Hi Helice:

I understand all that. I didn't reply to Club Red for that reason. I replied to aus22's comment in light of the Bible quote that was not plagiarized still in Club Red's post and the theme of this thread. Club Red obviously has no interest in anything I have to write about but 'sometimes' aus22 takes an interest.

That was the purpose of mentioning:

Hi Folks:

'Elohim' or elohim?

One reason why yhwh is not well known, even by those who are acquainted with his name, is due to the doctrines of man that swirl around the Hebrew word 'elohim'.

Traditional rendering seldom carries the Hebraic meaning of 'elohim' into the English translations. For instance ...

Gen 1:1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. (KJV)

... but then consider another English version of this verse ...

Gen 1:1 In the beginning Elohim created the heaven and the earth. (RNKJV)

'Elohim' here, to stay within a particular scope of the sense carried by the KJV translators in terms of actual Hebraic grammar, in this verse would read ...

Gen 1:1 In the beginning gods created the heaven and the earth.

'elohim' is simply a plural word and is not singular in any sense of the Hebrew language. The heavens and the earth were created by many, that is, more than one according to the plain and simple ancient Hebrew writings.

So right off the bat, the KJV tries to get its readers to understand that one personage named 'God' created the heavens and the earth rather than the teaching of the Hebrew scriptures that the gods created them.

Very deceiving, to say the least. And yhwh is not mentioned in this verse at all. And as a matter of course, yhwh is not mentioned directly at all in the KJV.

Even the RNKJV tries to stray from the Hebraic sense of 'elohim' by making its 'e' uppercase attempting to turn it into a proper name under the doctrinal pressure that yhwh and 'Elohim' are one and the same.

Therein lies the doctrinal connection between 'elohim' and yhwh where there is no connection. The Hebrew language does not support that doctrine in its script at all, anywhere.

Attempting to say that the 'elohim' are a singular yhwh is how the idea came about that the 'God' of the English Old Testament is mean and willing to destroy the precise billions of self aware consciousnesses that he directed into existence.

It was a portion of the multitude of the 'elohim' that has done such great harm to humankind, not one 'God'/'Elohim'. The Hebrew scriptures have been driven into a very misguided direction by the English translations and that direction forever leads away from the individual the Hebrew scriptures identify as the one and the only yhwh.

Hello DCInC,

That is what I was trying to explain what our Tom is doing the last few month.

Explaining what so many men were doing with the bible.
Putting them into the correct knowledge of truth.
But into the different languages of the world for all people to
be able to understand .

It took ? 3 ? [I all ready forgot] year I believe.
And the men were checking each other out as they were all into more then 2 different languages. They were all considered scholars !
So I feel that the KJB is still all correct ! After all those men have checked and re-checked.

Hi Grams:

I understand where you are coming from because that is how I looked at it when I was a Christian as well. And I still do hold a very deep gratitude towards those brave souls who risked and lost their lives for the difficult undertaking they took on to come up with those very first translations and getting them into print. It was an amazing feat to say the least.

But even though that took so very much grunt work to do, it does not eliminate the doctrinal pressures and the mis-guided knowledge that was available to them before their work was able to begin.

Say you found a treasure map and followed the compass directions to the letter and dug at the precise location it indicated - and found nothing. You'd think, 'What the ...?'.

You wouldn't want all that hard work to go for nothing plus there has to be a treasure somewhere if there is a map. You double check everything and you did everything 'right'. You keep checking and checking but it brings you back right to the same location that has no treasure.

You are in Canada. The starting point is London. But in reality the map originated in England but there is no indication of that because it probably never occurs to it's author that it would be used anywhere but in England. Starting from London, Canada is quite different than starting from London, England to find that treasure

Those English translators did essentially the same. They translated not from the Hebrew necessarily but from other languages, from a western Greek perspective rather than an ancient eastern Hebrew perspective, accepted many doctrines of Judaism contrary to the Hebraic teachings, named 'God' after the 'elohim' (in a round-about way), ignored the name that yhwh calls himself and provided substitutes, mis-identified the saviour of mankind and crowned another anti-messiah Saviour, among a whole host of other things.

Despite all the hard work and checking and double checking those English translators took so long to do, they picked a starting point that is different than that of the ancient sacred Hebraic writings.

Consequently, their translations are not going to yield the treasure of yhwh unless the staring point of the English Bibles is acknowledged and taken into account when they are studied.

Hi Folks:

For His Name's Sake

It appears that one reason yhwh has become unknown is because his name, especially its meaning, has been so long ignored. (It's proper pronounciation is of little importance at this time, however, or else yhwh would not have allowed it to be so quickly dismissed in the first century CE.)

In any Bible software can be searched the terms, "name's" and "sake", and found that these terms are in various combinations throughout the whole Bible in both testaments.

Consider these well known verses of scripture ...

Psa 23:1 YHWH is my shepherd; I shall not want.
Psa 23:2 He maketh me to lie down in green pastures: he leadeth me beside the still waters.
Psa 23:3 He restoreth my soul: he leadeth me in the paths of righteousness for his name's sake. (RNKJV) (emphasis by DCInC)

Perhaps also consider ...

1Jn 2:12 I write unto you, little children, because your sins are forgiven you for his name's sake.
1Jn 2:13 I write unto you, fathers, because ye have known him that is from the beginning. I write unto you, young men, because ye have overcome the wicked one. I write unto you, little children, because ye have known the Father.
1Jn 2:14 I have written unto you, fathers, because ye have known him that is from the beginning. I have written unto you, young men, because ye are strong, and the word of YHWH abideth in you, and ye have overcome the wicked one. (RNKJV) (emphasis by DCInC)

Having your sin's forgiven is part and parcel of having your soul restored and this most important aspect of salvation through faith in yhwh is done for the purpose of fulfilling the sake of yhwh's name.

It is very appropriate then that since the name of yhwh means, according to the Hebraic meanings behind the letters of his name, 'to manifest to breathe and to breathe' literally, that figuratively, according to the ancient Hebraic culture, can mean, 'to do (righteous) character and live'.

After all isn't salvation the hope of being able to avoid even any hint of evil by being made capable of doing only those things that lead to and promote life and living with only those who do likewise in his kingdom, just as yhwh and his son yhshua do?

Be blessed with the whole righteousness of yhwh and live life richly. (aka. shalom)

I call Him Hayah.

Hi Chocolategenii:

Yes, I remember well our previous discussions about your take on it. Since our discussions I have taken into account your comments and found out about some of the various ideas surrounding 'I AM THAT I AM' that have come to the conclusions similar to yours.

My recent studies in the ancient Hebrew language have been very interesting. It is quite involved with considerations being given to various aspects of that language in terms of grammar, ancient Hebrew culture, word idioms, doctrinal issues, word construction and determining root words. The study can become rather convoluted with numerous personal opinions and unknown, yet surmised, historic language developments producing many varied conclusions.

For instance, I have found that ancient Hebrew grammar was most very likely quite different then than the modern version. I had always been given the impression that the grammar had always been essentially the same 'forever'. So when modern grammar is applied to the ancient language you get today's doctrines but if the scriptures themselves are used to let them tell us what the rules of grammar are, quite a different meaning can emerge.

There will always be some to learn on this subject.

Oops ...

... There will always be something to learn on this subject.