Thursday, 7 December 2017

A Rebuttal to Matt Slick's: A Biblical Response to Jehovah's Witnesses!

A Rebuttal to Matt Slick's: A Biblical Response to Jehovah's Witnesses
October 11, 2013byletusreason
Here is what Matt Slick (CARM) says in regard to Jehovah's Witnesses on certain topic of scripture and I have begun a series of rebuttals, and as Slick is allegedly a Calvinist (pre-destination) he can't help propagating hal;f truths and out-right lies, as his life course is already mapped out for him, thus making God a party to his lies, so that God now becomes the author of lies!



1.    John 10:30-34 is a section of verses where the Pharisees say that Jesus is making Himself out to be God (v. 33).

1.    "I and the Father are one. Again the Jews picked up stones to stone him, but Jesus said to them, 'I have shown you many great miracles from the Father. For which of these do you stone me?'  'We are not stoning you for any of these,' replied the Jews, 'but for blasphemy, because you, a mere man, claim to be God.'"

2.    You can say, "See, even the Jews knew He was claiming to be God. The Jehovah's Witness (if he's quick enough) will say something like, "Jesus wasn't God, the Jew's only thought that Jesus was claiming to be God." Then you can say, "Oh, I see. Then let me get this right. You agree with the Pharisees, Jesus wasn't God? Is that correct? The Jehovah's Witness will not like it that he agrees with a Pharisee.
2.    Plurality in the Godhead

1.    The following group of scriptures strongly suggests a plurality within the Godhead. These verses are translated correctly in the Jehovah's Witness Bible so you can encourage them to use it. The NIV is not as literal in its translation in the Amos verses, so I recommend using either the King James or the New American Standard Bible when doing your own.

1.    Gen. 1:26, "Then God said, 'Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness . . .'"
1.    They will say that angels are the ones who helped God make man. However, there is no scriptural evidence for that. God is the only creator.

2.    You can also take him to Col. 1:15-17 where it says that Jesus is the creator of all things--including man and Isaiah 44:24where it says that God created the heavens and the earth all alone.
2.    Gen. 19:24, "Then the LORD [Jehovah] rained on Sodom and Gomorrah brimstone and fire from the LORD [Jehovah] out of heaven."

1.    Is this saying there are two Lords, two Jehovah's?

3.    Amos 4:10-11, 'I sent a plague among you after the manner of Egypt; I slew your young men by the sword along with your captured horses, and I made the stench of your camp rise up in your nostrils; yet you have not returned to Me,' declares the LORD. I overthrew you as God overthrew Sodom and Gomorrah . . . '"

1.    Jehovah is the one talking and He says, "I overthrew you as God overthrew Sodom and Gomorrah..." Very interesting.

4.    Isaiah 44:6, "Thus says the LORD, the King of Israel and his Redeemer, the LORD of hosts: 'I am the first and I am the last, and there is no God besides me . . . '" See also, Isaiah 48:16

5.    If you are reading these verses to a Jehovah's Witness he might say something like, "Are you trying to show the Trinity from these verses?" You can then say, "You got the Trinity out of these?"

6.    These verses and others are more fully developed in The Plurality Study, which is a powerful tool for witnessing to the Witnesses.

3.    John 20:25 says, "The other disciples therefore were saying to him, 'We have seen the Lord!' But he said to them, 'Unless I shall see in His hands the imprint of the nails, and put my finger into the place of the nails, and put my hand into His side, I will not believe'" (NASB).

1.    The Jehovah's Witnesses deny that Jesus was crucified on a cross. They say it happened on a torture stake where His wrists were put together over His head and a single nail was put through both. If that is true, then why does Thomas say "Unless I shall see in His hands the imprint of the nails..." In the Greek the word used here for "nails", helos, is in the plural. Therefore, there was more than one nail used in the hands of the crucifixion of Christ.

4.    First and Last?

1.    How many firsts and lasts are there? In the Bible God is called the first and last and so is Jesus. Since God says there is no God apart from Him and Jesus and God are both addressed by the same title, then that poses a problem for the Jehovah's Witness.

