D
DaveBj
Guest
I would have a hard time singing that, even if Rome hadn’t said not to use the Name. I don’t know what’s worse–trying to put my words in His mouth, or pretending to put His words in my mouth.
- Status
C
christosdavid
Guest
It wasnt so bad, when the words came to my memory when I was far away from the church it did feel like God speaking to me.
Why do you have such difficulty with it? The theology was catholic and like all church music has a form of teaching function,
D
DaveBj
Guest
Singing “I am God”? No thanks.It wasnt so bad, when the words came to my memory when I was far away from the church it did feel like God speaking to me.
Why do you have such difficulty with it? The theology was catholic and like all church music has a form of teaching function,
I’d have a much easier time with “He is Yahveh (or ‘the Lord’) who walks with me,” or “You are Yahveh who walks with me.” But not “I am Yahveh…”
That said, I’m glad the song had a good effect on you.
P
Phemie
Guest
I don’t think you’re right on this. A prominent Canadian Rabbi wrote a public statement that they couldn’t care less what Catholics did in this respect.
When I asked a liturgist why, if the Jews didn’t care, did we have to do this? His reply was that because of our roots, even if the Jews didn’t care what we did, the Church did.
J
JReducation
Guest
Being a Jew myself, I would say that Phemie is correct. I don’t see where the Holy Father’s statement says or suggests that this is offensive to the Jewish people. He gives a clear historical explanation of the rule regarding the use of YHWH and how this rule made its way into Christianity.
Jews would and should be offended if the Catholics were making statements about Jews. We are not offended by how other people use the name of God. That’s their problem. We simply do not think that way. In other words, we don’t think in terms of getting everyone to follow the faith as we do. We have a hard enough time getting our young to follow the faith, nevermind everyone else.
Even among Catholic Jews or Hebrew Catholics, such as I, the idea of saying YHWH is a discomforting one. It’s not because we’re Jewish, but because the reverence toward the name of God has been part of the Judeo Christian faith for over 2,000 years.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
D
DaveBj
Guest
Okay, I stand corrected. Well, actually, I’m sitting, but you get the picure.
J
JReducation
Guest
“I sit corrected?” 
N
noprem
Guest
Try the Jersualem Bible at Isa 42:8. A plain statement of fact that is clouded in most other translations. Some exceptions are American Standard Version of 1901, New World Translation of 1984, and many bible society bibles translated into third-world languages for missionary use.
DaveBJ has part of the story in his reply of July 1. (“everywhere you see LORD in small caps”).
Therefore one can ‘back-translate’, replacing LORD with Yahweh or Jehovah*****. This can be done over 6000 times in such bibles. BTW the Church’s view puts a new light on Ex 9:16- interfering with God’s purpose instead of furthering it.
***** The reader’s choice, like the difference between Peter and Pedro.
D
DaveBj
Guest
As has been pointed out in other threads, technically Jehovah is a mispronunciation, based on pronouncing “JHWH” with the vowels for “Adonai,” as it’s written in the vowel-pointed Masoretic texts, and then anglicizing the J. However, that really doesn’t bother me much, given 1) that 99.9% of English-speakers aren’t pronouncing “Yahveh” right to begin with, and 2) how big a stretch it is from the Savior’s real name (YESH-u-a3 in the Aramaic, ye-SHU-a3 in the Hebrew, 3 = “ayin,” a consonant that English-speakers have no clue about) to “DZHEE-zus,” which is what we hear from the pulpits and ambos every Sunday morning.
