Keep boycotting some of my points.

JMAN05:
You imply that the material I presented is no good testimony compared to the 5000 manuscript that omit the name.

The question is, since the xtian copyist removed the name in the septuagint do you view those manuscripts as a good proof that the name was never there?

Again, you and I agree that when Jesus read the OT, he didn't skip the name. But do you know that these manuscripts didn't even include the divine name in this place?

Don't u still get the point that something happened?

You talked about A BOOK in that POST you NOT SEPTUAGINT, go back to see how you keep throwing yourself off.

No, just live with it. U can research it.

Mtcheeeee

You don't get the point, do u?

Oga, [s]we agree he used the name while reading the law,[/s] and that he didn't stick to pharisaic tradition. Yet, the manuscripts we have never showed the name in these places. [size=14pt]It shows that even when Jesus used the name in another place, the copyists will remove it.[/size] Get d point bro. They did the same thing in the septuagint.

Note that it was not only in the septuagint that the removed it. The same happened in other manuscripts of the OT copied by 'christians'.

Since they removed it and the work of JWs is to REINSTALL the name where ever the scribes removed it, WHY IS THERE NO PLACE IN THE NWT where Jesus used it apart from the allege quotation from the OT or the scribes have removed it from NWT too?

The name you gave is not specific, but if the manuscript you are talking about is the one mentioned in the All Scripture Book, then it is Rylands 457.

So, how is did you date this manuscript to the first century AD?

Ask google...

Explain:

"I'm still wondering how Jehovah Witness got the pronunciation and rendering of Jehovah in YORUBA language.

In fact your organization has erroneously teach that Jehovah is an English word for the Divine name"

If I say you you're confusing things you will take it in another way. Remember you've swept these statements under carpet as if you didn't see it.

You're talking about Paul writing letters to the Greek, which I counter that something written in GREEK AND HEBREW won't be pronounced the same way.

This reinforced my point if Jehovah is pronounced in Hebrew, the pronunciation in Greek will be different also in YORUBA it will be different and this is difference from when I asked whether Jesus USED THE ACTUAL PRONUNCIATION at the synagogue which will leads to more accusation on Him by the Pharisees but swept under carpet by you.

If you ve never argued pronunciation, what do those comments mean?

Different pronunciation in different Languages is what you confused with whether Jesus used the actual pronunciation.

sorry, just carry that one go standard debate. humility will help u know more.

And still ranting as usual POST THE HEBREW & GREEK WORDS for JESUS simple, and let the humility starts helping me here!

So which characters of the divine name appeared in the septaugint?

You know!

Above should help us ask this xtian copyist that question. From above, [size=14pt]you will agree that they removed it wherever the name appeared.[/size] So we cant exactly know where. Sticking to where Jesus/others made quotations is a nice decision. dont you think so?

@bold-Since NWT has restored the Divine name where the scribes accused of removing it, why we didn't find A SINGLE PLACE IN THE NWT where Jesus addressed the Father? You once asked people like Abraham, David e.t.c used it why Jesus is exception? But when these people used it do they quote someone's work or addressed God directly with it?

Pardon sir, i dont get you:

"NWT used Jehovah 237 places in the NT whereas when [size=15]we[/size] check it ONLY 76 times is Jehovah included based on a direct Hebrew quote...so where did the remain INSERTION come from?"

You just pointed out that 237 times was a claim by the NWT, but you didnt explain what you are convinced you've found out.

SMH @underline for you sha.... let me come down to your level this time...on your own @BOLD it read when WE check IT (NWT) 76 times is Jehovah included based on a direct Hebrew quote (according to NWT claim)....so where did the remain INSERTION come from?" BUT according to NWT.

Do you understand now?

Thats simple logic. [s]you agree Jesus didnt skip the name while reading the Law.[/s] You are right, will he then skip it while making quotations in his day to day conversations?

Back to my early question, you agree Jesus used the actual pronunciation why did the actual pronunciation lost again because for Jesus to use the pronunciation it means Jesus has restored the long time lost pronunciation due to restriction.

The IT-2 p. 10 said:

"...Thus later copyists undoubtedly replaced the divine name in Tetragrammaton form with Ky′ri·os and The·os′"

This shows the our organisation knows that the name was removed. That being the case, your deductions were made out of context of that All Scripture Book.

What is the full meaning of IT?

Which one was first produced the one your organization praised the apostate Christian for doing a good job by removing God's name or the one you just quoted?

Where did you see this your first century?

Where did you see FIRST CENTURY in that post?

I know you're confused them together again, don't worry if you answer the question I will show you again.

