Re: The name of Jesus, and a novel about the Knights Templars
On Thu, Apr 03, 2003 at 01:49:08PM -0800, Tim May wrote: > On Thursday, April 3, 2003, at 01:02 PM, Harmon Seaver wrote: > > >On Thu, Apr 03, 2003 at 11:22:09AM -0800, Tim May wrote: > >> > >>YHWH is the Tetragrammaton. Jews (and some others) believe the name of > >>their god may not not be spoken. Vowels are usually left out in > >>Semitic > >>languages, with sometimes placeholder consonants. In this case, > >>various > >>transcriptions of YHWH come out as "Yahweh," "Jehova," "Jehovah," etc. > > > > Correct, except for the Jehovah part. The use of jehovah has been > >entirely > >refuted by pretty much all bible scholars and the only translation > >you'll find > >it in is, IIRC, the King James. Jehovah's Witnesses still use it, of > >course, > >but.. > > Nonsense. Do a Google search. It shows up in many texts, for many > flavors of religion. Many Bible texts? Care to tell us which ones? I don't really need to do much of a google since I've got hardcopies of all the mainstream bibles sitting here on the shelf, plus concordances. But just for instance: American Standard Version did have it, however, the New American Standard doesn't. King James had it in 4 verses, but none in the New King James. New International Version doesn't have it. The NIV is the favorite of most fundys. Revised Standard Version doesn't have it, nor does the New Revised Standard. The RSV is considered by almost any biblical scholar to be the hands-down best translation. Douay-Rheims doesn't. New American Bible, mostly used by Catholics, doesn't Hebrew Names Version of World English Bible doesn't have it. There are a couple fo the more recent colloquial translations that have it, but those aren't well thought of by *any* scholars. In short, there are almost no bible translations at all that use the name jehovah. > > The theory that the vowels were some of the ones in the Greek name for > "Lord" is just one of several theories. Inasmuch as there are several > main vowel sounds, nearly any attempt to speak "YHWH" out loud is going > to lead to some sound that is a variant of "Yah-way" or "Ya-ho-way" or > "Ya-ho-vah," given the usual Y/J and V/W and suchlike shifts. > > > > > > > >>The "Yah" part is familiat to those familiar with Rastafarians, as Ja > >>or Jah. > > > >Well, sort of -- but actually for them Jah is just the shortened > >version of > >Jah Ras Tafari, meaning Haile Selassie, Emperor of Ethopia, direct > >descendant of > >the King David. > > Again, nonsense. I said "Jah" is another variant of the name of their > god, and this is exactly what "Jah Ras Tafari" contains. And the word > "Jah" pre-dated that Ethiopian politician by thousands of years. > > To claim that the "Jah" in a name applied mid-20th century is part of > the "shortened version of Jah Ras Tafari" is silly. > > Get a clue, Harmon. > > I have plenty of clues. I think you either need a new set of glasses or else to put down that glass pipe if you have read *anything* at all about Rastafarianism and don't understand that Jah is Haile Selassie. He *is* their god. Yes, the name Yah or Jah predates them, but their use of it isn't even remotely debatable. Learn to read, Tim. > > None of the variant spellings of "Jesus" had _anything_ to do with "the > name of the god" (in terms of the "jewish thing" you cite). > > The Jews did not confuse Joshua/Yeshua/Iosus/Jesus/whatever with their > desert vengeance god YHWH. Neither should you. The mainstream Jews of course did not, however, the jewish followers of him most certainly did, and he very clearly said that he and YHWH were one and the same. Or at least so we read in the New Testament. Again, learn to read, Tim, this is another point that isn't at all debatable. See John 10:30 "The Father and I are one." but that's not the only place. And just that alone was enough to get him killed. Oh, that reminds me -- another thing that the christers got wrong -- the cross. There was none. The Romans, at least of that period, didn't "crucify" anyone. The impaled them, essentially a stout post set into the ground with the top end wittled to a fine point, which went up the ass of the victim. But of course, that wouldn't look to great on the alter, would it? > > You're letting your mystical/Wiccan/pagan superstitious drivel > interfere with scholarship. > I think I said before that I was only mildly interested in wicca. -- Harmon Seaver CyberShamanix http://www.cybershamanix.com
RE: The name of Jesus, and a novel about the Knights Templars
> By the way, a fun novel with crypto scattered throughout it > is the new > novel "The Da Vinci Code," by Dan Brown. It just came out and [...] > murdered grandfather. Uncovering the clues related to the Priory of > Sion, the Knights Templars, the Holy Grail, and the blood > line of Jesus > take the reader through France, Italy, and England. Sounds a lot like Umberto Eco's "Foucault's Pendulum". I found that a really fun read. The main plot is based on a centuries old conspiracy by templars and the like, and the YHWH based reordering of the name of God is central to part of the book. Looks like someone's trying to get money easily :) Unless it's the same book and the publisher decided it would sell better with an anglo saxon name on it ? :) -- Vincent Penquerc'h
