Which Bible translation is the best?

[historia]

Which English translation of the Bible do you like the best?

Why do you like it better than other translations?

And which one do you like second best?

[onewithhim]

Peace to you,

If that were the case Jehovah's Witnesses would, in no way lament this. In fact, if the form "JEHOVAH" ever did for some reason become archaic and pass into complete oblivion our English speakers might well adopt the form YAHWEH instead. The fact is however that YAHWEH has about 500 years of catching up to do, to even approach from a distance the English form Jehovah in terms of familiarity and use.

Jehovah (spelt in olde english) was the form used in the first English bibles and it remains in what , according to The British Library, is the most widely publish text in the english language, namely The King James Version. The KJV was used by many protestant translators as the basis for their translations and as a result transliterations (often very close or identical to the ENGLISH form) became familiar around the world*. It is engraved on churches, figures in prayers and hymns (It may surprise people to learn how popular the form is in Africa and Asia and search for hymns on YTube for example, will result many gospel - non-Witness - churches that use the name freely). The form JEHOVAH remains, because of its history, an integral part of the English language and beyond.

So in other words, "Jehovah" is the name that is being used because of popularity.


Not because it is true (it is certainly not true).

But because it is familiar, popular and traditional.



This is what we get from the religion that calls itself the 'one true religion' and that denounces other religions for accepting doctrines and falsehoods based on tradition or popularity or familiarity? It does the exact same thing as those it denounces! And people gobble it up, defend it, turn a blind eye to it. (Jeremiah 5:30, 31)


There is no religion that is the truth.

There is only Christ, WHO is the Truth. Not a religion. A person: the ONE to whom we must come (John 6:68), the only one who will lead us into all truth, and the one who has the words of eternal life. He is the One who God told us to listen TO:


"This is my Son, my Chosen One. Listen to Him!"




May anyone who wishes them be given ears so as to hear the Spirit (Christ) and the Bride say to YOU, "Come!" And may anyone who wishes and anyone who thirsts "Come! Take the free gift of the water of Life!"



Peace again to you,
your servant and a slave of Christ Jaheshua,
tammy

No one can honestly say that "Jehovah" is not true. I have read many opinions, and if they want to be totally honest, they will conclude what one gentleman concluded in his long article on the subject. After deriding the pronunciation "Jehovah," he finally said, "JEHOVAH" could, possibly be the correct way to pronounce the Divine Name.

When getting right down to the nitty-gritty, it is reasonable to consider "Jehovah" as a good rendering of YHWH. Pronouncing "W" as a "V"---like speakers of Hebrew do---take the Tetragrammaton, YHWH, and say the consonants. What comes out of your mouth sounds an awful like "YeHoVaH." Try it.

[onewithhim]

[Replying to post 49 by Tcg]

I'll go along with you there. It really doesn't matter which vowels are chosen. Inserting any vowels in the Tetragrammaton causes a word to come out that sounds a lot like "Yehovah."

[onewithhim]

Historia....would you comment on my post # 42? Thanks.

[brianbbs67]

How did the "what's your favorite Bible thread turn into the Jehovah debate thread"?

[JehovahsWitness]

How did the "what's your favorite Bible thread turn into the Jehovah debate thread"?

• I should say about here HERE. From what I can see the NWT is the only choice ANYONE on the thread chose to criticize; everyone else's choices and reasons passed without even s single comment from anyone else. I suppose if everyone simply acknowledged everyone else's choices and reasons without criticism there would have been no need for anyone to mount a detailed defence. I'm not recommending that I'm just pointing out the obvious.

My answer was that my choice was the NEW WORLD TRANSLATION and one reason was its use of The Divine Name in the text. Did you have anything you want to say in response to this point about the name of God or are you content to let the thread continue without comment or criticism of my personal choice? If you criticise (which is absolutely NOT a probem) or demand justification (which again I have no problem with) I will respond. If you don't this post will just sit here and you for one would not have contributed to making it {quote} "a Jehovah debate thread".

