Jehovah's Witnesses abuse the
divine name of my God!
In order to have "Jehovah" in the New World Translation,
they must claim the Bible has been altered and corrupted. Like all cults, they
destroy the reliability of the manuscripts of the Bible.
Here is what
scholars have to say about a Hebrew original of Matthew: click here.
Jehovah's Witnesses falsely claim that bibles
remove YHWH (Tetragrammaton) from the Old Testament. The truth is, they have
added the divine name in the New Testament where it is never found in the
original Greek manuscripts, and blamed the Bible as being corrupted from the
original where YHWH was once found. Rather than trashing their false
doctrine, they trash the Bible!
- The most obvious proof that Jehovah's Witnesses spell YHWH
wrong as "Jehovah" is the fact that the letter "J"
doesn't even exist in Hebrew, Greek, Latin. Further, the English language
did not have a letter "J" before about 1500 AD. For example, the
very first edition of the KJV printed in 1611 AD, contained no
"J". Not even one! Instead the letter "I" is used for
Jew, Jesus, Joshua, Joanna, John AND the person pronoun "I".
Instead these words were written in 1611 AD as, Iew, Iesus, Ioshua,
Ioanna, Iohn. In a stunning admission, Jehovah's witnesses tell us that
the reason they continue to use "Jehovah" instead of the correct
spelling Yahweh, is to be pleasing to man, not God.
- One of the first things that JW new converts learn from
their cultic Watchtower organization, is the lie that all Bibles are
corrupt because they remove the Tetragrammaton from the Old Testament.
- Most Jehovah's Witnesses are so dismally mis-informed
about the matter that they have no idea how to even find the
Tetragrammaton in the original Hebrew text of the Old Testament, much less
even heard the term "Tetragrammaton".
- What most JW's don't know is that they are the one's who
are truly guilty of adding to the word of God because the New World
Translation (the JW sectarian paraphrase they call a Bible), actually adds the word "Jehovah" in the New Testament
237 times where it is never found. So the hard cold fact is that
the New World Translation adds "Jehovah" into the New Testament
237 times, where there is absolutely no ancient manuscript evidence of any
kind to support it.
- The Watchtower teaching of a Hebrew original of Matthew
that used YHWH, surely trashes the Bible and destroys any confidence in
the New Testament. If Jehovah's Witnesses can argue that YHWH was deleted
from the Bible, then what else was deleted that we don't know about?
Perhaps the word trinity was also used in Matthew 28:18-19, but it too was
- A lost Hebrew Matthew that used YHWH contradicts Jesus
Statement that scripture cannot be broken (John 10:35) and that the word
of God is both incorruptible and imperishable. (1 Peter 1:23-25) For JW's
to affirm that YHWH was once in the Bible, but deleted, is quite different
from alternate readings. This is because there is absolutely no evidence
in any Bible manuscript that YHWH was used ANYWHERE in the New Testament,
much less Matthew. For YHWH to have been in the original, but 100% removed
without any trace, destroys all credibility in the reliability of the
entire Bible itself. Of course, Christians know that JW's add YHWH into
their NWT strictly for theological reasons, but in doing so, trash the
- The only scholars who JW's can quote as believing in a
Hebrew Matthew, are themselves Bible trashers and modernists who entirely
deny the inspiration of the Bible. No scholar who views the Bible as the
unalterable and inspired word of God will ever believe in a Hebrew Matthew
original. So the Watchtower organization is "in bed with" those
who try to ultimately destroy anyone's faith in the Bible. But the
Watchtower has a long history of doing just this. For example, in the
"Should you believe in
the Trinity" booklet, JW's reference several "scholars"
who come right out and say, "Trinity was a pagan origin
doctrine". But what the "door to door class" of Jehovah's
Witnesses doesn't know, is that all the scholars who say trinity is pagan
in that booklet are themselves Bible trashers who reject the virgin birth
and the resurrection of Christ and the inspiration of the Bible. Click here for specifics on this.
- So as we will see, the JW charge that the Bibles that
Christian commonly use, removes the divine name from the Old Testament is
- We accept that Hebrew was the language of the Jewish
Synagogue in the first century. This fact, however only strengthens the
fact that God did not want Christians to continue using YHWH since none of
the 27 New Testament books ever used it.
- Jehovah's Witnesses would have us believe that YHWH was
removed 100% from the New Testament, but never removed once from the Old
- The truth is that JW's are guilty of adding the Divine
name into the New Testament where it is never found.
- The expression, "Jehovah's Witnesses" did not
exist prior to it becoming a kind of corporate trademark name of the
salesmen of the Watchtower book selling company after 1930 AD. For 2000
years the followers of Christ have called themselves "Christians",
never "Yahweh's" or "Jehovah's Witnesses,".