1.    Isaiah 44:6, "This is what the LORD says -Israel's King and Redeemer, the LORD Almighty: I am the first and I am the last; apart from me there is no God."

2.    Revelation 1:8, "I am the Alpha and the Omega," says the Lord God, "who is, and who was, and who is to come, the Almighty."

3.    Revelation 1:17-18, "When I saw him, I fell at his feet as though dead. Then he placed his right hand on me and said: "Do not be afraid. I am the First and the Last. I am the Living One; I was dead, and behold I am alive for ever and ever! And I hold the keys of death and Hades."

1.    Obviously, Rev. 1:17-18 can only refer to Jesus.

4.    Revelation 22:12-13, "Behold, I am coming soon! My reward is with me, and I will give to everyone according to what he has done. I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last, the Beginning and the End."

1.    Here, both the "Alpha and the Omega" and the "First and the Last" are said to be one and the same.
2.    Also, at this point go to Titus 2:13 where it says that Jesus is the one who is coming soon, therefore, Jesus and Jehovah are the same.

5.    The Holy Spirit

1.    Jehovah's Witnesses teach that the Holy Spirit is an active force like radar. They deny that He is alive and that He is a person. This is, of course, because they deny the Trinity. Yet, if the Holy Spirit is simply a force then...

1.    Why is He called God (Acts 5:3-5)?
2.    How is it that He can teach (John 14:26)?
3.    How can He be blasphemed (Matt. 12:31,32)?
4.    How can He be the one who comforts (Acts 9:31)?
5.    How is it possible for Him to speak (Acts 28:25)?
6.    How then can He be resisted (Acts 7:51)?
7.    How can He be grieved (Eph. 4:30)?
8.    How can He help us in our weaknesses (Rom. 8:26)?
2.    If the Holy Spirit is a force, then how is it possible that the above mentioned characteristics are attributed to Him? A force doesn't speak, teach, comfort, etc.
3.    Nor can you blaspheme against a force.

6.    The Resurrection of Jesus

1.    The Jehovah's Witnesses deny the physical resurrection of Jesus. They say that if the sacrifice of Jesus were real then the body had to stay in the grave. They say that He rose in a spirit body. This body was a manifestation similar to the way angels manifested themselves in the Old Testament.
1.    The problem with their view is that the angels were not incarnated.  That is they are not born of women. Jesus became a man by birth, therefore, He had a real, physical body, a permanent body. In fact, right now, Jesus is in heaven in the form of a man, though he is a glorified man.  Also, He still has two natures, God and man, and will eternally be in this state.

2.    Jesus rose from the dead in the same body he died in.  For scriptural proof of this, consider the following verses.

1.    In John 2:19-22 before the crucifixion Jesus said, "Destroy this temple and in three days I will raise it up...He was speaking of the temple of His body." Since Jesus said He would raise the same body He died in, then it must be true.
1.    This last verse is worth focusing on. Remember, Jesus said He would be the one to raise His body. So, it must be true.
2.    John 20:27 - Jesus said to Thomas, "reach your finger...and put it into My side..."
1.    If Jesus were not raised from the dead, then why did He have a physical body?
2.    The Jehovah's Witnesses will reply that it was a temporary body materialized so the apostles would believe that He was raised. Yet, this is not what Jesus said in John 2:19-22. He said He would raise His very body.
3.    Luke 24:39 - "a spirit does not have flesh and bones as you see I have."
1.    Jesus said that He had "flesh and bones" not "flesh and blood." This is important because flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God (1 Cor. 15:50).  The blood of Jesus was the sacrifice for sin (Rom. 5:9). It is the blood that cleanses us of our sin (Heb. 9:22).
2.    The blood of Jesus was shed on the cross and so, most probably, Jesus doesn't have any functioning blood in His body.
7.    Similarities between the Jehovah's Witnesses and the Pharisees:
1.    The Pharisees denied the Trinity and the Deity of Christ, as do the JW's.
2.    The Pharisees denied  the physical resurrection of Christ and salvation by grace alone, as do the JW's."

I have already begun to address Slick's view of Gen 19:24 where there are supposedly two Jehovah's, but Slick slips upand shows his bias, as he is not aware of how Hebrew words with its idiom and I have shown examples of such in my rebuttal on his Trinitarian eisigesis of Gen 19:24, also seen in the other text (OT/NT) he uses!

