In article <128.21.18.05.459436000@srcbs.org>, Sarah Kanary says...
>

[snip]

>I don't care how you spell it or say it, either, as long as you are translating
>YHWH, NOT a substitute word.

And there is your error: it is not "a substitute word". It IS the qere for the
kethib, 'YHWH'. It is simply wrong to call this "a substitute word".

>> If it's Ok
>> for you to misspell YHWH as "Jehovah", then why isn't
>> it OK for someone else to misspell it "LORD"?
>
>Because "LORD" isn't a "spelling" of YHWH at all, it is a *substitution* of the
>Name with another word altogether. Surely you know this?

Again, not true. It is NOT "another word altogether", it is the "perpetual qere"
for YHWH. See, for example, sec. 3.6.6 of
http://www.wts.edu/hebrew/whmcodemanual.html.


>
>>
>> Either be hung up on phonetics or don't be.
>
>Amen! If everything has to be spelled and pronounced phonetically, then
>"Jesus" should vanish from all Bibles and be replaced with YHSH.

No, because you left out all the vowels! Pronouncing it w/o vowels would be
simply silly.

>
>> Your double
>> standard is showing.
>
>The 'double standard' is applying one standard to YHWH, but another standard to
>YHSH. Either translate them both to the receptor language or don't.

But you ARE applying a double standard! You are translating using the wrong
vowels in YHWH, but the right vowels in YHSH. THAT IS A DOUBLE STANDARD.
> "Jesus"
>is an English translation of "YHSH"

YEs, but...

> and "Jehovah" is an English translation of
>"YHWH".

No. That is completely wrong, since you are using the vowels not for the word
itself, but for its kethib. That is not 'tranlsation' at all.

> They're both "wrong" in Hebrew but perfectly fine for English.

Not true. The latter is wrong in any language.


--
---------------------------
Subudcat se sibi ut haereat Deo
quidquid boni habet, tribuat illi a quo factus est.
(St. Augustine, Ser. 96)

((( s.r.c.b-s is a moderated group. All posts are approved by a moderator. )))
((( Read http://srcbs.org for details about this group BEFORE you post. )))

Gary McNees wrote:

> Greetings Bob:
> Please see below.
>
>
> Bob Felts wrote:
> > Gary McNees wrote:
> >
> >
[...]
> >
> >>That is, I have met or talked to very very few persons who claim that
> >>they were converted by hearing TULIP.
> >
> >
> > TULIP is not the Gospel. I usually don't bring either up either