E
Eliphaz15
Guest
Well, I know I’m new, and I’m not very knowledgable, but I’m going to go out in a limb here and say that it probably has something to do with YHWH being the proper name of God. Now I’m going to guess that because of the Catholic Church’s connection to ancient Judaism and the tradition of not pronouncing God’s true name, we don’t pronounce God’s true name. That’s just my :twocents:
A
AR111
Guest
hi.We have corresponding discount rate from 10%–30% for the order ,Our Led lights have 3 years quality warranty,All of our LEDs Lighting products have passed the CE and ROHS test,Another 5‰ of your order will be offered for free, if the quantity is over 1000pcs,New LEDs lighting samples will be offered for free ,in the future after being our old customers ,
if you are favourable policies.please contact us or visit our cheap LEDs lights website
led-gu10.com/
led-gu10.com/LED-Spotlight-index.html
led-gu10.com/LED-E27.html
W
Warrenton
Guest
We do not address the Father in his name because we are taught by our Saviour not do do this. He said clearly, “No one comes to the Father except through the Son.” When we need to use the Holy Name, we use the name of our Lord, Jesus Christ. He will plead for us before the Father in the Father’s name. There is no other name in heaven or earth by which we can be saved.
The attempted use of the name of the Father in song is a misguided foray into what once might have been called Judaizing, except as Brother JR well notes, Jewish people did not, and do not, speak the Father’s name.
Trying to use the Father’s name in song is bad theology, and has no place in Catholic worship.
The attempted use of the name of the Father in song is a misguided foray into what once might have been called Judaizing, except as Brother JR well notes, Jewish people did not, and do not, speak the Father’s name.
Trying to use the Father’s name in song is bad theology, and has no place in Catholic worship.
N
noprem
Guest
Reply to Jreducation of July 9, who wrote
“What we know, from tradition is that YHWH was not said by the common man.”
Not for nothing did Jesus tell the mainstream religious leaders of his day that they had nullified the word of God by their tradition. (Mr 7:13; Mt 15:3)
As has been established here, men took God’s personal name out of his book and replaced [not “translated”] it with Lord. Thus I take the liberty of doing the reverse, at Ruth ch. 2:4, NIV:
Just then Boaz arrived from Bethlehem and greeted the harvesters, “Yahweh be with you!” “Yahweh bless you!” they called back.
Boaz and his harvesters qualify as ‘common man’ IMO. Others have correctly cited Ex 3 as a reason for retaining Yahweh/Jehovah in use in daily life. (“…when you sit at home and when you walk along the road, when you lie down and when you get up …”)
Other scriptures: Ex 9:16; Isa 42:8; Ps 110:1. The first should put on the defensive (against God, not me) most of the posts here. The second is bad grammar unless a name is used in it, not a title. The third causes confusion in keeping track of which “Lord” is being referred to in each case. Matthew ‘s record of Jesus’ confounding of the mainstream religious leaders of his day does not make the point to the modern reader unless the original is brought over literally, as I take the liberty to do here:
“He saith unto them, How then doth David in the Spirit call him Lord, saying, Jehovah saith unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, Until I make thine enemies thy footstool.”
(Mt 22:44,45; ASV)
All in attendance understood from the reference (correctly read) that Jehovah is ‘most high over all the earth’ (Ps 83:18), that the direction ‘sit and wait’ was given prophetically to the Messiah and descendant of King David, that this Messiah was David’s Lord.
Most important to Christians, It is not true that Jesus didn’t use Jehovah’s name- in John 17:6 and 26 he reminded his father that “I have revealed you***** to those whom you gave me out of the world.” And he promised that he would “continue to make you***** known in order that the love you have for me may be in them and that I myself may be in them."
These I quote deliberately from the NIV because of a footnote where my asterisk appears.
(17:6) Greek * your name; also in verse 26 *
Other bibles say openly “I have made your name manifest” or similar.
If Jesus the man is now dead, how can he fulfill his promise to ‘continue to make Jehovah known’ ‘on earth’ understood] today? Not via the Church, according to this thread.
“What we know, from tradition is that YHWH was not said by the common man.”
Not for nothing did Jesus tell the mainstream religious leaders of his day that they had nullified the word of God by their tradition. (Mr 7:13; Mt 15:3)
As has been established here, men took God’s personal name out of his book and replaced [not “translated”] it with Lord. Thus I take the liberty of doing the reverse, at Ruth ch. 2:4, NIV:
Just then Boaz arrived from Bethlehem and greeted the harvesters, “Yahweh be with you!” “Yahweh bless you!” they called back.