Letusreason


Who comprehends the mind of the LORD - Isa 40:13?



Who comprehends the mind of the LORD?


Isa 40:13

“Who comprehends the mind of the LORD, or gives him instruction as his counselor?” NET

“Who hath directed the Spirit of Jehovah, or being his counsellor hath taught him?” ASV

The original Hebrew has the Tetragrammaton – “×” וָ֑ ×” ×™ְ” (yhwh), rendered into English, either, as, “Yahweh” or “Jehovah” and not, “LORD”

Now we turn to, 1 Cor 2:16

“For who has known the mind of the Lord, so as to advise him? But we have the mind of Christ.” NET Bible

In 1 Cor 2:16, here Paul is quoting Isa 40:13!


A question for Trinitarians

How is it possible to not know the mind of the “Lord” (Jehovah), but, the mind of Christ, when Christ is supposed to be “Jehovah” (the Lord)?


Letusresaon (aka - Andrew Graham)










A Misunderstood Jehovah - by: Matteo Pierro.

A Misunderstood Jehovah - by: Matteo Pierro.
July 27, 2017byletusreason

A Misunderstood Jehovah


John Pacheco 'the Founder of the Apologists of St. Francis De Sales' Ottawa,Ontario,Canada says: In the Hebrew language, there is no ?J? sound.  Many Jewish names in the Bible have become traditionally Hellenized, and therefore they have assumed Greek pronunciations. For instance, "Jacob" is really pronounced "Yah-kobe" in Hebrew - likewise for ?Jehovah? and YHWH.  Furthermore, according to Strong?s Concordance (word number 1943) ?Hovah? (the second part of ?Je-hovah?) actually means ?ruin? and ?mischief? or ?disaster?.  It occurs three times in the Hebrew Old Testament (Isaiah 47:11[1], Ezekiel 7:26 [2]).  Now the question is:  is ?mischief?  what God?s name is supposed to be rooted on?  Give me a break.  Far from elevating God?s name, the Witnesses have ironically blasphemed the Holy Name, and go on insisting that everyone do the same!

Truth: This unfortunate missive comes from someone with little or no knowledge of the original languages. The last 3 letters, HWH(howah) do not change in the original languages whether you translate YHWH as Jehovah or Yahweh. So if Jehovah comes from a word meaning "?ruin? and ?mischief? or ?disaster?", then so does Yahweh. So, did the Catholic Jerusalem Bible "ironically blaspheme" the Holy Name by translating it 6800 times? Of course not! The HWH comes from the verb HAYAH(1961, as even Strong's will tell you). Now check the footnotes of any Catholic Bible, and they will tell you exactly the same thing. So what is the difference between 1943(hovah) and 1961(hayah) if they both contain the same hebrew characters? YHWH(Jehovah and/or Yahweh) uses the verb form HAYAH(1961) to define his name at Exodus 3:14. No respected theologian/scholar would say otherwise.
Is Jacob really "Yah-kobe"? Yes. Do we say Yahkobe when we refer to Jacob? No. Do we render John 1:19 as "This is Yochanan's testimony, when the Yehudim sent Kohanim and
Levites from Yerushalayim to ask him, "Who are you" ?? HNV No, this is too awkward.

"In the history of the English language however, the letter J has a written counterpart in the German J, although the latter J in German is pronounced like an English Y. The bulk of theological studies having come from the German sources, there has been an intermixed usage in English of the J and the Y. Our English translations of the bible reflect this, so we have chosen to use J, thus Jehovah, rather than Yahweh, because this is established English usage for Biblical names beginning with this Hebrew letters. No one suggests that we ought to change Jacob, Joseph, Jehoshaphat, Joshua etc. to begin with a Y, and neither should we at this late date change Jehovah to Yahweh." -Bible Translator Jay P. Green, Sr.

The following names would lose the "Jeho" if we would be so discriminating in all respects to Bible translation: Jehoahaz, Jehoash, Jehoiachin, Jehoiada, Jehoiakim, Jehonadab, Jehoram, Jehoshaphat, Jehosheba, Jehozabad. 