I. The progressive use of God's
name in the Bible:
- El Shaddai was God's
prime name to the Patriarchs. YHWH
was God's prime name to the Jews: "God spoke further to Moses and
said to him, "I am YHWH; and I appeared to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob,
as God Almighty [El Shaddai], but by My name, YHWH, I did not make
Myself known to them." (Ex 6:2-3)
- Jesus is God's prime
name for Christians: "And there is salvation in no one else; for
there is no other name under heaven that has been given among men by which
we must be saved." (Acts 4:12)
Moses to Cross
Cross till end
Used by Patriarchs
Never used by Patriarchs
Used 7000 times by Jews
Never used in NT
Never used in OT
Used 900 times in NT
II. YHWH not removed from the
Old Testament of Bibles:
- It is impossible to remove YHWH from the Old Testament,
because it is found in every original Hebrew Manuscript. (However, YHWH is
never found in any manuscript of the New Testament.)
- The American Standard version and Young's Literal
Translation, always uses Jehovah when the Tetragrammaton is found in the
- Reputable Bibles like the King James version and the New
American Standard version do not remove the divine name from the Old
- The King James Version uses "Jehovah" many
times: Ex 6:2; Ps 83:18; Isa 12:2; 26:4.
- In the "Principles of Translation" section in
the introduction of the New American Standard version, it says:
The Proper Name of God in the
Old Testament: In the Scriptures, the name of god is most significant and
understandably so. It is inconceivable to think of spiritual matters without a
proper designation for the Supreme Deity. Thus the most common name for the
deity is God, a translation of the original Elohim.
One of the titles for God is Lord, a translation of Adonai. There is yet another name for which
is particularly assigned to God as His special or proper name, that is, the
four letters YHWH (Exodus 3:14 and Isaiah 42:8). this name has not been pronounced by
the Jews because of reverence for the great sacredness of the divine name.
Therefore, it has been consistently translated Lord. The only exception to this
translation of YHWH is when it occurs in immediate proximity to the word Lord,
that is, Adonai.
In that case it is regularly translated God in order to avoid confusion. It is
known that for many years YHWH has been transliterated as Yahweh, however no
complete certainty attaches to this pronunciation.
- If we were given the choice, we would merely insert YHWH every
time it is used in the Hebrew Old Testament. If that is what the Holy
Spirit chose to use, it is good enough for us!
III. Jehovah's Witnesses
- "Jehovah" cannot be the name of God since
neither Hebrew, Greek, Latin don't even have a letter "J" and
English did not have the letter J before about 1500 AD?
- The name Jesus, John, Joanna, Jew all started in the Greek
with the letter "I", not J.
- As the introduction to the New American Standard confirms,
the proper way of spelling YHWH in the English language would be Yahweh,
- Dr. George Howard, who is quoted as proof that Matthew was
written in Hebrew also said the proper pronunciation of YHWH was
"YaHWeH" and that this is the accepted one by the vast majority
- Jehovah was popularized by a catholic monk who lived in
the 12th century AD. In fact "Jehovah" was never used before
- The form "Jehovah" results from reading the
consonants of the Tetragrammaton with the vowels of the surrogate word Adonai.
The dissemination of this form is usually traced
to Petrus Galatinus, confessor to Pope Leo X, who in 1518 a.d.
transliterated the four Hebrew letters with the Latin letters jhvh
together with the vowels of Adonai, producing the artificial form
"Jehovah." (This confused usage may, however, have begun as
early as 1100 a.d.; note KB, 369). While the hybrid form Jehovah
has met much resistance, and is universally regarded as an ungrammatical
aberration, it nonetheless passed from Latin into English and other
European languages and has been hallowed by usage in hymns and the ASV; it
is used only a few times in KJV and not at all in RSV. (Anchor Bible
- Take a look at the obvious error of spelling it Jehovah as
Jehovah's Witnesses demand it. We will not quibble with the three vowel guesses, but two of the four consonants are wrong! What a silly blind
organization the Watchtower is.
- Notice that the spelling Yahweh at least has all four
- When you point this out to Jehovah's Witnesses, they
hypocritically say "the spelling doesn't matter".