Boaz and his harvesters qualify as ‘common man’ IMO. Others have correctly cited Ex 3 as a reason for retaining Yahweh/Jehovah in use in daily life. (“…when you sit at home and when you walk along the road, when you lie down and when you get up …”)
Other scriptures: Ex 9:16; Isa 42:8; Ps 110:1. The first should put on the defensive (against God, not me) most of the posts here. The second is bad grammar unless a name is used in it, not a title. The third causes confusion in keeping track of which “Lord” is being referred to in each case. Matthew ‘s record of Jesus’ confounding of the mainstream religious leaders of his day does not make the point to the modern reader unless the original is brought over literally, as I take the liberty to do here:
“He saith unto them, How then doth David in the Spirit call him Lord, saying, Jehovah saith unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, Until I make thine enemies thy footstool.”
(Mt 22:44,45; ASV)
All in attendance understood from the reference (correctly read) that Jehovah is ‘most high over all the earth’ (Ps 83:18), that the direction ‘sit and wait’ was given prophetically to the Messiah and descendant of King David, that this Messiah was David’s Lord.
Most important to Christians, It is not true that Jesus didn’t use Jehovah’s name- in John 17:6 and 26 he reminded his father that “I have revealed you***** to those whom you gave me out of the world.” And he promised that he would “continue to make you***** known in order that the love you have for me may be in them and that I myself may be in them."
These I quote deliberately from the NIV because of a footnote where my asterisk appears.
(17:6) Greek * your name; also in verse 26 *
Other bibles say openly “I have made your name manifest” or similar.
If Jesus the man is now dead, how can he fulfill his promise to ‘continue to make Jehovah known’ ‘on earth’ understood] today? Not via the Church, according to this thread.
N
noprem
Guest
Your reply raises some questions.
I should note that this topic did not begin with a letter to Catholic Bishops. There was a time when literate English-speakers used the name Jehovah because they knew it was the proper name of the God of the Bible, and because it was found in their KJVs. Since 1611 (Happy tricentennial anniversary, KJV!) it has become the most widely-used transliteration in English and in many other languages.
The Anglican Newton used it. The Lutheran Handel used it. Charles Eliot, the Episcopalian academic and long-time president of Harvard, used it. (He chose the then-new American Standard Version for the biblical passages in the Harvard Classics.) A secular Jewish scholar whose name I have forgotten used it in an article on the Samaritans in the Scientific American some years ago- and the editors passed it. Gibbon, variously a Catholic and an Anglican, used it.
The Catholic Toynbee used Yahweh- a name, not a title- in his many books.
It has been mentioned that many Jews object to hearing the name, and that they don’t write it in their scriptures. That’s true, and it means that I say “God” or “Lord” when speaking to such ones. They deserve that courtesy, since even today there are many with tattooed forearms given them by Gentiles like myself in the Thirties.
D
DaveBj
Guest
snip
You have access to the 'net. Google it. I shouldn’t have to do your homework for you.
All of four times, and it was an error when it was used, like several other usages I could mention that are also errors. And how can the KJV be used in “many other languages”? It is an English translation.
I have already expressed myself to the effect that using the “Jehovah” pronunciation does not bother me, even if it is a mis-pronunciation.
I agree with you on that. I may disagree with them on whether or not the Name should be pronounced, but if they don’t want to hear it, I won’t speak it. (Not there are all that many Jews in Cullman County, Alabama.It has been mentioned that many Jews object to hearing the name, and that they don’t write it in their scriptures. That’s true, and it means that I say “God” or “Lord” when speaking to such ones. They deserve that courtesy, since even today there are many with tattooed forearms given them by Gentiles like myself in the Thirties.
N
noprem
Guest
Sounds like an “in word”. if I haven’t needed it in all these years I won’t need it now. Pulpit I understand.
Sorry, I wasn’t clear. I meant ‘using the proper name of God in God’s book’, in whatever the common transliteration is. Javé, Jeovä, etc.
but written 6000 times in the Hebrew- and pronounced often. (The Jews were to talk about God to their children constantly, and the kings were to read The Law daily ‘in an undertone’.)
Elsewhere I mentioned several other bibles that use a form of YHVH.
- Status