Thankfully, the Catholic Encyclopedia is much more respectful of the name Jehovah at: 
http://www.newadvent.org:80/cathen/08329a.htm

"Jehovah (Yahweh)" The proper name of God in the Old Testament; hence the Jews called it the name by excellence, the great name, the only name, the glorious and terrible name, the hidden and mysterious name, the name of the substance, the proper name, and most frequently shem hammephorash, i.e. the explicit or the separated name, though the precise meaning of this last expression is a matter of discussion (cf. Buxtorf, "Lexicon", Basle, 1639, col. 2432 sqq.).

Jehovah occurs more frequently than any other Divine name. The Concordances of Furst ("Vet. Test. Concordantiae", Leipzig, 1840) and Mandelkern ("Vet. Test. Concordantiae", Leipzig, 1896) do not exactly agree as to the number of its occurrences; but in round numbers it is found in the Old Testament 6000 times, either alone or in conjunction with another Divine name. The Septuagint and the Vulgate render the name generally by "Lord" (Kyrios, Dominus), a translation of Adonai—usually substituted for Jehovah in reading."
Catholic Bob Stanley writes: "show me a Greek dictionary which lists jehovah
as meaning kurios? No JW document please, any secular Greek dictionary only.
Betcha cant find even one." 

Response: Well the above Catholic document should more than make up...besides, you have Vine's Expository Dictionary of Biblical Words which says under the many meanings and uses of kurios, "(g)kurios is the Sept. and N.T. representative of Heb. Jehovah." p.379 

Catholic Bob Stanley answers:The Catholic Encyclopedia is not an official Catholic
publication..
What other Bible Translations use the Divine Name? 

The King James Version uses Jehovah at Ex.6:3, Ps.83:18, Is.12:2;26:4
The American Standard Version uses Jehovah thousands of times.
Young's Literal Translation uses Jehovah thousands of times.
The Holy Bible by J.N.Darby uses Jehovah thousands of times.
The Literal Translation/King James 2 Version by Jay P. Green uses Jehovah thousands of times.
The Emphasized Bible by Rotherham uses Yahweh thousands of times.
The Recovery Version by Livings Dreams Ministry uses Jehovah thousands of times.
The New English Bible uses Jehovah at Exodus chapters 3 and 6.
The World English Bible uses Yahweh thousands of times.
The Jerusalem Bible uses Yahweh thousands of times.
The New Jerusalem Bible uses Yahweh thousands of times.
The Living Bible/Protestant and Catholic editions uses Jehovah over 300 times.
The English Revised Version uses Jehovah at Ex. 6:2,3,6,7,8, Ps. 83:18, Is. 12:2;26:4.
The Bible in Living English by Byington uses Jehovah thousands of times.
The Webster Bible uses Jehovah in the same places as the KJV above.
The Modern Language Bible/New Berkeley Version uses Jehovah at Exodus 3:15; 6:3, Numbers 3:13, 45; 15:41; 21:14; 35:34, Ezra 6:21; Ps. 8:1, 9; 16:2, Is 12:2; 140:7; 141:8; 147:1, Hosea 12:5, Zech. 4:10 etc. 

The Complete Bible-Smith&Goodspeed uses Yahweh at Exodus 3:15, 6:3 and the shorter form Yah is used at Ps. 68:4, Is. 12:2; 26:4 

The New King James Version uses YAH at Is. 12:2; 26:4.
The New World Translation uses Jehovah thousands of times.
The Emphatic Diaglott uses Jehovah at Matt 21:42; 22:37, 44, 23:39, Mark 11:9 and Acts 2:34
The Amplified Bible uses Yaweh at Ex. 6:3 