Where is this first century manuscript?

Google is your friend.

He obviously did so, but it was removed. see above. They did it in sinaticus, even vatican 1207 in the OT parts. will the gospels be an exception for them?

YET no where it was RECORDED IN THE NWT (despite the restoration of the name) that Jesus addressed the Father with that name, who remove it in the NWT again?

I asked again who are these apostate Christians who removed the name are they Jews or Greek?

CANTICLES:
Well done bro , just some few minutes ago I came across a thread where a female atheist gave emusan a bible lecture .
Check this thread on pages 4 and 5 https://www.nairaland.com/2392515/did-anyone-ascend-into-heaven/5

JMAN05:
Honestly, the lady taught him. And he doesnt learn to be civil so that the shame wont be much when disproved. He keeps making noise.

Birds of the same feather flock together...like organization like followers!

On the same thread page 4 I said this, so no surprise at all. If your organization can do it, who are you not to follow suit?

You don't know JWs before

When their own Watchtower can discredit a whole one time respected Christian 'Justin Martyr' just because Justin Martyr preached that Jesus died on the CROSS not on the STAKE as they wrongly teach.

But in their one time booklet which was blindly distributed before they realized ALL THE LIES they put inside and quickly removed it their ONLINE library titled Should you believe in Trinity? in the booklet, OVER 5 BIBLE THRASHERS WERE quoted because those people spoke against Trinity BUT THEY FAILED TO TELL THEIR AUDIENCE that not do these people only speak against Trinity BUT THE BIBLE AS A WHOLE.

The person you HONEST about her post did not only thrash me BUT THE WHOLE BIBLE AND JEHOVAH HIMSELF.

JMAN05:
The emphasis I make on the septuagint is because, [size=14pt]that is likely what the apostles and even Jesus used.[/size] Not meaning that they didnt use any Hebrew scroll. [size=14pt]There were other manuscripts of the OT that they removed the name from.[/size]

We're going there;
@bold1-So you don't have the evidence that it was Septuagint that Jesus actually read in His own time.

@bold2-but your organization said IT WAS ONLY AFTER JESUS that the name started missing from the Hebrew scriptures.

I didnt say forged. They removed the name of God where it occurred.

And who remove where Jesus addressed the Father with the divine name from NWT that said to have restored it?

Am yet to see that first century manuscript. Second century? Yes. But the manuscript I mentioned above said nothing about God's name.

Were those over 5000 manuscripts reliable?
If God's name was removed without trace OVER 5000 Greek ONLY TEXT in possession without the ORIGINAL TO COMPARE WITH THEM how are will sure that it was ONLY the DIVINE NAME that was removed?

This means that many things that are not from God might have been inserted and many things from God might have been removed since these scribes are NOT TRULY JEHOVAH FAITHFUL SERVANT-apostate Christians (according to you)

Remove 'forged' above. [size=14pt]The name may have been removed cos they cant understand the name anymore.[/size] Since Moses, Abraham, Joshua, Solomon, Isaiah etc used the name, [size=14pt]do you think we shouldnt use it?[/size] and can we not include the name even when NT characters quote a scripture where the name appeared? This NWT did.

Just see how ridiculous the bold parts sound, @bold1-the name may have been removed cos THEY CAN'T UNDERSTAND THE NAME ANYMORE and you go on to the @bold 2 to ask do you think we SHOULDN'T USE IT? So you people are now the one who UNDERSTAND THE NAME that's why you can use but the people who are more closed to that time CAN'T, right

Since the ancient prophets of God used the name, there is no point to the tradition of not pronouncing the name. As such, Jesus used it. unless you believe he agreed with the pharisees.

And these ancient prophets who used it, do they quote someone else ONLY about the name or address God directly by the name?

Why Jesus didn't address the Father with the name for once?

[size=14pt]People's familiarity has always been the norm, not the correct pronunciation.[/size] For example, do you know how many names we pronounce/render a way different from how they are in the original?

Did this people's familiarity predated Jesus' time or after Jesus?

So if correct pronunciation has not been the norm, why do you argue that Jesus didn't follow the tradition of the pharisees BUT RATHER USED THE ACTUAL PRONUNCIATION?

This show that you're speaking from both side of your mouth.

Very funny Jesus didn't go with the tradition of men but used the actual pronunciation but the self acclaimed God's mouth piece can go with PEOPLE'S FAMILIARITY rather than go with the MORE CORRECT one.

Emusan:
Keep boycotting some of my points.



You talked about A BOOK in that POST you NOT SEPTUAGINT, go back to see how you keep throwing yourself off.