Re: The name of Jesus, and a novel about the Knights Templars
On Thu, Apr 03, 2003 at 11:22:09AM -0800, Tim May wrote: > > YHWH is the Tetragrammaton. Jews (and some others) believe the name of > their god may not not be spoken. Vowels are usually left out in Semitic > languages, with sometimes placeholder consonants. In this case, various > transcriptions of YHWH come out as "Yahweh," "Jehova," "Jehovah," etc. Correct, except for the Jehovah part. The use of jehovah has been entirely refuted by pretty much all bible scholars and the only translation you'll find it in is, IIRC, the King James. Jehovah's Witnesses still use it, of course, but.. > The "Yah" part is familiat to those familiar with Rastafarians, as Ja > or Jah. Well, sort of -- but actually for them Jah is just the shortened version of Jah Ras Tafari, meaning Haile Selassie, Emperor of Ethopia, direct descendant of the King David. Who was also Mesheach ha Israel, BTW, as was Solomon. And Saul, for awhile, but his annointing was taken away. Which is one of those deeply jewish things that the christers never comprehended when they co-opted Rabbi Yeshua's movement for their new religion -- they never even caught on to what messiah means, and still don't. Speaking of new religions -- gotta' love those Rastas. Their theology is a bit funky, with Haile Selassie and all, but still, what a groovin' religion, eh? > > As for silly claim that "no Jewish mother ever named her son Jesus," > Ken Brown and others have already dealt with how languages and > alphabets shift around. The shifts between consonants (like J and Y, > like D and T in German, and so on) are well known to all etymologists. Ah yes, I totally understand all that -- what you (and the christers and some others here) don't seem to grasp is the inviolate nature of the fucking *HOLY NAME* and what that means. It was, after all, a jewish thing, and -- if you want to play their game, you gotta play by their rules -- meaning you don't mess around with the name of the god. And also, you have to live it in accordance with their religious laws, times of observances, dietary, the whole bit. (snip) -- Harmon Seaver CyberShamanix http://www.cybershamanix.com
Re: The name of Jesus, and a novel about the Knights Templars
On Thursday, April 3, 2003, at 01:02 PM, Harmon Seaver wrote: On Thu, Apr 03, 2003 at 11:22:09AM -0800, Tim May wrote: YHWH is the Tetragrammaton. Jews (and some others) believe the name of their god may not not be spoken. Vowels are usually left out in Semitic languages, with sometimes placeholder consonants. In this case, various transcriptions of YHWH come out as "Yahweh," "Jehova," "Jehovah," etc. Correct, except for the Jehovah part. The use of jehovah has been entirely refuted by pretty much all bible scholars and the only translation you'll find it in is, IIRC, the King James. Jehovah's Witnesses still use it, of course, but.. Nonsense. Do a Google search. It shows up in many texts, for many flavors of religion. The theory that the vowels were some of the ones in the Greek name for "Lord" is just one of several theories. Inasmuch as there are several main vowel sounds, nearly any attempt to speak "YHWH" out loud is going to lead to some sound that is a variant of "Yah-way" or "Ya-ho-way" or "Ya-ho-vah," given the usual Y/J and V/W and suchlike shifts. The "Yah" part is familiat to those familiar with Rastafarians, as Ja or Jah. Well, sort of -- but actually for them Jah is just the shortened version of Jah Ras Tafari, meaning Haile Selassie, Emperor of Ethopia, direct descendant of the King David. Again, nonsense. I said "Jah" is another variant of the name of their god, and this is exactly what "Jah Ras Tafari" contains. And the word "Jah" pre-dated that Ethiopian politician by thousands of years. To claim that the "Jah" in a name applied mid-20th century is part of the "shortened version of Jah Ras Tafari" is silly. Get a clue, Harmon. As for silly claim that "no Jewish mother ever named her son Jesus," Ken Brown and others have already dealt with how languages and alphabets shift around. The shifts between consonants (like J and Y, like D and T in German, and so on) are well known to all etymologists. Ah yes, I totally understand all that -- what you (and the christers and some others here) don't seem to grasp is the inviolate nature of the fucking *HOLY NAME* and what that means. It was, after all, a jewish thing, and -- if you want to play their game, you gotta play by their rules -- meaning you don't mess around with the name of the god. None of the variant spellings of "Jesus" had _anything_ to do with "the name of the god" (in terms of the "jewish thing" you cite). The Jews did not confuse Joshua/Yeshua/Iosus/Jesus/whatever with their desert vengeance god YHWH. Neither should you. You're letting your mystical/Wiccan/pagan superstitious drivel interfere with scholarship. --Tim May "That government is best which governs not at all." --Henry David Thoreau
