Why is God's Name NOT in the Bible?

Young's Literal ((YLT)) was completed in 1898 and uses the Germanic transliteration 'Jehovah' in place of LORD as the KJV puts it.
Jerome's Vulgate is far older than 1600 & **usually** puts 'Dominus' for the Tetragrammaton, tho he used 'Adonai' at least once instead.


just FYI; no other reason
the whole world does not speak Elizabethan English.

I recently heard a guy say that if you don't speak English, you need to learn how. Then you can read the KJV and get truly saved.
I'd ask Him about it, but I don't know His name! Though He knows my name.
Yeshua calls me Ron, Ruach calls me friend, Abba calls me son.
He's my beginning and my end...He's my best friend! I'm so glad He loves me like He does!

I see you recognize what is leftist.

No concern because there is only three things we need to know from the KJV Bible;
1 Repentance
2. Baptism
3) Righteous living

10 new editions since the 1960's many with ulterior motive of changing God's word.

the topic of this thread is the Tetragrammaton & whether we ought to know & use it; more importantly, why God has made it indistinct.

in that context, i have shown that it is not true that 'only since the 1960's' has any translation of the Bible used anything other than LORD, as the kjv does.
thus it is demonstrated that the lack of knowledge and use of the true spelling & pronunciation of the Tetragrammaton is definitely not a result of failing to honor & cling to the kjv.

this is not a carnal politics thread.
this is not a kjv-only thread.
this is a thread about the name of God.

Thanks for your interest.
I don't really see any inconsistency in any of my posts.
I'm not imposing my beliefs on anyone. I freely admit that I lean toward the pronunciation of Yahuah over Yahweh.
That certainly doesn't mean that I am right, it is only what my position is.
Do I think there is some sort of purposeful action in the removal of God's name? Yes.
Still doesn't mean I'm stuck a flag in it. I would love to be convinced otherwise.
I thought that is why we are here.
I don't remember telling anyone they are wrong. Unless it was about me.

it's 'the gods must be crazy' part I



actually not such a bad movie. main theme is the culture shock between Western and 'primitive' African peoples.

Thank you. This must not be your first rodeo.

I'm sorry for getting agitated earlier.
I should not have.
May God Bless you

Brother, i mean no harm and please forgive me for coming across as 'attacking' which is not my intent.

Nah... disjointed comments are way more fun.

Discussing it is not annoying.

It is only when someone tries to teach a pronunciation to others as a matter of religious exactness that God wants us to follow that gets under my skin.

They have gotten way out of their lane when they do that.

1) They need to be expert in ancient Hebrew and should be able to read and write it before they teach it.
2) If all the experts say that it can't be known how to pronounce it, and adding vowels is a best guess, then it is not possible that God would require that we know how to pronounce it.

Therefore it is so very, very wrong for anyone to teach others that God is wanting them to call him by that exact pronunciation and the fear of God should constrain them from teaching such fallacy. That gets under my skin.

Good indication of a “Rightist “🤠

To be clear: Only God is righteous. I only have opinion and did express how I arrived at that opinion.
I didn't see the need to be technical. I thought YHWH was self-explanatory.
I hold no grudge against any pronunciation. That's not the point of the post so I'm sorry if it came off that way.
The point of the post is God has many titles and descriptors but only one name. God, many times, expresses that.
I don't think scripture was written to mean anything other than what it says. I don't see a legitimate argument against God wanting his name known. I understand that there was a time thousands of years ago when pronouncing His name was forbidden.
That time has past for many years and how many Bible revisions?
If you don't think it should be changed, that's fine.

Let me pose a question:
If you were perfectly literate in ancient Hebrew, Greek, Aramaic and Latin, would you prefer the original texts as your guide?

Posting my position on a topic is not teaching.
Post #237 explains a little better.

I don't know that I was intending to make your position to be wrong (your sense of it as you have expressed here). I was chiefly seeking to draw another meaning.

Perhaps if I said this:

Seeing as you expressed in your sixth post on this forum, as cited by myself, (you spoke of dark forces working in the world) a precept that is grounded in a world meaning - And seeing as you have expressed that the name of God has been removed from the bible - then my intention was to allude to that meaning - and yet I expressed a form of words that gave rise to a reasonable presumption of inconsistency.

Having cited your own words I would have thought that it may be reasonable to connect you with a meaning arsing out of them - rather than to try and correct your claims.

As a musician with your son leading worship of the saints - (a meaning that is grounded in a heavenly meaning) then sensing your own direction when you sing songs that you have also written may give you a means to differentiate between worship songs and songs that bear witness and may be called pleadings. I listened to both of the songs you posted in another thread and it was whilst listening in reflection of this thread that it occurred to me that you were personally struggling in your walk - in the sense that whilst I cannot know how your gift is effectual for others to bring them to a true worship of God in the assembly - I ought to reasonably presume that your gift in leading worship would be effectual and pleasing to God - whereas your bearing witness or your pleadings are malformed by a weakness in your projection. You lack vocative conviction in your own songs.

Worship songs need only one direction - towards God - whereas pleadings are towards men - even when they are intentionally meant to bear witness. This is in a simile of Miriam who is cited as the first prophetess in Scripture and her gift was singing. You are a singer and lead worship yet I believe that you are being moved to preaching the word and not singing or pleading to bear witness of God.

So I would separate things this way:

Your leading the worship in song forms part of the prophetic gift - but not a spoken gift in a woman who can also lead the worship as Miriam did - yet as a man you can also speak. Miriam got that wrong and suffered a curse for a week as a consequence. Her brother Arron had authority to speak - even if he was mistaken in trying to direct Moses - so he was not cursed. Numbers chapter twelve.

Perhaps your disquiet which you cited as, "praying and meditating about where [your] life was heading" lies in that transition from leading in worship (not necessarily given up) but rather in being proved in your speech. In that sense I spoke "The ability of Satan to deceive is not uncovered until we ourselves are first uncovered before God." And that was predicated by my saying, "By which I mean that the Lord does not settle one's personal need for a sense of direction by asking us to examine the church."

The only possibility that your gift of leading worship (which forms part of the prophetic ministry) is going to transport into speech (you do emphasis the phonetic meaning of words - a prophetic necessity) - is when you yourself are uncovered before God. Leading worship may well be a necessary conscience to prove effectual - but speech is a necessary ability to be always rejected and despised in the prophetic ministry - yet to always speak for God - just as your own songs are intended - yet they are malformed because they project your concern for yourself. God Bless.

in the vernacular,