Archaeologists findings on the "Jesus family Tomb"

[Flaw]

The church hid a great deal as some of the other exits painted a different more mortal picture. Constantine played an enormous role in this. He viewed himself as an "Apollo-like" god and actually evidence suggests that he altered a great deal of early Christian thought as a result. If you look at contemporary accounts of is architecture, it illustrates his mania and how he greatly changed what Christianity was.

.

"christians" today still follow the doctrines that constantine helped create. Under pressure from constantine The Council of Nicea voted to make the Trinity the official doctrine of the church. Constantine wasn't even a christian. He converted later and was baptized on his death bed!

"Constantine had basically no understanding whatsoever of the questions that were being asked in Greek theology," says A Short History of Christian Doctrine. What he did understand was that religious division was a threat to his empire, and he wanted to solidify his domain.


"The formulation 'one God in three Persons' was not solidly established, certainly not fully assimilated into Christian life and its profession of faith, prior to the end of the 4th century. . . . Among the Apostolic Fathers, there had been nothing even remotely approaching such a mentality or perspective."—New Catholic Encyclopedia

The Encyclopedia Britannica "Constantine himself presided, actively guiding the discussions, and personally proposed . . . the crucial formula expressing the relation of Christ to God in the creed issued by the council, 'of one substance with the Father' . . . Overawed by the emperor, the bishops, with two exceptions only, signed the creed, many of them much against their inclination."

[FONT=verdana, helvetica, arial, sans serif]'Fourth century Trinitarianism was a deviation from early Christian teaching.' —The Encyclopedia Americana[/FONT]

 

[AE14]

"christians" today still follow the doctrines that constantine helped create. Under pressure from constantine The Council of Nicea voted to make the Trinity the official doctrine of the church. Constantine wasn't even a christian. He converted later and was baptized on his death bed!

"Constantine had basically no understanding whatsoever of the questions that were being asked in Greek theology," says A Short History of Christian Doctrine. What he did understand was that religious division was a threat to his empire, and he wanted to solidify his domain.


"The formulation 'one God in three Persons' was not solidly established, certainly not fully assimilated into Christian life and its profession of faith, prior to the end of the 4th century. . . . Among the Apostolic Fathers, there had been nothing even remotely approaching such a mentality or perspective."—New Catholic Encyclopedia

The Encyclopedia Britannica "Constantine himself presided, actively guiding the discussions, and personally proposed . . . the crucial formula expressing the relation of Christ to God in the creed issued by the council, 'of one substance with the Father' . . . Overawed by the emperor, the bishops, with two exceptions only, signed the creed, many of them much against their inclination."

'Fourth century Trinitarianism was a deviation from early Christian teaching.' —The Encyclopedia Americana

constantine is quite fascinating. You are 100% correct, his conversion was not until his death bed. The vision on the bridge that he supposedly had is up for a lot of conjecture, as is the nature of christian doctrine before him. As I mentioned in an earlier post, look at the architecture of constantine. He was the god, not jesus nor apollo. He changed the stories of them both, and made a conglomeration with him as the true god.

One thing to look at.....the halo in early art. Look at how it was originally depicted and then look at the much earlier depiction of Apollo. The sun rays AROUND his head. Same look, same meaning. As I said, art always paints (no pun intended) an interesting picture.

If you have any info on non-popular carbon dating theories please do post. I've done some research on it in the past but not a whole lot.

I will see what I can find. It is always intriguing, and to me logical, to believe that our laws of physics might be constant, but that does not mean other universes would be subject to them.

 

[AE14]

They are? That's news to me. That's not only patently false, and intentionaly arbitrary, it's just plain ridiculous.
.

actually many of the stories are earlier legends and myths. I believe we have discussed that. I would not say all, but a percentage of the biblical stories are not original to judeo christian belief

 

[Flaw]

Some reading on carbon-dating.

