Jesus and YHWH — References to the Names


#1

Hi there everybody,

Once again I’d like to bring up Jehovah’s Witnesses. Just to clarify: I’m so busy with them as a good friend of mine is one and we often get into discussions (or rather him openly ridiculing the Church) and I need to be informed on certain topics. One of them I would like to bring up here.

Can you give me any Scripture references in which any of the following things are discussed:

[LIST=1]
*]Is there a passage that states there is only one name by which one can be saved?
*]Which passages use the name Jesus and which use “the LORD”? (Witnesses will commonly mistranslate NT passages to insert “Jehovah”.)
*]In which passages are titles, etc. of the LORD applied to Jesus?
[/LIST]

By the way, if we have any ex-Witnesses here: If it’s alright for you and you wish to do so, I’d be happy to have a PM conversation on a few things and other questions I have. I’d be glad.

Thank you all in advance!


#2

There is no one and only name to be used for the Father and Son, and one cannot be saved by a name.

The JWs are what I like to term a name worship cult. The JWs have published their own bible which uses the name Jehovah where ever possible. Jehovah is not even a real word, it was invented by the translators of the KJV combining the vowels from one name for God with the consonants from another, different hebrew name.

Their are other churches, not cults who also worship names, like the messianic “Jews” who insist on calling the Father Yahweh, and the Son Jeshua.

This is one fad amoung many perpetuated by fundamentalists, others are the rapture, premillinianism, the idea that the parousia can be predicted.


#3

Well, I didn’t mean that the name itself saves. But I read in Acts 4:12 yesterday that “there is no other name under heaven by which we must be saved.” (not the exact wording, sorry.) That’s the type of references I meant.

About the name of the Father and the Son, I am quite sure there are plenty of places in the New World Translation (Witness bible) that would result in “Jesus is Jehovah”, if translated consistently, which they don’t.


#4

Why are you involved with the JWs to begin with? They are heavy proselyisers for their cult.

And that is what the JWs are, not only a cult but heretical as well.

As an Anglican you should steer clear of them. Their teachings are in direct conflict with Anglican teachings, They do not beleive that Jesus is God or a member of the Holy Trinity.

Please.


#5

I know, I know. I’m not planning to convert, and neither do I consider them to have any authority. A friend of mine is a Witness, and he initially got me interested. (that’s years ago.) So I checked up on them, and found all that stuff they teach. I compared it to what I believe(d) and came to the conclusion that they had nothing to “offer”.

Nevertheless, I remained in discussions with my JW friend, hoping to “plant some seeds” in his mind, that might grow and get him to think and see the Truth. That’s why I am so interested in all of this. I don’t like seeing him go to waste in heresy.

And yes, I currently am Anglican, though rather of the branch some call “Anglo-Catholicism”. The question is rather, how long will it be until I enter the Catholic Church?


#6

Hi! I recommend you look into the Beginning Apologetics series. Book 2.5 specifically addresses concerns held by Witnesses and does so using their own faulty translation.

Unfortunately, since your friend’s pastime seems to be Catholic-bashing more than actual theological discussion, the most effective and potent response may be to just tell him that you will have to cut your time with him short so long as he insists on doing this. Nevertheless, for your benefit, I will address your points.

  1. [BIBLEDRB]Acts 4:10-12[/BIBLEDRB]
    I don’t know how their bible renders this passage but it may well have been corrupted.

  2. The second part of his question requires excellent scholarship (the first part seems to me closely similar to the 3rd question). Some NT passages are actually quotes of the OT where the Hebrew YHWH may have been replaced with Kyrie (“Lord”). Where that happens, it may be appropriate for purposes of study to take the Hebrew context. Where the OT instead uses “Adonai”, the correct word is always “Lord”. Where the OT uses some variant of “El”, the correct word is always “God”. Passages that are not quotes of the OT should always render “Kyrie” as “Lord” since it is impossible to discern whether the author intended “Adonai” or “YHWH” in his mind.

  3. The NT is written in Greek, so when it calls Jesus “Lord” it uses the word “Kyrie”. Unfortunately, that gives them some wiggle room. The challenge is to explain that when the Greek uses “Kyrie”, it refers to the one God, the creator, as opposed to the multiple false gods.