IV. Jehovah's Witnesses admit
Jehovah is wrong:
- In one of the most spectacular admissions in religious
history, the JW's actually admit that Jehovah is wrong: "Yahweh . ..
is admittedly superior to Jehovah. 'The wrong spelling Jehovah OCCURS
since about 1100' and then it offers its arguments in favor of Yahweh as
the correct and original pronunciation." Let Your Name Be Sanctified,
Jehovah's Witnesses, p 16-20)
- Even worse, they admit that the only reason they keep
using it is to please men, not God: "While inclining to view the
pronunciation "Yahweh" as the more correct way, we have retained the form "Jehovah" because of
people's familiarity with it Since the 14th century. New World
Translation, Jehovah's Witnesses, foreword p 25)
V. Jehovah's Witnesses add
"Jehovah" into the New Testament!
- The New World Translation adds "Jehovah" into
the New Testament 237 times, where there is absolutely no ancient manuscript
evidence of any kind to support it.
- Even the Watchtower admits this to be true! "no ancient Greek manuscript that we possess today of the
books from Matthew to Revelation contains God's name in full."
(The Divine Name That Will Endure Forever, Watchtower booklet)
- While the Hebrew Old Testament does contain YHWH many
times, the Greek New Testament, NEVER uses the name of God YHWH. In words
JW's would understand: "Jehovah is never found in the New Testament,
but was added by the Watchtower society to support their false
- When you point this most significant fact out to Jehovah's
Witnesses, they first think you are a liar. Then second, they thoughtfully
twitch in stunned wonder as to how this could possibly be true. Then
third, they run off to "the higher ranking" to learn that what
Christians first told them is in fact true! Finally they are told the most
bizarre lies by "the higher ranking".
- After JW's have recovered from the initial shock that the
Greek New Testament NEVER uses the word "Jehovah" (YHWH), the
answer is even more shocking and disturbing, than the original news!
- Jehovah's Witnesses actually teach that the gospel of
Matthew was originally written in Hebrew and that this original Hebrew
copy of Matthew (the one written by Matthew's own hand) did contain YHWH.
Problem is, no one has ever found any evidence of a Hebrew Matthew
original, and this still doesn't explain why the Jew world Translation
add's Jehovah in the books Paul wrote.
VI. Rev 19:1-6 does not use
YHWH, but YAH
- The Fourfold "Hallelujah" of Rev 19:1-6 is used
as proof that YHWH is used four times in the New Testament. The word means
"praise to JAH" not Praise to YHWH. We repeat, the
Tetragrammaton is NEVER used even once in the New Testament.
- "Alleluia—Hebrew, "Praise ye Jah," or
Jehovah: here first used in Revelation, whence Ellicott infers the Jews
bear a prominent part in this thanksgiving. Jah is
not a contraction of "Jehovah," as it sometimes occurs jointly
with the latter. It means "He who Is": whereas Jehovah is
"He who will be, is, and was." It implies God experienced as a
present help; so that "Hallelujah," says Kimchi in Bengel, is
found first in the Psalms on the destruction of the ungodly.
"Hallelu-Jah" occurs four times in this passage."
(Jamieson, R., Fausset, A. R., Fausset, A. R., Brown, D., & Brown, D)
- In Isaiah 12:2 and Isaiah 26:4 both Jah and YHWH are used
beside each other IN THE SAME VERSE. This proves that Jah is not a simple
abbreviated/shorted form of YHWH.
"Behold, God is my salvation, I will trust and not be afraid; For the
LORD [Jah YHWH], GOD is my strength and song, And He has become my
salvation." Isaiah 12:2
"Trust in the LORD forever, For in GOD [Jah] the LORD [YHWH], we have
an everlasting Rock." Isaiah 26:4
- Those who use Rev 19:1 as an example of the divine name
are left stumbling when they learn the following: It is Jah not YHWH and
the Holy Spirit doesn't shorten psalm 146:1, but He quotes it Jah for Jah,
not Jah for YHWH.
- Hallelujah is used in these passages: Ps 104:35; 105:45;
106:1, 48; 112:1; 113:1, 9; 115:18; 116:19; 117:2; 135:1, 3, 21. These
Psalms begin and end with Hallelujah: Ps. 146:1, 10; 147:1, 20; 148:1, 14;
149:1, 9; 150:1, 6.
- To summarize. The Holy Spirit used Hallelujah some 30
times in the Old Testament and Hallelujah is used only 4 times in New
Testament. The word Jah, which is one of the conjunctive components of
Hallelujah, is used twice beside YHWH (Jah
- Some argue that there are many shortened forms of YHWH is
seen in the various Old Testament names of God's people like Yah, Yahu,
Y'ho, and Yo. Suggested examples are: Isaiah (Heb. Yesha`yahu), Joel
(Hebrew Yo'el), Joshua (Hebrew Y'hoshua`), and Abijah (Hebrew Aviyyah). It
is suggested that these names each use a shortened form of YHWH. Isaiah
uses Yahu, Joel uses Yo, Y'hoshua uses Y'ho, and Abijah uses Yah. They are
all shortened forms of YHWH. The problem is exposed with Joshua. Ex 6:3
clearly says that Moses was the first one to hear YHWH. Yet, Joshua, who
was 20 years old before he ever met Moses was supposedly named after YHWH?
