahweh"....
G2962 - kurios (koo'-ree-os) : from kuros (supremacy); supreme in authority, i.e. (as noun) controller; by implication, Master (as a respectful
title):-- God, Lord, master, Sir
H113 - adown (aw-done) : or (shortened) adon [aw-done']; from an unused root (meaning to rule); sovereign, i.e. controller (human or divine):--
lord, master, owner.
Compare also names beginning with "Adoni-".
I'm sorry but there are way too many holes in your theory. The word Kurios is simply how the word Yahweh has been rendered in Greek, because there is
no corresponding Greek word, and as I pointed out, is done so in the Greek version of the Old Testament, the Septuagint, which was translated from the
same texts we have. There are even early Greek versions of the gospel texts where they insert the Hebrew Tetragrammaton for clarity.
Again, nothing has been changed, or if you believe so, then you can't trust anything in the OLD Testament, and you don't have faith in God to
preserve his word.
The word David wrote in verse 5 of Psalm 110 is not Yahweh, it is adonay, so it is not saying that there was one Yahweh sitting on the right hand of
another Yahweh. Yahweh is the Father, as Paul and Peter pointed out numerous times, and NEVER ONCE said Christ was Yahweh. As I have pointed out
before, if Christ was also Yahweh, then he exalted himself to the right hand of his Father, and made himself High Priest, because as Paul pointed
HEBREWS 5:5 So also Christ glorified not himself to be made a high priest; but he that said unto him, Thou art my Son, today have I begotten thee.
6 As he saith also in another place, Thou art a priest forever after the order of Melchizedek.
The person who said both of these quotes was Yahweh, so if Christ was also Yahweh, then he too exalted himself, and made himself a priest forever
after the order of Melchizedek, which Paul says isn't the case.
Psalms 2:7 I will declare the decree: the LORD (Yahweh) hath said unto me, Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee.
PSALMS 110:4 The LORD (yahweh) hath sworn, and will not repent, Thou art a priest forever after the order of Melchizedek.
Paul states here clearly that Christ didn't exalt himself or make himself high priest, but that Yahweh did, proving Christ was NOT Yahweh, and that
Yahweh who said these quotes, was the Father of Christ.
Christ was made High Priest after the order of Melchizedek, just as the son's of Aaron were priests of the order of Aaron, they were not Aaron, they
were his sons. So who was Melchizedek? Obviously not Christ, because as Paul pointed out, Melchizedek had no mother or father, no beginning of Days,
nor end of life, yet Christ had both a mother and father, and although you don't believe he had a beginning of days, you can't dispute that he DID
have an end of life, because he died for your sins, and was resurrected three days and three nights later. Christ is now a priest of the order of
Melchizedek, made like unto Melchizedek (meaning he wasn’t Melchizedek). Melchizedek was a physical manifestation of God, just as the manifestation
God used to speak to Abraham in Genesis 18.
Also, if Christ was also Yahweh, Satan would have known this. So, why did Satan believe he could tempt him by offering him all the world, when if
Christ was Yahweh, he would have already had it? Why do the Apostles state that Christ was tempted in all things?
If Yahweh is the family name, then all that become part of that family must then be deemed what the word Yahweh means, which is ridiculous if you
understand the meaning of the word....
H3068 - Yhovah (yeh-ho-vaw) : from 1961; (the) self-Existent or Eternal; Jehovah, Jewish national name of God:--Jehovah, the Lord. Compare 3050,
Even if we become Elohim, none of us are or ever will be eternally and self-existing, because even though we may then have Eternal life, we have not
existed for all eternity as Yahweh has, since we had a beginning, and we are in existence because of the Father (not self-existent), who
is/was/always-will-be Eternal and self-existing. Christ also doesn't fit this meaning, because he is only now in possession of eternal life, being
the first-fruits to eternal life after his resurrection from the dead, and he was once dead for three day and three nights, and had to have faith in
the Father that he would be raised from the dead, proving he was not Eternal and self-existent. Like I said, there are way too many holes in your
theory, and to back up your belief you have to claim that the word of God was changed, instead of changing your belief to correspond to the word of
God. There is only one who has never died, and never will, who has eternally and self existed, and that is the Father, who is Yahweh Elohim, the
P.S Here is a searchable version of the Septuagint, if you want to look for yourself....