New Online King James Bible Restores The Divine Name.

reply to post by Blue_Jay33

. . .they are using God's name . . .

Jesus came to stop people from acting like they knew God's name, and by trying to reverse what Jesus did makes you anti-christ.

Anyway, the "divine name" is, Jesus.
Anyone who thinks otherwise is anti-christ and will go into the lake of fire with the false prophet.

Originally posted by jmdewey60
reply to post by Blue_Jay33

 

. . .they are using God's name . . .

Jesus came to stop people from acting like they knew God's name, and by trying to reverse what Jesus did makes you anti-christ.

Anyway, the "divine name" is, Jesus.
Anyone who thinks otherwise is anti-christ and will go into the lake of fire with the false prophet.

edit on 18-12-2011 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)

Jesus is a Hebrew, born to a Hebrew woman. His dad was Hebrew, all from the tribe of David. How exactly did they name Him "Jesus"? That's His Anglicized English translated name.

Truthfully, you hate His name because of what it means. His name means literally "YAH Saves". You're of the extreme camp that views YHWH as not Father God, but some demon pretednding to be God. Which is utterly absurd.

Just be a man and admit you simply hate Jews, you hate their native tongue. You hate that they have a nation to call home. You hate that they are God's chosen people. Just grow a pair and admit your hatred.

reply to post by NOTurTypical

. . . Jesus is a Hebrew . . .

Jesus lived in "Galilee of the Gentiles", beyond Samaria from Judea, and had spent his earliest twelve years or whatever in Egypt in the diaspora and was a Hellenized Jew who spoke the Koine Greek language and had a Hellenized name, Jesus, derived from some archaic dead language that was proposed as the original language of the Hebrews, who were probably central Asians who spoke a particular dialect of Aramaic, which was what the original "Hebrew", Abraham, spoke, which would have been his native language from wherever he came from, but not necessarily in widespread usage in the Land of Canaan.

reply to post by NOTurTypical

Just be a man and admit you simply hate Jews, you hate their native tongue. You hate that they have a nation to call home. You hate that they are God's chosen people. Just grow a pair and admit your hatred.

You wish this was true, then you would not have to come up with an actual argument.
You are just making this all up. What I like the least are non-Jews who make up excuses for crimes against humanity (by the illegal regime occupying Palestine and calling themselves Israel) so they can have their anti-christ and their Armageddon, so they can be raptured and go to some asteroid somewhere and sit around wishing they could either go to heaven or go back to earth (which they can not, since these spots are already spoken for, by right of birth, by someone else).

This bible isn't new. The Jehovah Witnesses have had this bible for many years now. Best stick with the Good old 1769 edition (all modern KJV's) of the KJV guys. Bsides, there is a HUGE reason why the KJV translators only placed the word "Jehovah" in the KJV a few times, and not 6700 times.....but that's for another day.

p.s... NOTurTypical has been right with every post in this thread so far.....as usual.

As for Jesus and where the name came from:

Jesus in Hebrew is = Yahshua (also Joshua, the Y sounds like a J)
Jesus in Greek is = Iesous with an "i" (Now for the MIND BLOWER!!!) ↓

Yahshua in English is.....wait for it.....= Jesus!!!
Iesous in English is......wait again....= Jesus!!!

Guess what? The King James Bible is a.....wait........English TRANSLATION!!!!!!

Do you speak english? Then say his name correctly. Its JESUS if you speak english. To say other wise is to act like you can speak ancient Hebrew or the dead stupid language of Greek. Don't be prideful ladies and pretent you can "get-a-hold" of God better by calling His name in a different tonuge. How arrogant.

Originally posted by Blue_Jay33
Interesting.

The Divine Name King James Bible

This has long been a pet peeve of mine how translators just decided to remove the name because they weren't sure enough how to pronounce it. When a quick search of the Tetragrammaton Hebrew symbols in OTHER words show that there is no controversy, it is fabricated.

I applaud this translation and kudos to the translators.

I was under the impression every christian knew Jehovah was one rendition of his name. Well, technically that isn't correct since there is no letter J in the hebrew language. It's more like Yahovah. I seem to remember reading somewhere when God told Abraham his name was Yah.