There is no record of his name being changed when he met Moses. Even
Moses' mother was named "Jochebed" which is a compound word that
some suggest derive from YHWH and glory: "Jehovah of Glory". All
this before anyone on the planet had ever heard of God's name given to the
Jews through Moses: YHWH at the burning bush when he was 80 years old. So
down goes that theory! Of course, some suggest that since the Jews
developed that annoying and anti-biblical tradition of not pronouncing the
name of God, that this explains why the name was not used in the NT. So
supposedly the Jews would name their kids after YHWH, "God's personal
name", but never refer to God Himself as Jehovah. I can just hear it:
"Now Jehovah, come home right after school, we have a soccer game and
you know G-D tells you to obey your parents!"
- All this is just silly and useless speculation. The Holy
Spirit is the one who chose to never use YHWH in the New Testament. The
suggestion that the Holy Spirit bowed to some anti-Biblical tradition of
not using the divine name is just not worth consideration to serious Bible
VII. Hebrew original of the
gospel of Matthew is a myth
reject that Matthew was originally written in Hebrew: click here.
- The best and only argument JW's can come up with for
inserting Jehovah into the New Testament is that the gospel of Matthew,
unlike the other 26 books of the New Testament, was written in Hebrew.
- Even if Matthew was written originally in Hebrew, it would
still mean Jehovah's Witnesses change the other 26 New Testament books
that were originally written in Greek. But with brazen deception they
think if the Holy Spirit wrote one NT book in Hebrew that contained YHWH,
this justifies changing the Holy Spirit's choice of not using YHWH, but
LORD, in the other 26 books.
- But the most important fact to note, is that Jehovah's
Witnesses admit that the other 26 books of the New Testament were written
in Greek where the Hebrew "YHWH" would not be used. It is one
thing to falsely argue that Matthew was written in Hebrew, then later
corrupted when translated into Greek by removing YHWH, but quite another
to explain why YHWH is never found in the other 26 New Testament books.
You see, Jehovah's Witnesses believe the entire New Testament has been
- Anyone who has studied the writings of the "Apostolic
Fathers" knows that they are quite unreliable. It is most likely that
they thought a Hebrew translation of the original Greek text of Matthew
into Hebrew was the original. They were mistaken.
- It is also possible that Matthew produced both a Hebrew and
a Greek Original, except for the fact that we have no textual manuscript
evidence in the way of ancient fragments to support a Hebrew original of
Matthew. The fact remains that there is absolutely no evidence of a Hebrew
- There has never been found any copies of a Hebrew Matthew,
all were written in Greek, just like the other 26 books.
- In fact of the 5000 oldest
manuscripts of the Bible NONE use YHWH in the New Testament. So
JW's are found to be liars.
- JW's argue that the text of the Bible as we have it is
corrupted and that it did originally contain YHWH, at least in Matthew,
but it was removed. This is entirely different than saying Bible's
mistranslate the Greek underneath, because in this case, it is missing
from the Greek.
- If JWs can argue that YHWH was lost from the original,
then Christians can argue the word "trinity" was originally used
in the Bible, but lost. When JW's argue that Trinity is never used in the
Bible, we can equally argue that YHWH was never used in the New Testament.
Of course this kind of simple logic is too much for the average JW to
comprehend and they will argue in one breath that YHWH was lost from the
Greek, then in the other breath say it is adding to the word of God if
someone insists the word trinity is found in the Bible. (note: Trinity was
never used in the Bible, but the argument is used for hypothetical reasons
only. Go to our trinity in the
Bible section for more details.)
- Isn't that convenient! They say that YHWH was originally
in the Bible, but it was removed... but we have no evidence it was
removed. They say Matthew was written in Hebrew... but there is no
evidence it was written in Hebrew.
VIII. Statements by the
"Church Fathers" do not prove a Hebrew Matthew:
Anyone who has studied the writings of the "Apostolic Fathers"
knows that they are quite unreliable. It is most likely that they thought a
Hebrew translation of the original Greek text of Matthew into Hebrew was the
original. They were mistaken. It is also possible that Matthew produced both a
Hebrew and a Greek Original, except for the fact that we have no textual
manuscript evidence in the way of ancient fragments to support a Hebrew
original of Matthew.
reject that the early church fathers provide evidence of a Hebrew original of
Matthew: click here.