Boothroyd's Versions uses Jehovah thousands of times.
S. Sharp's translation uses Jehovah thousands of times.
The Reina Valera Bible uses Jehova thousands of times.
The Moderna version uses Jehova thousands of times.
The Bover-Cantera Bible uses Yahveh thousands of times.
The Nacar-Colunga Bible uses Yave thousands of times.
The Evaristo Martin Nieto Bible uses Yave thousands of times.
The Biblia de Jerusalen uses Yahveh thousands of times.
The Cantera-Iglesias Bibles uses Yahveh thousands of times.
The Straubinger Bible uses Yahve thousands of times.
The Almeida Bible uses Jehovah thousands of times.
The Pontificio Instituto Biblico uses Jave thousands of times.
The Osty Bible uses Yahve thousands of times.
The Brasileira Bible uses Jehovah thousands of times.
The Elberfelder Bible uses Jehova thousands of times.
The Crampon Bible uses Jehovah thousands of times.
The Lienart Bible uses Yahweh thousands of times.
La Bible de Jerusalem uses Yahve thousands of times.
The Leidsche Vertaliing Bible uses Jahwe thousands of times.
The Willibrordvertaling Bible uses Jahwe thousands of times.
The Himmelriech Bible uses Jahve thousands of times.
The Canisiusvertaling Bible uses Jahweh thousands of times.

Catholic Bob Stanley says: All of these bibles you list are nothing more than one protestant lie being followed by other protestant liars, all lemmings following one another as the first one jumps off the cliff..
Response: As you can see, there is much hatred for the Divine Name, and it seems to stem from ignorance, as many of the Bibles mentioned above, including the Encyclopedia, are Catholic.
   
Addendum 1
This article was published on the Catholic magazine "Rivista Biblica", year XLV, n. 2, april-june 1997, p. 183-186. 

JHWH. The tetragrammaton in the New Testament

For a long time it was thought that the divine Tetragrammaton YHWH, in Hebrew written with the letters  YHWH/JHVH (which recurs over 6800 times in the Hebrew text of the Old Testament) did not appear in the original writings of the New Testament. In its place it was thought that the writers of the New Testament had used the Greek word for LORD, KYRIOS. However, it seems that such an opinion is wrong. Here below are some factors to consider:
 
1) The Tetragrammaton in the Greek Version of Old Testament, the Septuagint (LXX).

One of the reasons produced to support the above mentioned opinion was that the LXX substituted YHWH (YHWH) with the term KYRIOS, (kurios) which was the equivalent Greek of the Hebrew word ADONAY used by some Hebrews when they met the Tetragrammaton during the Bible reading.
However, recent discoveries have shown that the practice of substituted in the LXX YHWH with KYRIOS started in a much later period in comparison with the beginning of that version. As a matter of fact, the older copies of the LXX keep the Tetragrammaton written in Hebrew characters in the Greek text. (See App. 1)

Girolamo, the translater of the Latin Vulgate confirms this fact. In the prologue of the books of Samuel and Kings he wrote: "In certain Greek volumes we still find the Tetragrammaton of God's name expressed in ancient characters". And in a letter written in Rome in the year 384 it says: "God's name is made up of four letters; it was  thought ineffable, and it is written with these letters: iod, he, vau, he (YHWH). But some have not been able to decipher it because of the resemblace of the Greek letters and when  they found it in Greek books they usually read it PIPI (pipi)". S. Girolamo, Le Lettere, Rome, 1961, vol.1, pp.237, 238; compare J.P.Migne, Patrologia Latina, vol.22, coll.429, 430.

Further confimation comes from The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology, that says: "Recently discovered texts doubt the idea that the translaters of the LXX have rendered the Tetragrammaton JHWH with KYRIOS. The most ancient mss (manuscripts) of the LXX today available have the Tetragrammaton written in Hebrew letters in the Greek text. This was custom preserved by the later Hebrew translater of the Old Testament in the first centuries (after Christ)". Vol.2, pag.512.
Consequently, we can easily deduce that if the writers of NT in their quotations of the OT used the LXX they  would surely have left the Tetragrammaton in their writings the way it recurred in the Greek version of the OT. To confirm  the correctness of this conclusion it is interesting to note the following declaration made before the finding of the manuscripts proving that the LXX originaly continued the Tetragrammaton:

