JW Question

[IncRus]

LDS: The JW's CAN'T be the restoration of the church! They're a CULT!

JW'S: The LDS's CAN'T be the restoration of the church! They're a CULT!

And may I add: The RCC and her protestant daughters CANNOT be the restoration of the church either! To the Biblical church that Christ built, they're a CULT! They teach the Trinity which the apostles did NOT preach.

[evantisin]

Thanks for your reply. I do understand that the J.W's are most sincere in their 'faith' However how do you square God avenging with a God of Love. Truth is, they do not square.

What did God say to Moses when he asked of God who would he tell them had spoken, when he was communicating with God. The reply was to tell them 'That I am' spoke, hence you have the correct name. Excuse me that I dont have the text in front of me but Iam sure you will know which one I refer to.

Regards

You're probably referring to Exodus 3:14

Exodus 3:14 (King James Version)

14And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you.

Do you, personally, call God "I AM" or "that I am?" I think it was a name he would be known by and not exactly his proper name:

Exodus 6:3 (King James Version)

3And I appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, by the name of God Almighty, but by my name JEHOVAH was I not known to them.

Is the King James Version corrupted?

No. The authors of the King James Version made an attempt at rendering the Tetragrammaton (YHWH) into English.

How or what one calls God or says is his name isn't going to determine the level of one's faith completely. The scriptures simply say that God desires that his name be acknowledged, so Jehovah's Witnesses do that. They're a Bible-based religion. They don't ignore the context of any piece of scripture, and intend on putting scripture to use (James 1:22-25).

[Gatsby]

Thank you, yes, 'And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you.'

This is exactly what I was reffering to. And this is The name of God.

This is what we say each day to other's and there are many books now saying that we all actually use God's name on a daily basis when we refer to ourselves.

Jesus said I AM The Life and he was correct.

Regards

[IncRus]

Thank you, yes, 'And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you.'

This is exactly what I was reffering to. And this is The name of God.

This is what we say each day to other's and there are many books now saying that we all actually use God's name on a daily basis when we refer to ourselves.

Jesus said I AM The Life and he was correct.

Regards

The name of God is NOT "I Am." Neither is Jehovah the name of God.

If you know the name that God GAVE Jesus (Phil. 2:9), that's the name of God (John 17:11-12 TEV).

[jahrule84]

The name of God is NOT "I Am." Neither is Jehovah the name of God.

If you know the name that God GAVE Jesus (Phil. 2:9), that's the name of God (John 17:11-12 TEV).

What? The name of God is not Jehovah? Did you not read Ps 83:18? "You, WHOSE NAME IS Jehovah, art the most high over all the earth." Or Exo 6:3? "But by MY NAME Jehovah, I was not known unto them." How much more plain can God say that this is his name? If it's mistranslated, then please, give us the correct translation, English please, not Hebrew (Yahweh)! Which ever way you should translate Yod He Wah He (tetragrammaton) at Ps 83:18 and Exo 6:3, that is God's name in English!

[IncRus]

What? The name of God is not Jehovah? Did you not read Ps 83:18? "You, WHOSE NAME IS Jehovah, art the most high over all the earth." Or Exo 6:3? "But by MY NAME Jehovah, I was not known unto them." How much more plain can God say that this is his name? If it's mistranslated, then please, give us the correct translation, English please, not Hebrew (Yahweh)! Which ever way you should translate Yod He Wah He (tetragrammaton) at Ps 83:18 and Exo 6:3, that is God's name in English!

You are not an Israelite, are you? These verses are of the OLD Testament which God spoke in time past to our fathers BY the prophets (Heb. 1:1).

The words that God had spoken to us in these last days BY His Son (Heb. 1:2) are written in the NEW Testament. These are the words of God that are PERTINENT to us.

[faithymom]

2 Tim 3:16 All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, 17so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.

[IncRus]

2 Tim 3:16 All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, 17so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.

I am NOT denying that "all scripture is God-breathed...." but scripturtes are useful ONLY for those to whom the scripture is addressed. Heb. 1:1-2 are ALSO "God-breathed."

Therefore, in the study of the scriptures, Heb. 1:1-2 MUST be considered too in order for scriptures to be "useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the man of God [b](in these last days - Heb. 1:2)[.b] may be thoroughly equipped for every good work."

[evantisin]

Thank you, yes, 'And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you.'

This is exactly what I was reffering to. And this is The name of God.

This is what we say each day to other's and there are many books now saying that we all actually use God's name on a daily basis when we refer to ourselves.

Jesus said I AM The Life and he was correct.

Regards

Gatsby, the use of "I am" in everyday speech is not the acknowledgment of addressing God's name. When one says "I am hungry" or "I am going home," they are not talking about God nor necessarily have God in mind when they say that. It's not a sincere attempt at addressing God.

"I AM" is not God's name, but a part of the title ("I AM THAT I AM") that God wanted Moses to tell the Israelites. Again, there's an emphasis on acknowledging God's name (Psalm 91:14; Isaiah 12:2-4) and putting it into use (James 1:22-25). Unintentionally using God's name is not so sincere an attempt at addressing God.