- Papias (150-170 C.E.) Matthew composed the words in the
Hebrew dialect, and each translated as he was able. (quoted by Eusebius
Eccl. Hist. 3:39. Remember, this was quoted by
Eusebius in 315 AD, 175 years after Papias died.)
- Ireneus (170 C.E.) Matthew also issued a written Gospel
among the Hebrews in their own dialect. (Irenaeus; Against Heresies 3:1)
- Origen (c. 210 C.E.) The first [Gospel] is written
according to Matthew, the same that was once a tax collector, but
afterwards an emissary of Yeshua the Messiah, who having published it for
the Jewish believers, wrote it in Hebrew. (quoted by Eusebius; Eccl. Hist.
6:25 Remember, this was quoted by Eusebius in 315
AD, 100 years after Origen died.)
- Eusebius (c. 315 C.E.) Matthew also, having first
proclaimed the Gospel in Hebrew, when on the point of going also to the
other nations, committed it to writing in his native tongue, and thus
supplied the want of his presence to them by his writings. (Eusebius;
Eccl. Hist. 3:24)
- Pantaenus... penetrated as far as India, where it is
reported that he found the Gospel according to Matthew, which had been
delivered before his arrival to some who had the knowledge of Messiah, to
whom Bartholomew, one of the emissaries, as it is said, had proclaimed,
and left them the writing of Matthew in Hebrew letters. (Eusebius; Eccl.
- Epiphanius (370 C.E.) They [the Nazarenes] have the Gospel
according to Matthew quite complete in Hebrew, for this Gospel is
certainly still preserved among them as it was first written, in Hebrew
letters. (Epiphanius; Panarion 29:9:4)
- Jerome (382 C.E.) "Matthew, who is also Levi, and
from a tax collector came to be an emissary first of all evangelists
composed a Gospel of Messiah in Judea in the Hebrew language and letters,
for the benefit of those of the circumcision who had believed, who translated
it into Greek is not sufficiently ascertained. Furthermore, the Hebrew
itself is preserved to this day in the library at Caesarea, which the
martyr Pamphilus so diligently collected. I also was allowed by the
Nazarenes who use this volume in the Syrian city of Borea to copy it. In
which is to be remarked that, wherever the evangelist... makes use of the
testimonies of the Old Scripture, he does not follow the authority of the
seventy translators [the Greek Septuagint], but that of the Hebrew."
(Lives of Illustrious Men 3)
- "Pantaenus found that Bartholomew, one of the twelve
emissaries, had there [India] preached the advent of our Lord Yeshua the
Messiah according to the Gospel of Matthew, which was written in Hebrew
letters, and which, on returning to Alexandria, he brought with him."
(De Vir. 3:36)
- Isho'dad (850 C.E.) His [Matthew's] book was in existence
in Caesarea of Palestine, and everyone acknowledges that he wrote it with
his hands in Hebrew...(Isho'dad Commentary on the Gospels)
- Other "church fathers" have testified to the
Semitic origin of at least one of Paul's epistles. These "church
fathers" claim that Paul's Epistle to the Hebrews was translated into
Greek from a Hebrew original, as the following quotes demonstrate: Clement
of Alexandria (150 - 212 C.E.) In the work called Hypotyposes, to sum up
the matter briefly he [Clement of Alexandria] has given us abridged
accounts of all the canonical Scriptures,... the Epistle to the Hebrews he
asserts was written by Paul, to the Hebrews, in the Hebrew tongue; but
that it was carefully translated by Luke, and published among the Greeks.
(Clement of Alexandria; Hypotyposes; referred to by Eusebius in Eccl.
- Eusebius (315 C.E.) For as Paul had addressed the Hebrews
in the language of his country; some say that the evangelist Luke, others
that Clement, translated the epistle. (Eusebius; Eccl. Hist. 3:38:2-3)
- Jerome (382) "He (Paul) being a Hebrew wrote in
Hebrew, that is, his own tongue and most fluently while things which were
eloquently written in Hebrew were more eloquently turned into Greek (Lives
of Illustrious Men, Book 5)
IV. Scholars reject a Hebrew
original of Matthew:
reject that Matthew was originally written in Hebrew: click here.
- The only scholars today that maintain a Hebrew Original of
Matthew instead of a Greek original, are Bible Skeptics and Bible
trashers. By this we mean, these men believe in the "Q Document"
theory where each of the four gospel writers copied from each other and
this Phantom "Q Document" for which there is no evidence of its
- The apostolic fathers who make reference to a Hebrew
Matthew are simply not reliable witnesses as any one knows who has studied
these uninspired writings.