"If that version (LXX) would have kept the term (YHWH), or had used the Greek term for JEHOVAH and another for  ADONAY, such a use would have surely been followed in the  discourses and in the reasonings of the NT. Therefore our Lord, in quoting the 110th Psalms, insteand of saying: 'The LORD has said to my LORD' could have said: "JEHOVA has said to ADONI". Supposing that a Christian student was translating in Hebrew the Greek Testament: every time that he met the word KYRIOS, he should have had to consider if in the context there was something that indicated the true Hebrew correspondent; and this is the difficulty that would have arisen in translating the NT in whatever language if the name JEHOVAH would have been left in the Old Testament (LXX). The Hebrew scriptures would have constitued a standard for many passages: every time that the expression "the LORD's angel" recurs, we know that the term LORD represents JEHOVA; we could come to a similar conclusion for the expression "the LORD's word", according to the precedent established in the OT; and so it is in the case of the name "the LORD of armies". On the contrary, when the expression "my LORD" or "our LORD" recurs, we should know that the term JEHOVA would be inadmissible, when instead the words  ADONAY or ADONI should be used". R.B.Girdlestone, Synonyms of the Old Testament, 1897, p.43.

For a stronger support of this argument there are the words of the professor George Howard, of the University of Georgia (U.S.A.) who observes: "When the Septuagint Version that the New Testamental Church used and quoted, contained the Divine Name in Hebrew characters, the writers of the New Testament included without doubt the Tetragrammaton in their quotations". Biblical  Archeology Review, March 1978, p.14.

Consequently several translators of the NT have left the Divine Name in the quotations from the OT made by the New Testament writers. It can be noted, for example  the versions of Benjamin Wilson, of Andrè Chouraqui, in Efik, and Malgascio languages.

2)The Tetragrammaton in Hebrew version of the NT.

As many know, the first book of the NT, the gospel of Matthew was written in Hebrew. The proof of this is found in the work of Girolamo De viris inlustribus, chap. 3, where he writes:

"Mattew, that is also Levi, that  became an apostle after  having been a tax collector, was the first to write a Gospel of Christ in Judea in the Hebrew language and Hebrew characters, for the benefit of those who where circumcised that had believed. It's not know with enough certainly who  had then translated it in Greek. However the Hebrew one it self is preserved till this day in the Library at Cesarea, that the martyr Pamphilus collected so accurately. The  Nazarenes of the Sirian city of Berea that use this copy have also allowed me to copy it". From the Latin text edited by E.C.Richardson, published in the series Texte und Untersuchungen zur Geschicte der altchristlichen  Literatur, vol.14, Lipsia, 1986, pp.8,9.
It is therefore natural to conclude that when Matthew quoted passages from the OT in which the Tetragrammaton appeared (thing that occurred both in the Hebrew OT and in the Greek one then available) he would have surely left YHWH in his gospel as no jew ever dared to take away the Tetragrammaton from the Hebrew text of the Holy Scriptures.

To confirm this there are at least 27 hebrew versions of the NT that present the Tetragrammaton in the quotations of the OT or where the text requires it. (see note 11)

3) The Tetragrammaton in the christian Scriptures according to the Babylonian Talmud.

The first part of this Yewish work is called Shabbath (Sabbath) and it contains an immense code of rules that establishes what could have been done of a Sabbath. Part of it deals with if on the Sabbath day Biblical manuscripts could be saved from the fire, and after it reads:

"The text declares: 'The white spaces ("gilyohnim") and the books of the Minim, can't be saved from the fire'. Rabbi Jose said: 'On working days one must cut out the Divine Names that are contained in the text, hide them and burn the rest'. Rabbi Tarfon said: 'May I bury my son if I don't burn them toghether with the Divine Names that they contain if I come across them". From the English translation of Dr. H.Freedman.

The word "Minim" means "sectarians" and according to Dr. Freedman it's very probable that in this passage it indicates the Jewish-Christians. The expression "the white spaces" translates the original "gilyohnim" and could have meant, using the word ironically, that the writings of  the "Minim" where as worthy as a blank scroll, namely nothing. In some dictionaries this word is given as "Gospels". In harmony with this, the sentence that appears in the Talmud before the above mentioned passage says: "The books of the Minim are like white spaces (gilyohnim)."