Originally posted by jmdewey60
reply to post by NOTurTypical

 

. . . Jesus is a Hebrew . . .

Jesus lived in "Galilee of the Gentiles", beyond Samaria from Judea, and had spent his earliest twelve years or whatever in Egypt in the diaspora and was a Hellenized Jew who spoke the Koine Greek language and had a Hellenized name, Jesus, derived from some archaic dead language that was proposed as the original language of the Hebrews, who were probably central Asians who spoke a particular dialect of Aramaic, which was what the original "Hebrew", Abraham, spoke, which would have been his native language from wherever he came from, but not necessarily in widespread usage in the Land of Canaan.

If Jesus wasn't Hebrew He couldn't be your Messiah. Who had to be from the line of David. His name is Yahshua, the anglicized tongue calls Him Jesus. But even though we call Him Jesus today doesn't mean I'm ignoring that His given Hebrew name is Yahshua.

Originally posted by jmdewey60
reply to post by Blue_Jay33

 

. . .they are using God's name . . .

Jesus came to stop people from acting like they knew God's name, and by trying to reverse what Jesus did makes you anti-christ.

Anyway, the "divine name" is, Jesus.
Anyone who thinks otherwise is anti-christ and will go into the lake of fire with the false prophet.

edit on 18-12-2011 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)

Point to me anywhere in the bible where he said that if anyone called him by any other name other thanJesus that they were going to hell. You can't, because he didn't. By stuffing words into the Lord's mouth you make of yourself a false prophet speaking lies. The truth is, Jesus is just one rendition of his name. To the Hebrew he is Yahshua (Joshua in english), to the Aramaens his name is Yeshuah or Yeshua, Jesus is the closest to Iesus his greek name. Now will you please stop filling people's heads with utter nonsense? Some people didn't even use his name, some called him Adonai (Master), others called him Rabbi or teacher and never used his name so are they going to hell too? By your words you presume the Lord is a fool.

reply to post by jmdewey60

Anyway, the "divine name" is, Jesus. Anyone who thinks otherwise is anti-christ and will go into the lake of fire with the false prophet.

This would be funny IF you didn't actually believe it with sincerity, but you seem to.
May God help you see the truth like he did with Saul, who was very sincere in his beliefs but was wrong, so Jesus helped him literally see the light, and he became the apostle Paul.

reply to post by Blue_Jay33

So then, you admit to being anti-christ.
Well there you are with your self assured special knowledge that gives you the edge on God, seeing you now have the handle to manipulate Him as you see fit with this name. You will go into the flames prepared for those who practice sorcery.
The sacred name of God is Jesus and you scoff at it so you will find yourself with those who crucified Jesus and then ridiculed him as he hung dying.

reply to post by KJV1611


All the points you made so well equally apply to the Tetragrammaton, in regards to the Y verses J issue.
And I will add that if you have the J on Jesus than you have the J on Jehovah. Again either have them both Y or both J. It is an issue of transliteration consistency.

reply to post by jmdewey60


I am not responding to you anymore until you calm your incendiary rhetoric down

Remember what Jesus said about casting stones, good thing he will be the judge and not either of us.

reply to post by KJV1611


One query: was the letter "J" not a recent invention? What did early English translations give for the name of Jesus before the invention of the letter "J"? I am going to look into the www a bit on this and report back...

OK, here's what I found in Answers.com:


The first English-language book to make a clear distinction between I and J was published in 1634 (Ref). Its use in the English alphabet followed, the letter J was the last of the 26 letters to be added to the English Alphabet. Its emerging distinctive use dates back to Middle High German, originally being a typographical flourish or swash character on the Roman i. The Italian: Gian Giorgio Trissino (1478-1550) was the first to explicitly distinguish I and J as representing separate sounds in 1524 with his "Trissino's epistle about the letters recently added in the Italian language."

[Ref: Hogg, Richard M.; Norman Francis Blake, Roger Lass, Suzanne Romaine, R. W. Burchfield, John Algeo (1992). The Cambridge History of the English Language. Cambridge University Press. pp. p.39. ISBN 0521264766. books.google.com...]