Nobel prize winning nuclear physicist W. F. Libby, one of the pioneers in radiocarbon dating, stated in Science: “The research in the development of the dating technique consisted of two stages—dating of samples from the historical and the prehistorical epochs, respectively. Arnold [a co-worker] and I had our first shock when our advisers informed us that history extended back only for 5000 years. . . . You read statements to the effect that such and such a society or archeological site is 20,000 years old. We learned rather abruptly that these numbers, these ancient ages, are not known accurately.

Study on human remains which were once believed to be 30,000 years old are now dated to 3,000
Invalid Link Removed

Good read on carbon dating
Invalid Link Removed

Some random reading.

, when the fossil is considered to be about 50,000 years old, its level of radioactivity has fallen so low that it can be detected only with great difficulty. Second, even in more recent specimens, this level has fallen so low that it is still extremely difficult to measure accurately. Third, scientists can measure the present-day rate of radioactive carbon formation but have no way of measuring carbon concentrations in the distant past.So whether they use the radiocarbon method for dating fossils or other methods, such as employing radioactive potassium, uranium, or thorium, for dating rocks, scientists are unable to establish the original levels of those elements through ages of time. Thus, professor of metallurgy Melvin A. Cook observes: “One may only guess these concentrations [of radioactive materials], and the age results thus obtained can be no better than this guess.” That would especially be so when we consider that the Flood of Noah’s day over 4,300 years ago brought enormous changes in the atmosphere and on earth.Dartmouth College geologists Charles Officer and Charles Drake further add doubt to the accuracy of radioactive dating. They state: “We conclude that iridium and other associated elements were not deposited instantaneously . . . but rather that there was an intense and variable influx of these constituents during a relatively short geologic time interval on the order of 10,000 to 100,000 years.” They argue that the breakup and movement of the continents disrupted the entire globe, causing volcanic eruptions, blocking sunlight and fouling the atmosphere. Certainly, such disruptive events could change radioactivity levels, thus distorting results from modern-day radioactive clocks.​

 

[Whacked]

Carbon dating is meaningless with respect to dinosaurs since carbon dating only works for objects in the range of 50,000-60,000 years old. Dinosaur fossils are dated using other forms of radiometric dating, not carbon dating.

if everything was made in 7 days how do you explain dinosaurs?

. carbon dating wrong?? are you serious?? carbon has a half life, that doesnt change no matter how you look at it, but i suppose god did that too right? easy explanation for everything. the basic laws of physics apply nearly everywhere weve looked in the universe, it doesnt mean there are different laws, we just dont fully understand them. rant

 

[schroedes]

there are so many holes in all of those ideas i dont even know where to start, wow

 

[schroedes]

its a debate that nobody can win because '' faith'' throws out most logic and facts

 

[B5150]

there are so many holes in all of those ideas i dont even know where to start, wow

Science has holes blown in it all of the time.

 

[Whacked]

I understand your point but to a Christian, faith and belief in Jesus is the most logical factual choice we know LOL

PS: It's always a pleasure to see AE14 and Flaw go at it b/c they are both a sick wealth of knowledge and they maintain a respectful tone.

Good stuff fellas.

its a debate that nobody can win because '' faith'' throws out most logic and facts

 

[Flaw]

its a debate that nobody can win because '' faith'' throws out most logic and facts

Without faith it's impossible to see the facts. There is no way you can see them. As the scripture states "we are walking by faith, not by sight".

When Jesus expelled at demon from a boy the disciples could not cure him because they had no faith. Just a little faith Goes a long way.

Matthew 17: 18 Then Jesus rebuked it, and the demon came out of him; and the boy was cured from that hour.
[SUP]19[/SUP] Thereupon the disciples came up to Jesus privately and said: “Why is it we could not expel it?” [SUP]20[/SUP] He said to them: “Because of YOUR little faith. For truly I say to YOU, If YOU have faith the size of a mustard grain, YOU will say to this mountain, ‘Transfer from here to there,’ and it will transfer, and nothing will be impossible for YOU"

 

[Flaw]

I will often find myself repeating the same thing over and over to people as if what I said they did not see or hear. They don't even respond properly to the information I give as if I didn't say anything at all. It's always fascinating because it's proof of these words.

