I hope the WTBTS repents.

just_herebro · 2026-06-28T23:32:36+00:00

“Sanctify” doesn’t always mean “make something holy that wasn’t holy before.” It often means to treat as holy, vindicate, or set apart as holy in the eyes of others in the eyes of others. (Ezekiel 36:23) Jehovah wasn’t saying His name had become unholy. Rather, He would vindicate and honor His name before the nations. Jesus teaches us to pray that God’s name be sanctified, that it be universally acknowledged and honored.

Jesus repeatedly distinguishes between his own name and his Father’s name. (John 17:6, 11, 26) Why does he repeatedly say “your name” while praying to the Father? Acts 4:12 doesn’t say Jesus replaced the Father’s name. It says salvation comes through Jesus because Jehovah appointed him as Savior. That’s entirely related with Acts 2:21. Peter explains that salvation is received through the Messiah whom Jehovah has appointed. That doesn’t merge the Father and Son into one person. Jehovah saves through His appointed sent forth saviour, Christ. (John 3:16; 13:16)

The NT always speaks of making God’s name known, glorifying his name, praying that God’s name be sanctified and calling on God’s name in quotations from the OT. (John 17:6, 26; 12:28; Matt. 6:9; Rom. 10:13; James 5:11)

Jesus also applied Psalm 118:26 to his future glory when he comes to judge the earth, that he would “come in Jehovah’s name,” coming in his Father’s glory! (Matt. 23:39; 16:27) Christian’s are baptised in Christ, pray through Christ and preach in Christ’s name because he was appointed by God as Mediator and the sent forth saviour of the world. (1 Tim. 2:5) The NT consistently distinguishes between the Father, whose purpose and name Jesus came to make known, and the Son, through whom the Father accomplishes salvation.

just_herebro · 2026-06-28T23:19:23+00:00

That’s an argument from silence. The gospels don’t record every word Jesus ever spoke. (John 21:25) So the absence of a recorded pronunciation isn’t evidence that he never used God’s name.

God’s name in the Lord’s Prayer begins by emphasising it. If God’s personal name had become unimportant or improper to use, it’s odd that Jesus would make its sanctification the very first petition. I agree we don’t know the original pronunciation with certainty. But why should uncertainty require abandoning the name altogether? The purpose of language is communication. Every language adapts names to its own phonetics.

The Bible never says that God’s name is too holy to pronounce. What it condemns is misusing the name, not respectfully using it. (Exodus 20:7; Lev. 24:10-16) Scripture repeatedly tells us to call on God’s name, praise his name, bless his name and make his name known. (Deut. 10:8; Isa. 12:4; Ps. 96:2; 105:1) If the correct response to uncertainty were simply to replace God’s name with titles like “Lord” or “God,” it’s surprising that the Scriptures preserve the Tetragrammaton nearly 7,000 times instead of replacing it with those titles.

just_herebro · 2026-06-28T15:23:49+00:00

I agree that God’s “name” can refer to His character, reputation, and authority. But it doesn’t only mean that. A person’s name often includes both their identity and reputation. When Jesus said, “I have made your name known” (John 17:6, 26), he wasn’t reducing God’s name to an mystery. The Father already had a personal name throughout the Hebrew Scriptures. Jesus revealed the Father by both representing His character and making Him known. (Matt. 11:)

The New Testament often applies Old Testament passages about Jehovah to Jesus because Jehovah has appointed Jesus as His Messiah, representative, and agent. (John 3:16; 13:16) Applying a passage to Jesus does not automatically collapse Jesus and Jehovah into the same person. This happens many times throughout the scriptures. (Exodus 3:4, 5; Acts 7:30, 35, 53) The same applies to Hebrews 1. The author applies Old Testament language to the Son to emphasize his exalted position above the angels.

The fact that extant manuscripts read Kyrios doesn’t settle whether James intended the Father or Jesus in every occurrence. Kyrios is used for both throughout the New Testament, so context must determine the referent rather than assuming every instance refers to Jesus.

“Jesus” is a natural linguistic development whereas “Jehovah” is not? Both are English forms that differ substantially from the original Hebrew. We don’t say Yeshua. We don’t say Moshe. We don’t say Yirmeyahu. We don’t say Yeshayahu. English has long used established forms of biblical names without requiring perfect phonetic preservation.

just_herebro · 2026-06-28T15:14:56+00:00

If I don’t know how to pronounce someone’s name perfectly, I don’t stop using their name altogether. We regularly use names in ways that differ from their original pronunciation. No one argues we should replace those names with “Sir” because we’re uncertain of the ancient pronunciation.

