-
The Divine Name in Later TimesThe Watchtower—1980 | February 1
-
-
The Preface of the Revised Standard Version states: “The present revision returns to the procedure of the King James Version, which follows . . . the long established practice in the reading of the Hebrew scriptures in the synagogue. . . . For two reasons the Committee has returned to the more familiar usage of the King James Version: (1) The word ‘Jehovah’ does not accurately represent any form of the Name ever used in Hebrew; and (2) the use of any proper name for the one and only God, as though there were other gods from whom he had to be distinguished, was discontinued in Judaism before the Christian era and is entirely inappropriate for the universal faith of the Christian Church.” (Italics ours.)
-
-
The Divine Name in Later TimesThe Watchtower—1980 | February 1
-
-
“The word ‘Jehovah’ does not accurately represent any form of the Name ever used in Hebrew,” says the Preface of the Revised Standard Version. But what word does “accurately represent” the divine name in Hebrew? Some prefer “Yahweh,” others “Yehwah,” others “Jave,” and so on. The problem is that when writing ancient Hebrew only consonants were used, and even experts admit that it is a matter of conjecture as to which vowels made up the complete divine name.
-