- Any early reference to a Hebrew Matthew my in fact be a
Hebrew translation of the original Greek text of Matthew into Hebrew.
- Professor George Howard: The Jehovah's Witnesses only
scholar is quoted profusely as evidence of a Hebrew Original of Matthew.
What JW's won't tell you is that George Howard is almost alone in the
world today in his views which have been universally rejected because they
are based upon speculation and guesses and no solid proof. Howard's theory
has never found any support in any New Testament manuscript. Howard and
JW's must both claim that the New Testament has been lost altered and
corrupted as you will notice below.
- Here is how Jehovah's Witnesses quote Howard:
"Thus, Professor George
Howard, of the University of Georgia, U.S.A., made this comment: "When the
Septuagint which the New Testament church used and quoted contained the Hebrew
form of the divine name, the New Testament writers no doubt included the
Tetragrammaton in their quotations." (Biblical Archaeology Review, March
1978, page 14)" (The Divine Name That Will Endure Forever, God's
Name and the "New Testament", Watchtower publication, Jehovah's
"The same thing occurred in the "New
Testament," or Christian Greek Scriptures. Professor George Howard goes on
to say: "When the Hebrew form for the divine name was eliminated in favor
of Greek substitutes in the Septuagint, it was eliminated also from the New
Testament quotations of the Septuagint. ... Before long the divine name was
lost to the Gentile church except insofar as it was reflected in the contracted
surrogates or remembered by scholars." (The Divine Name That Will Endure
Forever, God's Name and the "New Testament", Watchtower publication,
Jehovah's Witnesses, 2001)
X. When Jews translated the
Hebrew Old Testament in 250 BC, (the Septuagint, LXX) they did not retain YHWH
in the Greek translation but changed the word to LORD [gr: kurios].
- If there was a Hebrew original of Matthew (something we
deny) and the Christians did not retain the name of God in the Greek
translation, this could only be because they did not think it was
important to do so.
- It is self-defeating for Jehovah's Witnesses to attempt to
prove the Septuagint originally contained YHWH in Hebrew embedded in Greek
translated text of the Old Testament, by producing photographs of ancient
fragments of the Septuagint that contain YHWH, because they cannot produce
any producing photographs of ancient fragments of the New Testament that
contain YHWH. All 5,000 manuscripts and fragments of the New Testament use
LORD [kurios] not YHWH. So it matters not if some Jews inserted YHWH into
the Greek LXX.
- It might come as a shock to Jehovah's Witnesses that Jesus
quoted often from the Septuagint (LXX) and so did the writers of the New
"Probably around the beginning of the second century
C.E. an influential edition of the Hebrew Bible was published that eventually
became the textus receptus of rabbinical Judaism and very successfully replaced
competing editions. At the same time, rules and regulations were developed on
how to deal with scribal errors concerning the name of God. This standard edition of the Hebrew Bible was then translated
into Greek, resulting in the editions of Aquila, Theodotion, and Symmachus.
Unlike their Christian colleagues, however, these Greek editors did not
translate the tetragram; instead, they retained the Hebrew letters, thus
demonstrating that they regarded the tetragram as an essential editorial
element of the Hebrew original." (The first edition of the New
Testament, David Trobisch, p 15, 2000)
XI. Hebrew manuscripts that use
YHWH were translated from Greek!
- JWs are deliberately confused by the watchtower
organization into thinking we have Hebrew originals of the New Testament
where YHWH (or some form of the Tetragrammaton) is used.
- What they don't tell you is that these medieval
translations date later than 1000 AD and were actually translated from
- The average Jehovah's Witness is simply too poorly
equipped to see the utter deception being played upon them by the
Watchtower organization and just accept we actually have Hebrew
manuscripts of New Testament books.
XII. JW's, like Mormons, think
the Bible is corrupted!
- Jehovah's Witnesses believe the New Testament has been so
badly corrupted, that YHWH was actually removed by copyists. Of course,
there is no evidence of this and the charge is false. But don't take our
word for it, listen to the Watchtower organization yourself in their
famed, "Aid to Bible Understanding"
"Why, then, is the name absent
from the extant manuscripts of the Christian Greek Scriptures or the so called
'New Testament'? Evidently because by the time those extant copies were made
(from the third century C.E. onward) the original text
of the writings of the apostles and disciples had been altered. The divine
name in the Tetragrammaton form was undoubtedly
replaced with 'Kyrios' and 'Ho Theos' by later copyists." (Aid to
Bible Understanding" p. 887, 1971)
"However, Jesus and his
followers had prophesied that an apostasy would occur in the Christian
congregation. The apostle Peter had written: "There will also be false
teachers among you." These warnings were fulfilled. One result was that God's
name was pushed into the background. It even got removed from copies and
translations of the Bible! (The Divine Name That Will Endure Forever,
Watchtower publication, Jehovah's Witnesses, 2001, p16)
- Jehovah's Witnesses argue for the divine name in the New
Testament based upon wishful thinking, driven by false doctrine and call
into question the reliability of the text of the New Testament. After all,
if the divine name was removed but we have no evidence of this.... what
else was also removed that we have no evidence of?
