Why is God's Name NOT in the Bible?

Brother - thank you
Yes i am quite familiar with John ch8, and you are correct in that they recognized the name.

Here are my questions again = look carefully - Peace

How do you know that "they all knew YHVH"???
Why was there no need for Jesus to teach about YHVH???
What, in fact, did Jesus teach then???

Thank you for the opportunity and the privilege.

Admittedly, I was expecting a discredit of JJP through assignment to the Pharisaical collective but comforted to see that not being the case. I arrived at my trust in his guidance having noted his deep personal commitment to and adoration of Jesus. As I mentioned, his studies are far more extensive than my own so I'll provide a link to a starting point which reading contains within it many more links to tributaries of thought on this subject here:
Names of God

Unless it has gone over my head that it is only a rhetorical question, of course, under the subheading, "Names Revealed in the Tanakh," you'll find a link to the page YHVH offering an answer to your question posed in this thread wherein JJP claims that neither Jehovah nor Yahweh are correct pronunciation and why, though neither does he offer any other 'correct' transliteration.

Why is God's Name NOT in the Bible?


God has many names, and they are found everywhere throughout the Bible.

They might not know God as the Father, but they did know their Scripture, especially the name YHVH in Ex. 3:14. Many people at the time like Nicodemus and the woman at the well acknowledged him as a prophet, but only Peter confessed to him that he is the son of God, that's beyond comprehension to others. One objection was that the invisible God appearing in the form of a man was idolatry, many jews and muslims still reject Jesus for the same reason.

According to God he has one name. He is known by many titles and descriptors.

Thank you for the opportunity and the privilege.

Admittedly, I was expecting a discredit of JJP through assignment to the Pharisaical collective but comforted to see that not being the case. I arrived at my trust in his guidance having noted his deep personal commitment to and adoration of Jesus. As I mentioned, his studies are far more extensive than my own so I'll provide a link to a starting point which reading contains within it many more links to tributaries of thought on this subject here:
Names of God

Unless it has gone over my head that it is only a rhetorical question, of course, under the subheading, "Names Revealed in the Tanakh," you'll find a link to the page YHVH offering an answer to your question posed in this thread wherein JJP claims that neither Jehovah nor Yahweh are correct pronunianciation and why, though neither does he offer any other 'correct' transliteration.

Thanks Mem. That is a great link and it is what I have read from other authors through the years. Very well articulated.

https://www.hebrew4christians.com/Names_of_G-d/YHVH/yhvh.html

I especially agree with his summary statements under the heading "Gnosticism and the Name"

Do you believe in the Trinity? Very few would not consider "Jesus" to be a name for God.

Acts 4:12 Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.

I was just thinking of highlighting that very segment, thank you. Initially, I thought to do that in my previous post and remembered it just now while catching up on the thread. I think it to be the main point of this topic of discussion in general. But of course there are many other points of relevant interest also such as the gematria of it for one and (as you noted, a better articulation of) the relation to the Hebraic phrase, 'was, am, will be,' (or something to that effect if my clumsiness in articulation muddled it).

And your background in study hasn't gone unnoticed by me either. You are an approved read, iyam.

The author in the Hebrew4Christian article is apparently steeped in Rabbinical Judaism.

The history of YHWH is steeped in Rabbinical Judaism wouldn't you say?

I don't expect anyone to take my word.
If you agree that we should study the scriptures (on our own), testing scripture against scripture, and holding fast to that which is good then I would only ask one thing of you.

If you study the scripture, both old and new testaments, and find that God, indeed wants his name (YHWH) to be known, then you will know that the Rabbi is a liar. If God does not want his name known, then you will know the Rabbi speaks the truth.
I would never suggest that you make such a call based on my opinion.

I do know that Satan worshipers use all of the same titles and descriptors for their God.
I also know that their religious practice intentionally hides the name of their God. (who would want to follow Satan on purpose?)

I pray and study scripture to be closer to the God who loves me so much that he would send his only Son to freely give his life so that this wretched soul could be saved.
Peace

The author in the Hebrew4Christian article is apparently steeped in Rabbinical Judaism.

An extensive knowledge of something doesn't qualify as being "steeped" in it. If you know the history of, say the Jehovah Witness movement, it doesn't necessarily mean you've been initiated into their brotherhood, they most likely will even look at you as an outsider until you fall in with all their doctrinal adaptations. But neither can I dismiss a truth for a lie simply because Jehovah Witnesses subscribe to it, even if I don't agree with any other of their assertions.

Throughout the Bible it is clear that GOD wants his name to be known and proclaimed.
In this day and age we can easily figure out that his name is YHWH (Pronounced Yahuah).
His name is always replaced with a Title, "the Lord". (about 6,800 times).
Can anyone explain why this has not been corrected? (IN ANY mainstream Bible).

One day I do hope to know how his name here is pronounced.

By studying the scripture one will come to the conclusion that it is a descriptive name and means who God is, rather than just a sound created by sounding out letters.

Putting an emphasis that God wants the sound of a particular string of letters to be sounded out when we call upon him does not seem to be what the scriptures are teaching us in the context of answering the question of His name by Moses.

Therefore the context really does shed light on the answer as to His name. We know this and all the translators in the history of translating seem to have understood this as well, and no I don't believe they were all liars but rather intelligent people who concluded based on the facts that the name is descriptive. So in my opinion those who come up with a different idea about the importance of sounding out the sound correctly rather than the message God was intending when he spoke to Moses would be in error, or if you insist, "liars" because they don't agree with the scripture PROPERLY INTERPRETED in their original context.

When Jesus taught the disciples to pray He said "Our Father which art in Heaven".... No YHWH, or Yahweh, or Y...whatever" Just "Our Father" and I like that. It embodies a message that was new to them. Maybe that was what Jesus was doing, answering the arguments about how to pronounce His name correctly?

It would be impossible to go wrong if you followed Jesus instructions when you prayed and said "Our Father in Heaven" and therefore if anyone suggests that we are not obeying God by not using a string of letters besides "Our Father in Heaven" they are contradicting the plain example Jesus gave and I would reject their argument as false and invented based on bad interpretations about the name of God.

That information in that article has been repeated by many who are not Jewish. Facts about this subject don't change based on whether a Jewish scholar writes about it or a Christian Gentile scholar writes about it. Ancient Language rules, history and translation rules don't change based on the authors if they are being intellectually honest.