Posted by Rick [Rick] on April 02, 1999 at 16:29:19 {ppHCdFLRUMctB9oBIfGcFMFBt36Xyc}:
In Reply to: **NIV and Jehovah posted by Covert on April 02, 1999 at 15:54:39:
> You know better than to use such shoddy reasoning and make someone say something which they actually aren't!
Good catch there. However, after stating what you just said about the reference to the Hebrew scriptures and profits, it goes on:
"But a Christian has to be also wise and
practical. We are the victims of 350 years of the King James tradition. It is far better to get two million to read it -- that is how many have bought it to date � and to follow the King
James, than to have two thousand buy it [and miss the grand truths of the Bible on every page. However they are following on old fashioned translating] and have the correct translation of Yahweh." [BOLD ADDED FOR EMPHASIS]
His emphasis on ideals vs. profits shows that if it is proven God's name was used in the Greek scriptures (from Dead Sea Scrolls evidence and possibly future discoveries), he would surely acknowedge again the "ideal" covers using the Divine Name in the Greek scriptures, don't you agree?
"And we do cover ourselves in the preface."
Have you read the Preface, Covert?
"It was a hard decision, and many of our translators agree with you."
Once again, what do many translators agree with? At the start of letter, about Miss Julie's "concern about the fact that the NIV did not use the name Jehovah in the Old Testament."
But, Covert, the most damning thing of all against your retort, is that the letter from Mr. Palmer states emphatically at the beginning:
"You are right that Jehovah is a distinctive name for God and ideally we should have used it."
They acknowledge the IDEAL is to used the name Jehovah, through conceding "we do not know if we should say Jahu or Yahweh or Jehovah." Unlike the NWT Committee, the NIV Committee was unwilling to go all the way in conveying the fact "that Jehovah is a distinctive name for God".
That's a powerful statement in itself. "Jehovah is a distinctive name for God."
God is referred to in the New Testament. Let's use some Logic 101. If God is referred to in the NT, and "Jehovah is a distinctive name for God," then Jehovah is referred to in the NT (whether scholars acknowledge this literally or not).
The bottomline is many claim the NIV Committee soldout for profits, while others claim they might as well not have published it if they didn't cater to the unwashed masses.
Rick