- A rather stunning observation Jehovah's Witnesses have
simply missed, is that while they argue YHWH was removed from the New
Testament, and we have no evidence of its use, the oldest Hebrew version
of the Old Testament retains YHWH in all 7000 places. So the actual
manuscript evidence for the divine name YHWH used in the Old Testament is
100% intact, but 100% corrupted for the New Testament. If such a
conspiracy really existed to remove YHWH from the Bible, why would they
only remove it from the New Testament manuscripts and not the Old? The
answer is because Jehovah's Witnesses are false apostate teachers who
trust the manuscripts of their Watchtower magazine more than the
manuscripts of the Bible.
- So in the end the Watchtower proves itself to love its own
agenda of false doctrine so much, that it will question the accuracy of
the original Greek manuscripts of the Bible before it will question
- So Jehovah's Witnesses are prepared to teach the Bible is
corrupted, rather than change their doctrine!
XIII. The Holy Spirit replaced
YHWH with LORD:
- Even in the Old Testament, the Holy Spirit substituted the
word "God" in place of YHWH. Look for the substitution by
comparing Ps 14:2,4,6,7 and Ps 53:2,4,5,6.
- Lets summarize: We know that YHWH was used many times in
the Old Testament. We know that no known New Testament manuscript (over
5000) uses YHWH.
- Jehovah's Witnesses agree that the other 26 books of the
New Testament, apart from Matthew, were written in Greek.
- So focussing on these 26 books written in Greek, we notice
that most of these books quote passages from the Hebrew Old Testament that
contain the Tetragrammaton (YHWH). Yet the Holy Spirit chose to replace
YHWH with LORD (Greek: kyrios) in the New Testament.
- YHWH reads the same in Hebrew and Greek, yet God DID NOT
WANT to use it in the New Testament.
- This is because YHWH was replaced by the name JESUS as per
- So the practice of the New American Standard Bible
replacing YHWH, has divine precedent!
XIV. Removing YHWH from the NT
is not meaningless & confusing, as JW's charge:
- Look at this outrageous statement made by Jehovah's
Witnesses in their foremost booklet on the subject:
Jehovah's Witnesses write: "The LORD"—Equivalent of "Jehovah"? "To
remove God's distinctive personal name from the Bible and substitute a title
such as "Lord" or "God"" ... "makes the text weak
and inadequate" ... "it can lead to meaningless combinations of words"
['The Lord is God' vs. 'Yahweh is God'] ... "can
also lead to awkward phrases." Psalm 8:9 [O LORD our Lord vs.
Jehovah, our Lord] ... "can also lead to
confusion." Psalm 110:1 [THE LORD said unto my Lord vs. Jehovah
said unto my Lord] (The Divine Name That Will Endure Forever, The
LORD"—Equivalent of "Jehovah, Watchtower publication, Jehovah's
- Jehovah's Witnesses really place themselves in a difficult
position. They must either accuse God of using "meaningless combinations and awkward phrases that lead
to confusion" in the New Testament (see Acts 2:34) or trash
the manuscript reliability of the Bible as corrupted. Of course option
three is they realize they are entirely wrong about their watchtower
theology regarding YHWH.
- The fact remains that these expressions are "meaningless combinations and awkward phrases that lead
to confusion" only in the mind of JW's. We find absolutely
nothing wrong with them.
XV Abbreviated words in the
earliest manuscripts: "nomina sacra" give no proof of YHWH in the
Jehovah's Witnesses actually argue that the words "God" and
"Lord" are abbreviated in the earliest manuscripts of the Greek New
Testament prove that YHWH was once there, but it was removed.
- Metzger (Text of the New Testament) mentions as included
among those that were written in abbreviated form the Greek words for the
following: Jesus, Christ, Son,
God, Lord, Spirit, Savior, David, Cross,
Mother, Father, Israel, Man, Jerusalem, Heaven.
- The actual form was like this: Instead of writing
"Jesus" they would write: "J-s", where the dash was
above, rather than as we have shown it in the middle.
- It was an abbreviation, not a substitution or replacement
of one word for another.
- The Jehovah's Witness argument, therefore is invalid,
because there is no substitution, but merely abbreviation.