2 corinthians 4: For if also our gospel is covered, or hid, in these that perish it is covered; in which [the] god of this world, that is, the devil, hath blinded the souls of unfaithful men, that the lightening of the gospel of the glory of Christ, which is the image of God, shine not.

The very actions of a un-believer are all desribed in the bible and to see how they act is PROOF that what is written is true. The un-believers don't even realize they are part of prophecy. To the one that knows the word their opposition is not dicouraging but faith strengthening.

 

[Whacked]

Hey Flaw, not to derail this thread but there is some Christian preacher on TV (who is a converted Rabbi from Judaism) saying that God's PERSONAL name is Yahweh and NOT Jehovah. Actually, he is saying YHWH.

I thought in other threads you said Jehovah was God's name. I believe it was in a thread or post about HOW we are to address Him when praying.

He said the Orthodox Jews will not use his name out of respect (we are not holy enough) but that God gave/revealed his name to Moses (and NOT prior).

 

[B5150]

I will often find myself repeating the same thing over and over to people as if what I said they did not see or hear. They don't even respond properly to the information I give as if I didn't say anything at all. It's always fascinating because it's proof of these words.

2 corinthians 4: For if also our gospel is covered, or hid, in these that perish it is covered; in which [the] god of this world, that is, the devil, hath blinded the souls of unfaithful men, that the lightening of the gospel of the glory of Christ, which is the image of God, shine not.

The very actions of a un-believer are all desribed in the bible and to see how they act is PROOF that what is written is true. The un-believers don't even realize they are part of prophecy. To the one that knows the word their opposition is not dicouraging but faith strengthening.

He went on to say, “This is why I told you that no one can come to me unless the Father has enabled them.” John 6:65

 

[schroedes]

Hey Flaw, not to derail this thread but there is some Christian preacher on TV (who is a converted Rabbi from Judaism) saying that God's PERSONAL name is Yahweh and NOT Jehovah. Actually, he is saying YHWH.

I thought in other threads you said Jehovah was God's name. I believe it was in a thread or post about HOW we are to address Him when praying.

He said the Orthodox Jews will not use his name out of respect (we are not holy enough) but that God gave/revealed his name to Moses (and NOT prior).

thats what i mean, how you could you possibly think you know what gods name is or even think that with your simple human mind that you could even possibly try to understand what '' god'' thinks or says etc?? bible was written by men, theres no actual proof of any of the ideas in it that have to do with faith etc

 

[Whacked]

I think you may have taken my question a bit out of context

I was only asking "how shall we address Him when praying" that's all.

Written by man, yes, but the Bible represents God's inspired words.

Let's say the doorbell rings. You look out the window to see who it is. You realize it's a Jehovah's Witness. So, you tell your 5 year old son to kindly but firmly say: "no thank you, we are not interested in your religion, please do not come back".... and he does so.

Is the "message" his or yours? YOURS

WHO is the author of this message? YOU

Now, who uttered the words? YOUR SON - he was simply following orders.

Probably a pathetic example/explanation but IO hope that makes sense?

thats what i mean, how you could you possibly think you know what gods name is or even think that with your simple human mind that you could even possibly try to understand what '' god'' thinks or says etc?? bible was written by men, theres no actual proof of any of the ideas in it that have to do with faith etc

 

[schroedes]

I think you may have taken my question a bit out of context

I was only asking "how shall we address Him when praying" that's all.

Written by man, yes, but the Bible represents God's inspired words.

Let's say the doorbell rings. You look out the window to see who it is. You realize it's a Jehovah's Witness. So, you tell your 5 year old son to kindly but firmly say: "no thank you, we are not interested in your religion, please do not come back".... and he does so.

Is the "message" his or yours? YOURS

WHO is the author of this message? YOU

Now, who uttered the words? YOUR SON - he was simply following orders.