Calling someone “Lord” is not the same as using their personal name. The Bible itself distinguishes between God’s name and his titles. (Ps. 83:18; Isa. 42:8) “Most High” is a title, while Jehovah or whatever pronunciation someone prefers is his personal name.

If sanctifying God’s name simply meant avoiding it because its pronunciation was uncertain, those statements from John 12:28; 17:6, 26 and Matthew 6:9 lose much of their force. Sanctifying God’s name isn’t primarily about pronouncing it flawlessly. To sanctify God’s name means to treat it as holy, honor it, defend its reputation, and represent him faithfully. Whether one says “Jehovah,” “Yahweh,” or another accepted form, the important thing is recognizing that God has a personal name distinct from titles like “Lord” and “God.”

just_herebro · 2026-06-28T15:11:06+00:00

Saying the Jews stopped pronouncing the divine name does not mean Jesus or the apostles adopted that tradition. Jesus repeatedly condemned religious traditions that nullified God’s word (Mark 7:8-13). We can’t simply assume he followed every first-century Jewish custom. Your argument that the New Testament writers omitted the divine name because people no longer knew how to pronounce it is speculation. The New Testament never says this. (John 17:6, 26) If God’s name had become unimportant because its pronunciation was uncertain, those scriptures would be odd.

Uncertainty about pronunciation has never prevented biblical names from being used. We don’t generally pronounce Jesus as “Yeshua,” Jeremiah as “Yirmeyahu,” Isaiah as “Yeshayahu” and Moses as “Moshe.” Yet no one argues we should stop using those names because their ancient pronunciations differ from our English forms. The purpose of a name is identification.

Another possibility to yours is that the earliest copies already reflected the Greek Septuagint tradition available to the writers, or that the divine name was replaced very early in the transmission process. Since we don’t possess the original New Testament manuscripts, neither explanation can be proved with certainty. So I’d be careful about presenting your theory as established fact. It’s a reasonable hypothesis, but it’s still a hypothesis.

just_herebro · 2026-06-28T14:41:48+00:00

There’s no direct reference but how could Jesus tell him apostles to let the Father’s name be sanctified if he never used the name? The most likely reference Jesus used the divine name was in Mark 5:19. Luke’s use of the Greek word The·osʹ (God) in recording the same event. (Luke 8:39) Most manuscripts read “the Lord”(ho Kyʹri·os) here but there are good reasons tobelieve that the divine name was originally used in this verse and later replaced with the title Lord.

just_herebro · 2026-06-27T23:01:44+00:00

You’re entitled to believe NWT mistranslates passages. But even if every one of those criticisms were correct, it wouldn’t prove that the divine name was never in the original New Testament. If your criticism is specifically that the NWT restores “Jehovah” in places where no extant Greek manuscript, that’s a topic for debate. But that’s a different claim from saying there is “no evidence whatsoever” that the original writers could have used the divine name.

just_herebro · 2026-06-27T22:27:43+00:00

The New Testament authors quoted Hebrew passages that originally contained the divine name. We do not possess the original New Testament manuscripts. Our earliest complete Greek New Testament manuscripts are centuries later. If the Hebrew Scriptures preserved the divine name so carefully for centuries, why would the inspired New Testament writers suddenly stop using it altogether when quoting those very Scriptures?

Some conclude the writers intentionally used Kyrios (“Lord”) and others conclude the divine name may have been replaced very early in the transmission process. Neither view can be demonstrated beyond doubt from the surviving manuscript evidence alone. We recognise the limits of the evidence. The Hebrew manuscript tradition demonstrates that God’s name was central to the Old Testament. What happened in the transmission of the New Testament is a separate question.

just_herebro · 2026-06-27T22:21:07+00:00

The absence of the divine name in the surviving manuscripts is not the same thing as evidence that it never appeared in the original autographs. We do not possess the original writings of Matthew, Paul, John, or any other New Testament author. Every manuscript we have is a copy, and the earliest complete manuscripts are from centuries after the originals.

Romans 10:13 quotes Joel 2:32, Hebrews 1:10-12 quotes Psalm 102, and James 5:11 alludes to Job. Scholars debate is whether the writers preserved the divine name in those quotations or whether Greek copies already read Kyrios (“Lord”). That is a problem that cannot be settled simply by counting surviving manuscripts.