Regards,
evantisin

[JAYMZ]

And may I add: The RCC and her protestant daughters CANNOT be the restoration of the church either! To the Biblical church that Christ built, they're a CULT! They teach the Trinity which the apostles did NOT preach.

If this is true there sure are a lot of people goin to hell. Except for IncRuss upstart sect.

[JAYMZ]

There are born again believers in the RCC. There are born again believers in reformation based churches.
DESPITE OUR DIFFERENES WE ALL AGREE ON THE NATURE OF GOD.

[evantisin]

What? The name of God is not Jehovah? Did you not read Ps 83:18? "You, WHOSE NAME IS Jehovah, art the most high over all the earth." Or Exo 6:3? "But by MY NAME Jehovah, I was not known unto them." How much more plain can God say that this is his name? If it's mistranslated, then please, give us the correct translation, English please, not Hebrew (Yahweh)! Which ever way you should translate Yod He Wah He (tetragrammaton) at Ps 83:18 and Exo 6:3, that is God's name in English!

There are those who argue that "Jehovah" is not God's name because the original rendition used by the Jews ceased and was long lost, never to correctly be pronounced or understood how to do so again.

The thing is, names like "Joanna," "Joel," and "Jesus" have God's name in them. "Joanna" means "Jehovah Has Been Gracious." "Joel" means "Jehovah is God." "Jesus" means "Jehovah Saves." Of course, the letter "J" hasn't always existed in the English alphabet, so use of "I" or "Y" to end up with names like "Yeshua" (which mean "Jesus") used to be used.

There are a limited number of variations of entering out the Tetragrammaton as a full word or translate it. It's not like an accurate enough rendering is completely unknown.

If "Jehovah" is not "politically correct," then "Jesus" probably isn't either, as the original, Old English form of the name "Jesus" is indeed "Yesh'ua." "Jehovah" and "Jesus" are translations of "Yahweh" and "Yesh'ua," respectively, into the contemporary English language. "Joel" ("Jehovah is God" or "Yahweh is God" or "YHWH is God") would probably be a severe mistranslation as well.

Even though they're not 100% accurate, they're used anyway. "Jehovah" is no more a corruption of God's name than "Jesus" and "Joel," both of which are names that refer to God's name in the same format.

Is "Jehovah" the most accurate and that the Israelites at the time pronounced it? No, not exactly like that at all, but neither do most people pronounce words like Jesus or God in the same way that they used to be pronounced in the original languages. The New Testament says to spread the good news of God's Kingdom to the Gentiles. Encountering a difference in languages and communicating in other than Hebrew and Aramaic is to be expected.

Some say that God's name shouldn't be pronounced or rendering in any way because it is too holy. If it's too holy to have been heard, we wouldn't know about to this day and nor would it have entered into common names like John, Joseph, and Joanna, among others. It would also make scripture that states to praise God's name and acknowledge it irrelevant. There's no big issue with translating God's word into other languages; no issue with the possibility that translating from Hebrew may slightly lose the meaning. The benefit of translating (spreading the teachings and putting it in practical use beyond just among the Israelites) outweighs the possible ramifications (that "Jehovah God" might not be acceptable enough a way to refer to him).

The translators of the King James Version used one of the known translations and it stuck as a familiar name. They used it and the King James Version is now commonly used among most any Protestant Christian. Is one supposed to ignore these verses of scripture and simply not pronounce them? (Genesis 22:14; Exodus 6:3; Exodus 17:15; Judges 6:24; Psalm 83:18; Isaiah 12:2; Isaiah 26:4)

Respect of God is one thing. Being afraid to go about his teachings is a whole other thing for any Christian; it's disregarding the essence of scriptural teachings and a relationship with God as an actual God. (Psalm 79:6; Psalm 91:14; Isaiah 12:2-4)

[faithymom]

So, back to the OQ: What is the proof that JWs are the 'restoration'?

[Gatsby]

Gatsby, the use of "I am" in everyday speech is not the acknowledgment of addressing God's name. When one says "I am hungry" or "I am going home," they are not talking about God nor necessarily have God in mind when they say that. It's not a sincere attempt at addressing God.

"I AM" is not God's name, but a part of the title ("I AM THAT I AM") that God wanted Moses to tell the Israelites. Again, there's an emphasis on acknowledging God's name (Psalm 91:14; Isaiah 12:2-4) and putting it into use (James 1:22-25). Unintentionally using God's name is not so sincere an attempt at addressing God.

Regards,
evantisin

Hi, yes you are quite right in what you say. People do not know that they are using God's name. I Am That I AM is the correct name, but equally so is I AM. The point I was making is that God's name is being used by default, I was not saying anything more or less that this.

Regards

[Gatsby]

There are born again believers in the RCC. There are born again believers in reformation based churches.
DESPITE OUR DIFFERENES WE ALL AGREE ON THE NATURE OF GOD.

And what is it that you have all agreed? Tell me what is the nature of God, in your words please.

Regards