Probably a pathetic example/explanation but IO hope that makes sense?

again, its alll faith, theres no actual fact or science really behind it, nothing wrong with faith, its great to think theres something better waiting for us when we die, i hope so too, its just the actual evidence behind the bible is really weak and flawed in my opinion

 

[Whacked]

I understand exactly where you are coming from

It's difficult for the human mind to wrap its head around and believe in something based on something as complicated/complex as "faith".

I imagine pre-Columbus, it was mind boggling and insane to have faith that the world was round and upon traveling west, your ship wouldn't just "fall off a cliff" at the edge of a flat earth.....along with many other "now-proven" scientific facts that made prior beliefes foolish.

The issue becomes, what if it's TOO LATE for you to acccept Jesus as "fact"?

Only YOU can decide. Every man must make that decision SOLO. No scientists, no tangible proof, just a leap of faith.

God has provided the tools, rationale, majestic wonders and beauty of the world along with unexplainable elements of physics, biology, chemistry and other facets of science that simply cannot be comprehended or explained away that point to a creator. It's every man's SOLE decision tio accept or refute the "evidence".

If God simply appeared to prove His existence, where's the faith and trust needed in that?

The rewards for belief are eternal. What does science, man and non-belief offer?

Nothing but soul-less pride-filled rotting corpse 6-ft under. What if you're wrong?

Look, I'm not as intelligent, well-spoken or polished as AE14 or Flaw or any of the world-renown anti-God orators denouncing God for that matter.

I speak from my heart as a man humbled by God's love, what He has done in my life, WHO he is, WHO I am now with Him in my life, and what HE has to offer that transcends human comprehension.

At the end of the day, with all the brilliant minds and endless scientific research examined and performed, ALL science can "prove" as FACT is still just a "theory". How is BLIND FAITH in science any different than blind faith in a Creator

 

[Flaw]

Hey Flaw, not to derail this thread but there is some Christian preacher on TV (who is a converted Rabbi from Judaism) saying that God's PERSONAL name is Yahweh and NOT Jehovah. Actually, he is saying YHWH.

I thought in other threads you said Jehovah was God's name. I believe it was in a thread or post about HOW we are to address Him when praying.

He said the Orthodox Jews will not use his name out of respect (we are not holy enough) but that God gave/revealed his name to Moses (and NOT prior).

I like how you make me work whacked The answer is very technical and involves understanding of different languages and traditions. This is one of the topics that I have spent a lot of time on and it has taken many years of research to come to the conclusion I have today. There's no easy answer to this one. I'll start off with..

There's really no way to know how God's name was originally prounounced in Hebrew. The name of God appears as

in the original Hebrew scriptures almost 7,000 times. It is known as the tetragrammaton in Greek meaning "a word having four letters". These letters are represented in many languages as YHWH or JHVH. Since hebrew was written only in consonants and not vowels translators naturally did the same. The problem is what they came up with could not be pronounced in english. Also note that I am talking about the name of God translated into english, not any other language. When Hebrew was the everyday language people had no problem prounouncing the name of God and did not have to think of using the vowels that we use today. A example in english would be when we say a whole word for a abbreviation. For example st. we might say saint or street. We prounounce the vowels even though they are not written. Sorry if this sounds complicated but it is. Now some things happend that made the proper way to prounounce god's name lost. First of all a superstitious idea arouse among the Jews that God's name was not to be used outloud. They started using lord or 'Adho·nai' which is a title and not a name. As time went by the Hebrew language ceased to be used in everyday conversation and it seems that the original way the name of God was prounounced Got lost in history.
In order to ensure that the pronunciation of the Hebrew language as a whole would not be lost, Jewish scholars of the second half of the first millennium C.E. invented a system of points to represent the missing vowels, and they placed these around the consonants in the Hebrew Bible. Both vowels and consonants were written down, and the pronunciation as it was at that time was preserved.
When it came to God's name, instead of putting the proper vowel signs around it, in most cases they put other vowel signs to remind the reader that he should say 'Adho·nai'. From this came the spelling Iehouah, and, eventually, Jehovah became the accepted pronunciation of the divine name in English. This retains the essential elements of God's name from the Hebrew original text.