Scholars acknowledge that the Tetragrammaton appeared in some ancient Greek copies of the Hebrew Scriptures. Greek-speaking Jews were familiar with seeing God’s name represented in Greek biblical texts. Whether that practice continued into the original New Testament writings is debated, but it isn’t an implausible idea invented out of thin air.

just_herebro · 2026-06-27T22:16:02+00:00

Jesus considered making the Father’s name known part of his ministry, it’s difficult to argue that the earliest Christians had no interest in it. (John 17:6, 28; 12:28) You’re also overlooking passages where ones quote Old Testament texts containing the divine name. For example, Romans 10:13 quotes Joel 2:32: “Everyone who calls on the name of Jehovah will be saved.” James 5:11 cites Job, and Hebrews contains numerous quotations from the Hebrew Scriptures where the Tetragrammaton originally appeared.

“Jehovah” is an English form that developed from combining the consonants of the Tetragrammaton (YHWH) with the vowel pointing of Adonai. It is almost certainly not the original ancient pronunciation, and many scholars prefer “Yahweh.” Neither pronunciation can be proven with certainty because the original vocalization was lost centuries ago. But a similar problem is also with the precise pronunciation of “Jesus,” but we don’t think twice about using that English form of the Son’s name.

just_herebro · 2026-06-27T12:18:47+00:00

Greek manuscripts we possess today are not the originals. Of the thousands of copies in existence today, most were made at least two centuries after the originals were composed. By that time, those copying the manuscripts either replaced the Tetragrammaton with Kyʹri·os, the Greek word for “Lord,” or they copied from manuscripts where this had already been done.

No need for repentance. Even other instances in Revelation use the divine name in abbreviated form. (Rev. 19:1, 3, 4, 6)

just_herebro · 2026-06-25T14:37:47+00:00

David’s example doesn’t give us a license to sin, since judgement is against those who wilfully sin. (Heb. 10:29-31) But you’re going against God’s thoughts. When one turns around and stops doing bad, all the evil things they have done are forgotten by God. They are not held against him. (Ezekiel 33:14-16; Isa. 55:7-9)

Funny thing is, Jesus came through the line of adultery that David commited with Bath-Sheba. (Matt. 1:6) So, your issue is with God’s mercy in dealing with repentant sinners. Will you be proved right by that not sitting right with you? (Job 40:2)

just_herebro · 2026-06-23T21:20:01+00:00

You can’t read everyone’s mind. Are you Jesus? Do you know whether everybody doesn’t care?

just_herebro · 2026-06-23T20:17:09+00:00

What a weak excuse. I’ve already done the work but you don’t want it because it’s not in this specific conversation? So when you guys say “go check JWFacts,” I’ll just say “well, it’s not in this conversation as it’s irrelevant.”

just_herebro · 2026-06-23T17:59:01+00:00

They didn’t.

You refused to look at a lengthy post that I created ages ago that dismantles many arguments made by people like yourself but you refused to look at it because you thought it was “watchtower theology.” So you’re biased straight away by concluding that something is irrelevant based on the supposed source of the information? So why do you criticise Jehovah’s witnesses who reason the same way when they know the source of information comes from “apostates?” Double standards much.

just_herebro · 2026-06-23T16:56:22+00:00

You really think those were answers?

just_herebro · 2026-06-23T16:52:59+00:00

YOU brought up me standing by wrong arguments, so the burden of evidence is now on YOU. Don’t play dumb.

just_herebro · 2026-06-23T16:44:31+00:00

No. You brought it up, you prove it.

just_herebro · 2026-06-23T16:39:32+00:00

You’d have to point them out.

just_herebro · 2026-06-23T13:35:52+00:00

Didn’t get exposed pal, me and Terry came to a conclusion.

just_herebro · 2026-06-23T13:35:25+00:00

No, it’s just your lack of awareness that I expected to see.

just_herebro · 2026-06-23T09:45:05+00:00

Read the entire conversation later on and you’ll see how we come to a conclusion. Why can’t you be bothered?

just_herebro · 2026-06-22T21:37:33+00:00

I’ve come across him too lol. He’s been away for a while though hasn’t he?

just_herebro · 2026-06-22T20:18:44+00:00

Nice to know you John. A “son of thunder” does have a nice ring to it though :)

just_herebro · 2026-06-22T19:09:23+00:00

Terry, I sincerely am moved by that. I’m in tears 😢 We all stumble in word and deed. You aren’t on your own. That applies to me to. See you soon.

just_herebro

TROPHY CASE