#7

[quote="SonCatcher, post:6, topic:288849"]
Hi! I recommend you look into the Beginning Apologetics series. Book 2.5 specifically addresses concerns held by Witnesses and does so using their own faulty translation.

[/quote]

I live in Europe, I don't think they ship it here. :(

[quote="SonCatcher, post:6, topic:288849"]

Unfortunately, since your friend's pastime seems to be Catholic-bashing more than actual theological discussion, the most effective and potent response may be to just tell him that you will have to cut your time with him short so long as he insists on doing this. Nevertheless, for your benefit, I will address your points.

[/quote]

Well, you can actually have a proper discussion with him. He is willing to listen, and I think I got him to understand the real definition of the Holy Trinity, rather than the misrepresenting one that the Watchtower uses for their "refutation".

The "bashing" is things like: "Christmas is pagan! The Catholic Church adopted it from Saturnalia!" The usual stuff. Or on our recent trip to Rome a few days ago: "How arrogant of the Pope to put his name with that of the Apostle Peter." (He was referring to the dedication on the façade of St Peter's Basilica.

[quote="SonCatcher, post:6, topic:288849"]

  1. [BIBLEDRB]Acts 4:10-12[/BIBLEDRB] I don't know how their bible renders this passage but it may well have been corrupted.

[/quote]

Their rendering of the verse doesn't seem corrupted, although I find it paraphrased. (I have the German version of their bible, which my friend gave to me.)

[quote="SonCatcher, post:6, topic:288849"]

  1. The second part of his question requires excellent scholarship (the first part seems to me closely similar to the 3rd question). Some NT passages are actually quotes of the OT where the Hebrew YHWH may have been replaced with Kyrie ("Lord"). Where that happens, it may be appropriate for purposes of study to take the Hebrew context. Where the OT instead uses "Adonai", the correct word is always "Lord". Where the OT uses some variant of "El", the correct word is always "God". Passages that are not quotes of the OT should always render "Kyrie" as "Lord" since it is impossible to discern whether the author intended "Adonai" or "YHWH" in his mind.

[/quote]

I'm unsure what you mean by the "first part" and the "second part"?

[quote="SonCatcher, post:6, topic:288849"]
3. The NT is written in Greek, so when it calls Jesus "Lord" it uses the word "Kyrie". Unfortunately, that gives them some wiggle room. The challenge is to explain that when the Greek uses "Kyrie", it refers to the one God, the creator, as opposed to the multiple false gods.

[/quote]

OK, but how would I explain that? I mean I could flat-out state it, but that would be much of an argument, would it?


#8

Also available on Amazon

Well, you can actually have a proper discussion with him. He is willing to listen, and I think I got him to understand the real definition of the Holy Trinity, rather than the misrepresenting one that the Watchtower uses for their “refutation”.

The “bashing” is things like: “Christmas is pagan! The Catholic Church adopted it from Saturnalia!” The usual stuff. Or on our recent trip to Rome a few days ago: “How arrogant of the Pope to put his name with that of the Apostle Peter.” (He was referring to the dedication on the façade of St Peter’s Basilica.

Evangelical Fundamentalists do this a lot, too.

I’m unsure what you mean by the “first part” and the “second part”?

the first part: Which passages use the name Jesus and which use “the LORD”?
the second part: (Witnesses will commonly mistranslate NT passages to insert “Jehovah”.)
I only addressed the second and don’t have any response for the first outside of that I wrote for the 3rd part.

OK, but how would I explain that? I mean I could flat-out state it, but that would be much of an argument, would it?

Unfortunately, I don’t currently have the tools to break that down. Hopefully, one of the excellent theologians here can.


#9

Alright, no problem. :slight_smile: I hope somebody else can add to this!


#10

If you are looking to prove the divinity of Jesus...

Isaiah 44:6 and Revelation 1:8, 11, 17-18, 2:8

and John 1:1 and Revelation 19:13-16

or any number of other passages from John Salza's website:
scripturecatholic.com/jesus_christ_divinity.html


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.