Now onto the name:

The name first appeared in an English Bible in 1530, when William Tyndale published a translation of the first five books of the Bible. In this he included the name of God, usually spelled Iehouah, in several verses, and in a note in this edition he wrote: "Iehovah is God's name . . . Moreover as oft as thou seist LORD in great letters (except there be any error in the printing) it is in Hebrew Iehovah." From this the practice arose of using Jehovah's name in just a few verses and writing "L[SIZE=-1]ORD[/SIZE]" or "G[SIZE=-1]OD[/SIZE]" in most other places where the Tetragrammaton occurs in the Hebrew text.

Note that there was no "J" in English at this time; the J is a product of a stylized I; thus giving us the current Jehovah rather than the Old English Iehovah. The "u" used in the above names is also a reminder that there was no "v" in Old English, as you can read David in the original King James version was written "Dauid".

In 1534 Martin Luther published his complete translation of the Bible in German, based on the original languages. While he used the German "Herr" (Lord or Sir) for the Tetragrammaton, in a sermon which he delivered in 1526 on Jeremiah 23:1-8, he said, "The name Jehovah, Lord, belongs exclusively to the true God."

In 1543 Luther wrote: "That they [the Jews] now allege the name Jehovah to be unpronounceable, they do not know what they are talking about . . . If it can be written with pen and ink, why should it not be spoken, which is much better than being written with pen and ink? Why do they not also call it unwriteable, unreadable or unthinkable? All things considered, there is something foul."


The Great Bible (1539) renders Jehovah in Psalm 33:12 and Psalm 83:18.
The Geneva Bible (1560) translates the Tetragrammaton as JEHOVAH, in all capitals, in Exodus 6:3, Psalm 83:18, Jeremiah 16:21, and Jeremiah 32:18.
In the Bishop's Bible (1568), the word Jehovah occurs in Exodus 6:3 and Psalm 83:18
The Spanish VALERA version of 1602 (don't know the exact number the name is used)
In 1611 what became the most widely used English translation, the Authorized Version, was published. In this, the name appeared four times in the main text. (Exodus 6:3 Psalm 83:18 Isaiah 12:2 26:4) "Jah," a poetic abbreviation of the name, appeared in Psalm 68:4. And the name appeared in full in place-names such as "Jehovah-jireh." (Genesis 22:14; Exodus 17:15; Judges 6:24)
The Portugese ALMEIDA version of 1681 (Don't have the exact number)
Webster's Bible Translation (1833) by Noah Webster, a revision of the King James Bible, contains the form Jehovah in all cases where it appears in the original King James Version, as well as another seven times in Isaiah 51:21, Jeremiah 16:21; 23:6; 32:18; 33:16, Amos 5:8, and Micah 4:13
Young's Literal Translation by Robert Young (1862, 1898) renders the Tetragrammaton as Jehovah 6,831 times
In the Emphatic Diaglott (1864) a translation of the New Testament by Benjamin Wilson, the name Jehovah appears eighteen times.
The English Revised Version(1885) renders the Tetragrammaton as JEHOVAH, in all capitals, where it appears in the King James Version, and another eight times in Exodus 6:2,6–8, Psalm 68:20, Isaiah 49:14, Jeremiah 16:21, and Habakkuk 3:19.
The German ELBERFELDER version of 1871 (Don't have exact number)
The Darby Bible (1890) by John Nelson Darby renders the Tetragrammaton as Jehovah 6,810 times.
The Five Pauline Epistles, A New Translation (1900) by William Gunion Rutherford uses the name Jehovah six times in the Book of Romans.
The American Standard Version (1901) renders the Tetragrammaton as Je-ho’vah in 6,823 places in the Old Testament.
The Modern Reader's Bible (1914) by Richard Moulton uses Jehovah in Exodus 6:2–9, Exodus 22:14, Psalm 68:4, Psalm 83:18, Isaiah 12:2, Isaiah 26:4 and Jeremiah 16:20.
The Holy Scriptures (1936, 1951), Hebrew Publishing Company, revised by Alexander Harkavy, a Hebrew Bible translation in English, contains the form Jehovah in Exodus 6:3, Psalm 83:18, and Isaiah 12:2.
The New English Bible (1970) published by Oxford University Press uses JEHOVAH in Exodus 3:15 and 6:3, and in four place names at Genesis 22:14, Exodus 17:15, Judges 6:24 and Ezekiel 48:35.
The Living Bible (1971) by Kenneth N. Taylor published by Tyndale House Publishers, Illinois, uses Jehovah extensively, as in the 1901 American Standard Version, on which it is based.
In the New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures (1961, 1984) published by the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society, Jehovah appears 7,210 times, comprising 6,973 instances in the Old Testament, and 237 times in the New Testament—including 70 of the 78 times where the New Testament quotes an Old Testament passage containing the Tetragrammaton,where the Tetragrammaton does not appear in any extant Greek manuscript.
The Bible in Living English (1972) by Steven T. Byington, published by the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society, renders the word Jehovah throughout the Old Testament over 6,800 times.
Green's Literal Translation (1985) by Jay P. Green, Sr., renders the Tetragrammaton as Jehovah 6,866 times.
The American King James Version(1999) by Michael Engelbrite renders Jehovah in all the places where it appears in the original King James Version.
The Original Aramaic Bible in Plain English (2010) by David Bauscher, an English translation of the New Testament, from the Aramaic of The Pe****ta New Testament with a translation of the ancient Aramaic Pe****ta version of Psalms & Proverbs, contains the word "JEHOVAH" in call caps, in the New Testament, over 200 times.
And Just published this year 2012 The devine name king james bible restores the name of God as Jehovah 6972 times.
To be continued....