XVI Questions for Jehovah's
Witnesses to answer:
- How can "Jehovah" be the name of God since
neither Hebrew, Greek, Latin don't even have a letter "J" and
English did not have the letter J before about 1500 AD?
- Why would Matthew compose a Hebrew gospel when the mass
population could not even speak or read Hebrew in the first century?
Aramaic and Greek were the predominant languages. Spoken and written Hebrew
went extinct about 200 AD.
- If the name Jehovah is so important, then why is it never
used in the entire Greek New Testament? If men edited out the name of God,
"YHWH" when they copied the New Testament, as only the
Watchtower organization claims, then how can we have any confidence in any
of the New Testament? Should we discard the New Testament or the
Watchtower organization as unreliable?
- Lets accept, for the sake of argument, that Matthew was
written originally in Hebrew. (It was not written in Hebrew but Greek, but
this is for argument's sake only.) How does a Hebrew original Matthew
justify your "adding to and changing the word of God" in the
other 26 New Testament books that were originally written in Greek where
there is no evidence YHWH was ever used?
- If the name "Jehovah" is so important, then why
does Acts 4:12 say, "There is salvation in no one else; for there is
no other name [v10 Jesus Christ] under heaven that has been given among
men, by which we must be saved"? Would this not have been the logical
place for God to have used the name "YHWH"?
- What is the correct spelling of God's proper name
"Yahweh" or "Jehovah"? If Jehovah's Witnesses maintain
that "Yahweh" is more proper, why do they misspell it
"Jehovah"? If the name of God is so important, then should you
not only pronounce it correctly, but spell it correctly too? Is not
spelling more important than pronunciation?
- The NWT translates the Greek word "kyrios" as
"Jehovah" more than 25 times in the New Testament (Mt 3:3, Lk
2:9, Jn 1:23, Acts 21:14, Rom 12:19, Col 1:10, 1Thess 5:2, 1Pet 1:25, Rev
4:8, etc.). Why is the word "Jehovah" translated when it does
not appear in the Greek text? Why is the NWT not consistent in translating
kyrios (kurion) as "Jehovah" in Rom 10:9, 1Cor 12:3, Phil 2:11,
2Thess 2:1, and Rev 22:21 (see Gr-Engl Interlinear)?
- In Lk 4:12, the NWT translates "kyrios"
(Gr-lord) as "Jehovah", which makes the verse read "...
'You shall not put Jehovah your God to the test.'" See Gr-Engl
Interlinear. Why is kyrios translated as "Jehovah" in this
verse? Was the devil, in Lk 4:9-11, putting Jehovah to the test or JESUS
to the test?
- In Phil 2:9, the NWT inserts the word "other",
even though it doesn't appear in the original Greek (see Gr-Engl
Interlinear). What is the reason for inserting this word? Is the word
"Jehovah" a name? See Ex 6:3, Ps 83:18, and Isa 42:8. How would
the verse read if the word "other" had not been inserted? What
does scripture say about adding words to the Bible? See Prov 30:5-6.
- Why are you called, "Jehovah's Witnesses" and
not "Christians"? Since Jehovah's Witnesses appeal to Isa 43:12;
44:8 for scriptural support that they should be called, "Jehovah's
Witnesses" then what was the "new name" prophesied in Isa
62:2? Can't be "Jehovah's Witnesses", for God already used it 20
chapters earlier. Could the new name be "Christian" after our
- Why would the name God gave to His people not be
"Christians" since Acts 11:26 says, "The disciples were
first called Christians in Antioch"? Why is the name "Jehovah's
Witness" found nowhere in the New Testament, if that is God's divine
name for His people under the new covenant? Why would God wait almost 2000
years to suddenly start using the name "Jehovah's Witness". Does
this mean that first century Christians were not known as Jehovah's
- While Jehovah's Witnesses charge that Bibles remove the
divine name this is false. These Bible's do not remove the divine name,
they substitute LORD (all caps) to signify YHWH. As we have seen, these
Bibles actually follow the divine example in substituting LORD for YHWH.
- The New World translation actually changes, alters and
adds to the text of the New Testament by adding JEHOVAH where it was never
found in the Greek originals.
- Hence Jehovah's Witnesses will have the plagues of
Revelation added to them because they added to the word of God.
- To justify this addition, Jehovah's Witnesses are taught
that the Bible is lost altered and corrupted so badly, that YHWH was
removed from the New Testament by men.
- Jehovah's Witnesses are therefore a dangerous cult and
stand beside Mormons in teaching that the Bible is corrupted and
By Steve Rudd
Call my direct hotline at: 905-575-4564