Sunday, November 7, 2010


Update: 8/19/2012

The Book of proverbs emphatically shows that one’s wisdom is dictated by their ability to learn from mistakes, make corrections, and be corrected, not the inability to make mistakes and/or be corrected. Only fools are not subject to correction and reproof. Assemblies who will continue to perpetuate blaspheme by using “the name”, after knowledge of this clear evidence, represent the fool in proverbs.

Blaspheme: The Mishnah (Sanh. 7:5), rules that the death sentence by stoning should be applied only in the case where the blasphemer had uttered the *Tetragrammaton and two witnesses had warned him prior to the transgression. In the Talmud, however, R. Meir extends this punishment to cases where the blasphemer had used one of the *attributes, i.e., substitute names of God (Sanh. 56a). The accepted halakhah is that only the one who has uttered the Tetragrammaton be sentenced to death by stoning; the offender who pronounced the substitute names is only flogged (Maim., Yad, Avodat Kokhavim, 2:7). In the court procedure (Sanh. 5:7 and Sanh. 60a) the witnesses for the prosecution testified to the words of the blasphemer by substituting the expressions "Yose shall strike Yose" (yakkeh Yose et Yose). Toward the end of the hearing, however, after the audience had been dismissed, the senior witness was asked to repeat the exact words uttered by the blasphemer. Upon their pronouncement (i.e., of the Tetragrammaton), the judges stood up and rent their garments. The act expressed their profound mourning at hearing the name of God profaned. The custom of tearing one's clothes on hearing blasphemy is attested to in II Kings 18:37, where it is told that Eliakim and his associates tore their garments upon hearing the blasphemous words of the Assyrian warlord *Rab-Shakeh (Sanh. 60a). It is codified in Shulḥan Arukh (YD 340:37) that whoever bears a blasphemy whether with the Tetragrammaton or with attributes, in any language and from a Jew, even from the mouth of a witness, must rend his garment. The second and any successive witnesses only testified: "I have heard the same words" (Sanh. 7:5); according to the opinion of *Abba Saul, whoever utters the Tetragrammaton in public is excluded from the world to come (Av. Zar. 18a). Besides the sacrilege of God, vituperation against the king, God's anointed servant, was also considered blasphemy (cf. Ex. 22:27 and I Kings 21:10). Gentiles, too, are obliged to refrain from blasphemy since this is one of the Seven *Noachide Laws (Sanh. 56a, 60a). Maimonides also classified as blasphemy the erasure of God's name written on paper or engraved on stone, etc., which was to be punished by flogging (Yad, Yesodei ha-Torah 6:1–6). After Jewish courts were deprived of jurisdiction in those cases where capital punishment was applied, excommunication (see *ḥerem) was the usual sanction against a blasphemer (J. Mueller (ed.), Teshuvot Ge'onei Mizraḥ u-Ma'arav (1898), 27a, responsum no. 103 by Amram Gaon).

Hebrew letter VAV acts both as a consonant, W, or as a vowel, 'oo.' It can act as a part of a word or as a prefix that means 'and.' In this sense, VAV is like a connecting tissue, like a mirror where things reflect and meet. Kabbalistically, its form denotes Divine light streamlined downwards into the Creation.

Grammatically, the morphology of the
Tetragrammaton, God's Name made of four letters
י-ה-ו-ה, reflects fusion of different forms of the Hebrew verb 'to be.' It is a very elusive word, because grammatically it is neither one of the forms we know. It denotes future continuous tense, meaning that it is an ever evolving Existence that brings everything into being. This name is so elusive, and thus reflects so perfectly the prohibition to utter His Name in vain, that we even don't know how it should be pronounced correctly. All the attempts in English literature to spell it as it is written, are incorrect as they defy the grammar and the phonetics of Hebrew language. Only priests in the Temple knew to pronounce this Name correctly. Therefore in Jewish tradition we do not even attempt to read this Name, lest we misspell it, but replace it instead with the name Ado-nai, which means literally My Lords. It is plural because it reflects the idea that this name does not refer to God Himself (only the Tetragrammaton Name does), but to His manifold manifestations in the worlds.

"On a frequent basis we attach a meaning of a word from the Bible based on our own language and culture to a word that is not the meaning of the Hebrew word behind the translation. From Meditation 8.30.11 "ezekials beating heart" – Matisyahu

In light of Rashi and other Jewish sages of old, the ISR and the RNKJV version of scriptures are pagan/christian in their translation of Gen 18:3.

Anytime a person is completely out of track and is worshipping demi-gods or other humans instead of God, then it is our duty to enlighten him. 

Gen 18:3  ויאמרH559  אדניH113  אםH518  נאH4994  מצאתיH4672  חןH2580  
Nowhere is the Name of HaShem found in their justification making a deity in the form of a man. 

Caveat lector: Reader Beware:


The restoration of the Name of the Almighty to any translation of the Scriptures should require no justification. After all it was the Almighty himself who originally placed his name in the Scriptures at least 6823 times! It was human beings who decided, for reasons that made sense to them, to delete His Name and to replace it with something “more appropriate” in their view. This, in spite of the Creator’s own statement to and through Mosheh (Moses) that: “This is My Name forever, and this is My remembrance to all generations.” (Shemoth / Exodus 3:15, The Scriptures - 2009 Edition (ISR). The reference in this passage is to the Name which, in Hebrew, consists of four letters Yod, Hey, Waw, Hey, and which is frequently referred to as ‘The Tetragrammaton’. These letters are often brought across into English characters by the use of the four letters, Y-H-W-H (or as Y-H-V-H). This has been variously pronounced as YaHWeH, YaHoWeH, YaHuWeH, YaHVeH, etc. We have chosen not to enter the pronunciation debate, but rather give the Name exactly as it appears in the unpointed Hebrew text, i.e. *Picture*

While there has been some debate over what is the most accurate and precise pronunciation, three things are clear however: Firstly, the word Jehovah is definitely an erroneous pronunciation. This is so because it derives from a combination of the letters J-H-V-H and Hebrew vowel points belonging to
an altogether different word. Incidentally, the J was originally pronounced as a capital I (or Y), and thus the term Jehovah would have been read by early readers of the King James Version as Iehovah (or Yehovah).

Secondly, any one of the various attempts to pronounce the Name is infinitely superior to the actual removal of the Name, and its substitution by an altogether different term! Substitution by a ‘good’ term does not alter the fact that it is a substitution, a replacement word. Further, some of the terms traditionally substituted for the Name are actually the names of pagan deities! This is true, not only in English, but also in the other languages of the world!

Thirdly, in spite of the above facts, many translations perpetuate a “tradition”of substituting “LORD” or “GOD”, all in capital letters, for our heavenly Father’s chosen Name, i.e. *picture* Why? Many, and varied are the reasons which have been given, amongst both Christian and Jewish communities, for this serious error. Nevertheless, the fact remains that a translation purporting to be literal, yet resorting to the “device”, however well intentioned, of adding and subtracting from our heavenly Father’s own choice of Personal Name, would be doing a grave disservice to His cause. At best it would display ignorance, but at worst would show disrespect, or blatant disregard for the plain Word of the Almighty Himself!

This is a matter that the ISR has taken seriously from the very beginning. In the 1993 edition of “The Scriptures” we stated: “The Scriptures differs radically from most other translations in that it does not continue in the tradition of substituting the Name of the Father and of the Son with names ascribed to gentile (pagan) deities. All the names of deities which in the past have been ascribed to the Father, the Son, and even used when engaged in worship, have been avoided”. Our position has NOT changed.

No comments:

Post a Comment