Mtcheeeee



Since they removed it and the work of JWs is to REINSTALL the name where ever the scribes removed it, WHY IS THERE NO PLACE IN THE NWT where Jesus used it apart from the allege quotation from the OT or the scribes have removed it from NWT too?



Ask google...




If I say you you're confusing things you will take it in another way. Remember you've swept these statements under carpet as if you didn't see it.

You're talking about Paul writing letters to the Greek, which I counter that something written in GREEK AND HEBREW won't be pronounced the same way.

This reinforced my point if Jehovah is pronounced in Hebrew, the pronunciation in Greek will be different also in YORUBA it will be different and this is difference from when I asked whether Jesus USED THE ACTUAL PRONUNCIATION at the synagogue which will leads to more accusation on Him by the Pharisees but swept under carpet by you.



Different pronunciation in different Languages is what you confused with whether Jesus used the actual pronunciation.



And still ranting as usual POST THE HEBREW & GREEK WORDS for JESUS simple, and let the humility starts helping me here!



You know!



@bold-Since NWT has restored the Divine name where the scribes accused of removing it, why we didn't find A SINGLE PLACE IN THE NWT where Jesus addressed the Father? You once asked people like Abraham, David e.t.c used it why Jesus is exception? But when these people used it do they quote someone's work or addressed God directly with it?



SMH @underline for you sha.... let me come down to your level this time...on your own @BOLD it read when WE check IT (NWT) 76 times is Jehovah included based on a direct Hebrew quote (according to NWT claim)....so where did the remain INSERTION come from?" BUT according to NWT.

Do you understand now?



Back to my early question, you agree Jesus used the actual pronunciation why did the actual pronunciation lost again because for Jesus to use the pronunciation it means Jesus has restored the long time lost pronunciation due to restriction.



What is the full meaning of IT?

Which one was first produced the one your organization praised the apostate Christian for doing a good job by removing God's name or the one you just quoted?



Where did you see FIRST CENTURY in that post?

I know you're confused them together again, don't worry if you answer the question I will show you again.



Google is your friend.



YET no where it was RECORDED IN THE NWT (despite the restoration of the name) that Jesus addressed the Father with that name, who remove it in the NWT again?

I asked again who are these apostate Christians who removed the name are they Jews or Greek?

Oga, those comments you cancelled are essential. I demand answers to them before I reply:

Do you still agree that Jesus read the divine name when he read the prophets?

Where did you find the first century manuscript you spoke of?

Why do you keep rejecting the FIRST CENTURY MANUSCRIPTS evidence in possession today that the Divine name was not used?

Again

Why do you keep rejecting the FIRST CENTURY MANUSCRIPTS evidence in possession today that the Divine name was not used?

Wiki

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rylands_Library_Papyrus_P52

So, where did you get what you said?

Which language characters of Gods name appeared in the scriptures used by Jesus?

Give simple answer not a Talmud to fill the thread.

Time and energy you guys are using for all this arguments can be turned money, sorry I am just viewing

Emusan:


We're going there;
@bold1-So you don't have the evidence that it was Septuagint that Jesus actually read in His own time.

@bold2-but your organization said IT WAS ONLY AFTER JESUS that the name started missing from the Hebrew scriptures.



And who remove where Jesus addressed the Father with the divine name from NWT that said to have restored it?



Were those over 5000 manuscripts reliable?
If God's name was removed without trace OVER 5000 Greek ONLY TEXT in possession without the ORIGINAL TO COMPARE WITH THEM how are will sure that it was ONLY the DIVINE NAME that was removed?

This means that many things that are not from God might have been inserted and many things from God might have been removed since these scribes are NOT TRULY JEHOVAH FAITHFUL SERVANT-apostate Christians (according to you)



Just see how ridiculous the bold parts sound, @bold1-the name may have been removed cos THEY CAN'T UNDERSTAND THE NAME ANYMORE and you go on to the @bold 2 to ask do you think we SHOULDN'T USE IT? So you people are now the one who UNDERSTAND THE NAME that's why you can use but the people who are more closed to that time CAN'T, right



And these ancient prophets who used it, do they quote someone else ONLY about the name or address God directly by the name?

Why Jesus didn't address the Father with the name for once?



Did this people's familiarity predated Jesus' time or after Jesus?

So if correct pronunciation has not been the norm, why do you argue that Jesus didn't follow the tradition of the pharisees BUT RATHER USED THE ACTUAL PRONUNCIATION?

This show that you're speaking from both side of your mouth.