Read more: wiki.answers.com...

reply to post by Lazarus Short


It's interesting that you mention "I" that is the Latin version.
The original old Geneva bible from 1599
Psalms 83:18

That they may knowe that thou, which art called Iehouah, art alone, euen the most High ouer all the earth.

Originally posted by Blue_Jay33
reply to post by jmdewey60

 

I am not responding to you anymore until you calm your incendiary rhetoric down

Remember what Jesus said about casting stones, good thing he will be the judge and not either of us.

That's OK and don't worry about that too much because I didn't really expect an answer.
I'm not trying to cast a stone to kill you, which is what the saying would be referring to.
I'm trying to inform you that you are going down the wrong path and there is time now to repent of that so you will be saved. Jesus is that path (to salvation) and you need to recognize that, and that there is no other.

Originally posted by jmdewey60
reply to post by Blue_Jay33

 

. . .they are using God's name . . .

Jesus came to stop people from acting like they knew God's name, and by trying to reverse what Jesus did makes you anti-christ.

Anyway, the "divine name" is, Jesus.
Anyone who thinks otherwise is anti-christ and will go into the lake of fire with the false prophet.

edit on 18-12-2011 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)

Tell me oh knowledgeable one, where you get your garbage from?! It is obvious that it is Hellenistic, Jesus name is not Jesus, It is Y-hshuah, which is a consecrated form of the Holy Name. Which litteraly means salvation in Hebrew. Secondly, if you are child of the Most High, stop with all the traditional thinking, heaven and hell. There is no hell in the bible, (there is of course time vacuums and black holes that never end - found in enoch and rev) but the traditional catholic garbage and the garbage that come out of these churches destroys everything the messiah lived for. How about just emphasizing this last sentence in your mind, because I know you aim to please the Omnipresent, The King cares for all human life, equally, there has never been a prophet who hated unreasonably, or who was biased to a certain way of thinking, did not every leader strive to love the whole group and preserve them?

reply to post by NOTurTypical

Actually, I think the original name means "Messiah," doesn't it? And why is it then Hebrew People not only do not believe in Jesus, they are quick to tell you he is not the Messiah.

Originally posted by autowrench
reply to post by NOTurTypical

 

Actually, I think the original name means "Messiah," doesn't it? And why is it then Hebrew People not only do not believe in Jesus, they are quick to tell you he is not the Messiah.

No, Yahshua means "YAH saves".

reply to post by HeavenWolf

It is obvious that it is Hellenistic, Jesus name is not Jesus, It is Y-hshuah, which is a consecrated form of the Holy Name.

Apparently I am not too "learned" since I have no idea what you mean by a consecrated form of the Holy Name.
Let's use a little bit of logic please.
Let's say for the sake of argument that there is a such thing as a consecrated form of the Holy Name. Now, tell me how many people would go around using this consecrated form of the Holy Name for their mundane, vulgar name?
Only a small percentage of the people who were members of the group associated with the religious practice of Judaism in the time of Jesus actually lived in Judea, including Jesus, who lived in a gentile province called Galilee. Most of these people who today people would consider as "Jews" spoke a dialect of Aramaic and lived in the Persian Empire or more correctly, the former Persian Empire and would have been considered as Parthians in the Roman world. The vast bulk of the remainder of them would have lived in the greater Roman sphere which basically inherited the western portion of the former Greek Empire, so mainly spoke the common language, being Greek.
This is why you have something like the Septuagint which was not a book for gentiles to read, as a lot of people take it for but was the way most of the Jews in the Greek Speaking West read the Bible, including inside Judea itself.
Within this Hellenized world, a lot of people adjusted names, like we have today with names from other languages being adjusted for use in the English language, for use in the language in common usage, in this case being Greek. So there were plenty of people for a couple hundred years at least going around using the Hellenized forms of names derived from past famous people formerly know from another language not in current common use, such as the name, Jesus, where it comes from the same place where we also get, Joshua, in English. So just like you are likely to run into someone named, Josh, in America, back in the Roman Empire, you were also likely to run into a lot of People named, Jesus.