 

[Flaw]

Now onto the name Yahweh.

Yahweh appeared in the 1966 roman catholic Jerusalem bible. The vatican however, following JEWISH tradition and superstition said that the name of God should not be used.

Some quotes
"In recent years the practice has crept in of pronouncing the God of Israel's proper name," the letter noted, referring to the four-consonant Hebrew "Tetragrammaton," YHWH.That name is commonly pronounced as "Yahweh," though other versions include "Jaweh" and "Yehovah." But such pronunciation violates long-standing Jewish tradition, the Vatican reminded bishops. (notice jewish tradition, not christian tradition)
"As an expression of the infinite greatness and majesty of God, (the name) was held to be unpronounceable and hence was replaced during the reading of sacred Scripture by means of the use of an alternate name: `Adonai,' which means `Lord,"' the Congregation said.

The vatican makes a attempt to cover up and hide the name of God by replacing it with adonai or lord.

I wouldn't say that Yahweh should not be used but as the evidence shows the name JEHOVAH has been used as the name of God the most through out english history. That is why I use it. I think what's most important is that people use a name. Take the evidence, make it a matter of prayer, and if you come to Yahweh, use Yahweh, if you come to Jehovah use Jehovah. I truly believe you cannot come to know God to the fullest if you do not know his name. The doctrine of the trinity did not help either. Because it was settled under constantine that Jesus and God were equal the name of God pretty much got thrown out by many. 2 major factors contributed to the name of God being hid. 1. Jewish tradition and superstition 2. The doctrine of the trinity. Both of which aren't christian teachings.

Also some things to note. In hebrew Jerusalem is Yerushaláyim. In the bible Jesus name was Yeshua or Yehoshuah. When the English rendered the Latin IESVS from the Greeks who translated the Semitic name Yeshua they came up with Jesus (Yehoshua became Yeshua became Iesous became Jesus. Notice how the y's turned into J's and in many circumstances this has become acceptable. So why would the name Jehovah be any different.

 

[Whacked]

WOW man

You are one deeply knowledgeable dude!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Thanks for all the info and for taking the time it took to write all of this!

Much appreciated

Now onto the name Yahweh.