Very funny Jesus didn't go with the tradition of men but used the actual pronunciation but the self acclaimed God's mouth piece can go with PEOPLE'S FAMILIARITY rather than go with the MORE CORRECT one.

Oga, we have a discussion already above. Go and face it. Don't gather many discussion for ursef lest u die on Nairaland.

But why do u sound like a wounded lion? Take it slow OK.

JMAN05:
Oga, those comments you cancelled are essential. I demand answers to them before I reply:

How many comments did I cancel?

I only cancelled the TWO statements I've already settled...now you're using this as an excuse to BOYCOTT the rest of the points I raised.

Do you still agree that Jesus read the divine name when he read the prophets?

Answered!!!

Where did you find the first century manuscript you spoke of?

Why do you keep rejecting the FIRST CENTURY MANUSCRIPTS evidence in possession today that the Divine name was not used?

Again

Why do you keep rejecting the FIRST CENTURY MANUSCRIPTS evidence in possession today that the Divine name was not used?

Wiki

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rylands_Library_Papyrus_P52

So, where did you get what you said?

Do you even read the link you provided? I guess you did not!

Answer my questions and those ones you boycott.

Which language characters of Gods name appeared in the scriptures used by Jesus?

Which scriptures did Jesus use first?

Give simple answer not a Talmud to fill the thread.

Like you always do.

JMAN05:
Oga, we have a discussion already above. Go and face it. Don't gather many discussion for ursef lest u die on Nairaland.

See excuse everywhere, if I die how does it concern you? Jesus will receive, so to me to live is Christ and to die is gain.

But why do u sound like a wounded lion? Take it slow OK.

Coming from someone with excuses everywhere...

BERNIMOORE:
Time and energy you guys are using for all this arguments can be turned money, sorry I am just viewing

I'm telling you.

Emusan:


How many comments did I cancel?

I only cancelled the TWO statements I've already settled...now you're using this as an excuse to BOYCOTT the rest of the points I raised.



Answered!!!



Do you even read the link you provided? I guess you did not!

Answer my questions and those ones you boycott.



Which scriptures did Jesus use first?



Like you always do.

I mean the scripture Jesus used - Septuagint. Did it occur in Hebrew characters or Greek?

Respond to the manuscript you claimed to have come from the first century AD. Your proof?

JMAN05:
I mean the scripture Jesus used - Septuagint. Did it occur in Hebrew characters or Greek?

Respond to the manuscript you claimed to have come from the first century AD. Your proof?

Firstly, I'll take you more serious only if you can provide answers to my previous questions because it's just too obvious that you're attacking strawman. I NEVER BOYCOTTED ANY OF YOUR QUESTION HERE BUT YOU DO, YET YOU'RE THROWING MORE QUESTIONS WITHOUT ADDRESSING MINE.

Secondly, you said Jesus used Septuagint whereas in your previous post your claim was "that is LIKELY what the apostles and even Jesus used." very funny of you...

About the First Manuscript, you provided a Link and my respond to it was did you even read the link you provided at all?

I asked this because I didn't see how your link refuted my point nor were you be able to provide a tangible quote from it to counter my claim.

Don't worry I know how a typical JWs behaves when s/he is stuck in between refutable facts.

Lastly, any attempt not to address those points I raised earlier but find your way around my post again will not be welcomed but end my reply here and it'll also good for you to bookmark this my post in case of it, so that you won't run your mouth any day that I run away.


*You can post any of your point I didn't address and let me post mine so that people can see and compare.

Emusan:


Firstly, I'll take you more serious only if you can provide answers to my previous questions because it's just too obvious that you're attacking strawman. I NEVER BOYCOTTED ANY OF YOUR QUESTION HERE BUT YOU DO, YET YOU'RE THROWING MORE QUESTIONS WITHOUT ADDRESSING MINE.

Secondly, you said Jesus used Septuagint whereas in your previous post your claim was "that is LIKELY what the apostles and even Jesus used." very funny of you...

About the First Manuscript, you provided a Link and my respond to it was did you even read the link you provided at all?

I asked this because I didn't see how your link refuted my point nor were you be able to provide a tangible quote from it to counter my claim.

Don't worry I know how a typical JWs behaves when s/he is stuck in between refutable facts.

Lastly, any attempt not to address those points I raised earlier but find your way around my post again will not be welcomed but end my reply here and it'll also good for you to bookmark this my post in case of it, so that you won't run your mouth any day that I run away.


*You can post any of your point I didn't address and let me post mine so that people can see and compare.

Where did you see the first century, show us.

Oga tell us whether the characters the name occurred in. This question will dispel your ignorance.

U hijacked a conversation you are not ready to handle.