So in the book Who was a Jew?, of L.H.Schiffman, the above mentioned passage of the Talmud is translated: "We don't save the Gospels or the books of Minim from  the fire. They are burnt where they are, together with their Tetragrammatons. Rabbi Yose Ha-Gelili says: "During the week one should take the Tetragrammatons from them, hide them and burn the rest". Rabbi Tarfon said: 'May I bury my children! If I would have them in my hands, I would burn them with all their Tetragrammatons'". Dr. Schiffman continues  reasoning that here "Minim" is refered to Hebrew Christians.

And it's very probable that here the Talmud refers to the Hebrew Christians. It is a supposition that finds agreement among the studious people, and in the Talmud seems to be well supported by the context. In Shabbath the passage that follows the above mentioned quotations relates a story, regarding Gamaliel and Christian judge in which there is an allusion to parts of the Sermon on the Mount. Therefore, this passage of the Talmud is a clear indication that the Christians included the Tetragrammaton in their Gospel and their writings.

Because of all we have said there are valid reasons to assert that the writers of the New Testament reported the Tetragrammaton in their divinely inspired work.
Matteo Pierro.
 
Appendix 1
List of LXX versions that have Tetragrammaton:
 
1) LXX P. Fouad Inv. 266, have the Tetragrammaton as:  +,
2) LXX VTS 10a, have the Tetragrammaton as:  .-
3) LXX IEJ 12, have the Tetragrammaton as:  .-
4) LXX VTS 10b, have the Tetragrammaton as:  0/
5) 4Q LXX Levb,  have the Tetragrammaton as:  1
6) LXX P. Oxy. VII.1007, have the Tetragrammaton as:  23
7) Aq Burkitt, have the Tetragrammaton as:  45
8) Aq Taylor, have the Tetragrammaton as:  67
9) Sym. P. Vindob. G. 39777, have the Tetragrammaton as:  89 o ;:
10) Ambrosiano O 39 sup., have the Tetragrammaton as:  ==

 
Appendix 2
List of Hebrew versions of the NT that have the Tetragrammaton:
 
1) Gospel of Matthew, a cura di J. du Tillet, Parigi, 1555
2) Gospel of Matthew, di Shem-Tob ben Isaac Ibn Shaprut, 1385
3) Matthew and Hebrews, di S. Munster, Basilea, 1537 e 1557
4) Gospel of Matthew, di J. Quinquarboreus, Parigi, 1551
5) Gospels, di F. Petri, Wittemberg, 1537
6) Gospels, di J. Claius, Lipsia, 1576
7) NT, di E. Hutter, Norimberga, 1599
8) NT, di W. Robertson, Londra, 1661
9) Gospels, di G. B. Jona, Roma, 1668
10) NT, di R. Caddick, Londra, 1798-1805
11) NT, di T. Fry, Londra, 1817
12) NT, di W. Greenfield, Londra, 1831
13) NT, di A. McCaul e altri, Londra, 1838
14) NT, di J. C. Reichardt, Londra, 1846
15) Luke, Acts, Romans and Hebrews, di J. H. R. Biesenthal, Berlino, 1855
16) NT, di J. C. Reichardt e J. H. R. Biesenthal, Londra, 1866
17) NT, di F. Delitzsch, Londra, ed.1981
18) NT, di I. Salkinson e C. D. Ginsburg, Londra, 1891
19) Gospel of John, di M. I. Ben Maeir, Denver, 1957
20) A Concordance to the Greek New Testament, di Moulton e Geden, 1963
21) NT, United Bibles Societies, Gerusalemme, 1979
22) NT, di J. Bauchet e D. Kinnereth, Roma, 1975
23) NT, di H. Heinfetter, Londra, 1863
24) Romans, di W. G. Rutherford, Londra, 1900
25) Psalms and Matthew, di A. Margaritha, Lipsia, 1533
26) NT, di Dominik von Brentano, Vienna e Praga, 1796
27) NT, Bible Society, Gerusalemme, 1986
 
This article was published on the catholic magazine "Rivista Biblica", year XLV, n. 2, april-june 1997, p. 183-186.

Source: http://web.archive.org/web/20040603222120/http:/hector3000.future.easyspace.com:80/jehovah.htm#favorable

Letusreason (aka - Andrew Graham)