Over to you, do YOU have anything to say about my choice? And if you do, may I respond?


JW

[kcplusdc@yahoo.com]

I like the amplified bible format.
Additionally I like study bibles as well.

I'm not to worried about accuracy as I believe that spiritual truths and truths in general bear fruit, as such these ideas are testable and protected from mistranslations.

[Tcg]

[Replying to post 49 by Tcg]

I'll go along with you there. It really doesn't matter which vowels are chosen. Inserting any vowels in the Tetragrammaton causes a word to come out that sounds a lot like "Yehovah."

Yehovah is very different from Yohaveh. There are of course other combinations. My point is that makes little difference which combination is used if god knows who his followers are.


What is the point of arguing over these meaningless differences?


One gets the impression that they are introduced to direct attention away from much more important considerations. Considerations that cast doubt on the whole story.



Tcg

[brianbbs67]

How did the "what's your favorite Bible thread turn into the Jehovah debate thread"?

• I should say about here HERE. From what I can see the NWT is the only choice ANYONE on the thread chose to criticize; everyone else's choices and reasons passed without even s single comment from anyone else. I suppose if everyone simply acknowledged everyone else's choices and reasons without criticism there would have been no need for anyone to mount a detailed defence. I'm not recommending that I'm just pointing out the obvious.

My answer was that my choice was the NEW WORLD TRANSLATION and one reason was its use of The Divine Name in the text. Did you have anything you want to say in response to this point about the name of God or are you content to let the thread continue without comment or criticism of my personal choice? If you criticise (which is absolutely NOT a probem) or demand justification (which again I have no problem with) I will respond. If you don't this post will just sit here and you for one would not have contributed to making it {quote} "a Jehovah debate thread".

Over to you, do YOU have anything to say about my choice? And if you do, may I respond?


JW

I don't think you have ever not responded. AND my comment was not directed at you, specifically. It was to the group. Your choice is what it is, yours. I thought it was an interesting question and wanted to hear people's preferences.

[historia]

So your point is, that the form JEHOVAH (the English) is now "unacceptable"

No, I'm afraid both here, and at several other points in your recent replies, you've inadvertently misconstrued my argument.

Note that at no point in this thread have I argued that the term Jehovah is "unacceptable." In fact, I said just the opposite:

Personally, it doesn't bother me one way or the other.

I have no personal objection to people using Jehovah, if that is their tradition.

Rather, I'm making the narrower point that onewithhim's assertion -- that if you accept the (Latinized) name 'Jesus', you should necessarily accept the (Latinized) name 'Jehovah' -- is based on the erroneous premise that both words share the same characteristics. In fact, Jehovah has a unique etymology that makes it different from all other Latinized biblical names. So this particular argument in favor of Jehovah isn't compelling.

In order to establish that conclusion, I merely need to show that Jehovah is different from other Latinized biblical names, and so I've offered evidence along those lines. It seems, though, that you are trying to critique that evidence as if each one was intended to support a broader argument that Jehovah is "unacceptable." That's not my point, and so not the purpose of the evidence.

Allow me to ask some questions to try to refocus the discussion:

Do you disagree with my assertion that 'Jehovah' is the conflation of YHWH with adonai?

Do you disagree with my assertion that 'Jehovah' was first created in the late Middle Ages?

It appears you disagree with my assertion that Yahweh has eclipsed Jehovah in contemporary usage. But allow me to address that together with your reply to the above questions.

[historia]

Historia....would you comment on my post # 42?

Sure.

You think "Jehovah" or even "Yahweh" are wrong pronunciations

Jehovah is almost certainly a misconstruction. But, as I've said repeatedly, I have no objection to others using it if that is their tradition.

At no point have I said Yahweh is "wrong." Based on the evidence, that is the most accurate transliteration one can use. It's the one I use when I speak and write.

yet "LORD" isn't even CLOSE to YHWH.

Lord is not an attempt to transliterate the divine name, it's a title used in place of the divine name.

I see no reason to object to that practice in Christian bibles, as this convention is part of Christian tradition.