Yahweh appeared in the 1966 roman catholic Jerusalem bible. The vatican however, following JEWISH tradition and superstition said that the name of God should not be used.

Some quotes
"In recent years the practice has crept in of pronouncing the God of Israel's proper name," the letter noted, referring to the four-consonant Hebrew "Tetragrammaton," YHWH.That name is commonly pronounced as "Yahweh," though other versions include "Jaweh" and "Yehovah." But such pronunciation violates long-standing Jewish tradition, the Vatican reminded bishops. (notice jewish tradition, not christian tradition)
"As an expression of the infinite greatness and majesty of God, (the name) was held to be unpronounceable and hence was replaced during the reading of sacred Scripture by means of the use of an alternate name: `Adonai,' which means `Lord,"' the Congregation said.

The vatican makes a attempt to cover up and hide the name of God by replacing it with adonai or lord.

I wouldn't say that Yahweh should not be used but as the evidence shows the name JEHOVAH has been used as the name of God the most through out english history. That is why I use it. I think what's most important is that people use a name. Take the evidence, make it a matter of prayer, and if you come to Yahweh, use Yahweh, if you come to Jehovah use Jehovah. I truly believe you cannot come to know God to the fullest if you do not know his name. The doctrine of the trinity did not help either. Because it was settled under constantine that Jesus and God were equal the name of God pretty much got thrown out by many. 2 major factors contributed to the name of God being hid. 1. Jewish tradition and superstition 2. The doctrine of the trinity. Both of which aren't christian teachings.

Also some things to note. In hebrew Jerusalem is Yerushaláyim. In the bible Jesus name was Yeshua or Yehoshuah. When the English rendered the Latin IESVS from the Greeks who translated the Semitic name Yeshua they came up with Jesus (Yehoshua became Yeshua became Iesous became Jesus. Notice how the y's turned into J's and in many circumstances this has become acceptable. So why would the name Jehovah be any different.

 

[Flaw]

I want you to check out something else. Check out this link on bible names.

Invalid Link Removed

When you see JAH in a name it's the abreviation for JEHOVAH. For example ABIJAH or ELIJAH. This website wrongfully uses YAHWEH. If the the proper translation was YAHWEH then the names would read ABIYAH or ELIYAH but they don't

Also look at names that begin with JE. For example Jehoash or Jehu. Again they are translated using YAHWEH on this site but clearly you can see that they include 3 letters of the name Jehovah. More proof why Jehovah is the proper name of God in english.

Jesus actually means "Jehovah saves" or "Jehovah is salvation".

This site defines the meaning of Jesus as "Jehovah is generous. Jehovah saves"

Invalid Link Removed

When you see meanings as lord saves or lord is salvation, they are following the jewish tradition to not use the name of God and the definition is not accurate. How appropriate for the son of God to have that name! It aknowledges the humility of Jesus in knowing that Jehovah God is the ultimate savior.

Isaiah 43:10-11 " before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me. I, even I, am Jehovah; and besides me there is no saviour." - ASV

If I have a son I plan to use the name Jaoquin (as the actor Jaoquin Phoenix) for his first or middle name. The name is spanish and a abreviation of the Hebrew name Jehoichin meaning "Jehovah has established.

 

[Whacked]

Very interesting and cool
Thanks again Flaw!

If I have a son I plan to use the name Jaoquin (as the actor Jaoquin Phoenix) for his first or middle name. The name is spanish and a abreviation of the Hebrew name Jehoichin meaning "Jehovah has established.

 

[Flaw]

Very interesting and cool
Thanks again Flaw!

No problem bro, I enjoyed doing the research. If anyone ever tells you Jehovah is not in the bible, you tell them the name actually appears in more bibles than it doesn't. Over 20. A lot of people don't know the name of God because they use newer versions where it has been removed like the NIV, the NKJB or the NASV. New doesn't always mean better

 

[Whacked]

I tell people that all the time.....but....for age related reasons

haha thanks buddy

New doesn't always mean better